Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

    Originally posted by BassAle View Post
    no, you're just dumber than you think if you really think this is normal lame duck legislation.
    Politics is a no-holds barred brawl. Anyone who doesn't realize that is being naive. That's why moves like gerrymandering or this lame duck legislation occurs. People can sit there and pretend like only one team does it. People have a right to be naive.

    I have yet to hear one logical explanation as to why the legislation proposed in Michigan and Wisconsin is illegal or unconstitutional. Same as in North Carolina.

    Personally, I think it's short-sighted on Republican's part to make these moves, and probably not politically smart. Why give D's something to run against in the next legislative races in Wisconsin? Also, as I said yesterday, the power stripped from the governor doesn't just address the power of a Democratic governor, it applies to a Republican governor too. But the Republican legislature in Wisconsin being short-sighted, or buying short-term political gain for long-term political loss isn't illegal or unconstitutional.
    That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

    Comment


    • Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

      Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
      When all I get is name-calling, I tend to think I struck a little closer to home than people like to admit.
      It’s funny, I knew you were going to address my post rather than actually have to respond to something intelligent.
      Code:
      As of 9/21/10:         As of 9/13/10:
      College Hockey 6       College Football 0
      BTHC 4                 WCHA FC:  1
      Originally posted by SanTropez
      May your paint thinner run dry and the fleas of a thousand camels infest your dead deer.
      Originally posted by bigblue_dl
      I don't even know how to classify magic vagina smoke babies..
      Originally posted by Kepler
      When the giraffes start building radio telescopes they can join too.
      He's probably going to be a superstar but that man has more baggage than North West

      Comment


      • Originally posted by SJHovey View Post

        I have yet to hear one logical explanation as to why the legislation proposed in Michigan and Wisconsin is illegal or unconstitutional. Same as in North Carolina.
        Who's claiming it is? But it ain't right.

        And since you made the claim that its just politics as usual, and, you know, both sides, its up to you to offer some examples of Democrats engaging in the exact same practices.

        We'll be here waiting.
        What kind of cheese are you planning to put on top?

        Comment


        • Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

          Originally posted by rufus View Post
          Who's claiming it is? But it ain't right.

          And since you made the claim that its just politics as usual, and, you know, both sides, its up to you to offer some examples of Democrats engaging in the exact same practices.

          We'll be here waiting.
          You want me to give you examples of lame duck legislation??
          That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by SJHovey View Post

            Personally, I think it's short-sighted on Republican's part to make these moves, and probably not politically smart. Why give D's something to run against in the next legislative races in Wisconsin? Also, as I said yesterday, the power stripped from the governor doesn't just address the power of a Democratic governor, it applies to a Republican governor too. But the Republican legislature in Wisconsin being short-sighted, or buying short-term political gain for long-term political loss isn't illegal or unconstitutional.
            If and when they get a Republican governor again, they'll just pass legislation to give him those powers back.
            What kind of cheese are you planning to put on top?

            Comment


            • Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

              Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
              It’s funny, I knew you were going to address my post rather than actually have to respond to something intelligent.
              I'm not sure, but I think you may have just insulted yourself.
              That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

              Comment


              • Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

                Originally posted by rufus View Post
                If and when they get a Republican governor again, they'll just pass legislation to give him those powers back.
                Yep. They might.

                So hey, I have an idea. How about the D's win the Wisconsin legislature and they can decide what powers they want the governor to have. To winners go the spoils.
                That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                  You want me to give you examples of lame duck legislation??
                  No, I want you to give me examples of lame duck legislation that intends to do what this does, namely, the losing party, in this case examples from you, the Democrats, using their political authority to weaken the statutory powers of the winning party, in this case, Republicans.
                  What kind of cheese are you planning to put on top?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                    Yep. They might.

                    So hey, I have an idea. How about the D's win the Wisconsin legislature and they can decide what powers they want the governor to have. To winners go the spoils.
                    Maybe they will, once they gerrymander the districts back in their favor.
                    What kind of cheese are you planning to put on top?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                      You want me to give you examples of lame duck legislation??
                      Stop stalling.
                      the state of hockey is good

                      Comment


                      • Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

                        Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                        I'm not sure, but I think you may have just insulted yourself.
                        No, I insulted you while acknowledging my post was just chatter.
                        Code:
                        As of 9/21/10:         As of 9/13/10:
                        College Hockey 6       College Football 0
                        BTHC 4                 WCHA FC:  1
                        Originally posted by SanTropez
                        May your paint thinner run dry and the fleas of a thousand camels infest your dead deer.
                        Originally posted by bigblue_dl
                        I don't even know how to classify magic vagina smoke babies..
                        Originally posted by Kepler
                        When the giraffes start building radio telescopes they can join too.
                        He's probably going to be a superstar but that man has more baggage than North West

                        Comment


                        • Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

                          Originally posted by rufus View Post
                          No, I want you to give me examples of lame duck legislation that intends to do what this does, namely, the losing party, in this case examples from you, the Democrats, using their political authority to weaken the statutory powers of the winning party, in this case, Republicans.
                          Wait, you think the Wisconsin legislation is using political authority to "weaken the statutory powers of the winning party?" How exactly does it do that?

                          It weakens the statutory powers of the office of governor. Whoever holds that seat.
                          That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

                          Comment


                          • Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

                            Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                            Is this just a deliberately obtuse post, or do you really not get this?

                            Some of you here, along with a bunch of halfwits in Wisconsin, Michigan and elsewhere don't get that this is lame duck legislation?? Lame duck legislation occurs literally every single time there is a change in power from one party to the other at either the state or federal level. The outgoing party knows "it's now or never" and the incoming party screams "foul" (although admittedly not with the shrillness of some of the D's in Wisconsin).

                            There is nothing illegal about it. There is nothing evil about it. It's no different than if they had passed the legislation last February. Personally I wouldn't pass a bunch of legislation like Wisconsin's since it's shortsighted -- there will almost certainly come a time when the Wisconsin legislature is controlled by the D's and the Governor is an R, but that's really their problem.
                            So my question would be about the constitutionality of the laws passed when stripping these government officials of their powers and transferring them to the legislature. Were the powers stripped provided to these office holders by their respective states' constitutions, or subsequent legislation?

                            Regardless of the legal outcome of this, it's severely short-sighted and very foolish. Talk about giving ammo to the opposition come next election cycle!


                            Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                            You want me to give you examples of lame duck legislation??
                            Obamacare. Regardless of whether or not a person views it as good legislation, it was passed a few short days before the Republicans took control of Congress in 2011.


                            Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
                            I’m not sure I buy the pence indictment thing. Where is this rumor coming from?

                            /r/deepstate?
                            I won't hold my breath until reputable news orgs start to report this, or more likely the actual indictment is submitted. However, to you point of Hair Furor being clean while all others are dirty, it's more like the leader of a mafia gang insulating himself from prosecution by leaving no recordable trace, having those around him commit things to paper so that if anybody goes down, it's them and not him. Comey said that the most striking impression he took from his first 1:1 conversation with Trump is that the Hair Furor operated like a Mafioso.
                            "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

                            "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

                            "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                              Wait, you think the Wisconsin legislation is using political authority to "weaken the statutory powers of the winning party?" How exactly does it do that?

                              It weakens the statutory powers of the office of governor. Whoever holds that seat.
                              What drugs are u on? You need to share.
                              **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

                              Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
                              Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
                                What drugs are u on? You need to share.
                                Sharing is caring
                                a legend and an out of work bum look a lot alike, daddy.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X