Just drop them right in the middle of San Francisco, let's see how that conflict of sexual freedom and choice blends with Sharia Law. They asked for it, might as well deliver the goods.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
Just drop them right in the middle of San Francisco, let's see how that conflict of sexual freedom and choice blends with Sharia Law. They asked for it, might as well deliver the goods.
Everybody pays the same rate on what they spend but people who spend all of their income pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than does someone who only spends half of their income.
BTW, the program does not exist. "Before announcing the new scholarship for adults, Haslam emphasized the early success of Tennessee Promise, which has sent more than 33,000 high school students to community and technical colleges tuition-free since he proposed it during his 2014 State of the State speech. Expanding that model to adults, he said, was a natural next step."
I agree that the lottery is a "stupid tax"...but I'm not so sure that Democrats play it any more or less than do Republicans. My biggest issue with the lottery is that it was sold as it was going to bring additional money in for education which hasn't been the case. It has just replaced some of the money that has been diverted from education. Lottery scholarships haven't made up for the rise in tuition costs
He has already won and that's what makes you insufferable. Suffer loser.
Agree. Put your money where your mouth is libs. Cut all federal funding and let the citizens of those states foot the entire bill for these people.
I agree. Hell Obama would drop refugees and illegals right into red states on purpose. Trump should have them mainly sent to blue state liberal cities, if I were in charge I sure as hell would. NYC, Seattle, San Fran. All of them would be getting bus loads of refugees sent in tonight.
You know that that is actually verifiable right? I know you believe anything that King Trump tells you but I'm not sure there's been an instance of someone who came here during Obama's time who has been a terrorist.
Trump got denied because the court knows this was religious discrimination, based on nothing, and also affected American citizens here.
He will spend the next 4 years blaming anyone but himself for whatever happens in the country. He's too much of a narcissist to ever think he is wrong. But the buck stops with you Mr Drumpf.
That would require that he admit that he phucked up with this one. Yes, I agree that if he was only interested in accomplishing a task he would himself rescind the original EO and issue a new and properly written one. He could do that tonight but he's too stupid to figure that out.
BTW, the order was only for 90 days...it will be longer than that before it ever gets to the SCOTUS and the point will be moot.
If this was 2-1 you'd have a point but that 3-0 with the Bush appointee gleefully going along too is compelling.
If the SC sees a religious test or a violation of due process then Trump will lose 8-0 if those arguments can be made (maybe 7-1 if Clarence Thomas didn't get laid last night). Barring that (as the stuff about how the order was carried out with all the chaos is not relevant to the legal argument) then you don't just waltz into kneecapping Presidential power to protect the country.
I don't think the argument is there for the religious test or violation of due process because there are already established reasons for singling out these 7 countries as that was already done by the Obama administration so I expect a convincing decision from the SC in favor of Trump. If Obama's actions to increase the vetting for these 7 countries was not unconstitutional then how can Trump using the same criteria only upping the vetting to a complete halt until they can assess the situation be unconstitutional?
You guys are cartoons. Obama and your hero's never took responsibility for anything in 8 years that they screwed up and trust me they had far more than their share. At one time I thought it inconceivable that there were people as dumb as you in this country until the last 8 years. You guys have proven there are a lot of dumb and seriously corrupt people in the Democratic party. You must be very proud.
Last edited:
He should buy the land and houses that neighbor the judge then load that hood up. Judge moves? Guess what we coming with you. The refugees should park a cousin eddie rv right in the drive way. Shitters full! Try to make them move. Muslim ban that.
"Bush appointee gleefully going along too is compelling."
Not at all compelling. Your reading and comprehension skills need a lot of work. It has been noted here time and again that most of the GOP don't have the guts to do what Trump is doing because of corruption. This ruling simply proves the point.
Not at all compelling. Your reading and comprehension skills need a lot of work. It has been noted here time and again that most of the GOP don't have the guts to do what Trump is doing because of corruption. This ruling simply proves the point.
Orders to stand down while travel ban is caught up in courts. No way do they want to give Trump a reason to win.
Obama has told them to stand down until Trump has been in office long enough to take the blame.
You don't know what you're talking about. Clearly the 9th Circuit did not like being told Trump's EO was not reviewable as they field goal kicked it 70 yards. That was a pancake ruling. They wanted it to hurt.
I hope somebody convinces Trump to rescind his EO and do a new one because I don't think the country will be able to take Trump's ego when he wins in the SC and make no mistake, he will win in the SC.
A few lines from Thomas Friedman's Pulitzer winning and critically important work "From Beirut to Jerusalem" would do nicely to that end, as throughout Mr. Friedman makes clear, better than anybody who has ever put English in ink, how those tribal regions are one in the same with strict, religious and cultural adaptation to Islam, and that the "states, countries, nations" as we know them by their names or by the lines drawn are distantly secondary - very distantly - to the overall identification of the people and purposes therein.
Is it xenophobic not to want fellow citizens to be beheaded?
Let's remove all the nonsense and look at this situation for a moment.
