Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Trump supporters don't want a constitution, they want a right-wing dictatorship, that will suppress all those not on their radical side of things. If Trump is allowed to succeed in this attempt to destroy democracy, he will keep going and take away all our rights. We would end up in no better shape than Venezuela, if we don't stop him now.
You really have a severe case of TDS. He has the full legal and constitutional authority to do so. The 1976 National Emergencies Act, passed by Congress, gives the president the statutory power to not only declare a national emergency. It also explicitly authorizes him to order the military to build construction projects the president deems to be in the nation’s vital interest. Countless presidents—George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush—have used it for hurricanes, earthquakes and tornadoes.
I love the Constitution and I've been watching politicians making end runs around it for decades. That's the bar now, and if we can't get the Dems to work with Trump on border security then so be it. It's necessary, and even Dems were saying so a few years ago. Maybe they were lying? It's not like border walls has a negative effect on us, it doesn't deny anyone their rights, it doesn't take anything away, it doesn't even cost that much when you consider the money wasted on things like the CA bullet train to nowhere and countless other boondoggles so saying "it's a waste of money" isn't an arguement. I'm open to hearing how having a border wall is evil though...but so far the only thing I've heard is that some butterflies may be inconvenienced.
lets not pretend that supporters of either of the two major parties support the constitution.
both parties support the patriot act-- it was passed by republicans and written by a democrat, neither party deserves any votes until that thing sunsets. it isnt all bad, but it goes too far in eroding constitutional rights and needs to be amended or replaced with something in accordance with the bill of rights.
the government is run almost exclusively by lobbyists paid for by corporations, and the two major parties are just advertising agencies to the two major demographics. if you care about the constitution, youll support serious election reform. neither the democratic party nor the republican party care about any of this-- at least a few democrats and republicans do. most who are in office are there because they dont.
if you vote democrat or republican, and you arent in favour of an article v convention to bypass congress to reform election funding, then youre playing politics with a pretend, hypothetical constitution anyway.
the real one is just a reminder of how this country is supposed to work. of course the entire point of the article v convention is to give people a way to change the rules, even when congress is useless or corrupt. its smarter than revolution, its dangerous but its less dangerous, and of great importance is that its much more likely to work than revolution (or voting by itself.)
if you really think revolution is a better idea than article v, strap arms to your roomba and let it shoot at you.
the next civil war will have major corporations firing drones at citizens. if you actually cared about the country or the constitution, you would be fighting that, more than each other.
Last edited by dynamicjson; 02-17-2019 at 04:23 AM..
One of the basic ideas of the Constitution is that (1) Presidents don't make the laws, and (2) certain powers - including Power of the Purse - are reserved for the Congress.
With this "national emergency," you conservatives support your guy just bypassing Congress altogether and implementing his policies (which he couldn't get support through Congress) via royal decree.
That's basically called a dictatorship. Might as well disband Congress and just annoint Donald as King.
If you're for this stuff, then you're opposed to the spirit and concept of the Constitution.
Whenever 90% of the heroin in your country comes from the country on your southern border, killing 15,000 of your citizens each year, it's an emergency.
That's like having a 9/11 attack (3000 dead) 4 times a year.
Whenever 90% of the heroin in your country comes from the country on your southern border, killing 15,000 of your citizens each year, it's an emergency.
That's like having a 9/11 attack (3000 dead) 4 times a year.
Heroin kills people the same way sugary or fatty food kills people - through voluntary consumption with little to no portion control. It's not an emergency you solve through the "national emergency act". You solve this through education.
And it's not at all comparable to 911 where a bunch of people flew planes into buildings. Stop using ridiculous analogies and hyperbole.
Heroin kills people the same way sugary or fatty food kills people - through voluntary consumption with little to no portion control. It's not an emergency you solve through the "national emergency act". You solve this through education.
And it's not at all comparable to 911 where a bunch of people flew planes into buildings. Stop using ridiculous analogies and hyperbole.
But, when that 'voluntary consumption' starts creating all kinds of expensive problems for society, like numerous overdoses, ER visits, drug related crime, committed in order to get money to buy drugs, used needles littering parks and playgrounds, etc...that is definitely a national emergency!
Use of military, on foreign soil would definitely be justified in this emergency, sending in troops to destroy the cartels, the poppy fields, processing and distribution facilities. Why we have yet to do this beyond me!
When you have such a problem, you target THE SOURCE!!
The DEA are truly the ones to blame for this though, it is this agency that aids and abetts the drug cartels, ensuring they have a profitable market to sell their drugs with no competition.
I agree with the OP. This is the first step in transforming this nation into a dictatorship. And Nancy Pelosi jumped on the bandwagon and said the democrats will use the same approach to attack gun rights in the future. Taking away any ability to resist a dictator. My guess is as fractured as this nation is, this is the road that leads to the disintegration of the union.
All those who are hyperventilating over Trump using a national emergency to bypass congress, were you equally upset when Obama did it 13 times?
False equivalency. There is no president in the past, Democrat or Republican, who asked for funding for something, Congress said no (not only once, but multiple times,) and the president refused to accept this and did it anyway.
Securing the border has their panties in a wad. Unbelievable. Who’s team are you on anyway?
He's not securing the border. He's not hiring more border patrol nor sending the military to guard the border. Those would be legitimate uses of his authority. Instead, he's going to use eminent domain to take people's properties and render the remainder of many properties worthless (cutting off access to water). He's going to take money allocated for other uses and use it for a fence project Congress refused to fund. The precedent he's setting is very dangerous and Nancy Pelosi already gave a hint of what they will use it for in the future.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
