Board Logo
« Trump protests »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Apr 28th, 2017, 1:00pm


Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

« Previous Topic | Next Topic »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5  Notify Send Topic Print
 veryhotthread  Author  Topic: Trump protests  (Read 1991 times)
foxfeeder
Watcher of the Skies
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

I'm an all-eras fan. Of Steve Hackett!


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4895
angry Re: Trump protests
« Reply #45 on: Feb 2nd, 2017, 07:05am »

on Feb 2nd, 2017, 01:49am, Yild4Genesis wrote:
Yep, nice attitude, so they guy is a biscuit short of a barrel and is absolutely a racist white supremist. And because he was elected you begrudge people protesting?
rolleyes


Forgot you'd already posted? wink

Anyway, point is, protesting is going to change......... what? (unless you think Trump is going to listen).
User IP Logged

Ian

"One wish?"
"Yes, one" said the genie.
"Simple! I'll have the musical talent of Steve Hackett" I replied!
boredatwork
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Female
Posts: 2273
angry Re: Trump protests
« Reply #46 on: Feb 2nd, 2017, 07:55am »

on Feb 1st, 2017, 7:00pm, NoSonOfVine wrote:
Except what he has done is utterly tyrannical. Banning the citizens from seven countries from entering the U.S. contradicts what the country is supposed to be: A nation of immigrants where everyone from every background is welcome. Furthermore, shutting out the people of these countries only helps militant groups radicalise and grow in numbers. This order is based around fear, distrust and paranoia, which is what makes terrorists thrive. It's absolutely disgraceful and Trump deserves to be shamed and derided from every angle for tarnishing the suffering reputation of the United States.

Trump was fairly elected president under the (somewhat odd) US voting system, but whatís alarming is that heís forcing all these policies through instantly by using Executive Orders. Obama used them too much because he couldnít get what he wanted past the Republican opposition any other way, so heís unfortunately set a precedent that Trump's all too eager to follow. But since Trump has a majority he could pass most of what he wants through congress without resorting to executive order, then at least the end result would be more legitimate, albeit probably still racist to some extent & causing protests.

Executive orders give the president the power of a dictator, instantly doing whatever he wants whenever he feels like it. Issuing them should be restricted to emergency situations, but neither party will do that because both sides can benefit from them. rolleyes
User IP Logged

rael1974
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

"They call me the trail blazer-Rael-electric razor."


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 503
xx Re: Trump protests
« Reply #47 on: Feb 2nd, 2017, 09:54am »

on Feb 2nd, 2017, 07:05am, foxfeeder wrote:
Anyway, point is, protesting is going to change......... what? (unless you think Trump is going to listen).


They're better off encouraging his decisions to the point of him getting impeached. grin
User IP Logged

User Image
rael1974
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

"They call me the trail blazer-Rael-electric razor."


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 503
xx Re: Trump protests
« Reply #48 on: Feb 2nd, 2017, 10:00am »

on Feb 2nd, 2017, 07:55am, boredatwork wrote:
But since Trump has a majority he could pass most of what he wants through congress without resorting to executive order, then at least the end result would be more legitimate, albeit probably still racist to some extent & causing protests.


I don't think many in congress (including Republicans) agree with the selective immigration ban.
« Last Edit: Feb 2nd, 2017, 9:45pm by rael1974 » User IP Logged

User Image
HENRY
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Miserable Git


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 6405
xx Re: Trump protests
« Reply #49 on: Feb 2nd, 2017, 11:26am »

on Feb 2nd, 2017, 07:55am, boredatwork wrote:
Trump was fairly elected president under the (somewhat odd) US voting system, but whatís alarming is that heís forcing all these policies through instantly by using Executive Orders. Obama used them too much because he couldnít get what he wanted past the Republican opposition any other way, so heís unfortunately set a precedent that Trump's all too eager to follow.

Executive orders give the president the power of a dictator, instantly doing whatever he wants whenever he feels like it. Issuing them should be restricted to emergency situations, but neither party will do that because both sides can benefit from them. rolleyes

There was nothing unusual nor precedent about Obama's use of Executive Orders. Previous presidents have routinely used them, and more often than Obama.

There is nothing dictatorial about EOs. It is part of the constitution and allows the president to make policy decisions over federal agencies that he oversees.

