Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
37 user(s) are online (28 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 1
Guests: 36

mitts, more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (drifterx)




Re: Trump Our New President
#1
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

jerseymom wrote:
Justice Department advised not to defend Trump’s travel ban
By Daniel Halper January 30, 2017 | 6:59pm |

In an extraordinary move, Acting Attorney General Sally Yates has ordered Justice Department lawyers not to defend President Trump’s executive order blocking immigrants from seven mostly Muslim countries.

“I am responsible for ensuring that the positions we take in court remain consistent with this institution’s solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right,” Yates said in an email to lawyers of the Civil Division on Monday.

“At present, I am not convinced that the defense of the executive order is consistent with these responsibilities nor am I convinced that the executive order is lawful,” she added.

More


It's not really shocking when the executive order was formed without much consultation. If people think this is purely political, there are many Republicans in Congress not happy with the executive order and not just because of how bad the optics are, they also agree it's bad policy because of how it was formed.

Posted on: 1/30 20:14
Top


Re: Trump Our New President
#2
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

drifterx wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

drifterx wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

drifterx wrote:
Especially since many of those European immigrants were dirt poor and social pariahs in their own countries of origin.

It's also true that the US banned some Jews from entering the country when they were fleeing Nazi Germany. Is that where Trump wants us to return to as a country?

That is the history of America and some people here seem to have a terrible grasp of history. The real history, not the alternative kind.



Add yourself to the list.

In the real history of America, immigration policy was settled by the question: will accepting these immigrants benefit our nation?

It's true that we took plenty of unskilled immigrants, but that's because there was plenty of unskilled work that needed to be done. Working to construct the railroads was one huge project.

We never had some kind of open door policy, and it's not going to happen now. It would be unsustainable given our generous social services which are available for immigrants.

And your terrible analogy to the Jews was already debunked in the Atlantic article I posted. Not to mention, the safe zones that President Trump is working to establish in the Middle East will be a safe place for refugees to live.


It's true that there were economic reasons for accepting immigrants in the past. That hasn't changed.

What has changed is areas of responsibility. We not only have military footprints in many of these countries, we are actually engaged in the conflicts that arose from many of these displacements. The Jewish analogy fits in because we got involved in World War II and we became very much involved in the fate of the Jewish people. Whether you agree in our involvement in these affairs or not, we do bear a responsibility since we are involved.


No, we don't bear this kind of responsibility, and will fulfill any humanitarian obligations through the safe zones.

The Jewish analogy is horrible for several reasons, not the least of which is the fact that these Muslims are killing each other. If the analogy applies at all, it is to a religious minority, which are the Syrian Christians.

You know, the same ones that Obama seemed to go out of his way to reject. Christians are 10% of Syria's population yet made up less than 1% of Syrian refugees admitted last year.

That's why Trump wil be prioritizing them, once the refugee ban is lifted. And even then I would argue we don't have the responsibility to take them. But if you're going to use the Jewish analogy, that's where it goes.


That's your opinion, that you think safe zones are enough. Apparently it wasn't, ever since we invaded Iraq. I wonder why?

There is no real evidence that Obama rejected Christian refugees but we do have Trump saying he would start a Muslim ban during his presidential campaign. Too bad his ban also affected Christian refugees.


No, it is not just my opinion. In fact, we had an election on this very issue. As I'm sure you will acknowledge, the different policy stances were communicated loud and clear. Everyone knew the platforms of each candidate. And Trump won.

What people like these protesters are doing is essentially being a sore loser. I include you in this group because you are trying to skirt the fact that Trump is merely doing exactly what was promised. Something I, and 60 million other Americans, strongly believe is in our own best interest for our long term future. And you seem to be sneakily claiming that my stance is a mere "opinion," making yours fact. When it just simply isn't the case.

At best, you have a contrary opinion that was put on the ballot and rejected.

