Ivanka Trump Will Become a Federal Employee

Even if you don't take seriously the brief time he spent in the US Senate, it seems to me hypocritical of so-called conservatives to discount state legislative experience, given that they're the so-called ideology of localism and federalism. It would make much more sense for a leftist to discount state and community office, because they are the ideology of "DC Only."

Also, so-called conservatives nominated a Republican candidate with zero qualifications to run for president.

personally I think Trump's experience exceeds that of being a state legislator....and certainly offsets all the negatives of Hillary's experience.....
 
Default to abortion because you can't defend Stretch's lie.

Well, you have to concede it is the supreme position to hold, if one needs a default. It's kind of like how slavery would negate every good position the Democratic Party held in the 19th Century, had it, in fact, ever held one. Actually, I think secession was a bigger negation. Also, don't you leftists always point-out the difference between abortion and infanticide, which is what Obama's position actually was?
 
What legislation did Senator Obama write?

A short selection, and there's another list for his state senate career.

The Lugar-Obama Cooperative Threat Reduction.

Introduced by Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. Dick Lugar and Sen. Tom Coburn.

Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006
This act of Congress, introduced by Senators Obama and Coburn, required the full disclosure of all entities or organizations receiving federal funds in FY2007.

The Obama-McCain Climate Change Reduction Bill
The Obama-McCain bill, which is co-sponsored by Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., would cut emissions by two-thirds by 2050.

Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007
Introduced by Obama, this binding act would stop the planned troop increase of 21,500 in Iraq, and would also begin a phased redeployment of troops from Iraq with the goal of removing all combat forces by March 31, 2008.

The Comprehensive Nuclear Threat Reduction provision
Working with Sen. Hagel and Rep. Adam Schiff, Obama authored this provision, which would require the president to develop a comprehensive plan for ensuring that all nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material at vulnerable sites around the world are secure by 2012 from the threats that terrorists have shown they can pose.
 
A short selection, and there's another list for his state senate career.

The Lugar-Obama Cooperative Threat Reduction.

Introduced by Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. Dick Lugar and Sen. Tom Coburn.

Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006
This act of Congress, introduced by Senators Obama and Coburn, required the full disclosure of all entities or organizations receiving federal funds in FY2007.

The Obama-McCain Climate Change Reduction Bill
The Obama-McCain bill, which is co-sponsored by Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., would cut emissions by two-thirds by 2050.

Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007
Introduced by Obama, this binding act would stop the planned troop increase of 21,500 in Iraq, and would also begin a phased redeployment of troops from Iraq with the goal of removing all combat forces by March 31, 2008.

The Comprehensive Nuclear Threat Reduction provision
Working with Sen. Hagel and Rep. Adam Schiff, Obama authored this provision, which would require the president to develop a comprehensive plan for ensuring that all nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material at vulnerable sites around the world are secure by 2012 from the threats that terrorists have shown they can pose.

Thank you.
 
Well, you have to concede it is the supreme position to hold, if one needs a default. It's kind of like how slavery would negate every good position the Democratic Party held in the 19th Century, had it, in fact, ever held one. Actually, I think secession was a bigger negation. Also, don't you leftists always point-out the difference between abortion and infanticide, which is what Obama's position actually was?

Do you say the same thing when a poster defaults to a Hitler reference? Pmp is just obfuscating.
 
A short selection, and there's another list for his state senate career.

The Lugar-Obama Cooperative Threat Reduction.

Introduced by Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. Dick Lugar and Sen. Tom Coburn.

Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006
This act of Congress, introduced by Senators Obama and Coburn, required the full disclosure of all entities or organizations receiving federal funds in FY2007.

The Obama-McCain Climate Change Reduction Bill
The Obama-McCain bill, which is co-sponsored by Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., would cut emissions by two-thirds by 2050.

Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007
Introduced by Obama, this binding act would stop the planned troop increase of 21,500 in Iraq, and would also begin a phased redeployment of troops from Iraq with the goal of removing all combat forces by March 31, 2008.

The Comprehensive Nuclear Threat Reduction provision
Working with Sen. Hagel and Rep. Adam Schiff, Obama authored this provision, which would require the president to develop a comprehensive plan for ensuring that all nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material at vulnerable sites around the world are secure by 2012 from the threats that terrorists have shown they can pose.

did any of those pass?.......
 
Do you say the same thing when a poster defaults to a Hitler reference? Pmp is just obfuscating.

we were talking about laws Obama wrote.....I brought up a law he wrote....its not my fault you're embarrassed by the fact the law he wrote authorized the murder of children after birth......which by the way isn't abortion......
 
Do you say the same thing when a poster defaults to a Hitler reference? Pmp is just obfuscating.

I'm not one to automatically declare that a Hitler reference is a fallacy to be ignored. It you're someone who overuses them, then I will probably not take you seriously. That being said, I think there is greater value in Hitler references than most people probably see, because I don't view the Nazis as an aberration of history, but a form of the human condition that could surface at any given time.
 
I'm not one to automatically declare that a Hitler reference is a fallacy to be ignored. It you're someone who overuses them, then I will probably not take you seriously. That being said, I think there is greater value in Hitler references than most people probably see, because I don't view the Nazis as an aberration of history, but a form of the human condition that could surface at any given time.

This is one very smart insightful person here.
 
Well, you have to concede it is the supreme position to hold, if one needs a default. It's kind of like how slavery would negate every good position the Democratic Party held in the 19th Century, had it, in fact, ever held one. Actually, I think secession was a bigger negation. Also, don't you leftists always point-out the difference between abortion and infanticide, which is what Obama's position actually was?

dear fucking idiot


go study the history of American political parties


where did the republican and democratic partys come from
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_parties_in_the_United_States



First Party System: 1792–1824[edit]
Main article: First Party System
The First Party System of the United States featured the Federalist Party and the Republican Party (also called "Democratic-Republican" or "Jeffersonian Republican"). The Federalist Party grew from the national network of Washington's Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, who favored a strong united central government, close ties to Britain, a centralized banking system, and close links between the government and men of wealth. The Republican Party was founded by Madison and Thomas Jefferson, who strongly opposed Hamilton's agenda.[9] The Jeffersonians came to power in 1800 and the Federalists were too elitist to compete effectively. They survived in the Northeast, but their refusal to support the War of 1812 verged on secession and was a devastating blow when the war ended well.
The Era of Good Feelings under President James Monroe (1816–1824) marked the end of the First Party System and a brief period in which partisanship was minimal.[
 
Republican Party[edit]
Main articles: Republican Party (United States) and History of the United States Republican Party
The Republican Party is one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States of America. Since the 1880s it has been nicknamed (by the media) the "Grand Old Party" or GOP, although it is younger than the Democratic Party.
Founded in 1854 by Northern anti-slavery activists and modernizers, the Republican Party rose to prominence in 1860 with the election of Abraham Lincoln, who used the party machinery to support victory in the American Civil War. The GOP dominated national politics during the Third Party System, from 1854 to 1896, and the Fourth Party System from 1896 to 1932.
Since its founding, the Republican Party has been the more market-oriented of the two American political parties, often favoring policies that aid American business interests. As a party whose power was once based on the voting clout of Union Army veterans, this party has traditionally supported more aggressive defense measures and more lavish veteran's benefits. Though initially founded to oppose slavery, following Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy" in 1968,[citation needed] the Republican Party has become the less progressive party in areas of racial, gender and identity politics-motivated social justice. Today, the Republican Party supports an American conservative platform, with further foundations in economic liberalism, fiscal conservatism, and social conservatism. The Republican Party tends to be strongest in the Southern United States and the "flyover states", as well as suburban and rural areas in other states. One significant base of support for the Republican Party are Evangelical Christians, who have wielded significant clout in the party since the early 1970s.
President Donald Trump is the 20th and most recent Republican to be elected to the office of President of the United States. Since the 2010 midterm elections, the Republicans have held a majority in the United States House of Representatives, and since the 2014 elections, the Senate.[23]
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_parties_in_the_United_States



First Party System: 1792–1824[edit]
Main article: First Party System
The First Party System of the United States featured the Federalist Party and the Republican Party (also called "Democratic-Republican" or "Jeffersonian Republican"). The Federalist Party grew from the national network of Washington's Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, who favored a strong united central government, close ties to Britain, a centralized banking system, and close links between the government and men of wealth. The Republican Party was founded by Madison and Thomas Jefferson, who strongly opposed Hamilton's agenda.[9] The Jeffersonians came to power in 1800 and the Federalists were too elitist to compete effectively. They survived in the Northeast, but their refusal to support the War of 1812 verged on secession and was a devastating blow when the war ended well.
The Era of Good Feelings under President James Monroe (1816–1824) marked the end of the First Party System and a brief period in which partisanship was minimal.[

First of all, that Wiki entry is factually incorrect, because New England neither threatened to secede, nor ever came close to secession, at all. Second, the Democratic Party has always claimed to trace its roots to Jefferson, even though it formally was created by Jackson. Go read the book, Party of the People, and you will note that it begins with Jefferson. Really, the Democratic Party apparatus was born in NYC when Aaron Burr founded Tammany Hall to help him and Jefferson win the Election of 1800. The Federalist Party lost most of its influence over the later parties, so, the GOP largely had its origins simply in anti-Jacksonianism and the Whig Party, but, late in the 19th Century, many Republicans had discovered a fondness for Alexander Hamilton.
 
personally I think Trump's experience exceeds that of being a state legislator....and certainly offsets all the negatives of Hillary's experience.....

He knows nothing. I watched his stupid show a couple times. I recall being amazed there was no criteria at all for advancement other that Trump's whim. These clowns showed no aptitude or business acumen at all, and neither did dump. Just bluster and posing as a honcho or slavish obsequiousness to the dump. Good life lessons to be sure, but not worthy of qualification to run a hotdog stand much less balance a checkbook. Has Trump ever said a damn thing that made any sense about anything that was not just vague puffery? You might rejoin that it was just a TV show. Yes, yes it was, and that is his only qualification. That's the point. Trump is completely unqualified for office by any objective experience or skill set whatsoever.

He's a god damned clown and you don't care that he is the captain of the US ship of state and will run us all aground. That makes you an accomplice.
 
First of all, that Wiki entry is factually incorrect, because New England neither threatened to secede, nor ever came close to secession, at all. Second, the Democratic Party has always claimed to trace its roots to Jefferson, even though it formally was created by Jackson. Go read the book, Party of the People, and you will note that it begins with Jefferson. Really, the Democratic Party apparatus was born in NYC when Aaron Burr founded Tammany Hall to help him and Jefferson win the Election of 1800. The Federalist Party lost most of its influence over the later parties, so, the GOP largely had its origins simply in anti-Jacksonianism and the Whig Party, but, late in the 19th Century, many Republicans had discovered a fondness for Alexander Hamilton.



citation
 
First of all, that Wiki entry is factually incorrect, because New England neither threatened to secede, nor ever came close to secession, at all. Second, the Democratic Party has always claimed to trace its roots to Jefferson, even though it formally was created by Jackson. Go read the book, Party of the People, and you will note that it begins with Jefferson. Really, the Democratic Party apparatus was born in NYC when Aaron Burr founded Tammany Hall to help him and Jefferson win the Election of 1800. The Federalist Party lost most of its influence over the later parties, so, the GOP largely had its origins simply in anti-Jacksonianism and the Whig Party, but, late in the 19th Century, many Republicans had discovered a fondness for Alexander Hamilton.




"Democratic-Republican"


both partys have their origin in slavery


you cant just blame one


and your republican label now stands for intolerance
 

WikiWikiWiki said:
There are a number of reasons why historians doubt that the New England Federalists were seriously considering secession. All the states, especially Connecticut with its claims to western lands, stood to lose more than they would gain. Efforts were made in the delegation selection process to exclude firebrands like John Lowell, Jr., Timothy Pickering, and Josiah Quincy who might have pushed for secession, and the final report of the convention did not propose secession.
[SUP]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartford_Convention[/SUP]


WikiWikiWiki said:
By 1798, the society's activities had grown increasingly political. High ranking Democratic-Republican Aaron Burr saw Tammany Hall as an opportunity to counter Alexander Hamilton's Society of the Cincinnati and developed it into a political machine.[SUP][9][/SUP] Eventually Tammany emerged as the center of Democratic-Republican Party politics in the city.[SUP][10][/SUP] Burr used Tammany Hall influence in the election of 1800, in which he was elected Vice President of the United States. Many historians believe that without Tammany, President John Adams might have won New York State's electoral votes and won reelection.
[SUP][/SUP]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tammany_Hall

WikiWikiWiki said:
Opinions of Hamilton have run the gamut: both John Adams and Thomas Jefferson viewed him as unprincipled and dangerously aristocratic. Hamilton's reputation was mostly negative in the eras of Jeffersonian democracy and Jacksonian democracy. However, by the Progressive era, Herbert Croly, Henry Cabot Lodge, and Theodore Roosevelt praised his leadership of a strong government. Several nineteenth- and twentieth-century Republicans entered politics by writing laudatory biographies of Hamilton.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Hamilton

Damn, I'm good. :cof1:
 
"Democratic-Republican"


both partys have their origin in slavery


you cant just blame one


and your republican label now stands for intolerance

Democratic-Republican Party was never the official name. Jefferson usually just called it the Republican Party, but, since it is viewed as the predecessor to Jackson's Democratic Party, and because the name could easily be confused with the GOP, that is why we assign it the DR label. The name was probably coined due to the fact that the members who split from the party in opposition to Jackson, called their party the National Republican Party, likely conscious of the fact that they wanted to distinguish themselves from both the Jeffersonian Republican Party, as well as from the new Democratic Party. Oh, yeah, and the NR membership included abolitionists, such as former president John Quincy Adams...
 
Back
Top