View Full Version : President Trump
Pages :
1
2
[
3]
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
gandalf26
02-21-17, 10:09 AM
Cmon, I bet you love him really.
I thought conservatives liked big corporations. Now you don't?
Can't speak for others, but conservatism as an ideology is meant to favor competition. That's actually something larger corporations dislike, which is why many of them lobby for more regulations tailored to help them stay entrenched. Even the ones that aren't explicitly tailored this way represent a barrier to entry for upstart competitors that hurts them more than the established players. Worth remembering the next time someone proposes regulation to restrain them.
That said, Republicans/conservatives don't always do enough to make this distinction, so I'm not surprised that this is the perception.
dteam6 Couple questions
Is your spouse illegal? If not, what has Trump said that makes you fearful?
Would you blame the black lives matter movement for the rash of police shootings we have seen recently?
Feel like I'm sounding like a Trump supporter again, I'm not. For the fifth time I want to go on the record as not liking his immigration propoganda. However, I am very confused as to why legal immigrants feel threatened.
Well, that executive order led to a lot of people with green cards being detained. That probably hasn't helped.
The rhetoric was always harping on the legal/illegal distinction, but his first action failed to make even that basic consideration. I'm pretty sure this was incompetence rather than dishonesty, but it was definitely one of them.
Well, that executive order led to a lot of people with green cards being detained. That probably hasn't helped.
The rhetoric was always harping on the legal/illegal distinction, but his first action failed to make even that basic consideration. I'm pretty sure this was incompetence rather than dishonesty, but it was definitely one of them.
Are you talking about the airport stuff, or is there something I have missed?
With the caveat that we may not mean exactly the same thing by "airport stuff," yeah, basically.
With the caveat that we may not mean exactly the same thing by "airport stuff," yeah, basically.
Again, I'm not defending Trump's immigration policies but I want to call a spade a spade. The NSA has been a point of contention since 9/11. It is an equal opportunity discriminator (yeah, I know how that sounds). People with green cards being detained for periods of time by NSA because of the executive order is a much different animal then ICE ripping a legal immigrant out of their bed in the middle of the night, no?
dteam6 (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=95647) Couple questions
Is your spouse illegal? If not, what has Trump said that makes you fearful?
She's 100% Legal, tax-paying, green-card holding permanent resident. I stated that in my post.
As I stated, we're fearful because of how anti-immigration this man is. Look at his first blunder--green card holders were detained because of his clumsy handling of things. I don't care how far-flung the chances are for her ever being deported by him--when you're dealing with a loose cannon president who inspires racism and hates immigrants, it makes ANY immigrant uneasy, regardless of status. Again--you have to live this to understand it. I don't expect everyone to understand what we're going through.
Would you blame the black lives matter movement for the rash of police shootings we have seen recently?
I blame BLM for a lot of things. They are disgusting and seem to be a black version of the KKK. They're just as bad as those they oppose.
Feel like I'm sounding like a Trump supporter again, I'm not. For the fifth time I want to go on the record as not liking his immigration propoganda. However, I am very confused as to why legal immigrants feel threatened.
I can't expect you to understand it.
To me, the man is a loose cannon, seemingly mentally unstable and hates and discriminates against immigrants, seemingly wanting to paint them all with the same brush: leeches, criminals, drains on the US. Illegal and Legal--they seem to get lumped in the same way all the time. My wife, unlike illegals, has paid her dues and STILL gets lumped into those unfavorable camps by Trump supporters.
When you're in an interracial relationship with an immigrant and dealing with a president who hates immigrants and inspires racists to feel more comfortable being their true selves, it makes you sweat if you're at all involved with that immigration boat.
Again, I realize that, rationally, she'll be just fine. She's a model immigrant. But as a HUSBAND, those fears are always present.
We're in that immigration circle--trust me, a lot of legal immigrants are afraid. It doesn't matter how low the chances are--this man inspires people to hate ALL immigrants, legal or otherwise. That's enough to make my wife and I worry.
Well, that executive order led to a lot of people with green cards being detained. That probably hasn't helped.
The rhetoric was always harping on the legal/illegal distinction, but his first action failed to make even that basic consideration. I'm pretty sure this was incompetence rather than dishonesty, but it was definitely one of them.
Well said, Yoda. His first act on immigration right out the gate was a complete fumble and caused chaos. ALL immigrants have a right to be afraid after that.
Again, I'm not defending Trump's immigration policies but I want to call a spade a spade. The NSA has been a point of contention since 9/11. It is an equal opportunity discriminator (yeah, I know how that sounds). People with green cards being detained for periods of time by NSA because of the executive order is a much different animal then ICE ripping a legal immigrant out of their bed in the middle of the night, no?
Let's also remember that this man has angered several countries during his short stint in office. He's been saber-rattling like crazy and has us in danger of war with several nations.
During periods of war, the president can justify mass deportation in order to "secure borders". It's not inconceivable to think that such a scenario could happen.
This man wants to deport everyone for any little infraction--even a traffic ticket.
Again, I'm not defending Trump's immigration policies but I want to call a spade a spade. The NSA has been a point of contention since 9/11. It is an equal opportunity discriminator (yeah, I know how that sounds). People with green cards being detained for periods of time by NSA because of the executive order is a much different animal then ICE ripping a legal immigrant out of their bed in the middle of the night, no?
Certainly. I don't think people are scared because they're equating those things (and I have little patience for anyone who goes all Slippery Slope on every one of them). I think they're scared because, if he could be this careless about something he talked about so often during the campaign, then we really don't have much of a baseline for what he might do.
Also, I think it's a good mental exercise to think backwards from a possibility to see how plausible it is. If you just ask "Will we start detaining legal immigrants?" the question seems silly. But think instead about what would be required to make a "yes" plausible. A major terrorist attack, perhaps, enabled by immigration? Would it be hard to imagine then? We already have proof that the President will take broad, clumsy, sweeping actions if he thinks something is urgent. Now imagine a real, sudden, violent emergency. A situation where people are demanding a swift, strong response. Hard to say, with much confidence, what would or wouldn't be on the table.
Certainly. I don't think people are scared because they're equating those things (and I have little patience for anyone who goes all Slippery Slope on every one of them). I think they're scared because, if he could be this careless about something he talked about so often during the campaign, then we really don't have much of a baseline for what he might do.
Also, I think it's a good mental exercise to think backwards from a possibility to see how plausible it is. If you just ask "Will we start detaining legal immigrants?" the question seems silly. But think instead about what would be required to make a "yes" plausible. A major terrorist attack, perhaps, enabled by immigration? Would it be hard to imagine then? We already have proof that the President will take broad, clumsy, sweeping actions if he thinks something is urgent. Now imagine a real, sudden, violent emergency. A situation where people are demanding a swift, strong response. Hard to say, with much confidence, what would or wouldn't be on the table.
True, and this is where you and I agree.
I don't want to be the I know immigrants guy, but I can tell you stories from work that absolutely are terrible for the families involved and they are from the last few years at my job not from January.
Our immigration system is broken and Trump isn't fixing it the right way. He also didn't start the fire. He just wants to fan the flames.
Everything he does is more symbolic than effective, and that's where I have such a huge problem with him.
Everything in this country is harder and scarier if your an immigrant. That's not new.
Certainly. I don't think people are scared because they're equating those things (and I have little patience for anyone who goes all Slippery Slope on every one of them). I think they're scared because, if he could be this careless about something he talked about so often during the campaign, then we really don't have much of a baseline for what he might do.
Also, I think it's a good mental exercise to think backwards from a possibility to see how plausible it is. If you just ask "Will we start detaining legal immigrants?" the question seems silly. But think instead about what would be required to make a "yes" plausible. A major terrorist attack, perhaps, enabled by immigration? Would it be hard to imagine then? We already have proof that the President will take broad, clumsy, sweeping actions if he thinks something is urgent. Now imagine a real, sudden, violent emergency. A situation where people are demanding a swift, strong response. Hard to say, with much confidence, what would or wouldn't be on the table.
You pretty much took the words out of my mouth, Yoda. Yes, this is another point I would have otherwise made. I'm glad you see where I'm coming from on this. :)
True, and this is where you and I agree.
I don't want to be the I know immigrants guy, but I can tell you stories from work that absolutely are terrible for the families involved and they are from the last few years at my job not from January.
Our immigration system is broken and Trump isn't fixing it the right way. He also didn't start the fire. He just wants to fan the flames.
Everything he does is more symbolic than effective, and that's where I have such a huge problem with him.
Everything in this country is harder and scarier if your an immigrant. That's not new.
My wife was never afraid to be an immigrant in this country. That only started after Trump came along. Many fellow legal immigrants share her sentiment. That really says something.
Everything--EVERYTHING Trump is doing seems to be 100% polar opposite of Obama...that's wrong. He's going one extreme to "undo" the other while creating a whole new set of problems. This has been an ongoing problem in human history: always one extreme or the other--no middle ground.
I do want to defend what I think is Sean's underlying point, though, which is that outrage fatigue is real, and if we sound the alarm on everything that takes even a single step in this direction, nobody's going to be listening if and when it actually happens.
I think it's possible to be very concerned, but still realize the necessity for prudence in how we talk about this, even if only for purely pragmatic reasons.
My wife was never afraid to be an immigrant in this country. That only started after Trump came along. Many fellow legal immigrants share her sentiment. That really says something.
Everything--EVERYTHING Trump is doing seems to be 100% polar opposite of Obama...that's wrong. He's going one extreme to "undo" the other while creating a whole new set of problems. This has been an ongoing problem in human history: always one extreme or the other--no middle ground.
Why wasn't she? Serious question, because immigrants were deported under Obama. Immigrants were detained for long periods of time. Everytime I turn on the nrws I am reminded travel bans and deportation aren't new, with statistics to back it up.