The issue becomes a matter of controversy when such orders are seen as contravening established authority, and in this particular case the legality of Trump's orders are being questioned.
User IP Logged

"Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid." - Frank Zappa
Yild4Genesis
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




Homepage PM


Posts: 3383
xx Re: Trump protests
« Reply #50 on: Feb 2nd, 2017, 2:01pm »

on Feb 2nd, 2017, 07:05am, foxfeeder wrote:
Forgot you'd already posted? wink

Anyway, point is, protesting is going to change......... what? (unless you think Trump is going to listen).


You're right, too hard, don't try...
rolleyes
User IP Logged

I wrote the last entry in my diary today. It simply said...bugger
boredatwork
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Female
Posts: 2273
angry Re: Trump protests
« Reply #51 on: Feb 2nd, 2017, 3:02pm »

on Feb 2nd, 2017, 11:26am, HENRY wrote:
There was nothing unusual nor precedent about Obama's use of Executive Orders. Previous presidents have routinely used them, and more often than Obama.

There is nothing dictatorial about EOs. It is part of the constitution and allows the president to make policy decisions over federal agencies that he oversees.

The issue becomes a matter of controversy when such orders are seen as contravening established authority, and in this particular case the legality of Trump's orders are being questioned.

Executive Orders may not be dictatorial in themselves, but they give a president who wants to be a dictator the power to act like one, as weíre currently witnessing.

They might be necessary in some circumstances, but using them in peacetime to enforce what would otherwise probably be illegal is a worrying development & itís very unlikely that the writers of the constitution envisaged them being used in this way.
User IP Logged

HENRY
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Miserable Git


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 6405
xx Re: Trump protests
« Reply #52 on: Feb 2nd, 2017, 5:00pm »

on Feb 2nd, 2017, 3:02pm, boredatwork wrote:
Executive Orders may not be dictatorial in themselves, but they give a president who wants to be a dictator the power to act like one, as weíre currently witnessing.

The powers of EOs have guidelines and restrictions. For one thing, laws can neither be made nor affected by an EO.

Quote:
They might be necessary in some circumstances, but using them in peacetime to enforce what would otherwise probably be illegal is a worrying development & itís very unlikely that the writers of the constitution envisaged them being used in this way.

And what way is that?

Again, an EO cannot overrule or affect established legalities. This has been addressed and dealt with in the most recent case, and as such is typically dealt with in the courts.

They are directives by the executive branch made to the agencies under the authority of that branch of government. Many such orders can be actually beneficial to the public, and others are simply changes of policy. Much of what Trump has signed has been either fairly common for an incoming president and generally involved matters of restructuring bureaucratic rules. There is nothing unusual about this, despite any criticism of specific EOs.
« Last Edit: Feb 2nd, 2017, 5:02pm by HENRY » User IP Logged

"Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid." - Frank Zappa
Schrottrocker
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4559
xx Re: Trump protests
« Reply #53 on: Feb 2nd, 2017, 5:11pm »

on Feb 2nd, 2017, 3:02pm, boredatwork wrote:
Executive Orders may not be dictatorial in themselves, but they give a president who wants to be a dictator the power to act like one, as weíre currently witnessing.

They might be necessary in some circumstances, but using them in peacetime to enforce what would otherwise probably be illegal is a worrying development & itís very unlikely that the writers of the constitution envisaged them being used in this way.


Why does this sound so familiar?... History will teach us nothing, as they say.
User IP Logged

Liam
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 1474
angry Re: Trump protests
« Reply #54 on: Feb 3rd, 2017, 03:37am »

on Feb 1st, 2017, 7:00pm, NoSonOfVine wrote:
Except what he has done is utterly tyrannical. Banning the citizens from seven countries from entering the U.S. contradicts what the country is supposed to be: A nation of immigrants where everyone from every background is welcome. Furthermore, shutting out the people of these countries only helps militant groups radicalise and grow in numbers. This order is based around fear, distrust and paranoia, which is what makes terrorists thrive. It's absolutely disgraceful and Trump deserves to be shamed and derided from every angle for tarnishing the suffering reputation of the United States.



Paranoia, eh?

So there's nothing to fear, except when a temporary travel ban is imposed on certain countries because of a perceived security threat, those poor people are just bound to join ISIS. What other choice have they got!?

I mean, I don't know about you, but if Trump put a temporary block on UK citizens visiting the USA, well, the first thing I'd think of doing is going out and beheading someone.

