NYC cycling update

[AMuzi]

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213

We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought to
be against the law. Anyone piloting a motor vehicle on a
public road should have to pass a skills competence test and
a written statute-based test and then carry a document with
their picture on it. More laws! Yep that oughta do it.


--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[cycl...@gmail.com]

On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 6:52:59 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213
>
> We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought to
> be against the law. Anyone piloting a motor vehicle on a
> public road should have to pass a skills competence test and
> a written statute-based test and then carry a document with
> their picture on it. More laws! Yep that oughta do it.

I hope that you realize that "sanctuary city" laws are designed to protect felons first and foremost. This is why I believe that any city or state that becomes a "illegal alien sanctuary" should both lose all Federal Funding but the people who vote this in should be charged as criminals and imprisoned.

[AMuzi]

If you think a sovereign nation ought to have borders,
you're a racist. I learned that from the NYT.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 10/6/2017 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>
> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213
>
>
> We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought to be against
> the law.  Anyone piloting a motor vehicle on a public road should have
> to pass a skills competence test and a written statute-based test and
> then carry a document with their picture on it. More laws! Yep that
> oughta do it.

Your sarcasm is noted. But what do you propose? No requirement for
driver's licenses, no limit on blood alcohol while driving?

--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

On 10/6/2017 10:26 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 10/6/2017 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213
>>
>>
>> We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought

>> to be against the law.Ā Anyone piloting a motor vehicle

>> on a public road should have to pass a skills competence
>> test and a written statute-based test and then carry a
>> document with their picture on it. More laws! Yep that
>> oughta do it.
>
> Your sarcasm is noted. But what do you propose? No
> requirement for driver's licenses, no limit on blood alcohol
> while driving?
>

Since those great ideas are hardly practiced, back at you.

Our local news regularly notes arrests for 6th, 8th, 12th
offense DUI. We don't have as many illegal aliens (no
registration, no license, no speak English) as they do in
SoCal but the trend is clear.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/16/california-unlicensed-drivers-undocumented-immigrants_n_2490337.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4492544/Driver-DUI-hit-run-crash-deported-15-times.html

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-alvarado-crash-immigration-20170307-story.html

[Frank Krygowski]

On 10/6/2017 11:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 10/6/2017 10:26 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 10/6/2017 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought

>>> to be against the law.  Anyone piloting a motor vehicle

>>> on a public road should have to pass a skills competence
>>> test and a written statute-based test and then carry a
>>> document with their picture on it. More laws! Yep that
>>> oughta do it.
>>
>> Your sarcasm is noted. But what do you propose? No
>> requirement for driver's licenses, no limit on blood alcohol
>> while driving?
>>
>
> Since those great ideas are hardly practiced, back at you.
>
> Our local news regularly notes arrests for 6th, 8th, 12th offense DUI.
> We don't have as many illegal aliens (no registration, no license, no
> speak English) as they do in SoCal but the trend is clear.
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/16/california-unlicensed-drivers-undocumented-immigrants_n_2490337.html
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4492544/Driver-DUI-hit-run-crash-deported-15-times.html
>
> http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-alvarado-crash-immigration-20170307-story.html

The topic seems to have suddenly shifted from drunk drivers to illegal
aliens. Those topics may overlap, but they are not one and the same. The
guy in your article is Hispanic, but I didn't see that he was in the
U.S. illegally.

For the record: I'm not in favor of illegal immigration any more than
I'm in favor of drunk driving. But I haven't heard much here about
really practical ways of stopping either.

I'm not impressed by arguments that say things like "Here's a guy who
committed a crime despite a law, so laws do no good." If someone makes
such an argument, I think it's fair to ask them what _should_ be done.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[jbeattie]

Yah, he was an illegal -- but he did apologize. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/unlicensed-driver-crashed-cyclists-article-1.3494205

He apparently had no prior record and had been in the US for 18 years. He's a construction worker, and in an interview, he said that he worked directly for Donald Trump. In fact, it was Trump who served him the beer and margaritas and told him to mix it up with some liberals on bikes. The interview was on Felix Jones "Info Battles," the new radical left-wing, ANTIFA YouTube channel. He was supposedly drinking with Trump at Comet Ping Pong and sending nasty Tweets to Hillary.

US citizen white people never drive drunk. FACT! Anyone who is not me, go back to your not-me country!

-- Jay Beattie.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

In a March 2011 report titled "Criminal Alien Statistics, Information on Incarcerations, Arrests, and Costs", the Government Accountability Office (GAO) estimated, based on a random sample it had performed, that the criminal aliens it studied had an "average of 7 arrests, 65 percent were arrested at least once for an immigration offense, and about 50 percent were arrested at least once for a drug offense." This means that of the criminal aliens GAO studied, the average alien who had been arrested at least once was arrested seven times; simply put, criminal aliens generally commit other crimes.

Drunk driving is an offense that is particularly prone to repetition. According to MADD statistics, "an average drunk driver has driven drunk 80 times before first arrest" and "every day in America, another 27 people die as a result of drunk driving crashes" and "about one-third of all drivers arrested or convicted of drunk driving are repeat offenders." Any individual who is arrested for DUI or DWI has likely, therefore, driven drunk tens of times before, and has an extremely high chance of doing so again.

But this is all a joke and should be demonstrated with sarcasm - right?

