Are you psychic? Pelosi was just yelling about gun control!

Down voted without reply. Whatever.

Just to be clear here, an irrefutable argument is one which is irrefutably true.
To deny the truth - when shown/known to be so - is an intellectual betrayal of the gravest extreme.

You can call yourself whatever you want, but Objectivists wouldn't usually do that.

...and like alcohol prohibition, would have to be walked back to save the Republic.

Of course, a “gun crisis” emergency executive order could be issued. My sense is that this would be a bridge too far and would result in a prohibition-like atmosphere with chaos, crime and civil disobedience approaching civil war.

I am never afraid. Weren't they all shocked when Trump was elected? We aren't all stupid! I never hear from my liberal friends. They are very quiet. I think there is going to be a real explosion inside the Democrat Party. The conservatives aren't going to let these liberals do more than run off their mouths.

I think the danger sign is when they say 'we are doing this for your own good.' Those words give me a chill.

We know that people will at least use the word "crisis" to justify spending and gov't powers based on history. I remember crisis being used to promote gov't health insurance. In every recession there's been a crisis in homelessness, hunger, joblessness. Then there was the Sept 11 attack, when they had a huge law expanding gov't powers and plans to invade Iraq, apparently waited for a crisis, related or unrelated. As Rahm Emanuel said, "You never let a serious crisis go to waste."

I do not know whether President Trump is effectively setting a precedent that will actually result in executive power to spend money. I think he is not. I think there is a slow broad trend toward more executive power, and President Trump is just on one step in a long non-partisan process.

That was the strength of my argument - I wasn't referring to polls. I used simple reason from well established facts.

The fact is our country is split almost exactly down the middle - half liberal/ half conservative. Every election is 51/49 these days. A 55% victory margin is considered a "mandate."

From that one easily deduces that half the country is liberal and opposed to the wall.
From the other half a fair number of Republicans are still Never Trumpers - myself included but I am far from alone.

Hence, by simple deduction, more than half of the population is not in favor of the wall.

BTW - what polls did you see that showed the opposite? The polls I saw showed numbers skewed heavily against the wall.

But I don't trust polls so I didn't reference them,
(I didn't say "polls be damned" because they were against my position - I said it because they are damn-able - constantly manipulated to get the desired result. I should have been clearer. That's my bad.)

"And the congress that denied funds for the wall did, in fact, express the will of the people."

No, it doesn't..

No idea what polls you are looking at but you are wrong.

Dude.

I vote Republican for a reason. But I am not a partisan hack.
My BS detector is on high gain at all times and turns a full 360 degrees.

Just to drive home the point:
We all love the Constituion here, right? And everyone knows the Founding Fathers gave the power of the purse to Congress - the voice of the people.

And we all know this was on purpose - the single most powerful check-and-balance against abuse by the Executive branch.

And the congress that denied funds for the wall did, in fact, express the will of the people.
(All Dems oppose the wall as do a great many Republicans - myself included. Therefore, polls-be-damned, more than half of Americans oppose the wall.)

360 degrees, dude.

It must be convincing enough to overcome the convenience of the current enslavement.
Most people just consent in ignorance and/or fear.
What will be the propaganda event that takes the place of Lexington and Concord? Will it be the evidence of treason by the previous administration and the most recent Dem candidate for POTUS?

I find it difficult to bring examples of abuse on the right to the extent it has been practiced on the left.

For example: Harry Read did not bring any bill up for vote during Hussein's rein. Can you show an equally egregious abuse of power on the right?

As far as emergency powers: Hussein used them a dozen times. Did you worry at that time how it'll affect future president's power?

As far as "power mad" politicians, I suggest you look for them in the Dem party. You'll be surprise how many of them you will be able to identify.

The left and the right. There are plenty of examples both ways.
That's one reason you're so dissatisfied with the Republican Party, right?
They are not true small-government advocates but will assume powers un-given as readily as any other politician, right? So, of course, this seems a clear case of the right doing things they were not intended to do, no?

And seriously, if you are not afraid of power mad politicians hell-bent on making you do what they say... well...
I'll just be polite and let it hang.
(We are too rude in this new age of instant outrage.)

"Are you not afraid of what the next liberal president will do with this newly expanded power?"

Not at all.

The left will use anything to expand their power, even illegal means. There are plenty of examples.

Bypassing congress wasn't my point.
Are you not afraid of what the next liberal president will do with this newly expanded power?
And I imply 'Wouldn't it be better not to take this opportunity to expand this particular presidential power?'

Obviously there are too many defensive weapons out there. It’s called freedom.

When someone can convince enough people to wake up and stop giving their consent and their money to the feds, then there will be a chance for the unconstitutional overreach to stop.

Wouldn't that include this moment right now?
Isn't this a direct call-out to stop giving your consent?

I'm always afraid of what the government can do. One of the things that needs to happen to actually have a representative government is for congress to stop giving blank checks such as this to the executive, particularly in the area of regulation. They pass generic bills authorizing the agencies which, in essence, write their own laws when they draft the regulations. They need to have less latitude.

Bypassing Congress did not start with president Trump.

It started with Hussein in recent years.

Remember his "I have a phone and a pen" mantra?

There was no other president in recent memory who "governed" by executive orders bypassing Congress.

But... my question?
Are you not afraid of what will happen next, when it's not your guy?

It's not technically bypassing congress since what he is doing is activating the National Emergencies Act of 1976 which was passed by congress to give the president the power to act.

Does this fall within the scope of that act? I guess we'll find out in the ensuing court battles.

And what he's doing is moving money around, not removing a constitutional right -- which would probably instantly fail in the courts. Although FDR did get away with imprisoning a race of citizens, but then the Court let FDR do pretty much anything he wanted, it was a New Deal after all, not that old constitution.

I think that presidents have been conspiring with con-gress for decades against the liberty of Americans. Of course, I am concerned if ANY president has emergency powers that are unconstitutional, but presidents have been doing the bidding of the state with such powers for decades pretending its for our own good.
When someone can convince enough people to wake up and stop giving their consent and their money to the feds, then there will be a chance for the unconstitutional overreach to stop.
Until that happens Americans will follow the new savior of the moment. Trump may be the least harmful and the best chance for a return to constitutional government, but only if he resists the temptation of great power and can gather enough allies and support to defeat a very powerful deep state enemy that has been manipulating people for centuries. The risk that any leader will be willing to give up the power once vested is a great danger to liberty.
If Americans give up their firearms there is nothing to prevent dictatorship.
I have no peaceful solution to this quandary, Zero.