tvc184

I agree everyone should be vetted. You however continue to support a party that thinks open borders are okay and no one gets vetted, especially if they can get past the border even if it isn't thrown open. You don't put people in housing, you make it available. Remember we are talking about people that are not in this country and claim they are fleeing from something. Being interned is forced. I clearly said in my statement that you quoted, not internment. Your zeal to find fault for some reason makes you unable to see what is actually written. If anyone is receiving counseling it isn't because of what someone else thinks.

time?

That was brought up by the GOP when Reid did that. If you break your own rules to do it to us, you'd better hope we aren't in charge next. Oops!!

Yes, Smith is correct and you are wrong. Do you lose your right to protest if you do not vote? Obviously not. Do you have to vote? Obviously not. Then you go on with the working class and working hard and other such stuff. None of that has anything to do with what Smith said. It seems hypocritical to not vote, say you don't believe in the system and then complain about the system that you couldn't take 15 minutes out of your day to vote for. Can you? Sure you can. You have no obligation to do anything in order to use your First Amendment right of freedom of speech. If someone doesn't want to vote, more power to them. Complain away if you want but you seem like a phony if you complain about the status quo but can't take time to do anything about it. And does your vote matter? Ask the Democrats and are now the whiners in chief after they didn't think their vote was needed.

So what if a Trump supporter believes something? I seem to remember that quite a few Obama supporters that were members of BLM were chanting that the police should fry like bacon. I guess Obama condones the murder of police officers. He certainly gave moral backing to BLM after some members make their chants of frying officers. If Trump is responsible for any belief by anyone that voted for him, shouldn't Obama be held to the same standard? It makes perfect sense using the same rationale of, "A Trump supporter says.....". Internment camps for people that are in this country is stupid. Camps (not internment) for people that are looking to come in but not yet here might make sense. They want to get here with our permission. If they are overseas and in camps with tents or other adequate housing while waiting to prove their past, it seems okay to me. In fact it could be humanitarian giving them a decent place to stay before any acceptance to get into the country. As an example the Vietnamese, who were our allies in a decade of war and were fleeing after the USA backed out of an agreement to defend the country if they were attacked again by North Vietnam, were placed in camps in Guam and the Philippines to begin with. They were then transferred to "housing" in the USA before gaining true freedom and resident status. I am fairly certain that the USA owed them something after signing an agreement and then reneging. Even so, they were placed in camps and/or housed in two different countries before being released into the rest of the USA. Some of the Muslims fleeing are owed what by the USA? Everyone wants to come here so I understand their desires but what other connection is there? It is like the Vietnamese who were war allies? If so, where? The idea of "internment" seems like nonsense but being placed in camps or housing before reaching US shores does not.

Oh!! I didn't know that!! Thanks for the meaningless info. To get back to the point, Hillary had a lock on the presidency. Even the liberal pundits were making jokes (as some people on here) about not being close and a landslide for the Dems. She was such a lousy candidate that she could not win against a buffoon reality tv star with no political experience. Trump trumped everyone. He is not my choice as he is at the bottom of the 17 Republicans that ran but he won by the rules and that includes beating the practically unbeatable Hillary. In my opinion had it not been for her name and her gender and considering her background, she would have never made it out of the primary on the Democratic ticket, much less the presidency. Even a guy that was practically unelectable like Trump beat her in the final show. Therein lies my response to nappy. His criticism that is that Cruz could not beat Trump. Hmmm.... neither did the darling of the left.

.....or show it as a scam. What happens when all the fear mongers claims that we are going back 50 years of history and blah blah blah, doesn't happen?

They only missed it by about 12 minutes.

By that rationale, why couldn't Hillary Clinton compete so well against Donald Trump? Is your question about Ted Cruz an admission that Hillary Clinton was no good?

I brought some land locked people in Missouri about 60 pounds of high tech shrimp from a PA shrimp dock about 3 months ago. I ate the very best boiled shrimp that I have ever eaten made by one of those land lockers. I know that he travels to the Gulf coast a couple of times a year. I'm sure that he did not learn it up there but some of them definitely know how to cook seafood. On the other hand, I know people around this area that have absolutely no idea how to cook seafood. I am sometimes amazed when people think you're supposed to boil shrimp for 15 minutes at a rolling boil........

