sanctuary counties

Another opportunity to see if Democrats can take what they dish out.

(04-21-2019 10:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  sanctuary counties

Another opportunity to see if Democrats can take what they dish out.

On the surface, this seems like an issue of local control versus state control. I seem to remember a number of arguments on this board about how states overriding local ordinances was the way things should work.

On the surface you would also be opaque to the very inherent and very visible Constitutional and Bill of Rights issues present in the matter.

If this were a matter of a municipality refusing to adhere to a state law that preempts their ordinance on grocers handing out plastic shopping bags you would be spot on.

But, it is not, is it? It is a matter of a state restriction that arguably violates a portion of the Bill of Rights.

(04-21-2019 11:24 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 10:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  sanctuary counties

Another opportunity to see if Democrats can take what they dish out.

On the surface, this seems like an issue of local control versus state control. I seem to remember a number of arguments on this board about how states overriding local ordinances was the way things should work.

My personal opinion is that national laws should be enforced throughout the nation and state laws enforced throughout the state. I would oppose all sanctuary anythings.

But, it seems to be the position of some in your camp that smaller political units can pick and choose which laws they enforce. Just wondering if they will be consistent with the non enforcement of laws they like. What is your position?

In another vein, this illustrates my contention that all too often Democrats fail to look past the first domino.

foreign meddling

(04-20-2019 05:49 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-20-2019 05:27 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(04-20-2019 05:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-20-2019 04:57 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  When did Obama say Romney was racist or going to kill old people?

Are you saying that nobody on the left was saying that? Or that as long as it wasn't actually Obama, it didn't count?

I’m saying that Obama didn’t say those things, so Tanq’s attempt to compare a criticism of Trump lying to not criticizing talking heads during the Obama admin, is a poor comparison. I’m saying it matters more what POTUS’s say than what others say.

The weight of the words the POTUS are significant, and certainly more so than than pundits and talking heads. Would you agree or disagree?

lad, I did not say that. I am saying that I found JAAO's whining about Trump being a liar pretty fing hypocritical.

Someone that launches a tearfest on Trump being a liar (he undoubtedly is, mind you) and refuses to even cast a backward glance at the policies, rules to operate by, and the continuous and absolute wall of cries of BIIIGGGOOOTTTSS that has fing defined the Democratic Party since Reagan -- and refuses to even acknowledge that that absolute and continued wall of cries in that unabated fashion has *anything* to do with the landscape of Trump and his lying ways, is pretty much off the fing dock.

Yep it sucks that Trump is a liar. Look at the policies that *your* side has institutionalized for the last thirty fing years that just *may* have had a part to play in it. Or not. Your choice.

*Your* side defined that some pretty fing upstanding people (Romney, Ryan, McCain) were tarred and feathered with the fing 'kneejerk' statements (lies) of being racist, homophobic, ageist, killing old people, amd whatever other fing class, racial, or socio-economic division the Democrats could pry open with that rhetoric.

Yep, y'all won 2008 by slandering McCain and Palin with that. Continued into 2012 by tarring and feathering pretty much the *most* upright human that has run for the office since Carter or Reagan with that crap. Wash rinse repeat for Baby Bush, and to a smaller extent Papa Bush. Raise the level on it with Reagan.

Now people like JAAO cry like monkeys that big bad evil Trump lies. Good god, what the **** do you all expect after close to 40 fing years of simply using the tar and feather approach? And good fing god, when you use it on Romney and Ryan, dont act all fing innocent when an actual nasty baddy fing emerges that doesnt give a rat's ass what you all call him, nor gives a rat's ass what he calls others.

via Imgflip Meme Generator

(04-21-2019 06:23 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  

(04-20-2019 05:49 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-20-2019 05:27 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(04-20-2019 05:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-20-2019 04:57 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  When did Obama say Romney was racist or going to kill old people?

Are you saying that nobody on the left was saying that? Or that as long as it wasn't actually Obama, it didn't count?

