Trump protesters breed more than their fair share of discord and confusion. When Trump won, I consoled myself with the expectation that he would be a one-term president. But with the jackasses on the left trying so hard to get him reelected, I'm not so sure.
How could uber break the strike when there was no strike?
Strikes are work stoppages orchestrated to give workers bargaining power in contract talks. This was a protest and Uber has every right to protest (or not) in the manner it sees fit without clearing it with the taxi drivers.
Oh my, where to begin. Trump has never been accused of being a lefty? Trump is more Democrat than Republican. He became a Republican because he saw an easier path to the nomination there. Much like Michael Bloomberg in New York.
Trump is trying to scale back government regulation over the police? You are aware, are you not, that the police are a government agency. Talk about nonsensical!
Public sector unions are doing something fundamentally different from what private sector unions are doing. I am not per se against public sector unions; I am, however, against calling them unions and allowing them to co-opt the rich history of unionization in America.
"One of the fundamental rights of every American is to live in a safe community."
Wrong right out of the gate. I agree that Black Lives Matter is a destructive, dangerous, hypocritical organization and that the reflexive protest to every "outrage" is dishonest and counterproductive, but part of the whole point of electing Trump was to remind the government of who works for whom.
Fake rights are the language of the left looking to expand the government at the expense of the citizen.
Personally, I'd like to do away with the entire FOIA structure. Instead, all public documents should as a matter of standard procedure be loaded into a searchable public database. Then, instead of making a request, waiting a bunch of months, and then being presented with a bill for the search regardless of whether any documents turn up, you could just go to the database and search and print to your heart's content. After all, you've already paid for it through your taxes. And if we're a government of the people, by the people, for the people, then conceptually, we're entitled to ti at any time for any reason.
The bar for secrecy should be much higher as well.
"Presented without comparison, it will skew public perception, making it appear as though the main criminal force in the US is people who aren't here legally."
Yes, 49 pointy heads CAN dance on the head of a pin. It may not matter much to the apparatchiks referenced in the "banality of evil" quote, but it will matter a great deal to the specific victims of the specific crimes.
The problematic legal aspect of asset forfeiture is not that the Attorney General thinks it's ok (I don't care what the AG's position on it is, except perhaps tangentially as an aspect of his overall world view), but that the Supreme Court thinks it's ok.
It's obviously unconstitutional (not even a close call) and deeply troubling that freedom's last resort has turned its back on the fourth amendment.
It's not a numbers game. Used properly, executive orders are an important tool in implementing laws passed by congress. Used improperly, executive orders are a nefarious tool used to get around the laws passed by congress.
When Obama said, "I don't need congress to act, I have a pen and a phone," that was an example of the dangerous authoritarianism that Democrats cry so much about under Trump (before he even took office!) that they completely ignored under Obama.