The Trump Presidency

Hawk said:
They do? How so?

North Korea is absolutely a legitimate threat. To say otherwise is to expose stark naivete.

Whether or not you are personally worried is immaterial. I lived in Seoul when North Korea shelled an island 70 miles away. Nobody batted an eye. That doesn't mean the threat wasn't imminent. Koreans are used to it. Japanese are used to it. 40 + years of this kind of behavior has nurtured a surreal sense of complacency. That shouldn't be an excuse to allow the regime to run rampant, especially when they are developing/testing advanced hydrogen bombs.

Do you see how Abe is twisting the North Korean 'threat' to grow Japanese new nationalism? Article 9. Historical revisionism. Defense spending. The United States just opened up a new $11 billion military base in Southeast Seoul. In many ways this war is already being fought.
Click to expand...

Nobody believes NK is going to fire a missile at the U.S. It would be suicide for them. Even if they did, it's quite likely that we could intercept it.
 
The Left has always been the "party" of cheap labor.
buy a history book

Peter Daou‏Verified account @peterdaou

LOL, Trump still tweeting about @HillaryClinton. I've never seen grown men more obsessed and intimidated than Republicans are of Hillary.
 
sturg33 said:
From the guy who wants red state citizens to drown and fantasized about Trump having sex with his daughter.

OK guy
Click to expand...

and Lot's wife was really turned into a pillar of salt and Jonah and the whale

The Old Testament is filled with scenario's gold's point was aimed at.

You need to read more -- as in critical reading -- understand literary devices and how they are used in everyday conversation. The prevalance of their use in for instance Greek Mythology.

Ever been to church ? Heard some of those sermons ?

for a smart kid you have a lot of holes in your game.

As far as Donald and Ivanka --

you can look it up
 
Joy Reid‏Verified account @JoyAnnReid

There is no economic, national security or social cohesion rationale for ending DACA. This is purely Trump's nod to racial resentment.

The Rude Pundit‏ @rudepundit 7h7 hours ago

On National Prayer Day, Trump threw baby Jesus out of the inn.
 
LOLGOP‏ @LOLGOP

If you think fertilized eggs are people but people brought to this country as kids aren't, stop pretending your concerns are religious.
9:33 PM - 3 Sep 2017
 
I'd like to ask supporters of DACA a question. Have you ever considered the Constitutional issues with the president having the power to enact something like that or is the thinking limited only to whether you like the underlying policy?

In enacting the DACA, Obama openly said he was refusing to enforce valid law and creating new standards out of thin air. Does this not strike you as worrying?

Suppose Trump tells the EPA to stop enforcing the clean air act. Should he have that power? If the DACA is Constitutional then we're ceding huge amounts of power to the presidency.

I honestly don't mind the policy of the DACA. But I am hugely concerned with the growth of presidential power.
 
striker42 said:
I'd like to ask supporters of DACA a question. Have you ever considered the Constitutional issues with the president having the power to enact something like that or is the thinking limited only to whether you like the underlying policy?

In enacting the DACA, Obama openly said he was refusing to enforce valid law and creating new standards out of thin air. Does this not strike you as worrying?

Suppose Trump tells the EPA to stop enforcing the clean air act. Should he have that power? If the DACA is Constitutional then we're ceding huge amounts of power to the presidency.

I honestly don't mind the policy of the DACA. But I am hugely concerned with the growth of presidential power.
Click to expand...

We either have rule of law or not. We either have established laws regarding our sovereignty or not. Why should anyone get to bypass that law because of the whims of a president?

I'm against any immigration act that goes against the legal system we have in place. These people should not be pushed to the head of the line.
 
The legal system we have in place is the President oversees the Executive Branch and decides the priorities of the Executive Branch unless over ruled by the courts or the legislature.

Obama was within his constitutional rights to do what he did as Trump is within his constitutional rights doing what he is.
Should Trump not want to enforce EPA regs or over rule Obama's DACA policy he is constitutionally within his rights

Just yesterday your little brother was propping up Trumps accomplishments by saying he was rolling back regulations.
You two seem to read from the same playbook --- are you opposed to Trump unilaterally rolling back or freezing regulations ?

This is 9th grade civics and the (R) understands their base was too busy trying to see Mona Dunlaps tits in 9th grade to know how to vote.
Or even how this democracy works
 
Trump is rolling back regulations which were imposed by executive order just like he is doing with DACA.