I hope you answer but I believe it is because Trump is all about the symbolic nature of government. It's a problem now, was before, will be again. People feel safe in their rhetoric, not in actual policy.
Cmon, I bet you love him really.
Yeah, I love him like I love constipation. Scratch that--I prefer constipation over Trump tenfold.:yup:
I do want to defend what I think is Sean's underlying point, though, which is that outrage fatigue is real, and if we sound the alarm on everything that takes even a single step in this direction, nobody's going to be listening if and when it actually happens.
I think it's possible to be very concerned, but still realize the necessity for prudence in how we talk about this, even if only for purely pragmatic reasons.
To be honest, I'm already fatigued from my Trump outrage. He's oversaturated in the news and I'm sick of seeing articles about him. However, the subject of Trump can be like a trainwreck in the way that it can be difficult to look away. He's the looniest president I've ever personally witnessed in my lifetime--like a clown show in the White House.
PS: I should emphasize a point here: while my wife and I have fears, they're not CONSTANT ones or the type to keep us up at night. It's not like these fears are ruling over our lives or anything and the expediting of the US citizenship isn't 100% due to Trump--it's also because she wants to travel home to visit later this year and it's more expensive to renew her international passport/travel to do it than it is to apply for US citizenship. We paid a good deal of money for her green card--that was the only reason we held out for so long: to get our money's worth. The Trump election and her desire to travel home influenced this decision.
But it's not like we sit around all day, obsessing over this worry. It's just a nagging worry that we wish to alleviate. Every time the news hits of hardline immigration acts, it causes anxiety. That's anxiety that can effectively and 100% be eliminated by going for the "gold" a couple years early, you know?
So, don't get the wrong idea, guys--we're not PANICKING or anything--it's just a worry that we want alleviated. This was something we were always going to do, anyway--we're just ramping it up early. Better safe than sorry and all that.
dteam6 I wish you and your wife all the best. I'm sorry this is our first interaction on the board and hope I didn't come off too confrontational. See you out and about the forum.
Why wasn't she? Serious question, because immigrants were deported under Obama. Immigrants were detained for long periods of time. Everytime I turn on the nrws I am reminded travel bans and deportation aren't new, with statistics to back it up.
I hope you answer but I believe it is because Trump is all about the symbolic nature of government. It's a problem now, was before, will be again. People feel safe in their rhetoric, not in actual policy.
Why wasn't she? Because there wasn't a reason to feel concerned. Obama wasn't the same sort of loose cannon that Trump is. I found him foolish but never a raging lunatic. Trump is unpredictable. Trump inspires massive anti-immigration mindset.
Trump's policies seem to paint ALL immigrants as "the bad guys" and not just illegals.
"Americans first" is his motto. Fine. That's how any leader of any country should stand for--it's the WAY he goes about such matters.
He wants:
-Close monitoring of ALL immigrant workers to see "who screws up at work" and how often it happens
-Work-related injuries that were caused by the onsite conduct of an immigrant
-Banning all immigrants who need some form of government aid (Immigrants and citizens alike can and do lose their jobs for various reasons--such as downsizing--and may temporarily need such aid in order to survive while looking for work)...WHY should immigrants be penalized for that?
Many of the immigration laws have been in place long before Trump--yes--it's the WAY he goes about it all...it's cruel. It's reckless. It's rather heartless. It's as if he's PICKING on immigrants--making them the bad guys. Lumping them all in together--not just the illegals. Obama didn't do any of that.
My wife is a practical person--she felt no need to worry back then. A loose cannon like Trump would set off anyone's radar in her position.
@dteam6 (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=95647) I wish you and your wife all the best. I'm sorry this is our first interaction on the board and hope I didn't come off too confrontational. See you out and about the forum.
Thank you! :)
I'll be sure to let it be known around here once she's a citizen. We'll have to have a party around here or something. :p
I didn't find you confrontational. You stated your points, made your position known and were considerate of my feelings.
That's why I stated in my first post that I don't expect anyone not in our situation to really understand.
No, I appreciate your intelligence and candor in this matter. 👍
TheGothamCat
02-21-17, 02:15 PM
Well as a Trump supporter so far I have no regrets on the job that Trumps doing so far, and having a brother who is currently severing in the military and is about to be deployed over seas it's comforting to have a president who is working to strengthen America's armed forces once again.
Oh, and not to mention that the Stock Markets are doing pretty good under Trumps presidency and I've been investing in the Stock Markets for several years now, so that's just an added bonus to Trump becoming president :yup:.
It hit new heights under Obama, too. Ergo...Obama was good for the economy? Do you believe that?
I'm not a fan of either, so don't take that as a defense of Obama. It's just remarkable how many of these talking points are demonstrably incompatible with criticism of the previous administration.
It hit new heights under Obama, too. Ergo...Obama was good for the economy? Do you believe that?
I'm not a fan of either, so don't take that as a defense of Obama. It's just remarkable how many of these talking points are demonstrably incompatible with criticism of the previous administration.
This is exactly why I get sick of hearing people defend Trump with "But Obama did this", "Hillary did that" and so on and so on.
A president should be judged on his own merits and NOT as some comparison piece to a previous president.
If you ever look at an article on Yahoo it's always the same things:
- "You Libtards! Go cry to Obama!"
-"Obama did this and this."
-"Hillary was all about this."
-"Snowflake!"
You can't engage in a civilized discussion with people like that.
What bothers me is when people feel no need for what they're saying now to align with what they said before. I mean, geez, at least rationalize it by pointing out some flimsy, arbitrary distinction between the two, like a normal person.
Slappydavis
02-21-17, 03:41 PM
Would you blame the black lives matter movement for the rash of police shootings we have seen recently?
I've seen "police shootings" to mean police shot with a firearm and also others shot by a police officer, so maybe I'm misinterpreting this. But just in case you mean police shot with a firearm: regardless if you believe BLM is responsible, do you have any evidence that there even is a rash of police shootings?
I did a quick look at 2017 to date, and police fatalities by shootings are down compared to 2016's pace: http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/
BLM got started in ~2013 IIRC, so lets look at some data: http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/causes.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/
The average number of police fatalities by firearm from the 3 years "before" BLM (which I'll roundly say is 2010,11, and 12) was 61. The average number of police fatalities in the 3 years "after" BLM (2013, 14, and 15 ) is 41.
[I]Edit: I found some other sources for 2016's data. And if you bring in 2016's total (64) the average would still be much lower, ~47. 2016 is also below the peaks of 2007 (70) and 2011 (73).
But if you mean police shootings as in, police shooting civilians, that's a different set of statistics. Though I'd be very hard pressed to blame shot civilians on BLM.
I'm also very disappointed to see BLM being compared to the KKK elsewhere. Even using the Black Panthers as an analogy to the KKK would be a stretch.
I've seen "police shootings" to mean police shot with a firearm and also others shot by a police officer, so maybe I'm misinterpreting this. But just in case you mean police shot with a firearm: regardless if you believe BLM is responsible, do you have any evidence that there even is a rash of police shootings?
I don't think BLM is responsible for police shooting with firearms, but the reason I asked is because I also don't think Trump is responsible for people jumping back into the KKK. My point is that political rhetoric or even policy is not responsible for bringing out the worst in our society unless policy is governing that way. Ramping up our illegal immigration policies is a long way away from lynchings and segregation. Just as protesting because we want better policing is a long way from gunning down officers.
Ironically I'm not a Trump or BLM fan, although it appearsI'm taking up the mantle of both.
Dexter007
02-21-17, 07:07 PM
It is undeniable that people are now coming out of the woodwork all over the country and acting like racist attitudes and overtly politically incorrect behaviors are "ok". This whole debacle over the forthcoming "Dear White People" Netflix show would have never happened while Obama was at the height of his presidency. Breitbart and other alt-right media sites/groups have grown wildly ever since Trump became a possibility for President.
Is it undeniable. I live in the south surrounded by Trump supporters, by people I fundamentally disagree with and don't see any blatant racism, or KKK activity, or picketing at the mosque in our po-dunk town. Help me out because it seems like both sides are cherry picking horrible events and painting people with the same broad brush. Maybe I need to live somewhere other than rural NY, rural south, NY city suburb, or Fl city. Because I have lived a significant time in all those places and don't see the Nazis coming back to life in any of them.
Mandwa Mona Rudao
02-22-17, 06:31 AM
It is undeniable that people are now coming out of the woodwork all over the country and acting like racist attitudes and overtly politically incorrect behaviors are "ok". This whole debacle over the forthcoming "Dear White People" Netflix show would have never happened while Obama was at the height of his presidency. Breitbart and other alt-right media sites/groups have grown wildly ever since Trump became a possibility for President.
No under Obama your fellow liberals would have called it a racist and got it canned for not being progressive enough. UN PC behavior will be ok again if you like it or not. There is a limit to how much people are willing to pretend in a country with a First and a Second.
ash_is_the_gal
02-22-17, 09:34 AM
Actually, really, I might not have ever grown to love Trump as much as I did, if this forum hadn't been so deadset against allowing anything constructive about him to stand, I mean, he is our President, after all
so we have power over you? thanks for the heads up :)
So, I wanted to address another matter here: Racism inspired by Trump.
Now, the number 1 defense I keep reading about Trump (mainly in Yahoo comments sections of Trump articles) is this: "Just because White Nationalists/KKK/other racists are inspired to be their racist selves doesn't mean that Trump should be blamed!)
That is EXACTLY why Trump should be blamed. A president, like a parent, is supposed to set an example. He may not be wearing a white hood and rallying himself, but you know what? He's not CONDEMNING it either. Why isn't he giving national addresses speaking against the KKK and other racist attacks? Why isn't he condemning the fact that David Duke loves him? Why isn't he condemning those people who gave Nazi salutes at his rallies?
