web analytics

State of the Disunion

By Mahons On January 23rd, 2019

I think the Speaker is wrong for denying the President the use of the House of Representatives for the State of the Union address. She is of course within her powers in doing so but it strikes me as petty, even though his behavior has also been petty.
He may just deliver it from another location. He might choose a rally or some historic location (The Alamo would be my devilish suggestion).
Let him go in front of the cameras and lie again. Deny him the venue doesnt move the needle in any direction. His supporters will condemn her and her supporters will praise her. Meanwhile nothing of substance is getting done. The President and the Speaker were not elected to play High School, they were elected to lead. And lead now they should.

127 Responses to “State of the Disunion”

  1. Sanders has said that he will address the American people on the 29th one way or another. Madame Speaker is coming across as petty, but it takes two to tango. He should be able to give the speech.

  2. Trump has been high school ” mean girl ” his whole life.

    Of course he was elected to play hijinks. What else could he have been expected to do?

  3. Ultimately, while Pelosi is coming across as petty, it is probably right that the State of the Union not occur until after the end of the shutdown.

  4. Let him send angry tweets from the toilet.

    Isn’t that more his style anyway?

  5. Of course he could deliver it from the Kremlin.

  6. Cohen has postponed his testimony citing threats to his family from Trump??????

    Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen, is postponing his testimony to the US Congress because of threats against his family from Trump, his adviser has announced.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/michael-cohen-testimony-trump-family-threats-congress-latest-update-a8743386.html

  7. I would take that report with a huge grain of salt Paul.

  8. Once Trump and Pelosi are in the chamber on the day if the speech everyone else should leave the room lock the doors and tell the two of them they have to stay and stare each other out until they blink and come to a deal 😉

  9. Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen, is postponing his testimony to the US Congress because of threats against his family from Trump, his adviser has announced.

    The Independent huh!

    No bias there then..

    😏

  10. That story about Cohen is true. Several US outlets are carrying it:

    “President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, on Wednesday postponed his plan to testify before Congress in February because of concerns about his family’s safety, Cohen’s adviser Lanny Davis said.

    Davis cited “ongoing threats” to Cohen’s family from Trump and the president’s current personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, in the decision to delay his appearance before the House Oversight and Reform Committee, where he was expected to talk at length about the president.”

    https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/23/michael-cohen-postpones-plan-to-testify-at-congress-.html

  11. Giuliani is a pathetic figure of fun these days. From respected former mayor of NYC to Trump sock-puppet is a long way to fall.

  12. Trump’s character was molded by mob lawyer Roy Cohn.

    Take that as you will.

    Giuliani was by far the best mayor my city ever had. And now he is in the service of a bum from the sewer, who isn’t fit to shine the shoes of the old Giuliani.

    Rudy’s lost a few inches on his fastball. He’s making big errors now, ruining one of the important legacies in US politics.

  13. Absolutely mob boss tatics.

    If you can’t get to the witness, go for the family.

  14. https://www.npr.org/2018/01/07/576209428/president-trump-called-for-roy-cohn-but-roy-cohn-was-gone

  15. So Cohen was due before the House Oversight and Reform Committee, where he was expected to talk at length about the president.

    Then he bailed and they were fine about it.

    Nope, doesn’t pass the smell test.

  16. I think the Alamo would be a superb location. He could stay at the historic Menger Hotel. Maybe 50 yds from the Alamo. Good enough for several Presidents including TR. I’ve been there and thoroughly recommend it.

  17. San Antonio is a large, relaxed, swell town.

  18. These types of events, due to security, take weeks and months to work out, not days. I think the President would be best served if he gave an Oval Office address. I know he likes the friendly audiences of his rallies, but his security is paramount.

  19. Hey Charles

    I helping someone navigate an Amtrak trip from NC to NYC so I’ve been spending some time looking at Amtrak.

    Have you ever considered taking an Amtrak out of El Paso?

    Its not for everyone, but if you have the time, it can be a neat way to lay back and see the country.

  20. We have considered it Phantom. The problem with Amtrak is it takes so much money and time compared to flying.

    You can take the train west to LA or east to New Orleans. From there you can change trains and head to Chicago or New York (east) or up the California coast (west).

    My brother swears by it though. He’s visited me by train from Dallas!

  21. I assume that Amtrak pulls into Penn station?

  22. It would usually not be something that you do to save money. But the experience can be nice

    Aside from the ( uninteresting but damned useful ) Boston/NYC/Phil/Washington DC ) lines that I have taken the following

    NYC to Montreal ( beautiful, follows the Hudson a good way )
    Denver to Grand Junction CO ( also beautiful, following the Colorado River )
    Southern California for a short stretch

    But I might think that some of those long runs to California or New Orleans could be interesting. The country is so big. And taking the train one direction and flying back is another option too.

    I love trains, almost all of them, as you might have figured out.

  23. Yes, Amtrak in NYC is via Penn Station, not the much more beautiful Grand Central.

  24. I’ve taken the train from Montreal to Quebec City all along the St. Lawrence River, which is strikingly beautiful country. I’ve never taken a long haul, which for me would require a sleeper.

    Our next vacation is a cruise to Hawaii out of San Francisco in April, and may be our last big trip due to my health.

    But give me a sleeper and a dining car, and you might have a great idea for a great vacation!

  25. That cruise sounds great.

    Despite its problems, SF is wonderful.

    And Hawaii aint half bad.

  26. Cheers Phantom!

  27. Good riddance to the SOTU. It’s a mind numbing, rhetorical bore. The damn thing should be cancelled forever.

    Trump built his own trap on this shutdown, Pelosi just locked the door behind him.

    I expect he caves soon, his poll numbers are plummeting.

  28. It’s a mind numbing, rhetorical bore

    Yes, its a pack of imbeciles doing fake cheers along partisan lines.

    Send every one of them to Leavenworth for 20 years, and tell them to take the fake president with them

  29. Yes!!

  30. Pelosi smacked down Trump on the speech. She knows he lives on attention. She is not letting him have it. It may help him cave sooner on the shutdown. All his numbers are in deep trouble territory.

    As to Cohen reneging, from the outside it is difficult to judge the nature and severity of the threats. It is likely Chairman Cummings knows much about the threats, and he can subpoena Cohen if not satisfied. Cohen knows threats well having delivered at least a few, so I feel no mercy for him.

    Guiliani is a pathetic joke. It is notable he has nobody, or will not listen to anybody, to tell him to stay off TV. His personal life is probably as messed up as his professional life. Him and Trump are a pair of liars who will come to no good.

  31. I read that Trump has backed down and will not give the SOTU address while the shutdown continues. He’s on the ropes, Pelosi is hovering over him waiting to land the knockout blow . Ding Ding 😉

  32. A wit wrote Trump should offer Pelosi $130k to be silent. He’s done it before.

    Yes, according to his tweet he will postpone the his speech.

  33. You know Bill Clinton was a conman and a philanderer and Obama was a marxist and if you criticized either of these two you were attacked from a million different angles. For 8yrs if you said anything against Obama you were a racist no matter what and the same people who attacked genuine criticism of them are the ones who only spew bile and the most horrible slanders against Trump now….. you people need a reality check.

    As for Nancy & Donald’s little dance of tit for tat it is not childish it’s dangerous. Due to the way the pay system works the last pay the first one they missed wasn’t a missed paycheck it was a 3/4 paycheck they were paid for 63hrs of work because the government pay is two weeks behind the same as a lot of corporations. The check they would get tomorrow will be the first full check held in escrow.

    U.S. Constitution – Article 2 Section 3
    Article 2 – The Executive Branch
    Section 3 – State of the Union, Convening Congress
    <>

    He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

    In 1915 Woodrow KKK Wilson gave the first State of the Union in Person since the it has been delivered 83 times in person in the format that we are used to today.

    Read the piece of the Constitution that dictates that it be done above. It is the President that says when and where it takes place. Not the Speaker of the House. What the Speaker is saying is she will not allow the House to participate. That is how the dispute should be framed to put it properly.

    Today they will vote on two bills one with a wall one without, neither will pass they need 60 votes in the Senate and neither bill will make that number.

