Impressed by Trump administration

• salto

  

  [video=youtube;sx0ICHi1atk][/video]
• QuakerOats

  Before the August recess, Congress passed 55 measures that were signed into law, 46 of them considered substantive, tying this Congress for fifth-most productive in the past 30 years, according to a Pew Research Center analysis. Though that is the largest number of substantive measures passed since 2007-08, the sole purpose of 14 of them was to overturn Obama-era rules.
  Pew Research Center (8/29)
  
  
  
  
  only the beginning !
• Spock

  

  QuakerOats;1869429 wrote:Before the August recess, Congress passed 55 measures that were signed into law, 46 of them considered substantive, tying this Congress for fifth-most productive in the past 30 years, according to a Pew Research Center analysis. Though that is the largest number of substantive measures passed since 2007-08, the sole purpose of 14 of them was to overturn Obama-era rules.
  Pew Research Center (8/29)
  
  
  
  
  only the beginning !

  only 14 were dealing with Obama messes. THought that would of been higher
• QuakerOats

  It is the rollback of regulatory rules that has been a big help already .......not so much the legislative side. This is where some of the real problems are: incredibly harmful rules and regulations passed by nameless bureaucrats over the last 8 years, due to the radicals in charge of federal agencies during the obama years. I couldn't begin to list all of the rules that have been reversed already, that will ultimately have a substantial impact on economic growth, and we are just getting started.
• Fab4Runner

  

  Spock;1869431 wrote:only 14 were dealing with Obama messes. THought that would of been higher

  
• Heretic

  

  Fab4Runner;1869439 wrote:

  While Justin hasn't set up site-wide negs yet, I still have my mod negging ability and, for that moronic shit, I used it.
  
  MAKE GRAMMAR GREAT AGAIN!!!
• ppaw1999

  http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/healthcare/since-repeal-scare-obamacare-has-never-been-more-popular/ar-AAqYfcT?li=BBnb7Kz
  
  Wow! President Trump has made Obamacare even more popular. How low can the bar go?
• QuakerOats

  the Commerce Department released data Wednesday showing that “the economy had expanded at an annual rate of 3 percent in the second quarter of the year, better than initially estimated,
  
  
  
  best growth in a decade ................and of course the WAPO had it buried on page 18
  
  
  Fuck the mainstream media .......they deserve the ass-kicking they are getting.
• O-Trap

  

  CenterBHSFan;1868163 wrote:How do you even win a ideological/religious war nowdays? Whether the US puts troops into or out of place (middle east) its not going to make people more religious or less religious.

  Historically, attempts to force behavior against people's religious views are often met with accusations of persecution, and in many cases, the ideologies or religious worldviews actually flourish under such force.
  
  And the tricky part is that ideologies and religious worldviews never really go away. Even if, at some point, they're completely eradicated entirely, there's no guarantee that someone doesn't adopt them at a later date.
  
  This goes back to the game theory elements referenced earlier. Military forces seem best suited to handle a finite game. But ideological wars are not finite games.
• QuakerOats

  11,000 fewer federal government employees so far this year
  
  4 contractors selected to build border wall prototypes
  
  obama overtime rule overturned
  
  Trump donating $1 million for Harvey recovery effort
  
  156,000 jobs in August
  
  GDP at 3% in trailing qtr.
  
  
  
  Another good week.
• gut

  QuakerOats;1869722 wrote:11,000 fewer federal government employees so far this year

  But like half of those are just appointments Trump has been too lazy to fill (or he can't find enough people willing to work for him).
• salto

  

  QuakerOats;1869722 wrote:
  4 contractors selected to build border wall prototypes

  aaaaaaaand the GOP doesn't have a way to pay for it.
• superman

  salto;1869869 wrote:aaaaaaaand the GOP doesn't have a way to pay for it.

  Mining the salt from liberal tears seems fairly lucrative.
• thavoice

  O-Trap;1869593 wrote:Historically, attempts to force behavior against people's religious views are often met with accusations of persecution, and in many cases, the ideologies or religious worldviews actually flourish under such force.
  
  And the tricky part is that ideologies and religious worldviews never really go away. Even if, at some point, they're completely eradicated entirely, there's no guarantee that someone doesn't adopt them at a later date.
  
  This goes back to the game theory elements referenced earlier. Military forces seem best suited to handle a finite game. But ideological wars are not finite games.

  Here is the thing though.... the ideological is not against a whole religon, it's against the very small percentage who bastardize that religon and pursuade the feeble minded to follow suit. For instance islam....we could not defeat those numbers but it's a small group of them who use their influence on the weak. Illiteracy runs rampant in many poor areas so the young listen to and take what they say as gospel because they cannot read to see what the Qur'an says. Even at that they cannot get enough so they kidnap kids to become child soldiers. I worked with one who was abducted as a kid to fight in the Lord's Resistance Army, joseph kony) and he escaped to then join his own countries army. He said there were nearly a thousand kids in his camp that they get indoctrinated.
  
