I usually get carded, especially at the supermarket since I use the self checkout and the person has to come over and approve before I can continue. However, I was not carded the last two times I went to the liquor store.

My wife gets carded still, but I don't, unless they are just being nice. I am 53 and she is 48 and looks much younger, so I expect it. But damn, I am sick of always being that dirty old man with a young chippy, while she gets to smile and play the "Black don't crack" line.

It's your party that threw a tantrum at the idea of a national ID card.

so, I see Trump's staff are still using non-government e-mails.

Can tarcone, mmbf, or Jon let us know why its ok for the gander? or are ganders the lady gooses?

I get carded at the grocery store to buy beer or wine, and I think at some chain restaurants that require carding everyone, but usually I don't have to show ID to get booze - even at liquor stores.

Or

Response: " I am discussing why getting an ID isnt a big deal and you are assuming that the poor dont have a clue why you would need ID."

My Mom was 82 when she died. Still had her license. And she grew up in a state where you didnt need a drivers license. But she knew you needed ID. Just because it was a good idea and a safety issue.

I cant see why a person would walk around with out ID. what if you die? Or get hurt and are unresponsive?
Having ID in todays society is a must have.

You have got to be shitting me...

Trump's most senior staff use a private email server

But... emails!

Wait, am I doing that right?

Yes, because you still need local officials to go along with it to produce evidence, as Pat McCrory found out when he tried pulling similar shenanigans in the NC governor's race and found that the Republican dominated, politically-appointed local voting officials were more interested in doing their job competently than partisan shenanigans. Just as their more egregious voting restriction overreaches were slapped down by the courts. There probably are some corrupt local officials, but things are borderline impossible to invent at that level.

Now, as Goodell showed with Deflategate, Trump can just lie about what was found even when the actual report disproves his statements, and people will be more than happy to go along with it as long as it fits their preferred narrative. But I don't think actual commission's will be inventing things in concert with local election officials.
I think the hands issue proved it.
I've assumed since I started paying in to SS 15 years ago that I would definitely not receive all the promised benefits. I've always thought it was more likely they'd increase means testing and retirement age instead of completely throwing the program out, but if you're under 45 and you've been planning to retire comfortably on SS alone you're an idiot.
I feel bad for individuals caught up in it, but many state and local governments have been drastically over promising for decades and it makes the federal numbers look positively rosy in comparison. Massachusetts was giving 80% of the top 3 years income after as little as 20 years in certain fields (the MBTA was the most notorious offender). Detroit's the most prominent municipality to file for bankruptcy, but it's not just declining rust belt areas - there are a plethora of California jurisdictions that had to file, even Orange County. Your mother sounds like someone the system should be there for, but with advances in life expectancy & quality of life there is way too high a ratio of retirees to workers to sustain the high benefits (and way too many able bodied workers retiring when they could still contribute, and even being forced into early retirement at various times to solve short term budget problems.)
I don't want to do it for voting ID reasons, but I think there's a lot of sense in standardizing ID's. It's insane that my flimsy SS card with no picture is considered better proof in some instances than a driver's license. (Luckily I have a passport to skip all the SS card/birth certificate BS.) Maybe you could even tie it in with census's - you could apply anytime, but also when they do their census every 10 years they proactively registered people as well. That eliminates the "how could a bed ridden person with 3 jobs and no transportation ever get one" argument (btw, I don't think major cities are the place it's hard to get an ID, it's poor rural areas.)

We're trending towards a national ID card anyways, why not just go for it. If you want to opt out for separatist/anarchist reasons, go for it, but even as a fairly libertarian person (sorry for mentioning it Larry!) I have no problem saying that person shouldn't have a say in how our government is run.
This doesn't sound right at all, but a perusal of the DHS website says you can verify your identity other ways? Have you actually done this or is it just theoretical (makes sense to have some option for a traveler who loses their ID)? But also with the emphasis on REAL ID being implemented soon I can't imagine it's an easy process.
Massachusetts was much more strict than North Carolina has been, but even there different businesses had different standards, from "card under 30" to "just card everyone to prevent putting this 18 year old clerk from putting our company at liability". Hippie central Northampton also passed a town ordinance requiring stores to ID on EVERY tobacco purchase. I worked at a liquor store and we'd be able to sell alcohol elderly people but had to deny them tobacco. It was odd. (They also banned plastic bags. And the town of Concord banned the sale of bottled water - except on Patriots Day. Liberal do gooders come up with some fun regulations.)
I'm not sure one is needed, but it sure seems hard to be a productive member of society without one. I suppose elderly retiree is a good example, but they're presumably still tied in to the Social Security system. I guess you could do so living in a really rural area (or being Amish) and either working on a farm or doing web based contracting.

