Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Clearly she was too emotional for the job.  She probably couldn't believe her luck when she was given the opportunity to be a martyr for the cause.

 

This is why it is best not to hold over flunkies from the previous administration unless they are exceptional at what they do.

  • Like 1

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Or maybe she's just a decent person.  Who knows, eh?

Wouldn't that suggest her replacement, who was also an Obama appointee, wasn't a decent person?

From everything I have read and heard this ban is perfectly legal.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
1 minute ago, Argus said:

Wouldn't that suggest her replacement, who was also an Obama appointee, wasn't a decent person?

From everything I have read and heard this ban is perfectly legal.

Maybe she just thought it was stupid.

Posted
Just now, bcsapper said:

Maybe she just thought it was stupid.

Fine. But you don't get to make that decision in her job. If a point is arguable then a lawyer's job is to argue it on behalf of their client. Almost any point is arguable, and it's up to the judges to decide who is right.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted (edited)

So apparently Trump had his idiot friend Giulliani get together with Bannon and the like to come out with this executive order on barring refugees and immigrants from seven countries. What did they not do?

They never consulted with the White House Attorney's Office on either the legality or clarity of the order.

They never consulted with or informed congress, not even their own party heads running committees on Homeland Security or Foreign Relations.

They did not consult with or inform the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, or the Secretary of Homeland Security until the order was signed and in effect.

According to insiders the Secretary of State is 'baffled' by his not being consulted, the Secretary of Defense is 'incensed' about not being consulted. What the Secretary of Homeland Security is feeling wasn't reported, but I doubt he was happy about having zero notice or time to get clarification or brief his senior people. He was on a coast guard aircraft at the time, and had no way to quickly brief them so they could brief those beneath them who were tasked with implementing the order. This led to mass confusion and horribly bad press for the administration, not to mention pissing off most of congress, including their own party, needlessly.

No one with any skill at explaining policy had a go at it in order to put the administration's spin on it except press secretary Sean (Mad dog) Spicer, who barked and snarled and was fairly unsympathetic.

All in all, amateur hour, ham-fisted incompetence which has cost the administration a lot of bad publicity, sacrificed good-will with congress, and pissed off the secretaries of defense, state and homeland security, all of whom are rich, and none of whom need their jobs.

Edited by Argus

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
8 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Maybe she just thought it was stupid.

Did she think Obama's "muslim ban" was stupid too?

The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. - Ronald Reagan


I have said that the Western world is just as violent as the Islamic world - Dialamah


Europe seems to excel at fooling people to immigrate there from the ME only to chew them up and spit them back. - Eyeball


Unfortunately our policies have contributed to retarding and limiting their (Muslim's) society's natural progression towards the same enlightened state we take for granted. - Eyeball


Posted
3 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Did she think Obama's "muslim ban" was stupid too?

I'll ask her next time we have coffee.

Posted
3 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

Did she think Obama's "muslim ban" was stupid too?

Given the fact that the 2 situations were significantly different, how she felt about Trump's muslim ban is irrelevant to how she would have felt about Obama's.

From what i understand, Obama's "Muslim ban" was related to a specific threat... 2 Iraqi refugees with problematic backgrounds that managed to get in despite procedures. As a result, the government managed to fix the procedures to keep the problem from recurring.

On the other hand, Trump's ban is both 1) much more far reaching, and 2) not specifically related to any threat, other than a "we don't trust them Muslims" mindset.

http://www.factcheck.org/2017/01/trumps-faulty-refugee-policy-comparison/

Posted

During the election, the drug companies were the big bad meanies and Trump would save the world by negotiating much lower prices from them. Today he cozies up to the industry and says give them massive tax cuts and get rid of regulation.

- Not my President.

Posted
1 minute ago, ?Impact said:

During the election, the drug companies were the big bad meanies and Trump would save the world by negotiating much lower prices from them. Today he cozies up to the industry and says give them massive tax cuts and get rid of regulation.

 

 

This will not save Canada's Valeant Pharmaceuticals...glad I sold that turd stock (VRX).

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted
28 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Judicial appointments should not be influenced by party political considerations.

I agree wholeheartedly, but that's simply not realistic either in the US or in Canada, where judicial appointments are ALWAYS influenced by party political considerations.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Argus said:

I agree wholeheartedly, but that's simply not realistic either in the US or in Canada, where judicial appointments are ALWAYS influenced by party political considerations.

Less obviously in Canada although Harper did go a bit over the edge in his last few picks. The Garland situation was ridiculous down there.

