Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #21

    Sep 6, 2017, 10:14 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by talaniman View Post
    It was cruel no matter who did it. But amnesty was by a conservative hero...Reagan.
    Yes, Reagan has a lot to answer for. Amnesty, fall of the Soviet Union
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,327, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #22

    Sep 7, 2017, 04:26 AM
    As much as I have criticized King Reagan, and disagreed with his policies, I must credit his tax policy he implemented with the democratic congress as being fiscally responsible, and common sense. It added flexibility to the economic well being of the country, and set the stage for subsequent ability of having a balanced budget under Clinton. Pappy Bush boxed himself in a corner, and got booted out after his first term by promising no new taxes, until reality and fiscal responsibility required he too had to raise taxes, to avoid a financial budgetary shortfall.

    And how did Clinton balance the budget with Newt and the repubs in the congress? He raised taxes and closed military basses. Baby Bush came after and started two military incursions into Iraq and Afghanistan off the books, and blew all the money on tax cuts for the rich that allowed corporate America to spend all kinds of money overseas, and destroy the Global Economy with their taxpayer funded schemes, tricks, and traps.

    Obama will never be credited for righting the ship that Baby Bush nearly sunk, or leaving The Dufus with a solid foundation, and stable economy on which to build. He brought structure and certainty back where there was chaos and confusion, but conservatives repubs and certainly not the loony fringe was willing to do anything to help continue the effort. Instead they hollered and screamed and tried to seize power, and to a great extent, succeeded by opposing EVERYTHING that made sense.

    Now they have to govern, but their fiscal plans favor the oligarchs again, who are already fat and happy with overseas money extracted from CHEAP SLAVE labor, while they holler for MO"MONEY and that means YO" MONEY. They holler the tax rate is too high on them, yet none of them pay the highest rates. And none of them pay their workers MO"MONEY! Indeed TAX payers have been subsidizing wages for the working poor for decades.

    And tell me more about that big beautiful wall that Trump wants to build that you can see from space! Repubs are full of crap!
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #23

    Sep 7, 2017, 07:34 AM
    Why don't you create an amnesty for all those already there who can demonstrate they have not broken any other law, and deport the rest, close the borders, so there are no day trippers either way, and sit quietly for a while contemplating your navel, which is the special skill of all those in Congress and the Senate

    The republicans would gain great political kudos from this and truly uphold their tradition of emancipation. There is a lot to be said for holding the political high ground
    But amnesty was by a conservative hero...Reagan.
    Clete there was a blanket amnesty in 1986 (Simpson–Mazzoli Act,).It was the result of a deal between Reagan and the Dems . It was supposed to be a one shot deal and in exchange there would be tough enforcement of immigration laws ;especially on employers who hire illegals .

    Very few of the eligible illegals took advantage of the law and none of the enforcement aspects were vigorously enforced .

    This whole debate cracks me up . Trump saved the precious unconstitutional Dreamers rules . It was made by executive fiat and could've been reversed the same way . The thanks he gets is demonstrations and vile spewed at him as demonstrated in this op. There were many state's AGs who were days away from challenging it in court .The emperor knew that his actions were unconstitutional . But the Dems don't give a rat's A$$ about the rule of law .


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=Gw4BIWiWyQg
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #24

    Sep 8, 2017, 09:58 AM
    here is a video from the "double faced bozo " ,"moronic jackass".

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKa8KYT-NSI
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,327, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #25

    Sep 8, 2017, 10:33 AM
    Doing the right thing may be against YOUR rules but like you said rules can be changed from one exec to the next. So tell me why Dufus didn't just rescind Obama's EO, and be done with it, case closed?
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #26

    Sep 8, 2017, 01:17 PM
    for cynical reasons no doubt . But his action is the correct one. Congress makes law not the President .
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,327, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #27

    Sep 8, 2017, 01:34 PM
    That's true, but presidents must act when the congress doesn't, and who wouldn't act on behalf of children? You have to admit this congress hasn't acted very much, not even on easy stuff. I don't blame Trump much actually for passing this hot potato to the congress and maybe sparing himself some heat from his base. I think he's lucky Mother Nature has dominated the news cycle, and will for many days to come.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #28

    Sep 9, 2017, 03:59 AM
    1. but presidents must act when the congress doesn't,
    There already was a law . Obama made a rule he knew was unconstitutional .
    1. maybe sparing himself some heat from his base
    His base is seeing the fraud they supported . It actually took longer for them to recognize it than I though . Some of the hardliners will still blame the swamp creature Repubics ;but I don't see how they can stomach Trump going all in with the Dems.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=nltXQOIrPH8
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #29

    Sep 9, 2017, 04:26 AM
    more proof herr Donald is all in with the Dems .

