FYI...UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE...

I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WERE HUMAN BEINGS AND THE BLATANT TRUTH IS THIS....WE R BECOMING A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY....NO LAWS,JUST AN OLIGARCH RUNNING THE COUNTRY ,AND ENRICHING HIMSELF AND FAMILY FROM TAXATION OF IT'S CITIZENS. ......WHEN U ARRIVE AT THIS POINT IN HISTORY.....A REVOLUTION IS ALMOST CERTAIN.....WAIT AND WATCH....
BECAUSE AMERICA IS IN A VERY PRECARIOUS POSITION....AND IT WILL NOT BE PRETTY.

homeagain wrote: I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WERE HUMAN BEINGS AND THE BLATANT TRUTH IS THIS....WE R BECOMING A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY....NO LAWS,JUST AN OLIGARCH RUNNING THE COUNTRY ,AND ENRICHING HIMSELF AND FAMILY FROM TAXATION OF IT'S CITIZENS. ......WHEN U ARRIVE AT THIS POINT IN HISTORY.....A REVOLUTION IS ALMOST CERTAIN.....WAIT AND WATCH....
BECAUSE AMERICA IS IN A VERY PRECARIOUS POSITION....AND IT WILL NOT BE PRETTY.

Prediction: there will not be a revolution as long as people are being entertained and fed. This goes back to Roman times, bread and circuses.

People in America are fat and happy, and the Trump Administration is an entertaining circus.

They just had a special election in Tennessee, the Democrats spent millions to win this Nashville seat and couldn't pull it off.

homeagain wrote: I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WERE HUMAN BEINGS AND THE BLATANT TRUTH IS THIS....WE R BECOMING A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY....NO LAWS,JUST AN OLIGARCH RUNNING THE COUNTRY ,AND ENRICHING HIMSELF AND FAMILY FROM TAXATION OF IT'S CITIZENS. ......WHEN U ARRIVE AT THIS POINT IN HISTORY.....A REVOLUTION IS ALMOST CERTAIN.....WAIT AND WATCH....
BECAUSE AMERICA IS IN A VERY PRECARIOUS POSITION....AND IT WILL NOT BE PRETTY.

Anwar al‑Awlaki was a human being too, right? These narco-terrorists have chosen a path which harms others and puts them in harms way, just as al-Awalki did.

This isn't the first president, nor will he be the last president, who orders drone strikes, even so-called "double tap" drone strikes, on declared enemies of this Union of ours.

Sure, your sensibilities may be offended when the president is Trump instead of Obama, or Clinton, or Bush, or Biden, but you are seeking to draw a distinction without a difference when you do so. The president of these United States is the Commander in Chief of the military. Congress could, if they wished, enact legislation which precluded a president from conducting drone strikes absent their consent and override any veto of such legislation.

Jefferson conducted the Louisiana Purchase absent the approval of Congress. A president acting on their own initiative has been going on for as long as our republic has existed, Congress didn't give explicit approval for Washington to put down the Whisky Rebellion either, but he did it, even riding at the head of the militia force raised to squash the rebellion.

President Trump is demonstrating the ability, and the will, to suppress violent opposition to the laws of these United States, just as Washington did in his day. His calling in the National Guard to assist other federal agencies in the removal of illegal aliens who have committed criminal acts falls along similar lines, a demonstration of the ability, and the will, to enforce the laws of these United States.

FredHayek wrote: They just had a special election in Tennessee, the Democrats spent millions to win this Nashville seat and couldn't pull it off.

And the Republicans spent millions to win that election and were successful . . . if you count a single digit spread in a district Trump carried by 22 points a successful effort. Yes, one more seat in the House will be occupied by a Republican, but it should never have been that close in that district.

FredHayek wrote:

homeagain wrote: I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WERE HUMAN BEINGS AND THE BLATANT TRUTH IS THIS....WE R BECOMING A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY....NO LAWS,JUST AN OLIGARCH RUNNING THE COUNTRY ,AND ENRICHING HIMSELF AND FAMILY FROM TAXATION OF IT'S CITIZENS. ......WHEN U ARRIVE AT THIS POINT IN HISTORY.....A REVOLUTION IS ALMOST CERTAIN.....WAIT AND WATCH....
BECAUSE AMERICA IS IN A VERY PRECARIOUS POSITION....AND IT WILL NOT BE PRETTY.

