How do neo-cons / fake conservatives reconcile their fraudulent stances?

Trump administration aims to roll back more than 60 workplace safety rules
https://www.livenowfox.com/news/trump-labor-deregulation-rules

https://www.cbpp.org/media/trump-budget-cuts-federal-infrastructure-spending-in-long-run

Massive cuts to science and medicine in Trump budget
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5468112/

States jostle over $50 billion rural health fund as Trump's Medicaid cuts trigger scramble
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/states-rural-health-fund-trump-medicaid-cuts/

Trump's 2026 budget would slash NASA funding by 24% and its workforce by nearly one third
On May 2, the Trump administration released its 2026 "skinny budget" request, a broad summary of its funding plans for the coming fiscal year. That document proposed cutting NASA funding by nearly 25%, from $24.8 billion to $18.8 billion, with much of the reduction coming from the agency's science programs.

https://www.space.com/space-explora...percent-and-its-workforce-by-nearly-one-third

 

Like literally having farm animals and growing fruits and vegetables in your backyard? Joking aside, we actually do some of that ourselves, not just because it’s fresher, but because we want a bit more independence from the system. A small safety valve, if you will.

I think everyone strives for self reliance, but the truth is, most people need help at some point. People who grew up extremely poor, like my parents, worked their butts off but still needed help when our house flooded and we lost everything. I’m not sure I’d be where I am today without that temporary assistance. Even those doing fine right now are just one major illness or disaster away from needing help.

As for Reagan, his philosophy centered on small gov, free markets, personal responsibility, and accountability. But he also believed in immigration, signed amnesty for over 3 million undocumented immigrants, and constantly preached optimism and belief in the American people. He didn’t frame Americans as victims; he inspired confidence in everyone’s ability to succeed. He worked for all Americans, not just a subset.

That’s very different from what we’re seeing today from this admin. We now have a big gov deeply involved in people’s lives, telling them what they can and cannot say / do, silencing dissent, and using prosecution as political revenge. We don’t have a true free market; we have big money openly buying influence in the White House, massive and selective tariffs (relief for those with influences and connections to the WH) distorting trade, and for the first time, direct gov ownership of multiple private companies, along with bailouts of foreign politicians not because it helps America, but because it supports the kind of politics this admin prefers abroad.

And instead of accountability, we get constant blame shifting and zero responsibility for failures. The overall tone has also changed: no optimism, less belief in all Americans (only selective ones), and massive division that pits Americans against each other. The philosophy you admire in Reagan feels almost the opposite of this admin’s style.

 

Arguing yes. Asking them to explain their nonsense isn’t useless.

 

Not useless, just tiresome, which will eventually turn into uselessness

 

I don't see things the way you do. The crap that happened last Trump POTUS ain't happening this time around. As far as Trump going after his enemies, if they have done nothing wrong they have nothing to worry about. If they were throwing rocks in glass houses let the chips fall where they may. As far as Reagan and immigration he got it wrong. Follow the laws that are on the books. It's really pretty simple and that's what Homan company are doing. If you don't like it then contact your congressmen and work on having them change the laws.

And yes, chickens, and a garden. During COVID a friend of mine slaughtered a cow and we had steaks.

 

I'm talking about defending the country when I'm talking about safety.

I've got no problems with the cuts.

 

Fauci funneled our tax dollars to a research partner of his in China once Obama made him stop his research here. He's a lying evil little man

 

then why didnt you say that in the first place?

its very odd that the trump administration is destroying/dismantling the things you say are most important to you and you say you have "no problem" with it. if thats not TDS i dont know what is!

 

Hey man, OP asked a question and @raining threes is flat out delivering

 

Actually, there is plenty to be concerned about. You can be 100% innocent and still face huge costs defending yourself against wrongful prosecution. There is the time you lose, the money spent on legal defense, and of course, the emotional and mental toll of being wrongly targeted by the State.

There are also indirect effects, such as silencing people from speaking or acting because they fear political retaliation. Innocent people should not be prosecuted for political and personal (vengeful) reasons. It is harmful both to individuals and to the country as a whole.

In many ways, this is the ultimate example of gov interfering in people’s lives. You say you do not want the gov involved in our lives, yet you seem fine with politically motivated prosecutions that were clearly pushed by a president against people he personally dislikes, not because they committed a crime.

 

I agree. Follow the law. And if you don't like the law, then work to change it.

But this admin is far from following the law. For example, they are literally jailing citizens without due process and, in some cases, killing people without due process. These are unlawful actions.

As for immigration laws, the ultimate law of the U.S., the Constitution, essentially allows for open borders. As I mentioned before, the U.S. originally had completely open borders. Over time, laws were introduced to start restricting who could enter (for example, the Chinese Exclusion Act). Since then, Congress has passed so many immigration laws that the system has become extremely complex and, at times, even self-contradictory.

Take asylum seekers, for example. Seeking asylum is 100% legal under both U.S. and international law. Yet this admin has effectively made it impossible by replacing immigration judges with ones who deny nearly every asylum case. That’s not following the law, that’s pushing a political agenda.

Now imagine if Congress passed a new law that brought us back to the early days of the country- open borders with little to no restrictions. Would you still say, "just follow the law"? I doubt it. You would argue that the law needs to be changed.

Most people agree that the immigration system needs serious reform, but that hasn’t happened, largely because Republicans have repeatedly blocked reform efforts. They see a political advantage in keeping the laws as they are: overly complex, confusing, and ineffective for Americans. So when people say, “just follow the law,” it often becomes a way of defending a broken status quo, one that uses immigration as a political tool to win votes, rather than actually solving the problem.

 

if you actually care about "safety" then you shouldnt be supporting a president who gave blanket pardons to people who assaulted police officers.

 

In no way does the Constitution allow for open borders. People that 1st came to this country were checked for disease and had to have a sponsor to enter this country. Please show me the law that says there's open borders laws?

Also when 20 million illegals are let in the country there are bound to be some deportation mistakes. I've got no problem with this. Shouldn't have let them in anyways.

It's not a tool it's the law. Maybe you don't understand the definition of the word illegal.

 

Yeah, you should ask Trump ,Manafort, Stone, Flynn about this. The Dems started the lawfare and now that the shoe is on the other foot it's not fitting well. Bottom line is the libs shouldn't have gone through Melania's lingerie drawers. They're reaping what they sowed

 

They don't think, they just repeat

 

They were all stone-cold guilty.

So what's your question?

 

Ok


Just like Comey, James, Schiff etc .. .

 

Not just alike. Trump ,Manafort, Stone, Flynn were all convicted.

 

As mentioned earlier, the Constitution allows for open borders. It neither prohibits them nor requires them. In the early years of our history, the U.S. essentially had open borders.

No, that’s actually not accurate. For most of U.S. history, there were no federal restrictions on immigration at all. From the founding through most of the 19th century, anyone could arrive and settle. There were no medical screenings, no visa requirements, no sponsors, and no federal immigration officers.

As I briefly mentioned before, the first federal immigration law wasn’t passed until 1875, and it specifically targeted Asian immigrants.

So again, at the very beginning, America really did have what would today be considered real open borders. Anyone could arrive, live, and work here without federal gov permission.

History of immigration and nationality law in the United States - Wikipedia

During the 18th and most of the 19th centuries, the United States had limited regulation of immigration and naturalization at a national level. Under a mostly prevailing "open border" policy, immigration was generally welcomed, although citizenship was limited to "white persons" as of 1790, and naturalization was subject to five-year residency requirement as of 1802. Passports and visas were not required for entry into America; rules and procedures for arriving immigrants were determined by local ports of entry or state laws. Processes for naturalization were determined by local county courts