Why? Because he agrees with them. That's my view of it. And even if--even IF he actually DOESN'T agree with those people...why is he not condemning them? Because he doesn't want to lose voters for the re-election? If so--that's just as bad. That's letting racism and White Nationalism slide.
I've seen people constantly blame Obama for BLM and for not condemning it but I never see a single supporter of Trump calling for Trump to condemn all these KKK supporters/White Nationalists/etc.
This falls back to my original point: It's one extreme or the other with no middle ground. This is why our country is rapidly sinking. As the old saying goes: two wrongs don't make a right.
Nostromo87
02-22-17, 08:36 PM
Actually, really, I might not have ever grown to love Trump as much as I did, if this forum hadn't been so deadset against allowing anything constructive about him to stand, I mean, he is our President, after all
We didn't "allow" it to stand in the same way a house of cards isn't "allowed" to stand when a gust of wind comes along. It didn't stand even under its own weight.
You mentioned Trump's supporters not conceding anything, clearly his opposition doesn't either. Works both ways. And pretty hoity-toity to write off the country outside of California and New York, and the voters that elected him.
That's what happens, though, if you form your opinions based on what other people hate, rather than on a coherent sent of principles. This stuff matters.
Was interesting when you didn't squeeze Hillary's voters though, when their reason was hating Trump. That wasn't a principle either. Regardless this whole line of reasoning has been derogatory, when literally no one else here or even you has expressed their in-depth political principles.
so we have power over you? thanks for the heads up
Only in the sense of bringing balance, in the force, hey that's a Yoda thing :D
You mentioned Trump's supporters not conceding anything, clearly his opposition doesn't either. Works both ways.
It would if we were in equivalent positions. Lies and contradictions require concessions. Pointing out things are lies and contradictions does not.
And pretty hoity-toity to write off the country outside of California and New York, and the voters that elected him.
Huh? Who is this even directed at?
Was interesting when you didn't squeeze Hillary's voters though, when their reason was hating Trump. That wasn't a principle either.
Oy, this again. I responded to it here (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1509023#post1509023) and here (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1526267#post1526267) and here (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1534188#post1534188), and a few other places, too. This whole bit is worthless if you can't ever address the response.
Regardless this whole line of reasoning has been derogatory, when literally no one else here or even you has expressed their in-depth political principles.
Are you kidding? I've been describing my principles on here for half my life. I make no secrets about what I believe and will gladly answer any question you care to ask on the topic. This is so aggressively false that it makes me think you're just reflexively bouncing the same accusations back without stopping to ask yourself if they're remotely true.
Moreover, nobody asked you for "in-depth political principles." You refuse to answer even broad, simple questions about policy. Asking you about Reagan's trade policy is not a personal question, dude, let alone a derogatory one.
Captain Steel
02-22-17, 09:53 PM
For nostromo87: President Trump = Git 'er done!
Nostromo87
02-23-17, 12:08 AM
Actually, really, I might not have ever grown to love Trump as much as I did, if this forum hadn't been so deadset against allowing anything constructive about him to stand, I mean, he is our President, after all
We didn't "allow" it to stand in the same way a house of cards isn't "allowed" to stand when a gust of wind comes along. It didn't stand even under its own weight.
You mentioned Trump's supporters not conceding anything, clearly his opposition doesn't either. Works both ways.
It would if we were in equivalent positions. Lies and contradictions require concessions. Pointing out things are lies and contradictions does not.
Pretty hoity-toity to write off the country outside of California and New York, and the voters that elected him.
Huh? Who is this even directed at?
When you claim there's nothing constructive or encouraging about President Trump, that is hoity-toity to write off the country outside of California and New York that elected him. Pretty straight-forward.
Was interesting when you didn't squeeze Hillary's voters though, when their reason was hating Trump. That wasn't a principle either. Regardless this whole line of reasoning has been derogatory, when literally no one else here or even you has expressed their in-depth political principles.
Oy, this again. I responded to it here (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1509023#post1509023) and here (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1526267#post1526267) and here (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1534188#post1534188), and a few other places, too. This whole bit is worthless if you can't ever address the response.
And how's that logic work, anyway? If I started criticizing Hillary more, then what happens?
Then you'd have conducted a more balanced forum during the campaign :shrug:
Ðèstîñy
02-23-17, 12:10 AM
How can people defend Trump? I don't understand it at all.
Well, I normally try to speak clearly, using the English language. It's the only one I know. It's that or I just use my keyboard, trying to remember where all the keys are. Especially when I lose my glasses. :p
Dexter007
02-23-17, 12:12 AM
While there is a lot of things to criticize Hillary about, it'd be impossible to balance criticisms of both her and Trump. He'll always be worse, no matter how you look at it. No matter what.
Ðèstîñy
02-23-17, 12:32 AM
It'd be impossible to balance criticisms of both her and Trump. He'll always be worse, no matter how you look at it.
Nope! I'd be able to. Don't get the impression I'll work up a big debate in here. I'm a big hater of those things. It's rather pointless. No matter what I'd say, you'd never change your mind, and no matter what you'd say, I'll never change mine. I'm not a fan of wasting time.
Fact: A thing that is indisputably the case.
Opinion: The beliefs or views about a particular thing.
Those pictures are both good, but in my opinion, the second picture is hilarious.
http://i.imgur.com/Rv4eSEn.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/nFXNU1j.jpg
OK, that second pic IS hilarious. :p
Nostromo87
02-23-17, 12:47 AM
While there is a lot of things to criticize Hillary about, it'd be impossible to balance criticisms of both her and Trump. He'll always be worse, no matter how you look at it. No matter what.
Still trying to figure out how Hillary had the government, the liberal education system, the national media, the entertainment industry in her pocket, AND was handed the script to the debates... and still lost! Nobody has talked about that on here. A candidate who rigged everything, and still lost, it's pretty funny
When you claim there's nothing constructive or encouraging about President Trump
Show me where I said this. To the contrary, I've gone out of my way many times to explain what I think a reasonable reason for supporting him would be (the most recent is just a couple pages back), and I wrote out a list of possible silver linings the morning after the election.
that is hoity-toity to write off the country outside of California and New York that elected him. Pretty straight-forward.
Straightforward? It's a total non-sequitur. Criticizing Trump is not writing off his voters, and it sure as hell doesn't have anything to do with geography.
Here's what's really happening: you like to lump all or your political enemies together, because it's easier. Thus, if you think safe spaces are silly, and you don't like it when people criticize Trump, you just lazily accuse Trump critics of wanting a "safe space" even though it's literally the opposite of what they're asking for. Similarly, you don't like coastal elites, and you don't like me criticizing Trump, therefore you just lazily decide my criticism somehow is the same as coastal elites looking down on flyover country. It's sloppy thinking that has no connection to what's actually been said.
Then you'd have conducted a more balanced forum during the campaign :shrug:
As I've pointed out before, "balance" does not mean doing everything an equal amount. It means holding people to the same standards. If Trump lies more, and his supporters say more ridiculous things more often, then they're going to be argued with more.
The idea that he or you are entitled to some kind of 50/50 equal coverage guarantee regardless of behavior makes no sense.
Dexter007
02-23-17, 01:12 AM
Still trying to figure out how Hillary had the government, the liberal education system, the national media, the entertainment industry in her pocket, AND was handed the script to the debates... and still lost! Nobody has talked about that on here. A candidate who rigged everything, and still lost, it's pretty funny
She didn't have the national media in her pocket, the government includes both Republicans and Democrats (guess which party hates her), the education system isn't inherently "liberal", and her better performance in the debates is because she was a professional. Stilted and rehearsed? A bit too much, yes. But as least she didn't vomit all over the stage like Trump did. But yes, the entertainment industry overwhelmingly supported her, because Hollywood is made up of liberals. How dare they like a Democrat! And she lost because she was boring, not because Trump was a better candidate.
Dexter007
02-23-17, 01:14 AM
Oh, and for those that criticize Hillary of being corrupt, may I remind you that Trump has filled his administration with billionaires, many of whom have never held public office before?
I guess that's just a coincidence.
Also, we actually talked about her failings as a candidate a lot. But I think we've already established that he'll toss out any random accusation without really knowing or caring if it's true. Zero points for guessing who he might have learned that from.
Oh, and for those that criticize Hillary of being corrupt, may I remind you that Trump has filled his administration with billionaires, many of whom have never held public office before?
I guess that's just a coincidence.
You're wasting your time. nostromo talked about corruption a lot, and I showed him maybe half a dozen instances of the same thing happening under this administration, and all I got back were crickets.
You won't get back a substantive response. Just more deflections about Hillary, or how it's unfair that most of the people on the board criticize Trump. Whatever specific thing you get back, though, they all have the same purpose: change the subject.
Dexter007
02-23-17, 01:18 AM
You're wasting your time. nostromo talked about corruption a lot, and I showed him maybe half a dozen instances of the same thing happening under this administration, and all I got back were crickets.
You won't get back a substantive response. Just more deflections about Hillary, or how it's unfair that most of the people on the board criticize Trump. Whatever specific thing you get back, though, they all have the same purpose: change the subject.
Thanks, Yoda.
Once you realize it's happening you can see it in literally every reply. None of them actually address the arguments or the facts. They all change the subject, usually by clumsily trying to put the accuser on the defensive. The specific excuse or deflection will change, but it's always the same move.
Dexter007
02-23-17, 01:24 AM
Once you realize it's happening you can see it in literally every reply. None of them actually address the arguments or the facts. They all change the subject, usually by clumsily trying to put the accuser on the defensive. The specific excuse or deflection will change, but it's always the same move.
Sort of like how they keep bringing up Hillary, as Trump does, when that's in the past for us?