[jbeattie]

Absolutely -- because the nut-job Chicken Littles are driving me crazy. This is the Deseret News, the mouthpiece of the Mormon Church (but nonetheless a pretty good newspaper): https://www.deseretnews.com/article/700043538/Fact-or-fiction-The-myths-and-realities-of-illegal-immigration.html

You and your zany tin-foil hat crowd go overboard with such vigor and regularity that even fair-minded people like me tune out.

I'm all for reasonable immigration policies and immigration enforcement. I'm just sick, sick, sick of all the alt-right BS -- which is not only unchristian, it ignores basic economic realities -- as well as other realities.

BTW, the right should scare you, too. Paul Ryan is talking about privatizing Medicare, which means you'll get some paltry stipend to buy a policy that costs five times as much. Your alt-right wish will become a nightmare.

-- Jay Beattie.

[AMuzi]

On 10/6/2017 2:13 PM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 11:35:56 AM UTC-7, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 11:05:40 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
>>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 9:50:55 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 10/6/2017 11:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 10/6/2017 10:26 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/6/2017 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought

>>>>>>> to be against the law. Anyone piloting a motor vehicle

We don't disagree fundamentally.

My grandparents all endured a 40 day quarantine, had to
provide a destination address and person responsible for
them plus assurance they would not be a public charge. My
son in law, a licensed engineer, spent 8 years and a heap of
trouble to become naturalized, as did two friends (both
educated professionals). I have sponsored visas for
immigrants through my company and hired others.

That said, there seems to be no lower limit or much of any
limit now for the open borders policy, richly exploited by
various and sundry scum from IRGC to MS13 and so on.

Whatever policy may exist on paper, in practice it's a mess.

Oh, and unreasonably, unfairly, inefficiently and flippantly
random such that hotel maids get deported but dope dealers
and other criminals bring the whole village in.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 10/6/2017 2:35 PM, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Drunk driving is an offense that is particularly prone to repetition. According to MADD statistics, "an average drunk driver has driven drunk 80 times before first arrest" and "every day in America, another 27 people die as a result of drunk driving crashes" and "about one-third of all drivers arrested or convicted of drunk driving are repeat offenders." Any individual who is arrested for DUI or DWI has likely, therefore, driven drunk tens of times before, and has an extremely high chance of doing so again.
>
> But this is all a joke and should be demonstrated with sarcasm - right?

The question was: What exactly do you propose should be done about it, Tom?

You provide lots of ranting, but very few realistic answers.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[John B.]

On Fri, 06 Oct 2017 08:52:58 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>
>http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213
>
>We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought to
>be against the law. Anyone piloting a motor vehicle on a
>public road should have to pass a skills competence test and
>a written statute-based test and then carry a document with
>their picture on it. More laws! Yep that oughta do it.

Maybe just enforce the laws that exist :-) After all a $60 fine (I
think you once posted) is not really a deterrent against running over
bicyclists... is it?
--
Cheers,

John B.

[jbeattie]

It seems like ICE is more interested in sending a signal to sanctuary cities -- busting maids and pulling wings off flies for the political fun of it. The hard work of catching drug dealers is not the top priority. It would be nice if we had a policy that actually promoted crime prevention. At least they could sweat the maid to make her rat-out MS13 -- unless she happens to be Filipino or doesn't know MS13 from WD40.

-- Jay Beattie.

[John B.]

On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 12:50:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 10/6/2017 11:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 10/6/2017 10:26 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 10/6/2017 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought

>>>> to be against the law.  Anyone piloting a motor vehicle

>>>> on a public road should have to pass a skills competence
>>>> test and a written statute-based test and then carry a
>>>> document with their picture on it. More laws! Yep that
>>>> oughta do it.
>>>
>>> Your sarcasm is noted. But what do you propose? No
>>> requirement for driver's licenses, no limit on blood alcohol
>>> while driving?
>>>
>>
>> Since those great ideas are hardly practiced, back at you.
>>
>> Our local news regularly notes arrests for 6th, 8th, 12th offense DUI.
>> We don't have as many illegal aliens (no registration, no license, no
>> speak English) as they do in SoCal but the trend is clear.
>>
>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/16/california-unlicensed-drivers-undocumented-immigrants_n_2490337.html
>>
>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4492544/Driver-DUI-hit-run-crash-deported-15-times.html
>>
>> http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-alvarado-crash-immigration-20170307-story.html
>
>The topic seems to have suddenly shifted from drunk drivers to illegal
>aliens. Those topics may overlap, but they are not one and the same. The
>guy in your article is Hispanic, but I didn't see that he was in the
>U.S. illegally.
>
>For the record: I'm not in favor of illegal immigration any more than
>I'm in favor of drunk driving. But I haven't heard much here about
>really practical ways of stopping either.
>
>I'm not impressed by arguments that say things like "Here's a guy who
>committed a crime despite a law, so laws do no good." If someone makes
>such an argument, I think it's fair to ask them what _should_ be done.

I suggest "just enforce the laws you've got". Years ago people were
actually scared to get arrested for drunken driving as the penalties
handed down were severe. Now, apparently, as I read about "6th, 8th,
12th offense", it is more of a slap on the wrist sort of thing.

Suppose that drunk driving was punished by a minimum sentence of 6
months loss of license for first offence and permanent loss for
second, and driving without a license was a minimum of 6 months
imprisonment for first attempt and one year for second.