The only legitimate objection one could have to Trump's orders is the fact that some green card holders initially seemed to be banned as well. But that was quickly cleared up as a mistake in administering the order, and green card holders can travel back and forth, albeit with extra questioning. The refugee issue is settled, and as I said, we don't have a responsibility to bring them here.


Well if you are going to politicize this issue then I can rightfully say Republicans have been sore losers for the past 8 years. That doesn't really get us anywhere.

It is entirely your opinion at this point because the country as a whole hasn't followed this trend, and it won't. I guess we just have to wait and see. So far, it's not looking good for your guy.

All politics aside, I would really like to see how just having safe zones will accomplish anything. How exactly do you establish a safe zone in Syria? Boots on the ground? Talk his BFF out of backing Assad? Most of these refugees are not fleeing because of ISIS. It is because their own government has been bombing them.

Posted on: 1/30 19:30
Top


Re: Trump Our New President
#3
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

drifterx wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

drifterx wrote:
Especially since many of those European immigrants were dirt poor and social pariahs in their own countries of origin.

It's also true that the US banned some Jews from entering the country when they were fleeing Nazi Germany. Is that where Trump wants us to return to as a country?

That is the history of America and some people here seem to have a terrible grasp of history. The real history, not the alternative kind.



Add yourself to the list.

In the real history of America, immigration policy was settled by the question: will accepting these immigrants benefit our nation?

It's true that we took plenty of unskilled immigrants, but that's because there was plenty of unskilled work that needed to be done. Working to construct the railroads was one huge project.

We never had some kind of open door policy, and it's not going to happen now. It would be unsustainable given our generous social services which are available for immigrants.

And your terrible analogy to the Jews was already debunked in the Atlantic article I posted. Not to mention, the safe zones that President Trump is working to establish in the Middle East will be a safe place for refugees to live.


It's true that there were economic reasons for accepting immigrants in the past. That hasn't changed.

What has changed is areas of responsibility. We not only have military footprints in many of these countries, we are actually engaged in the conflicts that arose from many of these displacements. The Jewish analogy fits in because we got involved in World War II and we became very much involved in the fate of the Jewish people. Whether you agree in our involvement in these affairs or not, we do bear a responsibility since we are involved.


No, we don't bear this kind of responsibility, and will fulfill any humanitarian obligations through the safe zones.

The Jewish analogy is horrible for several reasons, not the least of which is the fact that these Muslims are killing each other. If the analogy applies at all, it is to a religious minority, which are the Syrian Christians.

You know, the same ones that Obama seemed to go out of his way to reject. Christians are 10% of Syria's population yet made up less than 1% of Syrian refugees admitted last year.

That's why Trump wil be prioritizing them, once the refugee ban is lifted. And even then I would argue we don't have the responsibility to take them. But if you're going to use the Jewish analogy, that's where it goes.


That's your opinion, that you think safe zones are enough. Apparently it wasn't, ever since we invaded Iraq. I wonder why?

There is no real evidence that Obama rejected Christian refugees but we do have Trump saying he would start a Muslim ban during his presidential campaign. Too bad his ban also affected Christian refugees.

Posted on: 1/30 18:41
Top


Re: Trump Our New President
#4
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

drifterx wrote:
Especially since many of those European immigrants were dirt poor and social pariahs in their own countries of origin.

It's also true that the US banned some Jews from entering the country when they were fleeing Nazi Germany. Is that where Trump wants us to return to as a country?

That is the history of America and some people here seem to have a terrible grasp of history. The real history, not the alternative kind.



Add yourself to the list.

In the real history of America, immigration policy was settled by the question: will accepting these immigrants benefit our nation?

It's true that we took plenty of unskilled immigrants, but that's because there was plenty of unskilled work that needed to be done. Working to construct the railroads was one huge project.

We never had some kind of open door policy, and it's not going to happen now. It would be unsustainable given our generous social services which are available for immigrants.

