President Trump

I don't believe that it's a settled matter that Obamacare is collapsing or that it's failed. I can agree that it's overall a crap policy written by lobbyists and something has to be done to make it better. But the AHCA is a solution to that like shooting your foot is a solution to your leg pain.

I can absolutely appreciate this point of view, but my main issue is that he hasn't hit many nails yet but he's hit a whole ton of puppies and maybe even a kitten or two. I even appreciate the fiscal responsibility point of the right's ideology, except it's muddled in with all these senses of "how things should be" that make any attempt at fiscal sound judgement a laughing matter. There are very real topics and issues where they can apply that ideology, such as the criminal justice system; there is a ton of money waiting to be saved when we stop locking people up for every minor thing such as possession charges, etc. The money is more responsible being spent at rehabilitation of those people to make them productive citizens again, improving our economy and tax revenue, that's above and beyond the money you'd just simply not spend by not locking them up.

How about wages and unions? Why aren't republicans trying to encourage common sense unions to ensure living wages for people, to take them off welfare and unburden the system, while at the same time cracking down on teacher's unions and police unions which, for all the good they do, make it a nightmare to get rid of bad elements within both systems.

Universal education? You'd think for all the talking Republicans do about a stronger America, they would quickly hop on this bandwagon. Having a highly educated population not only increases and promotes our own economy, but makes us more globally competitive in the global economy. We would even gain a technological edge over our rivals having a more educated population, directly increasing military strength.

Can you explain which "alt-right" talking points are inherently legitimate?

This I can agree with.

I hope you appreciate this action next time when the Democrats do the same thing, making a shame of our legal system and Constitution. The very fact they refused to even hold a vote for Garland is atrocious and I would be just as angered if the Democrats had done it. Think of the precedent this sets.

Already blocked by a judge

So had every Republican President, the next Democratic one will just turn it back on, like every Democratic President has done.

And Trump was registered as a Democrat for about 8 years.

Of course she would, which is why I didn't vote for her either, she's not trustworthy.

 

Trump was a Democrat and so was my grandpa. Then they got their brain.

Sanctuary cities deal can be appealed. Just like AHCA, it'll get done.

Yes, the next Democratic president will come in, change verythig Trump did and then blame Trump for everything.

Pray for a wall!

 

They support universal education up to a high school level. You don't need a college degree to be middle class, statistically, 77% of people who finish high school, have full time jobs, and have kids after they get married are making above $55,000 a year. If you want to go to college, its not impossible, you just have to work to make yourself desirable and/or take out loans, which, assuming you go to college and take courses that help you get an actual job, you should be able to pay off as an adult with a career. Paying for everyone to go to college is unnecessary.

There criticisms of far leftist ideas like "rape culture", and there criticisms of how corporate interests distort reality and take things out of context to further there agenda.

I agree that the republican legislators undermined gorsuchs legitimacy, but he is on the supreme court, and he seems like he has integrity.

Doesn't take away from the fact that he did it.

Right, but its not just that Hillary was a republican, its that she supported a segragationist. The distinction between segregationists and segregation sympathizers isn't very important.

 

Pray to what?

--- Double Post Merged, May 6, 2017, Original Post Date: May 6, 2017 ---

Are you a Christian?

 

Pray for a wall is just a saying. If you want something then yes, pray for it. Not to god it's not even really a religious thing.

Um, I'm independent when it comes to religion. However, the traditional Christian beliefs and values is what I typically lean towards.

 

Like what?

 

Technically any restrictive laws are an infringement...

 

I don't think I can explain it any clearer. If you would like to ask me a more detailed question then I would be happy to answer it.

 

So threatening to kill someone should be free speech?

 

threatening to kill someone transcends purely speech. It has real world consequences, same with screaming theater in a crowded fire, because if affects real people, its not purely speech.

 

@Deinen Free speech allows you to speak without consequence and make your voice be heard. Until it can physically harm something/someone.

 

I don't know.

 

I was responding to Ranger's statement, since the laws restricting threats would be an infringement, technically.

 

Yelling fire in a theater isn't 'speech' because it's a call to action that will result in people getting hurt/killed. Making a threat isn't a call to action, so it requires a lot more scrutiny.

 

Isn't it a call to action? Your just calling yourself to action right?

 

No, you're informing someone of intent.

 

Regarding threats: Brandenburg v. Ohio, SCOTUS 1969 ruling:

The constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.

Basically free speech is not protected when your speech threatens "imminent lawless action." I'd say a threat qualifies as imminent lawless action.

 

Stephen colbert though...
I don't expect anything to come of it, the mom would crucify the FCC if they went after there golden boy. Does anyone really think saying Donald Trumps mouth is Putins ****-holster is ok for CBS?

 

Sure, as long as it was within the rating of the program and of course CBS can take any action they like... I thought it was pretty funny xD.

 

Anything is okay if it's a rude comment about Trump, even if it's a lie. However, if it's a Democrat being made fun of or lied about it's a large issue. Remember when Obama was elected. His kids were "not allowed to be involved". But look what they are doing to innocent Barron Trump. "Barron after bed time" broadway show??? And they wonder why Melania wants to keep him in New York.