But on an aside - I would think Liberals/Democrats would love this because it gives their constituency more opportunities for jobs.
 
having said that:

Jennifer Rubin‏Verified account @JRubinBlogger 11h11 hours ago



Charlottesville, Arpaio, DACA -- hard to argue this is not the party of white grievance. Despicable.
 
And coincidentally enough - Black people will benefit the most from the enforcing of illegal immigration.

SHHH!!! Don't tell our voters that.
 
Your right, if law enforcement turns to hunting Mexicans they won't have as much time and resources to rape and pillage black communities. Win win scenario.
 
57Brave said:
The legal system we have in place is the President oversees the Executive Branch and decides the priorities of the Executive Branch unless over ruled by the courts or the legislature.

Obama was within his constitutional rights to do what he did as Trump is within his constitutional rights doing what he is.

Should Trump not want to enforce EPA regs or over rule Obama's DACA policy he is constitutionally within his rights

Just yesterday your little brother was propping up Trumps accomplishments by saying he was rolling back regulations.

You two seem to read from the same playbook --- are you opposed to Trump unilaterally rolling back or freezing regulations ?

This is 9th grade civics and the (R) understands their base was too busy trying to see Mona Dunlaps tits in 9th grade to know how to vote.

Or even how this democracy works
Click to expand...

This is dangerous thinking. The greatest threat to our republic is one man amassing too much power. If the President can ignore the checks and balances of the other branches then we're in trouble.

Setting the priorities of the executive branch is one thing. Abrogating entire legislative schemes is something different. A president should not have the option of simply refusing to enforce laws he doesn't like.

This is not a partisan issue. I don't care who the POTUS is or what the law is. I don't like the president having that power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
This goes back to Louisianna Purchase and the precident went into high gear during the Andew Jackson years.

Every President on Mt Rushmore was accused of overstepping

his authority.

The President is granted that. Power in tje constititiom. The Congrss is given the power too over ride as are the courts.

It is up to the voters and citizenry at tbe end of the day . .

Remember, 17 out of 20 here voted to Allow this
 
striker42 said:
This is dangerous thinking. The greatest threat to our republic is one man amassing too much power. If the President can ignore the checks and balances of the other branches then we're in trouble.

Setting the priorities of the executive branch is one thing. Abrogating entire legislative schemes is something different. A president should not have the option of simply refusing to enforce laws he doesn't like.

This is not a partisan issue. I don't care who the POTUS is or what the law is. I don't like the president having that power.
Click to expand...

57 wants the government to have all the power. He openly mocks freedom
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/03/world/asia/north-korea-kim-jong-un.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur

Mr. Kim, some of Mr. Trump’s advisers and outside experts believe, thinks he may be able to force the United States to withdraw sanctions and pull back its troops from South Korea, where they are a perennial irritant to Pyongyang.

One fear is that it could use its nuclear arsenal as a shield for a military invasion of South Korea in an attempt to reunify the peninsula by force.

The worry, say those who fear the North is considering that option, is that its ability to strike the United States with nuclear missiles could undermine Americans’ ability to guarantee that it would protect South Korea, as well as Japan, from attack.
 
nsacpi said:
Obama had a bias toward regulation that probably hurt the economy. For example, if you want to reduce consumption of carbon fuels the much better way to do it is to raise taxes on it rather institute complex regulations regarding motor vehicle fuel economy, etc.

Trump's general idea of reducing the regulatory burden is a good one. I just have my doubts that he and his team have the chops to implement it in a sensible way.
Click to expand...

I'm not anti-regulation, per se, but I definitely agree with this.
 
Runnin said:
Nobody believe NK is going to fire a missile at the U.S. It would be suicide for them. Even if they did, it's quite likely that we could intercept it.
Click to expand...

I'm not at all worried about the CONUS. I'm worried about the 30K troops we have on South Korean soil. I'm worried about 10 million of our allies in Seoul. We have THAAD installed right outside of the metropolitan area, but it's no guarantee.

Sure, it would be suicide for NK, but I wonder why you think that would be a deterrent. Read up on Juche (especially with respect to the transition to Songun-based ideology circa 1995).

http://www.iar-gwu.org/node/337
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top