• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

President Trump is dressed as a king on the new Time magazine cover [W:132]

trouble13 said:
I encourage them to do so as long as thet are prepared to accept the penalities to get back in our fold.

Mexico should tale a leade4ship in 5his inatove since its understood we have an irrational hatred of brown people.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That's the part you're not getting; they may start pulling away altogether.
 
ElChupacabra said:
That's the part you're not getting; they may start pulling away altogether.
Click to expand...
Im confused now....

Are we economically too big to be ignored or should be afraid that Mexico isn't going to take our money anymore?

In all honesty I think you have it backwards. It's not us who should be concerned with Mexico not doing buisiness with us, it's them who should be concerned about us not doing buisiness with them.

I remember when NAFTA was passed and I initially was against it until it was explained to me that NAFTA was a means to control illegal immigration and spread democracy by means of investing in impoverished nations. It would build their middle class and raise their standard of living. It would make the world a better place for everyone. I bought into that sales pitch.

Now 3 decades later it still has not lived up to its promises and it's come at a great cost to us domestically. I'm ready to admit that it was a failed experiment and time to begin repairing the damage we have done. If that's not in Mexico's interest I have no problem with them seeking out a new trading partner.

I don't view them as good neighbors nor do I view their actions as that of a freinds. In some cases it's borderline on being hostile. I'm not only fine with build a wall both litterally and metaphorically but, I'm also ok with not including a door until Mexico changes its tune.


Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Cisero said:
I wasn't sure if you were claiming that Obama's use of his pen and phone were more "royally" inclined than Trump.
If that wasn't the case, my apologies.
Click to expand...

Well, that depends on if you acknowledge the fact that Obama circumvented The Constitution via executive order.
 
apdst said:
Well, that depends on if you acknowledge the fact that Obama circumvented The Constitution via executive order.
Click to expand...

Obama did have EOs stricken down by the SCOTUS.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-of-the-260-executive-orders-issued-by-Barack-Obama-were-overturned-by-the-courts

And Trump's EOs have not been overturned by the SCOTUS (at least, not that I recall of).
So yes, I agree with you. Obama did have a foul tendency to use EOs to circumvent the Constitution.

I think when people say Trump is acting like a king, they are referring to his general narcissism, huge ego and tendency to disrespect other nation leaders and colleagues.

I do know however Trump had his immigration EO contested. Not all provisions were accepted by the SCOTUS.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Not to raise an irrelevant point, but have you ever seen someone's hand after they have had a pistol shot out of it?
Click to expand...

You mean by a cowboy firing a six shooter that had been fired fifty times from the back of a galloping horse? In the movies, it just stings a little. In real life, I imagine it is a bit more serious, if it ever happens.
 
Cisero said:
Obama did have EOs stricken down by the SCOTUS.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-of-the-260-executive-orders-issued-by-Barack-Obama-were-overturned-by-the-courts

And Trump's EOs have not been overturned by the SCOTUS (at least, not that I recall of).
So yes, I agree with you. Obama did have a foul tendency to use EOs to circumvent the Constitution.

I think when people say Trump is acting like a king, they are referring to his general narcissism, huge ego and tendency to disrespect other nation leaders and colleagues.

I do know however Trump had his immigration EO contested. Not all provisions were accepted by the SCOTUS.
Click to expand...

Obama ignored the court order in at least one case. Did he do so by royal decree?
 
apdst said:
Well, that depends on if you acknowledge the fact that Obama circumvented The Constitution via executive order.
Click to expand...

Obama's level of use of his executive order powers is hardly unprecedented compared with previous Presidents and well within the mainstream of his modern predecessors. George W Bush's use of "signing statements" was more controversial. George W. Bush routinely asserted that he would not act contrary to the constitutional provisions that direct the president to “supervise the unitary executive branch.” This formulation can be found first in a signing statement of Ronald Reagan, and it was repeated several times by George H. W. Bush. Basically, Bush asserted that Congress cannot pass a law that undercuts the constitutionally granted authorities of the President.

