I still do not understand why you feel unsafe because of the Trump Order. Your comments, as I understand them, suggest that the Order created anger. INTERESTING.Originally Posted by mark blazejewski
Are you suggesting that the people that you seemingly support, are inclined to react to that Order with anger and apparently with attendant violence? If so, I submit that these actors are not good candidates for approved refugee status, and in fact, your observations/comments strongly support the Trump Order.
If I understood your original position correctly, you held that enhanced vetting was unwarranted because these actors present(ed) no substantial threat to America. Logically,if these actors pose no threat, there should be no basis for fear. This all seems a little oxymoronic.
As far as not "consulting his cabinet," thanks to the tantrums of the Senate Democrats, he still does not have a complete cabinet, including an Attorney General. Trump's only mistake is that, for the interregnum, he retained Obama political appointee Sally Yates. Ms. Yates refused to execute Trump's order based on her own moral code, to the exclusion of a publicly expressed, fact-based legal argument.
I understand that the President relied on the advise of his National Security team, along with the collective wisdom and input of the Giuliani group, which included Attorney General and former Federal Judge Mukasy.
Last edited by mark blazejewski; February 6th, 2017 at 09:38 PM.
An interesting column by Doug Turner that is sure to generate different perspectives; depending on political views.
Moderation in tone and activity is needed. A bipartisan effort by our elected leaders to work together to resolve issues and to reunite the country is especially needed, but sorely lacking.
It is time for all to grow up!
https://buffalonews.com/2017/02/03/d...tossed-window/
Iran is on the list.
What people really need to stop acting clueless about is that United States is bankrupt. I don't agree with Trump's Keynesian plans either. but... That's what people should be outraged about. So why on earth should we take anymore on? The people that leave their countries are the ones that have not only the means to travel but do their homelands a disservice because they are the most able to turn things around. Overpopulation, resource scarcity, poverty will not be solved by immigration. There needs to be a concerted world wide effort on preventing overpopulation. This could be achieved in a few generations. But like immigration to the US,, somehow it morphs into a right despite consequences. Most of the worlds problems have to do with overpopulation. Wars have and will increasing be caused by resource scarcity. While we are at it let's face the facts that the world doesn't need to be Americanized with our values by force.
Millenials are crying for the wrong reasons.
Maybe if the left spent more energy on thinking things through as opposed to protesting and carrying on with emotive outbursts they would get it. But like I say, math is not a strong suit of the right- brained.
[QUOTE]I said "I certainly don't feel any safer." I don't think the EO does anything that actually makes us safer. It just pissed off a and unconvinced a lot of people. I guess my "feeling" is as hollow as those that feel the opposite.
Where did I support violence? Since I don't support Trumps actions, I must support violence. Since I am critical of police violence, I must support the killing of police officers. Is this your logic?Are you suggesting that the people that you seemingly support, are inclined to react to that Order with anger and apparently with attendant violence? If so, I submit that these actors are not good candidates for approved refugee status, and in fact, your observations/comments strongly support the Trump Order.
You didn't.If I understood your original position correctly...
Tantrum? Pound sand. SCOTUS appointee was stolen. Unprecedented. 8 years of unprecedented obstruction. Forgive some folks if it takes more that two weeks to move on from that.As far as not "consulting his cabinet," thanks to the tantrums of the Senate Democrats, he still does not have a complete cabinet, including an Attorney General. Trump's only mistake is that, for the interregnum, he retained Obama political appointee Sally Yates. Ms. Yates refused to execute Trump's order based on her own moral code, to the exclusion of a publicly expressed, fact-based legal argument.
Sally offered her legal opinion, not a moral code. The memo is publicly available.
Really? Press reports seem to indicate they did not perform the due diligence generally required of EO's. This is in fact on the reasons Yates gave the statement she did.I understand that the President relied on the advise of his National Security team, along with the collective wisdom and input of the Giuliani group, which included Attorney General and former Federal Judge Mukasy.
Amazing that we need to start this now instead of 8 years ago.
[QUOTE=Jeff;1697668](1) I am sorry for your uneasiness. I wish you safety in your travels.
