The Real timschochet

So unless Trump changes his mind again (always a possibility) the new age of tariffs begin April 2. We will be placing tariffs on every country on Earth. These new tariffs will not be like any this world has ever seen before; way bigger than Smoot- Hawley (formerly the largest in history.) We import 3.5 trillion dollars worth of goods every year; 100% of these will have a new tax. Most economists predict the effects will be catastrophic to our economy. Trump says it will be the start of a new golden age. He predicts large scale manufacturing will return to the USA. Most others doubt this.

Your first point is incorrect. Though Hegseth made that distinction, Trump’s executive order did not. Your second point is incorrect. Those who have had transgender surgery do not have gender dysphoria. 3. Your third point has not, to the best of my knowledge, been addressed by the courts. Personally I don’t understand why this is or should be a limiting factor. 4. I don’t believe the SC addressed this specific issue.

If your wife is married to you then she is as foolish as you are. HTH

When he calls you stupid he’s not calling you a name; he’s using an adjective to describe you. I feel he’s being a little kind actually. There is stupid, there is moronic and then there are your posts somewhere below the two.

My rebuttal is pretty simple: transgender persons don’t suffer from gender dysphoria. If they had it they’ve been cured of it by undergoing a sex change. Now they’re who they were supposed to be. Therefore mental illness is not a sufficient reason to restrict a transgender person from joining the military. (Now I would agree that it is not the proper role of the military to pay for someone’s surgery. Therefore I have no problem excluding a person with gender dysphoria or who hasn’t yet had the surgery. But if they’ve already had the surgery, then it seems to me it’s wrong to exclude them. Thus I believe this judge is correct and you are wrong.)

Well now I can add a 4th guy to my list. Thanks for the heads up!

I wrote that I was disgusted. Not that I was upset. I rarely get upset by anything posted in this forum and certainly not by your garbage.

It’s really disgusting to read this hate filled nonsense here but what’s worse is that nobody around here condemns it. @Frozenbeernuts, @Cdub100 , and @HB Localboy have shown themselves to be ignorant hate filled anti-Semites, yet they’re tolerated as if they were normal people.

You’re right. It’s just that you post such ridiculous stuff I can’t help myself. But I’m procrastinating now. Have fun.

I partially am.

Again you’re ignorant of our laws to make this assertion.

Not at all. There are certain laws in our history, very few of them which if carried out, are clearly immoral. The Fugitive Slave Act is the most obvious example. I hold that any law that says the government has the right to round up, incarcerate and deport a non-violent, non-felony committing undocumented person is on the face of it immoral and should be disobeyed. I further hold that this belief is in the finest traditions of American justice. So gtfo with your accusations of childish or seriousness. You obviously know nothing about our history.

Then give her a trial. You guys can’t have it both ways. If she committed a felony she gets a trial and if convicted she gets deported. If she didn’t commit a felony then she doesn’t deserve to be deported.

This was fun guys but I gotta go to work.

If she didn’t commit a felony then she doesn’t deserve to be deported. I don’t care what the law says; we have a duty to disobey immoral laws.

Because she pays into Social Security without taking anything out of it. She and millions of other undocumented people do this and it helps keep SS afloat so that you can be paid and the whole system doesn’t go insolvent. Even more broadly, undocumented immigrants work for lower wages and keep prices low for us, particularly in agriculture and at restaurants. This doesn’t apply to her specifically but to undocumented people in general.

It’s the other way around. You’re living off her, and millions like her. If I had to deport someone I would choose to deport you over her.

Two more folks here rooting for no due process. This is how we do away with the Constitution: public sentiment. How long before Trump proposes an Enabling Act? Sounds like many here will cheer him on.

I’m not interested in what Pelosi or anyone else said. I was referring to YOU calling her a “taco maker” out of the blue, which was a clearly racist remark.

@Strike’s justification for deporting her is that she committed a felony. If that is the case then she should get a trial. In any case you’re wrong: due process is necessary for deportation or incarceration.

Then you’ll always be wrong.

I don’t know why you’re trying to personalize this but no.

No. I’ve described what I do and that’s not it. I feel the way I do on this issue not for selfish reasons but because it’s part of my political philosophy, and one of my core beliefs.

With a felony? Fine. Let’s have a court trial. If she’s found guilty she can be deported.

So racism is at the heart of your opinion on this issue. Thanks for making that clear.