Would there be as much crime?
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Tim McNamara]

On Fri, 06 Oct 2017 08:52:58 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>

> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213
>
> We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought to be against
> the law. Anyone piloting a motor vehicle on a public road should have
> to pass a skills competence test and a written statute-based test and
> then carry a document with their picture on it. More laws! Yep that
> oughta do it.

Maybe breathalyser interlocks should be required on all cars as a matter
of course...

[somebody]

Bzzzzt. Wrong again.

Racist, sexist, homophobic guilty of microaggressions.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[cycl...@gmail.com]

Didn't it strike a nerve when they said that they didn't know how many illegal vs. legal aliens there were but 17% of Hispanics were responsible for identity theft? Do you suppose legal immigrants are going to steal identities to work?

At what point did it become the government's (Joe Taxpayer who has his own problems) responsibility to supply YOU with healthcare beyond Medicare?

I'm getting pretty sick and tired of someone that is making a healthy living tell the rest of us that we should help our fellow man even if he is here in this country illegally.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 12:25:57 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:

The sanctuary city policies are designed ONLY to protect felons. This is the liberal's idea of being kind.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

And as usual the obvious flies right past you. All it takes is enforcing traffic laws since the danger to the public comes from people breaking these laws. Let me here you say "duhhhhhhh" as usual.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

ICE raided entire groups last week. Who did they arrest? Only those with criminal records that had been deported many times already.

So exactly why are you proposing that they've been busting maids?

[cycl...@gmail.com]

Jay's business is getting criminals off.

[jbeattie]

I don't do criminal work. But if you're talking about lawyers in general, don't forget that we comprise the DOJ, local district attorneys and prosecutors of every stripe. Who do you thing is prosecuting criminals? Santa?
He knows whose been good or bad, but he's not getting indictments.

-- Jay Beattie.

[jbeattie]

Andrew mentioned the maid. I was talking out ICE political retaliation.

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/judge-ice-said-austin-raid-was-because-sanctuary-policy/dHWeSUd7nyp0XPJ6HcW8NP/

In your hood: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/07/29/ice-shows-up-to-apartment-complex-looking-for-undocumented-hayward-man-arrests-two-others-instead/

Kind of a waste of time and typical of Trump's petty politics. I don't recall the evil-satan-Kenyan-boogeyman Obama retaliating against cities or states that didn't toe his political line. He targeted criminals, and his actual deportation rate was higher than Trump's. The current ICE policy has resulted in a lot of arrests but less deportations. More theater, less result. Now, theater can be a good thing to slow new entries (as can walls in places), but actually doing sweeps and carting off entire work-forces benefits no one.

There are not legions of US citizens or documented workers waiting in the wings to take back jobs picking crops. The H2/H2-A program never provided enough workers.https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/06/can-americas-farms-survive-the-threat-of-deportations/529008/ The answer is to come up with a rational immigration policy either via enforcement or different worker programs.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Frank Krygowski]

Wow, how simple! Just "enforce traffic laws."

OK, so a guy gets caught driving drunk. They give him the maximum fine
allowed by law, and let him go, as the law demands. They've just
enforced the traffic law.

The next evening he gets back in his car and drives drunk. He gets
caught. They take away his driver's license. They've just enforced the
traffic law again.

A week later, he gets in his car and drives again. So what's going to
happen? "Hey, I think that's that's Tom, and I remember hearing from
cops two districts away that he lost his license, so I'll pull him over
without probable cause just to check whether that's really true."

In real life, most of the time he drives, no cop will ever see him. If a
cop does look at him, he won't recognize him or know he has no license.
In some places there are plate-reading cameras, and they may be
programmed to catch plate numbers of people who have lost their license,
but in most jurisdictions they're going to sample only a tiny percentage
of the cars on the road.

So sorry, "just enforce the law" is simplistic claptrap.

And once again, reality hates you, Tom.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On 10/6/2017 9:12 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 12:50:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 10/6/2017 11:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 10/6/2017 10:26 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 10/6/2017 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought

>>>>> to be against the law.  Anyone piloting a motor vehicle

I'll note that what you're proposing is not "enforce the laws you've
got." You're proposing new, much harsher laws. And while I don't
necessarily disagree with the concept, I think those will be politically
impossible to get written into law.

I've been involved with passage of a few state laws, plus several
village ordinances. Simplistic solutions run into practical and
political roadblocks.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

There's your Minnesota Nice showing, Tim.
Your average human is more devious.

Or maybe not. I hear on the news that restrictions of
abortion will force millions of women to unlicensed illegal
procedures but restrictions of firearms will encourage
criminals to obey that one law so they will comply.

[avag...@gmail.com]

1 April, 1971

I drive good, I can turn a dry road into a sheet of ice. I pay attention. Every trip is the Mille Miglia. I have a safe drivers license.

POINT


everyone else, ceptin mega$ owners, will drive to enter the road way on the oncoming side n pullout as my big white van enters their space. The oncoming into the roadway vehicles turn right into the side of the big white van. How can anyone in their right mind do this ? They do it when I'm moving at 70 mph on a narrow patchy road. MINDFUCK !

BUTBUTBUT... traffic moves along every day thru construction against temp concrete walls. ? I know their white knuckled n at their limit but they do it very day on the way home from the mill in the rain......

conscious choice/forced n unavoidable ongoing choice. ( case for driverless cars ! )

[AMuzi]

On 10/7/2017 9:25 AM, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 6:12:06 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 12:50:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/6/2017 11:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 10/6/2017 10:26 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On 10/6/2017 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213

-snippity snip snip-

> Jay's business is getting criminals off.

