Mexican Tariffs

I know. One side will always justify why it is OK to bend the rules or even break them when it furthers their goals - regardless of how noble those goals are. But if you take the stance (and I do) that the Founding Fathers had a system put in place for a reason and that we should follow this system in all but the most dire circumstances (and even then, I'm not so sure) then you can't support using Executive Powers.

I agree that bending the rules leads us down the slippery slope, but it is also true that the President has enormous inherent authority when we are talking about an issue as crucial as border security. It amazes me that "principled conservatives" will argue that the President can start WW III without congress' approval but cannot do anything to stop a border invasion. The military builds everything from schools, hospitals, prisons and border walls all over the globe but somehow it is a Constitutional crisis if they do it on our own border.

And if 100,000 plus illegal immigrants a month rushing the border and taking advantage of our system is not a crisis, I have no idea what a real crisis would look like.
 
I agree that bending the rules leads us down the slippery slope, but it is also true that the President has enormous inherent authority when we are talking about an issue as crucial as border security. It amazes me that "principled conservatives" will argue that the President can start WW III without congress' approval but cannot do anything to stop a border invasion. The military builds everything from schools, hospitals, prisons and border walls all over the globe but somehow it is a Constitutional crisis if they do it on our own border.

And if 100,000 plus illegal immigrants a month rushing the border and taking advantage of our system is not a crisis, I have no idea what a real crisis would look like.

I hope you don't mean me when you refer to "principled conservatives" argue the President can start WWIII. I don't believe that for a second.
 
I know. One side will always justify why it is OK to bend the rules or even break them when it furthers their goals - regardless of how noble those goals are. But if you take the stance (and I do) that the Founding Fathers had a system put in place for a reason and that we should follow this system in all but the most dire circumstances (and even then, I'm not so sure) then you can't support using Executive Powers.

We are going to follow laws because unless, Congress changes it, it will stay on the books. The best President Donald Trump can do is reduce the effect of bad laws thru Executive Orders. He cannot change the laws by himself. That is the job of Congress. Unfortunately, we cannot hope for Congress to do its job. It is more concerned about impeaching President Trump by any means necessary rather than, doing their jobs to secure the borders and enforce our laws already, on the books!
 
You're right about the hypocrisy, but you understand it cuts both ways, right? Shouldn't support Trump for something you criticized Obama for, but shouldn't criticize Trump for something you supported Obama for either.

Uh...duh! No shit. I don't get erect for politicians like you guys here and swallow all they say blindly (except maybe AOC on the erect part). I doubt, question, dislike all of their ways and their hypocritical followers.
 
Uh...duh! No shit. I don't get erect for politicians like you guys here and swallow all they say blindly (except maybe AOC on the erect part). I doubt, question, dislike all of their ways and their hypocritical followers.

I get "erect" for politicians and swallow everything they say blindly?

Apparently you don't read many of the things I say. I don't see any point in continuing a conversation with you if you're going to be accusing me of doing the opposite of what I am about.
 
I hope you don't mean me when you refer to "principled conservatives" argue the President can start WWIII. I don't believe that for a second.

No, sorry if it came out that way. What I meant was there is a giant chorus of mainly republicans who seem to think the President can launch attacks on foreign countries who displease him for one reason or another and he doesn't need congress' ok to do so. Indeed, they criticized Trump for not doing so in Syria when there are Russian troops and aircraft there at the invitation of the host government. They wanted Trump to face off with the Russians over some incident involving a boat off Ukraine. They want him to invade Venezuela.

At the same time, they claim that he has no authority to put troops on our own border or do anything to shore it up without specific approval from congress.
 
No, sorry if it came out that way. What I meant was there is a giant chorus of mainly republicans who seem to think the President can launch attacks on foreign countries who displease him for one reason or another and he doesn't need congress' ok to do so. Indeed, they criticized Trump for not doing so in Syria when there are Russian troops and aircraft there at the invitation of the host government. They wanted Trump to face off with the Russians over some incident involving a boat off Ukraine. They want him to invade Venezuela.

At the same time, they claim that he has no authority to put troops on our own border or do anything to shore it up without specific approval from congress.

Ah, I see. Agreed.
 
Back
Top