Suspicious Packages Shipped To Clintons, Obamas, and Time Warner

[LGR4GM]

5 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

I, personally find Trumps actual policies refreshingly pro American Citizen. Two 5humbs up for 80% of his policies.

Where I take issue is healthcare (the biggest one) and his roll back of a few of the EPA clean water and air regulations. By no means should that indicate I am anti-business or fossil fuels however.

I believe the single payer system, rated in accordance to income AND usage (for example, family as opposed to single with no children) would help to stabilize the system. More importantly, the most important natural asset America has is its citizens, the people. We PM our machinery to prevent catastrophic failure, we should be doing the same with healthcare imho.

Does that mean a single payer tax? Yes, yes it does, but there can be no denying the benefits of such a system. I didn't dislike the Affordable Care Act because it took money. I disliked it because 9t was a rush job, half-assed lie to my face straight out scheme by one political party because they feared the next election cycle. That sucked, and quite honestly, I don't expect better from our elected representatives, I demand better.

As for the EPA, yes, rolling back a majority of the regulations wasn't a bad thing, but the emphasis on air and water is non-nogetiable to me. We must, and can do better, so it's not so much what he has repealed in as much as what he is not attempting to accomplish.

 

The man has literally been trying to destroy the countries health infrastructure for 2 years. If John McCain had died a few months earlier we would be back to the days of insurance dropping those with pre-existing conditions, something Trump and the Republicans have constantly tried to erase. 

Please name Trump policies that are pro American. 

As for this comment on the EPA. It literally stands for the Environmental Protection Agency. They protect the environment. So when you say the Air and Water is non-negotiable you mean literally 80% of what the EPA protects. 

Edited November 1, 2018 by LGR4GM

[Scottysabres]

4 minutes ago, SwampD said:

So, where are those planes taking off from?

I have no problem being the "world's police." We benefit the most from it.

Being a vet, I can tell you factually a carrier air group can devastate a target. I can also tell you bombers can and have taken off from right here in the US on Combat missions around the world.

[Scottysabres]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Please name Trump policies that are pro American. 

Trade policies

Immigration policies

Tax policies

Government purchasing policies

 

[LGR4GM]

5 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

Trade policies

Immigration policies

Tax policies

Government purchasing policies

 

Trade Policies, in what way? His Tariff's have cost more jobs than they have created. The cost of every day consumer goods is increasing... good thing I get an extra 18$ a paycheck with that amazing tax cut... which I get to below. 

Immigration policies, in what way? Birth rates are down and immigration rates a also down. The US population is stagnating. Also he hasn't passed an immigration policy. Unless you think he has the ability to change the 14th amendment with an executive order. Do you think that? 

Tax policies, this is a downright lie. The Trump tax cut has severally impacted our ability to function as a nation and is responsible in 1 year for a 17% deficit increase. It was a tax break for the wealthy elite and put a pittance back into the pockets of regular Americans. The corporations who benefited most from it have done almost nothing in the way of investment with that extra money but instead did exactly what economists said they would, stock buybacks. 

Government purchasing policies? First I have heard of this so, I guess another explanation is required. 

 

The man is a hack and a con artist. 

Edited November 1, 2018 by LGR4GM

[SwampD]

4 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

Being a vet, I can tell you factually a carrier air group can devastate a target. I can also tell you bombers can and have taken off from right here in the US on Combat missions around the world.

I don't doubt that, but who is going to keep those shipping lanes open? Until those tariffs make the cost of goods so ridiculously high that they could actually be manufactured here, paying American wages, we need to be out there, I mean, unless you want to let those Mexicans in who will work cheaper.

[Scottysabres]

7 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

 

The man has literally been trying to destroy the countries health infrastructure for 2 years. If John McCain had died a few months earlier we would be back to the days of insurance dropping those with pre-existing conditions, something Trump and the Republicans have constantly tried to erase. 

Please name Trump policies that are pro American. 

As for this comment on the EPA. It literally stands for the Environmental Protection Agency. They protect the environment. So when you say the Air and Water is non-negotiable you mean literally 80% of what the EPA protects. 

I completely disagree with this. He hasn't tried to destroy anything. Forgive me if this insults you, but honestly, those talking points fall on deaf ears over here. As one who has 2 sons, 2 daughters and a wife, it would be a blessing if he repealed the ACA and replaced it. Just because it didn't personally effect you doesn't mean others weren't heavily effected by its passage

 

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Trade Policies, in what way? His Tariff's have cost more jobs than they have created. The cost of every day consumer goods is increasing... good thing I get an extra 18$ a paycheck with that amazing tax cut... which I get to below. 