So really the problem here is that it's not ok when the black guy does it.
 
Atomic Kid said:
Obama's level of use of his executive order powers is hardly unprecedented compared with previous Presidents and well within the mainstream of his modern predecessors. George W Bush's use of "signing statements" was more controversial. George W. Bush routinely asserted that he would not act contrary to the constitutional provisions that direct the president to “supervise the unitary executive branch.” This formulation can be found first in a signing statement of Ronald Reagan, and it was repeated several times by George H. W. Bush. Basically, Bush asserted that Congress cannot pass a law that undercuts the constitutionally granted authorities of the President.

So really the problem here is that it's not ok when the black guy does it.
Click to expand...

I never questioned Obama's use of executive orders, except for his executive orders that were unconstitutional. The president, regardless of race, can't use EO's to make laws, or change laws.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Please do enlighten us: What court order did Obama ignore?
Click to expand...

.........

The Obama administration still hasn’t fully rescinded the 2,000 three-year amnesties it wrongly issued four months ago in violation of a court order, government lawyers recently admitted in court, spurring a stern response from the judge who said the matter must be cleaned up by the end of July — or else.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/29/three-year-amnesties-not-fully-rescinded/
Click to expand...
 
Cisero said:
Obama did have EOs stricken down by the SCOTUS.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-of-the-260-executive-orders-issued-by-Barack-Obama-were-overturned-by-the-courts

And Trump's EOs have not been overturned by the SCOTUS (at least, not that I recall of).
So yes, I agree with you. Obama did have a foul tendency to use EOs to circumvent the Constitution.

I think when people say Trump is acting like a king, they are referring to his general narcissism, huge ego and tendency to disrespect other nation leaders and colleagues.

I do know however Trump had his immigration EO contested. Not all provisions were accepted by the SCOTUS.
Click to expand...

People are crying about President Trump because they're butthurt about him winning the election.
 
apdst said:
I never questioned Obama's use of executive orders, except for his executive orders that were unconstitutional. The president, regardless of race, can't use EO's to make laws, or change laws.
Click to expand...

Many of the Executive Orders overturned by the Court during the Obama Administration Presidential authority was NOT the issue and the vast majority of the cases had originated under and were first litigated by the Bush Administration. Obama issued 276 Executive Orders during his 8 years in office. As of May 25, 2018 Trump has issued 75 Executive Orders. A little more than a quarter of the total issued by Obama in just a year and a half.
 
Atomic Kid said:
Many of the Executive Orders overturned by the Court during the Obama Administration Presidential authority was NOT the issue and the vast majority of the cases had originated under and were first litigated by the Bush Administration. Obama issued 276 Executive Orders during his 8 years in office. As of May 25, 2018 Trump has issued 75 Executive Orders. A little more than a quarter of the total issued by Obama in just a year and a half.
Click to expand...

The fact that Obama issued unconstitutional EO isn't changed.
 
apdst said:
.........
Click to expand...

I see.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the agency responsible for overseeing the amnesty, said it’s trying to round up all of the permits, sending out two-year amnesties and pleading with the illegal immigrants to return the three-year cards.

But they are having trouble getting some of the lucky recipients to send them back.

“USCIS is carefully tracking the returns of the three-year EAD cards, and many have been returned within weeks,” the agency said in a statement to The Washington Times. “USCIS continues to take steps to collect the remaining three-year EAD cards.”
Click to expand...

So, they issued three year cards instead of two year cards, and then had to try to get them back. It doesn't say why they were given "amnesty cards" in the first place - sounds like DACA perhaps?
 
trouble13 said:
Im confused now....

Are we economically too big to be ignored or should be afraid that Mexico isn't going to take our money anymore?

In all honesty I think you have it backwards. It's not us who should be concerned with Mexico not doing buisiness with us, it's them who should be concerned about us not doing buisiness with them.

I remember when NAFTA was passed and I initially was against it until it was explained to me that NAFTA was a means to control illegal immigration and spread democracy by means of investing in impoverished nations. It would build their middle class and raise their standard of living. It would make the world a better place for everyone. I bought into that sales pitch.

Now 3 decades later it still has not lived up to its promises and it's come at a great cost to us domestically. I'm ready to admit that it was a failed experiment and time to begin repairing the damage we have done. If that's not in Mexico's interest I have no problem with them seeking out a new trading partner.

I don't view them as good neighbors nor do I view their actions as that of a freinds. In some cases it's borderline on being hostile. I'm not only fine with build a wall both litterally and metaphorically but, I'm also ok with not including a door until Mexico changes its tune.


Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The US is a massive economy, so any changes away from it aren't going to be done overnight. The thing is though, the trade we have with other nations is important for this country too. You can threaten to take your ball and go home, but then you're not in the game. The other kids might just find someone else with another ball. It's too early to tell what the overall impact is going to be, but the threats and arrogance don't help in negotiations. If you push people to hard they start to work against you, and it seems like such an unnecessary way to start talks. The EU, Canada, and Mexico are aware of the importance of the US economy so it makes no sense to open up aggressively. The ideals around NAFTA are one thing, the realities another. The influx of subsidized corn was great for the US, but it decimated rural subsistence farmers who then had to move to urban centers for work. When they found no work there, they sought work here. Those who remained on their farms then turned to the crop which was providing good money: marijuana and poppy.
 
ElChupacabra said:
The US is a massive economy, so any changes away from it aren't going to be done overnight. The thing is though, the trade we have with other nations is important for this country too. You can threaten to take your ball and go home, but then you're not in the game. The other kids might just find someone else with another ball. It's too early to tell what the overall impact is going to be, but the threats and arrogance don't help in negotiations. If you push people to hard they start to work against you, and it seems like such an unnecessary way to start talks. The EU, Canada, and Mexico are aware of the importance of the US economy so it makes no sense to open up aggressively. The ideals around NAFTA are one thing, the realities another. The influx of subsidized corn was great for the US, but it decimated rural subsistence farmers who then had to move to urban centers for work. When they found no work there, they sought work here. Those who remained on their farms then turned to the crop which was providing good money: marijuana and poppy.
Click to expand...
You have an intesting perspective that is thought provoking.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
Atomic Kid said:
Time magazine's Trump cover has the president dressed as a king

Congrats to the President on making the cover Time Magazine! Gotta feeling though that this one isn't going to end up hanging handsomely framed on a wall somewhere in Mira a Lago. But who knows? Maybe he would really like that image.

View attachment 67233996
Click to expand...

Kind of weird to me. Trump has beaucoup faults which include being an obnoxious, egotistical oaf of a president. But he at least goes through congress or he hasn't used a pen and a phone to bypass the constitutional process. At least, not yet. The one who used the pen and a phone seems to me to act more of the king with all the power to himself then this, ah, former reality TV show host.
 
Perotista said:
Kind of weird to me. Trump has beaucoup faults which include being an obnoxious, egotistical oaf of a president. But he at least goes through congress or he hasn't used a pen and a phone to bypass the constitutional process. At least, not yet. The one who used the pen and a phone seems to me to act more of the king with all the power to himself then this, ah, former reality TV show host.
Click to expand...

Oh really? What about tarrifs? He is using the flimsy pretense of Canada’s steel tariffs being a matter of national security.

Then there are his attacks on the department of justice and other government watchdog groups
 
Perotista said:
Kind of weird to me. Trump has beaucoup faults which include being an obnoxious, egotistical oaf of a president. But he at least goes through congress or he hasn't used a pen and a phone to bypass the constitutional process. At least, not yet. The one who used the pen and a phone seems to me to act more of the king with all the power to himself then this, ah, former reality TV show host.
Click to expand...

Are ... you ... serious?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_executive_actions_by_Donald_Trump
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom