Another Nail in Bike Week's Coffin ??

[swnoel]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

I read this rationale for the government's existence somewhere once, and thought it sounded good:

To form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

Drink up my friend... drink up!

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by swnoel

Drink up my friend... drink up!

I'll drink the Kool Aid that is the United States Constitution any day. The ideas and ideals that it describes are just as valid today as they were 229 years ago.

Think about this: every person who is and ever has been a member of our armed forces and protects your rights and freedoms took an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution. Have they all been drinking the Kool Aid too? How insulting if you believe that's the case.

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

I'll drink the Kool Aid that is the United States Constitution any day. The ideas and ideals that it describes are just as valid today as they were 229 years ago.

Think about this: every person who is and ever has been a member of our armed forces and protects your rights and freedoms took an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution. Have they all been drinking the Kool Aid too? How insulting if you believe that's the case.

As did the Commander in Chief. How has that worked out?

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

As did the Commander in Chief. How has that worked out?

If you care to be more specific, I will be happy to address whatever issue you feel there is. Otherwise, I can only guess at what you are referring to.

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

If you care to be more specific, I will be happy to address whatever issue you feel there is. Otherwise, I can only guess at what you are referring to.

https://nworeport.me/2015/12/16/a-li...al-violations/

[Newbiesaukee]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

https://nworeport.me/2015/12/16/a-li...al-violations/

I do try to understand other peoples points of view so I checked this link. It is on a website whose masthead says:

NWO Report

NWO News,End Time,World News and Conspiracy News.

At least the site puts it up front, difficult to see anything objective here. I am not sure but I think that NWO is New World Order

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by Newbiesaukee

I do try to understand other peoples points of view so I checked this link. It is on a website whose masthead says:

NWO Report

NWO News,End Time,World News and Conspiracy News.

At least the site puts it up front, difficult to see anything objective here. I am not sure but I think that NWO is New World Order

Exactly. Don't believe everything you read on the internet, especially if A) it's an opinion piece, and B) it's written at a fifth grade level (to include the expected grammatical errors).

Here's the bottom line: if the executive or legislative branch acts in an extra-constitutional manner, there's a remedy for that: the court system. Don't you think that if in fact a president was doing all sorts of crazy stuff in violation of the Constitution, that his political adversaries would be challenging him in court, and the judicial branch would be ruling against the president? Why isn't that happening on the grand scale that it should be if all these claims are true? Are we going to hear next that it's because of all the partisan judges that are on the bench? To be sure, some things that the president has done recently have been challenged in court, and some of those things have been ruled unconstitutional, but not to any greater degree than with other recent presidents. See, the system works.


Here's one example of debunking one of the claims in the link that was provided:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/interpol.asp

[Acrossamerica]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

Exactly. Don't believe everything you read on the internet, especially if A) it's an opinion piece, and B) it's written at a fifth grade level (to include the expected grammatical errors).

Here's the bottom line: if the executive or legislative branch acts in an extra-constitutional manner, there's a remedy for that: the court system. Don't you think that if in fact a president was doing all sorts of crazy stuff in violation of the Constitution, that his political adversaries would be challenging him in court, and the judicial branch would be ruling against the president? Why isn't that happening on the grand scale that it should be if all these claims are true? Are we going to hear next that it's because of all the partisan judges that are on the bench? To be sure, some things that the president has done recently have been challenged in court, and some of those things have been ruled unconstitutional, but not to any greater degree than with other recent presidents. See, the system works.


Here's one example of debunking one of the claims in the link that was provided:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/interpol.asp

The reason why more has not been done to rein in this out of control president is the congress is afraid of being branded racist because of the color of the president. And because congress has not moved, that is why Trump is winning so many supporters and has a better than 50 - 50 chance of taking the White House come November. Many are outraged by the lack of concern by congress.

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by Acrossamerica

The reason why more has not been done to rein in this out of control president is the congress is afraid of being branded racist because of the color of the president.

Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan are telling people that they don't want to challenge the president in court because they are afraid of being perceived as racist? Really? What about when they challenge him on legislation, budget matters, same sex marriage, etc., etc., etc.? Why wouldn't that be perceived as racist, too? Your reasoning makes no sense.

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

Exactly. Don't believe everything you read on the internet, especially if A) it's an opinion piece, and B) it's written at a fifth grade level (to include the expected grammatical errors).

Here's the bottom line: if the executive or legislative branch acts in an extra-constitutional manner, there's a remedy for that: the court system. Don't you think that if in fact a president was doing all sorts of crazy stuff in violation of the Constitution, that his political adversaries would be challenging him in court, and the judicial branch would be ruling against the president? Why isn't that happening on the grand scale that it should be if all these claims are true? Are we going to hear next that it's because of all the partisan judges that are on the bench? To be sure, some things that the president has done recently have been challenged in court, and some of those things have been ruled unconstitutional, but not to any greater degree than with other recent presidents. See, the system works.


Here's one example of debunking one of the claims in the link that was provided:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/interpol.asp

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/17/fa...beral-blogger/

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

Snopes is a joke

This is a classic example of attacking the messenger and ignoring the message. If the Snopes link I posted that discusses the Interpol executive order is somehow factually incorrect, then by all means, take issue with what it says. But to simply say that it lacks credibility because it might have been written by someone that a conservative website is calling out as a liberal, without actually addressing the information presented, is ridiculous.

The Snopes article provides the source for its content. If you question Snopes, you could start there.

[Boater]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

The Snopes article provides the source for its content. If you question Snopes, you could start there.

There is lots of evidence that Snopes has a liberal bias. Just Google "is snopes liberal biased" for many opinions and examples. I am very skeptical of what they say. I assume you'd be skeptical of a conservative run fact checker that had been repeatedly accused of conservative bias.

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by Boater

There is lots of evidence that Snopes has a liberal bias. Just Google "is snopes liberal biased" for many opinions and examples. I am very skeptical of what they say. I assume you'd be skeptical of a conservative run fact checker that had been repeatedly accused of conservative bias.

You're assuming that I'm a "liberal," when in fact I am strongly independent. What I am for is transparent, constructive government that isn't dominated by idealogues who make getting things done nearly impossible.

Having a liberal or conservative bias doesn't mean that you can't still conduct a rational analysis and come to conclusions that are based on facts. The main point in my last post was that dismissing an argument simply because the author might be predisposed to a liberal (or conservative) bias is dumb.

The contention in the NWO Report that Executive Order 13524 gives INTERPOL jurisdiction on American soil beyond law enforcement agencies, including the FBI, is completely unsupported by any facts, not to mention any kind of analysis that seeks to explain why this is the case. Snopes provides analysis, supported by facts, to refute the assertion.

[MAXUM]

A few things to point out here - not that I am trying to continue this conversation as usually it's taboo here since many on this forum do not appreciate political discourse of any kind.

First any information on the internet is pretty much suspect these days. Many things that are published contain bits of information that may be factually correct but are selective in their presentation thus give the appearance of something may not accurate in totality. Even the good old fact checkers are notorious for doing this - yes including snopes which does have a political leaning.

Many who read this stuff have no basis or foundation in understanding constitutional law or even how to interpret it against an action that is taken by congress or the president. It should never be assumed that just because either take action and a bill is signed doesn't mean it's not in violation of the law. I continue to be amazed at the number of so called "rights" that have been completely fabricated lately.

The judicial system is also not necessarily dependable when it comes to handing down just rulings either. Many of the district courts are stacked with activist judges who in and of themselves are making decisions based on a political philosophy versus interpreting the validitiy of a law. It's interesting to see how that plays out when judges can come to opposite opinions on things when they are all looking at the same case.