The Obama administration determined that there were extraordinary circumstances surrounding 7 countries that made it necessary to single those countries out for an increased vetting before admitting these people into our country due to security concerns as these are either States that are sponsoring terrorism directly or they are compromised to the point we can't trust the documentation coming out of those States regarding their qualifications for their nationals being admitted into the US safely.
That was not unconstitutional.
So Trump takes this same criteria for these same 7 countries and simply ups the remedy. He doesn't change the rationale for deciding to single these 7 countries out as needing special attention, he just says we are going to halt these folks from being given new visas to enter the United States from these 7 countries for 90 days until we can review and possibly increase the Obama administration's already increased vetting.
That is clear. It cannot possibly be unconstitutional if Obama's initial action was not. It makes no sense. When you peel away all the emotional hysteria here you have to see a clear Trump victory in the Supreme Court.
The Obama administration determined that there were extraordinary circumstances surrounding 7 countries that made it necessary to single those countries out for an increased vetting before admitting these people into our country due to security concerns as these are either States that are sponsoring terrorism directly or they are compromised to the point we can't trust the documentation coming out of those States regarding their qualifications for their nationals being admitted into the US safely.
That was not unconstitutional.
So Trump takes this same criteria for these same 7 countries and simply ups the remedy. He doesn't change the rationale for deciding to single these 7 countries out as needing special attention, he just says we are going to halt these folks from being given new visas to enter the United States from these 7 countries for 90 days until we can review and possibly increase the Obama administration's already increased vetting.
That is clear. It cannot possibly be unconstitutional if Obama's initial action was not. It makes no sense. When you peel away all the emotional hysteria here you have to see a clear Trump victory in the Supreme Court.
You would think so Z, but the law is obviously not what swayed the original judge in Washington or these 3 judges decision.
If that were the case it never gets this far, because clearly the President has the authority to do what Trump did.
These judges ruled on emotion, either hatred for Trump or sympathy for the people affected. However, that is the exact reason we have laws, to remove those emotions in how the Govt operates.
The judges ruling is far more dangerous than Trumps executive order, and I'm not speaking of terrorists.
Was the obama process challenged or was it accepted simply because of the source (obama)? Was it ever declared by judicial process AS constitutional (not being in conflict with the US Constitution)? President Trump's process will not be upheld by the US Supreme Court simply because obama's process was never challenged. You can take that to the damn bank. If the US Supreme Court declares President Trump's process unconstitutional we may be left only to wonder if Obama's process was also. Or worse yet . . . (I don't even want to imagine).
It is possible that the real question the SC may consider is if it is constitutionally possible to discriminate against foreigners on the basis of ethnic origin, as "ethnicity" may refer to several original basis, including that which may be common to culture, common to nationality.
Make no mistake. This President is prepared to protect. If the Supreme Court doesn't back him up his next move is against the entire visa program. He won't discriminate against any damn body.
Did the Muslim IT spy guys top off the raid?
http://www.americanow.com/story/society/2017/02/06/muslim-spy-ring-linked-navy-seals-death
http://www.americanow.com/story/society/2017/02/06/muslim-spy-ring-linked-navy-seals-death
Well shit.
Given Z's track record on everything, expect 8/9-0 ruling affirming the 9th Circuit.
Given Z's track record on everything, expect 8/9-0 ruling affirming the 9th Circuit.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
Nope, if this hits the SC you're looking at a convincing Trump win and that will make him even more insufferable.
The blood will 100% be on the judges and democrat partys hands. The democrat party should be called the party of terrorism.
Let's rehash Hillary's excuse she used during the debates for wanting to grab guns.
- Toddlers might acidentally shoot themselves
Supports abortion
- We can't have any more innocent people dying. We must have gun control.
Supports open borders and bringing in Islamic terrorism unchecked.
- Toddlers might acidentally shoot themselves
Supports abortion
- We can't have any more innocent people dying. We must have gun control.
Supports open borders and bringing in Islamic terrorism unchecked.
They are aiding and abetting terrorism by giving those pigs the idea that we are weaker than we are and basically inviting them to attack us.
Can another state sue the state of Washington for putting them at risk or would an act have to happen before suit?
Can one say this has caused irreparable damages to the security of their state and take on Washington? That'd be a shit show I'd like to see a just cause it all seems like a shit show these days.
Can one say this has caused irreparable damages to the security of their state and take on Washington? That'd be a shit show I'd like to see a just cause it all seems like a shit show these days.
No. Their only recourse would possibly be against the Federal Government for finding in favor of Washington in the extremely unlikely scenario you describe.
LMAO. The WA State AG responded to Trump's "SEE YOU IN COURT!" tweet with this:
"We have seen him in court twice, and we're 2 for 2."
LOL.
"We have seen him in court twice, and we're 2 for 2."
LOL.
That is kind of funny, if you ignore the ramifications.
Unfortunately, any system of government is only as good as the people running it. If people have no integrity and act based on their own agenda instead of following the Constitution, the Republic, as it was intended to function, will die. We have already seen this time and time again over the last 80 years. It's to the point where it doesn't surprise me at all to see judges, representatives, the President, ignore the Constitution to advance some agenda they believe in. It's sickening, but not surprising.
Similar threads