Are people not allowed to use private email servers?

I go running, biking, kayaking a lot and find it annoying to even have keys in my pocket or on my waistband. Is that a good enough reason, or should I be getting my license/health card wet and risk losing it all the time?

I dunno, I was in a car accident recently and left unresponsive. They figured out who I was.

In a probably futile attempt to apply reason...

I expect they're using them exactly as the Bush admin folks did, as a way to do business with no traces left behind.

dola

The thing missing in the ID discussion is the fact that there isn't a good faith intention to make sure IDs are accessible for everyone. The whole point is to restrict voting. It's clear in the lack of evidence. It's clear in the added regulations written into these bills. It's clear in the statements made by supporters/authors of these bills.

That's what I got out of it.

You're not required to cancel all of your existing email accounts when you start working for the government.

I imagine most significant republicans have RNC email accounts, just like most significant Democrats, including those in the Obama administration, have DNC email accounts. But you're not supposed to conduct official government business through those accounts, or through private servers. The mere fact that they exist doesn't mean much.

I do the same but keep keys/ID/credit cards in the pocket of my water bottle.

I believe we went through an election where a bunch of people said no you aren't.

No, we went through an election where a bunch of people said you can't conduct federal government business on one.

Getting a photo ID so you can vote is easy. Unless you’re poor, black, Latino or elderly. - The Washington Post













There are a few anecdotes in that article about specific older folks who have expired forms of ID that aren't accepted and were unable to get a voter ID without legal help and paying fees of $250+ due to birth certificate issues, but studies and appeals court findings hopefully carry more weight than any anecdote so I quoted those instead.

Yeah that's not true. There is enough legit stuff to be upset about without going after shitty headlines like this one if there isn't actually a legit legal issue here.

Never said they were doing anything wrong. But the hypocrisy is rich. And especially after the Administration has asserted that there isn't going to be any further investigations into Clinton, it seems obvious that the entire thing was a smokescreen.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

There was an attempt at making IDs for everyone and Republicans fought against it.

Ya, a lot of European countries have voter ID laws, but usually those are in countries were IDs are automatically issued to everyone. I get how that idea might have been scary a while ago, but in 2017, maybe it's time to just submit to technology and to the concept that we're all connected and a part of this country. Compulsory state and/or federal ID cards would probably make a lot of government functions and services a lot more efficient and inexpensive to run.

I would definitely support a universal ID paid for by the government which would then have to be used to vote. It can be issued to everyone at 16 then renewed at 18 and every 5-10 years after? With digital pictures that maybe can be taken in multiple government offices for no charge, you wouldn't have to worry about going to an office that may be 50 miles away at renewal as well.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

The problem with a national ID for voting is that voting and elections are run at the state level. The only thing the feds really have involved is the Constitution selecting the date.

So what minority groups are left for him to go after in the next few hours? He's gone after hispanics, he's gone after Muslims, he's gone after blacks. Has he said anything about the LGBTs or disabled lately.

So he wants this probed because of something Bernhard Langer said... of course a German spurs the downfall of our society.

Clinton illegally used a private server for government business. Nothing in the article above suggests that the same is happening. The hypocrisy on this issue is your own invention.

Trump consistently attacked Clinton for her private email server simply because there might be something salacious. Remember his constant 'what happened to the 30,000 email' attacks? And conflating the DNC leaks of Podesta's (not a governmental employee) emails with Clinton's?

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Are you being obtuse on purpose?