*ahem*
His practice is corporate defense in civil courts

[AMuzi]

On 10/7/2017 10:00 AM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 7:25:36 AM UTC-7, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 6:12:06 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
>>> On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 12:50:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/6/2017 11:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 10/6/2017 10:26 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/6/2017 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought

>>>>>>> to be against the law.Ā Anyone piloting a motor vehicle

And without lawyers we'd be short big chunks of humor!

Like Lisa Bloom, a joke unto herself. Plaintiff's counsel
for Bill Cosby's [alleged] sexual escapades but now defense
for Kim Jong Fat's evil twin Weinstein against similar
charges. Solidarity, sisters!

[AMuzi]

On 10/7/2017 10:28 AM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 7:24:26 AM UTC-7, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 5:59:00 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
>>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 12:25:57 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 10/6/2017 2:13 PM, jbeattie wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 11:35:56 AM UTC-7, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 11:05:40 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
>>>>>>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 9:50:55 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/6/2017 11:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/6/2017 10:26 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 10/6/2017 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought

>>>>>>>>>>> to be against the law. Anyone piloting a motor vehicle

I'm not disagreeing with you generally but

"don't recall...Obama retaliating against cities or states

that didn't toe his political line. "

Howzabout:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/11-182

[avag...@gmail.com]

if you have legs, try the AZ outback tour n a stay in Flagstaff/Sedona after looping the Tetons with a trip down the Snake

Sedona is dirt bike. Sedona is DIRT BEACH. The girls are AAA. Sedona is 21C American Kitsch done perfectly for MoMA.

[jbeattie]

On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 9:12:41 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
<snip>

> >
> > Kind of a waste of time and typical of Trump's petty politics. I don't recall the evil-satan-Kenyan-boogeyman Obama retaliating against cities or states that didn't toe his political line. He targeted criminals, and his actual deportation rate was higher than Trump's. The current ICE policy has resulted in a lot of arrests but less deportations. More theater, less result. Now, theater can be a good thing to slow new entries (as can walls in places), but actually doing sweeps and carting off entire work-forces benefits no one.
> >
> > There are not legions of US citizens or documented workers waiting in the wings to take back jobs picking crops. The H2/H2-A program never provided enough workers.https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/06/can-americas-farms-survive-the-threat-of-deportations/529008/ The answer is to come up with a rational immigration policy either via enforcement or different worker programs.
> >
>
> I'm not disagreeing with you generally but
>
> "don't recall...Obama retaliating against cities or states
> that didn't toe his political line. "
>
> Howzabout:
>
> https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/11-182

This proves my point -- a totally genteel way of asserting federal authority: filing a successful action for declaratory and injunctive relief seeking a determination that federal immigration laws preempt an Arizona law purporting to regulate immigration. No ICE commandos cracking down on sanctuary cities. A functioning Supreme Court and a majority opinion written by a conservative to middle-of-the-road judge. That's how we want government to work.

If the Supreme Court had ruled against the Obama administration (which it did in part), there would be no tweet-storm about lying conservative judges, impeachments, appointments of real judges, etc., etc., etc. There was no tweet from Obama about how Scalia, Thomas and Alito (all of whom dissented in whole or part for different reasons) were "losers." The case also makes sense. We can't have 50 different immigration policies. I dream of an Executive that functions this way now.

-- Jay Beattie.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 8:00:42 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
>
> I don't do criminal work. But if you're talking about lawyers in general, don't forget that we comprise the DOJ, local district attorneys and prosecutors of every stripe. Who do you thing is prosecuting criminals? Santa?
> He knows whose been good or bad, but he's not getting indictments.

Actually I'm not concerned about getting criminals off. That's generally the job of the jury to decide and if they can be led about by the nose by a lawyer the tried deserves to get off.

What I am concerned about is convicted criminals not getting punishments to fit the crime. Not just short sentences but murderers that get better treatment than homeless vets.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

Jay, do you think that it's comical that illegal aliens are entering
Travis AFB to work? That is an extremely serious activity. There is so much classified information on an AFB that it isn't funny. Even the layout of the base in many cases is classified.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

You might want to ask your friend Jay before frothing at the mouth about not having probable cause after a man has had his car impounded. But then no one believes that a liberal is going to be able to work these things out for themselves. You have to have someone like Hillary to lead your way.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 9:12:41 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/26/us/states-texas-sue-obama-administration-over-transgender-bathroom-policy.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/veto-override-911-saudi-arabia-obama/502055/

https://www.texastribune.org/2017/01/17/texas-federal-government-lawsuits/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/aclu-muslim-lawsuit_us_56bba3c1e4b0b40245c52747

[jbeattie]

Considering that everyone entering the base has to pass through a security check-point, I leave it to the Air Force to decide who will and won't be allowed on the premises. Don't you trust the Air Force?

-- Jay Beattie.

[AMuzi]

On 10/7/2017 2:45 PM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 12:17:24 PM UTC-7, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 8:28:16 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
>>> On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 7:24:26 AM UTC-7, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 5:59:00 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 12:25:57 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/6/2017 2:13 PM, jbeattie wrote:
>>>>>>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 11:35:56 AM UTC-7, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 11:05:40 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 9:50:55 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 10/6/2017 11:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/6/2017 10:26 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/6/2017 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:

-snip snip snip-

Don't you trust the Air Force?

