simple1 Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) 16 minutes ago, GreasyFingers said: The bit in the emails quote this part: "That an applicant for immigration must be of good moral character and in agreement with the principles of our constitution" The conclusion is that the quoran forbids muslims to swear allegance to the constitution. Have fun with it for it keeps the world laughing. As I understand those of the Islamic faith in the USA are the most integrated in the Western world. Muslims granted US citizenship , would have taken the oath to swear... "I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God." https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/naturalization-test/naturalization-oath-allegiance-united-states-america IMO the volume of extreme negativity articulated towards Muslims in general is counter productive. Edited January 31, 2017 by simple1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackThompson Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Jingthing said: The Russians are even happier now than the redhats, especially after many of the redhats lose their health care and realize that rust belt style jobs are never coming back. You are going a bit afield, just to spread Fear Uncertainty and Doubt, but to respond to those points: If they have incomes, they may have already lost their health-care - and more likely will when the next wave of "Obamacare" premium-increases takes effect. That said, I don't like most of the Trump/GOP solution either. I like the non-profit private hospitals and insurance system of the 1970s, combined with changes to the operation of Big-Pharma (more spent on advertising than research, Americans gouged on drug-prices, etc). Some rust-belt jobs are coming back, thanks to proposed changes in tariff/trade policy But many more will be automated away due to technology. Automation is a key reason that nearly all immigration to the USA should be halted immediately. We need to preserve the remaining jobs for those who are already citizens. Millions of citizens who are jobless or employed in low-wage jobs need every advantage to get careers. Edited January 31, 2017 by JackThompson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ELVIS123456 Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 This is but one of many reasons Trump was elected - and this is just the beginning of him keeping those promises. And I just love the hysterical indignation and abuse from the left wing - best entertainment for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunroaming Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 How dare she do her job! She really should know that anyone disagreeing with Trump will be fired immediately. Didn't she ever see his show? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opl Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Thaidream said: A court of law will judge whether Trump's Executive Order is legal. At Present, there is a stay on the order in several jurisdictions because the courts have already ruled there is a compelling case that the order may violate the Constitution. The Acting AG declined to proceed because she believes the order has constitutional problems. Trump has the right to fire her and appoint a new Acting AG which he did. The fact is that Trump's order was not properly vetted and the execution of it was poor. If a foreigner already has a valid Immigrant Visa (Green Card) they have already been investigated thoroughly and should not be detained anywhere for more vetting. They should be allowed freedom of movement the same as an American citizen. A person who already has approved Visas of any kind should be allowed to continue with their plans. It is obvious neither the President or his inner circle who drafted the order has any concept of legality; the basis of the American Constitution; the meaning of the Statue of Liberty or how America is viewed in the World. To me , the greatest danger America faces- is the incompetence of Mr Trump and his clique and it is time for the Reuplican leadership in the house and senate to stand up to these buffoons. Trump’s Executive Orders Were Brought to You by Breitbart ( Either Donald Trump is the president, or he just plays one on TV.) "Trump is an expert in spectacle, not governance. ...The documents have been drafted with the consultation of virtually no one but Breitbart mastermind Steve Bannon, and his fellow right-wing nationalist Stephen Miller, according to Politico. Trump, is continuing the improvisational style he used to run his company, his campaign and his transition. He’s relying on a small circle of trusted advisers to act decisively." http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/01/trumps-executive-orders-were-brought-to-you-by-breitbart.html Edited January 31, 2017 by Opl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaidream Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 I would agree that most rust belt jobs are not coming back but to eliminate all Immigration based upon the fact there are not enough jobs for the current American population is not correct. There are plenty of jobs available and good paying ones. The issue is that no American Government is willing to provide tuition free education for a University or tuition free for trade education. The Government has no real policy regarding matching education for present jobs today or the future. This must change now but not a priority for the current regime in power. Trump and his cronies are not making America great- they are making it worse and they have no real understanding of how to handle income inequality which is one reason why the middle class is declining and the poor are becoming poorer. If every Immigrant legal or not working in the construction industry as laborers; picking vegetables or fruit in the farms or working in processing plants were to leave- most of these jobs would remain unfilled as they are low pay positions and not livable salaries for most Americans. I would agree compared to the current Health debacle in America , I would prefer the 70S style system where both insurance; doctor's visits and pharmaceuticals were affordable. America needs to make healthcare a human right; provide a single payer system via Medicare; and force Hospitals/doctors and Big Pharma to lower their prices. Healthcare must be available to everyone. Everyone has a right to live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