    The US budget is 4.5 Trillion Dollars the cost of the Wall 5 Billion that’s 1% of the budget to help stem the flow of Illegals and Drugs coming across our southern border and the Democrat Party does not want that Wall built. They look at every illegal as a democrat welfare vote a vote for Socialism which is the direction the Democrat Party wants to take the country in. They don’t care about the 60,000 drug deaths a year or the victims of MS-13 or any of the victims of the animals that come here to rob, rape, and pillage with those that come here looking for work. In their view and all of your views that support the Democrat position those killed maimed mugged and raped are a fair price for the 20 million welfare recipients and votes to push the country towards socialism.

    The President last night conceded to the speaker, there will be no state of the Union.

    I personally hope this sham lasts a year.

  34. //I read that Trump has backed down and will not give the SOTU address//

    I heard that he’s planning instead to give Congress a STFU address,

  35. in the meantime nuclear war being threatened over Venezuela

    Russia warns U.S. against military intervention in Venezuela
    “Venezuela is friendly to us and is our strategic partner,” Vladimir Putin’s deputy foreign minister said. “We have supported them and will support them.”

    MOSCOW — Russia warned the U.S. on Thursday not to intervene militarily in Venezuela, saying such a move would trigger a catastrophe.

  36. aahh the brilliance……

    Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) said “there are two co-equal branches of government” during an appearance on CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360” Tuesday.

    Warren, who is running to be the Democratic nominee for president, neglected to mention the judicial branch while responding to a question from host Anderson Cooper. She also referred to the executive and legislative branches as “the president” and “the Congress.”

    There are 3 equal branches of government: executive, legislative, judicial

  37. Patrick, some of the comments above are shameful about the SOTU. It’s constitutionally mandated. What if the Republicans had done this to Obama! There would have been hell to pay.

  38. Charles – the speech itself is not mandated. It became a tradition about 100 years ago.

  39. Mahons, you’re right, it’s not mandated on Jan. 29, but says “from time to time.” I think Pelosi is over playing her hand here. I think this only strengthens support for the President. Time will tell.

  40. The state of the Union is mandated, the clause in Constitution is right above for you to read. Woodrow Wilson gave the first in person one not via letter in 1915.

  41. Aahh the brilliance……

    I think that WFB quote is somewhat misleading Pat. Warren was obviously asked the question in the context of the shutdown :

    Do you ever think, look, the realistic endgame is that Republicans get two-thirds of what they want and Democrats have to settle for the shorter straw? Is that how the balance of power works?

    The balance of power is quite a different concept from the doctrine of seperation of powers.

  42. lol

    a song for Nancy

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWSoYCetG6A

    Allan will love it…..

  43. //The state of the Union is mandated, the clause in Constitution is right above for you to read. Woodrow Wilson gave the first in person one not via letter in 1915.//

    The point was that it isn’t mandated for a certain place or date. Or method of the address: it could also be presented in writing, or by Tweet.

    She doesn’t have to let him deliver it in person before Congress.

    This would be a better song

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlrGyjdEjlE

  44. Noel the way the Constitution reads he could ORDER both Houses to convene…….

  45. The constitution says that the Senate is supposed to consider supreme court nominees, but the Trumper’s didn’t care about that too much now did they

    They like the constitution when it suits them

  46. Phantom, fair point!

  47. Phantom, on January 24th, 2019 at 2:31 PM Said:
    The constitution says that the Senate is supposed to consider supreme court nominees, but the Trumper’s didn’t care about that too much now did they

    Provide an example please….. because that statement makes no sense.

  48. I don’t remember any Supreme Court appointees without Senate Hearings,,,,,,, can you name one?

  49. come on throw it out there….. lets talk about the Biden Rule……

  50. Yes. I can’t remember his name. One of Obama’s picks was held up for a year until Obama left.

  51. At least Charles understands the English language And the constitution

  52. Trump already has his short list to replace RBG.

  53. charlesintexas, on January 24th, 2019 at 2:42 PM Said:
    Yes. I can’t remember his name. One of Obama’s picks was held up for a year until Obama left.

    Following the Biden Rule…..

  54. and if RBG doesn’t die this year…. Trump won’t get to replace her in his 4th year, but he will in his 5th.

  55. Merrick Garland, that’s it! He was nominated by Obama to replace Scalia. McConnell wouldn’t let his name come to the floor. Now I don’t know about the Biden rule, but the constitution does say “advise and consent.”

  56. How many more years has the Trump Presidency got to run?

    I only ask, because liberal progressives mental breakdowns are so entertaining, so much fun.

