| JWeinCom said: The president is sworn to uphold the constitution. This is objectively necessary part of the job. Because the constitution is the law of the United States. |
Yes they must adhere to the current constitution but that DOES NOT imply that they CAN'T CHANGE IT!
| JWeinCom said: Ok... I never said you couldn't and I clarified that I was not talking about banning immigration, so I don't know why you're still on about htis. And no, that doesn't make Trump right because even if you can it may not be a good idea. |
I NEVER BROUGHT IN THE ARGUMENT OF WETHER THAT WAS A GOOD IDEA OR NOT! That's just a strawman on your part that you just accused me of doing ...
I was only trying to bust the myth that you CAN'T profile according to religion ...
| JWeinCom said: At this point I can't help but think this is trolling. If you want to completely divorce yourself from reality, no the army never has to do anything internationally, and no the president never has to deal with other countries. But considering this is reality, and Trump has already said he will use the military internationally, and said he would deal in international trade, then you're being intentionally obtuse. I don't believe for a second that you don't think the president will ever have to deal with the international community. |
YOU argued NEED, I proved otherwise ...
Heck, presidents don't even need to do anything aside from being commander in chief of an army, appointing officials, reporting to congress, paying officers and the rest is OPTIONAL ...
Feasibility is another argument altogether ...
| JWeinCom said: Bill O Reilly: "You are not going to be able to deport people who have American citizenship now. And the federal courts will never allow mass deportations without due process for each and every one. And do you envision federal police kicking in the doors in barrios around the country, dragging families out?" Donald Trump: "Bill, I don't think that they have American citizenship. And if you speak to some very, very good lawyers — and I know some would disagree, but many of them agree with me — you're going to find they do not have American citizenship. We have to start a process where we take back our country. Our country is going to hell." Yes, he specifically said he would deport people born in the US. I don't know if he's changed his stance since then, but it's right there for you. http://www.businessinsider.com/bill-oreilly-donald-trump-immigration-deport-birthright-2015-8 |
Unfortunately, that's a strawman that Bill O Reilly made as Trump has made no such statements even at his initial launch of a presidential campaign ...
That's one lie that the media made up and you seem to have went with it unless you have another source to object. He makes it clear that he dislikes anchor babies and even says that their not citizens but he didn't outright say to deport them ...
| JWeinCom said: I don't know where you've gotten the idea that emotional and rational are oposites or mutually exclusives. Our thoughts are a combination of processes going on in the prefrontal cortex (what you'd probably call logic) and processes going on in the limbic system (what you'd probably call emotions). Every thought process is a combination of these two elements, as the two systems are in constant communication.. While you may rely more heavily on one or the other at certain times, there is no shutting one or the other off. Even when solving math problems, emotions play a rather large part. Anger is an emotion which is the result of a thought process. Assuming your mind is functioning correctly, that anger is rational. The dividing line between rational and emotional does not exist in reality. |
Yes you cannot seperate the two but if you aren't going to at least try to keep shit real then I won't bother when it does not make for a constructive discussion ...
| JWeinCom said: Oh seriously, you know better than that. Clearly when I said "the things Donald Trump says" I was referring to specific things he says, like the examples I was giving. Obviously, I didn't mean that if you agree with Trump that the sky is blue you're an idiot. I'm not going to insult you by pretending that you actually believe what you say. |
What everyone thinks of his proposals is for themselves to figure out but feel free call out whatever erroneous statement that people believe from Trump however from time to time he does bring in a shred of truth even if it is offensive ...
| JWeinCom said: Errrr... what specific thing did I fabricate or did I say that was misinformation? I actually try my best to not do that. Of course I'm not immune, so if you noticed something, tell me, provide evidence, and I'll be sure not to do so in the future. But you're not pointing out anything specific. |
Just look at our previous posts ...
| JWeinCom said: Yes. I know what a president should do (to an extent) is based on what the public wants. I assume that most of us are decent people who want what is best for ourselves and for others, and that on this basis we can have conversations to determine the best course of action. But, maybe in your case, that's not true. |
If you think your ideals is the only one that entails "decency" among people I don't know what to say since it's too hilarious and ironic, LOL. There are many other's out there that too claim this "decency" in their own ideals even from a wahhabist, it's a bigger world than you think ...
| JWeinCom said: I guess this is why we're having a problem understanding eachother. I made the erroneous assumption that you were a decent and empathic human being who cared about others, even those not immediately involved in your life. I guess I was wrong in this regard. There is a word for people who don't care about anything but their own needs and desires. The word is sociopath. And while I kind of hope you are simply trolling, maybe you are one. Maybe you legitimately don't give a shit about what happens to anyone else. And if that's the case, then go ahead and vote for Trump I guess. Like I said, those kinds of people really aren't worth talking to. If however, you actually do care about those around you, then I urge you to critically examine the candidates. |
Nice ad hominem, just because I don't care about any random strangers doesn't mean you can't care about those closest to you who truly matter in your lives. I'm not blind or oblivious to the fact that humans are social creatures but what in what ways did we guarantee that we all treat each other equally again ?
Again, neat ad hominem (sarcasm), personally those who sacrifice their own existence along with their new born just for this great so called species known as humanity are sickingly selfless to the point when they don't consider how much they'll be missed or needed by others so that's still plain selfish that you'd be the one to lightly weigh how much your life is worth since that's for everyone else to determine ...
Humans should have an absolute right to decide based on their own feelings and those that deprive themselves of that are worse than monsters ...