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Posted
7 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Less obviously in Canada although Harper did go a bit over the edge in his last few picks. The Garland situation was ridiculous down there.

The Liberals have always been pretty in-your-face about appointing judges who suited their ideological aims, witness Trudeau's desperate search for anyone who wasn't white and male to fill empty robes or Paul Martin's appointment to the supreme court of two gay rights activists at the same time.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
On 1/4/2017 at 8:53 PM, Derek 2.0 said:

 

Sure and I remember not a month before the election Obama saying how US elections couldn't be hacked and the results should be respected, and in not accepting defeat, Trump would undermine a Clinton administration..........Yet Putin has now stolen the election for Trump.......by hacking and turning over to Wikileaks internal DNC emails........in other words, Obama is suggesting if American voters didn't know what Democrats really thought, Clinton would be President.  

I really can't believe (well I guess I can believe because people are not bright)  that people are still falling for this 'Russia hacked the US elections'. 

Clinton did herself in 100%. Putin did not win it for Trump. Hillary's policital baggage brought her down giving Trump the win.

Posted

Nice piece by our own David Frum, not exactly a liberal:

Quote

It’s 2021, and president donald trump will shortly be sworn in for his second term. The 45th president has visibly aged over the past four years. He rests heavily on his daughter Ivanka’s arm during his infrequent public appearances.

Fortunately for him, he did not need to campaign hard for reelection. His has been a popular presidency: Big tax cuts, big spending, and big deficits have worked their familiar expansive magic. Wages have grown strongly in the Trump years, especially for men without a college degree, even if rising inflation is beginning to bite into the gains. The president’s supporters credit his restrictive immigration policies and his TrumpWorks infrastructure program.

Donald Trump, however, represents something much more radical. A president who plausibly owes his office at least in part to a clandestine intervention by a hostile foreign intelligence service? Who uses the bully pulpit to target individual critics? Who creates blind trusts that are not blind, invites his children to commingle private and public business, and somehow gets the unhappy members of his own political party either to endorse his choices or shrug them off? If this were happening in Honduras, we’d know what to call it. It’s happening here instead, and so we are baffled.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...ocracy/513872/

 

Posted
4 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Nice piece by our own David Frum, not exactly a liberal:

Big tax cuts, big spending, big deficits. Sounds like the current Liberal government...

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
On 1/30/2017 at 10:26 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

If she could not support the president's policies, it was her duty to resign, not wait to be fired.

The person who is replacing her didn't think so - This is gold:

 

"What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.

Posted
1 hour ago, Argus said:

Big tax cuts, big spending, big deficits. Sounds like the current Liberal government...

But the big difference is that one of them delivers on his campaign promises.

Science too hard for you? Try religion!

Posted
1 hour ago, marcus said:

The person who is replacing her didn't think so - This is gold:

 

I thought she said that the AG has an obligation to follow the law.  What she did was refuse to defend the president's legal rights.  

The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. - Ronald Reagan


I have said that the Western world is just as violent as the Islamic world - Dialamah


Europe seems to excel at fooling people to immigrate there from the ME only to chew them up and spit them back. - Eyeball


Unfortunately our policies have contributed to retarding and limiting their (Muslim's) society's natural progression towards the same enlightened state we take for granted. - Eyeball


Posted
2 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

I thought she said that the AG has an obligation to follow the law.  What she did was refuse to defend the president's legal rights.  

Her job is to give her opinion on what is legal or not. As you can see in the video above, Jeff Sessions who will assume the role of AG, picked by Trump, agrees that she must follow the law and sometimes that means that she would have to disagree with the president.

"What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.

Posted
47 minutes ago, marcus said:

Her job is to give her opinion on what is legal or not. As you can see in the video above, Jeff Sessions who will assume the role of AG, picked by Trump, agrees that she must follow the law and sometimes that means that she would have to disagree with the president.

Exactly!  And what the president did was fully lawful.  She knew she was a lame duck anyway, this way she gets martyr status from the left and Trump does away with her - everybody wins.

The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. - Ronald Reagan


I have said that the Western world is just as violent as the Islamic world - Dialamah


Europe seems to excel at fooling people to immigrate there from the ME only to chew them up and spit them back. - Eyeball


Unfortunately our policies have contributed to retarding and limiting their (Muslim's) society's natural progression towards the same enlightened state we take for granted. - Eyeball


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,900
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Ana Silva
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Ana Silva earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Scott75 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Political Smash went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Politics1990 earned a badge
      Very Popular
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...