    It seems a crying shame for it all to come to an end.

  57. Harri, hopefully 2024! 🙂

  58. Charles.

    Oh Dear Lord.

    Please let it be..

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wDYNVH0U3cs

  59. The Biden Rule is a principle elucidated by United States Senator Charles Grassley in February 2016 with regard to vacancies in the United States Supreme Court: that during a presidential election year, such vacancies should not be filled.

  60. in Context: The ‘Biden Rule’ on Supreme Court nominations in an election year. Yes, as in Vice President Joe Biden. McConnell is using Biden’s own words from 1992, when George H.W. Bush was president and Biden was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, to explain why he intends to block President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court pick in an election year.

  61. and like I said if RBG doesn’t die this year and makes it to next year a Presidential election year Trump shouldn’t get to replace her.

  62. and like I said if RBG doesn’t die this year and makes it to next year a Presidential election year Trump shouldn’t get to replace her.

    You are being consistent with this statement, Patrick. I just wonder if RBG dies next year in an election year if the Senate Republicans would be as intellectually honest as you! My feeling is that the prize of a SCOTUS nomination would throw the Biden Rule under the bus.

    Besides, I don’t think a “Biden Rule” trumps the constitutionally mandated “advise and consent.”

  63. Patrick,

    “Read the piece of the Constitution that dictates that it be done above. It is the President that says when and where it takes place. Not the Speaker of the House. What the Speaker is saying is she will not allow the House to participate. That is how the dispute should be framed to put it properly.”

    “He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient”

    He can do so. There is literally nothing stopping him from giving information to Congress about the current state of the Union. However if he wants to address a joint session of the United States Congress then he needs to permission of the United States Congress. Which, de facto, means he needs the permission of the Speaker of the House.

    “Noel the way the Constitution reads he could ORDER both Houses to convene…….”

    Except he can’t. The President has no control over the Congress. The whole separation of powers thing you’ve been banging on about. This is kind of a big part of that.

    “lets talk about the Biden Rule……”

    Let’s talk about the Biden Rule. Which I add was never put into force, never adopted by the rules of the Senate, and the actual wording was:

    “Should a justice resign this summer and the president move to name a successor, actions that will occur just days before the Democratic Presidential Convention and weeks before the Republican Convention meets, a process that is already in doubt in the minds of many will become distrusted by all. Senate consideration of a nominee under these circumstances is not fair to the president, to the nominee, or to the Senate itself.”

    The summer. Antonin Scalia died in February. Merrick Garland was nominated in March. The Biden rule didn’t kick until a few weeks before the nominating conventions. So the Biden Rule (that doesn’t actually exist – no such rule was ever enacted by the Senate) would only apply from a few weeks before the 2016 RNC. So the Senate, if following the Biden Rule (which doesn’t exist), would have confirmed Garland up to about the start of July.

    They didn’t because they are partisan hacks.

  64. “Besides, I don’t think a “Biden Rule” trumps the constitutionally mandated “advise and consent.””

    It doesn’t. The constitution does not mandate that the Senate consents. Such a requirement would be meaningless. The President can only appoint “with and by the Advice and Consent of the Senate”. The Senate is well within their constitutional role to refuse to consent to an appointment.

    It is why the Senate, while acting dishonestly, were not acting unconstitutionally with their failure to confirm Garland. It also means that any future Democratic Senate would not be acting unconstitutionally by refusing to confirm any and all Republican nominees.

  65. Seamus

    Right now the Senate is considering legislation that would open the government. But I believe the Constitution says that all spending bills must originate in the House.

    Thoughts?

    Have you ever studied the concept of the “legislative veto?”

  66. My understanding is that appropriations bills start in the House but a continuing resolution is not an appropriations bill per se but is technically a joint resolution. As such it can likely originate in either chamber.

    “Have you ever studied the concept of the “legislative veto?””

    In the context of the President’s veto?

  67. Except he can’t. The President has no control over the Congress. The whole separation of powers thing you’ve been banging on about. This is kind of a big part of that.

    Ah but he can….

    he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them,

    That means he can order them to convene….. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say the Speaker can REFUSE…. the Invitation for the President to enter either House or Senate Chambers is a TRADITION, not written anywhere. But a TRADITION that Trump is respecting nonetheless.

