ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
If I watch a Duke game and gracie allen doesn't trip anyone, I consider it wasted life.
 
No. Their only recourse would possibly be against the Federal Government for finding in favor of Washington in the extremely unlikely scenario you describe.
Unlikely that political figures make a stink and make an outrageous claim for points? Nah.

Interesting on the other part tho, thanks.
 
Just like during the campaign cycle Dems getting all warm and fuzzy about a so called victory. I am sure when they get a losing ruling at the SC they will be out protesting and destroying more property at a city near you.
 
Why the eff was Schumer allowed to talk at the inauguration? Eff that guy.

Eff the whole left. These sacks of crap are going to file lawsuits non-stop and they're going to do everything they can to kill our nation and stay in bed with Islam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AustinTXCat
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.

Exactly. Obama even did this through Congress, not an EO. The judges are trying to relitigate standing law. Their main focus the other night was asking questions on evidence proving terrorism connected to the seven countries.

Asking for evidence is irrelevant because obviously more than enough evidence was already provided in 2015. Said evidence connecting the seven countries with ties to terror has already been debated when said bill was introduced into Congress and subsequently enacted into law by Congress.

The job of these judges is to follow and enforce the laws on the books and rule on one question alone; does Trump have the constitutional power to enforce this travel ban? Not to politicize national security and relitigate a two year old law because they disagree with it. Not to mention, more than likely most, if not all, of the evidence is classified and couldn't be provided anyways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigblueinsanity
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

You are absolutely wrong about the lottery not bringing money to education. It funds the KEES scholarships. It did not impact public ed. I have experience working in school finances. Ultimately, KEES money was seen by university boards as "free" money, allowing them to increase fees for students. From the late 90's when KEES began, it took only about 8-10 years for costs of tuition, fees, etc... to absorb all the KEES money a student could receive. So the brilliant idea of this money enabling kids to obtain post secondary schooling is hogwash.

University presidents will say the Kees money made for the years state government cut funds or limited tuition increases. IMO, those moves were intended to cause universities to REDUCE expenditures. Imagine that....a university actually reducing expenditures.

You are correct when you say lottery scholarships haven't made up for the rise in tuition costs. If lawmakers had any fortitude, they would have told universities that not only are they not getting any more money, but neither are they increasing student fees. Why not have the prof that teaches 2-3 courses a week add another course??? For college classes, class size is not a big issue....have more lecture hall classes with 150-200 students.
 
Yeah, the bad guys will run out, get a visa in a week, and be on our shores in no time flat because of this horrendous ruling.

Never mind that it takes on average like 2 years to go through the existing vetting process if you're coming in from those 7 countries, when you're delusional facts fade into nothingness and all ignorance is possible.
Not the refugee program. Remember, this travel ban of Trump's wasn't only a 90 day hold on travel from those seven countries. It also included a 120 day hold on the Syrian refugee program.

The refugee program, the same exact one Isis vowed to use as cover and sneak into the country, has been fast tracked from 18-24 months to a 90 days vetting process in order to meet Obama's going away present deadline. Not to mention, the vetting is done by the UN at a resettlement surge center, not the DHS/FBI.
 
I don't see how he can take it to the Supreme Court without a 9th justice confirmed. Too risky.

Just rewrite it and start over. And perhaps get some state to test it in court in a state outside the 9th circuit.

Actually he should do both.

I think we'll have a clear ruling from the SC. This is not 4-4 stuff.

I agree. It's clearly constitutional and will be ruled as such the first time any objective court looks at it
 
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.

Is this a complaint? Lord, I hope not. Rhetorically questioned anyway. Borrowing this as encouragement to younger posters. Part of my wealth building "you can do it" thing I like to do from time to time. And I certainly hope the young people can grab the powerful and virtuous truth in Fuzz's words here, although I suspect he meant them differently from how I welcome it. Yes, you will be taxed the more you spend, the more you possess, the more space you take up, etc., etc., etc. It is a monumental savings opportunity for each of you.

In the perfect world the is no such thing as tax on income, no such thing as being penalized for your productivity. In the perfect world a govt. collects revenue by how money is spent, not by how money is earned. However, in our society, and likely most, we do both.

That is not to say some forms of tax against consumption do not reflect quality investments (land, real estate, etc.). But choose wisely your lives throughout, as repetitious, frivolous spending adds up to many needless possessions, interferences to quality investment could-have-been, and scores upon scores of consumption taxes you did not want to pay.
 
If you haven't watched Waters' World on O'Reilly tonight, the replay segment is about to come on.

He interviews all of the high school kids who walked out today to protest Trump. It is cringeworthy of how GD stupid these kids are.


good lord. when I was that age we skipped morning classes in cold weather because it was deer or duck season, not for some stupid bullshit. And it would be excused. Principal wouldn't let us go just all the time but he understood. But some of it seems a bit odd looking back now. You were expected to come back for afternoon classes in hunting clothes or he'd think you'd been out goofing off. Literally, I've sat in high school algebra class with a vest full of 12 ga. #6 shot and nobody thought anything different way back then. Loaded shotguns in the school parking lot, more ducks to shoot that afternoon. Shop teacher had a place for our dogs. Long ass time ago. A better time. I am surely getting old.
 
