|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Trump Presidency | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
The rape of US citizens continues as Trump opens up those lands, air and water that actually belongs to all of us to sell those resources to corporations.
quote: quote: source
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined:
|
marc9000 responds to me:
quote: That you think being happy that people are not going to die is "grandstanding and showboating" says a lot. Oh, of course there's political posturing on both sides, but let us not play dumb and engage in false equivalency, shall we?
quote: But Trump wasn't involved. They had seven years to come up with a plan and they scrapped it all to come up with yet another one and only gave themselves a couple months to do it? After all, Trump was saying all during the campaign that he had a "wonderful" plan. It was going to cover everyone. Where was it? And when it became clear that he didn't actually have a plan, why didn't Congress simply say, "No, this is complicated. It's going to take more time"? Of course, that leads to the question of "Seven years isn't enough time?" There was no guarantee that Trump was going to win. Surely they were working on a better way to provide actual health care to people no matter what, right? I mean, that is their job, isn't it? To write laws no matter who is in the White House? The Republicans may have this silly rule that no bill will come before the House unless a majority of Republicans support it, but the Democrats don't.
quote: How could it be? He didn't write the bill. He just wanted his name on it. You know, like everything else in his "empire." He doesn't actually build it...he just puts his name on it.
quote: Which is why it is stupid to try to run business like a government: With government, you have to deal with people who have all the brains and don't seem to take too kindly to their constituents dying on them.
quote: Except it is. Let us not play dumb and pretend that the Constitution is a laundry list. Does the government have the right to create an atomic bomb? It's not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. Should we dismantle our nuclear array post haste? Hint: What do the words "general welfare" mean to you? It's mentioned twice in the Constitution. Can you tell us where? No...you don't get to look it up. From memory: Where does the Constitution talk about the power of government to provide for the general welfare?
quote: Someone doesn't understand what the 10th Amendment means. Given that you've already shown you don't know what the Constitution says about general welfare and how it isn't a laundry list, this is not surprising. Hint: Article 6.
quote: Hold it right there: First, you were just asking about the difference between the two parties. Now that you've been shown the difference (Republicans when they're out of power don't actually try to do their job while Democrats do), you're complaining that there really is a difference? Second, "free"? Who said anything about "free"? You do realize that it will be paid for, yes? That's part of the contract you signed when you accepted citizenship in this country. Taxes aren't free.
quote: Of course. Things need to be paid for. This is in direct contrast to Republicans that spend even more profligately than Democrats but cut taxes and thus ensure that nothing gets paid for. That's right: If you truly cared about cutting spending, you want to vote for the Democrats. They are much more fiscally responsible. If the Congress had merely rubber-stamped Reagan's budgets, the deficit would have been billions of dollars bigger than it actually turned out to be. Clinton delivered a surplus, you'll recall. And Obama reversed the hemorrhaging of Bush with his two undeclared wars...you did remember that Bush kept the Afghanistan and Iraq wars off the books, yes? But, back to the point: You tax people to raise the money that you then spend on the services to be enjoyed by the people which is why they paid those taxes in the first place. Are you about to say that you would rather spend $8000/year in "premiums" because to pay $4000 in "taxes" is anathema? In the end, is it really simply the word being used? You're going to pay for it no matter what. Do you really want to pay twice as much for worse outcomes simply because it isn't a "tax"?
quote: Incorrect: To provide for the general welfare as mandated by the Constitution and demanded by the populace since it has become apparent that only the government can effectively manage the problem.
quote: Yes. Can you? If you can't, why not? Have you considered the possibility that you are parroting talking points you don't understand? Hint: Don't you find it interesting that in all the 8 years of Obama, we had the longest sustained period of private sector job growth? Now, there truly is a festive clue in there. Let's see if you can find the important words in that sentence. Bonus hint: What is missing from that sentence? That is, something specific is called out, but there is a very obvious complementary part that isn't mentioned at all. And that's just a start.
quote: (*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? You seem to have forgotten that the ACA passed without any Republicans. Not one Republican voted for the ACA. So whence cometh your claim that they "caved"?
quote: No, the ACA is quite sustainable. First, we need to rollback the Republicans sabotaging of the funding (have you forgotten Rubio's comments?) and then make a few tweaks. What would be better is a single-payer, universal coverage like Medicare for All, but that's a separate issue.
