The Cysko Kid Posted February 21, 2019 Report Share Posted February 21, 2019 I often find Democrat logic baffling and laughable and this is no exception. For my entire politically aware adult life, every time Democrats want to find money for some social welfare program they rant and rave and rail against the defense budget. But now, when there is a project they're against, that actually falls under "defense" suddenly the defense budget is unassailable and how can the EEEEVIL right want to cripple our noble troops? By the way it's a measly amount of money to the overall defense budget. Undoubtedly, the Pentagon wastes that much money semi-annually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted February 21, 2019 Report Share Posted February 21, 2019 On 2/18/2019 at 8:19 AM, BaconHound said: ...by taking money from the Military. Can't imagine the outrage if a Democrat President had the audacity to raid $3.6 billion of military funding for a pet project. A very typical deflection. But what if Obama did it? Wall - national defense project Giving poor people free smartphones - ...not defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconHound Posted February 21, 2019 Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2019 7 hours ago, The Cysko Kid said: A very typical deflection. But what if Obama did it? Wall - national defense project Giving poor people free smartphones - ...not defense. Again, a National Emergency was not declared to circumvent Congressional approval and money wasn't raided from the military coffers for smartphones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted February 21, 2019 Report Share Posted February 21, 2019 The president has the power to declare a national emergency. No approval from an obstructionist congress needed. Also, again, since when did Democrats love the defense budget? They ought to be clicking their heels together in joy. If this stands think of how much money they'll be able to steal from the defense budget in the future, now that a precedent is being set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 21, 2019 Report Share Posted February 21, 2019 I never liked Trump campaigning on the wall in 2016 and saying "Mexico will pay for it" without saying how Mexico would pay for it. He may have meant the new trade agreement with Mexico? He had to know this would come up in the future about Mexico paying for the wall. I never expected Mexico to pay as why would they but 5 billion for a wall in our budget of over a trillion dollars is a very small amount. The dems are simply being obstructionists and not wanting Trump to have a victory regardless of what is best for the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 21, 2019 Report Share Posted February 21, 2019 1 hour ago, The Cysko Kid said: The president has the power to declare a national emergency. No approval from an obstructionist congress needed. Also, again, since when did Democrats love the defense budget? They ought to be clicking their heels together in joy. If this stands think of how much money they'll be able to steal from the defense budget in the future, now that a precedent is being set. And we have between 11 and 17 million illegals in the country already that cost more than it would to build fucking wall WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vambo Posted February 22, 2019 Report Share Posted February 22, 2019 2 hours ago, Westside Steve said: And we have between 11 and 17 million illegals in the country already that cost more than it would to build fucking wall WSS If the wall cost to much how do they plan on paying for Medicare for all, free college and that train to end air travel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorka Posted February 22, 2019 Report Share Posted February 22, 2019 On 2/18/2019 at 8:19 AM, BaconHound said: ...by taking money from the Military. Can't imagine the outrage if a Democrat President had the audacity to raid $3.6 billion of military funding for a pet project. To begin with the military budget is $716 billion. $3.6 barely makes a dent, hardly a "raid". The wall and the military serve the same function. The military exists for the purpose of defending the country, as does a border wall exist for the purpose of defending the country. Call it a pet project if you wish but a wall serves every one of us....as does the military. Fuck yeah, easy to imagine the outrage if some liberal democrat president would have the audacity to pluck out $3.6 billion of military funding for some stupid democrat pet project. The construction of gender neutral bathrooms in government buildings across the country using military funding wouldn't sit so well with the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 22, 2019 Report Share Posted February 22, 2019 obamao could have used all this money to build a wall in various badly needed areas, per the BORDER PATROL's desperate advice. but the left wants the future blue states, new voting base, of all those desperate and loyal to the dems for their survival. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/27/obama-backed-green-energy-failures-leave-taxpayers/ I don't remember any leftie complaining that that wasted money could have been better spent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconHound Posted February 23, 2019 Author Report Share Posted February 23, 2019 On 2/22/2019 at 12:54 AM, Gorka said: To begin with the military budget is $716 billion. $3.6 barely makes a dent, hardly a "raid". The wall and the military serve the same function. The military exists for the purpose of defending the country, as does a border wall exist for the purpose of defending the country. Call it a pet project if you wish but a wall serves every one of us....as does the military. Fuck yeah, easy to imagine the outrage if some liberal democrat president would have the audacity to pluck out $3.6 billion of military funding for some stupid democrat pet project. The construction of gender neutral bathrooms in government buildings across the country using military funding wouldn't sit so well with the rest of us. Definition of raid (Entry 1 of 2) 1a : a hostile or predatory incursion b : a surprise attack by a small force 2a : a brief foray outside one's usual sphere b : a sudden invasion by officers of the law c : a daring operation against a competitor d : the recruiting of personnel (such as faculty, executives, or athletes) from competing organizations3 : the act of mulcting public money 4 : an attempt by professional operators to depress stock prices by concerted selling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 23, 2019 Report Share Posted February 23, 2019 42 minutes ago, BaconHound said: Definition of raid (Entry 1 of 2) 1a : a hostile or predatory incursion b : a surprise attack by a small force 2a : a brief foray outside one's usual sphere b : a sudden invasion by officers of the law c : a daring operation against a competitor d : the recruiting of personnel (such as faculty, executives, or athletes) from competing organizations3 : the act of mulcting public money 4 : an attempt by professional operators to depress stock prices by concerted selling That's how they get funding for every single thing, number three. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted February 24, 2019 Report Share Posted February 24, 2019 On 2/21/2019 at 6:06 PM, Westside Steve said: 2 hours ago, BaconHound said: Definition of raid (Entry 1 of 2) 1a : a hostile or predatory incursion b : a surprise attack by a small force 2a : a brief foray outside one's usual sphere b : a sudden invasion by officers of the law c : a daring operation against a competitor d : the recruiting of personnel (such as faculty, executives, or athletes) from competing organizations3 : the act of mulcting public money 4 : an attempt by professional operators to depress stock prices by concerted selling Are you still whining about the national defense project taking money out of the defense budget? I mean I've heard some ridiculous shit before, like the president saying Mexico was going to pay for it, but the defense budget is literally for defense. I have no problem with 3.6 billion coming from there. I'd have no problem with the entire 8 billion coming from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorka Posted February 24, 2019 Report Share Posted February 24, 2019 4 hours ago, BaconHound said: Definition of raid (Entry 1 of 2) 1a : a hostile or predatory incursion b : a surprise attack by a small force 2a : a brief foray outside one's usual sphere b : a sudden invasion by officers of the law c : a daring operation against a competitor d : the recruiting of personnel (such as faculty, executives, or athletes) from competing organizations3 : the act of mulcting public money 4 : an attempt by professional operators to depress stock prices by concerted selling Lol...Ok, by definition a raid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 24, 2019 Report Share Posted February 24, 2019 6 hours ago, BaconHound said: Definition of raid (Entry 1 of 2) 1a : a hostile or predatory incursion b : a surprise attack by a small force 2a : a brief foray outside one's usual sphere b : a sudden invasion by officers of the law c : a daring operation against a competitor d : the recruiting of personnel (such as faculty, executives, or athletes) from competing organizations3 : the act of mulcting public money 4 : an attempt by professional operators to depress stock prices by concerted selling totally WRONG. You want definition? I got definition. mulct Dictionary result for mulct /məlkt/ formal verb gerund or present participle: mulcting extract money from (someone) by fine or taxation. "no government dared propose to mulct the taxpayer for such a purpose" deprive someone of (money or possessions) by fraudulent means. **************************** Therefore, since CONGRESS GAVE THE RIGHT TO THE PRES TO DECLARE EMEGENCIES ETC, and ONLY THE PRESIDENT IS COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF and it is NOT A TAX or FINE. It is simply an emergency re-allocation of funds, which are desperately necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted February 24, 2019 Report Share Posted February 24, 2019 Sweet. A fight over the definition of words carry on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 24, 2019 Report Share Posted February 24, 2019 31 minutes ago, Browns149 said: Sweet. A fight over the definition of words carry on If that is someone's main point in telling the other guy he's wrong I think it's valid. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorka Posted February 24, 2019 Report Share Posted February 24, 2019 33 minutes ago, Browns149 said: Sweet. A fight over the definition of words carry on Lol..and initiated by who else but a lefty. It's really slim pickins out there for yu folks lately ! Let's see, we recently had 3 top democrats in Va. accused of racism and rape. The liberal media lie spread about those MAGA hat wearing kids harassing a Native American. The Jussie Smolett hoax. The corrupt FBI and their little coup. But, but, but,....Trump is a big fat liar!!! Don't know if I should laugh or have pity on you folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted February 24, 2019 Report Share Posted February 24, 2019 4 hours ago, Gorka said: Lol..and initiated by who else but a lefty. It's really slim pickins out there for yu folks lately ! Let's see, we recently had 3 top democrats in Va. accused of racism and rape. The liberal media lie spread about those MAGA hat wearing kids harassing a Native American. The Jussie Smolett hoax. The corrupt FBI and their little coup. But, but, but,....Trump is a big fat liar!!! Don't know if I should laugh or have pity on you folks. Yes all that happened and yes Trump is a big fat liar ALL IS TRUE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconHound Posted February 24, 2019 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2019 23 hours ago, Westside Steve said: That's how they get funding for every single thing, number three. WSS verb mulcted; mulcting; mulcts Definition of mulct (Entry 2 of 2) transitive verb 1: to punish by a fine 2a: to defraud especially of money : SWINDLE b: to obtain by fraud, duress, or theft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 24, 2019 Report Share Posted February 24, 2019 22 minutes ago, BaconHound said: verb mulcted; mulcting; mulcts Definition of mulct (Entry 2 of 2) transitive verb 1: to punish by a fine 2a: to defraud especially of money : SWINDLE b: to obtain by fraud, duress, or theft There are quite a few variations bud. Shall we not get tedious? 😉 WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 24, 2019 Report Share Posted February 24, 2019 mulct verb (tr) to cheat or defraud to fine (a person) noun a fine or penalty ☆ Word Origin for mulct C15: via French from Latin multa a fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 24, 2019 Report Share Posted February 24, 2019 mulct Dictionary result for mulct /məlkt/ Learn to pronounce FORMAL verb past tense: mulcted; past participle: mulcted extract money from (someone) by fine or taxation. "no government dared propose to mulct the taxpayer for such a purpose" deprive someone of (money or possessions) by fraudulent means. "he mulcted Shelly of $75,000" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbluhm86 Posted February 25, 2019 Report Share Posted February 25, 2019 Do we need better border security? Yes. Do we need to be wary of the overreaching of presidential power to do so? Also yes. One can hold these two thoughts in one's head simultaneously. Checks and balances were written into our Constitution for a reason. The President is supposed to be the head of the Executive branch of government, not a monarch who creates laws solely on his own initiative. This emergency declaration is a gross misuse of Presidential power, as much as Congress' writing of the emergency declaration law in the first place was a shameful abdication of their responsibility. This needs to be challenged in the Supreme Court and have that power removed from the President and force Congress to do its job. Nothing will ever improve in this country as long as the extremists from both the right and left refuse to negotiate in good faith on these issues and instead try to cram their respective agendas into law to spite the other side. I know that this may come as a shock, but laws in this country used to be passed by compromise and negotiation; it should return to that. Our conservative friends on this forum should remember back to when they voiced their concern about Presidential overreach during the Obama administration, and rightly so. Gross expansion of presidential power is gross expansion of presidential power, no matter who sits in office. Just because the abuse of power grants things that you are in favor of at the moment doesn't make it right; it wasn't right when Obama was using it to cram his agenda through and the left said nothing about it, and it isn't right now that Trump is attempting to do the same and the right remains silent on it. And to those on here still insistent that Trump is doing the right thing here by abusing the national emergency powers, I offer a sobering warning: the political wheel continues to turn, just as it always has, and there will come a day when the Democratic party will have a majority control of government again. If you are concerned about how the Democratic party is acting now, while they're still in a relative political minority, imagine what they could potentially attempt to do with the emergency powers precedent that Trump trying to use now, if successful. Better to keep checks and restrictions on the presidency in place now to prevent future abuse of power by a party who does not share your beliefs and values down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 25, 2019 Report Share Posted February 25, 2019 7 minutes ago, jbluhm86 said: Do we need better border security? Yes. Do we need to be wary of the overreaching of presidential power to do so? Also yes. or the overreach disguised as checks and balances bye a monolithic Congress dedicated to nothing but blocking everything at anything for no other reason than a visceral hatred of the president. Can we say also yes. One can hold these two thoughts in one's head simultaneously. Checks and balances were written into our Constitution for a reason. The