"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..."

[barbara]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

Trump's smooth prime time presentation of his supreme court nominee seems to have knocked the messy suspension travel ban off the media screens.



Appears to have recovered his stride quickly.

Don't worry, he will make another stupid mistake before long and will be right back on his disastrous path.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by barbara

Don't worry, he will make another stupid mistake before long and will be right back on his disastrous path.

Trump is winning.

He's going to win so much you will get tired of him winning.

[68custom]

gonna win for himself and his cronies, you and me not so much! bend over TJ you gonna take it too.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by 68custom

gonna win for himself and his cronies, you and me not so much! bend over TJ you gonna take it too.

He's promised to leave my Social Security and Medicare alone.

If he breaks that promise I will turn on him like a stepped on snake.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

Trump is winning.

He's going to win so much you will get tired of him winning.

If you call the last 10 days worth of clusterf*cks winning, I have a bridge to sell you.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by finnbow

I have a bridge to sell you.

I'm sure you do.

One that you have been to many times.

And that you are personally acquainted with the architect that designed it and the engineer that built it no doubt.

[catswiththum]

If it has already been mentioned, my oversight, but Google up Bill Clinton's immigration speech - he could sue Trump for plagerism. A roomful of Democrats cheering wildly with a standing ovation.

Agree or disagree with the policy, Trump is enacting what has been long promised by Democrats and Republicans.

If you oppose the policy I would be careful about depending on the Democratic Party to see the fight through, as their agreement or opposition to immigration law enforcement seems to depend on who is running or in office, not the plight of the illegal immigrants they now loudly champion.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

The Congressional GOP delegation had the opportunity to offer input to their own RomneyCare/HeritageFoundationCare and chose not to during Congressional deliberations on Obamacare. That notwithstanding, Obamacare went through the legislative process, got the necessary votes and it was signed into law. It wasn't developed on the back of an envelope by a single 31 year old without consulting with anyone else. With Obamacare the GOP has had years to introduce tweaks to Obamacare in Congress and help improve it (as they were encouraged by Obama to do). Instead, they cast meaningless "repeal and replace" votes and it has now been clearly revealed by a hidden microphone in Philadelphia that they've never had a replacement plan and still don't.

Here were go with the same attempted BS analogy between Romneycare and Obamacare. Romneycare the same size / scope as Obamacare? No. Romneycare have age-banding like Obamacare? No. "Illegal" or so - called "junk policies" which most of the folks who bought them actually liked them - that were unilaterally cancelled by carriers who were complying with Obamacare? No. These were the elements that cause the most turbulence in the marketplace - the "fucking with people's lives". So, let's move on, shall we?

Originally Posted by finnbow

Lastly, it's ridiculous to compare a law intended to extend healthcare to the uninsured (a largely realized goal, BTW) with an unvetted EO seemingly designed solely just to maliciously fuck with (already vetted and desperate) refugees and immigrants, not to mention green card holders. The former effort showed President Obama's humanity, the latter showed President Trump's lack thereof.

You're correct, to the extent that it took an EO to let the agencies know that is was time to enforce EXISTING LAW. Your loopy assertion that the EO was designed "solely just to maliciously fuck with people"...well...I'll simply consider the source of that comment.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Here were go with the same attempted BS analogy between Romneycare and Obamacare. Romneycare the same size / scope as Obamacare? No. Romneycare have age-banding like Obamacare? No. "Illegal" or so - called "junk policies" which most of the folks who bought them actually liked them - that were unilaterally cancelled by carriers who were complying with Obamacare? No. These were the elements that cause the most turbulence in the marketplace - the "fucking with people's lives". So, let's move on, shall we?

The GOP had every opportunity during debates on Obamacare to help make it better, just as they did 65 other times when they meaninglessly voted to repeal and replace it. FWIW, they still have no replacement and the one that Trump promised he would unveil last Tuesday doesn't even exist per Senator Hatch.

You're correct, to the extent that it took an EO to let the agencies know that is was time to enforce EXISTING LAW. Your loopy assertion that the EO was designed "solely just to maliciously fuck with people"...well...I'll simply consider the source of that comment.

His EO was not about enforcing existing law. Where in the existing law did it say to turn back already vetted refugees, people with green cards or dual citizenship, and Iraqi interpreters and their families who had been vetted for years and had valid visas? Did the existing law say to handcuff and detain a 5 year old boy who was an American citizen?

I'd say all of those unequivocally qualify as maliciously fucking with people and have absolutely no basis in existing law. I support the views of 100 national security professionals who assert that this EO actually made us less safe and that it should be cancelled. Defend it if you want, but first take a deep look into your soul and see if it's there before doing so.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

The GOP had every opportunity during debates on Obamacare to help make it better, just as they did 65 other times when they meaninglessly voted to repeal and replace it. FWIW, they still have no replacement and the one that Trump promised he would unveil last Tuesday doesn't even exist per Senator Hatch.

Dealt with already. You continue to get it wrong, including the part about not having a replacement. Flail on.

Originally Posted by finnbow

His EO was not about enforcing existing law.

BS. Already responded to this in an earlier post.

Originally Posted by finnbow

I'd say all of those unequivocally qualify as maliciously fucking with people and have absolutely no basis in existing law..

I'm sure you would.