I’m saying that Obama didn’t say those things, so Tanq’s attempt to compare a criticism of Trump lying to not criticizing talking heads during the Obama admin, is a poor comparison. I’m saying it matters more what POTUS’s say than what others say.

The weight of the words the POTUS are significant, and certainly more so than than pundits and talking heads. Would you agree or disagree?

lad, I did not say that. I am saying that I found JAAO's whining about Trump being a liar pretty fing hypocritical.

Someone that launches a tearfest on Trump being a liar (he undoubtedly is, mind you) and refuses to even cast a backward glance at the policies, rules to operate by, and the continuous and absolute wall of cries of BIIIGGGOOOTTTSS that has fing defined the Democratic Party since Reagan -- and refuses to even acknowledge that that absolute and continued wall of cries in that unabated fashion has *anything* to do with the landscape of Trump and his lying ways, is pretty much off the fing dock.

Yep it sucks that Trump is a liar. Look at the policies that *your* side has institutionalized for the last thirty fing years that just *may* have had a part to play in it. Or not. Your choice.

*Your* side defined that some pretty fing upstanding people (Romney, Ryan, McCain) were tarred and feathered with the fing 'kneejerk' statements (lies) of being racist, homophobic, ageist, killing old people, amd whatever other fing class, racial, or socio-economic division the Democrats could pry open with that rhetoric.

Yep, y'all won 2008 by slandering McCain and Palin with that. Continued into 2012 by tarring and feathering pretty much the *most* upright human that has run for the office since Carter or Reagan with that crap. Wash rinse repeat for Baby Bush, and to a smaller extent Papa Bush. Raise the level on it with Reagan.

Now people like JAAO cry like monkeys that big bad evil Trump lies. Good god, what the **** do you all expect after close to 40 fing years of simply using the tar and feather approach? And good fing god, when you use it on Romney and Ryan, dont act all fing innocent when an actual nasty baddy fing emerges that doesnt give a rat's ass what you all call him, nor gives a rat's ass what he calls others.

via Imgflip Meme Generator

JAAO, I understand Tanq's frustration. Everyone on the right is tired of being labeled a racist, greedy. unfeeling, unthinking, a Nazi, a deplorable, a bitter clinger, a redneck, a yahoo, and so forth, just to name a few, and then anything and everything we say dismissed.

Friday night, I was listening to Anderson Cooper, realized he was talking about me. Not personally of course, but as a member a huge class of people he thinks he is better than.

Running away holding your nose is not helping. We need to have dialogue between the right and the left if we are to survive as a country, and I respect Lad and Rice 93 for making their opinions known and engaging in dialogue.

I must say that I find a lot things that democrats say and do hypocritical. I wuld love to discuss those things with you, and of course, the things you find hypocritical from us rightists.

I'm crushed that JAAO has 'lost respect for Republicans.'

I'll bet you c-notes to ding-dongs I have voted both relatively and nominally more for Democrats than JAAO has for Republicans.

Dollars to donuts that JAAO's ratio of (voting not R) / (voting R) fails because of a divide by zero error.

I do note the nice grand layer of hypocrisy in this combo:

Quote:These sorts of lies are not defensible and are further poisoning our civic and political culture.

And that just gets in to his dishonesty, not even touching on the misogyny, racism, mocking the disabled, etc.

Yeah, cry me a fing river about 'further poisoning our civic and political culture' and follow up with the fing knee-jerk rhetoric stated for every Republican candidate since Reagan.

Good god, what a caricature the juxtaposition of those two sentences is....

(04-20-2019 05:49 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Now people like JAAO cry like monkeys that big bad evil Trump lies. Good god, what the **** do you all expect after close to 40 fing years of simply using the tar and feather approach? And good fing god, when you use it on Romney and Ryan, dont act all fing innocent when an actual nasty baddy fing emerges that doesnt give a rat's ass what you all call him, nor gives a rat's ass what he calls others.