That would certainly be a good choice for us conservatives. He could probably sit next to Clarence Thomas and they could compare conservative notes which never waiver.

I will rise in defense of six burg. The conservatives on this site have a horrible record of violence such as complaining about riots and destruction, whining about the killing of unborn babies through abortion, worrying about violent crimes and innocent people getting killed in big cities, bellyache about illegal aliens committing continued violent crimes and simply being allowed to return, etc. You Republicans need to quit whining, bellyaching and complaining about death, destruction, abortions, murders, violent crimes and stuff like that.

Right. I have bought the same shrimp. As I said above, they thaw it before selling it. Unless the people you bought it from actually caught it themselves a day or so before (a the most), it was likely at some point frozen. There are very very few ice boats left. Those boats have to bring several tons of ice loaded just before they leave and their under decks are essentially huge Igloo ice chests. They have to pay lots of money for that ice and then back back in dock within a few days as it melts away. I am not saying that those boats do not exist but from the boats that I have seen around this area, about 98% of boats are freezer boats.

In the "for what it's worth" category, I have a couple of friends with shrimp boats. Most of my shrimp I get straight off the decks (frozen in sacks) of those boats that I am talking about. I haven't gotten shrimp off of a boat locally in...... about five days, frozen solid as usual. An interesting tidbit is that they freeze them in water. There is usually a freezer vat on deck with water with several 50 pound bags of salt in the water. It is then circulated with the heavy salt concentration so that it doesn't freeze but they get it down to 0 degrees. The shrimp are taken off the deck, put in sacks and lowered into the vat to be frozen. Then they are put below deck and most of the area under the main deck is a large freezer where they can keep several tons of frozen shrimp.

Then how come they will not even detain criminals here? We arrest and charge illegal aliens all the time and they are simply released.

Actually it is according to what kind of seafood. As as example "fresh" shrimp here is rarely fresh as in, "not frozen". Almost all shrimp now is frozen on the deck of the boats a few minutes after being caught. The boats might stay out for up to 4 weeks. So when you go to a local fish market and get that "fresh" shrimp, it might be a month old an frozen. Of course they thaw it before putting it into the pan to be sold so you aren't usually buying it in its frozen state. You can go to that landlocked state and get shrimp from the same dock that is "only" two weeks frozen. I see those trucks roll out of there all the time and deliver all over. If the boats make a good catch they come in and offload and go back out. When they aren't into the shrimp, they stay out trying to find them and sometimes that goes into several weeks.

I think that he is going to have a hard time convincing very many states to change the Constitution and give up their individual rights. Perhaps a study of the reason that the Constitution was laid out like it was would be in order. I really don't think Trump has any less knowledge of than the average person in that area but I don't think he has any more either.

Reading is FUNdamental (from the old tv commercials) so let's go back and read. I said and as you quoted, Obama issued executives "sometimes illegally". I never said nor suggested that executive orders were illegal. Let's go back and review that quote from my post...... "He legislated, sometimes illegally, through executive order". Several times the federal courts including the USSC have ruled that one of his orders was not legal and it was overturned.... or as I said, "sometimes" they were illegal. EDIT: I forgot to add, an executive order does not have to be approved by the USSC. It only does that if someone files a lawsuit or restraining order to overturn it. Then it goes to a federal trial court, then if appeals to a circuit court and then if appealed to the USSC. An example was Obama's executive order keeping illegal aliens in the country simply on his order, overturning legislation. The trial court/judge in TX ruled against Obama stopping the order. Obama appealed to the 5th Circuit in New Orleans and lost again. He then appealed to the USSC and since Scalia had recently passed away, came to a 4-4 time thereby upholding the 5th Circuit ruling. They had to go through the steps just as any other person filing a lawsuit. The USSC does not interfere with executive orders unless asked to do so just as in any other case. I have no idea where you got the idea that executive orders have to be approved by the USSC and the justices say yes or no. That simply does not happen unless there is a lawsuit filed and normally that does not happen to most executive orders.