Nostromo87
02-23-17, 01:42 AM
All of this about no principles, and yet only one MoFo actually presented a personal video (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1612168#post1612168) they made about their entire historical worldview this year
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZGgAWwRs_4
The West
By FrastromoFranko
Ðèstîñy
02-23-17, 01:52 AM
Sort of like how they keep bringing up Hillary, as Trump does, when that's in the past for us?
Honey, I'm just having fun. You made that post as a solid fact, when it is clearly your opinion. As far as Yoda's post that you quoted and replied to, I may be wrong, but when he keeps saying "them/they", he is referring to Nostro's posts, not all of us literally. Again, I may be wrong . . .
Once you realize it's happening you can see it in literally every reply. None of them actually address the arguments or the facts. They all change the subject, usually by clumsily trying to put the accuser on the defensive. The specific excuse or deflection will change, but it's always the same move.
Yoda will correct me if I'm wrong.
Anyways, as far as the past is concerned, I consider that entire insane election the past. Personally, I am just waiting to see what happens. That's really all we can do. I'd sooner shoot the ***** about movies and music. Again, I was just teasing you with my posts. Besides, as far as we are concerned, you brought her up first. ;) I was just looking for David Letterman's joke on Shreded Wheat by Hillary. :p
Dexter007
02-23-17, 01:55 AM
Destiny, I appreciate your etiquette. I apologize, and specifically wanted to avoid targeting your posts. While we may disagree, I'm glad we can be civilized about it.
Ðèstîñy
02-23-17, 03:39 AM
Destiny, I appreciate your etiquette. I apologize, and specifically wanted to avoid targeting your posts. While we may disagree, I'm glad we can be civilized about it.
No need to apologize, and thank you very much. I truly appreciate your kind words. :)
Iroquois
02-23-17, 05:15 AM
"The depressing thing about tennis is that no matter how good I get, I'll never be as good as a wall." - Mitch Hedberg
"This is not Trump’s America!" Passengers rejoice when man accused of racism is kicked off flight
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JRqzq1gTZw
“Goooodbyeee raaacists!”
That was the blunt — and unquestionably sarcastic — message one heated passenger delivered to a man and a woman as they were being kicked off a United Airlines flight Saturday evening for causing a disturbance that was blamed on racist comments.
The confrontation on Flight 1113 from Chicago to Houston began several minutes earlier, when a Pakistani man and woman wearing traditional clothing were boarding the plane, according to VHF affiliate KHOU.
As the couple placed their bags in an overheard bin, a male passenger — who was not identified by the airline — asked the couple if they had a bomb in their luggage, another passenger sitting nearby told KHOU.
“That’s not a bomb in your bag, is it?” the man said, according to the passenger who was not identified by KHOU. The passenger added that the couple did not immediately hear the comment, which prompted the man to repeat his remark.
KHOU reported that a woman sitting nearby alerted a flight attendant, which led other passengers to also complain about the man’s questions. When the Indian American boyfriend of the woman who alerted the attendant complained, a heated exchange followed.
“The person ahead of us turned around and asked where my boyfriend was from; my boyfriend said it’s none of your business,” the woman told KHOU. “At that point he said all illegals and all foreigners need to leave the country.”
Cellphone footage of the incident shows the man saying all the “illegals” need to kicked off the plane, moments before the man and woman are asked to collect their belongings and exit the aircraft.
“I didn’t say anything,” the man protested, shrugging.
http://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAneQZ3.img?h=676&w=1019&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f
^^^ All you ignorant Trumpets send your hate Tweets to United Airlines ; )
“Happy flight home,” he added seconds later while his female companion holds her middle finger up to the person filming. “I hope you stay there.”
“Get out of here,” a woman responded. “Racists aren’t welcome in America! This is not Trump’s America!”
“Goooodbyeee raaacists!” the woman added.
“Hey, I’ll come back, but you’ll be gone,” the man said as he walked away.
Jonathan Guerin, a United Airlines spokesman, told The Washington Post the man and woman understood why they were asked to leave the plane and calm down. They were placed on a later flight bound for Houston, but Guerin said he didn’t know if the Texas city was their final destination.
“We removed two passengers for making others feel uncomfortable on the flight and for saying some inappropriate things to customers on the flight,” Guerin said, noting that removing customers from flights because of disruptive behavior is exceedingly rare.
“Most customers appreciate a place where they feel safe and where they’re not going to be attacked and we want to provide that,” he added.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/‘this-is-not-trump’s-america’-passengers-rejoice-when-man-accused-of-racism-is-kicked-off-flight/ar-AAneKNh?li=BBnb7Kz
Meanwhile, in the White House.........
Trump administration rolls back protections for transgender students
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-administration-rolls-back-protections-for-transgender-students/ar-AAnezrE?li=BBnb7Kz
Trump campaign team showed him positive coverage to control Twitter habits: report
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-campaign-team-showed-him-positive-coverage-to-control-twitter-habits-report/ar-AAne6Gq?li=BBnb7Kz
http://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAne91v.img?h=574&w=1019&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=454&y=240
:laugh:
Majority of Americans trust the media more than Trump: poll
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/majority-of-americans-trust-the-media-more-than-trump-poll/ar-AAnfg8N?li=BBnb7Kz
Still trying to figure out how Hillary had the government, the liberal education system, the national media, the entertainment industry in her pocket, AND was handed the script to the debates... and still lost! Nobody has talked about that on here. A candidate who rigged everything, and still lost, it's pretty funny
What's funny about it? That entire election was a joke and both candidates were jokes. I didn't vote for either. I find it sad and pathetic that either candidate would resort to lying/rigging to try to win. This was the worst election I've ever seen--two clowns with no right to be president. A truly sad commentary on how far our society and country have fallen.
This is why I don't like speaking to Trump supporters: they just ASSUME that any of us who hate Trump are Hillary supporters, "Libtards", "Democrats", etc. I'm none of those things, thank you very much.
Iroquois
02-23-17, 09:13 AM
Nothing funny about not voting at all, either.
What's funny about it? That entire election was a joke and both candidates were jokes. I didn't vote for either. I find it sad and pathetic that either candidate would resort to lying/rigging to try to win. This was the worst election I've ever seen--two clowns with no right to be president. A truly sad commentary on how far our society and country have fallen.
This is why I don't like speaking to Trump supporters: they just ASSUME that any of us who hate Trump are Hillary supporters, "Libtards", "Democrats", etc. I'm none of those things, thank you very much.
You like Bernie Sanders?
-crosses fingers-
I would also like to point out (since the subject is now coming about on this thread) that I've seen VERY few defenses of Trump that actually just defend the man on his own merits. It's almost always: "Oh, yeah? But Hillary did this" and "Obama was worse" and other deflections.
You know what? What any other president or presidential candidate did is IRRELEVANT. Why? Because TRUMP is our current president and this is HIS responsibility. Deflecting to other people is not a valid defense in my book. Those people are gone. These are TRUMP's decisions--TRUMP's choices. If people are so happy with and confident in him why are 99% of the defenses all about "Hillary did worse" and "Obama started it"? It's IRRELEVANT as to who started it and yes--it IS irrelevant.
People are judging Trump based upon his handling of situations. That is EXACTLY how his defenders should be handling it. All these comparisons. All this deflection. If you ask me, I don't believe that many of his supporters have actual confidence in the man. It seems to be more of a collective sigh of relief because they're happy that Hillary didn't win and Obama is out. I do not believe that many of his supporters are fully confident in the man--they just feel (in their opinion) that "things are better than they were before". Why else would they have to deflect so often?
Imagine this deflection defense applied to something else in life like a work situation:
-A man is caught stealing office supplies from his workplace. His defense is: "Yeah, but Sally stole way more than I did!" What sort of defense is that? That's how many of those Trump supporter "Defenses" sound like to me. It's not a defense. It's trying to find excuses.
Nothing funny about not voting at all, either.
Who said it was? Nevertheless, I stand by my decision. I'm not pulling that "I voted for such and such to keep the other from getting in" crap that so many did. That was even the excuse of a lot of people who voted for Trump: "Oh, I just didn't want Hillary to win and feel that Trump is the lesser of two evils, so I voted for him."
If I don't agree with either candidate--I'm NOT voting. Simple as that.
PS: And YES, there do exist defenses of Trump where said person is defending him on his own merits--I realize that. No offense intended against people who support him.
I'm simply stating that almost every defense that I've personally read online is always one of those deflection ones. I understand that not EVERY supporter is like that, so please don't take offense.
All of this about no principles
Well, first, I didn't say, and don't think, you have "no principles." I just think you either have really vague ones with no opinions about specific policies, or else you have those too but hide them because you know many are inconsistent with Trump's actions. I lean towards the former.
Also, this proves that all the "principles are private" stuff was just an empty excuse, right? Because you can't simultaneously say "I won't tell you because they're private" and "I already told you!"
and yet only one MoFo actually presented a personal video (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1612168#post1612168) they made about their entire historical worldview this year
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZGgAWwRs_4
That is not a video about your "entire historical worldview." It's a video about history, and the only principle even hinted at is "the West is good." That tells us nothing about economics, trade, entitlements, judicial activism, or a ton of other things I've asked after.
Also--and this is the key reason this doesn't explain anything--I specifically asked you about this video. You sent it to me privately, and I responded with this:
"I can't tell if you're sharing this just to share it, or if it's meant as a sort-of response to the thing you quoted. If it's the latter, I can only take it to mean that your Trump support is based primarily on the fact that you think Islamic extremism is an existential threat, and therefore we need a candidate who regards it as such. Is that what you're getting at?"
You never replied. If this is meant to be a declaration of principles, when on earth would you refuse to answer such a simple question about what it means?