quote: But the only thing the Republicans want to "do" is to roll back all of the progress we've made. So, of course the Democrats are going to fight it. They've seen the disaster and are working to avoid it. When someone argues that we don't need the umbrella because we aren't getting wet, you fight them. Did you forget Jindal's sneering about "volcano monitoring"...only to have a volcano erupt in Alaska? Or should we go back to the Gilded Age? Oh, wait...don't tell me...you have completely forgotten the Bush II years, haven't you? The country went straight from Clinton to Obama with no intervening presidency in between, right?
quote: Actually, the voters have them in the majority. More people voted for Democrats, both for the presidency and for Congress, than for the Republicans. However, due to the Electoral College, the will of the people was thwarted with regard to the presidency and due to gerrymandering, the will of the people was thwarted with respect to Congress. And that goes for state legislatures, too.
quote: Oh...I see...they don't count. Trump got more votes if you don't count all the people who voted for Clinton because hey, those votes don't count.
quote: Indeed, Democrats have a problem with mid-terms. Their campaign focus on presidential elections leads to them having the structural bias against Democrats exacerbated when it comes to non-presidential elections. Remember: More people vote for Democrats than Republicans, even in non-presidential elections, and yet somehow Republicans manage to get seated in direct contradiction to the will of the people.
quote: Because it would be evil to withhold a solution to a problem that is causing people to die. If you see a problem and you know how to fix it, then "right now" is the time you have to tell us what it is.
quote: Why would they block it if it were a solution to the problem? After all, now that everybody knows about it and can see what a wonderful solution it is, they'll vote for people who would implement the solution. But that assumes that your congresscritter is evil and wouldn't implement the solution straight away. If they're actually good people, they'll get to work on it right away which will make everybody's job easier. Besides, McCain got re-elected to the Senate and it's been in Republican control for quite some time. Why's he holding back? Surely with Republican control of Congress they could override any presidential veto, which would be stupid considering the solution is so wonderful. And thus, we're back to healthcare: Majorities in both the House and Senate and they still couldn't manage to get a bill passed. This is what happens when you elect people who think government can't do anything: They'll fulfill their own prophecy.Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time. Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
The Trump Administration is taking even more steps to try to whitewash the Russian Connection by trying to limit and redact Sally Yates testimony before Congress.
quote:source I wonder if il Donald has ever heard "Liar, liar, pants on fire!"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
14174dm Member (Idle past 1109 days) Posts: 161 From: Cincinnati OH Joined:
|
Rrhain: It's a bit like the way both McCain and Trump claimed that they had these wonderful plans that would solve our problems...but no, they aren't going to tell us what they are now. You'll have to wait until they get elected. Um...if it is such a wonderful plan, spit it out! Of course, it turns out that it was all just hype, but that's the Republicans for you. Why should they make anything public before they have to? It only would give the Democrats more time and ability to block it. Are you kidding? The whole point of a campaign is to inform the VOTERS what you plan to do if you are elected. If Trump and the Republicans had been HONEST and admitted that they had NO IDEA of what they were going to do, they would not have been elected. They WASTED seven years when they could have developed a complete plan with full agreement of the party. They should have shown up on the first day of Congress and voted on the bill they had written over the last seven years. I think the reason they never did was, first, they are too centered on sound bite electioneering to accomplish anything and, second, it is unlikely that they would be able to come up with a bill that would satisfy everyone. They merely did the bare minimum to get campaign money. God help us with their plans for tax reform (deficit explosion) and the military budget (billions to the military contractors).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Why should they make anything public before they have to? It only would give the Democrats more time and ability to block it. Stop trying to make ineptitude look like genius. There never was a plan. Everybody knows that now. Do you have any interest whatsoever in telling the truth or are is defending the Republican party your only aim. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I already understand everything you said. People who can't afford healthcare simply forgo healthcare as much as possible. That's right. However the purpose of the penalty is to modify behavior. It is the case that you don't get anything for the penalty, but that is how penalties work. And of course the really poor folks were supposed to be covered by Medicaid expansion which was intended to be mandatory. Unfortunately, a full 1/3 of the states opted out of coverage for poor folks. And again, there is no need to fix that before fixing the rest of the ACA. The penalty is not being enforced right now.