Hillary is claiming that it was Comey. They media is claiming it was them by making everyone feel comfortable and not going to vote or try to convince people. Everyone on the left is blaming each other, taking credit for the loss and it was their fault (like some in the media) and all sorts of diatribe. Why not simply face the obvious? Hillary Clinton was a crappy candidate and probably the very worst person they could have put up to run. The Democrats lost because of the Clinton political machine and the other Dems fear to go against it. Any of the real politicians from the Republicans (Cruz, Rubio, Christie, Kasich, et al.) would have destroyed Hillary. I think Kasich would have beaten her by 15% or more. Trump then made a shambles out of the Republican primary with his reality star persona. On the other hand, it was the Democrats race to lose. Any Democrat other than Hillary would likely have won the election and any of them might have destroyed Trump. The Dems were so excited about a second straight record setting president that they were blinded. As Hillary said early in the campaign, it is now time for a woman president. Her big claim for votes was her gender. She was hated and/or distrusted by so many Americans that it didn't matter. Here is the potential outcomes in my opinion. Trump vs. any other Democrat = Democrat win. Hillary vs. any other Republican = Republican win. Any other Democrat vs. Any other Republican = Democrat win. The Republicans were so split between 17 candidates that they screwed up and nominated Trump, giving the election to the Dems. The Dems screwed up selecting Hillary and gave it right back. Let's face it, Hillary had the cards stacked in her favor and she was deemed by the Democrat machine to win. Bernie Sanders never had a chance and yet almost won it. It is kind of ironic that the Democrat machine selected Hillary, got their way and lost. The Republican machine selected anybody but Trump, did not get their way and won.

From my local law-enforcement standpoint I can tell you what has changed. Under every president that I have worked, if a person is caught at the border he has turned around. If the Border Patrol has caught more people crossing under Obama, great. The democrats love to spit out the numbers on how many they're catching but that has to do with law-enforcement and not national policy. What has changed radically since Obama has taken office is that once they get past that little narrow border, they are left alone. Local law-enforcement has many contacts with illegal aliens every day. We can do absolutely nothing with them. Legally they can be held immediately with no other charges required however the current administration will not allow it. Even if we catch a known illegal alien in a crime, if it is not a felony they will not place a hold on them for deportation. We can arrest an illegal alien for possession of marijuana, DWI, assault, trespassing, etc., and the current administration will do absolutely nothing about it. I am not talking about rounding up people or stopping them based on race or anything else. I am talking about people that have lawful criminal charges filed against them and are already sitting in jail. Under the previous administration that was a straight ticket out. Under Obama nothing happens at all.

I don't know that conservatives do take him seriously or trust him. He is the epitome of the phrase, "the lesser of two evils". I don't necessarily think he will do bad but he is near the bottom of the list from Republican candidates. I have two major issues, gun rights and the US Supreme Court (which sometimes goes into gun rights). There are tons of other issues like taxes, education, drugs, entitlements, defense, immigration, etc. Those are sometimes important but take a back seat to the first two. I think that Trump will appoint reasonably conservative justices to the Court and will not try to restrict gun ownership. After that, I want a lot more but those first two aren't up for negotiations in my opinion. I think the fact that Trump never really got much support from conservatives in the primaries shows that they were not very warm to him. His star status kept him alive until the others ran out of money. It is nothing more than that. His biggest selling point is, he isn't Hillary.

He can't repeal or add to any of it. Trump is not Congress. The only issue is if the House and Senate agree on a bill, will he sign it. He can give opinions behind the scenes or even openly but he can do nothing without Congress. I think that is going to be Obama's legacy, not working or compromising with Congress. He legislated, sometimes illegally, through executive order. Much of that will be undone by Trump with another executive order. If you don't get it past Congress, it is somewhat meaningless.

Trump would be foolish to not seek advice from Obama. You can never know about any job, and that one more than almost any other, until you have walked in those shoes. I don't think that Trump will ask Obama if he should open the southern border or if they should complete the Keystone Pipeline. I believe there is a lot more to being the president than political opinions.

I suspect that no one changed his religious beliefs based on a political race and if it actually happened, they didn't have much conviction to begin with and were looking for an excuse to make the break.

It seems obvious to me but I am sure not to the opposition that they have little or no clue what they are protesting except "our side lost". Most probably can't tell you what the electoral college is (they probably think they are playing them this week in an away game), can name any three of the founding fathers, can even explain what the term means, etc. BUT... they know they lost the election. The good thing about rights is that you do not have to pass an intelligence or knowledge test in order to use them.