brett05

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 02:39 PM) At least one month in we've reached a point where no one save coal miners and brett take this ... clown seriously. You failed remedial math, didn't you. Be brave and admit it. With his 53% approval rating, most people are coal miners if I am wrong.

QUOTE (brett05 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 01:51 PM) So are there different kinds of cloture since it was used extensively over the past few weeks and I am guessing there was not 60 votes for it. Found out the differences. I highly doubt that the Dems are going to continue to be obstructionists. I know they are beyond what the Republicans have done in recent past but to go full on obstruction for two years, you mind as well give the Conservatives a super majority in each house now and end the charade.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 01:20 PM) Nah, time is on liberals side. Every year America becomes more diverse, less white. Look at the numbers, Trump did horrific with non-whites. This is your last stand, your battle of the bulge. Yes there was a setback, but liberals will still win the day eventually. http://college.usatoday.com/2016/11/09/how...al-orientation/ Those graphs have to be terrifying to you, unless you think "whites no degree" are the future of the USA? I don't care an iota about race outside of the one we all are a part of...the human race. Yes, liberals over the past 8 years have been making gains in the highest positions in government. Oh wait. That's the opposite of what has been happening. https://www.google.com/#q=gains+made+by+reb...ns+last+8+years I don't know if this is the last chance for Liberals for the foreseeable future. Wouldn't be shocked however.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 12:42 PM) I know you don't understand, because you clearly have no grasp of the American Constitution. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and re-read what you wrote. It's improper English still and I shouldn't be surprised that no one else called you out on it. Please re-read and then rephrase so I can understand your point. Or don't - I guess I am good either way.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 12:32 PM) Google is your friend Different terms are sometimes used. It's related to rules of cloture. So are there different kinds of cloture since it was used extensively over the past few weeks and I am guessing there was not 60 votes for it.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 12:18 PM) I can't tell if you actually don't know about the procedural filibuster (which is admittedly not as widely known as it should be), or you're trying to make some sort of point. Enlighten if you would

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 12:15 PM) Cause constitution. uh...that's an answer alright. Not the correct one. But an answer.

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 10:15 AM) Brett. This is from an article on The Hill. The Supreme Court would probably slow play this, Gorsuch or not. "It is impossible to predict what the Supreme Court will do, but in recent, controversial matters, the court has proceeded slowly. It was more than six years after the establishment of the Guantanamo Bay detention camps that the Supreme Court ruled on the habeas corpus rights of persons detained there." Changes not my opinion or the opinion of conservative pundits that this will happen and sooner not later.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 10:13 AM) You mean those fake news sites who predicted that Hillary would win and Democrats would keep the Senate and maybe take the House? 2 years is a long time, a lot of red states have a lot of people who use Obamacare, ever seen how people react when you take something away from them? Maybe Republicans gain, maybe they dont. But the fear is already creeping in, and its only been a month. Trump did something Hillary couldnt, he mobilized the left in a way that I have never seen in my life. He basically turned Twitter into a political weapon and now the left is using that weapon against him and his party. The people with the huge Twitter followers are generally liberal. Another case of, unintended consequences. There is no mobilization. It's the same folks that just got done voting. The fear that you think is there is the last hope of the liberals.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 10:24 AM) You literally just told me that a policy was worth supporting because Barack Obama and Joe Biden did, while I still can obviously see that is violated the Religion clauses of our constitution. Not sure what you are trying to say here on the second part. Missing some words I think. As for the first part, I literally did not. I told you where the idea originated. Not that if the dems think it's good we should do it.

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 11:41 AM) Trump hasn't done anything for health care reform yet, and will require 60 votes to pass meaningful replacement. Good luck, you aren't close yet. Why are 60 votes needed for repeal and replace? why not just a simple majority?

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 10:07 AM) I'm down the road in Lockport. Feel free to stop by whenever you'd like. Address please...what airline you flying out of to leave this country? Would hate to drop you off at the wrong gate.