  68. “he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them,”

    Which means he can force them to end a recess. He can’t force them to do anything else.

  69. Right now the Senate is considering legislation that would open the government. But I believe the Constitution says that all spending bills must originate in the House.

    Unless it’s Obamacare which Originated in the Senate……

  70. “Unless it’s Obamacare which Originated in the Senate……”

    It didn’t. It was introduced in the House in September 2009, and introduced in the Senate in December 2009.

  71. Seamus,

    On research I’ve found that the concept of the legislative veto was found unconstitutional in 1980. It was a practice whereby Congress could nullify an Executive action.

  72. Sounds like Clinton’s line item veto. Something that is likely a sensible idea but does violate the constitution.

  73. But it seems to me that the legislature is practicing a covert if not overt veto over the Executive. We’re in a tough spot constitutionally. The House won’t pass want the President wants, and the President won’t sign what the House passes!

  74. The Biden Rule is a joke…. it’s an argument that the Dems started in 92 and backfired on them in Obama’s last year.

    The majority of how things work in both the House and the Senate are controlled by the rules of the House and Senate…. not the Constitution. Those rules are written by the body and modified by whoever controls the body. That’s where you hear about things like the Nuclear Option…. very few things are set in the Constitution like how often a majority of two thirds is needed. All the rest are determined by the RULES….

    The Turtle (mitch mcconnell) could have forced the building of the wall last year but refused to use the nuclear option (simple majority) but he refused. So here we are.

  75. “It was a practice whereby Congress could nullify an Executive action.”

    Had a look. It is still permissible (or at least hasn’t been directly found to be unconstitutional). But it requires consent from both chambers of Congress to back it. Previous to the Supreme Court case, INS v. Chadha, either Chamber could veto the actions.

    The court found against it largely because it was inconsistent with bicameralism.

    So it still does apply, it just requires both the House and Senate to agree. It largely deals with secondary legislation – regulations for example passed by executive agencies. A joint resolution of Congress can strike out the rules passed by any executive agency.

    “But it seems to me that the legislature is practicing a covert if not overt veto over the Executive.”

    You could argue vice versa as well. And its due to the nature of the separation of powers (technically the separation of personnel but that is largely a semantic point). In the absence of agreement nothing happens. One branch of government can’t force another branch of government to do what it wants. It is veto, just not the veto as described in the Constitution.

  76. Therefore, Obamacare is revenue-raising tax legislation, originated in the Senate in violation of the Constitution. This has the Obama administration and its Justice Department scrambling. House conservatives, led by Representative Trent Franks (R., Ariz.), are pushing an Origination Clause challenge in the federal courts.#page#

    Obamacare’s Unconstitutional Origins | National Review
    http://www.nationalreview.com/2013/10/obamacares-unconstitutional-origins-andrew-c-mccarthy/

  77. “The majority of how things work in both the House and the Senate are controlled by the rules of the House and Senate”

    True. And the Biden rule is not in the rules of the Senate.

    So it isn’t a Biden rule. It is a McConnell dodge.

  78. Except he is wrong. The legislative record is clear. Obamacare, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, originated as HR 3590, introduced in the House by Charles Rangel. HR 3590 was a modification to the Internal Revenue Code. It was then gutted by the Senate and replaced with Obamacare.

    So officially, by the legislative record, Obamacare was introduced as HR 3590. In the House.

    It was an artful dodge but a dodge nonetheless.

  79. Seamus I can sit and make the argument of why you are wrong but the argument is made much better and explained more clear than I can in the following article…..

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2013/10/obamacares-unconstitutional-origins-andrew-c-mccarthy/

    Please read it….

    Here is also the Timeline of the components of HR 3590 please take note where the component parts started on the Tax Bill known as the Affordable Care Act……

    https://www.c-span.org/congress/bills/bill/?111/hr3590

    The Law was a complete bastardization of american law, it only survived because John Roberts rewrote it from the bench…..

  80. You have already linked to that before. It is nonsense. The official bill that makes the bulk of the Affordable Care Act was HR 3590. Yes the substantive originated in the Senate. But procedurally started in the House.

    Which is why the Bill was HR 3590. That fact alone, regardless of where the actual substantive took place, is enough to satisfy the Origination Clause.