It's worth noting that Trump has occasionally advocated a single-payer system, but it's hard to know how serious he is I think we know the answer to that. At this point, it is pretty obvious that any advocacy for single payer by Trump is an insignificantly low priority because he did not ask his party for any such thing. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
NoNukes writes: That's right. However the purpose of the penalty is to modify behavior. It is the case that you don't get anything for the penalty, but that is how penalties work. And of course the really poor folks were supposed to be covered by Medicaid expansion which was intended to be mandatory. Unfortunately, a full 1/3 of the states opted out of coverage for poor folks. I understand all that, but to my mind there shouldn't be a penalty at all, because it's taking away money from the people who can least afford it.
And again, there is no need to fix that before fixing the rest of the ACA. The penalty is not being enforced right now. But the penalty is one of the major reasons there was so much push-back from Republicans. They need to find another way.
I think we know the answer to that. At this point, it is pretty obvious that any advocacy for single payer by Trump is an insignificantly low priority because he did not ask his party for any such thing. Agreed. After all the campaign talk about having a better system that would be cheaper, fairer and cover more people, he had nothing. He just straight out lied, and continues to lie. I don't understand how the Trump constituency can't see this. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Trump is great he is doing everything he said he would. White House press release: President Donald J. Trump Will Continue to Enforce Executive Order Protecting the Rights of the LGBTQ Community in the Workplace. Reality: Trump just gutted the LGBT executive order he promised not to touch.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Trump is great he is doing everything he said he would. "I said, 'Who makes the pipes for the pipeline?’ Well, sir, it comes from all over the world, isn’t that wonderful? I said, 'Nope, it comes from the United States or we’re not building one.’ American steel. If they want a pipeline in the United States, they’re going to use pipe that’s made in the United States, do we agree?" --- Donald J. Trump on the Keystone pipeline, speech to CPAC, Feb. 23, 2017.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Trump is great he is doing everything he said he would. "I won't settle because it's an easy case to win in court." --- Donald J. Trump on the lawsuit over his fraudulent "university", on the "Morning Joe" show, Mar. 3, 2016.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Trump says that the Democrats and Freedom Caucus should be fought.
The interesting thing is all of the members of the Freedom Caucus are Conservative Republicans. How many more groups can he piss off this week?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
BBC has the story.
Sounds like there is truth to the idea that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. Flynn is also quoted as saying:
"When you get given immunity that means you've probably committed a crime,"
with regard to Clinton aides. I doubt that he'd say that now.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
After all of this, it seems as if some members of the current Chinese Government do have a better grasp of reality than the current US President. The US is rapidly loosing it's dominance. Volunteerily. It's mind-boggling.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Sounds like there is truth to the idea that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. Maybe. But Flynn's request has been refused. http://www.nbcnews.com/...cts-immunity-michael-flynn-n741061
quote: In my view, turning down Flynn's request is the right thing to do. Flynn is implicated, and if you accept his plea without knowing the facts, Flynn could just fall on his sword without implicating anyone else. Investigate some more, and then make a call on offering Flynn immunity once you've gotten some details. Or at least get a proffer from Flynn regarding what he would say. Absent that, no immunity. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
marc9000 writes: There's no grandstanding and showboating going on with Democrats today? As they celebrate their latest victory of prolonging the status quo? That you think being happy that people are not going to die is "grandstanding and showboating" says a lot. "Not going to die" ?? I assume this must be a reference to the continuation of Obamacare. The U.S. got along well enough before the passing of Obamacare, and it will when it's over. People "died" in the U.S. in 1817, in 1917, and they still do in 2017. Not only from old age, but from society coming up short on coming to their rescue when they can't provide their own medical care. They do in every country all over the world.
But Trump wasn't involved. They had seven years to come up with a plan and they scrapped it all to come up with yet another one and only gave themselves a couple months to do it? After all, Trump was saying all during the campaign that he had a "wonderful" plan. It was going to cover everyone. Where was it? He's only been in office 10 weeks. It's a recurring problem throughout this thread - Trump is getting put down for not fulfilling in 2 months every promise he made during his campaign. No president in the past has done any better.
And when it became clear that he didn't actually have a plan, why didn't Congress simply say, "No, this is complicated. It's going to take more time"? Of course, that leads to the question of "Seven years isn't enough time?" There was no guarantee that Trump was going to win. Surely they were working on a better way to provide actual health care to people no matter what, right? I mean, that is their job, isn't it? To write laws no matter who is in the White House? The Republicans may have this silly rule that no bill will come before the House unless a majority of Republicans support it, but the Democrats don't. They don't?
quote: Pelosi firm: No vote on offshore drilling - ABC News
marc9000 writes: They believe the government is capable of doing plenty of things right, those things are outlined in the constitution. Healthcare isn't in there. Except it is. Let us not play dumb and pretend that the Constitution is a laundry list. Enumerated powers is the actual term, one of us is playing dumb, and it's not me.
