|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
posted February 05, 2017 06:34 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Btw, one thing surprises me, 6 of the 7 countries on the ban list, which are now so suddenly vocal about Trump ripping apart our family, are themselves banning jews from entering their country, based on their religion. I don't mind having occidental people protesting against the ban, but conveying tons of whining Iranian articles in the main media does not look very right to me.
That's because those are poorly developed countries obstinately clinging to 80-year-old injustices in order to smokescreen their racism and bigotry, and to distract their civilian population from the abuses they commit by focusing and redirecting the public's attention towards an outsider. It's a highly effective poltical tactic that has been used since the earliest Chinese dynasties.
"They are mean so I'm going to be mean back" is something we hopefully unlearn in elementary school. The administration has failed to provide concrete reasons for blanket banning these countries, other than "general unrest", in which case, we might as well have the travel ban up for the next 50 years, and add many more countries to the list while we're at it.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 06:57 PM |
|
|
|
Not to mention, people in those articles or people who write those articles are not their government. They can also be critical of the policy in their own country. An official objection from a state with a similar policy can be evaluated as a double standard, while personal objections can not.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 07:00 PM |
|
|
That was not my point, I am all for sovereign immigration rules, if a country decides no one should enter and is legal within its constitution, that's all that matters to me. I already recall that France didn't allow any immigration or touristic visa to Romanians back in the 1990, and it never came through my mind that is a poor or a fascist country.
I was only surprised the press conveys a lot of articles from Iranians individuals complaining about the "unfair". I mean when you practice it, you shut up.
|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 07:04 PM |
|
|
Okay that's fine, but this thread isn't about why Iran is a sore loser. It's a US thread and right now we're talking about the travel ban that suddenly and rapidly got put in place towards 7 different countries and with rather poor implementation.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 07:08 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 19:20, 05 Feb 2017.
|
Sal said:
I was only surprised the press conveys a lot of articles from Iranians individuals complaining about the "unfair". I mean when you practice it, you shut up.
Or you criticize your own government, too. Although, I'm not sure to what degree you are allowed to do that in Iran. Two wrongs don't make a right. I wouldn't be surprised if SOME of the Iranians believe that their country's policy is "not the same thing" but I'm sure there are also ones who are not like that.
About the constitution, I already replied in the last post of the previous page, in case the new one made it go unnoticed.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 07:18 PM |
|
|
Look, the point I was making is, that wít is KNOWN that Banon, when he wrote the text of the muslim ban, has been notified about the potential problems arising from not excluding green card holders (because that is actually the problem), but Bannon didn't want to exclude them.
Bannon wants the confrontation, and the only reasons he wants that is, he wants to unhinge the supreme court.
I mean, look at the president's tweets. In my opinion, it's basically disqualifying him that he's tweeting about things concerning his offic, like some pop star about their critics, but the disrespectful way he speaks about a judge named by Gorge W. Bush (ironically) is even worse. It's the judges's job to check these things.
USUALLY, executive orders are checked and re-checked whether they comply with the constitution - not in this case, though.
And, like artu confirmed, this is the start into fascism - I know how ridiculous it sounds, but keep in mind that in Germany things were completely legal and within the constitution. People were fed up with things; "making Germany great again"... And people bought that.
The Suprme Court is the bastion that is supposed to make sure that everything the executive and the legislative does is in keeping with the constitution. If the Trump government can discredit the Supreme Court by letting it look the Supreme Court would prohibit the executive doing their job and protect the country and "making it great again", you might face some serious changes.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 07:27 PM |
|
|
I think we should ban Blizzardboy from entering Heroes Community until he learns to use Stealth Edit.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 07:37 PM |
|
|
I think the forum should be recoded so that all edits are stealth edits instead of making me checkmark a damn box.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 07:42 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 19:49, 05 Feb 2017.
|
|
I like the option to edit without stealth if the edit contains significant new content, but you're right, all that unbearable effort to click a damn box, it's just unacceptable.
|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 07:42 PM |
|
|
If this goes to the Supreme Court - which it might - and the Supreme Court shoots it down for violating green cards and/or overstepping executive powers, then the only avenue left is to either impeach members of the Supreme Court or wait several years for the case to be presented again.
Trump right now seems to have low chances of success since he wouldnt have the entire backing of even his own party. Then again I've said many times before how Trump would fail at this or that and he still marched through.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 07:43 PM |
|
|
artu said:
but you're right, all that unbearable effort to click a damn box, it's just unacceptable.
Thank you.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 07:53 PM |
|
|
Look, they could just CHANGE the executive order, because the white house is not bunch of clueless idiots. Enough people KNEW that the exec order wasn't kosher.
They could change it NOW - but, no, confrontation with the courts. You really think they are BLUNDERING?
Nope.
Trump got elected because people are fed-up with "elites governing against their interest". Trump promised to act and act FAST.
"Checks and Balances" isn't helping fast, though, and if they can convince public opinion that it's the goddamn COURTS that keeps the administration from doing what has to be done, then "Checks and Balances" may be "adjusted", shifting the balance of power in favor of the executive - the way it happens, for example, in a state of emergency.
Thnk Gorbatchev. Destruction of elites may need destruction of the system, and everything you can read about Bannon makes me extremely cautious when it comes to gauging his intentions.
Trump is obviously no president material. The president should NOT tweet, especially not like a spoilt chid.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 08:09 PM |
|
|
Because of our Constitution, it will be incredibly difficult to remove any actual power from the Judiciary. Although those powers aren't very detailed in the Constitution and were established largely through precedent, it's almost 250 years of precedent. It would probably take an amendment to the Constitution to make it happen, and it's really tough to amend the Constitution.
It is far more likely the Executive will influence the ideology of the Judiciary via court appointments, but those don't always work out how the Executive plans.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 08:22 PM |
|
|
History is full of "impossibles" - I'd have thought the Soviet Union would last, for example. Still, it - and the whole "constitution" was toppled from above.
The constitution doesn't trump (excuse the pun) the will of the population.
By the way, I really like the way, how nearly everyone is just loving these dystopian stories, like Hunger Games, and 1984, and The 100 and COUNTLESS others - but strangely, no one thinks it can possible happen.
Or that countries - even BIG ones - just may change.
They just need to fake a terror attack or provoke a war, and things will slip.
|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 08:37 PM |
|
|
He isn't modifying the executive order because he wants to win in the court so he doesn't have to modify it. That isn't challenging or upsetting the system. This is the standard procedure to follow. Appeals in courts exist because they are integral to a healthy, democratic system. Whether you think the travel ban is garbage or not is irrelevant; it is the administration's right to make an appeal and present their case. That's how civilized society works.
The most likely explanation is usually the correct explanation: Trump believes he is doing the right thing. Not a plot to undermine the make-up of the three branches of government.
And no, I think a dystopia upset is improbable because you would need about 75% support from the legislature to make amendments, and he doesn't have anywhere close to that number, nor does he have anywhere close to that number in the general population. So he has neither overwhelming power within the government or among the population.
People need to just calm the **** down and allow the process do what it does, instead of acting hysterically and posting covers of the Statue of Liberty getting beheaded. A single federal judge overturned the executive order and guess what: the entire country fell into line promptly. That's because it is a smooth system with a strong rule of law.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 09:34 PM |
|
|
You seem to forget that this isn't a Trump ego trip, but supposed to be a question of national security. A question of leaving terrorists into the country.
You'd think he's act in the interest of the US, instead of starting a yes-no shoting match with the courts at first opportunity. It's not supposed to be the executive versus the jurisdiction, and voluntarily:
You are STILL not getting that they full well knew BEFOREHAND that the exec order was likely to be turned down by court. They are not stupid, after all, and they do have lawyers as well.
Oh, and posting covers of the Statue of Liberty getting beheaded is protected by freedom of the press.
I expect a couple of angry tweets about Germans and glass houses from the child in the white house. Which is ironical, considering the problems the Danish press had when they started to make fun of Mohammed.
It's funny, how positions change.
A pretty good assessment.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 09:54 PM |
|
|
Quote:
And no, I think a dystopia upset is improbable because you would need about 75% support from the legislature to make amendments, and he doesn't have anywhere close to that number, nor does he have anywhere close to that number in the general population. So he has neither overwhelming power within the government or among the population.
JJ is taking it too far and I agree that this is not the beginning of your "First Reich" but it's also clear to me that Trump will bend the rules as much as he can, he will cause serious reaction, animosity, even crisis both on a national and international scale and looking back at some of his decisions people won't be remembering them much different than McCarthyism. He will take the U.S. into a more authoritarian and fear mongering path as possible as the contemporary context allows him, that may not be a 1930's style dictatorship but it wont be a progressive or proud aspect of your history either.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 09:59 PM |
|
|
|
Says the man from a country who's just nose-diving into it.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 10:06 PM |
|
|
|
Yes, but Turkey is a country which had been a democracy only since 1946, that democracy had been interrupted by 3 military coups and despite everything, Erdogan isn't as totalitarian as some African dictator or something similar. The biggest problem in Turkey is that the opposition is fractured and insignificant, somebody taking enough votes to at least challenge Erdogan would change a lot but unfortunately no one can at the moment. Besides, we have political Islam which is a much different beast. Still, nothing is as horrible as something out of 1984.
|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 05, 2017 10:21 PM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
You seem to forget that this isn't a Trump ego trip, but supposed to be a question of national security. A question of leaving terrorists into the country.
You'd think he's act in the interest of the US, instead of starting a yes-no shoting match with the courts at first opportunity. It's not supposed to be the executive versus the jurisdiction, and voluntarily:
You are STILL not getting that they full well knew BEFOREHAND that the exec order was likely to be turned down by court. They are not stupid, after all, and they do have lawyers as well.
Oh, and posting covers of the Statue of Liberty getting beheaded is protected by freedom of the press.
I expect a couple of angry tweets about Germans and glass houses from the child in the white house. Which is ironical, considering the problems the Danish press had when they started to make fun of Mohammed.
It's funny, how positions change.
A pretty good assessment.
Of course they knew the probability of rejection beforehand. I dont understand why you find this worth pointing out.
Trump believes strongly and idealogically in using executive powers to provide national security. This is public knowledge. So, when making the order, he is going to make it strong and then see how much of it he is able to do without modifying it. It's like bargaining on a used car: you make a set price and then see if you can sell it with as little price reductions as possible. This will also set a precedent in the future for what the executive branch is able to do. Do you understand these basics? He's following the appeals process and hoping to advance the agenda which he believes is best. Those who oppose him will make the appropriate countermoves. In some cases, there will be a coalition from both parties if it's an issue without widespread agreement in either party.
No conflict between judiciary, legislative, and executive is a fiction. Judges are flesh and blood human beings and they have varying ideologies and visions of society. They always have and always will. This is why presidents make appointments on certain judges, and the legislative body might reject that appointment. Moves and countermoves.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