President is supposed to be the head of the Executive branch of government, not a monarch who creates laws solely on his own initiative. This emergency declaration is a gross misuse of Presidential power, as much as Congress' writing of the emergency declaration law in the first place was a shameful abdication of their responsibility. This needs to be challenged in the Supreme Court and have that power removed from the President and force Congress to do its job. Nothing will ever improve in this country as long as the extremists from both the right and left refuse to negotiate in good faith on these issues and instead try to cram their respective agendas into law to spite the other side. I know that this may come as a shock, but laws in this country used to be passed by compromise and negotiation; it should return to that. Our conservative friends on this forum should remember back to when they voiced their concern about Presidential overreach during the Obama administration, and rightly so. Gross expansion of presidential power is gross expansion of presidential power, no matter who sits in office. Just because the abuse of power grants things that you are in favor of at the moment doesn't make it right; it wasn't right when Obama was using it to cram his agenda through and the left said nothing about it, and it isn't right now that Trump is attempting to do the same and the right remains silent on it. And to those on here still insistent that Trump is doing the right thing here by abusing the national emergency powers, I offer a sobering warning: the political wheel continues to turn, just as it always has, and there will come a day when the Democratic party will have a majority control of government again. If you are concerned about how the Democratic party is acting now, while they're still in a relative political minority, imagine what they could potentially attempt to do with the emergency powers precedent that Trump trying to use now, if successful. Better to keep checks and restrictions on the presidency in place now to prevent future abuse of power by a party who does not share your beliefs and values down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted February 25, 2019 Report Share Posted February 25, 2019 Wasn’t all of Congress on his side when he was elected? And they are still half on his side? And he still can’t get what he wants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 25, 2019 Report Share Posted February 25, 2019 1 hour ago, Browns149 said: Wasn’t all of Congress on his side when he was elected? And they are still half on his side? And he still can’t get what he wants? Not really, haven't you been paying attention? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted February 25, 2019 Report Share Posted February 25, 2019 5 minutes ago, Westside Steve said: Not really, haven't you been paying attention? WSS Congress was controlled by the Republicans. When he was elected. Oh wait. His own party wasn’t on his side? That about ssys it all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 25, 2019 Report Share Posted February 25, 2019 9 hours ago, Browns149 said: Congress was controlled by the Republicans. When he was elected. Oh wait. His own party wasn’t on his side? That about ssys it all That's about as astute as the Democrats here repeating "I thought Mexico was going to pay for the wall." Just think about it this has been said a dozen times. The Republicans and the Never trumper's including the supposed conservatives in not only the Freedom caucus but people like Bill Kristol Etc hated him and were infuriated that he made the Old Guard Republicans, who wanted Jeb Bush, look like fools. If Republicans weren't grandstanding assholes ie Rand Paul and Jeff Flake and voted in lockstep like the Democrats do things would be much different now. WSS Edit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorka Posted February 25, 2019 Report Share Posted February 25, 2019 10 hours ago, Browns149 said: Wasn’t all of Congress on his side when he was elected? And they are still half on his side? And he still can’t get what he wants? For heavens sake no one can possibly be this out of touch!!! To preface what Steve said..Trump made the old guard Republicans look like fools because Trump was an outsider. A non politician who for the first time in history was able bust down the door to their Republican club. War hero, and long time politician and presidential candidate John McCain seethed with bitterness over Trumps election. Hated Trump with a passion. A proponent for the repeal of Obamacare , he decided he was gonna vote against it's repeal because he was a Trump hating baby. Do you remember that? To make matters worse, aside from the never-Trumpers, many reasonable Republicans were duped by the Russian collusion hoax perpetrated by the left and deep state. It took at least a year when they finally came around to the realization that the idea of the Russians helping Trump win the election was horse shit.. And who handed over that fake dossier riddled with lies over to the DOJ?...John McCain. Fuck that bastard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 25, 2019 Report Share Posted February 25, 2019 So it's not Trump's fault because I his own party didn't like him? So he gets a pass on not passing anything earlier, and it justifies the use of an "emergency"? Alright. Also... Trump repeatedly said Mexico will pay for the wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.