If you think Trump's hardline position on Islamic extremism outweighs his many faults and flaws...then say that. Own your position.
TheUsualSuspect
02-23-17, 12:18 PM
https://i.imgur.com/LSn9Pw6.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/LSn9Pw6.jpg
:eek::eek::eek::eek:
I don't thing wealth is automatically indicative of corruption, nor do I think it's an example of him going back on any campaign promise.
What's relevant is the insider-outsider distinction. So the more damning thing, I think, is that he said he wanted to take on "the establishment," then made the head of the RNC his Chief of Staff, and the RNC's Communications Director his Press Secretary.
I don't thing wealth is automatically indicative of corruption, nor do I think it's an example of him going back on any campaign promise.
What's relevant is the insider-outsider distinction. So the more damning thing, I think, is that he said he wanted to take on "the establishment," then made the head of the RNC his Chief of Staff, and the RNC's Communications Director his Press Secretary.
It's almost as if you need people who have made politics their career to navigate this world properly, you know like a job. This is not a defense of Trump, it is an indictment of him and anyone who makes broad generalizations about draining the swamp and getting rid of career politicians. Frustrating.
"This is not Trump’s America!" Passengers rejoice when man accused of racism is kicked off flight]
Still blows my mind cretins like that exist in this day and age.
TheUsualSuspect
02-24-17, 10:31 PM
Can I get some Trump supporters opinion on this? (https://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/comments/5w07ne/white_house_blocks_cnn_bbc_new_york_times_la/?st=IZKMGLZM&sh=2b4c7e93)
Can I get some Trump supporters opinion on this? (https://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/comments/5w07ne/white_house_blocks_cnn_bbc_new_york_times_la/?st=IZKMGLZM&sh=2b4c7e93)
I imagine they would say Trump is blocking all the corrupt, overrated, nasty, dishonest, liberal fascist terrorist-supporting America-hating commie lying hillary-lovingpatheticangryhatefuljealousincompetentfailing fake news media organizations. :shrug:
gandalf26
02-25-17, 08:23 AM
Yeah that sums it up about right. :)
Nostromo87
02-25-17, 11:04 PM
All of this about no principles, and yet only one MoFo actually presented a personal video (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1612168#post1612168) they made about their entire historical worldview this year
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZGgAWwRs_4
The West
By FrostromoFranko
If this is meant to be a declaration of principles, when on earth would you refuse to answer such a simple question about what it means?
With all the declared nuance around here I wouldn't have thought MovieForums.com requires that even a crystal clear 4-minute shortfilm be spelled out.
2,000+ casualties by Radical Islamic Terrorists in European/American cities in just the last couple years in Istanbul (Turkey), Kumanovo (Macedonia), Graz (Austria), Berlin (Germany), Würzburg (Germany), Ansbach (Germany), Munich (Germany), Sicily (Italy), Brussels (Belgium), Nice (France), Paris (France), Seaside Park- New Jersey (USA), Manhattan- New York (USA), St. Cloud- Minnesota (USA), Columbus- Ohio (USA), Roanoke- Virginia (USA), Chattanooga- Tennessee (USA), Orlando- Florida (USA), Fort Lauderdale- Florida (USA), and San Bernardino- California (USA)
And so we had Donald Trump campaigning to strengthen screening on those immigrating from regions known for terrorist activity, while Hillary Clinton campaigned for a 550% increase in refugee migration and a wide-open border policy in spite of any terrorist threats.
I love the concept that it is okay for people living in Western nations to be proud of our history in nations such as Greece, Italy, France, Germany, Britain, which spread to the Americas and thanks to our Founding Fathers became the USA.
Can anyone imagine if Trump and his supporters had engineered and inflicted 2,000 casualties on someone in the last couple years, by the way? It would be framed as the Biggest Story in Universe History. The left already accused him of being Adolf Hitler- with no casualties. But if it is Islamic extremists performing violent acts in Western nations, and on minorities, women, and homosexuals within their own- then the left has to look the other way out of some misguided sense of 'tolerance.' Double standards. I don't appreciate my stance and pride in our own Western culture against Radical Islamic violence being undercut and sort of discarded, but at the same time it gives me great karma, so whatever
With all the declared nuance around here I wouldn't have thought MovieForums.com requires that even a crystal clear 4-minute shortfilm be spelled out.
It doesn't: the video is quite clear. What isn't as clear is the rest of your worldview. Specifically, whether or not you acknowledge the myriad problems people have pointed out, and whether or not you excuse them simply because you think this one thing is more important than all of them.
It's a simple question, and I've put it to you three times now. And it's awfully conspicuous that you keep trying to talk past it.
Guaporense
02-26-17, 01:04 AM
The number of non Islamic people murdering people in the Western world is about 150,000 a year. Yes western world includes South America and Mexico, but even among developed Western countries the murders number about 30,000 a year. The few hundred deaths a year from terrorism are nothing compared to that and obviously not representative of the over 1 billion Islamic people in the world. Also, it's not hard to understand what those attacks are about and they are specific attacks made by specific organizations for specific purposes. They are not a part of a war of Islam against Christendom as there is no such war.
The US is being really weird in their position on immigration right now because the US is made up of immigrants: American it's not an ethnic group. So blocking immigration is very weird for such New World country to be and specially religious discrimination. It's contradictory with its own past history.
Trump's hostility towards immigration is doing a huge deal of damage to legal immigration already. They already made it much more difficult for people to get work visas, for example. He is doing a lot of harm and if he gets to run over 8 years it would be awful for the US and also for the rest of the world, he might even default on the US debt. China and Russia are the only countries that want Trump in the White House and are taking advantage of him to expand their spheres of power.
d_chatterley
02-26-17, 01:39 AM
@Dani8 (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=95651) I read this today and thought of you. It made me so angry and embarrassed.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/25/australian-childrens-author-mem-fox-detained-by-us-border-control-i-sobbed-like-a-baby
Captain Steel
02-26-17, 01:40 AM
The number of non Islamic people murdering people in the Western world is about 150,000 a year. Yes western world includes South America and Mexico, but even among developed Western countries the murders number about 30,000 a year. The few hundred deaths a year from terrorism are nothing compared to that and obviously not representative of the over 1 billion Islamic people in the world. Also, it's not hard to understand what those attacks are about and they are specific attacks made by specific organizations for specific purposes. They are not a part of a war of Islam against Christendom as there is no such war.
The US is being really weird in their position on immigration right now because the US is made up of immigrants: American it's not an ethnic group. So blocking immigration is very weird for such New World country to be and specially religious discrimination. It's contradictory with its own past history.
Trump's hostility towards immigration is doing a huge deal of damage to legal immigration already. They already made it much more difficult for people to get work visas, for example. He is doing a lot of harm and if he gets to run over 8 years it would be awful for the US and also for the rest of the world, he might even default on the US debt. China and Russia are the only countries that want Trump in the White House and are taking advantage of him to expand their spheres of power.
It's all a matter of perspective. We don't even know the numbers (tens or hundreds of thousands) who have been murdered by ISIS over the last 4 years - and we won't know for a long time.
As far as a war by Islam on Christendom not existing - Copts in Egypt would disagree (and dozens of other Christian groups throughout the middle east and northern Africa that have been experiencing a literal holocaust of genocide over the last few decades would also disagree).
Trump's stance is not contradictory with America's past. (First, the country's entire history has been a series of alterations, changes and contradictions.) But whenever the country has been attacked, restraints on importing certain outsiders have been put into place. After Pearl Harbor, FDR immediately stopped all Japanese immigration and, worse yet, began putting Japanese Americans into camps.
The attack by Islamists on 9/11 was the single most devastating attack on American soil - Bush should have put a halt to all immigration temporarily and from all Islamic countries for an indefinite period.
Every President since Jimmy Carter has put immigration bans into place as a response to hostile events or threats from the middle east.
I have a hard time understanding how someone can feel terrorism is a major issue and then support Trump. The guy does nothing but talk big and put on a show. He's incompetent, he has no experience, and he can't even bother to take security issues seriously. You really think the president should be at odds with the national security agencies? Or tweeting about an upcoming interview while a military raid is going on in Yemen, a raid that turned out disastrous by the way, which Trump then lied about being Obama's plan and also boasted about it being successful?
It seems to me Trump supporters have either been conned or they're simply politicizing the terrorism issue as some sort of justification. There's already an extreme vetting process in place for Syrian refugees. There's been no attacks from people from those seven countries, but countries where he could have made a case for a travel ban were spared, several of which Trump has business deals in. Coincidence? The intelligence community has found no benefit to the travel ban, but that hasn't stopped Trump from trying to pressure them to find a justification. Sounds a lot like what happened leading to Bush's Iraq war. That turned out well.
Clinton did say she supported increasing Syrian refugees by 550%, though it's now impossible to say it would have happened, but all refugees would have undergone extreme vetting. I have mixed feelings about these things, I'll admit. But as far I know under Obama every terrorist attack in this country was from either U.S. citizens born of immigrants or from immigrants who'd been in the country since before Obama took office.
Anyhow, I just don't get how anyone can think a self-serving, reckless, inexperienced, narcissistic blowhard is going to keep the country safe. We can only hope those who do know what they're doing are able to do their jobs in spite of Trump.
@Dani8 (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=95651) I read this today and thought of you. It made me so angry and embarrassed.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/25/australian-childrens-author-mem-fox-detained-by-us-border-control-i-sobbed-like-a-baby
I saw that, D. I have to say, I've travelled a lot and met some pretty rude border control people as well as super nice, was detained n tokyo for hours because I'd been in africa for 6 months, but our experience at LAX was pretty cringey (we were only in transit as well), and that was way before this current mess. We were in US for a ********* conference to buy equipment from american companies, for heaven's sake. Don't be embarrassed, though. It could happen anywhere in the world. She's received a formal apology but nowhere have I seen WHY she was detained. I mean, was a 70 year old lady making Hi Jack jokes? I doubt it.