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 09:54 AM) Board Question: There was a decent article sometime back comparing how Trump could end up like Jimmy Carter, in that Carter fumbled his relationship with a majority dem congress so badly nothing of substance passed. If tax reform and ACA measures can't get passed (say takes too long then Dems gain the House in 18), do we see it as remotely possible Trump would be primaried? The biggest issue is that there is no chance that the Dems take anything in two years and all pundits point to a ground loss in 2018.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 09:52 AM) The feeling is mutual. The next time you give a clear, concise, policy driven post with any sort of actual thought process instead of repeating the talking points you are being fed... will be your first. All I have seen is name calling as a sad substitute for any intelligent thought. This board might be full of liberals, but at least 95% of them can put together a thought on their own. You have gotten to the point of supporting Barack Obama to make your point, and that is just sad. The only one suporting the dems in here and portraying a Conservative is you. But hey, you keep thinking nothign has been added. You libs do a great job of sticking your head in the ground and blame everyone else.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 09:28 AM) I don't like things that help America? Please refrain from telling me what to do. Feel free to pack those bags at anytime. I'll even drive ya.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 09:18 AM) I have to say, I am surprised to see you so openly promoting both Obama and Biden. Liberal. There there, back to bed. There are no monsters in your closet.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 08:58 AM) I mean, I could find instances where Bush and other Presidents also mentioned those countries together in a speech or even a policy, but that has zero to do with the point. Neither Obama nor anyone other than Trump suggested blocking everyone from those countries (not to mention adding the exception for non-Muslims). The relationship you are trying to draw doesn't have any logical footing. I can't help you clearly

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 08:32 AM) Nobody in America likes separating families, especially green card/permanent resident families. Obama's list was never intended to be used as a comprehensive travel ban. If the case was allowed to back to District Court for discovery, the odds of winning are currently 1-2%. Trump's ego won't allow Gorsuch being blocked for long...and there's no way (in the current political climate) he peels off 8 Dems to get to 60. At best, he gets Manchin from WV. Go after 8-11 million people at once and you'll be blocked by half the states in the country in the courts. You might have 25% of the country agreeing...and the economic impact would be over $1 trillion. The sheer number of agents to go house to house and forcibly round up that many people would be astronomical. So jobs and dems wasting money. Not surprised.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 08:24 AM) ...didn't he just say yesterday that Republicans might not get around to doing anything with Obamacare until next year? e: "The list comes from Obama!" may be the worst talking point yet from Trumpists deny truth all you wish.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 07:41 AM) Here's the problem. If he hadn't spoken to Giuliani and asked for him to help craft a "Muslim ban," if he hadn't tried to protect Christians in those countries from "reverse discrimination," if he hadn't excluded green card holders/permanent residents who had already gone through the EXTENSIVE vetting process, we wouldn't be having this discussion. If children under 18, those needing immediate medical care and all those working/studying in the US weren't part of this, then he would at least have a legitimate argument. As it stands, there was no compelling threat to the security of the country (at least that we know of)... and there NEVER has been a deadly attack inside the US from a citizen of any of those 7 countries, while there were lots of European and Middle Eastern countries more clearly connected to terrorism that were left off the list. If he hadn't chosen to directly attack the judicial branch and basically DARE them to stand in his path, we might not be here. And it's doubtful that two Republican judicial appointees (one in Washington, one part of the 3 judge appellate court) would have blocked the order as unconstitutional. Saying that the opposition "is against anything that helps America" is just another version of "so-called judge," questioning the former Attorney General's patriotism, and then calling any decision that goes against you "political" despite the fact that 2 of the 4 judges who have gotten in the way since last weekend have been Republican appointees. If all four were Democratically-appointed, that would be one thing. Of course, the GOP will still argue the Western District is the most liberal of all and that such a decision isn't a surprise, but Trump will always have an excuse. What will the excuse be if the Supreme Court unanimously goes against him? He'll probably get 3 out of 8 votes, but there's no way they will let him fundamentally disrespect the entire rationale for our checks and balances system. If they jam through Gorsuch using the nuclear option and try to get the case into his hands with the hope the SC will overturn on appeal, then the well will have been poisoned completely in terms of anyone trusting the fairness of our system after Merrick Garland was blocked for nearly a year. If that happens, just for Trump to prove a point that he never loses, it will be a shame for our country and the impact will be lasting. All Trump has to do is improve the ACA, stay out of Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security (as he promised numerous times as a candidate in 2015), and come up with some type of compromise on immigration reform/Dreamers. Heck, 90+% of Americans would agree with sending those convicted of felonies who are illegally in the US back to their home countries and creating severe penalties for (getting caught) returning. It's roughly 800,000 people, but, instead....he has to threaten to evict 8-11,000,000 and throw the country into total chaos and protest when it's not even necessary. 1) The Us Protects minority groups with refugees in general 2) You don't bring in minors without their parents 3) The list comes from President Obama 4) It's not unconstitutional, the 9th district did not rule on it's constitutionality 5) The nuclear option won't happen in time nor will it be necessary. As you all were wrong with the election you are all wrong thinking that this will be anything but in favor of the President. I have more faith in the liberals on the Courts than you liberals here. 6) The 11,000,000 are all criminals. Not just 800,000. You tell that it's ok to those families that have lost loved ones thanks to the crime of illegals. So far, greatest President ever. He made promises and he's keeping them at lightning speed including fixing our healthcare not just dismantling it like every single liberal though he'd do.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 07:15 AM) Stop wasting your time on trolls who do NOT READ. Move forward, for every 1 brett there are 10 people who voted Trump who will look at #realnews and realize their grave mistake. The color of the sky in my world is blue, in yours it's what?