    Trump’s Justice Department Lets Lois Lerner Off The Hook | 710 WOR
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #30

    Sep 9, 2017, 06:01 AM

    1. and who wouldn't act on behalf of children?
    Bubba Clintoon . He sent men with automatic weapons to kick a child refugee out of America . And the Dems cheered .
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #31

    Sep 9, 2017, 06:34 AM
    Tom you keep telling us that Trump is a closet democrat, I seem to remember telling you that before he was elected.

    I also seem to remember the democrats were the party of slavery and repression, how were they allowed to switch their agenda and fool your nation?
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,327, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #32

    Sep 9, 2017, 07:39 AM
    Dems and repubs both believe in economic slavery Clete to some extent. No Trump is no true republican, nor is he a true democrat. He will use whatever it takes to get what he wants. He will play ball with whomever. Didn't he start his campaign for president by blasting repubs? He brags often how he kicked ALL their butts, so for sure he is beholding to neither party.

    It is weird that the southern democrats became republicans and northern republicans became democrats as a fallout from the civil war which is still being fought but with less blood. It was all about civil RIGHTS and who had them in the first place. They started with the premise on paper anyway that "All men were created equal", when in reality was no they weren't. We have been trying to live up to those words ever since. Well some have but many do not believe completely in the words of the founders, so they resist for whatever reason.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #33

    Sep 9, 2017, 11:23 AM
    the big shift came 1964-1968 when liberal Repub Nixon started the 'silent majority ' law and order campaign while the Dems were rioting in the streets of Chitown ....and roughly around the same time that LBJ introduced the modern welfare state (“I’ll have those ni**rs voting Democratic for 200 years.”).
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #34

    Sep 9, 2017, 04:20 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by talaniman View Post

    It is weird that the southern democrats became republicans and northern republicans became democrats as a fallout from the civil war which is still being fought but with less blood. It was all about civil RIGHTS and who had them in the first place. They started with the premise on paper anyway that "All men were created equal", when in reality was no they weren't. We have been trying to live up to those words ever since. Well some have but many do not believe completely in the words of the founders, so they resist for whatever reason.
    But the founders didn't believe that, they were slave owners and made sure their status wouldn't be disturbed in their lifetime. All men are equal only in appearance but nature tells you that some are stronger than others. It needed law to give some men rights the strong would not allow and the strong will not allow others to be equal with them
    Athos's Avatar
    Athos Posts: 1,108, Reputation: 55
    Ultra Member
     
    #35

    Sep 9, 2017, 09:59 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    All men are equal only in appearance but nature tells you that some are stronger than others.

    The Constitution doesn't read "All men are equal". It says "All men are CREATED equal". There's a world of difference.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #36

    Sep 10, 2017, 12:19 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Athos View Post
    The Constitution doesn't read "All men are equal". It says "All men are CREATED equal". There's a world of difference.
    Isn't that what I just said, your Constitution was only made to protect the rich, just like the earlier version, the Magna Carta, on which it is allegedly based. Some of your founders decided that those who are not equal should have guns so they have the illusion of being equal, or something like that
    Athos's Avatar
    Athos Posts: 1,108, Reputation: 55
    Ultra Member
     
    #37

    Sep 10, 2017, 01:28 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    Isn't that what I just said, your Constitution was only made to protect the rich, just like the earlier version, the Magna Carta, on which it is allegedly based. Some of your founders decided that those who are not equal should have guns so they have the illusion of being equal, or something like that

    The Constitution is not based on the Magna Carta although it is certainly in the same line of the lesser powerful challenging the more powerful. This idea (as you know) goes far back - the Hebrew Biblical prophets crying out to Yahweh for justice for the poor, Confucius and Jesus admonishing all men to "do unto others", and the many others down the years slowly, step by painful step, always flawed but always reaching for that perfect document or system by which humans can effectively govern themselves. We're not there yet.

    My point --- the 250-year-old Constitution is also not a perfect document, but it wisely contained both progressive and conservative elements and, most importantly in my view, it allowed itself to be amended as the need arose. I don't think it is fair to characterize it as "made only to protect the rich". That is an anachronism and an invalid one at that.