Hint: What do the words "general welfare" mean to you? Since I have a middle school history education, they mean to me exactly what they meant to the most prominent of the U.S. founders. What do Federalist Papers 41 and 45 mean to you?
quote: "Few and defined", I'm sure Rachel Maddow and Ed Shultz have instructed you to call enumerated powers a "laundry list", but that's only current liberal efforts to re-write history. You could learn more about actual U.S. history concerning the general welfare clause here if you'd like to actually learn something.
Someone doesn't understand what the 10th Amendment means. Yes it's very clear that you don't. Tell me, if the general welfare clause gives congress unlimited power in domestic issues (not "external objects", Madison's words), then what is the purpose of having the 10th amendment at all?
But, back to the point: You tax people to raise the money that you then spend on the services to be enjoyed by the people which is why they paid those taxes in the first place. Are you about to say that you would rather spend $8000/year in "premiums" because to pay $4000 in "taxes" is anathema? In the end, is it really simply the word being used? You're going to pay for it no matter what. Do you really want to pay twice as much for worse outcomes simply because it isn't a "tax"? Hmmm, $8000 versus $4000, so you believe the government is twice as efficient as free markets?
marc9000 writes: are all for one reason, to increase the size and scope of government. Incorrect:To provide for the general welfare as mandated by the Constitution and demanded by the populace since it has become apparent that only the government can effectively manage the problem. "Demanded by the populace" that currently has Republicans in control of the presidency, the house, the senate, and the majority of governorships?
marc9000 writes: Can you describe any action the Democrats have attempted over the past....20 years that attempt anything that doesn't make the government bigger, first and foremost? Yes. Can you? No, I can't. I can't think of a thing that today's Democrats do that doesn't directly or indirectly increase the size and scope of government. You say you can, but you didn't name any. Maybe in your next post?
If you can't, why not? Have you considered the possibility that you are parroting talking points you don't understand? We DO have irony! Do Maddow and Schultz ever mention the Federalist papers to their audiences?
Hint: Don't you find it interesting that in all the 8 years of Obama, we had the longest sustained period of private sector job growth? Yes it is interesting, how the private sector can grow IN SPITE OF every government effort to license, regulate, restrict and prohibit most everything it tries to do. But some of the "private sector job growth" you refer to is private companies that support government mandates, like private environmental companies as one example.
Actually, the voters have them in the majority. More people voted for Democrats, both for the presidency and for Congress, than for the Republicans. However, due to the Electoral College, the will of the people was thwarted with regard to the presidency and due to gerrymandering, the will of the people was thwarted with respect to Congress. And that goes for state legislatures, too. So, of this Constitution that you embrace, the Electoral College is the ONE THING that you'd like to do away with. Anything else? The second amendment maybe? The fourth and fifth amendments if global warming is involved?
Oh...I see...they don't count. Trump got more votes if you don't count all the people who voted for Clinton because hey, those votes don't count. According to U.S. foundings, some votes can mean less than others. Especially today, when so many Clinton voters just want free stuff, and so many voters from your state are ineligible-to-vote Mexicans, which your state allows to vote anyway.
Because it would be evil to withhold a solution to a problem that is causing people to die. If you see a problem and you know how to fix it, then "right now" is the time you have to tell us what it is. That can lead to complications on both foreign and domestic issues. On foreign issues, it allows enemies who hate the U.S. to plan how to defeat that solution. In domestic ones, it allows Democrats who hate the U.S. to defeat that solution.
marc9000 writes: It only would give the Democrats more time and ability to block it. Why would they block it if it were a solution to the problem? Because it would make them look bad politically. Democrats have demonstrated that it's their power first, and the good of the U.S. second. Their thirst for more and more refugees pouring into this country to vote for them is proof of it.
And thus, we're back to healthcare: Majorities in both the House and Senate and they still couldn't manage to get a bill passed. This is what happens when you elect people who think government can't do anything: They'll fulfill their own prophecy. It's only been 10 weeks for this president. Maybe a better bill, one that reduces government meddling in health care even better, will come along.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024