QUOTE (New Era on South Side @ Feb 9, 2017 -> 09:49 PM) So...now do the Dems fillibuster to just keep the court at 8 justices? Would the vote go 5-4 in favor of the Travel Ban? While the SC is political, they are nothing like the 9th Circuit. They are going to side with the Constitution. Even with 8 judges, the vote will side with the President.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 10, 2017 -> 06:50 AM) Thankfully, it's nothing, because it was so poorly conceived, planned, and executed by racist bigots that the other branches of government are rightly doing their job to block it. The people are rising up, and I am proud of them. We have to keep to feet on the gas peddles. We cannot let us. The moment we as a nation let up, they will know they can get away with the bulls***, lies, and genuine evil this administration is trying to pull off. It's not racist at all. Typical liberal playbook. The "people" are allowing an even bigger landslide in 2018.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 9, 2017 -> 10:45 AM) Do you have twitter, Brett? The President has stated numerous times that it's a ban. It's not Democrats making s*** up. I do, it's not, it's a ban for a short period of time from 7 countries. It is not a ban on Muslims. 90% of the foreign Muslims are under no such EO. Just stop, please folks, I know you don't like anything that helps America. Please just stop.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 9, 2017 -> 01:25 PM) My wife contacted both Duckworth's and Durbin's office yesterday in regards to the Elizabeth Warren stifling which she took as both sexist and racist . She spoke to someone at both offices for quite a while, and Durbin's office asked her to draft a letter and email it to them. She's a lawyer who has argued in front of the Supreme Court so her letter was well thought out and written. Nothing will obviously come of it, but it is action nonetheless from someone who never acted before. If this picks up, things will eventually change. Who knows, maybe this BS going on now was the kick in the ass we all needed. Unfortunately, at minimum, there is going to be a lot of collateral damage that can't be repaired. And that is far sadder than Ivanka's clothes made in China not being sold at Nordstrom's anymore. Your wife should know that Warren broke the rules and was disciplined appropriately. Best of luck proving that it was sexist or racist.