@raphjd: I solved this problem years ago. The US military has automatic tracking machine guns that shoot various sizes of bullets depending on the system.    Rather than an ugly wall, we could just install these along the border. Also, instead of cucking to illegals, we need to get tough on them.  We need to be as tough as Mexico is.    Illegals should never be given amnesty and never, ever be given priority in the queue over those who went the legal route. + They round up homeless children in Mexico and have them shot.

@raphjd: Despite proof to the contrary, the leftists are still claiming Trump never met with the victims. Imagine what the press would do if Trump did what Sheik Obama used to do during disasters…  play golf!

It's all about negotiation. The President also has to enforce laws he might not agree with. The fact that he is negotiating with Democrats shows that he is willing to work with them rather than just Executive Order them like Obama did creating law Unconstitutionally. If Obama didn't like a law, he simply did Congress's job for them and wrote an EO and said "Screw You, what are you gonna do about it?"

In the 2000 election, 2 electoral votes went to GWB "in protest" over the electoral college system.  As far as I'm aware, this is the first time this has happened. At the time of GWB, 5 or 6 Presidential elections were lost in the electoral college, even though they won the popular vote.  For some reason, 7 is the number that sticks in my mind for this happening to date.

@mhorndisk: D= 500 C= 100 600 X= 10 L= 50 60 V= 5 I= 1 6 You literally worship Satan. It's pathetic. You need to get a life. To go to through the numbering system to come up with something like that? It could be worse.. he could have made his name "HillaryCCXX"

@Spintendo: Appeals Court Limits Trump Travel Ban and Allows More Refugees by Miriam Jordan of The New York Times SEPT. 7, 2017 LOS ANGELES — A federal appeals court on Thursday reopened the country’s door to thousands of refugees who had been temporarily blocked by President Trump’s travel ban, and also upheld a lower court decision that had exempted grandparents and other relatives from the ban. The ruling, from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Seattle, clarifies, for now, who is covered by the ban. In June, the Supreme Court allowed parts of President Trump’s executive order temporarily barring all travelers from six predominantly Muslim countries, and all refugees, to take effect while the court considered arguments over whether such a ban was constitutional. But the court said the government should let in travelers and refugees with a “bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States,” without fully defining what that meant. The administration defined it as immediate family members and in-laws, but not grandparents, cousins, aunts and uncles. The Ninth Circuit's 37-page opinion declared that definition to be lacking in substance: “Stated simply, the government does not offer a persuasive explanation for why a mother-in-law is clearly a bona fide relationship, in the Supreme Court’s prior reasoning, but a grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, or cousin is not.” The court mandated that the government resume resettling refugees in the United States beginning in five days. This will be interesting, because I don't think the Supreme Court will appreciate the California Court of Moonbats overruling them.

@aadam101: Strangeloop is Frederick.  I'm certain of it.  I have a strict policy about ignoring Frederick and will be ignoring Strangeloop too. You sure don't ignore me blue waffle.  And just how many people are you going to say are me?  According to you, I must have at least 4 accounts here.  Anybody who agrees with Trump is called Hitler, and anybody who is intelligent is accused of being me.

@mhorndisk: I'm concerned that this is going to end with Congress passing amnesty for all 40 Million illegals. That would be the end for Republicans. I don't think Congress has the power to do that officially, but they do it by inaction, and with things such as Obama's notorious executive orders.