And your terrible analogy to the Jews was already debunked in the Atlantic article I posted. Not to mention, the safe zones that President Trump is working to establish in the Middle East will be a safe place for refugees to live.


It's true that there were economic reasons for accepting immigrants in the past. That hasn't changed.

What has changed is areas of responsibility. We not only have military footprints in many of these countries, we are actually engaged in the conflicts that arose from many of these displacements. The Jewish analogy fits in because we got involved in World War II and we became very much involved in the fate of the Jewish people. Whether you agree in our involvement in these affairs or not, we do bear a responsibility since we are involved.

Posted on: 1/30 18:17
Top


Re: Trump Our New President
#5
Home away from home
Home away from home


Especially since many of those European immigrants were dirt poor and social pariahs in their own countries of origin.

It's also true that the US banned some Jews from entering the country when they were fleeing Nazi Germany. Is that where Trump wants us to return to as a country?

That is the history of America and some people here seem to have a terrible grasp of history. The real history, not the alternative kind.


Posted on: 1/30 16:57
Top


Re: USA added to list of persecuted Christians
#6
Home away from home
Home away from home


The funny thing is, America used to ban Christmas and if not for immigrants we wouldn't have these old pagan rituals back as the Christmas we know now.

Christians should be more worried about the commercialization of their religion as I'm sure Christ would hate it now as he did back then.

Posted on: 1/10 19:42
Top


Re: Republican Convention
#7
Home away from home
Home away from home


He already has a wall paid for by his donors so anything is possible.

https://secure.donaldjtrump.com/djtsvi ... all-splash-100&amount=100

Posted on: 2016/11/4 16:07
Top


Re: If you found the wallet this morning at Hamilton Park...
#8
Home away from home
Home away from home


Do I need a 'track record' to speak up against racism? I sure hope not.

Posted on: 2016/11/4 16:04
Top


Re: If you found the wallet this morning at Hamilton Park...
#9
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

On_The_3rd wrote:

I never said people don't have the freedom to express their opinion back – they absolutely do – but keep in mind that fueling a fire does nothing to extinguish it.


And neither does ignoring it, especially if that fire was set for no good reason.

While I appreciate the freedom we all have to say what we feel, I would like to think that lashing out against bigotry is still by far the normal response.

Posted on: 2016/11/4 14:31
Top


Re: Democratic Convention
#10
Home away from home
Home away from home


"Oh but Trump is not a politician. That's why I'm voting for him."

No, he's not a politician. He's just the guy who brags about buying politicians.

Posted on: 2016/10/25 16:53
Top


Re: Democratic Convention
#11
Home away from home
Home away from home


It's a good thing Donna Brazile isn't running for POTUS then.

Republicans however gets behind a man who constantly lies to everyone including to himself. I'm surprised he hasn't claimed his hair's been rigged because it loses to a gentle breeze.

As fat-ass-bike already said, everyone in politics lies. We should at least vote for someone who is somewhat competent, even at lying.

Posted on: 2016/10/25 10:11
Top


Re: Democratic Convention
#12
Home away from home
Home away from home


Because it went to court and a judge?

Posted on: 2016/10/24 20:08
Top


Re: 10/19/2016: Presidential Debate 3 (Las Vegas)
#13
Home away from home
Home away from home


China wants him first for being such a good customer.

http://www.newsweek.com/how-donald-tr ... teel-workers-china-505717

And the best part:

Quote:

Another recent Trump building that has used metal from China is Trump International Hotel and Tower in Chicago, which opened in 2009. For that project, Trump obtained loans from Deutsche Bank and three hedge funds that in turn used financing from George Soros, the business magnate who is the subject of many conservative conspiracy theories and is portrayed as a threat to the Republican Party.


Posted on: 2016/10/20 18:02
Top


Re: 10/19/2016: Presidential Debate 3 (Las Vegas)
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


People can be angry about Obama and Hillary all they want but the question is: why did you pick an imbecile as your candidate?

At some point, conservatives have to take responsibility for their own actions, like how they always preach. Own it.

Posted on: 2016/10/20 12:01
Top


Re: Republican Convention
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


She chose to speak out against Donald Trump for behaving like a classless clown. Good for her.

Posted on: 2016/10/19 18:54
Top


Re: Republican Convention
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


I think that ad went over your head because you failed to realize what Trump was actually doing in that ad.

Let me spell it out for you. The ad claims the woman is a Republican who thinks Trump should be disqualified for mocking people with disabilities like that of her son.

I guess it requires some empathy to understand the ad? Some Trump supporters simply lack that human quality.

Posted on: 2016/10/19 11:15
Top


Re: Republican Convention
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


Actually, don't we have 4 candidates? None of them are worth a damn.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 23:08
Top


Re: Republican Convention
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


If the FBI says there is nothing there, there is nothing there. I'm sure they'll keep trying. Hillary Clinton has got to be the most investigated, the most scrutinized politician in the US and yet her opponents can't find anything. Either she is that good or her opponents are just too incompetent.

I don't like Clinton because I generally don't like political operators who are too slick for their own good. She is definitely dishonest, and maybe it's because she's a target but she is definitely an example of the larger issue of big money in politics. The problem is, both candidates are guilty of it. We had one candidate who could have done something about it, but he lost.

Posted on: 2016/10/17 10:40
Top


Re: Republican Convention
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Nobody is ignoring them. The press is definitely interested but the people aren't. There just isn't any sex in those emails. If they can find something there that tops 'grab them by the pussy' then Trump might just have a chance at a comeback. The email leaks are so tame that the Clinton campaign is barely responding to them. I find it funnier that the Republicans are suddenly loving Wikileaks. It wasn't that long ago when they wanted them to be branded as a terrorist group.

I find it odd that there is no hacking of Trump campaign emails. Are they not as interesting or has Wikileaks turned partisan? I would bet there is a ton of dirt to be found there.

Posted on: 2016/10/17 10:27
Top


Re: Republican Convention
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


I wish I could make that up. Trump supporters are just that stupid.

Posted on: 2016/10/17 9:58
Top


Re: Democratic Convention
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


As long as the banks can give out large checks, nobody will go full Warren in an election year. It's a shame because out of all them, Warren and like-minded members of Congress actually accomplished something this year by going after Wells Fargo, forcing the CEO out with as little compensation as possible. There should be more Warrens out there but we know who's buttering the bread on both sides.

Posted on: 2016/10/16 13:10
Top


Re: Republican Convention
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
No, the funny part is your stupid comments like this democrat/republican viewpoint and then trying to attribute it to Trump voters.

If anything is true, it is HRC escaping justice because of her last name and her democrat affiliation.

The HRC campaign is desperate for a large voter mandate... I think the polling numbers in key states do not look good for her and that is why we are in the middle of this media frenzy with half baked law suits that will all disappear after the election if Clinton wins.


Quote:

drifterx wrote:
What's funny is that some Trump supporters shrug off his despicable taped comments because apparently, in their view, he said them while he was a Democrat. Now that he's a 'Republican', they will never stop supporting him.

If Trump is indeed working for Clinton, Hillary is not paying him nearly enough. He's about to drown a shit-ton of lemmings.


I think I hit a nerve. I did say 'some' but if the shoe fits. All you have to do is check out the people at Trump rallies to prove my point. It's all out there, no conspiracy theories necessary.

This election is virtually over and Hillary didn't even have to lift a finger. Trump is all you need to blame for the Republican death spiral.

Posted on: 2016/10/16 13:00
Top


Re: Republican Convention
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


What's funny is that some Trump supporters shrug off his despicable taped comments because apparently, in their view, he said them while he was a Democrat. Now that he's a 'Republican', they will never stop supporting him.

If Trump is indeed working for Clinton, Hillary is not paying him nearly enough. He's about to drown a shit-ton of lemmings.

Posted on: 2016/10/16 8:59
Top


Re: Republican Convention
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


If you are all tired of all the sex talk by now, lets switch gears to something a little closer to home.

Donald Trump may have lied about donating to 9/11 Charities.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/polit ... arities-article-1.2829908

Couple that with: Donald Trump lied about claiming $150,000 in 9/11 money to "help people in need"

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/polit ... -people-article-1.2786879

Posted on: 2016/10/15 0:12
Top


Re: Disrespecting "other" religions
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:

I am stating what happen and what the report that was done by an outside firm on the sexual abuse of minors. The majority, close to 90% (forget the exact figure) were male victims. In order to stop the sexual abuse of minors then the Catholic Church must stop allowing gay men in the church. According to many on this blog, people are born with their sexual orientation so it was gay men not straight men attacking the youth. People here want to attack the Church but they also want to dismiss who attacked the victims.


Even if what you say is true, 90% is not 100%. You may have 90% Sanduskys in the priesthood but you also have 10% Donald Trumps in there. What do you propose to do about that? The female victims sometimes carry the double whammy effect of not only getting abused but also sometimes having to give birth to the children of their rapists. Do we just ignore that statistic?

You keep deflecting as if somehow sexual orientation is the crux of the problem when really it is the shoddy policing of the Church that ignores and even blames victims, and simply hides and moves the perps from the spotlight.

Posted on: 2016/10/14 13:45
Top


Re: Disrespecting "other" religions
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Right. So, your case proves what? That Catholics have a long and persistent problem with their priesthood and probably need to exercise some humility on how they view other religions? I think many Catholics already know that.

Or are you trying to say that your case of a priest sodomizing boys somehow invalidate the many cases of priests sexually abusing girls, and in some cases impregnating them? Are you trying to say these priests are somehow 'gay'? You are going to have a tough time selling that one.

Posted on: 2016/10/14 12:52
Top


Re: Disrespecting "other" religions
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


This may be true but unlike a robber caught by the police, a pedo priest doesn't get sent to jail, the Church simply sends them somewhere else.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/05/pries ... of-teen-pregnancy-center/

Posted on: 2016/10/14 12:41
Top


Re: Disrespecting "other" religions
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Which make perfect sense since one of the victims is female.

Posted on: 2016/10/13 20:30
Top


Re: 10/09/2016: Presidential Debate 2 (St. Louis)
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


While I think it is admirable that some evangelicals have spoken out against Donald Trump's words, that doesn't deny the support he's been getting and not just from evangelicals, and that's what I mean by the Religious Right.

However, we are starting to see a 'come to Jesus' moment for some where they may still not vote for Clinton, they would not vote for Trump either. There is now a 3rd party candidate taking away votes from Trump in Utah polls. Who knows how far trend will spread. Personally, I think it's too late for another 3rd party candidate but it's still bad news for Trump.

https://www.barna.com/research/the-fai ... p-and-clinton-supporters/



Posted on: 2016/10/13 11:55
Top


Re: 10/09/2016: Presidential Debate 2 (St. Louis)
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

135jc wrote:

Try answering what's worse. Verbally attacking and degrading a women accuser or bragging that a women lets you touch her.


You mean like calling Paula Jones a loser?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O50NvGrOx2k

Or calling them 'unnatractive'

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles ... f-unattractive-women.html

So what you are really asking is what's worse, Donald Trump or Donald Trump? All I can say to that is , yeah.

We haven't even started hearing about his response to his own accusers yet. It's only a matter of time and it is going to be ugly.

If the Religious Right have started running out of redemption stories for Trump and have begun turning their backs on him then it is all over. Even they can now see that woman is better off being President than a total sleaze bag.

Posted on: 2016/10/13 9:53
Top



TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 9 »






Login
Username:

Password:

remember me

Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017