Prediction: there will not be a revolution as long as people are being entertained and fed. This goes back to Roman times, bread and circuses.

People in America are fat and happy, and the Trump Administration is an entertaining circus.

They just had a special election in Tennessee, the Democrats spent millions to win this Nashville seat and couldn't pull it off.

POINT ONE.....SNAPS AND FOOD ASSISTANCE R [PHASING OUT AND THE R'S HAVE NOT COME UP WITH A CONCRETE PLAN FOR THIS ISSUE......FAT AND HAPPY...IN WHAT DIMENSION DO U LIVE IN?......FOOD INSECURITY IS/WILL BE A REAL PROBLEM

POINT NUMBER TWO....THE STATS OF THAT SPECIAL ELECTION SHOWED SOMETHING RATHER STRIKING....LAST TIME AROUND TRUMP HAD DOUBLE DIGIT ADVANTAGE...THIS TIME SINGLE DIGIT OUTCOME (OR CLOSE TO IT)....THE D'S CLOSED THE GAP WITH GREAT SPEED...DOES NOT BOLD WELL FOR THE R'S WHEN THE STATE WAS WON BY A LANDSLIDE, BARELY SQUEAKED BY THIS ELECTION...WHAT DOES THAT TELL U?.........MORE CITIZENS R QUESTIONING THE VALIDITY OF TRUMP'S POLICIES.

Yes, SNAPS benefits for able-bodied single individuals with no jobs has been cut back. Yes, every person currently receiving SNAPS benefits, including the 185K dead ones, are going to have to reapply to the program to root out the careless acceptance of fraud within the program. No, single mothers with dependent children aren't going to be seeing a reduction in benefits, unless, of course, you're talking about an illegal alien, who isn't qualified to receive any federal benefits, being the provider in the household. See, that's the loophole that Democrats love to overlook . . . that illegal alien head of household is getting benefit from the federal program that they are, in theory at least, precluded from benefitting from when we go nod, nod, wink, wink, the children are the only ones in the home benefitting from the program.

Food insecurity should be a problem for an able-bodied single individual with no dependents to support and no job to self-support. There should be work requirements for such individuals, whether the work be voluntary which benefits those who supply the charity, or part-time employment if that is all they are able to find. Drug addicts living on the street should have food insecurity, it motivates them to choose recovery over addiction.

PrintSmith wrote: Yes, SNAPS benefits for able-bodied single individuals with no jobs has been cut back. Yes, every person currently receiving SNAPS benefits, including the 185K dead ones, are going to have to reapply to the program to root out the careless acceptance of fraud within the program. No, single mothers with dependent children aren't going to be seeing a reduction in benefits, unless, of course, you're talking about an illegal alien, who isn't qualified to receive any federal benefits, being the provider in the household. See, that's the loophole that Democrats love to overlook . . . that illegal alien head of household is getting benefit from the federal program that they are, in theory at least, precluded from benefitting from when we go nod, nod, wink, wink, the children are the only ones in the home benefitting from the program.

Food insecurity should be a problem for an able-bodied single individual with no dependents to support and no job to self-support. There should be work requirements for such individuals, whether the work be voluntary which benefits those who supply the charity, or part-time employment if that is all they are able to find. Drug addicts living on the street should have food insecurity, it motivates them to choose recovery over addiction.

www.cato.org/commentary/about-1-5-kids-a...-failing-low-income#

ONE IN FIVE CHILDREN IS THE RATIO.....U R INCORRECT PS.

The current shutdown should serve as a catalyst for Congress to reassess the federal role in welfare. Children shouldn’t go hungry because Congress can’t govern—nor should they be dependent on the D.C. bureaucracy for their food. SNAP’s centralization and reliance on federal dollars have caused it to fail at meeting the nutritional needs of children, and now, millions of families face the prospect of sudden benefit disruptions.

Congress should stop treating Americans as collateral damage in their fight over extending Obamacare subsidies and end the shutdown immediately