@raphjd: You won't see me demand those who disagree with me be banned because I need an echo chamber. That line is so true about banning people  Banning people should be a LAST resort, and only used when people have been repeatedly warned, yet continue to do what got them the warning in the first place AND they never contribute anything meaningful.  The mods on Chaturbate often ban people for no good reason with no warning, not realizing that they are creating problems for the performer they are supposedly trying to assist.  In that murder case I sometimes refer to, I created a group with over 500 members.  86% of the members of that group were vocal adversaries of what I knew to be the truth.  I even sought out the most vocal opposition to my comments and invited them to my group.  In almost all cases they accepted my invitations.  I would sometimes spend several HOURS per day responding to those hateful people who were spewing all sorts of false information and echoing the media coverage.  I learned far more from researching the nonsense they were referring to than from the few people that were agreeing with me.  One woman was extremely helpful to me, unfortunately she died over a year ago.  Of the over 500, I only banned about 5 of them, and the reason for that is they began making personal death threats. Anyway, over time, I learned just about everything about the case, and the accused person going back 17 years, and even some background going back to the guy's childhood.  My point is.. no matter what someone thinks, they can always learn valuable things from listening and responding to opposing views.  The problem that has been going on here is, the moonbats can't come up with any credible views, so they resort to bitching and reporting, etc.  Even if they bitched and moaned AND contributed some ideas, that would be fine, but they don't.  One example of that is Swami in Pakistan who typically responds to my messages with nothing but "LOL LOL LOL"  and blatant factual lies, and repeats the same lies despite being presented the facts (not opinions).  Maadam loved to attack Trump, but when stuck with the impossible task of defending people like Pelosi, Hillary, Obama, Griffin, Lemon, etc.  He just gave up and instead resorts to personal threats.    If they can't win an argument, then like 5 year old children, they take all their marbles and go home and tell mommy.  It didn't help any that certain people colluded and made complaints resulting in the P&D group being removed from the front page of this site (and they CELEBRATED their achievement).  They want to silence, stifle and smother the truth with their inane garbage and lies. But.. if they are going to behave like little children who can't bear to be wrong all the time and lose.. then so be it. In my case, I will continue to comment about both sides of issues.  For instance.. Trump places far too much trust and confidence in people of law enforcement.  He is too in love with himself and his family.  He makes promises that he means to keep, but is unable to keep.  The sad thing about that is.. he is the best person available for the job!  Government at all levels has become ineffective, and corrupt. Getting back to the original "echo chamber" comment.  That is what congress has become.  The democraps can't come up with any meaningful ideas of their own, so all they do is sit there and give Trump the "Thumbs Down" of resistance.  If Trump does it, it is wrong in their pea brains.

@aadam101: @raphjd: :police:  Stop publicly accusing others of having dupe accounts. If you HONESTLY think this is happening, then report it on the helpdesk and let the dupe account staff deal with it.  :police: Fair enough but Frederick should stop posting about violating websites TOS by creating multiple accounts.  When someone tells you who they are, believe them. You continue to misrepresent my comments.   I said Facebook disabled my account, forcing me to make a new account, then disabling that, etc.   They used to have a system where they would suspend an account for a day, then a few days, then a week, then a month.  They used to have a system where they would suspend an account until you changed your name, or gave them more information.  They used to have a system where you had to verify your account by identifying people on your friend's list.  They used to have a system where you had to verify an account by giving them a cell phone number.   Even when given this information, they still don't re-instate the accounts.  They are fishing for information.   I have a few disabled accounts, and a few suspended accounts that they won't re-enable and give me no explanation. I never violated their TOS, they changed their TOS.  At the time I created those accounts, I was within the rules.  FACEBOOK doesn't even follow their OWN rules. So, enough about me. YOU Aadam101, consistently break the rules of this site.   That's not going to continue ad infinitum. In the meantime, prepare to get exposed as being the piece of dooky you are. :police: Tone it down please.  :police:

@mhorndisk: Nah, all they did was get labelled as a terrorist organization funded by a fucking Nazi scumbag and the lib-***** are totally pissed about the new reality they live in - ironically it's called "reality." :police: Stop that.  :police: In regards to the suffix *,  I think some people are being over sensitive. over politically correct in their demands upon  the english language.  I don't have a problem with avoiding the word re.. but I do have a problem with a blanket ban on the suffix ****.  That syllable is used for a spicy yellow condiment; in musical compositions to indicate when the tempo is to be slowed down;  and in general use indicating slowness.  I wasn't aware that being slow was a crime.  Turtles are slow, but are actually built for speed when in the water.  The phrase "slow and steady" comes to mind.  It' s the opposite of being hyper, reckless, etc.  For someone to call for a ban on an entire suffix is going to far. ==== It's a bit ironic that the lib***** objecting to the use of **** are the same people who endorse and justify abortion of babies whom they deem to be associated with that suffix that they want banned.  Also.. if all of those babies got aborted, who would be available to grow up to be cops?