Hahahahahaha. :)

All voter ID laws allow for the use of a military ID as a form of identification. Something that is given out on the federal level. I have not seen a single elected official complain about this so I don't think that excuse will work.

I gotta give GreenPeace an "A" for effort

Spoiled for size


But I don't know what this accomplishes.

The freaking FBI director said Clinton definitely behaved in an illegal manner and a regular citizen would be in jail for her actions.

Since 22 million emails were deleted, I guess we'll never know.

"Reimbursed in some form from whatever deal we make."

So whatever comes out of the NAFTA renegotiation will be called the payment for the wall?

Except he never said that or anything close to that (hint: even 'extremely careless' doesn't mean illegal).

No he did not.

That's right, it was disciplinary sanction. It was also negligence due to lack of sophistication. None of that was even hinted at with the article cited above.

Not did his statement less than two weeks before the election have any impact on voters.

I actually think he's mentally ill. Not even joking. He's talking about his appearance at the CIA.

Most of the time with Trump I think that he's clearly unhinged, and that the US have lost all moral high ground to laugh at other countries with crazy leaders. Then I think in fact these other countries must be laughing even harder as the US actually voted for their crazy leader!

And yet he does say some things that I agree with, or are exagerrated things that I agree with, and I start to doubt myself...

Then you see something like the above, if that's even real, and you wonder if he's just shit-storming for the hell of it...

Someone needs to take Trumps pen away from him for awhile so he can have some time to think of the consequences of his actions thus far.

Too much too fast IMO.

That could be a Trump endgame. Do everything via executive order, and then "see? I told you I could do it, it was easy" then resign and blame everything running aground on congress and the courts ruining his perfect plans.

Is that Peyton's first Superbowl win or his second Superbowl win?

Same here. Like sometimes he articulates on an issue like the H1B visas and you're like maybe he's got good ideas and is just an over-the-top personality.

But read the transcript of the interview. He spends like 5 minutes talking about some ovation he got at the CIA. He insinuates that Obama won in 2008 because the election was rigged. Goes on and on about the inauguration attendance. Talks about committing war crimes and breaking international law. Says we should steal resources from sovereign allies. I honestly think he is mentally ill.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trans...ry?id=45047602

This is what I don't get. He graduated from Wharton at Penn, top of his class, right? Is that what a Penn education gets you?

His third. #alternativefacts (is that still a thing?)

I am glad he's made it illegal to do honor killings in the US, that was such a scourge before. I hope he goes after unicorn sex next.

Not really.

Yes, Donald Trump really went to an Ivy League school - The Washington Post

When I go running, I wear an ID bracelet with contact info on it.

I just took a picture of my drivers' license and have that on my phone. Even though I always have a good tan, I assume cops won't stop me.

So this could drag on for another week if someone tells him that Brady got bigger standing ovations than Peyton, right?

This is from a public library a couple of towns over. :D

Well, to borrow from Ben, I don't think he's thought it out in this 3D chess sort of way.

I think that he sincerely and honestly thinks that that's how the Presidency works. You are the boss. You say things, and people do them. And if they don't, you fire them and get new people. That's how his life has worked ever since he started owning his own companies.

That's how he campaigned. I will fix it. I will make it better. Trust me. He didn't say things like "I will work with Congress and the existing administrative state to solve these problems."

dola:

so the endgame might be as you say. But that is not the plan at this point.

He will claim that the Brady ovations were really for him, because everyone knows Brady is his friend.

I give it about 45 minutes until all he pulls all federal funds from public libraries.

That would have been rather foolish on the campaign trail since neither of those things work particularly well very often. Although, technically, the use of executive orders IS part of "the existing administrative state".

Here's the thing: he's already gone against all convention as a candidate, and that turned out rather well. I'm very fine with an unconventional approach to his Presidency.

I agree with this. For the half of the country that supported him, his approach makes sense and is expected. He would lose some of that base support if he suddenly started acting like the negotiator-in-chief.

I doubt that fazes the Administration at all. If anything, that's welcome news. They don't have to bother to fire most of these people. They have no blood on their hands and now put people in their place that they feel are more appropriate for the position.