Uh, you mean _after_ John Slocumb retired?

[jbeattie]

The point? Every administration gets sued. The agencies are sued a thousand times a day. None of your posts involve government retaliation against states or local governments for implementing policies that upset the incumbent executive. Show me the Obama administration retaliating against Texas (or Houston or Dallas) for all of its suits against the government, e.g. withholding federal program funds, dispatching ICE to bust half the people in the state, turning park lands over to strip-miners -- and all the little, petty things the Orange Overlord loves to do. It reminds me of Huey Long minus the infrastructure projects and the oratory. At least Huey helped a lot of little people while lining his pockets and vanquishing his enemies.

-- Jay Beattie.

-- Jay Beattie.

[John B.]

On Sat, 7 Oct 2017 11:28:39 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 10/7/2017 10:22 AM, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 2:18:22 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 10/6/2017 2:35 PM, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Drunk driving is an offense that is particularly prone to repetition. According to MADD statistics, "an average drunk driver has driven drunk 80 times before first arrest" and "every day in America, another 27 people die as a result of drunk driving crashes" and "about one-third of all drivers arrested or convicted of drunk driving are repeat offenders." Any individual who is arrested for DUI or DWI has likely, therefore, driven drunk tens of times before, and has an extremely high chance of doing so again.
>>>>
>>>> But this is all a joke and should be demonstrated with sarcasm - right?
>>>
>>> The question was: What exactly do you propose should be done about it, Tom?
>>>
>>> You provide lots of ranting, but very few realistic answers.
>>
>> And as usual the obvious flies right past you. All it takes is enforcing traffic laws since the danger to the public comes from people breaking these laws. Let me here you say "duhhhhhhh" as usual.
>
>Wow, how simple! Just "enforce traffic laws."
>
>OK, so a guy gets caught driving drunk. They give him the maximum fine
>allowed by law, and let him go, as the law demands. They've just
>enforced the traffic law.
>

You need better laws :-)

Read up on the Maine laws:
http://www.maine.gov/dps/bhs/impaired-driving/laws.html

Note that Driving Under the Influence is a criminal act and that loss
of license, for a period and a 500 fine is the penalty for the first
offence.

And, if you are under 21 years of age the penalty is much more
serious. Driving with any measurable level of BAC results in loss of
license for one year.

Arizona, and quite a number of other states have, I believe, even
stricter laws.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Sat, 7 Oct 2017 11:31:28 -0400, Frank Krygowski

<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 10/6/2017 9:12 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 12:50:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/6/2017 11:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 10/6/2017 10:26 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On 10/6/2017 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/cyclist-dies-days-drunk-driver-slammed-tour-group-article-1.3545213
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We need sensible regulation, dammit. Drunk driving ought

>>>>>> to be against the law.  Anyone piloting a motor vehicle

I suggest that you read up on the various states laws about DUI.
Arizona, for example:

When you are stopped on suspicion of a DUI by a police officer and
either fail or refuse to take the BAC/breathalyzer test, the Arizona
Motor Vehicle Division will typically suspend your driver's license
(regardless of any criminal findings) on the spot for:

12 months.
OR
24 months, for a 2nd refusal or failure within 84 months.

For a 1st offense of a standard DUI, you may face:
10 days in jail.
A fine of $1,250.
Required completion of an alcohol/drug screening, treatment, and
education program.
An ignition interlock requirement for every vehicle you drive.
Community service.

>I've been involved with passage of a few state laws, plus several
>village ordinances. Simplistic solutions run into practical and
>political roadblocks.
--

Cheers,

John B.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 12:45:24 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
>
> Considering that everyone entering the base has to pass through a security check-point, I leave it to the Air Force to decide who will and won't be allowed on the premises. Don't you trust the Air Force?

Absolutely - so why the whining about illegal aliens being arrested for being in a national security area?

[cycl...@gmail.com]

The point was that Obama DID take retaliatory steps against ANYONE that threatened his regime.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 7:55:34 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Oct 2017 11:31:28 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> >

> >I'll note that what you're proposing is not "enforce the laws you've
> >got." You're proposing new, much harsher laws. And while I don't
> >necessarily disagree with the concept, I think those will be politically
> >impossible to get written into law.
>
> I suggest that you read up on the various states laws about DUI.
> Arizona, for example:
>
> When you are stopped on suspicion of a DUI by a police officer and
> either fail or refuse to take the BAC/breathalyzer test, the Arizona
> Motor Vehicle Division will typically suspend your driver's license
> (regardless of any criminal findings) on the spot for:
>
> 12 months.
> OR
> 24 months, for a 2nd refusal or failure within 84 months.
>
> For a 1st offense of a standard DUI, you may face:
> 10 days in jail.
> A fine of $1,250.
> Required completion of an alcohol/drug screening, treatment, and
> education program.
> An ignition interlock requirement for every vehicle you drive.
> Community service.

Which is the reason I have a medical exemption from taking those "head back, look straight up and walk three steps to the left" tests. With the medication I'm taking I cannot even walk a straight line. That doesn't mean my driving or bicycling is impaired save that I can no longer ride with no hands.

I am still required to use a breathalyzer or give a blood sample.

But I don't drink more than I should unless I'm sitting around watching the TV in evening and there's a little wine left after dinner.