User IP Logged

boredatwork
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Female
Posts: 2273
angry Re: Trump protests
« Reply #55 on: Feb 3rd, 2017, 06:15am »

on Feb 2nd, 2017, 5:00pm, HENRY wrote:
The powers of EOs have guidelines and restrictions. For one thing, laws can neither be made nor affected by an EO.


And what way is that?

Again, an EO cannot overrule or affect established legalities. This has been addressed and dealt with in the most recent case, and as such is typically dealt with in the courts.

They are directives by the executive branch made to the agencies under the authority of that branch of government. Many such orders can be actually beneficial to the public, and others are simply changes of policy. Much of what Trump has signed has been either fairly common for an incoming president and generally involved matters of restructuring bureaucratic rules. There is nothing unusual about this, despite any criticism of specific EOs.

Sure, Executive orders are appropriate & useful in some circumstances.

But itís just been demonstrated that the president can use one unilaterally to ban any non-American from entering the US, apart from a few legal exceptions like green card holders.

Tomorrow Trump could extend the present list of 7 banned nations to cover every other country on earth indefinitely, using the pretext of some unspecified threat which he couldnít disclose for reasons of national security. And no one could do anything about it.

Of course, one can argue that any past president could have done the same thing but didn't. Thatís true, but unfortunately itís not in the least reassuring.
User IP Logged

NoSonOfVine
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 14027
xx Re: Trump protests
« Reply #56 on: Feb 3rd, 2017, 2:34pm »

on Feb 3rd, 2017, 03:37am, Liam wrote:
Paranoia, eh?

So there's nothing to fear, except when a temporary travel ban is imposed on certain countries because of a perceived security threat, those poor people are just bound to join ISIS. What other choice have they got!?

I mean, I don't know about you, but if Trump put a temporary block on UK citizens visiting the USA, well, the first thing I'd think of doing is going out and beheading someone.

rolleyes
User IP Logged

Yild4Genesis
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




Homepage PM


Posts: 3383
xx Re: Trump protests
« Reply #57 on: Feb 3rd, 2017, 3:00pm »

on Feb 3rd, 2017, 06:15am, boredatwork wrote:
Sure, Executive orders are appropriate & useful in some circumstances.

But itís just been demonstrated that the president can use one unilaterally to ban any non-American from entering the US, apart from a few legal exceptions like green card holders.

Tomorrow Trump could extend the present list of 7 banned nations to cover every other country on earth indefinitely, using the pretext of some unspecified threat which he couldnít disclose for reasons of national security. And no one could do anything about it.

Of course, one can argue that any past president could have done the same thing but didn't. Thatís true, but unfortunately itís not in the least reassuring.


Everyone knows true executive power comes from a mandate from the masses. I mean if some moistened dint threw a semitar at me they'd lock me away....
User IP Logged

I wrote the last entry in my diary today. It simply said...bugger
FatOldLady
Eleventh Earl of Mar
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

...


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 228
xx Re: Trump protests
« Reply #58 on: Feb 3rd, 2017, 3:06pm »

on Feb 3rd, 2017, 03:37am, Liam wrote:
Paranoia, eh?

So there's nothing to fear, except when a temporary travel ban is imposed on certain countries because of a perceived security threat, those poor people are just bound to join ISIS. What other choice have they got!?

I mean, I don't know about you, but if Trump put a temporary block on UK citizens visiting the USA, well, the first thing I'd think of doing is going out and beheading someone.



It's not that simple.

In simplest terms, they say this helps radicalization because it shows that parts of the western world hate Islam. ISIS and friends take this hate and say, "look, they hate you and me, they must pay", and then the hate becomes mutual.

You could say this is the very same tactic far-right leaders use to turn people on muslims.
User IP Logged

"Soon the gypsy queen, in a glaze of vaseline, will perform a guillotine, what a scene, WHAT A SCENE."
boredatwork
Lord/Lady of Lords
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Female
Posts: 2273
angry Re: Trump protests
« Reply #59 on: Feb 4th, 2017, 2:38pm »

So now we learn that Trump used an Executive Order to implement a policy thatís been ruled illegal & unconstitutional. How amazing! whoever would have thought that once given the power, heíd wait a whole week before trying something like that? shocked

One thingís for sure: it certainly wonít be the last time he tries it.
User IP Logged

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5  Notify Send Topic Print
« Previous Topic | Next Topic »

Donate $6.99 for 50,000 Ad-Free Pageviews!

| |

This forum powered for FREE by Conforums ©
Sign up for your own Free Message Board today!
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Conforums Support | Parental Controls