Immigration policies, in what way? Birth rates are down and immigration rates a also down. The US population is stagnating. Also he hasn't passed an immigration policy. Unless you think he has the ability to change the 14th amendment with an executive order. Do you think that? 

Tax policies, this is a downright lie. The Trump tax cut has severally impacted our ability to function as a nation and is responsible in 1 year for a 17% deficit increase. It was a tax break for the wealthy elite and put a pittance back into the pockets of regular Americans. The corporations who benefited most from it have done almost nothing in the way of investment with that extra money but instead did exactly what economists said they would, stock buybacks. 

Government purchasing policies? First I have heard of this so, I guess another explanation is required. 

 

The man is a hack and a con artist. 

I am not 9n this conversation to bash him. He's done nothing to date I warrant worth the time.

[LGR4GM]

9 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

I completely disagree with this. He hasn't tried to destroy anything. Forgive me if this insults you, but honestly, those talking points fall on deaf ears over here. As one who has 2 sons, 2 daughters and a wife, it would be a blessing if he repealed the ACA and replaced it. Just because it didn't personally effect you doesn't mean others weren't heavily effected by its passage

 

I am not 9n this conversation to bash him. He's done nothing to date I warrant worth the time.

Replace it? They don't have a plan for that. They can fall on deaf ears but when you see ppl get help because they have insurance now and can actually go to work again, well that opens eyes. I'm with fixing the ACA but they don't want to. They want to destroy it and go back in time. They've actively tried to cut preexisting condition benefits multiple times

He's done nothing to date to warrant it? Ha! The list of things he's done to deserve bashing is long. 

Edited November 1, 2018 by LGR4GM

[Scottysabres]

1 minute ago, SwampD said:

I don't doubt that, but who is going to keep those shipping lanes open? Until those tariffs make the cost of goods so ridiculously high that they could actually be manufactured here, paying American wages, we need to be out there, I mean, unless you want to let those Mexicans in who will work cheaper.

Well, we come full circle back to the origins of Trumps policy, don't we? It is not only the US who benefits from those shipping lanes, and having 2 sons on the navy, myself a vet, a father, 3 uncles and 2 grandfathers all vets, I can assure you the US navy isn't keeping the "shipping lanes" safe, as they spend less than 35% of their time in them or responding to calls of distress about them.

The US navy is projection of monetary power, not keeping the oil and cargo containers flowing. In both cases by the way, China is the largest recipient of benefits, not us currently.

[SwampD]

4 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

Well, we come full circle back to the origins of Trumps policy, don't we? It is not only the US who benefits from those shipping lanes, and having 2 sons on the navy, myself a vet, a father, 3 uncles and 2 grandfathers all vets, I can assure you the US navy isn't keeping the "shipping lanes" safe, as they spend less than 35% of their time in them or responding to calls of distress about them.

The US navy is projection of monetary power, not keeping the oil and cargo containers flowing. In both cases by the way, China is the largest recipient of benefits, not us currently.

You don't think that's because we are there?

[Scottysabres]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Replace it? They don't have a plan for that. 

He's done nothing to date to warrant it? Ha! The list of things he's done to deserve bashing is long. 

Need I remind you it is not the Executive branches responsibility to establish legislation? Or has that slipped your mind? You appear to me in any event, to be under this false premise that the President is a monarchy, that is not the case. Legislation starts at the Legislative branch, specifically the peoples house, the House of Representatives. Our representatives. And I've heard Trump many times put it at their feet.

[Scottysabres]

Just now, SwampD said:

You don't think that's because we are there?

No, I don't. We currently have less than 300 ships globally, with less than 100 at sea most times. And out of those just under 300, 121 are dedicated to Western Atlantic and Eastern Pacific operations. Meaning those slots never leave the defense of the US coastlines unattended.

If you believe, and I've experienced it personally, that the US navies primary or one of its primary goals is protection of trade lanes, you are mistaken.

The only goal the United States Navy has is defence of America and its territories. War college can be a real eye opener. My youngest son just finished last year, exact same mission statement, 27 years later.

[LGR4GM]

7 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

Need I remind you it is not the Executive branches responsibility to establish legislation? Or has that slipped your mind? You appear to me in any event, to be under this false premise that the President is a monarchy, that is not the case. Legislation starts at the Legislative branch, specifically the peoples house, the House of Representatives. Our representatives. And I've heard Trump many times put it at their feet.

Thank you for condescendingly explaining how the legislative process works. 

[Scottysabres]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Thank you for condescendingly explaining how the legislative process works. 

I said, it was not my intention to insult you. Bit you appeared, by your posts, to be heavily indicating and actually straight out said Trump is trying to destroy it.