    The more serious charge is that the composers of those stirring words promoting a just society were themselves guilty of the most unjust actions by holding in bondage an entire group of people based on nothing more than their skin color. This original sin was partially paid for in a bloody war whose embers are not totally extinguished yet. We continue to pay for the sins of our fathers.

    Trump doesn't see America with its historical evolution. He sees America only as a giant cheeseburger, for him and his friends to chomp on and continually practice their hedonistic ways. He has turned the American dream upside down. No longer "tired masses yearning to breathe free", but "keep out the Muslims and send those Mexicans back where they came from".

    I think SOME Republicans are FINALLY starting to get it. They are the only hope to rid our country of this megalomaniac.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #38

    Sep 10, 2017, 01:45 AM
    I think SOME Republicans are FINALLY starting to get it. They are the only hope to rid our country of this megalomaniac.
    Do you think the true Republicans want to do that? They want to

    keep out the Muslims and send those Mexicans back where they came from".
    As a good Republican should. There is some sort of strange idea Republicans were emancipationists, they were not. Lincoln wanted to win without freeing a single slave, he could not. Lincoln did not want a coloured population in the United States and true to their roots nor do the Republicans. Had Lincoln survived he would have campaigned to deport coloured people, why should Trump, if he is a true Republican, do any less? Trump hasn't promised to govern for all the people and if he did, I wouldn't believe him
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #39

    Sep 10, 2017, 02:25 AM
    No longer "tired masses yearning to breathe free",
    The Statue of Liberty was not about that .The French gifted it to us because the US was a beacon liberty for the rest of world .It was not about come to America to experience liberty .It was build your liberty there .The surest way to ensure the continuance of despotic regimes is to have the dissident leave the country rather than to fight for their rights.

    The poem 'The New Colossus' was for a fund raising effort to build the statue's pedestal .It does not form the basis of US immigration policy . The only immigration policy that makes sense for any nation is what is in the best interest of the nation. Historically the US has had immigration policies that were open and at times restrictive based on the needs of the nation. There are historically restrictions . Next to the Statue of Liberty is Ellis Island . Every immigrant coming into New York were screened at Ellis Island before being allowed entry into New York. Many an immigrant were denied entry even though they had made it so far to almost touch Lady Liberty.The rate of immigration ebbed and flowed .After 1820 when we had a vast amt of territory to fill almost anyone was welcome . The US even gave away free land . By the 1920s the frontier was filled and strict quotas and enforcement followed .

    The sentiment of the poem does not reflect anything about United States immigration law. Instead, immigration law consists of regulations and statutory law that ensures the protection of the border as well as opening doors to individuals and families who come to the United States legally. The law does not advocate an unvetted process for people to arrive in the United States simply because they are "tired, poor, or your huddled masses." To insinuate that immigration policy should be an open borders system simply because it makes one feel good does nothing positive for the United States and its citizens.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #40

    Sep 10, 2017, 03:15 AM
    The sentiment of the poem does not reflect anything about United States immigration law
    Seems to me it is time for that statue to be taken down too! It no longer reflects the mood of the people

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

I'm serious I've been trying to find this movie for years and years and years [ 9 Answers ]

I think this movie/ TV film is from the 80s or 90s. I cannot remember the name of the movie as I watched it when I was quite young. What I can remember is that two young girls meet on a beach, one with blonde hair the other dark haired. It is set on a beach for majority of the film (I think). The...

10 years marriage-stay home mom 8 years. Now have job and husband has trust issues [ 7 Answers ]

Thank you for reading. Long story, short version. Met husband 12 years ago... both were social bar fly's. I love to dance and listen music and so did he. As we've aged (40 now) I still love music and dancing and hanging with friends once every few months to dinner and perhaps a lounge place. He...

If charged six years jail time and 4 years probation will you serve all 6 years jail [ 2 Answers ]

My exhusband was charged with theft by bring stolen property into state, theft by taking, theft by receiving stolen property, criminal trespass, aggravated cruelty to animals, removal of id items from animals. His sentence is 6 years jail time and 4 years probation. Will he serve all 6 years jail...

If charged six years jail time and 4 years probation will you serve all 6 years jail [ 1 Answers ]

My exhusband has never execised his visitation rights of our twin girls. We have been divorced for 7 1/2 years. He is in jail now. I have not received child support in 2 years. Is this considered abandament? I live in Georgia.


View more questions Search