Here's an example - Riz Ahmed, an english actor. F bomb warning and it's a novella from a book of essays and race in UK, but if you scroll down toward the bottom he talks about Heathrow. Worth a read, though.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/15/riz-ahmed-typecast-as-a-terrorist
My husband without fail always gets hit with the random drug detector, and I'm sure it's simply because he has dark hair and eyes. There is no other reason I cn think of that he's been pinged every single time since 9/11. Maybe they know something I don't. Is he hiding a WoMD under his business shirt? No, I think that's just the result of xmas lunch. It's just the way it is these days. He doesnt mind because it's just the routine of being lined up like cattle going across borders, but things have been tight since 9/11 everywhere in the world, not just LAX. And not being a muslim he doesnt feel vilified by it, but I can only imgine how muslims feel when it happens. It IS horrible being detained incase they think you might be smuggling but to be detained for no reason and at the age of 70, or because of what religion someone ASSumes you are would be mind blowing. I'm glad my passport with stamps from predominantly muslim countries expired before I went to LAX to be honest.
eta the censor pinged me again for posting dog nammit
matt72582
02-26-17, 12:12 PM
Personally, I don't like it.. Even if I never fly again, I don't like it happening to others.
A couple of terrorists did hijack the country and take many of our civil liberties.
They did win.
A couple of terrorists did hijack the country and take many of our civil liberties.
They did win.
Yeah, and still winning. I wish the media would settle down a bit whenever the mentally deranged at isis get up to their crap. I dont want the media censored but they're feeding into their attention whoring and doing the job for them. I dont know what the answer is.
matt72582
02-26-17, 12:35 PM
Yeah, and still winning. I wish the media would settle down a bit whenever the mentally deranged at isis get up to their crap. I dont want the media censored but they're feeding into their attention whoring and doing the job for them. I dont know what the answer is.
They are the whores -- the job is supposed to inform, but they only give gossip and trivial information, whatever keeps people at the edge of their seat long enough to cash in on commercials.
I like the "Fake News" narrative. Keep people on their toes, or to keep people from watching. If I had all the money on earth, I would revive newspapers.
When those loons get up to stuff I flip between reuters and al jazeera to see if I can find a bit of truth in the middle.
D, more info is coming out about Mem Fox. Apparently she had the incorrect visa, which she claims border security mde up. The truth here is somewhere in the middle is my guess, and has got nothing to do with Trump ramping up their powers IMO. If you go anywhere in the world with the wrong visa you're going to be detained for questioning. I can't imagine why they would make that up just to detain a 70 year old woman for shts and giggles. On the other hand, she's been to USA over 100 times so I'd also think her papers were in order, but sometimes mistakes happen.
eta...hmmm might also hve something to do with her husband being a convicted pedo, but that was back in 1980. I don't know if he was on the flight with her or not. Something to think about, though. I didn't know anything bout that but it came up on fb. I know her books, though. Pretty cute.
Pure incompetence on display:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oQLf65N-AU
"Nobody knew health care could be so complicated." Really? The best part is how he goes from openly admitting how ignorant he is to pretending he has all these great solutions. He's got no plan, folks. The Republicans have admitted not having a plan, but this clueless guy has a plan? How would he even know if a plan were good or not? How would he be able to judge such a plan, based on what knowledge or standard? Of course, first he's going to fix the tax code. Okay, that should be interesting. Can't wait to see how that turns out. But he does tip his hat a little in that two minute segment: Just blame everyone else. This is what we have "running" our country.
Yeah that sums it up about right. :)
I pointed this out earlier, but it bears repeating: the dude isn't trying to keep the media honest. He's just mad when they don't cover him positively. It's pure self-interest. Observe:
https://twitter.com/LPDonovan/status/836333612970704897
We've seen this same pattern over and over: such-and-such is awful, and failing, and sad, when criticizing him. When they have something nice to say, he just conveniently forgets all that and praises them. Or vice-versa. There's no loyalty to the truth; it's just pure reaction based on whether or not they're being "nice" or "nasty" to him. That's it.
So if you dislike much of the media and think they're dishonest, fair enough. I do, too. But don't make the mistake of thinking anyone yelling at them must be doing it to fix the problem. He's not taking them on, he's just reflexively defending himself. And he does it even when the reporting is fair and accurate.
Guaporense
02-27-17, 10:28 PM
A couple of terrorists did hijack the country and take many of our civil liberties.
They did win.
Indeed. Since September 11 the US has steadily declined in terms of the quality of its institutions and lost a lot of potential growth. In the Fraser economic freedom ranking the US was ranked 3rd in 2000, now is ranked 16th and failing. With Trump now the US is not even regarded as a full democracy anymore but as a flawed democracy like Argentina, Colombia, México and Italy.
The main impact of terrorism was to basically make the US a more closed country and to make US citizens scared of foreigners. Now half of ths people vote for a polítician that promises to close down the borders and build a massive wall with their neighboring country, Mexico while promising to shut down imports from China. That would be ludicrous back in 1997 at the zenith of US's prosperity and power.
The US will probably decline even faster with Trump now. Fingers crossed he doesn't get re-elected. Otherwise the risks of WW3 will be even higher, specially with Bannon predicting a war in the south chIna sea in 2021.
Nostromo87
02-27-17, 11:38 PM
Can understand President Trump, the human being, swinging back against an unprecedented level of hostility. There hasn't been another person who has been so obsessed over in such a negative way while they're still alive.
It's like people are paid to ensure everything said about him is antagonistic ALL THE TIME. This must happen.
I've never seen anything else like it.
Iroquois
02-27-17, 11:45 PM
Nobody would pay for something that so many people are willing to do for free.
Nostromo87
02-27-17, 11:47 PM
Nobody would pay for something that so many people are willing to do for free.
Obviously false, many do pay for it to happen
Iroquois
02-27-17, 11:49 PM
Like who?
Dexter007
02-28-17, 12:04 AM
Like who?
Invisible people.
Nostromo87
02-28-17, 12:08 AM
Pff, the broadcast news the left watches, the news sites they frequent, all paid to be hostile to Trump around the clock
Iro sure spends time on a President he says he doesn't give a f*ck about
Iroquois
02-28-17, 12:13 AM
There's more than one way to not give a f*ck.
Besides, does this mean that the right-wing media are praising Trump for free?
Nostromo87
02-28-17, 12:34 AM
So you show how you don't give a f*ck by rapidly frequenting the President's threads? Smells fishy
You declared NOBODY pays to make sure everything said about our President is hostile.
Sounds like you are accepting that is false. Obvious point. You will notice I didn't claim the opposite, yet the publicly broadcast hostile news, entertainment, and media about President Trump clearly outnumbers that which celebrates him. Which could never be clearer here, on a forum that needs him to be discussed negatively ALL THE TIME.
So respond quickly to keep that going.
Iroquois
02-28-17, 12:56 AM
That line is a quote from Escape From New York - taken in context, it's not supposed to be a sign of apathy so much as one of dissent (Snake's responding to Hauk trying to tell him he's got to rescue the President from danger, which he initially responds to by saying "get a new President" to signify that he does not consider the President to be worth saving). Like I said, there's more than one way to not give a f*ck about someone or something. "Withdrawing in disgust is not the same thing as apathy" and all that.
As a point of comparison, It's not like you give a f*ck about whether or not people's negativity and criticism of Trump is ever actually justified. You're more likely to think that people are getting paid to hate him no matter what he does instead of accepting the possibility (just the possibility - I'm not even talking about the certainty) that people will hate him because his actual actions are so reprehensible. By saying "nobody would pay", it's more a statement about the economics of the situation - if people are willingly doing something for free, then why would they need to be paid? That'd just be giving money away for no good reason. Also, if it's about the money, then does this mean the people who praise Trump are doing it for free or are they also being paid to do so?
Nostromo87
02-28-17, 01:30 AM
I'm familiar with the Escape From New York quote, it's an acceptable John Carpenter film with a cool soundtrack (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=f1JYDmo19to), and I've always liked Kurt Russell.
It's remarkable how I haven't seen anyone who obsesses over their hatred for President Trump scrutinized here. Really at all. Because that's what everyone is supposed to think.
This thread is fun
https://www.facebook.com/shootingstarsmeme/videos/1395521643801589/
Iroquois
02-28-17, 01:36 AM
I don't know, people do have a tendency to argue with me a lot.
I don't know, people do have a tendency to argue with me a lot.
You've always been very pleasant to me but I can put some boxing gloves on that quokka if you like, Iro.
No hang on, need to see Putin again. Back in a bit
Captain Steel
02-28-17, 02:04 AM
This thread is fun
https://www.facebook.com/shootingstarsmeme/videos/1395521643801589/
When nostro and iro (and others who know who they are) get together to argue politics, it's always fun! :D
Iroquois
02-28-17, 02:05 AM
Don't act like you're above this, Steel.
When nostro and iro (and others who know who they are) get together to argue politics, it's always fun! :D
Never mind Trump and Putin, Cap. Hipsters are the enemy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKt3zSeDwSA
Captain Steel
02-28-17, 02:09 AM
Don't act like you're above this, Steel.
:D I like fun.
(Let's face it, the best show is Yoda vs. Nostro!)
:D I like fun.
(Let's face it, the best show is Yoda vs. Nostro!)
Does Yoda have a hipster beard? I'm fascinated by that dude in my link.