performance Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 8 hours ago, zaphod reborn said: The 120 day immigration ban is obviously unconstitutional, because the President can't use an executive order to change an act of Congress (that being the 1965 law that set immigration quotas). Obama did it, but no one ever took his immigration orders to court. If Trump paid any heed to his advisers, he would push the legislation through Congress. However, he knows that the backlash would bring down the Republican house majority in the mid-term elections. Instead, he is going to waste time, a tremendous amount of money and judicial resources defending an indefensibly unconstitutional executive order. Sorry, the guy is an idiot and unfit for office. He didn't listen to his advisers who told him the executive order would cause tremendous panic and hysteria because it wasn't properly vetted, and ultimately it would be completely voided by the courts. Keep punching son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreasyFingers Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 49 minutes ago, simple1 said: IMO the volume of extreme negativity articulated towards Muslims in general is counter productive Only when you do not have to deal with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opl Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, GreasyFingers said: Only when you do not have to deal with them. Maybe Trump is federating Muslims against the West as well as / more effectively than Daesh ....Western countries have no choice but to disassociate themselves, and isolate Trump Edited January 31, 2017 by Opl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgordo38 Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) 8 hours ago, maewang99 said: Trump is nuts. No he is not. Tune in to the upcoming movie OOpps you missed it. See attached poster. Edited January 31, 2017 by elgordo38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreasyFingers Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Opl said: Maybe Trump is federating Muslims against the West as well as / more effectively than Daesh ....Western countries have no choice but to disassociate themselves, and isolate Trump I thought they were already federated against the west. I think it is called envy. Edited January 31, 2017 by GreasyFingers bad spelling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunkyDunky58 Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 8 hours ago, WaywardWind said: Do tell: who at the Department of Justice approved the executive order? The department of "Justice" proved during the election through Lying Loretta Lynch that it is partisan, corrupt and therefore cannot be trusted to exercise any good judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Srikcir Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 9 hours ago, webfact said: Yates said she did not believe defending the order would be "consistent with this institution's solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right." In her confirmation hearing in March 2015 by Senator Sessions questioned her about if she would say no to the President (Clinton) if he asks her for something that's improper, if she would uphold the law and the constitution in the face of political pressure, ie., from the White House. She replied she would. See video on c-span.org starting at 1:16:00 mark. I imagine that Sessions now has a different viewpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilostmypassword Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 When Yates was up for approval by the Senate she was questioned by a certain Senator named Jeff Sessions. He asked 2 questions and then she replied: “Do you think the Attorney General has the responsibility to say no to the President if he asks for something that’s improper?” Sessions asked. “If the views the president wants to execute are unlawful, should the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General say no?” he stressed. “Senator, I believe the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General has an obligation to follow the law and the Constitution, and to give their independent legal advice to the president,” Yates said at the time. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/justice-department-not-defend-trump-refugee-ban-article-1.2959991 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilostmypassword Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 2 minutes ago, Srikcir said: In her confirmation hearing in March 2015 by Senator Sessions questioned her about if she would say no to the President (Clinton) if he asks her for something that's improper, if she would uphold the law and the constitution in the face of political pressure, ie., from the White House. She replied she would. See video on c-span.org starting at 1:16:00 mark. I imagine that Sessions now has a different viewpoint. You beat me by 2 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grouse Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) Sally Yates was ABSOLUTELY correct to stand by her principles. She SHOULD have resigned Allowing herself to be fired pampered to the lunatic's blessed ego. She will be back! Edited January 31, 2017 by Grouse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smotherb Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 10 hours ago, Banana7 said: Wonderful! She should have been fired during the Obama administration, a long time ago. Trump has guts to get the job done and make sure people are doing their job. Or, he is still confused and thinks he is filming another episode of the Apprentice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunroaming Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) Sacking someone with more moral integrity than you just accentuates your own ignorance. Edited January 31, 2017 by dunroaming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPCVguy Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 47 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said: When Yates was up for approval by the Senate she was questioned by a certain Senator named Jeff Sessions. He asked 2 questions and then she replied: “Do you think the Attorney General has the responsibility to say no to the President if he asks for something that’s improper?” Sessions asked. “If the views the president wants to execute are unlawful, should the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General say no?” he stressed. “Senator, I believe the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General has an obligation to follow the law and the Constitution, and to give their independent legal advice to the president,” Yates said at the time. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/justice-department-not-defend-trump-refugee-ban-article-1.2959991 Video also published by the Telegraph and on Youtubehttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/31/sally-yates-responded-jeff-sessions-asked-would-defy-president/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumbastheycome Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 9 hours ago, PatOngo said: American politics becoming as entertaining as Thai politics. It certainly is quickly appearing to have elements far worse in fact! At least in Thailand repeated requests for public input have been made. In the land of supreme Democracy it would seem public or even current office holders under their understanding of the US constitution are redundant to the point of being subjectively sanctioned ! GBA! Thats Greed Bless America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retiredandhappyhere Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 10 hours ago, zaphod reborn said: The 120 day immigration ban is obviously unconstitutional, because the President can't use an executive order to change an act of Congress (that being the 1965 law that set immigration quotas). Obama did it, but no one ever took his immigration orders to court. If Trump paid any heed to his advisers, he would push the legislation through Congress. However, he knows that the backlash would bring down the Republican house majority in the mid-term elections. Instead, he is going to waste time, a tremendous amount of money and judicial resources defending an indefensibly unconstitutional executive order. Sorry, the guy is an idiot and unfit for office. He didn't listen to his advisers who told him the executive order would cause tremendous panic and hysteria because it wasn't properly vetted, and ultimately it would be completely voided by the courts. Not only was the Executive Order (possibly) not properly vetted, (as you claim) but it is certain that the potential immigrants would not be properly vetted either without that order. The same people who are marching in the streets and expressing their vitriol against Trump would quickly change their minds if the US were to experience some of the recent attrocities borne by France and Germany to name just two affected countries. You might even want to ask some Swedish citizens how they feel about their country being overrun by immigrants, with its disastrous effects on schools, hospitals,welfare services and the police, who have just appealed for help with the surge in the crime wave as they are unable to cope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grouse Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 This is a classic example of why we need our greatest intellects working out what to do. Not worried about personal vanity or wealth but interested in the overall wellbeing of their people AND others OK, the USA MIGHT protect against an undesirable coming in from these countries, BUT the ramifications of how this was done could be calamitous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janhkt Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 11 hours ago, Banana7 said: Trump fired her based on results. She refused to produce results as he directed. Any and every employer has the right to fire an employee who doesn't produce the correct result. If you're my employee, a flower picker, I tell you to go out pick 10 red tulips, and you return and say I don't want to pick tulips because of (whatever)... - your fired. Nobody will stand-up for a insubordinate employee. There can be a rather big difference between doing your job and doing what you're told. I suspect you're confusing the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cncltd1973 Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 13 hours ago, Banana7 said: Trump fired her based on results. She refused to produce results as he directed. Any and every employer has the right to fire an employee who doesn't produce the correct result. If you're my employee, a flower picker, I tell you to go out pick 10 red tulips, and you return and say I don't want to pick tulips because of (whatever)... - your fired. Nobody will stand-up for a insubordinate employee. She was going to be replaced anyway, being an Obama pick. It was convenient for her career to make a stand and accelerate her exit on a good note. The creation of this order was Giuliani's job, as directed by Trump. It was initially referred to, internally, as a Muslim ban on immigration. Giuliani was concerned it wouldn't hold legally, because it was a ban on people of a certain religious persuasion. Which is of course, unconstitutional. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/29/trump-asked-for-a-muslim-ban-giuliani-says-and-ordered-a-commission-to-do-it-legally/?utm_term=.4e0b1fab3fd0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timewilltell Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Absolutely right to fire her since the order was already sent to the Justice Department for vetting before issue and her job is to do her bloody job. If she had personal issues on the order - as many have - then she should have resigned. Her actions were politically motivated, traitorous and she was fired by the CEO. He doesn't need people like that around him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 1 hour ago, timewilltell said: Absolutely right to fire her since the order was already sent to the Justice Department for vetting before issue and her job is to do her bloody job. If she had personal issues on the order - as many have - then she should have resigned. Her actions were politically motivated, traitorous and she was fired by the CEO. He doesn't need people like that around him. Traitorous? Seriously? That's where the trumpism is going. People standing up for decent American values are enemies of the state. This isn't a good situation and 45 is making it WORSE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 9 hours ago, Jingthing said: trump would fight that violently in the streets with the military not to mention his redhat goons. Seriously he's turning out to be a monster. The biggest threat to the USA since the Civil War. Don't underestimate the threat he represents. You would appear to be someone who has never taken a Civics class or someone that has zero faith in America's political and legal institutions. If the institutions are not too badly corrupted, America has nothing to fear from corrupt, evil or even mad individuals. Trust in the process and your fellow citizens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 7 hours ago, Grouse said: This is a classic example of why we need our greatest intellects working out what to do. Not worried about personal vanity or wealth but interested in the overall wellbeing of their people AND others OK, the USA MIGHT protect against an undesirable coming in from these countries, BUT the ramifications of how this was done could be calamitous! The Intellectual Idiot class. https://medium.com/incerto/the-intellectual-yet-idiot-13211e2d0577#.z4rqgl6j9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NanLaew Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 17 hours ago, zaphod reborn said: ... ethical, legal, professional and moral duty... I think Donald skipped all that bit when swotting for his inauguration exam. "Hey you! Yes you. You're the new apprentice aren't you? Fine, so just give me the executive order pen dammit!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NanLaew Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 16 hours ago, lovelomsak said: I know this sounds like broken record but seems Democratics in America use the same way,s as Thai Democrati,s to keep power Yeah you're exactly right! It does sound like a broken record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now