  Recently hundreds of kids escaped an al shabaab camp and found freedom. Radical groups like these need fighters and with the offensive the world and us have put on them they are finding it more difficult for adults to join so they resort to kidnapping.
  
  
  Some very messed up people out there and many are using religon, islam, as a front and nothing more. They don't particularly care about sharia law, but are more interested in having power so that is the angle they use to try and gain support
• O-Trap

  

  thavoice;1869888 wrote:Here is the thing though.... the ideological is not against a whole religon, it's against the very small percentage who bastardize that religon and pursuade the feeble minded to follow suit. For instance islam....we could not defeat those numbers but it's a small group of them who use their influence on the weak. Illiteracy runs rampant in many poor areas so the young listen to and take what they say as gospel because they cannot read to see what the Qur'an says. Even at that they cannot get enough so they kidnap kids to become child soldiers. I worked with one who was abducted as a kid to fight in the Lord's Resistance Army, joseph kony) and he escaped to then join his own countries army. He said there were nearly a thousand kids in his camp that they get indoctrinated.
  
  Recently hundreds of kids escaped an al shabaab camp and found freedom. Radical groups like these need fighters and with the offensive the world and us have put on them they are finding it more difficult for adults to join so they resort to kidnapping.
  
  
  Some very messed up people out there and many are using religon, islam, as a front and nothing more. They don't particularly care about sharia law, but are more interested in having power so that is the angle they use to try and gain support

  Oh, I don't disagree, but I'd be remiss if I didn't admit that I think there are at least SOME who buy in because they're following the lead of those bastardizing the ideology. As such, it's obvious that those people can be convinced. As such, I'm not sure the numbers ultimately matter. Even if the number of extremists professing Islam were reduced to zero, there's no guarantee it would never be picked up again and used the same way. Conversely, there's no guarantee that whatever they're attempting to combat, be it western worldviews or resistance against their own power, would ever die out completely, either.
  
  It really doesn't seem as though it's the sort of thing that could ever be settled once and for all. As such, it's an infinite game.
• Dr Winston O'Boogie

  

  I had a colleague tell me this morning, "My ancestors came here legally. Why can't they?" My suggestion to him is to look that up. In reality, there were virtually no limits on how, when or how many immigrants could come into the US from Europe in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Hypocracy
  
  For all the Christian supporters of Trump - do you think Jesus would concur with his rhetoric and actions against immigrants to our country?
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  Dr Winston O'Boogie;1870058 wrote:I had a colleague tell me this morning, "My ancestors came here legally. Why can't they?" My suggestion to him is to look that up. In reality, there were virtually no limits on how, when or how many immigrants could come into the US from Europe in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Hypocracy
  
  For all the Christian supporters of Trump - do you think Jesus would concur with his rhetoric and actions against immigrants to our country?

  Uhh, not quite.
  There may not have been limits per say, but the country was still pretty freaking racist toward Irish, Italian, and especially Jews when they immigrated over.
  The country has been and continues to be very hostile toward immigrants. We claim to be very open toward immigrants, but the reality is if it ain't a WASP, we don't like it.
  
  The DACA decision today is Trump just punting to Congress. It is not as bad as liberals say. But, it is not good. Basically, these kids/ young adults, have their info before the feds now and could easily be swiped up. I would be freaking out right now if I was one of those guys.
  
  If Congress does not extend DACA or at least do something about immigration, I'm just resigned to accept that we as a nation as totally cool with just deporting millions of people until we deport all 11 million or so. We may be just fine with families being ripped apart.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  ptown_trojans_1;1870059 wrote:The DACA decision today is Trump just punting to Congress. It is not as bad as liberals say. But, it is not good.

  It really should have gone through congress to begin with. I wouldn't consider it, exactly, as "punting".
• CenterBHSFan

  

  But in the meantime, yes, let us govern ourselves through sonnets, odes and other forms of poetry instead of laws!
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  CenterBHSFan;1870061 wrote:It really should have gone through congress to begin with. I wouldn't consider it, exactly, as "punting".

  Yeah, there I agree. Just say back in January what they said today and say, Congress, you make immigration policy.
  The DACA thing came about from the failed immigration law a few years ago.
  
  Congress has to figure something out otherwise, like I said, we just accept and are cool with deporting 11 or so million people.
• jmog

  ptown_trojans_1;1870064 wrote:Yeah, there I agree. Just say back in January what they said today and say, Congress, you make immigration policy.
  The DACA thing came about from the failed immigration law a few years ago.
  
  Congress has to figure something out otherwise, like I said, we just accept and are cool with deporting 11 or so million people.

  I agree with the first line, Congress should have made the law in the first place, not basically what came down to an EO after they failed to get the bill through Congress.
  
  Until a law is passed, I see no reason why those here illegally shouldn't be deported. I don't know what part of "here ILLEGALLY" is hard to understand.
  
