Trump has awarded next year’s G-7 summit of world leaders to his Miami-area resort

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Gryphon66

I guess Thomas Jefferson was a liberal then.

Interesting point, Jefferson wanted each state to have their own currency, extremely limited federal government. He was an anti-Federalist that didn't want any Federal level Constitution.

Is that the point your are trying to make here?

Nope. More specific to our discussion:

We seem not to have perceived that, by the law of nature, one generation is to another as one independant nation to another… On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation… Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force and not of right.

Thomas Jefferson

I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

T. Jefferson

There are other quotes about the dead not binding the living, etc. etc. I think you see the reference.

a reply to: Gryphon66


You need to understand where this comes from... He wanted an extremely limited federal Goverment as in anti-federalist. The left is not this way, if I was going to label him I would call him a libertarian, but you are taking his words out of context to what he wanted to make what he says work.

Good thing he cancelled! It's a bit ludicrous that I have to take lengthy and repeated classes on Federal gifts etc., track every receipt for every thing I do while dealing with Federal contracts, go through annoying and long audits - but Trump thinks it's OK to have a summit meeting at his resort with no worry about conflict of interest.

I'm not sure how anyone could think this was "OK." Except his flock, who doubts nothing he says or does.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
a reply to: Gryphon66


You need to understand where this comes from... He wanted an extremely limited federal Goverment as in anti-federalist. The left is not this way, if I was going to label him I would call him a libertarian, but you are taking his words out of context to what he wanted to make what he says work.

LOL, I do understand where it comes from. You do know that his political views changed when he became President, right? He is very clear on multiple occasions that THE Constitution should not remain the same forever, that it was right and necessary that it be changed, and he even felt it should expire at the end of every generation (which he calcluated at 19 years.)

Jefferson would found your claim absurd. An unchanging Constitution would have been the heart and soul of the Federalist dream. And you don't have to squint over what modern category you would place him in ... he was and is a classic liberal.

I just caught your stealth edit.

You're going to have to update your tired rhetoric on the power of the Presidency and the growth of the Fed.

Trump and the Republicans did all they could in two years to grab even more powers for the President as well as growing the debt out beyond the dreams of Croesus. What Republicans always do, by the way, tax cuts for the wealthy, economic growth slows and then stops, and in some cases, crashes.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Oh, and you might explain how the Louisiana Purchase was an act of "small, limited government" just for fun.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Jefferson would found your claim absurd. An unchanging Constitution would have been the heart and soul of the Federalist dream. And you don't have to squint over what modern category you would place him in ... he was and is a classic liberal.

What he would find even more absurd is the size of our federal Goverment. I don't think our forefathers wanted a true democracy or a socialized system.

Classic liberal....not 2019 liberal...So whatever...

originally posted by: Gryphon66
I just caught your stealth edit.

You're going to have to update your tired rhetoric on the power of the Presidency and the growth of the Fed.

Trump and the Republicans did all they could in two years to grab even more powers for the President as well as growing the debt out beyond the dreams of Croesus. What Republicans always do, by the way, tax cuts for the wealthy, economic growth slows and then stops, and in some cases, crashes.

You assume I'm a Conservative...Not sure what that means anymore, but the difference is the left is full retard and the right is about 1/2 retard.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Oh, and you might explain how the Louisiana Purchase was an act of "small, limited government" just for fun.

He did that outside of constitutional limits, he was an anti-Federalist... lol Smart move, but he would have been fried in the courts if they pushed.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I don't assume anything about you. I don't know you. I have referred to your post.

My calculus for the extremists is more simple: naught from naught leaves naught.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I know you are but what am I?

a reply to: network dude

No link as both you and I know the venue is to be changed, holding it at doral was a bad idea because of the obvious criticism it would bring.

it's another example of this President acting without thinking about the consequences.

a reply to: gortex

Or maybe he did it to piss off the left then move it to look like a victim. He tends to play the victim card and it works wonders, eventhough, he is a victim, he just uses it against the left in a very effective way. They are so unhinged that they don't know they are helping him.

a reply to: ambassado12

The reports I heard he was going to do it at no cost anyway and they did supposedly look at 10 other venues and they felt that Miami was the best for various reasons.

It is a unique situation we have with the is p[resident because he does own real estate and has access to facilities such as these. You need to look at it from his point of view as well where it is somewhere he feels comfortable with and is probably confident that the security and other functions could be executed.

I don't agree with it from the standpoint that the perception is not good and I am also a little confused as to why this has to be done in person when looking at the technology today. Why do we need to play host to this thing anyway can't this all be done via secure networks?

I also think that many people think Trump is a dumb guy and while I think he does put his foot in his mouth a lot many times I think he is the best troll out there and it is done to get a rise out of people.

originally posted by: Riffrafter
a reply to: ambassado12

o looks like Trump has awarded next year’s G-7 summit of world leaders to his Miami-area resort and as usual leftist are complaining that he set himself up with a huge contract even though the Secret Service selected the location due to logistics.

Awarded? Or did you mean invited?

I didn't think the POTUS could award the location for the G-7 summit, but what do I know?

The US is hosting. The US Gov. decides where it will be hosted.

a reply to: ambassado12

Or maybe he did it to piss off the left then move it to look like a victim.

Maybe people should stop making excuses for his inadequacy , he's good at ranting but light on thinking.

Lol, the law is "the constitution" OK, so the constitution simply means whatever you want it to?

I appreciate a good laugh, but you almost made me choke on my coffee...

a reply to: dawnstar

The OP clearly states trump isn't the one who selects the venue... but yes blame him (he's awfully orange).

As far as action from the president, I'm refreshed to see the bloated govt have any movement as a change of pace. If only congress could show the same kind of effort, maybe something might get done. They wasted all of trumps first term to get him out of office as their only accomplishment (let's see if they get there). Besides politicking, I have yet to see anything from those fools.
a reply to: gortex

a reply to: Rob808

The OP clearly states trump isn't the one who selects the venue... but yes blame him (he's awfully orange).

Of course he isn't.

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I know you are but what am I?

Ironic.