I said "I certainly don't feel any safer." I don't think the EO does anything that actually makes us safer. It just pissed off a and unconvinced a lot of people. I guess my "feeling" is as hollow as those that feel the opposite.
Where did I support violence? Since I don't support Trumps actions, I must support violence. Since I am critical of police violence, I must support the killing of police officers. Is this your logic?
You didn't.
Tantrum? Pound sand. SCOTUS appointee was stolen. Unprecedented. 8 years of unprecedented obstruction. Forgive some folks if it takes more that two weeks to move on from that.
Sally offered her legal opinion, not a moral code. The memo is publicly available.
Really? Press reports seem to indicate they did not perform the due diligence generally required of EO's. This is in fact on the reasons Yates gave the statement she did.
(2) Apparently you did not, or chose not, to understand what I wrote.
(3) If I did not understand you correctly, then I simply can not follow your thinking. That may or may not be my fault.
(4) (A)-(C):
(A) "Pound sand." How intellectually thoughtful. I am sure, or at least hope, that you can do better than that.
(B) 8 years of unprecedented obstruction. Are you referring to the years 2001-2009?
(C) "SCOTUS appointee was stolen." That sounds like another left-wing talking point, like the Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan recounts, the "stolen election," the Russians, and all of the other nonsense.
I agree with Vice President Biden, who suggested during an outgoing Republican administration, that no SCOTUS appointment should be filled during a Presidential election year. Therefore, the election properly addressed the SCOTUS vacancy issue.
(5) I do not know what you are talking about here. The Guiliani group is a historic fact. But, I am sure that the unbiased news media will focus like a laser beam on all potential follies of the Trump administration, and crow kudos on the Congressional Democrats.
BTW, still no attorney general. What's the hold up? I may be pounding sand, but I am curious to know what the tantrumatic Senators are pounding?
If Ms. Yates's opinion was based on professional and moral grounds, why did she not resign, like Richardson and Ruckelshaus? Why did she wait to be terminated? A little political theater there?
I guess we will have to wait to see how the Ninth Circuit dance goes. I'll bet that the "unbiased" Ninth Circuit will do the correct thing: for you.
Last edited by mark blazejewski; February 8th, 2017 at 12:45 AM.
What I still find amazing. Listening to Trump talk to cops this morning. The stunning drop in intellect when he comes off the TelePrompter.
b.b.
Thanks...(1) I am sorry for your uneasiness. I wish you safety in your travels.
Not really.(A) "Pound sand." How intellectually thoughtful. I am sure, or at least hope, that you can do better than that.
Dems worked with Bush on lots of things. Many of which I disagreed with. No where even close to the inaction of the Obama years by the gop. This shouldn't even be argued.(B) 8 years of unprecedented obstruction. Are you referring to the years 2001-2009?
I don't . I voted for a President. Along with that vote was a contract that he would appoint Judges. That was taken away.(C) "SCOTUS appointee was stolen." That sounds like another left-wing talking point, like the Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan recounts, the "stolen election," the Russians, and all of the other nonsense.
I agree with Vice President Biden, who suggested during an outgoing Republican administration, that no SCOTUS appointment should be filled during a Presidential election year. Therefore, the election properly addressed the SCOTUS vacancy issue.
Unless I am mistaken, GOP can hold a vote anytime they want to confirm him just as they did with Devos. I don't know why they are delaying. Do they not have the votes? If not, is it because there are serious questions and concerns about Sessions record?(5) I do not know what you are talking about here. The Guiliani group is a historic fact. But, I am sure that the unbiased news media will focus like a laser beam on all potential follies of the Trump administration, and crow kudos on the Congressional Democrats.
BTW, still no attorney general. What's the hold up? I may be pounding sand, but I am curious to know what the tantrumatic Senators are pounding?
Why would she resign? This makes no sense to me. How can she do her job if she quits?If Ms. Yates's opinion was based on professional and moral grounds, why did she not resign, like Richardson and Ruckelshaus? Why did she wait to be terminated? A little political theater there?
I guess we will have to wait to see how the Ninth Circuit dance goes. I'll bet that the "unbiased" Ninth Circuit will do the correct thing: for you.
I guess. Not for me though.
No different than when Obama spoke off the teleprompter and where Obama is far above the crass Trump in political speak savvy and sophistication.