I think somebody like Trump who doesn't give a damn what anybody thinks is exactly what repbulicans have needed to counter the democrat hate machine. Do I like him? Not really. Would he be someone I'd like to hang with? Probably not. But sometimes you have to meet evil with evil.

At least he's not a milquetoast wuss like most recent repbublican leaders.

(04-22-2019 02:41 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I'm crushed that JAAO has 'lost respect for Republicans.'

I'll bet you c-notes to ding-dongs I have voted both relatively and nominally more for Democrats than JAAO has for Republicans.

I agree, I doubt he ever had any respect for Republicans, or for anybody not a Democrat. But we don't know that for sure. I changed from a liberal to a conservative over many years. the opposite journey is less common, but possible.

As for voting for Democrats, I try to split my ticket as much as possible. Getting tougher every election. I would think he is well acquainted with the straight ticket lever.

Still, I wish he would articulate his thoughts and opinions and his reasons for thinking that way instead of throwing a rock and running away. It seems like he thinks that arguing with lowlifes is beneath him. I think most Democrats see this as the Eloi vs. the Morlocks, and we are the evil beastly ones.

(04-22-2019 07:01 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-20-2019 05:49 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Now people like JAAO cry like monkeys that big bad evil Trump lies. Good god, what the **** do you all expect after close to 40 fing years of simply using the tar and feather approach? And good fing god, when you use it on Romney and Ryan, dont act all fing innocent when an actual nasty baddy fing emerges that doesnt give a rat's ass what you all call him, nor gives a rat's ass what he calls others.

I think somebody like Trump who doesn't give a damn what anybody thinks is exactly what repbulicans have needed to counter the democrat hate machine. Do I like him? Not really. Would he be someone I'd like to hang with? Probably not. But sometimes you have to meet evil with evil.

At least he's not a milquetoast wuss like most recent repbublican leaders.

What Trump has done is that he is playing Alinksy-rules like a champ to these issues and tactics that have been de rigueur for the left for some time.

And with that I will drop this instance.

Quote:These sorts of lies are not defensible and are further poisoning our civic and political culture.

Ann Richards, who for unclear reasons is somewhat idolized by Texas leftists, is remembered and admired by them CHIEFLY for poisoning civic and political culture. To be honest, for most of her admirers that I know, that is the ENTIRE basis of their admiration; most of them cannot name one other fact about her.

(04-21-2019 12:31 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  But, it seems to be the position of some in your camp that smaller political units can pick and choose which laws they enforce.

That notion has a long-standing pedigree among the Democratic Party: its most famous spokesman was John C. Calhoun.

Well, a little segue while the leftists are off congratulating each other on not talking to deplorables:

Kate Smith

God Bless America

At some point, we need to stop judging people of 80, 90 or more years ago by the standards of today. Before long, we will have to scrub Lincoln, Jefferson, Washington, Woodrow Wilson, and FDR out of history. In the 1930's, probably most people(95%+) were racist to some degree.

Overall, I am pretty satisfied with Trump's accomplishments with respect to the country since he was elected. While some could quibble with some details, it is difficult to see how many could be unhappy with his performance based on the improved and much stronger American economy versus his immediate predecessor.

Much like the traditional starter who is replaced by a younger and more talented up and comer on an athletic team, there are bound to be sour grapes from those who think they were entitled to the position. However, most reasonable folks want their best players leading in and playing in the game, and we clearly have that now, where before it was clear we had a man with some talents that weren't really applicable to be effective at the position.

Might I suggest what many on the left swore they'd do and have a transfer portal opened up for those who have been usurped by superior talent? (Progressive promises--quite an oxymoron.) I hear Venezuela is looking for a few folks to come live in their paradise, as they appear to be losing a couple of dissatisfied citizens for reasons few in the media can grasp.

The left is very unhappy with the way things are going - they do not want things to go well.