Far as congress and their inability to act, much of that comes down to their desire to keep their jobs and not rail against things that could create political fallout and ultimately their own demise. Much of that can be said from those who happen to oppose the current administration, there is clearly a double standard considering that any dissention is met with political backlash that is played out by the 24X7 news cycle on TV where the major media outlets also have a political sway to them as well depending on what they choose to report and how they report it.

If you are ignorant enough to think that the people acutally have control over the situation from a voter stand point consider this: The RNC does not like Trump, has never really accepted the fact he has won the primary and the power players on that side have gone out of their way to undermind his campaign. Why? He has not adopted the party lines and as such has been critical of his own party. The DNC on the other hand was in the bag for Hillary since day one actively underminding Bernie to ensure that whever outcome they decided was best would happen. The fact that he probably would have won if he had been as well connected as Hillary shows just how much power these parties are.

We as a country are in big trouble for one reason and one reason only. Not enough people are paying attention to what is going on and to many are not fully engaged in looking at candidates at the local, state and federal level by educating themselves on what is going on and what these people will do once they get into office. I can tell you right now that as little as 20 years ago neither of these candidates running for president would have had a snow ball's chance in hell of being the nominee of a major political party for president. Trump would have been scoffed at and Hillary would be in jail.

Make no mistake about it - these folks in DC may talk about how much they care and understand the plight of the American people, but in action they are doing something completely different that is self serving. That is why all of them mysteriously end up with fat bank accounts and lavish benefits regardless of their repeated dismal performance.

[P-3 Guy]

Interestingly enough, Maxum, I agree with a lot of what you have to say (including the part about political discussions on this forum), although I'm probably not as cynical about the current situation as you are.

I do not agree, however, with your claim that people are "ignorant" if they think that they actually have control over the situation from a voter standpoint. In fact, you go on to immediately show why this isn't the case: the Republican establishment does not like Trump, yet he is the party's nominee. He ran as a Republican, he got the votes, and he won the nomination. Voters were clearly in the driver's seat when it came to choosing the Republican nominee, despite the desires of the party insiders.

[ITD]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

Interestingly enough, Maxum, I agree with a lot of what you have to say (including the part about political discussions on this forum), although I'm probably not as cynical about the current situation as you are.

I do not agree, however, with your claim that people are "ignorant" if they think that they actually have control over the situation from a voter standpoint. In fact, you go on to immediately show why this isn't the case: the Republican establishment does not like Trump, yet he is the party's nominee. He ran as a Republican, he got the votes, and he won the nomination. Voters were clearly in the driver's seat when it came to choosing the Republican nominee, despite the desires of the party insiders.

The voters still have the power in this country and that scares the living daylights out of the career pols. Unfortunately voters give up that power by not educating themselves to issues but rather relying on soundbites, comedy shows and biased news for information, or voting with no information at all.

Listening to news reports on what Trump says versus listening to what Trump says shows how inaccurate reports can be. It is also extremely important to look existing pols records, how they vote versus what they say. For some there is a huge gulf between words and deeds. Actions are important also, everyone makes mistakes, some acknowledge them, some blame others for their misdeeds.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by ITD

The voters still have the power in this country and that scares the living daylights out of the career pols. Unfortunately voters give up that power by not educating themselves to issues but rather relying on soundbites, comedy shows and biased news for information, or voting with no information at all.

Listening to news reports on what Trump says versus listening to what Trump says shows how inaccurate reports can be. It is also extremely important to look existing pols records, how they vote versus what they say. For some there is a huge gulf between words and deeds. Actions are important also, everyone makes mistakes, some acknowledge them, some blame others for their misdeeds.

• Why are we getting news reports from Britain that we don't see here in the USA?

• One famous quote—a familiar media name from the past—sums it up...:



.

[noreast]

The funniest thing I ever read may be that Trump has a "Better than 50-50 chance to win" Even wishful thinking should have a little reality. I'll be voting Libertarian so please don't call me a liberal. Always funny when you argue with an Ideologue, They either call you a liberal or fascist, How about A realist, or Independent? Can't I be anti both?