  81. This is inside baseball, as communicated in ancient Hebrew.

  82. The difference between Obama and the turnip? Orange is NOT the new black
    Obama is class
    Turnip is ass

  83. you want to know why Charles supports a wal? This is on the other side of his…..

    https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2019/01/23/Across-Mexico-border-from-safe-El-Paso-violence-surges-in-Jurez/2961548187558/

  84. Phantom, on January 24th, 2019 at 6:04 PM Said:
    This is inside baseball, as communicated in ancient Hebrew.

    Truer words were never spoke

  85. Seamus read the c-span timeline

  86. It’s irrelevant anyway rightnow none of the ACA is enforceable since the mandates been removed (the tax) all anyone has to do is challenge it, but since it effectively destroyed the healthcare industry as a functioning insurance industry and no one knows how to fix it everyone is all suddenly quit about it.

  87. “Seamus read the c-span timeline”

    I did. It is not relevant. The bill is officially HR 3590. HR 3590 originated in the House. Which means, officially, the bill originated in the House. Which means, officially, Obamacare originated in the House.

  88. Good link Patrick.

  89. ahhh this should make the anti-israel crowd happy….. BiBi has a real challenger for control and could lose to Benny Gantz…. but they may not like his campaign adds that stress the things he’s running on…..

    Gantz, considered one of the only real challengers to incumbent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel’s upcoming national elections, unveiled his party’s election campaign slogan last week: “Israel Before Everything”.In subsequent promotional materials released across the party’s official social media networks, Gantz appears to position himself and the faction as centrist with a tough-on-terror take on security issues and an openness to pursuing peace.In one video, the party boasts that the IDF destroyed more than 6,000 Hamas targets under Gantz’s command during the 2014 war with Gaza sending parts of the Palestinian enclave “back to the Stone Age”.

  90. The Israeli government consists of six parties at the moment. As things stand, in current polling, the government will lose its majority in the Knesset. Meaning that it will have to add a seventh party just to keep its head above water. And this is all before the decision in February/March about whether or not to Netanyahu will be charged. If he is it is hard to envisage a situation where he can stay as Prime Minister.

    Even without it his coalition partners (who all hate him) may try to rally around Benny Gantz and force Likud to either ditch Bibi or ditch government.

  91. I hate to say it, but I think Gantz has a real shot at it, and Likud will not ditch government while more and more missiles are piled into Syria by Iran.

  92. Got a Question for Mahons

    Can you explain to me why it’s Immoral to build a wall but it’s not Immoral to Light NYC up in Pink tonight celebrate Abortion?

    How does that square with you?

    I’ll bet anyone 10,000 that he doesn’t even answer

  93. I had the same thought Patrick. What happens to the Democrats saying that abortion should be legal, safe, and RARE.

    That’s not something to celebrate. Shame on New York City and One World Trade Center!

  94. What is particularly sickening is the almost whitewashing of history in this particular move. Four buildings were lit up to celebrate the passing of the new abortion legislation. Obviously the decision to light a building, built almost as a memorial to the innocent lives taken on 9/11, to celebrate the taking of innocent lives is disgusting.

    But the other three buildings were also questionable as well. Firstly the Alfred E. Smith Building, named after the great New York Governor, and one time presidential candidate, Al Smith, is particularly galling. Al Smith would certainly not have approved of abortion. The Governor Mario Cuomo bridge is also a whitewashing. Mario Cuomo, while political pro-choice, abhorred abortion. So to have a bridge named in his honour lit up to celebrate abortion is pretty sickening. I also imagine, as a 19th century Catholic that Tadeusz Kościuszko would likely not have been in favour of abortion.

  95. sad

  96. Patrick – I don’t have as much free time as you. However I find the new law immoral and Cuomo’so celebration of it repulsive. It flies in the face of past justifications for abortion and in my opinion is pure infanticide.

  97. be grateful you don’t have the time like I do Mahons…. I wish my situation on no one.

    but thank you for answering…. and showing you still have a soul, but those are the things your Party celebrates.

  98. Lucky for me I don’t feel the need to support everything some Democrat politician champions.

  99. in for a penny in for a pound

  100. Says the man who disavowed his Party’s nominee in past elections.

  101. and resigned from the party…….

  102. Oh please. Not your alleged history again. Only a zombie fully supports everything their party supports.

  103. so now you call me a Liar again.

