What's new
By:
Filters

Moving forward, #fraudysix

How did his oath come out? Anyone watch it? He fumble anything up? Was he gassed up enough to get through it?
 
Slander said:
It's sad that serious news articles now read like an onion article from 2002.
Click to expand...

I lol’d at the first sentence... “in public and PRIVATE chat rooms....”

how would they know?
 
rockota said:
Now you're starting to understand the issue with the compromise that you call for. You're asking me for an agreeable, hopefully equitable exchange of goods for dollars.

That's not what happens in the compromise you are asking from the government. That's why it hasn't "worked for 240 years." The government compromises with your rights... something that should be non-negotiable. So when you demand both sides come together, you're stating that one side doesn't have anything of value to defend... that COTUS is just something to be compromised... and then you call them out for not compromising they way you think they need to.

Sure, my example is extreme... but that's exactly what government does. See 2nd amendment. See 1st amendment... 5th, 4th, etc, etc. Compromise kills... everyone loses... especially those who don't have a seat at the table.
Click to expand...

Don't you try to dance around giving me a handjob with some sort of constitutional lesson.:flipoff2:

I'm in agreeance that some things are non-negotiable. I would offer that doesn't mean that those on the left and the right can't compromise to find solutions to problems, only that both sides need to understand that some things are off the table.
 
woods said:
How did his oath come out? Anyone watch it? He fumble anything up? Was he gassed up enough to get through it?
Click to expand...

He almost slipped up on one or two words, then caught himself for the entire ceremony. Overall pretty good for an old guy with a stutter(or whatever other ailments people think he has).
 
Harry Johnson said:
Don't you try to dance around giving me a handjob with some sort of constitutional lesson.:flipoff2:

I'm in agreeance that some things are non-negotiable. I would offer that doesn't mean that those on the left and the right can't compromise to find solutions to problems, only that both sides need to understand that some things are off the table.
Click to expand...

You couldn’t afford me.

compromising in solving a problem also requires the problem first be accurately identified.

do we have gun problem? Or a value of life problem?

do we have an immigration problem or a lack of law enforcement of existing rules problem?

do we have a tax problem or a spending problem?

some compromise in approaches might... might have value. But rarely does compromise solve an actual problem... because government compromise on the accurate definition of the problem. The only place government doesn’t compromise is in defending... government
 
rockota said:
You couldn’t afford me.

compromising in solving a problem also requires the problem first be accurately identified.

do we have gun problem? Or a value of life problem?

do we have an immigration problem or a lack of law enforcement of existing rules problem?

do we have a tax problem or a spending problem?

some compromise in approaches might... might have value. But rarely does compromise solve an actual problem... because government compromise on the accurate definition of the problem. The only place government doesn’t compromise is in defending... government
Click to expand...

I think you're more cynical than I. You have already started to identify the steps needed to make it happen. To me that looks like a pathway forward.
 
TheRedHorseman said:
Well I certainly don't believe some youtube personality claiming it was some sort of super massive false flag operation. Do you?
Click to expand...

Well you believe in a fake dossier bought and paid for by Hillary....so theres that.
 
Harry Johnson said:
I think you're more cynical than I. You have already started to identify the steps needed to make it happen. To me that looks like a pathway forward.
Click to expand...

well... pot isn't legal here, so there's that.

I am cyincal... 100%... because history gives me reason to be, in my opinion.
 
rockota said:
You couldn’t afford me.

compromising in solving a problem also requires the problem first be accurately identified.

do we have gun problem? Or a value of life problem? I'd say it's more a mental health and pharmaceuticals problem

do we have an immigration problem or a lack of law enforcement of existing rules problem? I'd say the immigration process needs to be re-done and expanded.

do we have a tax problem or a spending problem? 100% Been saying this for years. When I was a little kid sales tax in CA was 5% and we had cops and parks and street sweepers and schools and everything including a surplus. Now the state is broke, the roads are fucked, people living and shitting on the streets, etc., all this with record revenues.

some compromise in approaches might... might have value. But rarely does compromise solve an actual problem... because government compromise on the accurate definition of the problem. The only place government doesn’t compromise is in defending... government
Click to expand...

I'll play.
 
Roc Doc said:
I'll play.
Click to expand...

why does immigration need to be re-done and expanded? What is the problem that said change might solve?

I'm not disagreeing on your pharma, but I don't know that I agree either... certainly highlights the importance of agreeing on the problem definition.
 
rockota said:
I lol’d at the first sentence... “in public and PRIVATE chat rooms....”

how would they know?
Click to expand...

I think they consider this forum the equivalent of a private chat room... since you have to sign up.
 
rockota said:
why does immigration need to be re-done and expanded? What is the problem that said change might solve?

I'm not disagreeing on your pharma, but I don't know that I agree either... certainly highlights the importance of agreeing on the problem definition.
Click to expand...

Because the birth rate of non-hispanics is too low for the labor requirements of the nation, white kids are not out there picking strawberries. We need immigrants, but we need to know they're not bad guys, and the process needs to speed up so they're not tempted to swim the Rio.

All of the "mass shooters" I can think of had psychiatric issues or were on meds or both. Shooting up a grade school or a concert venue is not normal behavior, but it's also not just a recent phenomenon, people have been crazy for a long time.
 
Roc Doc said:
Because the birth rate of non-hispanics is too low for the labor requirements of the nation, white kids are not out there picking strawberries. We need immigrants, but we need to know they're not bad guys, and the process needs to speed up so they're not tempted to swim the Rio.
Click to expand...