Factually, that is not the case.

[SwampD]

32 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

I said, it was not my intention to insult you. Bit you appeared, by your posts, to be heavily indicating and actually straight out said Trump is trying to destroy it.

Factually, that is not the case.

Like your deleted post intimated, I don't think we know yet how his economic policies will pan out. That will take years, most likely.

And if by his immigration policies you mean "the wall" and separating families, I have to disagree.

As to destroying this country, no other president has ever spoken about the "other side" like this one, using the language he does. To bring this full circle, it's no wonder someone incited into the reason this thread exists.

[Scottysabres]

1 hour ago, SwampD said:

Like your deleted post intimated, I don't think we know yet how his economic policies will pan out. That will take years, most likely.

And if by his immigration policies you mean "the wall" and separating families, I have to disagree.

As to destroying this country, no other president has ever spoken about the "other side" like this one, using the language he does. To bring this full circle, it's no wonder someone incited into the reason this thread exists.

While no one likes the situation, I cannot on any way support floods of immigrants at the border. A very good friend of mine was affected by heavily by this. Do what is necessary to secure the border, I want no more pain for my fellow citizens.

[Frieda]

23 hours ago, Scottysabres said:

While no one likes the situation, I cannot on any way support floods of immigrants at the border. A very good friend of mine was affected by heavily by this. Do what is necessary to secure the border, I want no more pain for my fellow citizens.

Just think, " doing what's necessary to secure the border" to prevent floods of immigrants , happened when your ancestors "invaded " America. You might not even exist.

[Scottysabres]

27 minutes ago, Frieda said:

Just think, " doing what's necessary to secure the border" to prevent floods of immigrants , happened when your ancestors "invaded " America. You might not even exist.

There's a grave yard in central PA dating back to 1588 with my ancestors in it, some 200 years before America existed.

[Weave]

1 hour ago, Scottysabres said:

There's a grave yard in central PA dating back to 1588 with my ancestors in it, some 200 years before America existed.

Well congrats.  I guess you get to stay.  I'm 4th generation.  My great grandparents were welcomed here during a flood of immigration shortly after WWI and had children that became citizens.  The same situation that Trump wants to stop.

Our birth rates are down.  The only way this country continues to grow is with immigration.

[Scottysabres]

24 minutes ago, Weave said:

Well congrats.  I guess you get to stay.  I'm 4th generation.  My great grandparents were welcomed here during a flood of immigration shortly after WWI and had children that became citizens.  The same situation that Trump wants to stop.

Our birth rates are down.  The only way this country continues to grow is with immigration.

By immigration, you certainly mean...….LEGAL immigration, right?

[Weave]

26 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

By immigration, you certainly mean...….LEGAL immigration, right?

Have you ever looked into the hoops and dollars necessary for this?  It is damned near impossible to get residency (not citizenship, residency) without an approved job.  Executive level workers and workers with exceptional abilities make up 28.6% of work visas.  Skilled workers and professionals make up another 28.6%.  Certain special immigrants who are employed or experienced in very specific jobs categories get another 7.1% of the work visas.Immigrant investors are next in priority with no set percentage of visas set aside for them.  That leaves something less than 35.7% of the available work visas for every other class of worker.

And temporary residency is easier to obtain than permanent residency, which is easier to obtain than citizenship.

Which is a long way to get to....... I would like to say I mean LEGAL immigration, but it has become so much more difficult today to obtain LEGAL citizenship that my great grandparents would not have qualified.  So, no, we need more immigration than what our heavily restricted system allows today.

[Scottysabres]

19 minutes ago, Weave said:

Have you ever looked into the hoops and dollars necessary for this?  It is damned near impossible to get residency (not citizenship, residency) without an approved job.  Executive level workers and workers with exceptional abilities make up 28.6% of work visas.  Skilled workers and professionals make up another 28.6%.  Certain special immigrants who are employed or experienced in very specific jobs categories get another 7.1% of the work visas.Immigrant investors are next in priority with no set percentage of visas set aside for them.  That leaves something less than 35.7% of the available work visas for every other class of worker.

And temporary residency is easier to obtain than permanent residency, which is easier to obtain than citizenship.

Which is a long way to get to....... I would like to say I mean LEGAL immigration, but it has become so much more difficult today to obtain LEGAL citizenship that my great grandparents would not have qualified.  So, no, we need more immigration than what our heavily restricted system allows today.

Ok, we currently allow roughly 1 million immigrants in legally a year. Your advocating that isn't enough.

Who are we trying to keep up with? The Jones's?