Nostromo87
02-28-17, 02:29 AM
When nostro and iro (and others who know who they are) get together to argue politics, it's always fun! :D
We're outnumbered again, Superman (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C-vz4Gdtrvc)
http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n617/frankog10/ezgif-1-45e6a2b14a_zpsy9d91qnp.gif
Iroquois
02-28-17, 02:30 AM
https://twitter.com/FoldableHuman/status/824748881292320768
Nostromo87
02-28-17, 02:57 AM
Liberals use Twitter to make their arguments and then simultaneously flip like Jimmy Kimmel (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OiBYRaLrFKk&app=desktop) and make dumb twitter poop jokes about President Trump- Double standard!
http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n617/frankog10/148826473820999_zpsgbqr6hxd.gif
Captain Steel
02-28-17, 03:01 AM
People think Trump is so harsh - if I'd been President on 9/12/2001 I would have:
Stopped all non-essential immigration for an indefinite period of time (until the immigration system could be completely revised and borders could be completely secured).
Rounded up everyone from overseas with an expired visa and deported them.
Deported all criminal illegal aliens within U.S. prisons.
Deployed the National Guard along both the North and South borders and established a Border Guard as an additional branch of the military.
Put all international airports and seaports under temporary martial law.
Instituted a mandatory one-year military service for all able-bodied, mentally competent citizens upon graduating high school.
Developed voluntary citizenship for service military programs for undocumented immigrants within the country.
Given Saudi Arabia 3 hours to unconditionally surrender.
Used tactical weapons on Afghanistan and the Taliban if they didn't produce and hand over Osama Bin Laden within 24 hours (a version of what Bush did).
Had no need for GITMO because all enemy combatants (Islamic Terrorists on the battlefield) would have "disappeared" on the battlefield if no further information could be gained from them.
Offered to move the nation of Israel to an area of Texas so that military bombardment of any countries in the middle east supporting or harboring Al Qaida terrorists could commence without Israel being used as a hostage.
Put hostile countries on notice that if a single American is so much as kidnapped or hurt on their soil, it would be taken as that country making a full declaration of war upon the U.S. and responded to with extreme prejudice.
And those would've been just a few programs begun on Wednesday.
Iroquois
02-28-17, 04:09 AM
Liberals use Twitter to make their arguments and then simultaneously flip like Jimmy Kimmel (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OiBYRaLrFKk&app=desktop) and make dumb twitter poop jokes about President Trump- Double standard!
http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n617/frankog10/148826473820999_zpsgbqr6hxd.gif
It is possible for a person to make both dumb jokes and cogent arguments. Someday you'll learn to do the latter.
Nostromo87
02-28-17, 04:12 AM
People think Trump is so harsh - if I'd been President on 9/12/2001 I would have:
Stopped all non-essential immigration for an indefinite period of time (until the immigration system could be completely revised and borders could be completely secured).
Rounded up everyone from overseas with an expired visa and deported them.
Deported all criminal illegal aliens within U.S. prisons.
Deployed the National Guard along both the North and South borders and established a Border Guard as an additional branch of the military.
Put all international airports and seaports under temporary martial law.
Instituted a mandatory one-year military service for all able-bodied, mentally competent citizens upon graduating high school.
Developed voluntary citizenship for service military programs for undocumented immigrants within the country.
Given Saudi Arabia 3 hours to unconditionally surrender.
Used tactical weapons on Afghanistan and the Taliban if they didn't produce and hand over Osama Bin Laden within 24 hours (a version of what Bush did).
Had no need for GITMO because all enemy combatants (Islamic Terrorists on the battlefield) would have "disappeared" on the battlefield if no further information could be gained from them.
Offered to move the nation of Israel to an area of Texas so that military bombardment of any countries in the middle east supporting or harboring Al Qaida terrorists could commence without Israel being used as a hostage.
Put hostile countries on notice that if a single American is so much as kidnapped or hurt on their soil, it would be taken as that country making a full declaration of war upon the U.S. and responded to with extreme prejudice.
And those would've been just a few programs begun on Wednesday.
THE MAN OF STEEL (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CvFo5BijsHs&app=desktop)
http://oi61.tinypic.com/mv58c9.jpg
(http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CvFo5BijsHs&app=desktop)
Can understand President Trump, the human being, swinging back against an unprecedented level of hostility. There hasn't been another person who has been so obsessed over in such a negative way while they're still alive.
Pretty sure Hillary was. Interestingly, you never tried to analyze that in the abstract. With that, it was always because of what she did, right? But with Trump, the "hate" and "hostility" (never just "criticism," of course) is treated like this arbitrary thing that fell on him for no particular reason, rather than something he invited and cultivated with his actions (hell, it was probably part of his strategy).
When he insults a war hero, or a woman for gaining weight, or lies brazenly about which wars he supported...you think the story is that people are mad about it, rather than that he did it in the first place? That's backwards thinking, and it's a really transparent way to try to change the subject. Which, as we've established, is your only move.
Also, time to update the counter:
It's a simple question, and I've put it to you threefour times now. And it's awfully conspicuous that you keep trying to talk past it.
Didn't even make it off page one when I remembered this is why I don't talk religion or politics online.
@Dani8 (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=95651) I read this today and thought of you. It made me so angry and embarrassed.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/25/australian-childrens-author-mem-fox-detained-by-us-border-control-i-sobbed-like-a-baby
Urghhh. More info, D - She's written an article here saying what happened and it uses such emotive language and carries on like a privileged elderly white person in such a way I'm actually finding her hard to believe. And reporters are obviously loving it. Byline:
Exclusive: The celebrated Australian children’s author tells how on her 117th visit to the US she was suddenly at the mercy of Donald Trump’s visa regime
Give me a break. Since when was Australi included in the 7 countries that have a temp visa restriction ?
gandalf26
02-28-17, 03:12 PM
People think Trump is so harsh - if I'd been President on 9/12/2001 I would have:
Stopped all non-essential immigration for an indefinite period of time (until the immigration system could be completely revised and borders could be completely secured).
Rounded up everyone from overseas with an expired visa and deported them.
Deported all criminal illegal aliens within U.S. prisons.
Deployed the National Guard along both the North and South borders and established a Border Guard as an additional branch of the military.
Put all international airports and seaports under temporary martial law.
Instituted a mandatory one-year military service for all able-bodied, mentally competent citizens upon graduating high school.
Developed voluntary citizenship for service military programs for undocumented immigrants within the country.
Given Saudi Arabia 3 hours to unconditionally surrender.
Used tactical weapons on Afghanistan and the Taliban if they didn't produce and hand over Osama Bin Laden within 24 hours (a version of what Bush did).
Had no need for GITMO because all enemy combatants (Islamic Terrorists on the battlefield) would have "disappeared" on the battlefield if no further information could be gained from them.
Offered to move the nation of Israel to an area of Texas so that military bombardment of any countries in the middle east supporting or harboring Al Qaida terrorists could commence without Israel being used as a hostage.
Put hostile countries on notice that if a single American is so much as kidnapped or hurt on their soil, it would be taken as that country making a full declaration of war upon the U.S. and responded to with extreme prejudice.
And those would've been just a few programs begun on Wednesday.
Ever thought about running?
Captain Steel
02-28-17, 03:38 PM
Ever thought about running?
Here's the thing - if Bush had taken care of business (and I'm not saying he didn't, he just didn't take it far enough and then lost focus on National Security and terrorism by invading Iraq in 2003) by doing the things I outlined, then many of the controversial issues covered in the debates and surrounding Trump's burgeoning presidency would have been things that were resolved 15 years ago and would no longer be issues.
The fact that so many of these things are still huge, controversial issues and pressing problems shows that we really didn't take 9/11 seriously, and our lack of accountability is almost like the nation asking to be hit again, but even harder next time.
9/11 was the perfect excuse to finally revise the immigration / visa system and to secure the borders - but we didn't.
PumaMan
02-28-17, 03:55 PM
Didn't even make it off page one when I remembered this is why I don't talk religion or politics online.
Yeah. It never has a good ending. And I have never seen anyone convinced on an online forum into changing their minds. Never. Probably never will.
gandalf26
02-28-17, 03:57 PM
I think in plenty of cases people will have changed their minds BUT, will never type an admission of this.
Captain Steel
02-28-17, 04:01 PM
Yeah. It never has a good ending. And I have never seen anyone convinced on an online forum into changing their minds. Never. Probably never will.
Really? Nostro changed my mind. Before reading his posts I loved Hillary and Obama!
I thought Trayvon MUST be innocent because if Obama had a son, he would've looked just like Trayvon - and therefore would be innocent because if Obama's son wouldn't attack anyone and he was black, then no black person would ever attack anyone! Right? It's just simple logic and I couldn't argue with the things Obama was trying to suggest. I was totally pulled in to his unfounded conclusions and overt racism! ;)
PumaMan
02-28-17, 04:25 PM
I think in plenty of cases people will have changed their minds BUT, will never type an admission of this.
Now that may be.
gandalf26
02-28-17, 04:26 PM
Now that may be.
What is a Puma Man?
Love how gandalf kinda changed PumaMan's mind on that and he accepted it :D
Captain Steel
02-28-17, 04:29 PM
What is a Puma Man?
This maybe?
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Sn6KXyExBvM/Tet0J6FICiI/AAAAAAAACGk/Q9pquNK51cs/s1600/puma.jpg
;)
PumaMan
02-28-17, 04:32 PM
Love how gandalf kinda changed PumaMan's mind on that and he accepted it :D
Yes. I admit that someone may change their mind (behind the scenes). But I've never seen it happen in the thread. My point.
You see? This is a political thread and it's nothing but arguments. QED.
I'm outa here. Have fun! :)
I know what you meant it was just funny that gandalf seemed to change your mind on something minor while you were discussing people never changing their minds and accepting it - which you did.
Captain Steel
02-28-17, 04:36 PM
Political debate is not so much about changing people's minds but rather, expanding their perspectives by forcing them to at least consider other arguments (and in order to debate arguments, one must first consider them).