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.
[laughing]Obviously if the Scotus overturns the temporary halt, when the ban is finally fully implemented, the 90 day travel and 120 day refugee counter will be reset and start anew.

They're not going to lift the halt and then say "Well, 90 days is up, ban over anyways, been fun.". Or, "The halt is lifted, you have two days (or however many are left out of 90) to assess the threats and implement your stricter vetting process".
 
  • Like
Reactions: ymmot31
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.
He's also a shareholder, along with the judges, liberal civil rights groups, MSM, Democrats, etc..., of any and all terrorists attacks that may occur from any of those seven countries and/or the Syrian refugee program going forward.

Make no mistake, right or wrong, fair or not fair, they own it from here on out. Trump has a built in excuse. He tried to protect the country, but they fought him with everything they had and wouldn't allow him to do his job, even went as far to politicize national security and overthrow the President's constitutional authority.

They'll have no way to spin it to the public either. 60% of the country agrees with Trump on this ban, and they all know exactly how (Democrats went judge shopping) and why (liberal judges ruled based on feelings, not law) it went down like it did.

This may help the Democrats with the fringe far left of their base, but it severely hurts them with the majority of America. Also, Trump is just the type of brash, loudmouth asshole who will have no qualms about pointing the finger and reminding everyone of this, even during such a tragedy as a terrorists attack.
 
Vote for Tom Price held at 2 a.m., he was confirmed.

On another note, Trump hitting back hard tonight. Word out of L.A., San Diego, Austin, and North Carolina, ICE Raids have been taking place all throughout the night. Deporting them Jaun by Jaun.

Friendly Paddock politics thread reminder -

C4S1HqSVMAAgwr8.jpg
 
"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.

Many on here and myself included do not care about the GOP. Brining up Bush, McCain, Graham, Ryan, Preibus, McConnell, and the rest of the swamp to prove us wrong is why they continue to lose.
 
The left considers 25 to 50 percent of this nation as deplorable. They know they will never get any of these votes. So, they want to bring in third world honor killing Muslims that want Sharia to even it up.

As to illegals, Pelosi actually said in a public forum that "our people" in sanctuary cities do not commit crimes. Are they that out of touch with reality or just liars?

http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/brian-l...gal-alien-our-people-sanctuary-cities-are-not
 
Last edited:
While I do not agree with the 9th circuit's ruling I do think that these EO's have gotten out of hand. In my opinion, it's too much power for the president and most of these should go through Congress.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Supreme Lord Z
[laughing] It's too much to take these days. They just spent a week demanding that Trump follow the law regarding his travel ban.

Now they're going to spend the next week demanding he ignore the law regarding immigrants' legal citizenship.

Just like the liberal judges, they want this country governed by emotions and feelings instead of rule of law, so that they can pick and choose which laws to enforce and/or not to enforce.
 
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.
You proved my point, thank you. You are clueless but, I like it. Winning will continue for us.
 
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.
This is what Z does not understand nor do many on the left. They will continue to listen to the liberal media and be fooled into believing that what Trump is doing is wrong even though Obama initiated it. Once again proving the point that some people including the Bush appointed judge do not have the guts to do what is right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ram1955
While I do not agree with the 9th circuit's ruling I do think that these EO's have gotten out of hand. In my opinion, it's too much power for the president and most of these should go through Congress.
Congress votes which ever way the wind is blowing these days and not with common sense or in reality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ram1955
While I do not agree with the 9th circuit's ruling I do think that these EO's have gotten out of hand. In my opinion, it's too much power for the president and most of these should go through Congress.
Maybe somebody should have said some shit like this whne Obama was busy forcing midnight EO's through? Just a stab in the dark.

Precedent, man. It;s a HUGE ****ing thing here.
 
I don't watch SNL, and don't really give a shit, but have they given up on trying to be funny, and are now just concentrating on antagonizing the POTUS as best they can?

I'd imagine Rosie Odonnell playing Bannon, and all the skits will lack any sort of comedic value. But man, if you can antagonize the POTUS to the point he sends a tweet, who gives a shit about comedy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigblueinsanity
Also, lol at the "Trump Travel Ban" that I've seen mentioned in so many headlines.

How blatantly biased can you get to take him banning entry to the US from countries named by a previous Administration as supporters of terrorism, and just call it a "travel ban."
 
  • Like
Reactions: YourPublicEnemy
Why do athletes think their opinion is more valuable than others? Most of them had to be tutored to get through school. Yeah, that C student, thanks to the tutor, has all the answers because he averages 30 points a game. Shut up and play ball.
Nail, this is spot on. Those degrees in Parks and Recreation Mgt were brutal.
 
65% of our naval planes don't work. wtf are we??? China owns us, imo. We are totally dependent on foreign shit to run our country.

This per some head of something talking on the radio right now...

We don't have money or parts to repair all sorts of military equipment. Wtf.
 
65% of our naval planes don't work. wtf are we??? China owns us, imo. We are totally dependent on foreign shit to run our country.

This per some head of something talking on the radio right now...

We don't have money or parts to repair all sorts of military equipment. Wtf.
Sounds like an opportunity to revive all these defunct tool&die shops littering the midwest.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT