Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
CoAspen

Let the fun begin!!(Trump Time)

Recommended Posts

joeb    331
joeb
3 hours ago, CoAspen said:

The changing tides....

Executive orders

When Obama did it you thought it was wonderful.  I told you guys then he was setting dangerous precedents, but you guys were all gung ho for what he was doing.  Now you see the flip side of what he did.  From now on Presidents will be doing a lot of this just because the press, congress, and the public let Obama get away with it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CoAspen    1,065
CoAspen

When all else fails, blame the last president! Nothing new, more of the same except with more 'vigor'!

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bonnie    700
bonnie
2 hours ago, CoAspen said:

When all else fails, blame the last president! Nothing new, more of the same except with more 'vigor'!

;)

You are right. For 8 years you enthusiastically backed the master of blaming the last president. One who blamed the previous president with more vigor than any other president previously. Now you seem to have a problem with that.WHY?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
debbym    1,173
debbym

The powers of the executive branch of government have been increasing since president  G. Washington.  Lincoln did more to expand the powers of the president then any president before or since, when he suspended all power of the press... the media of his time, in the name of national security.

Every new president inherits every new precedent exercised by the presidents before him. it has been going on for a long long time.  It is the nature of the office of the president.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer    1,444
The Wanderer
11 minutes ago, debbym said:

The powers of the executive branch of government have been increasing since president  G. Washington.  Lincoln did more to expand the powers of the president then any president before or since, when he suspended all power of the press... the media of his time, in the name of national security.

Every new president inherits every new precedent exercised by the presidents before him. it has been going on for a long long time.  It is the nature of the office of the president.

I didnt know Lincoln did that. But it makes sense in terms of where the current President is getting some of his precedence from. "National Security" masks a lot of things

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bonnie    700
bonnie
1 hour ago, CoAspen said:

Vote Suppression?

Are we seeing a trend for our future?

How do stricter voting laws suppress votes?

That last line is likely painfully familiar to liberals. Although Mr Trump's comments were over the top and easily debunked, they mirror more nuanced justifications Republican politicians have offered at the state level to justify tightening voter registration procedures, imposing strict polling place identification rules and curtailing early voting opportunities.

They are part and parcel, critics say, of a comprehensive plan to limit turnout of Democratic-leaning voting groups that are less likely to have necessary identification, less able to take time off to vote on election day and less comfortable navigating through voter registration procedures.

Last week I had to see a specialist at a clinic that I have never used. They didn't care what color I was,what gender,what political party. Before they would admit me I had to show picture ID,Insurance card and a current bill in my name with current address. Were they trying to prevent me from receiving very necessary medical care? No,it was to show proof I was who I said I was. I cannot get a library card without proper picture ID. Is requesting that an attempt to suppress democratic leaning groups from using the library? For medical care,cashing checks, to open a checking account,to get a library card,to use the local food shelf,to receive medicare,snap or any welfare benefits a valid picture ID is required along with other identification. Why is voting the one area that is seen as some kind of punishment to democratic leaning groups?

I had a rather silly occurrence when I applied for SS. I had to amend my birth certificate. No one cared if it was inconvenient or whether I was a democrat or republican. If I didn't comply,I didn't receive my SS.

I was delivered by a mid-wife at home. All information had been filed out correctly,stating my parents full name and indicaticating I was legitimate. The error that concerned them was the mid-wife gave my first and middle name but did not give my last name. It should have been obvious.I was not adopted,my parents were married,last name listed  so not sure why the question as to my last name.

There are a lot of procedures many of us don't like to navigate,we are not asked if we like it,we are told do it or you are not eligible

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CoAspen    1,065
CoAspen
Quote

Make no mistake, however, this fight over voter fraud is - at its heart - a nakedly partisan battle. As Republican legislators North Carolina made clear when they studied voting demographics and photo ID possession while crafting their state's election laws, it's a way to cut into their opposition's base.

Quote

"Look, if African Americans voted overwhelmingly Republican, they would have kept early voting right where it was," long-time North Carolina Republican strategist Carter Wrenn told the Washington Post. "It wasn't about discriminating against African Americans. They just ended up in the middle of it because they vote Democrat."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bonnie    700
bonnie
59 minutes ago, CoAspen said:

 

That proves it I guess. But you still haven't explained the rationale against requirements to vote.

Just exactly why shouldn't everyone have to show proof in voting when it is required for much less important issues? If you can't figure out how to find the time to vote on election day,no matter what your political bent or the color of your skin,maybe you shouldn't be voting.

Most people don't take time off work. At least not around here.

But if you would be kind enough to explain why the following is acceptable no matter democrat,republican,skin color,education level..... Last week I had to see a specialist at a clinic that I have never used. They didn't care what color I was,what gender,what political party. Before they would admit me I had to show picture ID,Insurance card and a current bill in my name with current address. Were they trying to prevent me from receiving very necessary medical care? No,it was to show proof I was who I said I was. I cannot get a library card without proper picture ID. Is requesting that an attempt to suppress democratic leaning groups from using the library? For medical care,cashing checks, to open a checking account,to get a library card,to use the local food shelf,to receive medicare,snap or any welfare benefits a valid picture ID is required along with other identification. Why is voting the one area that is seen as some kind of punishment to democratic leaning groups?

And requiring the same for voting is somehow a negative. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bravus    934
Bravus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_federal_executive_orders#Consolidated_list_by_President

Obama absolutely did not set the precedent on numbers of executive orders: he issued fewer than any other president since Gerald Ford. (George H W Bush issued 166 in his 4 years in office, which equates to 332 in 8 years, which all of the other presidents have served.) Obama issues fewer than G W Bush and more than 100 fewer than Reagan. He issued an average of 0.09 per day.

By way of contrast, Trump has to date issued an average of 1.78 per day, almost 20 TIMES (2000%) Obama's rate.

Blaming this on the previous president simply will not fly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bravus    934
Bravus

The all time champ of executive orders is FDR, with 3500 in his 12 years in office. That's still only a rate of 0.8 per day, less than half Trump's rate.

Trump won't continue at his present clip, but if he did he would easily eclipse FDR's record in only an 8 year incumbency (heaven forfend!) with about 5200 executive orders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeannieb43    264
Jeannieb43
19 hours ago, Bravus said:

The all time champ of executive orders is FDR, with 3500 in his 12 years in office. That's still only a rate of 0.8 per day, less than half Trump's rate.

Trump won't continue at his present clip, but if he did he would easily eclipse FDR's record in only an 8 year incumbency (heaven forfend!) with about 5200 executive orders.

I hope he doesn't last 8 years.   I vote for impeaching him now.   He's engaging in religious and ethnic cleansing already.   He can't run the country the way he ran the TV show "Apprentice."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bonnie    700
bonnie
3 hours ago, Jeannieb43 said:

I hope he doesn't last 8 years.   I vote for impeaching him now.   He's engaging in religious and ethnic cleansing already.   He can't run the country the way he ran the TV show "Apprentice."

Preventing illegal immigration and placing a temporary ban isn't the same as killing or rounding up certain groups and removing them

 

Definition of ethnic cleansing for English Language Learners

: the practice of removing or killing people who belong to an ethnic group that is different from the ruling group in a country or region

 

Friendly Reminder: Obama Selected The List Of Muslim Countries in Trump’s Executive Order

Matt Vespa
|
Posted: Jan 29, 2017 9:00 AM
Friendly Reminder: Obama Selected The List Of Muslim Countries in Trump’s Executive Order

As the Left and some Republicans lose their minds over President Donald J. Trump’s executive order on immigration, let’s not forget that the list of concerned countries that the Trump administration outlined in the order is based on the one signed into law by the former Obama administration. So, it looks like the Obama White House set the groundwork (viaMic News):

 

According to the draft copy of Trump's executive order, the countries whose citizens are barred entirely from entering the United States is based on a bill that Obama signed into law in December 2015.

 

Obama signed the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act as part of an omnibus spending bill. The legislation restricted access to the Visa Waiver Program, which allows citizens from 38 countries who are visiting the United States for less than 90 days to enter without a visa.

Though outside groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union and NIAC Action — the sister organization of the National Iranian American Council — opposed the act, the bipartisan bill passed through Congress with little pushback.

At the initial signing of the restrictions, foreigners who would normally be deemed eligible for a visa waiver were denied if they had visited Iran, Syria, Sudan or Iraq in the past five years or held dual citizenship from one of those countries.

In February 2016, the Obama administration added Libya, Somali and Yemen to the list of countries one could not have visited — but allowed dual citizens of those countries who had not traveled there access to the Visa Waiver Program. Dual citizens of Syria, Sudan, Iraq and Iran are still ineligible, however.

So, in a nutshell, Obama restricted visa waivers for those seven Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen — and now, Trump is looking to bar immigration and visitors from the same list of countries.

Yet, I don’t remember the Left freaking out over this. I certainly don’t remember them going indiscriminately insane when the Obama White House stopped processing Iraqi visas for six months in 2011 when—surprise! —Al-Qaeda operatives feigned refugee status to get relocated to Bowling Green, Kentucky. And yes, some of the visa applicants who were screwed over worked as intelligence assets and interpreters for the U.S. military, according to ABC News. But remember, there was a Democrat in the Oval Office, so it was okay at the time.

Here’s the text of the order.

Via The Atlantic this is what it will and will not do. Most importantly, the publication adds that this technically isn’t a Muslim ban, as people from Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country, can still visit the country:

 

Who is affected?

 

For 120 days, the order bars the entry of any refugee who is awaiting resettlement in the U.S. It also prohibits all Syrian refugees from entering the U.S. until further notice. Additionally, it bans the citizens of seven countries—Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, and Yemen—from entering the U.S. on any visa category. This appears to include those individuals who are permanent residents of the U.S. (green-card holders) who may have been traveling overseas to visit family or for work—though their applications will be considered on a case-by-case basis, a senior administration official said Saturday.

[…]

Is this a Muslim ban?

Technically no. The ban includes seven majority Muslim countries, but by no means are these states the most populous Muslim countries, nor are they among the top sources of Muslim immigration to the U.S., nor have they produced terrorists in the same numbers as other Muslim countries not on the list.

So, it’s not really a Muslim ban and the nations that Trump listed are the ones that were drafted by Obama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bonnie    700
bonnie

Obama, 5 Predecessors Have Banned Some Immigrants, Including Muslims

Image: Obama, 5 Predecessors Have Banned Some Immigrants, Including Muslims
(Photo by Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images)

By Jason Devaney   |   Thursday, 16 Jun 2016 01:07 PM

 

 

 
President Barack Obama and his five presidential predecessors have used their executive powers to temporarily ban certain immigrants — including Muslims — from entering the United States.

According to the Washington Examiner, Obama has used his rights as president to put a halt to some immigrants from arriving here six times. This is despite his claim that presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump's call to temporarily ban Muslims from coming to the U.S. is wrong.
The first time Obama used section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, reports the Examiner, was to stop "immigrants or nonimmigrants" from emigrating to the U.S. under a broader ban instituted by the United Nations in 2011.

That 2011 order, reports The Daily Caller, covered "anyone under a UN travel ban; anyone who violates any of 29 executive orders regarding transactions with terrorists, those who undermine the democratic process in specific countries, or transnational criminal organizations."

Former President George W. Bush used the executive powers six times as well, and Bill Clinton did twice, reports The Daily Caller.

Before Clinton, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and Jimmy Carter instituted bans using their executive powers a combined seven times.

Trump has said for months, including this week after the Orlando terror attacks, he wants to stop Muslims from emigrating to the U.S. "until we figure out what the hell is going on." 
Obama disagrees with Trump's call to ban Muslims, and said this week he still plans to resettle 10,000 Syrian refugees in America by October.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CoAspen    1,065
CoAspen

Confusion Reigns

Quote

Critics who argue that the ban is religion-based point to statements Trump and advisers have made as proof. In an interview with Christian Broadcasting Network, Trump said he would prioritize Christians. Trump adviser Rudy Giuliani, meanwhile, told Fox News Saturday night said that Trump called to ask him for "the right way to do it legally," referring to what Giuliani called a "Muslim ban." While on the campaign trail, Trump called for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States," a position still listed on his website

Quote

Trump on Sunday also defended his executive actions by saying that the Obama administration had previously identified the same seven countries "as sources of terror." But that claim is misleading, as Congress and the Obama administration together designated the seven nations as dangerous for American citizens to visit. They were not designated as a source of immigrant-related terrorism.

Above two quotes are from More Confusion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
debbym    1,173
debbym

Obama signed the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act

a visa waiver is the privilege of entering the country without a visa.  under the above Act that Obama signed...  citizens of those countries were then required to have a visa, they were not denied access to entering our country.  this was not any barring of anyone from entering the country. it just required a visa of them.

this cannot be compared to Trump's abrupt disregard of good peoples lives.  This was barring of any and all citizens with visa's or green cards.  It was those whose home and work and education was ongoing in the USA... a child is now stranded over seas with both parents here in the usa... separated because of this sudden act of Trump.  no reasonable warning, nothing done in an orderly way.  This was needless drama and trauma, and public discomfort and protest... alot of good people and innocent people's lives were deeply distressed and some seriously continue to be harmed by this policing action.   Initially they were being returned as undesirables... and they were not undesirables... then detained as criminals and some handcuffed... Their lives were completely disregarded and they were made to be treated as criminals.  Unless you have been subjected to this treatment you probably have no idea of the distress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CoAspen    1,065
CoAspen

First Raid

All of the current immagration headlines are a boon to this story. Media so intent on watching the pres's hands, they are missing what happening in the background. Last admin got pounded for such disasters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bonnie    700
bonnie

As I am sure Trump will be as well. Many civilians have been killed as a result of drones. I seem to recall a wedding party.

 

 

Act of compassion? Where was the outrage? I bet they were greeted on their return as heros and treated accordingly

 MEDIA SILENT ON WHAT OBAMA DID TO 91 REFUGEES 2 DAYS BEFORE LEAVING OFFICE

 
 
 
 
 

The liberal media is relentlessly attacking President Trump for an executive order halting immigration from seven nations on a temporary basis, but they didn’t treat Barack Obama the same way just a week and a half ago.

As a parting shot to President Trump, Obama changed the rules surrounding Cuban refugees just before he left office, and it resulted in at least 91 being sent back to Cuba to be persecuted by their government. Of course, the leftist media had very little to say about it at the time, and even now they’re not even mentioning it.

More from an older ABC News report, via the Gateway Pundit:

Mexico has returned to Cuba the first contingent of Cuban migrants since former U.S. president Barack Obama decided Thursday to end a U.S. policy of granting residency to Cubans who arrive on U.S. soil.

Mexico’s National Immigration Institute said Friday it put 91 Cubans on a federal police airplane and flew them back to the island after the Cuban government accepted their return.

Mexico had long technically been able to deport Cubans, but the Cuban government usually refused to accept them.

The Mexican government had been granting Cubans 20-day transit visas to make it to the U.S. border.

Nice, eh? Meanwhile, they’re having a total meltdown that some 109 Middle Eastern refugees were held up for a few hours before entering the country.

If it’s not obvious to you they’re working to get Trump impeached yet, stories like this should give you enough evidence. Make no mistake about it, their end game is either impeachment or ensuring he doesn’t get a second term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bravus    934
Bravus

You realise Mexico is a separate country, beyond Obama's control, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bonnie    700
bonnie
20 minutes ago, Bravus said:

You realise Mexico is a separate country, beyond Obama's control, right?

Yeah I think I heard that somewhere once,but then there is this.

 Barack Obama decided Thursday to end a U.S. policy of granting residency to Cubans who arrive on U.S. soil.

Mexico’s National Immigration Institute said Friday it put 91 Cubans on a federal police airplane and flew them back to the island after the Cuban government accepted their return.

Mexico had long technically been able to deport Cubans, but the Cuban government usually refused to accept them.

The Mexican government had been granting Cubans 20-day transit visas to make it to the U.S. border.

 

 

 

 

Wonder what prompted Mexico to stop granting 20 day transit visas. Could it be that the US would no longer accept them

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bonnie    700
bonnie

Obama must hate Cubans I guess.   Unless you have been subjected to this treatment you probably have no idea of the distress.

MIAMI — In a hotel room in suburban Miami, Luis Alberto Rodriguez wept when he heard that a government policy granting residency to Cubans who arrive on U.S. soil was ending. That means it could take two years or more before his wife and two children still in Cuba can legally join him here.

Rodriguez arrived in Laredo, Texas, on New Year’s Eve, a journey that took him through 10 countries. He had hoped his family would be able to follow shortly afterward, maybe flying to Mexico before walking across the border under the “wet foot, dry foot” policy that sent back Cubans intercepted at sea but gave those who reached land an automatic path to legal residency.

“It was exhilarating finally making it onto U.S. soil, and then a whirlwind of emotions days later,” when news came that the policy would end, Rodriguez said. “It was such a shock. … I don’t know when I will see them. “

 

On Thursday, a little more than two years after Cuba and the U.S. began re-establishing diplomatic relations, President Barack Obama decided to end the “wet foot, dry foot” policy, moving yet another step closer to normalizing ties that had been frozen for nearly a half-century. The change forces Cubans to follow the same rules as immigrants from other countries, formally applying for legal immigration status and waiting their turn behind a long list of people who applied before them.

Cuban leaders were not the only ones irritated by the “wet foot, dry foot” policy. It also rankled an increasing number of U.S. elected officials, who accused some Cuban immigrants of abusing their privileges by claiming benefits under federal aid programs even if they returned to Cuba to live. Millions of dollars were defrauded from Medicare that way, they said.

Cubans’ special status also angered immigrants from other countries, including those who felt they faced the same kinds of political challenges at home that Cubans had faced under the late Fidel Castro and his brother Raul Castro. Moreover, they said, many Cubans, particularly in recent years, went to the U.S. primarily for economic opportunities, not because of persecution.

“For the longest time, Cubans have had all the privileges here,” said Honduran immigrant Mario Hernandez as he walked outside a busy bookstore in Miami with his wife, daughter and grandchildren. Some Cubans have become millionaires, Hernandez said.

“No one enjoys as many advantages. But hopefully there will be no more of that.”

Haitian community leaders unsuccessfully lobbied the U.S. government for years to extend a similar “wet foot, dry foot” to Haitian migrants fleeing poverty and political persecution. While both groups made perilous journeys to Florida in rafts and rickety boats, risking possible death or capture by the U.S. Coast Guard, the Cubans who made it to land were assured of a warm welcome. Haitians, on the other hand, had to go straight into hiding — if they weren’t caught and detained first.

“Now the boat we’re in is getting tighter, because now our Cuban brothers and sisters are getting into the same boat,” said Haitian-American community organizer Sandy Dorsainvil.

Cuban immigrant Rodriguez said he’s resigned to wait for his family to navigate the backlog of U.S. immigration applications rather than have them risk deportation or even death if they try to follow him into the country illegally.

 

“I don’t want them to risk their lives in any way,” he said.

Immigration advocates, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and Service Employees International Union officials said the Obama administration’s decision to end “wet foot, dry foot” was disappointing and would only serve to make all immigrants more vulnerable.

“Now they’re going to add to the rolls of the undocumented, and that’s not good for them and not good for our community,” said Randy McGrorty, executive director of Catholic Charities Legal Services.

In the Florida Keys, law enforcement officials said they expect to encounter fewer Cuban migrants now that there’s no immediate benefit to reaching land. And Monroe County Sheriff Rick Ramsay said Cubans who do attempt landing in the island chain may start treating his deputies differently.

“Once they made it to land, it was open arms and smiles and taking pictures,” Ramsay said. “They were different from migrants from other foreign countries who, when they hit the shore, the first thing they want to do is vanish into society. They’d see a patrol vehicle and they’d try to run, flee and hide.”

A surge in Cuban migrants — fearing the end of the U.S. policy — began in December 2014, when Washington and Havana began re-establishing diplomatic relations. The exodus created problems in Central America, and the Coast Guard increased its patrols in the Florida Straits, Atlantic and Caribbean because of the spiking number of Cubans taking to the sea.

Nearly 200 Cubans have come ashore just in the Keys since Fidel Castro’s death on Nov. 25. As of Monday, 1,893 have attempted to reach U.S. soil by sea since the fiscal year began Oct. 1, according to Coast Guard figures. More than 7,400 Cubans were intercepted at sea in the one-year period that ended Sept. 30 — a 60 percent increase from the 4,473 tallied the previous year. The number who made it ashore without alerting authorities or who died at sea is unknown.

Rodriguez is worried about Cubans who started out when the “wet foot, dry foot” policy was still in effect and are now stranded at sea, in Central America or still waiting to leave Cuba after selling their belongings to pay for their journeys.

“All our brothers who are still traveling through land and waters, hoping to make their lives better, I feel saddened that they will not make it,” he said.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×