[AMuzi]

I do not know and I have no opinion but I strongly suspect
that the practice of charging or not charging DUI[1] may
vary a lot from State to State as I strongly doubt that
actual DUI varies so much among populations:

http://www.statisticbrain.com/number-of-dui-arrests-per-state/

Note that Wisconsin shows one per 140 persons and then next
door Illinois is rated 1:2621. I know that Illinois has a
history of vacated charges for DUI which are both
ridiculously expensive and also routine in the Chicago metro
area, but that rate seems unconnected to reality.

NJ with 1:362 versus NY at 1:773 are not as dramatic as a
comparison to DE at an unbelievable one to 4219 persons.

In sum, I believe there are significant factors we have not
considered. You can't make the case that a legal (by statue
or by prosecution or sentencing practice) could make that
magnitude+ sized difference.


[1] Perhaps reporting/not reporting?

p.s. I dropped that list into a spreadsheet with ratios.


State DUI Arrests in 2015 Population Size RATE
Alabama 14,991 4,802,740 320.4
Alaska 5,538 722,718 130.5
Arizona 39,746 6,482,505 163.1
Arkansas 11,707 2,937,979 251.0
California 214,828 37,691,912 175.5
Colorado 28,198 5,116,769 181.5
Connecticut 8,235 3,580,709 434.8
Delaware 215 907,135 4 219.2
Florida 61,852 19,057,542 308.1
Georgia 25,421 9,815,210 386.1
Hawaii 5,812 1,374,810 236.5
Idaho 11,850 1,584,985 133.8
Illinois 4,909 12,869,257 2621.6
Indiana 23,475 6,516,922 277.6
Iowa 14,147 3,062,309 216.5
Kansas 13,080 2,871,238 219.5
Kentucky 2,363 4,369,356 1849.1
Louisiana 7,977 4,574,836 573.5
Maine 7,270 1,328,188 182.7
Maryland 23,714 5,828,289 245.8
Massachusetts 12,941 6,587,536 509.0
Michigan 35,534 9,876,187 277.9
Minnesota 29,832 5,344,861 179.2
Mississippi 11,629 2,978,512 256.1
Missouri 34,004 6,010,688 176.8
Montana 4,240 998,199 235.4
Nebraska 13,692 1,842,641 134.6
Nevada 14,445 2,723,322 188.5
New Hampshire 4,571 1,318,194 288.4
New Jersey 24,313 8,821,155 362.8
New Mexico 9,741 2,082,224 213.8
New York 25,169 19,465,197 773.4
North Carolina 49,599 9,656,401 194.7
North Dakota 4,003 683,932 170.9
Ohio 19,088 11,544,951 604.8
Oklahoma 18,980 3,791,508 199.8
Oregon 17,015 3,871,859 227.6
Pennsylvania 53,319 12,742,886 239.0
Rhode Island 2,778 1,051,302 378.4
South Carolina 14,742 4,679,230 317.4
South Dakota 6,190 824,082 133.1
Tennessee 26,322 6,403,353 243.3
Texas 90,066 25,674,681 285.1
Utah 6,894 2,817,222 408.6
Vermont 2,647 626,431 236.7
Virginia 27,732 8,096,604 292.0
Washington 34,952 6,830,038 195.4
West Virginia 4,429 1,855,364 418.9
Wisconsin 40,549 5,711,767 140.9
Wyoming 7,159 568,158 79.4

[AMuzi]

I think Jay meant official and public acts, not extralegal
shenanigans like the Lois Lerner political persecutions and
the Trump Tower wiretaps.

[jbeattie]

No retaliation against states and cities. Looking back on both of the cited investigations, nothing became of them -- more Republican theater without prosecutions, even post-hoc. You can indict a potted plant, particularly if it is a federal employee. If there were any merit to the claims, we'd see charges under the Trump administration -- which spends a good deal of effort discrediting the Obama administration and promising prosecutions. Really, where's the meat? And we're talking an eight-year administration versus a nine month administration.

-- Jay Beattie.

[avag...@gmail.com]

Strata your organization n get back to us

[avag...@gmail.com]

similar to our current goverment product

[avag...@gmail.com]

Nightmare ?

Rump Fed with 10 year trillions deficits in tax cuts eliminating the Fed Gov ...

Kansas city gona KC here we go...sung to Eliot Wave Theory...Savings n Loan ballad

[avag...@gmail.com]

Tangent facto ... everyone has tightens up

in house IM n otherwise crime is down

ICE costs n employment r up per account

Deports are way down...assume gross mistakes equal to patho criminal dports

But imports are half ? maybe a rump star

IMA positive this was not an analysis product but unforeseen.

We haven't seen any analysis?

[cycl...@gmail.com]

I expect more from you than "there wasn't any charges so it never happened."

[jbeattie]

On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 8:36:52 PM UTC-7, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
<snip>

> > No retaliation against states and cities. Looking back on both of the cited investigations, nothing became of them -- more Republican theater without prosecutions, even post-hoc. You can indict a potted plant, particularly if it is a federal employee. If there were any merit to the claims, we'd see charges under the Trump administration -- which spends a good deal of effort discrediting the Obama administration and promising prosecutions. Really, where's the meat? And we're talking an eight-year administration versus a nine month administration.
>
> I expect more from you than "there wasn't any charges so it never happened."

With the 24 hour bullshit cycle, that's the only reasonably reliable metric -- was anyone criminally prosecuted? Otherwise, it's a bunch of political theater -- on both sides.