While the prevailing headline is "resigns", this from _CNN_ national security guy Jim Sciutto


Assuming those are the same people (as opposed to being four more people) interesting to see the different slant from within the same new organization

There you go. Actually, that makes far more sense. Trump is never one to avoid blood on his hands. Makes far more sense that he was going to have them fired and they said, "Fired? Nope, I resign!"

Keep fucking that chicken fellas.

A very Trump-esque posting tactic. Well done.

The America First theme is something I could get behind, if American, but I did love the phrase 'clean, beautiful coal'!

I just dont see how anyone who watched the interview or read the transcript doesnt go "holy shit I cant believe we elected that guy". And then worse - defends the stuff he vomits. Liberals, conservatives, populists, rednecks, hippies, immigrants, Missourians - anyone

Looking at the executive orders thus far, I don't really much care if he gives his interviews in Klingon.

He has exceeded my (admittedly limited) expectations thus far.

Quite the contrary. I haven't defended much of what he SAID at all. I judge a president on his actions. Thus far, I've found little to complain about. He's repealed Obamacare, he's called out big business on overseas trading, he's cleaning house in federal department positions, and he's building a wall on the southern border along with additional enforcement resources (Mexico isn't paying for it, but anyone who thought that they would is a true idiot). I also like some of the other things he's proposing regarding the economy.

He doesn't appeal to me at all as a person, but I really don't care. I didn't vote for him anyway. I just want him to make good decisions that benefit our country. He's generally done that so far IMO.

He's done nothing with Obama care yet. He signed an empty executive order. He doesn't have the power to repeal Obamacare. I'm not denying that Republicans are going to chip away, but he can't just sign an executive order and make it happen. BTW, I would have loved to be in the meeting when that was explained to him.



I honestly think a lot of presidents could come up with good economic policy and ideas if they could completely ignore the budget and future debt.

Speaking of being in meetings with him...

https://imgur.com/a/TSrPJ

@WhitehouseLeaks - Twitter Search

(I do not know if that is the same person as the first iteration, or if any of this is for real. But it's good reading, and is certainly plausible.)

The federal hiring freeze also has a direct impact on me. My wife is on orders to PCS to another duty station here in the US and until the freeze is lifted I can't transfer.

20% tax on Mexican imports... I guess we can say goodbye to tableside guac.

So Sorry. It's always normal folks who get caught in the cross-fire in these stupid symbolic stunts.

We're splitting hairs here. Obamacare is gone once they put together a replacement plan. If you're disputing that, you're delusional.

It's not splitting hairs when we're talking about the difference between something being done and something being several months if not a couple years away from really happening.

Trump doesn't have the power to repeal Obamacare. You said he repealed it.

not sure if anyone has seen this yet

And the "once they put together a replacement," could be a while given the lack of one for over six years.

To be fair, Congress is always the kids in class who does his homework when he gets dropped off for school in the morning.

About the State Department firings/resignations, isn't that normal when a new President comes into office, especially from the other party? So, that's basically much ado about nothing?

I think you've said it well for me. I think he has maybe/good ideas but he goes over the top with weird statements/misdirections/exaggerations/lies etc.

Wanting to stifle the press, very American.

Trump Strategist Steve Bannon Says Media Should ‘Keep Its Mouth Shut’

Thanks for clearing that up, cuervo. I read in an old Sports Illustrated article from 1984 about the USFL that Trump was first in his class.

That's amazing... you go back over three decades and you still see Trump throwing up smoke and mirrors and exaggerations, if not lies.

You mean alternative facts?

The people that voted for him thought that.

Yeah and the extra 5 pounds I put on over the holidays is gone once I start eating better and exercising. How is it splitting hairs? He hasn't done it yet and doesn't have a replacement plan.

If we're talking about his actions and policies only, I also like a lot of them. I'm glad he's challenging big business on overseas trading, killing off TPP, cleaning house, and doing something to reinforce the wall on the border (which already exists, by the way, albeit not very secure). As for Obamacare, if he and the Republicans have a replacement that is going to provide insurance for everyone - not "provide access", but actually give it to everybody, which would be a massive improvement over Obamacare - I'm all for it.