I am advocating legal immigration, and certainly from more places than central America/Mexico. But that is not the origins of this conversation. May ask you something? Do you personally know of someone who has been negatively affected by illegal immigration? I do. His wife and 2 children were car jacked by 2 illegal immigrants, his wife and daughter were tortured and raped repeatedly over several days before they were suffocated with plastic bags, dismembered and discarded. His younger daughter, who was 9 when this happened, they never found her. They figure she was shipped back to Mexico, who knows the fate she met, after watching what happened to her mother and 15 year old sister.

What do you say to him? Sorry dude, but the girl you met in high school and fell hopelessly in love with, she and your daughters aren't worth *****, they needed to be sacrificed to my pro let them all in agenda, ***** them? To bad, now move along......

Because that is exactly what your saying when you support one, just one illegal immigrant. The Federal government exists to serve its CITUZENS, the people, above all else. And your very stand on the subject is in direct conflict with that. How do you justify it? Not to me or any one else, but to yourself. You've never dealt with the negative aspects of what you advocate I surmise. But others have, your fellow citizens no less.

[Weave]

3 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

Ok, we currently allow roughly 1 million immigrants in legally a year. Your advocating that isn't enough.

Who are we trying to keep up with? The Jones's?

I am advocating legal immigration, and certainly from more places than central America/Mexico. But that is not the origins of this conversation. May ask you something? Do you personally know of someone who has been negatively affected by illegal immigration? I do. His wife and 2 children were car jacked by 2 illegal immigrants, his wife and daughter were tortured and raped repeatedly over several days before they were suffocated with plastic bags, dismembered and discarded. His younger daughter, who was 9 when this happened, they never found her. They figure she was shipped back to Mexico, who knows the fate she met, after watching what happened to her mother and 15 year old sister.

What do you say to him? Sorry dude, but the girl you met in high school and fell hopelessly in love with, she and your daughters aren't worth *****, they needed to be sacrificed to my pro let them all in agenda, ***** them? To bad, now move along......

Because that is exactly what your saying when you support one, just one illegal immigrant. The Federal government exists to serve its CITUZENS, the people, above all else. And your very stand on the subject is in direct conflict with that. How do you justify it? Not to me or any one else, but to yourself. You've never dealt with the negative aspects of what you advocate I surmise. But others have, your fellow citizens no less.

the bolded is nothing but hyperbole.  It is very similar to saying that if you voted for Trump you voted for accepting racism because he wouldn't call out the racists.  I don't accept that at all. 

And no, I haven't been affected negatively by illegal immigration.  Here is the kicker.  I live in an area surrounded by Mexican and Latin American immigrants.  I live in an agricultural county.  I see and interact with them every weekend when I run errands in town.  Your story is a sad one.  But for every one criminal that gets in there are thousands that are perfectly good neighbors.  Not unlike any other community.  In fact, the ratio of criminal behavior to non criminal behavior is very similar between immigrants and citizens.

And yes, the Federal government does exist to serve it's citizens (that it actually doesn't in practice is food for another thread).  Too bad we're not talking about our gov't serving non-citizens.  We're talking about a real path to citizenship.

 

My Spidey sense is tingling....

[Scottysabres]

6 minutes ago, Weave said:

the bolded is nothing but hyperbole.  It is very similar to saying that if you voted for Trump you voted for accepting racism because he wouldn't call out the racists.  I don't accept that at all. 

And no, I haven't been affected negatively by illegal immigration.  Here is the kicker.  I live in an area surrounded by Mexican and Latin American immigrants.  I live in an agricultural county.  I see and interact with them every weekend when I run errands in town.  Your story is a sad one.  But for every one criminal that gets in there are thousands that are perfectly good neighbors.  Not unlike any other community.  In fact, the ratio of criminal behavior to non criminal behavior is very similar between immigrants and citizens.

And yes, the Federal government does exist to serve it's citizens (that it actually doesn't in practice is food for another thread).  Too bad we're not talking about our gov't serving non-citizens.  We're talking about a real path to citizenship.

 

My Spidey sense is tingling....

Yes, there are good people coming in. But they should be coming iin legally.

[Weave]

1 minute ago, Scottysabres said:

Yes, there are good people coming in. But they should be coming iin legally.

You're not following.  The vast majority can't.  That's the problem.

It is disingenuous to say they need to come in legally while giving them virtually no opportunity to actually come in legally.

[Sabel79]

1 hour ago, Weave said:

You're not following.  The vast majority can't.  That's the problem.

It is disingenuous to say they need to come in legally while giving them virtually no opportunity to actually come in legally.

And also betting heavily on them getting here illegally so we can take full advantage of that and them...