And BTW, there is no evidence that Trump was wire tapped (which was his claim) and no evidence that anyone was illegally wire tapped, and we might actually get an indictment of Paul Manifort.

-- Jay Beattie.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41323172

As is usual you have to go to media outside of the US to discover anything. You expect people to believe that Trump's campaign committee chairman was wiretapped but not Trump?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/09/19/former-trump-campaign-chief-paul-manafort-demands-investigation-report-fbi-wiretapped-him/683236001/

After all - without a court order this was illegal before, during and after.

[jbeattie]

Note from your link: "The reported surveillance, granted under a court warrant, occurred both before and after the 2016 election." Manafort was surveilled under a court order.

-- Jay Beattie.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

So the court decided to have a person put under surveillance?

[jbeattie]

No, the FBI went to the court and got an order.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Doug Landau]

On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 9:21:03 AM UTC-7, avag...@gmail.com wrote:
> Strata your organization n get back to us

"Fronky dilk babso. Take us to your national city."
-H Allen Smith

[cycl...@gmail.com]

Jay - what is this conversation about? Manafort was Trump's campaign manager and was situated in Trump tower. So Trump was correct that his tower was bugged.

And WHY? There is NO LAW forbidding any foreign power from supporting anyone running for office. Obama spent $100,000 from the American taxpayers to campaign against Netanyahu in Israel. He interfered in almost every election during the time he was in office.

But there is supposed to be something wrong with Russia being horrified that they would be forced with more Pay For Play if Hillary got into office?

Why isn't Hillary under indictment? We HAVE complete knowledge of the laws she broke.

[jbeattie]

Trump said he was being "wire tapped," which wasn't true. Manafort was being surveilled before and after he moved to Trump Towers. One assumes that the Trump DOJ has determined that Hillary committed no indictable offense -- otherwise they would have obtained an indictment, because Trump keeps jumping on Jeff Sessions to prosecute her. Like I said, you can get an indictment against a potted plant if there is any evidence to support it. I suspect we'll see Manafort indicted.

-- Jay Beattie.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

Let's be absolutely clear on this: That Hillary had a private server with classified information on it (more that 300 instances with I think more than a cozen of them "black ops"). Because of this North Korea seized and executed many spies of the various world organizations that Hillary placed on her server.

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2016/12/28/Kim-Jong-Un-has-purged-executed-more-than-300-people-spy-agency-says/7071482971899/

Iran seized and imprisoned MANY spies and Obama took the unusual step of ransoming four of them out of Iran.

Now maybe human lives lost due to the actions of Hillary along with extremely important information lost doesn't seem indictable to you but to the real government it is.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

Please use Trump's actual words and not your invented ones:

http://www.factcheck.org/2017/09/revisiting-trumps-wiretap-tweets/

What we are seeing is a government almost entirely refusing to do their jobs properly. Why? Because Trump promised to drain the swamp and a large part of them are the swamp.

Latest: One of the pharmacists for Congress has leaked that a substantial number of Congressmen are taking medications for Alzheimer and other mental senescence diseases. He said that many are so bad that they cannot remember who he is when he delivers their medication or even what the medication is for or whether they've even been taking it.

This is WHY this government is spending so much time opposing Trump. And you're assisting them ever inch of the way.

[jbeattie]

On Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 8:08:40 AM UTC-7, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
<nip>

> Please use Trump's actual words and not your invented ones:
>
> http://www.factcheck.org/2017/09/revisiting-trumps-wiretap-tweets/

O.K., from your post: "Obama had my 'wires tapped' in Trump Tower." Parsing the tweet, Obama, meaning the former president Obama, had Trump's "wires" tapped in Trump Towers. The former president had Trumps wires tapped. That's patently false.

>
> What we are seeing is a government almost entirely refusing to do their jobs properly. Why? Because Trump promised to drain the swamp and a large part of them are the swamp.

Or because he's a lunatic. You pick.

>
> Latest: One of the pharmacists for Congress has leaked that a substantial number of Congressmen are taking medications for Alzheimer and other mental senescence diseases. He said that many are so bad that they cannot remember who he is when he delivers their medication or even what the medication is for or whether they've even been taking it.

I had no idea Congress had a pharmacist, which it doesn't. https://www.statnews.com/2017/10/11/congress-pharmacist-alzheimers/ This guy works at a store near the capitol, and as expected, states that patient confidentiality prohibits any comment on patient drug use.

> This is WHY this government is spending so much time opposing Trump. And you're assisting them ever inch of the way.

Pfffff (blowing out coffee). I'm assisting the government in opposing Trump? Gee, sorry Adolph. I'll stop doing that. BTW, when is the next SS meeting? I don't want to miss that.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Duane]

Gives a whole new meaning to "you can't make this stuff up" ...

[cycl...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 8:58:53 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
> On Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 8:08:40 AM UTC-7, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> <nip>
>
> > Please use Trump's actual words and not your invented ones:
> >
> > http://www.factcheck.org/2017/09/revisiting-trumps-wiretap-tweets/
>
> O.K., from your post: "Obama had my 'wires tapped' in Trump Tower." Parsing the tweet, Obama, meaning the former president Obama, had Trump's "wires" tapped in Trump Towers. The former president had Trumps wires tapped. That's patently false.

And then AFTER having access to what Trump actually said you still misrepresent it. But of course you're just being honest. The FBI looked the other way when Hillary was running pay for play with the Clinton Foundation on the receiving end. But they are investigating Trump's "Russian connection"?

By all means with that sharp legal mind tell us all what law could have been broken. It is perfectly legal for any foreign government or individual to make campaign contributions. Just like NO ONE complained when Obama spent $100,000 of taxpayer money to campaign against Netenyahu.

> > What we are seeing is a government almost entirely refusing to do their jobs properly. Why? Because Trump promised to drain the swamp and a large part of them are the swamp.
>
> Or because he's a lunatic. You pick.

I pick a Republican party that isn't supporting the very promised actions that got the majority of them elected. But I see you're willing to misrepresent that as well. Must be the lawyer in you.

> > Latest: One of the pharmacists for Congress has leaked that a substantial number of Congressmen are taking medications for Alzheimer and other mental senescence diseases. He said that many are so bad that they cannot remember who he is when he delivers their medication or even what the medication is for or whether they've even been taking it.
>
> I had no idea Congress had a pharmacist, which it doesn't. https://www.statnews.com/2017/10/11/congress-pharmacist-alzheimers/ This guy works at a store near the capitol, and as expected, states that patient confidentiality prohibits any comment on patient drug use.

And he did NOT name names. So even though he is making deliveries from a pharmacy to Congress with a great deal of drugs for mental incapacitation and he is saying that the people he is delivering this stuff to can't even remember that they're supposed to take it you couldn't care less and wish to misrepresent that as well.

We have a person in our group that we've just had to ban because his Alzheimer was making him a threat to himself and the group was having to watch him every second. And he is faster than the rest of us.

So I've seen this close up and know that no member of Congress with this disease should be allowed to serve. And any doctor/patient confidentiality should not be allowed in these sorts of cases. You ARE aware that doctors are supposed to report these cases to the DMV I hope? When I was having seizures they reported me and took my license. But anyone that can be manipulated in Congress is OK with you?

> > This is WHY this government is spending so much time opposing Trump. And you're assisting them every inch of the way.

>
> Pfffff (blowing out coffee). I'm assisting the government in opposing Trump? Gee, sorry Adolph. I'll stop doing that. BTW, when is the next SS meeting? I don't want to miss that.

You are excusing actions of a government that is doing exactly the opposite of what they were elected to do. Do tell us why that is.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 9:02:28 AM UTC-7, duane wrote:
>
> Gives a whole new meaning to "you can't make this stuff up" ...

Jay certain can find a way. Don't take the actual sentences - parse the words out and rearrange them to mean what you want.

[jbeattie]

There is this thing called the Constitution, and it has like these things called "articles." They're awesome! There is this Article 2 thing and then this Article 1 thing, and like the president . . . he's under the Article 2 thing, and the congress and senate guys -- they're under the Article 1 thing, and they don't have to listen to the president except sometimes. And those congress and senate guys are, like, elected by people who probably don't even like the president, because as it turns out, a lot of people don't like him. I didn't know that! Anyway, its all really, really complicated! Who knew it was so complicated? I thought a president could just like tell everyone what to do and they had to do it!

-- The Jay.

[AMuzi]

I hope your paragraph will console the not running again
Charlie Dent who said recently:

“I’ve come to expect a certain amount of dysfunction in
government, but they have taken the fun out of dysfunction..."

[cycl...@gmail.com]

But it was perfectly fine when Obama did it.

[Frank Krygowski]

Sure! All the Republicans said so!


--
- Frank Krygowski

[cycl...@gmail.com]

http://www.heritage.org/the-constitution/report/executive-unbound-the-obama-administrations-unilateral-actions

[Frank Krygowski]

Ah yes, The Heritage Foundation.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[jbeattie]

What was perfectly fine when Obama did it? Put up with opposition?

-- Jay Beattie.

[John B.]

Reality is that Obama issued fewer presidential decrees than any other
president in the last 20 years and actually is number 16 in a list of
all U.S. presidents.
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/number-of-executive-orders-per-president/
--
Cheers,

John B.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

The reality is that Obama was breaking the law with his executive orders and Trump has been ordering those executive orders canceled or for the law to be enforced.

Somehow that difference doesn't seem to impact anyone. Especially Frank and Jay who should know better.

[jbeattie]

Don't speak for me, particularly since you've probably never read a single executive order. Read these and report how many are unwinding "illegal" Obama orders and how many are Trump press-pieces or end-runs around existing laws. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_executive_actions_by_Donald_Trump Tell me how many represent attacks on ordinary Americans with dissenting views.

With the incessant in-fighting with his own party, the pace of ruling by fiat will only increase -- at least until the congress is filled with Christian Taliban like Roy Moore.

-- Jay Beattie.

[John B.]

On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 06:53:29 -0700 (PDT), cycl...@gmail.com wrote:

>On Friday, October 13, 2017 at 7:00:42 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 15:14:21 -0700 (PDT), cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >
>> >http://www.heritage.org/the-constitution/report/executive-unbound-the-obama-administrations-unilateral-actions
>>
>>
>> Reality is that Obama issued fewer presidential decrees than any other
>> president in the last 20 years and actually is number 16 in a list of
>> all U.S. presidents.
>> https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/number-of-executive-orders-per-president/
>
>The reality is that Obama was breaking the law with his executive orders and Trump has been ordering those executive orders canceled or for the law to be enforced.
>

Details please. Breaking which laws and who says so? Is there a court
ruling. If not, why not?

The devil is in the details, as they say.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

No one needs to speak for you since you pull the same thing Franks does.