HOWEVER... did he have to do all of that other crap (offend Mexicans and Muslims, make fun of a disabled reporter, throw out unsubstantiated claims about 3 million people illegally voting, exaggerating/lying about other things, etc., etc., etc.)? If he just promoted his policies without being a jerk, I would have been alright with him being in office. Just do the job without all that extra stuff.

Oops... thanks for fixing that for me. :)

AFAIK, everyone in a position that is appointed by an administration (President, members of his Cabinet, etc) hands in a letter of resignation. The new administration can choose to not accept the resignation and keep them on.

What seems to be out of the ordinary here is that even when the resignation is accepted, the person in the role will stay on until a new person is appointed/confirmed/etc. That isn't happening. These people were all shown the door and it could be weeks, if not months, before the positions are filled again.

Even if Trump wanted to do that, there's no way in hell Ayn Rand lover Paul Ryan would let it happen. The GOP replacement plan is going to be based around competition across state lines and severely underfunded high risk pools.

Here's what could be a horrible analogy, but it seems to fit:

Let's say the last eight years is a car.

It transitions to a new model, and it changes things around. A lot. It's not what the traditionalists like, but for some people, it's better. But then folks at the factory start gumming up the works because they want to go back to the way things were. So they start throwing small monkey wrenches in the works. And they start ranking each other on who can throw the most blatant monkey wrench in the works while it still works.. (barely).. then comes in a hotshot mechanic who promises that he can make the car just like the good old days. He can fix everything. He can make the car great again. Day One. You bet!

Then on Day One, He tries to throw the transmission in gear, and there's nine million monkey wrenches in the works and the whole car promptly shits itself and drops itself on the floor like the Bluesmobile at the end of the Blues Brothers

That's what I see it as.. They've been the party of No for so long, and didn't have to come up with a plan, and the victory came as such a surprise (and the candidate such a loose cannon) that they have no clue what to do. So Trump's trying to do his agenda, Ryan and Crew are trying to shoot the Obamacare hostage while they can (because once the ACA is all gone, they can make the Dems come to them for the replacement), except Trump is making grandiose promises that the replacement will be at the same time).. the defense hawks want a bigger budget, the wall needs to be built, the deficit hawks are screaming..

Wait...So you consider it a forgone conclusion that four individuals conspired together to "stick it to the man" and quit their jobs for some altruistic message that 48 hours from now nobody will remember except the families of these poor folks?.....Ok.

I don't think there's four people in Washington- much less the State Department- willing to fall on their swords like that.....I think I mean that sincerely.

...By the way- just for clarification- I am no raging fan of Trump; He comes across a spoiled simpleton who several in this thread have analogized quite accurately already. I voted for Trump, but mostly for my outright disdain for Hilary and her utter disconnect with the values I hold. Having said that- and as others have alluded, I don't care if he's a raging windbag as long as his actions reflect his campaign promises. When was the last time a President did that- this quickly?

I also have this nagging feeling he won't make it twelve months without doing something so colossally stupid he gets himself impeached. Here's hoping I'm pleasantly surprised.

See- it's generalizations like that that got Trump elected. Smart enough to know what I'm thinking- and that I'm an idiot. Why weren't you on the ballot?

I didn't call them idiots, MBBF did. And yes, my generalization is that voters of a candidate take them at their word for what they promise. That's not a huge stretch.

Trump has the lowest approval ratings of any incoming president. To say this is working for him is ignoring the only data we have.

Now, none of this really matters in terms of 2020. He'll either have fulfilled his promises and win or he won't and he'll lose. A reelection is a referendum on that candidate. Assuming the Dems run someone of even average capability, the race will be almost solely on what Trump has accomplished.

You kept using that same logic during the election. How'd that work out?

Did Trump promise Mexico would build the wall- or that a wall would be built? Because most voters took Trump at his word that he would build a wall -I agree. If he promised Mexico would pay for it I missed it; either way I would have dismissed that part under political rhetoric- as I think most did- as MBBF I think was implying.