  And no, the government would not be "ripping families apart" each and every parent worth their own spit would go back too if their kid would be one to be deported.
  
  Look, they broke the law, whether we like or agree with the law is inconsequential. Everyone in the family of someone being deported has the option to go back with them until they go through the proper channels to get back here.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  jmog;1870067 wrote:I agree with the first line, Congress should have made the law in the first place, not basically what came down to an EO after they failed to get the bill through Congress.
  
  Until a law is passed, I see no reason why those here illegally shouldn't be deported. I don't know what part of "here ILLEGALLY" is hard to understand.
  
  And no, the government would not be "ripping families apart" each and every parent worth their own spit would go back too if their kid would be one to be deported.
  
  Look, they broke the law, whether we like or agree with the law is inconsequential. Everyone in the family of someone being deported has the option to go back with them until they go through the proper channels to get back here.

  The ripping families apart is say a mother migrates here illegally, then has a son or daughter. They are U.S. citizens, but the mother is illegal and can be deported. That is what I mean there. You deport the parents and the kid probably ends up in a foster home.
  If we are fine with that as a country, ok then.
  
  At this point, I am resigned to that fact that we are.
  
  Also, the proper channels take way too long, as evidence of the DACA kids/ adults. They are waiting...yet can be removed at any time.
  
  It is all in the hands of the Congress now, as it should be.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  It's the damn parents who broke the law to begin - that's who I have a problem with. If myself or anybody else on this message board broke federal law, we'd damn sure have to deal with the consequences and so would our families whether it be shame or poverty or whatever.
  I don't see how we have to obey our own laws but people from other countries don't have to worry so much about it.
  
  It's all about peddling the feelz and virtue signaling.
• jmog

  Dr Winston O'Boogie;1870058 wrote:I had a colleague tell me this morning, "My ancestors came here legally. Why can't they?" My suggestion to him is to look that up. In reality, there were virtually no limits on how, when or how many immigrants could come into the US from Europe in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Hypocracy
  
  For all the Christian supporters of Trump - do you think Jesus would concur with his rhetoric and actions against immigrants to our country?

  So technically your colleague was correct, if there "were no laws" in the early 1800s restricting immigration then this ancestors did come here legally.
  
  You are welcome to discuss the moral nature of today's laws vs back then and welcome to discuss what should be changed, but his statement is still valid. His ancestors came here legally, "why can't they".
  
  Now, I am sure that he didn't know that his ancestors just had to pay their ticket on a boat and sign a piece of paper at the harbor (Ellis Island didn't exist as immigration check point until the 1900s), but his statement is still true and valid.
  
  I have a buddy that was born and lived in Ohio all until his 30s. His work sent him to Mexico and he was there for about 7 years.
  While in Mexico he met and married a Mexican woman and they had 2 kids. Each year he would have to drive to Juarez to fill out paperwork for his children to be US citizens even though they were born in and lived in Mexico.
  
  When it was time for him to move back to Ohio he had to spend an extra few months in Mexico and drop close to $1000 in fees/forms before his wife could move to Ohio with him. He stayed in Mexico with his wife and kids, until all of the proper paperwork was complete. It took at least 4 or 5 extra months than when he wanted to move back.
  
  They went through all of the BS interviews and questions about the legitimacy of their marriage (was she using this to get to the US) and he laughed at them saying things like "yeah, been married 5 years with 2 kids and she went through all that just to get a green card".
  
  But, he did it the legal way.
  
  To be honest I don't think his wife is a citizen, I think she chose to stay a Mexican citizen but has a permanent green card through marriage.
  
  Either way, whatever the current legal way to get in, do that, or don't come. I don't understand what is so hard about that.
  
  FYI, his wife abhors those that come in illegally, because she had to do it the "right way". Most Mexican-Americans I have every met feel this way.
• jmog

  ptown_trojans_1;1870069 wrote:The ripping families apart is say a mother migrates here illegally, then has a son or daughter. They are U.S. citizens, but the mother is illegal and can be deported. That is what I mean there. You deport the parents and the kid probably ends up in a foster home.
  If we are fine with that as a country, ok then.
  
  At this point, I am resigned to that fact that we are.
  
  Also, the proper channels take way too long, as evidence of the DACA kids/ adults. They are waiting...yet can be removed at any time.
  
  It is all in the hands of the Congress now, as it should be.

  The mother at that point has to decide if she wants her kid to stay with her or grow up in foster care. Tough choice, but most respectable parents would take their kids back with them.
  
  That child, being a US citizen, can obviously move back whenever they are an adult without any paperwork needed.
  
  I agree that the proper channels take too long, but that is the current system and we should reward those that circumvent the system just because it's too long.
  
  Going through the DMV line to renew my registration takes way too long, that doesn't mean I can make up my own license plate sticker and new registration each year. If I get caught doing so I would get ticketed and towed.