You may be right. Having said that, as a 3rd gen immigrant, I don't know that I agree that bringing more people into the US solves that particular problem (labor)... we have a massive part of the population that is... under employed.. so to speak.

Shoot, we used to require sponsors to ensure that we were getting the right people into the country - i.e. those who wanted to come here to the US because they wanted freedom and liberty. I'm not sure increasing rates of people coming here from other governmental models sustains COTUS.

All of the "mass shooters" I can think of had psychiatric issues or were on meds or both. Shooting up a grade school or a concert venue is not normal behavior, but it's also not just a recent phenomenon, people have been crazy for a long time.
Click to expand...

don't disagree.
 
rockota said:
You may be right. Having said that, as a 3rd gen immigrant, I don't know that I agree that bringing more people into the US solves that particular problem (labor)... we have a massive part of the population that is... under employed.. so to speak.

Shoot, we used to require sponsors to ensure that we were getting the right people into the country - i.e. those who wanted to come here to the US because they wanted freedom and liberty. I'm not sure increasing rates of people coming here from other governmental models sustains COTUS.



don't disagree.
Click to expand...

I too am 3rd gen, at least on one side, and my Grandfather became an American citizen (from Scotland) by marrying my Grandmother. He had skills, (accountant), and had fought in WWI. He loved this country, same as my late BIL who emigrated from Croatia (Yugoslavia at the time), you'd never met a bigger American flag waver.

As far as the immigration goes, there will always be those that don't have the motivation to improve their lot in life, maybe it's a fear of success and the responsibility it brings, I dunno. Here in the SW there is a huge labor shortage, even in the middle of big parts of the economy shut down. I work with construction products and I hear it from trucking companies, from parts houses, to actual construction workers. Landscapers hear they can go from $12/hr to 17/hr if they work concrete, those guys leave to be a roofer at 21/hr, roofer gets on as an apprentice electrician and evenently is making $30/hr, and so on. (I just made those numbers up, but you get the point). Eventually you're going to have to do your own landscaping.
 
Roc Doc said:
Eventually you're going to have to do your own landscaping.
Click to expand...

Or stop mailing checks to lazy, able-bodied fuckwits.
Dems won't let that stop and won't let us drug test them before giving them our tax money.
Now they will push for universal income or whatever they will call it upon rolling it out to the bums to buy their votes.
 
It would be nice to remove their paychecks and see how they like it. They should be honored for the privilege of representing the American people.
 
SanDiegoCJ said:
Impeachment is akin to an indictment. It's an accusation and the trial and witnesses are in the senate. The impeachment is BEFORE the trial.
Click to expand...

trial and witnesses are in the house, the senate just decides if the trial and witness results warrant removal
 
Turkeyjr09 said:
It would be nice to remove their paychecks and see how they like it. They should be honored for the privilege of representing the American people.
Click to expand...

That's how it started. We've obviously gotten away from that.

Harry Truman was effectively broke when he left the WH, and had to live on his WWI pension which was very small as you can imagine. That's when they started giving Presidents income for life.
 
JolietJames said:
Or stop mailing checks to lazy, able-bodied fuckwits.
Dems won't let that stop and won't let us drug test them before giving them our tax money.
Now they will push for universal income or whatever they will call it upon rolling it out to the bums to buy their votes.
Click to expand...

My sisters lazy able bodied fuckwit boyfriend is so lazy he won't even apply for assistance. He's fucked up now with the diabeetus from years of drinking and eating sugar, but until about 10 years ago he just couldn't hold a job, he would either get fired or quit so he wouldn't have kick someones ass:rolleyes:. Fucking loser.
 
Provience said:
trial and witnesses are in the house, the senate just decides if the trial and witness results warrant removal
Click to expand...

I disagree.



In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official of the federal government by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called “managers,” acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate sits as a High Court of Impeachment in which senators consider evidence, hear witnesses, and vote to acquit or convict the impeached official. In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office. In some cases, the Senate has also disqualified such officials from holding public offices in the future. There is no appeal. Since 1789, about half of Senate impeachment trials have resulted in conviction and removal from office.
 
rockota said:
Shoot, we used to require sponsors to ensure that we were getting the right people into the country - i.e. those who wanted to come here to the US because they wanted freedom and liberty.
Click to expand...

Did something recently change on this that I missed? I had a El Salvadorian buddy in 2010 I think that wanted to stay in the US after he finished up schooling here and his student visa was going to run out. He was trying to get the company he interned for to sponsor him or however that works, but they decided it wasn't worth the hassle.

He ended up getting some kind of financial job in Switzerland instead and daily drives a Huracan.
 
SanDiegoCJ said:
I disagree.



In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official of the federal government by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called “managers,” acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate sits as a High Court of Impeachment in which senators consider evidence, hear witnesses, and vote to acquit or convict the impeached official. In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office. In some cases, the Senate has also disqualified such officials from holding public offices in the future. There is no appeal. Since 1789, about half of Senate impeachment trials have resulted in conviction and removal from office.
Click to expand...

there are only witness' in the house.

let's compare this rushed version the other day with the process last year :laughing:
 
Harry Johnson said:
Did something recently change on this that I missed? I had a El Salvadorian buddy in 2010 I think that wanted to stay in the US after he finished up schooling here and his student visa was going to run out. He was trying to get the company he interned for to sponsor him or however that works, but they decided it wasn't worth the hassle.

He ended up getting some kind of financial job in Switzerland instead and daily drives a Huracan.
Click to expand...

H1-visa's need sponsorship, often by companies. we used to -50-100 year ago - require personal sponsorship, IIRC

EDIT: I think there are other visa's, etc. I'm not 100% sure.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh