One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
TRUMP “The Man of Sin” gives Satan influence in US.
Page <prev 2 of 13 next> last>>
Oct 21, 2017 10:52:45   #
pafret Loc: Northeast
 
JFlorio wrote:
At least most Americans now know there is a swamp that needs drained. I see where walls are being put up where it makes sense. If the openborders crowd would go away there's many a clever way to make Mexico pay, without sending them a bill.


Ship all the illegal South Americans back to their countries and remove the money drain from their remittances. All those jobs they worked at will become available and without an endless supply of economic slave labor, wages will rise. Mexico will pay for the wall by having to support their own people without the influx of our money to enhance their economy. Our economy will expand because American citizens will work at the jobs vacated and spend their money in the local economy, creating more demand for goods and services.

There will be a significant reduction in police needed as well as incarceration facilities. Crimes of all sorts will be reduced, making the populace safer and our election process will be less likely to be suborned by those in our government who steal elections.

Reply
Oct 21, 2017 11:01:42   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
JFlorio wrote:
Whenever you're twenty trillion in debt I believe it's already spent. Just saying.


Yes the money was spent but the Reflubs are going to cut down the debt by cutting taxes.

Reply
Oct 21, 2017 11:05:48   #
Big Bass
 
Geo wrote:
TRUMP “The Man of Sin” gives Satan influence in US.
He propagates Evil and Harm to the less fortunate.
1 Timothy 6:10 KJV “For the love of money is the root of all evil:”…..
Matthew 7:18-20 18 “A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit,
neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

10/16/17 11:01 AM—Updated 10/16/17 11:06 AM
By Steve Benen
While the opioid epidemic has earned a place in the national spotlight in recent years, our understanding of how the crisis went from bad to worse is still coming into focus. To that end, the Washington Post and “60 Minutes” have done some important reporting.
The Post published an amazing piece yesterday explaining that early last year, Congress “effectively stripped the Drug Enforcement Administration of its most potent weapon against large drug companies suspected of spilling prescription narcotics onto the nation’s streets.” The point of the measure was to “weaken aggressive DEA enforcement efforts against drug distribution companies that were supplying corrupt doctors and pharmacists who peddled narcotics to the black market.”
And leading the way on the effort was Tom Marino, a Republican congressman from Pennsylvania, who championed the controversial legislation, which seems tough to defend.
For years, some drug distributors were fined for repeatedly ignoring warnings from the DEA to shut down suspicious sales of hundreds of millions of pills, while they racked up billions of dollars in sales.
The new law makes it virtually impossible for the DEA to freeze suspicious narcotic shipments from the companies, according to internal agency and Justice Department documents and an independent assessment by the DEA’s chief administrative law judge in a soon-to-be-published law review article. That powerful tool had allowed the agency to immediately prevent drugs from reaching the street.
As the piece explained, the nation’s major drug distributors hired a former DEA insider to help formulate a strategy, and then invested in an ambitious lobbying campaign, which included at least $1.5 million in political action committee contributions to the small number of lawmakers who helped advance the issue.
All of this unfolded with almost no scrutiny: “Besides the sponsors and co-sponsors of the bill, few lawmakers knew the true impact the law would have. It sailed through Congress and was passed by unanimous consent, a parliamentary procedure reserved for bills considered to be noncontroversial. The White House was equally unaware of the bill’s import when President Barack Obama signed it into law, according to interviews with former senior administration officials.”
A separate Washington Post analysis explained that a story like this “shows everything people hate about Washington,” complete with a revolving door between the drug industry and those who regulate it, the influence of campaign cash on lawmakers, and Congress failing to do its due diligence on important policy matters.
But as we come to terms with the revelations, pay particular attention to Tom Marino, who championed the controversial bill in the House, following years of related efforts. Given the circumstances, it would seem the Pennsylvania Republican has some explaining to do, though the article added that Marino not only declined repeated requests, his staff ultimately called the Capitol Police when reporters tried to interview the congressman at his office.
It’s against this backdrop that Donald Trump has decided to give Marino a promotion – nominating him to serve as the nation’s new drug czar.
TRUMP “The Man of Sin” gives Satan influence in US... (show quote)


"For the love of money..." Yes that WOULD be hellary and slick willy. Glad Trump squashed that one.

Reply
 
 
Oct 21, 2017 11:09:00   #
Big Bass
 
Bad Bob wrote:
Yes the money was spent but the Reflubs are going to cut down the debt by cutting taxes.

Are you ever going to live your life without 24/7 supervision? Did you honestly not know that government deficits are cut by cutting wasteful and frivolous government spending??

Reply
Oct 21, 2017 11:11:53   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
Big Bass wrote:
Are you ever going to live your life without 24/7 supervision? Did you honestly not know that government deficits are cut by cutting wasteful and frivolous government spending??


Yeah, it's worked good so far right?

Reply
Oct 21, 2017 11:11:57   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Oh now you're worried about debt huh bum bob? You guys only whine about debt when taxes are cut yet have no problem funding transgender studies. I know this won't get through your thick skull but a big enough tax cut can actually produce more revenue to the treasury. Problem is congress generally spends more.
Bad Bob wrote:
Yes the money was spent but the Reflubs are going to cut down the debt by cutting taxes.

Reply
Oct 21, 2017 11:13:44   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Because neither sides ever done it. Hard to buy votes when you're cutting programs. You might want to stop this thread. You're looking rather uneducated.
Bad Bob wrote:
Yeah, it's worked good so far right?

Reply
 
 
Oct 21, 2017 11:13:53   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
JFlorio wrote:
Oh now you're worried about debt huh bum bob? You guys only whine about debt when taxes are cut yet have no problem funding transgender studies. I know this won't get through your thick skull but a big enough tax cut can actually produce more revenue to the treasury. Problem is congress generally spends more.


Worked for W Bush did't it?

Reply
Oct 21, 2017 11:14:57   #
Big Bass
 
Bad Bob wrote:
Yeah, it's worked good so far right?

If the obstructionists would let Trump do his job, we would see results sooner. Yes, the debt will rise in the short term. Long term debt reduction is the objective.

Reply
Oct 21, 2017 11:19:26   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
JFlorio wrote:
Because neither sides ever done it. Hard to buy votes when you're cutting programs. You might want to stop this thread. You're looking rather uneducated.


You gota degree in economics?

Reply
Oct 21, 2017 11:21:54   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
Big Bass wrote:
If the obstructionists would let Trump do his job, we would see results sooner. Yes, the debt will rise in the short term. Long term debt reduction is the objective.


Yeah those damn Crats won't let tRump do nuting.

Reply
 
 
Oct 21, 2017 11:28:36   #
Big Bass
 
Bad Bob wrote:
Yeah those damn Crats won't let tRump do nuting.


Thanks! Just the answer I expected from you.

Reply
Oct 21, 2017 11:33:06   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
Big Bass wrote:
Thanks! Just the answer I expected from you.


Well what else are the Reflubs going to blame? Obama? Hillary?

Reply
Oct 21, 2017 11:37:29   #
Big Bass
 
Bad Bob wrote:
Well what else are the Reflubs going to blame? Obama? Hillary?


If that is where the blame should fall, then yes. But demoncraps can't grasp that concept.

Reply
Oct 21, 2017 11:39:49   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
Big Bass wrote:
If that is where the blame should fall, then yes. But demoncraps can't grasp that concept.


Well what are you blaming for the Reflubs failure so far?

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 13 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.