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by noreast

The funniest thing I ever read may be that Trump has a "Better than 50-50 chance to win" Even wishful thinking should have a little reality. I'll be voting Libertarian so please don't call me a liberal. Always funny when you argue with an Ideologue, They either call you a liberal or fascist, How about A realist, or Independent? Can't I be anti both?

anti both, oh the horror!

Just busting your chops... know what anyone that resorts to labeling you as something ridiculous simply is not informed or to intellectually lazy to defend their own way of thinking.

[wifi]

It is the mass of illegal alien voters, and inner city people that are (trying to) live off "free stuff" (including free dental work, chuckle). which don't understand the principles that (used to) make this country work. That is the pendulum which could sway this into a total train wreck. One of my friends said he always votes for who will do him the most good (ie looking for what he can get personally). He is now waking up to the fact of how short sighted that is, and where we really are, not where we are painted as by the media and government redefining what is good and the bleak, if any, future.

It is personal greed by the voters, not what the main stream is leading you to believe, which has put ua to where we are.

6-2 and even, over and out.

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by wifi

It is the mass of illegal alien voters, and inner city people that are (trying to) live off "free stuff" (including free dental work, chuckle). which don't understand the principles that (used to) make this country work.

Interesting; I haven't heard about the "mass of illegal alien voters..." Do you have a link or reference so that I can educate myself about this problem?

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

As did the Commander in Chief. How has that worked out?

About as well as the last couple appointees to the supreme court ability to interpret it.

[Ms Molly McKever]

Originally Posted by maxum

about as well as the last couple appointees to the supreme court ability to interpret it.

the commander in chief ???

The supreme court ???

[swnoel]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

I'll drink the Kool Aid that is the United States Constitution any day. The ideas and ideals that it describes are just as valid today as they were 229 years ago.

Think about this: every person who is and ever has been a member of our armed forces and protects your rights and freedoms took an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution. Have they all been drinking the Kool Aid too? How insulting if you believe that's the case.

Are you talking about the same Constitution that's been ignored by the same corrupt individuals sworn to uphold it? Don't get me going about our corrupt government! I've taken that oath , so don't tell me about honor and integrity ... something sorrily missing by most government officials! You drink the kool-aid being offered by them, because our government and the Constitution are two separate things ! The sad part is how these elected people remain in these positions, continually doing what they do best... nothing constructive to protect individual rights and freedoms!! We all know how they stay in the positions of power, mandating and regulating every aspect of our lives under some pretext that they're saving us for us! It doesn't surprise me that town of Laconia will find anyway to extract money out of bikers week regardless of the impact to the businesses of the local community, even if it results with the ending of it, which by the way, I believe is what they want! That IS what they do well!

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by swnoel

Are you talking about the same Constitution that's been ignored by the same corrupt individuals sworn to uphold it? Don't get me going about our corrupt government! I've taken that oath , so don't tell me about honor and integrity ... something sorrily missing by most government officials! You drink the kool-aid being offered by them, because our government and the Constitution are two separate things ! The sad part is how these elected people remain in these positions, continually doing what they do best... nothing constructive to protect individual rights and freedoms!! We all know how they stay in the positions of power, mandating and regulating every aspect of our lives under some pretext that they're saving us for us! It doesn't surprise me that town of Laconia will find anyway to extract money out of bikers week regardless of the impact to the businesses of the local community, even if it results with the ending of it, which by the way, I believe is what they want! That IS what they do well!

Wow, so many exclamation points. I never passed judgment on "the government." I extolled the virtues of the Constitution of the United States. In a representative democracy, the people get the government that they deserve. You don't like the way that your elected representatives act? Fine, run for office yourself, form a new political party, support a candidate that holds your views, or start a movement. But to blame the Constitution for whatever problems you see in our current political system is absurd.