Not true. You know it. Say what you want about his politics, Obama's intellect was head, shoulders and torso above this guy. Standing over this guy.
b.b.
Jeff, this has more relevance today than eight years ago when there was rank animosity shown to Obama’s inauguration by some dolts in the Republican Party who openly swore to make Obama a one term president and where some alt right radicals also made some pretty outrageous claims against Obama.
But unlike today there were no protests in the streets, no hateful rhetoric, no openly vowed opposition movement to delegitimize Trumps electorate victory, no biased press that will give Trump any positive press. As the joke goes, if the media were to witness Trump walking on water they would report it as “Trump can’t swim.”
I would have to believe that the great majority of Americans are silently watching and waiting for this debacle to play out to the point where their vote will be determine the outcome of the upcoming Congressional election.
As to your questioning why the Republicans just don’t go nuclear and appoint their nominees, they will if need be. They are following protocol and in doing so reveal the extent to which the left will go to disrupt the confirmation process and set the stage where if Trump is found successful with his administration it will be without the help of an obstructive Democratic Party. Unfortunately, we the citizens are the losers in this political cluster f***.
Politics is an ugly, blood-sport. With rare exception, all political suck; but I can’t see how the Democrats feel it is in their best interest to play the game they are playing. Should they lose more of their base because of the disruptive and hateful game they are playing, they may not recover for years.
There is really nothing more I can add. I respect your position. I agree with some of your earlier expressed concerns, ie, the Tweeting ect., but on the Order issue, I stand with Trump and that is not going to change.
Thank you for your replies and the exchange.
Just some hanging, burning effigies. No big deal really.But unlike today there were no protests in the streets, no hateful rhetoric, no openly vowed opposition movement to delegitimize Trumps electorate victory, no biased press that will give Trump any positive press. As the joke goes, if the media were to witness Trump walking on water they would report it as “Trump can’t swim.”
As to your questioning why the Republicans just don’t go nuclear and appoint their nominees, they will if need be. They are following protocol and in doing so reveal the extent to which the left will go to disrupt the confirmation process and set the stage where if Trump is found successful with his administration it will be without the help of an obstructive Democratic Party.I would have to believe that the great majority of Americans are silently watching and waiting for this debacle to play out to the point where their vote will be determine the outcome of the upcoming Congressional election.I'll agree with that 100%Unfortunately, we the citizens are the losers in this political cluster f***.
The Dems never should have lowered the 60 requirement for appointments. Although, even if they didn't, I fully believe that the GOP would do so now regardless.
I'd be happier to see a constitutional amendment banning organized political parties. The Founders tried to setup a system to prevent them and even warned against them.Politics is an ugly, blood-sport. With rare exception, all political suck; but I can’t see how the Democrats feel it is in their best interest to play the game they are playing. Should they lose more of their base because of the disruptive and hateful game they are playing, they may not recover for years.
Disagree. On the teleprompter and with his slick ‘Joe Cool’ style Obama could sell ice cubes to Eskimos. Off the teleprompter, another matter – but still beyond Trump (and I said that).
As to intellect, the media has placed Trump’s life under a microscope where we know the good, bad and ugly about this man. Unfortunately we have heard so much about Obama’s intellect and educational accomplishments and yet know so little of his early life regarding his academic accomplishments, personal relationships and how his family structure came to be.
Hey Jeff:
I don’t ever remember in any of my 16 years of scholastic studies (and since then) ever hearing or reading anything on the ‘Founders trying to setup a system to prevent them (political parties) from forming, and even warning against them.’ The Constitution does not mention political parties.
As far as amendment banning political parties, that sounds like Stalin or Hitler fascism.
There is a lot of fake news out there and outrageous/speculative regarding illegal immigration rights and refugee acceptance. Those not walking the left’s line on open borders, illegal immigration rights and the right of refugees entering our country without proper vetting, identify those as racist, xenophobic and non compassionate. People of my age whose grandparents came here legally were taught and lived under the following precept of President Teddy Roosevelt:
"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American ... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag ... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language ... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
Theodore Roosevelt 1907
Perhaps that helps to explain why so many older people believe “Identity Politics” is anti- American.
There are currently 22 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 22 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote