BTW, Wondergirl, have you decided yet which illegal drugs should be legalized?
|
BTW, Wondergirl, have you decided yet which illegal drugs should be legalized?
I haven't decided yet. Alcohol and tobacco and in some states cannabis are already legal, so can't list them. Legalizing currently illegal drugs would be a type of reverse psychology. Fentanyl perhaps? Cocaine? Meth? Heroin? Legalize them and we won't need a wall.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Will still need a wall to stop the half million illegal immigrants currently pouring across each year. As to the drugs, I hope you are joking.Quote:
Fentanyl perhaps? Cocaine? Meth? Heroin? Legalize them and we won't need a wall.
Those who want to legalise drugs are not joking, they think prohibition doesn't work, you can't protect people from themselves.
There are some things society needs to change for addiction to become unnessary
But tRump needs those illegal immigrants to build his towers, staff them, and work at Mar-a-lago.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
What would that be?Quote:
There are some things society needs to change for addiction to become unnessary.
A return to believing in something other than self and self gratification
And better ways to handle physical and emotional pain.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Clete, I'm starting to like your posts.Quote:
A return to believing in something other than self and self gratification.
Well, of course. What's not to like?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I like that too, Clete!Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
We agree on something! It's a miracle.Quote:
I like that too, Clete!
The power is in the point of agreement. I wish politicians would learn that
Unable to get his funding Donald the orange has built a wall of vehicles and men upon the border showing those caravaneers that they shall not cross. This may be a more practical solution as the numbers of refugees are matched by law enforcement and troops and he doesn't need Nancy's approval
he won't need her approval to give them a wiff of grape.
I hear he is going to get some funding to build a little more wall maybe he could use that to build a little wall instead of a big beautiful wall but it has to be cheaper to build it with vehicles there must be a lot of tanks, APC and trucks in mothballs looking for a home
Oh look , Trumpy the dumpy going to get some of his mula in an agreement that will see the government not shut down for a second time.
Seriously, Will any political party give in if someone cries that much.
Oh well, back to Stephen Colbert for updates.
Exchanging one dill for another?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dchdman
cannabis is not legal .The Federal government ,that has primacy in the constitution ,has so far chosen to not enforce it's laws regarding marijuana .Quote:
I haven't decided yet. Alcohol and tobacco and in some states cannabis are already legal, so can't list them.
Trump has lost it completely, he now wants to declare a national emergency and dirvert funds to build the wall. Is this the art of the deal or just ego in full stride? It is obvious he either lacks advisers or cannot listen to anyone but himself
The mad king of america is worse than King George
>crunch... munch... crunch!< Told you to get popcorn and enjoy the show! When you gonna to listen?
Well, of course, Tal, we know it is a circus and the Clown in Chief holds the centre ring. Personally I have a circus of my own to watch at the moment but yours is much more entertaining. You see, it couldn't happen here that a money bill could originate in the Senate and our Head of State has no individual power of appropriation
as I said elsewhere the last King of America was MAD and this King is also MAD! I think you have a different emergency
If Trump-haters paid attention to this core idea, they might understand why Trump supporters care far more about whether the president builds the wall and strengthen border security than they care about whether Mexico pays for the wall directly or indirectly.
The same people who are upset about Trump now making the American taxpayer pay for the wall were remarkably quiet when Obama did not deliver on "You can keep your doctor/private plan."Quote:
If Trump-haters paid attention to this core idea, they might understand why Trump supporters care far more about whether the president builds the wall and strengthen border security than they care about whether Mexico pays for the wall directly or indirectly.
He did deliver on that, but severely neglected to warn of maybe your doctor didn't want you. That was the biggest sticking point going forward from Obamacare. Many doctors don't take my new Medicare plans... BUMMER!
You and perhaps five other people in America believe that. Changing to a different plan (couldn't keep your old one contrary to what Obama/Pelosi had promised) meant changing networks which meant, in many cases, you could not keep your doctor. Medicare has nothing to do with what happened to most people with Obamacare.Quote:
He did deliver on that, but severely neglected to warn of maybe your doctor didn't want you.
As far as I'm concerned ,the National Emergency Act(NEA )50 U.S.C. § 1601 is just another abdication of power by the Legislative Branch.In our constitutional system, Congress is supposed to do the legislating, which includes determining the conditions ;emergency or otherwise ; that call for legislation. The rise of the imperial Presidency began with the Wilson administration with the expansion growing every term. Precedence is with the President at this point .But if I were a property owner on the border ;and the President used executive powers to seize my land ,I would feel abused and would join a court challenge .Congress passed Obamacare .It was not accomplished by declaring a national emergency . I think it was a bad law ;but it was passed as law should be passed.The payback will come when future President AOC declares the climate a national emergency requiring executive action.
Tomder, I think you stated it well. I think Trump is making a mistake with this declaration of an emergency where there is plainly not one. However, it would seem that there are real emergencies that do need to be dealt with and require time-sensitive responses that legislation cannot meet. How should those be dealt with?
59 emergencies have been declared since the law passed .Most of them do not go away. Here is the list of National Emergencies we are operating under . Not many of them were real emergencies when the executive invoked them .even those which began under emergency conditions, like 9/11, have lingered well past all reasonable understanding of the term.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/list...ry?id=60294693
Before the NEA Presidents always had the power to declare emergencies and Congress generally trusted the Presidents to responsibly exercise their inherent Article 2 powers .If Congress wanted to they could always defund .Lawmakers were generally comfortable with giving the commander in chief the benefit of the doubt that he had the nation’s best interests at heart and would also use his authority responsibly.
But that wasn't always the case . FDR used it to intern Japanese American citizens . Harry Truman attempted to use emergency powers to seize American steel mills .Lincoln conceded that his unilateral suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War was constitutionally questionable, but defended it as necessary to preserve the Union. The Constitution says only Congress has to power to suspend habeas corpus. ….“when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it” and “provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.”In theory the NEA was supposed to give the legislative branch a share of the responsibility .
The law says that Congress is mandated to meet six months after a specific emergency is issued “to consider a vote on a joint resolution to determine whether that emergency shall be terminated.” If, for whatever reason, both houses of Congress believed a declaration was no longer appropriate, lawmakers could pass a joint resolution ending it. The truth is that it has never been invoked .Congress has never even met to consider ending one ;let alone every six months, to vote on whether to end them.
Yeah we don't need a wall
https://nypost.com/2019/02/16/mexico...ruining-lives/Quote:
“It’s cheap. And abundant. That is why we are seeing a dramatic escalation of crystal methamphetamine use because it is being shipped to our county at the border. People aren’t making it anymore, because it comes here so cheap from Mexico.”Cleveland says meth labs started popping up in Ashtabula in 2002, but due to a crackdown “in the last 18 months, we’ve seen almost a wholesale elimination” of them. “That void . . . is being filled by Mexican cartels bringing meth across the borders,”
A wall isn't going to make a dent in the drug trade.
Drug trafficking » Immigration to the United States
If the wall helps with the drug trade, then that's great, but the much greater purpose, at least in my mind, is to cut back on illegal immigration.
You really think a big beautiful wall will deter migrants? How many illegals will it stop , since most fly in on a visa and don't go home. The gang members and criminals get caught and deported many times so how will a wall work for them? You think a gangster can't get a visa? You think they worry about a wall? You've seen the tunnels, and they find new ones all the time. It's a never ending story.
Maybe the best outcome is helping the dufus build a wall and if it doesn't work as advertised then the taxpayers can send him the bill. HEHEHE I doubt we do much collecting on that, it's more likely we get stiffed like everybody else who deals with the dufus.
Yes undoubtedly the wall needs to be built some place else and the southern Mexican border would be a cheaper and quicker option but the Mexicans don't appear to be concerned by the flow of refugees, etcQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
So we just keep doing what we've been doing which is working... lousy?? No, most don't fly in on a visa. Most walk in from south to north, and yes, I think a wall will slow that down considerably. As for the gang members and criminals, we need to put them in a hot jail in the middle of the Nevada desert and let them sit for a few years.Quote:
since most fly in on a visa and don't go home. The gang members and criminals get caught and deported many times so how will a wall work for them?
It is a mistake to keep these people in jail in country, you need to deposit them in a dark place far away so they cannot develop their networks in a prison population. Think, what would Kim do with them. Ah. But you are too civilised to do this. Put them to work, perhaps building a border wall. No pay of course, enslave them the way they enslave others. This they understandQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
last night at the Academy Awards .... oh the irony https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...2d&oe=5CE87895
I've always suspected the Academy was run by a bunch of racist homophobes. The wall proves it! Down with the Academy and their big, beautiful wall. (<:
There is no irony over temporary security measures for an event.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:49 PM. |