Archive 2017-2019 Political Thread

[Matt]

Al Gore’s version was a hoax and there is a “chicken little the Sky is falling” mentality from many liberals but I believe we’ve been murdering the climate since the industrial revolution, conservative or liberal, that cannot be denied. We’ve trashed the air we breathe, the earth we plant and the waters (especially the oceans) for so many years, there is no way this doesn’t effect our climate!!
We’ve been such a wasteful generation! We should be ashamed and fussing about it isn’t going to help!!
Why not a few added steps and protests to take better care of the Earth our creator blessed us?
I don’t know how much it helps but it feels satisfying to recycle weekly, carry off various chemicals and other compounds to their proper disposal area.
We can’t just think, “well we will be gone or Jesus will come back before we pay for it”.
We’re paying for it already with our health and the amount of crap in our environments!!

Lori, I don't believe I ever claimed to be in favor of dirty air, water and planet. I am all for taking care of our resources. The United States has done a good job cleaning up the past few decades. And we can do more. I am not in favor of implementing the draconian schemes in order to deal with it.

 

[Mike S]

You are a fool! You bought this crap!

Are you not capable of refraining from namecalling?

 

[gangstonc]

Are you not capable of refraining from namecalling?

It didn’t bother me. I was more upset that my post clearly stated I didn’t think the report was true.

 

[maroonedinhsv]

Are you not capable of refraining from namecalling?

I’m assuming that was a rhetorical question.

 

[Evan]

Can anyone explain why the Trump administration is doing this?

I've thought and thought about it, but I just don't get it. Makes no sense to do this. What is the benefit? If it really only impacts 25 families or so a year, which seems to be the case, then why bother? Makes me think this is meant to set the stage for something more sinister.

 

[Arcadia]

Can anyone explain why the Trump administration is doing this?

I've thought and thought about it, but I just don't get it. Makes no sense to do this. What is the benefit? If it really only impacts 25 families or so a year, which seems to be the case, then why bother? Makes me think this is meant to set the stage for something more sinister.

I've given this a lot of thought as well. It's hard to wrap my mind around. I suppose those 25 families to be affected were deemed inconsequential. The botched rollout has caused fear, anger, and added worry no one needed. And for what? For what? I can only guess, same as you. but we're probably on the same page.

 

[gangstonc]

And another big lie.

 

[skelly]

I've given this a lot of thought as well. It's hard to wrap my mind around. I suppose those 25 families to be affected were deemed inconsequential. The botched rollout has caused fear, anger, and added worry no one needed. And for what? For what? I can only guess, same as you. but we're probably on the same page.

Read the article. How many military personnel basically never lived in the US? Seems like it would affect none. Active service counts as residency.

 

[Kory]

We have some absolutely sick in the head people in country to wish a catastrophic event on a location because the president happens to own property there.

 

[Evan]

Read the article. How many military personnel basically never lived in the US? Seems like it would affect none. Active service counts as residency.

There are some edge cases that it would impact. But, yes, it's pretty rare and USCIS estimates it would only impact about 25 cases a year. I don't think their estimate is off-base. I have a lot of experience with the US immigration system and I'm familiar with many major components of it, and I pay close attention to any major policy changes that occur. This is a perplexing shift in policy because it doesn't make a whole lot of logical sense.

The previous policy didn't seem to be creating any issues -- particularly because very few people needed to obtain citizenship through the alternate method. That's why it's odd that this administration decided to make any change to it. There doesn't seem to be any benefit to the country in doing so, and the only potential impact is to make things much tougher (or impossible) for a handful of people.

So why make the change and dedicate resources to doing so? That's the million dollar question here. And given this administration's history with immigration policy -- especially Stephen Miller's attempts at backdooring significant changes to the immigration system through administrative changes and EOs -- one has to wonder if this change is the prelude to something else. And I think that's especially true considering this policy change has occurred alongside major recent changes in the top leadership of USCIS, ICE, CBP, and other agencies responsible for enforcing or administering our immigration laws.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist -- I think anyone who's read my posts would agree -- but people generally don't do things just to do them. There has been a pretty consistent laying of groundwork for major changes to our immigration system through EOs, policy changes, and this admin's handling of federal court cases pertaining to immigration law and policy.

It hasn't been an abrupt shift, but rather a slow and consistent approach of making changes that substantially reduce the avenues available for legal immigration, and changes that make the financial and evidentiary burden much higher for people who are eligible for things like permanent residency and citizenship. This administration says their focus is on illegal immigration, but the vast majority of their actions have taken place in areas that correspond almost exclusively to legal immigration. It's not as if Stephen Miller has been shy about his desire to reduce legal immigration to a small fraction of the annual amounts this country has averaged for decades, and such changes comport with this admin's strategy of making major policy and regulatory changes via Executive branch action in lieu of the usual legislative process.

 

[Evan]

We have some absolutely sick in the head people in country to wish a catastrophic event on a location because the president happens to own property there.

It's very disturbing. I don't understand how people don't see the glaring hypocrisy of wishing bad things on others just because Trump is so unempathetic and self-centered. They're giving in to Trump's desired version of politics. Trump has a way of getting his opponents to sink down to his level of nastiness.

 

[skelly]

There are some edge cases that it would impact. But, yes, it's pretty rare and USCIS estimates it would only impact about 25 cases a year. I don't think their estimate is off-base. I have a lot of experience with the US immigration system and I'm familiar with many major components of it, and I pay close attention to any major policy changes that occur. This is a perplexing shift in policy because it doesn't make a whole lot of logical sense.

The previous policy didn't seem to be creating any issues -- particularly because very few people needed to obtain citizenship through the alternate method. That's why it's odd that this administration decided to make any change to it. There doesn't seem to be any benefit to the country in doing so, and the only potential impact is to make things much tougher (or impossible) for a handful of people.

So why make the change and dedicate resources to doing so? That's the million dollar question here. And given this administration's history with immigration policy -- especially Stephen Miller's attempts at backdooring significant changes to the immigration system through administrative changes and EOs -- one has to wonder if this change is the prelude to something else. And I think that's especially true considering this policy change has occurred alongside major recent changes in the top leadership of USCIS, ICE, CBP, and other agencies responsible for enforcing or administering our immigration laws.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist -- I think anyone who's read my posts would agree -- but people generally don't do things just to do them. There has been a pretty consistent laying of groundwork for major changes to our immigration system through EOs, policy changes, and this admin's handling of federal court cases pertaining to immigration law and policy.

It hasn't been an abrupt shift, but rather a slow and consistent approach of making changes that substantially reduce the avenues available for legal immigration, and changes that make the financial and evidentiary burden much higher for people who are eligible for things like permanent residency and citizenship. This administration says their focus is on illegal immigration, but the vast majority of their actions have taken place in areas that correspond almost exclusively to legal immigration. It's not as if Stephen Miller has been shy about his desire to reduce legal immigration to a small fraction of the annual amounts this country has averaged for decades, and such changes comport with this admin's strategy of making major policy and regulatory changes via Executive branch action in lieu of the usual legislative process.

It’s weird. I did mean to say that I read the article not to say that anyone should read it.

 

[gangstonc]

We apologize for the inconvenience... - United States Department of State

We apologize for the inconvenience. This page may have been moved, deleted, or is otherwise unavailable.To help you find what you are looking for: Check the URL (web address) for misspellings or errors. Search the most recent archived version of state.gov. Use our site search. Return to the home...

www.state.gov

 

[Evan]

It’s weird. I did mean to say that I read the article not to say that anyone should read it.

I understood you. You were saying you read the article not that we should read it. No worries!

 

[Lori]

It's very disturbing. I don't understand how people don't see the glaring hypocrisy of wishing bad things on others just because Trump is so unempathetic and self-centered. They're giving in to Trump's desired version of politics. Trump has a way of getting his opponents to sink down to his level of nastiness.

So we can start saying instead of “the devil made me do it” to “Trump made me do it”?

 

[gangstonc]

So we can start saying instead of “the devil made me do it” to “Trump made me do it”?

Same thing! J/k

 

[gangstonc]

Trump tweets out a classified picture. What an idiot.

 

[Matt]

Trump tweets out a classified picture. What an idiot.

You have no clue at all!

 

[gangstonc]

You have no clue at all!


View attachment 2002

That’s it.

US official confirms that Trump tweeted out a picture from a classified intelligence briefing — Business Insider

President Donald Trump. A US official told CNBC that a photo of an Iranian launchpad that President Donald Trump tweeted Friday afternoon came from an intelligence briefing Trump received earlier that day. "The United State of America was not involved in the catastrophic accident during final...

apple.news

What do I not have a clue about?

 

[Evan]

So we can start saying instead of “the devil made me do it” to “Trump made me do it”?

Either way it is someone giving into temptation when they know better. The fault isn't with the tempter its with the temptee. People are 100% responsible for their actions, and no one can make anyone do anything. There's always a choice.

I know you were just kidding, but I wanted to make clear that Trump isn't responsible for his enemies stooping to his level. They are responsible for their own actions.