They cling, bitterly, to the witch hunt of collusion. They keep saying that the evidence is in plain sight. I guess that means they think Mueller is either blind or a Trump stooge. Very disrespectful of them.

They keep saying X number of people are $500 away from financial disaster. I can believe that - most people live paycheck to paycheck and are very undisciplined in their financial dealings. Question have, what was the number of people in that positiion in 2015?

But these people who live paycheck to paycheck want to inspect Trump's tax returns. Why? One reason given is that they say he lied about his net worth.
I am worth $10,000,000,000. OK, that's not true, by a zero or 2 or more, but what crime have I committed with that lie? Does Congress need to correct that for you guys?

The Democrats are not using logic, reason, or even law. Just hate. They, aptly named the Resistance, just want to harass in hopes of setting the stage for a 2020 presidential win by...well, any one of the 20 or so.

And some of the Democrats say they have lost respect for the right. Ironic.

The left is very unhappy with the way things are going - they do not want things to go well.

They cling, bitterly, to the witch hunt of collusion. They keep saying that the evidence is in plain sight. I guess that means they think Mueller is either blind or a Trump stooge. Very disrespectful of them.

They keep saying X number of people are $500 away from financial disaster. I can believe that - most people live paycheck to paycheck and are very undisciplined in their financial dealings. Question have, what was the number of people in that positiion in 2015?

But these people who live paycheck to paycheck want to inspect Trump's tax returns. Why? One reason given is that they say he lied about his net worth.
I am worth $10,000,000,000. OK, that's not true, by a zero or 2 or more, but what crime have I committed with that lie? Does Congress need to correct that for you guys?

The Democrats are not using logic, reason, or even law. Just hate. They, aptly named the Resistance, just want to harass in hopes of setting the stage for a 2020 presidential win by...well, any one of the 20 or so.

And some of the Democrats say they have lost respect for the right. Ironic.

Quote:So all the “fake news” was true. A hostile foreign power intervened in the presidential election, hoping to install Donald Trump in the White House. The Trump campaign was aware of this intervention and welcomed it. And once in power, Trump tried to block any inquiry into what happened.

Never mind attempts to spin this story as somehow not meeting some definitions of collusion or obstruction of justice. The fact is that the occupant of the White House betrayed his country. And the question everyone is asking is, what will Democrats do about it?

But notice that the question is only about Democrats. Everyone (correctly) takes it as a given that Republicans will do nothing. Why?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/22/opini...party.html

Just saw a rather unbelievable statistic - in the year 2019, the Press Secretary for POTUS has had two press briefings that lasted for a grand total of only 30 minutes. Obama had issues with press freedoms, notoriously pushing for prosecution of whistle blowers, but it's insane to think that the POTUS has been so unreachable and basically in hiding.

Quote:As of Tuesday, the Trump White House will set a record for the longest stretch without a briefing, 43 days. This breaks the previous record set in March (42 days), which broke the record set in January (41 days). Since the beginning of the year, Sanders has had just two briefings, fielding press questions for a mere 30 minutes or so in total.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world...82036.html

(04-23-2019 01:10 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

Quote:So all the “fake news” was true. A hostile foreign power intervened in the presidential election, hoping to install Donald Trump in the White House. The Trump campaign was aware of this intervention and welcomed it. And once in power, Trump tried to block any inquiry into what happened.

Never mind attempts to spin this story as somehow not meeting some definitions of collusion or obstruction of justice. The fact is that the occupant of the White House betrayed his country. And the question everyone is asking is, what will Democrats do about it?

But notice that the question is only about Democrats. Everyone (correctly) takes it as a given that Republicans will do nothing. Why?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/22/opini...party.html

foreign meddling

How is this different? What are you gong to do about it?

Why do you think a liberal economist knows more about collusion than a former Attorney General of the US?

Three questions - I wonder how many you will answer. Best guess: zero.