    Unlike you Mahons some of us have Principals.

    Tried asking a question I got an answer along with an insult and then when I call out your hypocrisy you call me a Liar.

    No you’re typical Democrat.

  104. I didn’t call you a liar for this, I tire of threads that lead to your recounting your life history again. Anyway I’ll put you down for agreeing 100% with the Republican Party on every issue. Such as your being pro choice…

  105. Mahons I asked you a question, I did get an answer but I also got.

    Patrick – I don’t have as much free time as you.
    Oh please. Not your alleged history again.

    an insult and an accusation that I’m a Liar.

    You are the one choosing to be uncivil.

  106. I bet anyone 10,000 he doesn’t answer. I suppose that is civil for you.

  107. it didn’t attack you it stated the observation that you usually don’t answer me and was a goad to try and get one from you….

    It was not insulting, disparaging, or a personnel attack in any manner.

    both of yours are, but that’s ok with you.

    Why is that?

  108. I’ll bet anyone 10,000 he doesn’t answer that one……

  109. On a side note……. Over the past few Months Mahons you’ve picked up your posting. You’ve written some very good posts.

    I’ve complimented you on most of them, I have not personally insulted you on any of them. I try to be nice with you because I falsely you accused you in an email exchange of being involved in something that you were not involved in.

    For that I have tried to make amends, by being civil.

    I write this to you publicly because you asked that I lose your email and I have. You can leave this comment up or delete it. It’s your thread. I will continue to compliment your posts when they are good, I will continue to NOT insult you personally when disagreeing with you.

    It’s a shame you can’t do the same.

  110. Trump caved under pressure from Pelosi. It is just the first act of his caving. It is usually a shame to see a grown man cry. But in this case, keep the heat up Nancy and make him cry a river that carries him out of the White House.

  111. Meanwhile, Mueller continues to DRAIN THE SWAMP

    Trump’s long-time buddy Roger Stone has now been arrested.

  112. Yes, Roger Stone is a long time friend and confidante of both Donald Trump and of Alex Jones.

    The same Alex Jones that many Trumpers are embarrassed by, the guy who they say has not been a big influence on the president.

    Roger Stone has hosted radio and maybe TV shows on Infowars. I’ve heard him many times.

    A colorful, entertaining, complete rogue, who has a tattoo of Richard Nixon on his back, yes he does.

  113. Flash: Trump to open government for 3 weeks while negotiation on wall take place!

  114. SOTU could take place Tuesday as planned.

  115. He must have gotten everything he wanted…

  116. I so completely detest the SOTU.

    The fake cheering, the planted guests and shoutouts, all that god damned bullshit.

    It has been memorable at times, in crisis situations, but for the most part it is theater for the dim bulbs.

  117. He was the statesman that put country first, as opposed to Pelosi, that would let workers starve. They have 3 weeks to hammer out a wall deal, or it could shut down again.

  118. I don’t oppose the wall, but the shutdown is all on Trump. He said so himself before it even happened.

    Congress is under no moral or legal obligation to fund something that they don’t agree with.

  119. And if a next one come it will be all on Pelosi. So far 13 democrats, mostly for red districts, have defected. But placing your trusts in a Democrat Leaders word and good faith is foolhardy. Time will tell.

  120. Charles

    Does Congress have an obligation to provide funding for things that the Congress doesn’t agree with?

  121. no. However saying that I would like to hear from Congress, not just the Speaker.

  122. Charles – Trump didn’t open the government. He has backed down in a forced compromise.

  123. Fair enough.

    I’d like to hear from everyone, and not have undue power employed by Pelosi …or McConnell….

  124. It’s not that they even disagree with the wall. In the past, under Bush and Obama, they’ve put up just under 800 miles of fencing. Why not now, when this President is willing to look at the DACA and TPS folks?

    The truth of the matter is that Pelosi and Schumer want to make Trump look bad for 2020. That’s all this is about.

    I think the next 3 weeks are going to be very productive. If not, there’s alway exectutive action left.

  125. Charles

    “He was the statesman that put country first.” Your credulity is boundless!

  126. no he just isn’t viewing the issue through hate as many of you are.

    You’ve all been hoodwinked.

  127. Thank you Patrick. That’s it. I try to be objective.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.