Page 2 of 14 [ 220 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 14  Next

AndrewBatman82
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 54
Location: Tennessee

27 Mar 2017, 6:49 pm

i have no problem with the ban and yes i voted for Trump because he didn't let four brave americans die like Clinton did. Trump is an outsider and thats why he won he has no political strings. the judges are being to progressive and not following the rule of law. the president can ban foreign countries if he sees them as a threat to national security. im surprised that Saudi Arabia was not on the list



BettaPonic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Jan 2017
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 918
Location: NOVA

27 Mar 2017, 7:29 pm

AndrewBatman82 wrote:
i have no problem with the ban and yes i voted for Trump because he didn't let four brave americans die like Clinton did. Trump is an outsider and thats why he won he has no political strings. the judges are being to progressive and not following the rule of law. the president can ban foreign countries if he sees them as a threat to national security. im surprised that Saudi Arabia was not on the list

I dislike the current ban, but a ban of Saudi Arabia makes sense to me. The interpretation of the constitution is constantly changing. Plessy v Ferguson is a good example. The original interpretation of separate but equal was relooked by a different generation and the new generation had a different interpretation. I would disagree Trump is an outsider. He is the one working the system.

Just to be clear I hate Clinton. She is corrupt and lacks her own convictions. I can defiantly see an appeal of Trump. I do feel he is too PC for me to, but Clinton is PC in her own way.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

27 Mar 2017, 7:31 pm

feral botanist wrote:
Raptor wrote:
feral botanist wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
You mean so-called judges!


They were sworn in, and preside over a court of law, making binding decisions. Just because you and Trump call them "so-called judges," because you don't approve of their rulings, doesn't invalidate their positions on the bench.



He is making a joke with the added benefit, that if he gets a rise out of someone, he can feel powerful, so just ignore him.

Maybe if some people weren't so easy to get a rise out of and eager to be offended...



You are correct, you precious little snowflakes need to relax.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: ! !! !! !!


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

27 Mar 2017, 7:34 pm

AndrewBatman82 wrote:
i have no problem with the ban and yes i voted for Trump because he didn't let four brave americans die like Clinton did. Trump is an outsider and thats why he won he has no political strings. the judges are being to progressive and not following the rule of law. the president can ban foreign countries if he sees them as a threat to national security. im surprised that Saudi Arabia was not on the list


That's because Trump personally does business in Saudi Arabia, not to mention how America has a pusher/addict relationship with them in regards to oil.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


BettaPonic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Jan 2017
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 918
Location: NOVA

27 Mar 2017, 7:52 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
AndrewBatman82 wrote:
i have no problem with the ban and yes i voted for Trump because he didn't let four brave americans die like Clinton did. Trump is an outsider and thats why he won he has no political strings. the judges are being to progressive and not following the rule of law. the president can ban foreign countries if he sees them as a threat to national security. im surprised that Saudi Arabia was not on the list


That's because Trump personally does business in Saudi Arabia, not to mention how America has a pusher/addict relationship with them in regards to oil.

I know it will never happen, but if you are going to ban people because they come from an area with people who pose a threat to Americans. I would say at least choose one that is actually a threat.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

27 Mar 2017, 8:02 pm

BettaPonic wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
AndrewBatman82 wrote:
i have no problem with the ban and yes i voted for Trump because he didn't let four brave americans die like Clinton did. Trump is an outsider and thats why he won he has no political strings. the judges are being to progressive and not following the rule of law. the president can ban foreign countries if he sees them as a threat to national security. im surprised that Saudi Arabia was not on the list


That's because Trump personally does business in Saudi Arabia, not to mention how America has a pusher/addict relationship with them in regards to oil.

I know it will never happen, but if you are going to ban people because they come from an area with people who pose a threat to Americans. I would say at least choose one that is actually a threat.


I concur, if the people being banned are shown to be an actual threat.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

27 Mar 2017, 8:42 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
feral botanist wrote:
Raptor wrote:
feral botanist wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
You mean so-called judges!


They were sworn in, and preside over a court of law, making binding decisions. Just because you and Trump call them "so-called judges," because you don't approve of their rulings, doesn't invalidate their positions on the bench.



He is making a joke with the added benefit, that if he gets a rise out of someone, he can feel powerful, so just ignore him.

Maybe if some people weren't so easy to get a rise out of and eager to be offended...



You are correct, you precious little snowflakes need to relax.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: ! ! ! ! ! ! !


Cheer lead much?


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


AndrewBatman82
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 54
Location: Tennessee

27 Mar 2017, 9:32 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
That's because Trump personally does business in Saudi Arabia, not to mention how America has a pusher/addict relationship with them in regards to oil.



yeah they love their Oil. Saudis are a terror sponsor country like Iran.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

27 Mar 2017, 9:47 pm

feral botanist wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
You mean so-called judges!


They were sworn in, and preside over a court of law, making binding decisions. Just because you and Trump call them "so-called judges," because you don't approve of their rulings, doesn't invalidate their positions on the bench.



He is making a joke with the added benefit, that if he gets a rise out of someone, he can feel powerful, so just ignore him.


You're the one with the superiority complex, who's into heckling, not I.

Now be sure to come up with some logical fallacies you pretend apply.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

27 Mar 2017, 10:03 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
That's because Trump personally does business in Saudi Arabia, not to mention how America has a pusher/addict relationship with them in regards to oil.


Ever wondered why Bush never ordered the bombing of Riyadh after 9-11?
Fifteen of the 19 terrorists involved in the 9-11 attack were citizens of Saudi Arabia, and the others were from the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Lebanon.

Funny thing the two countries attacked after 9-11 (Iraq and Afghanistan) weren't on that list



feral botanist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Jul 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 881
Location: in the dry land

27 Mar 2017, 11:06 pm

AndrewBatman82 wrote:
i have no problem with the ban and yes i voted for Trump because he didn't let four brave americans die like Clinton did. Trump is an outsider and thats why he won he has no political strings. the judges are being to progressive and not following the rule of law. the president can ban foreign countries if he sees them as a threat to national security. im surprised that Saudi Arabia was not on the list



Logical argument: If A, then B

If Muslims are dangerous then they should be banned.

Logical issues with this argument:
1 - Not all Muslim are dangerous, so not all Muslims should be banned

2 - If all Muslims are dangerous, why are we not banning them all?

Most of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is not one of the banned countries.

The countries that are banned have never attacked the USA, and as far as I have read, none of thier citizens have commited terrorist attacks against US citizens.



feral botanist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Jul 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 881
Location: in the dry land

27 Mar 2017, 11:08 pm

EzraS wrote:
feral botanist wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
You mean so-called judges!


They were sworn in, and preside over a court of law, making binding decisions. Just because you and Trump call them "so-called judges," because you don't approve of their rulings, doesn't invalidate their positions on the bench.



He is making a joke with the added benefit, that if he gets a rise out of someone, he can feel powerful, so just ignore him.


You're the one with the superiority complex, who's into heckling, not I.

Now be sure to come up with some logical fallacies you pretend apply.



Love you Ezra



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

27 Mar 2017, 11:26 pm

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
feral botanist wrote:
Raptor wrote:
feral botanist wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
You mean so-called judges!


They were sworn in, and preside over a court of law, making binding decisions. Just because you and Trump call them "so-called judges," because you don't approve of their rulings, doesn't invalidate their positions on the bench.



He is making a joke with the added benefit, that if he gets a rise out of someone, he can feel powerful, so just ignore him.

Maybe if some people weren't so easy to get a rise out of and eager to be offended...



You are correct, you precious little snowflakes need to relax.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: ! ! ! ! ! ! !


Cheer lead much?


No, I don't have the legs for a miniskirt.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 39,637
Location: Long Island, New York

28 Mar 2017, 2:14 am

cyberdad wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
That's because Trump personally does business in Saudi Arabia, not to mention how America has a pusher/addict relationship with them in regards to oil.


Ever wondered why Bush never ordered the bombing of Riyadh after 9-11?
Fifteen of the 19 terrorists involved in the 9-11 attack were citizens of Saudi Arabia, and the others were from the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Lebanon.

Funny thing the two countries attacked after 9-11 (Iraq and Afghanistan) weren't on that list


I have a pretty good idea why.

Bush ties to bin Laden haunt grim anniversary - Denver Post

Quote:
In 1978, Bush and Osama bin Laden’s brother, Salem bin Laden, founded Arbusto Energy, an oil company based in Texas.

Several bin Laden family members invested millions in The Carlyle Group, a private global equity firm based in Washington, DC. The company’s senior advisor was Bush’s father, former President George H.W. Bush. After news of the bin Laden-Bush connection became public, the elder Bush stepped down from Carlyle.

Interestingly, on Sept. 11, 2001, members of the Carlyle Group – including Bush senior, and his former secretary of state, James Baker – were meeting at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Washington, D.C., along with Shafiq bin Laden, another one of Osama bin Laden’s brothers.

While all flights were halted following the terrorist attacks, there was one exception made: The White House authorized planes to pick up 140 Saudi nationals, including 24 members of the bin Laden family, living in various cities in the U.S. to bring them back to Saudi Arabia, where they would be safe. They were never interrogated.


_________________
“Self Acceptance is a process not a performance”
“You are autistic enough. And you always have been”

Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.


BettaPonic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Jan 2017
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 918
Location: NOVA

28 Mar 2017, 4:28 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
BettaPonic wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
AndrewBatman82 wrote:
i have no problem with the ban and yes i voted for Trump because he didn't let four brave americans die like Clinton did. Trump is an outsider and thats why he won he has no political strings. the judges are being to progressive and not following the rule of law. the president can ban foreign countries if he sees them as a threat to national security. im surprised that Saudi Arabia was not on the list


That's because Trump personally does business in Saudi Arabia, not to mention how America has a pusher/addict relationship with them in regards to oil.

I know it will never happen, but if you are going to ban people because they come from an area with people who pose a threat to Americans. I would say at least choose one that is actually a threat.


I concur, if the people being banned are shown to be an actual threat.

Do you feel any countries should have this ban?



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

28 Mar 2017, 5:26 am

feral botanist wrote:
EzraS wrote:
feral botanist wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
You mean so-called judges!


They were sworn in, and preside over a court of law, making binding decisions. Just because you and Trump call them "so-called judges," because you don't approve of their rulings, doesn't invalidate their positions on the bench.



He is making a joke with the added benefit, that if he gets a rise out of someone, he can feel powerful, so just ignore him.


You're the one with the superiority complex, who's into heckling, not I.

Now be sure to come up with some logical fallacies you pretend apply.



Love you Ezra


You love to target me that's for sure.