Jump to content

thetragichippy

Members
  • Posts

    8,175
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by thetragichippy

  1. I've never understood how it makes it harder. How does one function in America without an ID? Also, what percent that does not have the motivation/time/money to get an ID would actually spend the time to vote?

    The bigger issue is lowering standards to make it easy for anyone to do anything.  Laws get broken, lets change them.....Bails too high, lets lower it....STARR test is too hard.....lets end it......

    We are letting a very small percent of people change who we are as a nation......it's going to end up biting us......

  2. It is not necessary to pick a side. 

    I'm not gay so I have no idea why people are, so who am I to speak out against something I don't understand? 

    Over the years I have hired and became very good friends with gay men and women. None of them were mentally ill. ALL OF THEM added value to the business. 

    I think the problem is trying to force people to believe in something they either don't understand or don't agree with. Calling them "homophobic" is not going to change their minds, and will only make them pick a side......which is counter productive. 

    A business that sells to the public is making a horrible decision getting in the middle of cancel culture politics........

    How about we live and let live.......

     

  3. 37 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

    The fact that he hasn't yet been tried isn't proof of his innocence. 

    I think the basis of our disagreement is the understanding of our justice system. Before Trump, guilt had to be proved, not innocence........

    Would you provide the "law" you keep mentioning concerning the proper way to declassify documents. If it is a law, it should also have punishments listed as well.  

  4. 44 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

    Because it doesn't. That's not in the constitution.   There are a series of laws like the Presidential Records Act that are the laws pertaining to document handling... and Trump is accused of being in violation of that/those laws.  And you're right... if constitutionality is challenged, then so be it.  Isn't it funny how a few months ago y'all were all yelling "The Supreme Court can't legislate law!  That's the job of Congress! Roe v Wade was a mistake!"  And today when trumps orange bee-hind is on the line, y'all are like... "so what, Congress made a law... let's just see what the Supreme Court has to say about that!"

    By your argument, Joe Biden could just think to himself  "you know, I, ummmm.... classifieds are hard, ya know.... " and POOF.... no more secrets, anywhere, period.  No classifieds, no top secret, no "for your eyes only> Because Joe Biden thought it.  

     

    You're smarter than this argument.

    The American bar Association disagrees with you......

    Most national security legal experts dismissed the former president’s suggestion that he could declassify documents simply by thinking about it. But as an 

    This is the hidden content, please
     posted Oct. 17 explains, legal guidelines support his contention that presidents have broad authority to formally declassify most documents that are not statutorily protected, while they are in office.

    As the new ABA Legal Fact Check notes, the extent of a president’s legal authority to unilaterally declassify materials — without following formal procedures — has yet to be challenged in court.

     

    I am smart enough to research what I talk about

    This is the hidden content, please

  5. On 6/14/2023 at 3:54 PM, CardinalBacker said:

    And there's a procedure that has to be followed so that all agencies know which information has been declassified.  A president can't just "think it" and a doc is declassified. 

    This has yet to be proven. The procedures are not laws, so if not followed how are they crimes? If the constitution gives the President the single power to declassify anything with no instructions, why can't he declassify just by taking them home?  Trump will take this all the way to the Supreme Court.......The Supreme Court rules on constitutionality....... 

  6. On 6/9/2023 at 1:35 PM, SmashMouth said:

    I think the periphery are only stepping up in case Trump goes to jail, or cannot run for some other reason, etc.

    I actually liked him pre-2016. He made some sense. I watched a little of his town hall on CNN (amazing the difference of how he was treated versus Trump, Cooper let him speak)....I agreed with a lot of what he said. His Trump bashing is not going to get him the nomination....He's smart and should know it.

  7. 1 hour ago, CardinalBacker said:

    The rules are the rules… it’s how we elect Presidents. But it does make you wonder how long a “democracy” will stand when the will of tbt people is ignored. 
     

    It’s hard to crow “Trump won in a landslide in 2016” when he didn’t even win the popular vote. If every vote really counted, he wouldn’t have been president. 

    We are a representative democracy, not a mob. The electoral collage was to avoid mob rule and have each state fairly represented. If Presidents won on popular votes, why would they go to small states to campaign when all they had to do was win 3-4 large states? The system is working like it was designed. 

  8. 4 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

    Here's the difference... Trump won the electoral college in 2020... he was the President.  But he wasn't the popular choice.  More people wanted HILLARY CLINTON to be the President than Trump.  Let that sink in.   

    Dude, first it's 2016.....Popular vote has no bearing......but if you want to discuss it, He lost the total popular vote by 2.8 million in 2016......but he lost Cali by 4.2 million and New York by 1.8 million. That is why we have the Electoral college, so 1 or 2 states don't decide the President for all 50 states.......What you should pay attention to is Hillary only won 17 states.........

    Something else odd...in 2020 he gained 2 million votes in Cali versus 2016.....but again, popular vote means nothing....and I'm glad

     

  9. 2 hours ago, tvc184 said:

    Yep.

    Obviously wearing a life jacket if for unforeseen emergency situations. It isn’t intended a jump in the river at your own choosing for a leisurely swim. 

    If we are being honest, I don't wear my life jacket 100% of the time in either of my boats personally, and I know I should at minimum under way, but anyone under the age of 18 does in my boats.

     What I find incredibly odd is the life jacket regulations. When you get stopped they ask to see life jackets, sure let me get them, they are under the deck, and the deck is locked, let me get my key, here ya go! Game Warden, thank you......about the same with every safety device.

    I do keep my life jackets out in case I do need them. 

×
×
  • Create New...