I agree, Cap. I cant stand Trumpty dumpty but I am aghast at some of the reactions to a temporary tightening of border security at a time when nutbag extremists and disenfranchised youth are causing turmoil in the world, especially the aussie kids' author and the way the aus press is eating that alive. I'm finding some of it a bit irrational, tpo be honest. I'll probably never like the guy because I've never liked him, but open to viewing him from both sides (as I see fit).
ash_is_the_gal
02-28-17, 04:42 PM
People think Trump is so harsh - if I'd been President on 9/12/2001 I would have:
Stopped all non-essential immigration for an indefinite period of time (until the immigration system could be completely revised and borders could be completely secured).
Rounded up everyone from overseas with an expired visa and deported them.
Deported all criminal illegal aliens within U.S. prisons.
Deployed the National Guard along both the North and South borders and established a Border Guard as an additional branch of the military.
Put all international airports and seaports under temporary martial law.
Instituted a mandatory one-year military service for all able-bodied, mentally competent citizens upon graduating high school.
Developed voluntary citizenship for service military programs for undocumented immigrants within the country.
Given Saudi Arabia 3 hours to unconditionally surrender.
Used tactical weapons on Afghanistan and the Taliban if they didn't produce and hand over Osama Bin Laden within 24 hours (a version of what Bush did).
Had no need for GITMO because all enemy combatants (Islamic Terrorists on the battlefield) would have "disappeared" on the battlefield if no further information could be gained from them.
Offered to move the nation of Israel to an area of Texas so that military bombardment of any countries in the middle east supporting or harboring Al Qaida terrorists could commence without Israel being used as a hostage.
Put hostile countries on notice that if a single American is so much as kidnapped or hurt on their soil, it would be taken as that country making a full declaration of war upon the U.S. and responded to with extreme prejudice.
And those would've been just a few programs begun on Wednesday.your profile picture is literally an illegal alien
gandalf26
02-28-17, 05:01 PM
Love how gandalf kinda changed PumaMan's mind on that and he accepted it :D
The dark arts son, the dark arts.
Captain Steel
02-28-17, 05:22 PM
your profile picture is literally an illegal alien
He was adopted as an infant by Americans and thus "naturalized." ;)
Captain Steel
02-28-17, 05:30 PM
This thread's going to be ROCKING tonight! :yup:
Captain Steel
02-28-17, 05:38 PM
I agree, Cap. I cant stand Trumpty dumpty but I am aghast at some of the reactions to a temporary tightening of border security at a time when nutbag extremists and disenfranchised youth are causing turmoil in the world, especially the aussie kids' author and the way the aus press is eating that alive. I'm finding some of it a bit irrational, tpo be honest. I'll probably never like the guy because I've never liked him, but open to viewing him from both sides (as I see fit).
I don't "like" him either - never did.
But I "liked" Hillary far less! ;)
I didnt like Hillary either. Caused a stir at the other place when I called her a psychopath.
your profile picture is literally an illegal alien
*Undocumented alien
Iroquois
02-28-17, 09:26 PM
An undocumented alien who grows up to become a journalist, who we all know are now "enemies of the American people".
Captain Steel
02-28-17, 10:07 PM
Trump to Clark Kent at a news conference...
"Oh, Kent... more fake news. Who do you work for again? The Daily Planet? There's a winner!
I bet you're not even a real so-called journalist - he probably wears blue pajamas and a cape under his suit, folks, believe me.
I don't know if those glasses are doing you much good, Kent, maybe you need them to tell the real news from fake news. He probably can't even see straight enough to write. (makes spastic gesture)
No, you're not my enemy Kent, you're the enemy of the American people.
How's your wife, Lois? Who'd want to be stuck looking at THAT all day? She's no Melania, I'll tell ya that, believe me, right folks? Believe me.
But enough of the fake news media, we're going to take care of the media, believe me.
Now it's time for me to announce my latest cabinet pick - a great man with so so much experience, he's got all kinds of experience, and who's going to make great deals and do such a good job, believe me... ladies and gentlemen, please welcome Mr. Lex Luthor."
jiraffejustin
02-28-17, 10:13 PM
We are now discussing the politics of an avatar in this thread. Good stuff, guys. Keep it up.
ash_is_the_gal
02-28-17, 11:03 PM
&it's actually up there in quality in comparison to the previous 20 pages
jiraffejustin
02-28-17, 11:19 PM
Something to be proud of, I'm sure.
Frightened Inmate No. 2
02-28-17, 11:42 PM
i would rather talk about supermen for the rest of the thread than the disgusting nonsense that was posted on the last page.
Iroquois
03-01-17, 02:06 AM
As someone pointed out on Twitter a while back, Batman v Superman is actually too optimistic for these times because it involves the xenophobic billionaire learning to accept the illegal alien he's been raging against the whole time.
https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/836863843640958976
ash_is_the_gal
03-01-17, 12:46 PM
if Trump could get past his own insecurities and not freak out any time he is even slightly criticized, he'd realize most of the media is just dying to kiss his butt if given the opportunity. he is able to make it through reading one prepared speech without accidentally crapping his pants or throwing out a racial slur and they all start screaming "PIVOT!"
it's like someone in an abusive relationship getting excited because their spouse didn't throw them down the stairs last weekend. "I just knew he would change!"
https://www.facebook.com/badlipreading/videos/1488474931165201/
It's only short.
https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/836863843640958976
LOL at using NYT to fact check something...
You silly ape! ;)
What's wrong with NYT? I rarely read it.
Nostromo87
03-02-17, 12:59 AM
Can understand President Trump, the human being, swinging back against an unprecedented level of hostility. There hasn't been another person who has been so obsessed over in such a negative way while they're still alive.
I've never seen anything else like it.
Pretty sure Hillary was. Interestingly, you never tried to analyze that in the abstract. With that, it was always because of what she did, right?
Most of the nationally broadcast media rolled out the carpet for her the whole election, practically handing it to her. And she certainly wasn't obsessed over here, anywhere near as much as Trump was. Her voters spent more time dumping on Trump than talking about her, and Trump's voters spent way more time being favorable about Trump than flooding Hillary with negativity. The activity here reflects that, Hillary's thread didn't get much activity bc it seemed her voters hated Trump more than they liked her, and Trump's voters like him more than they hated Hillary.
But with Trump, the "hate" and "hostility" (never just "criticism," of course) is treated like this arbitrary thing that fell on him for no particular reason, rather than something he invited and cultivated with his actions (hell, it was probably part of his strategy).
When he insults a war hero, or a woman for gaining weight, or lies brazenly about which wars he supported...you think the story is that people are mad about it, rather than that he did it in the first place? That's backwards thinking, and it's a really transparent way to try to change the subject. Which, as we've established, is your only move.
Usually what people try to hammer President Trump for is that he swings back when people attack him. He and McCain had a back-and-forth prior to when he said he likes soldiers who weren't captured. If we're talking about people's only move, well- taking Trump out of context while disregarding for the situation- that's a major part of the manipulation playbook his attackers use. People want him to shut up while they criticize him. He was only ever lukewarm about the war in Iraq, the only quote I've seen was with Howard Stern way back in the early 2000's Factcheck.org (http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/donald-trump-and-the-iraq-war/)
http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n617/frankog10/trump%20iraq_zpsvi2xvqzg.png
That isn't resounding support for a war like his enemies claim. That's what enemies do, they frame a person out of context to try and destroy them, I've experienced it before myself- not here though. Well, people did try to destroy the Nostromo brand here, for liking Trump, but not that way.
Anyways, I see this whole battle as one between negative and positive energy. President Trump is going to continue to win it, because, his enemies are devoting all their energy towards negativity directed at him, they'd be wiser to aim their energy in a constructive form towards some other politician who can rival him in the next election. That's what Trump's enemies didn't really do in 2016, they used all their effort trying to bring him down instead of directing it towards promotion to someone they like. The argument was always "Not Trump" instead of, "Here is why it should be this person instead." Where is that other person? It's easy to weigh Donald Trump against some imaginarily perfect ideal candidate, yet where is that candidate? Find him/her, and promote that, that's what I'd do if I hated President Trump so much
Her voters spent more time dumping on Trump than talking about her
*thread implodes in a supernova of irony*
The activity here reflects that, Hillary's thread didn't get much activity bc it seemed her voters hated Trump more than they liked her, and Trump's voters like him more than they hated Hillary.
This isn't borne out by the exit polls, which show a sizable number of Trump's voters disapproved of him.
It seems like your pontifications about this stuff never describe reality or jibe with the facts: they're just things you'd like to believe are true, because they sound nice.
Usually what people try to hammer President Trump for is that he swings back when people attack him. He and McCain had a back-and-forth prior to when he said he likes soldiers who weren't captured.
So it's okay to insult him for being a POW...? Yes or no? Or does McCain having a "back-and-forth" with him mean Trump is absolved from having to be a decent human being?
People want him to shut up while they criticize him.
No, they want him to not lie, and not insult people like an oversensitive middle-schooler just because they dared to criticize him.
He was only ever lukewarm about the war in Iraq, the only quote I've seen was with Howard Stern way back in the early 2000's Factcheck.org (http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/donald-trump-and-the-iraq-war/)
http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n617/frankog10/trump%20iraq_zpsvi2xvqzg.png
That isn't resounding support for a war like his enemies claim.
This is really dishonest:
1. He said he was AGAINST it, not that he was lukewarm. Therefore, in admitting he was lukewarm, you just admitted he lied, right?
2. Why do you think you can sidestep this lie by claiming some people (who? when?) said it was "resounding"? Even if you actually elaborated (which you almost never do), you won't have changed the lie; just the subject.
3. I was talking about Libya, not Iraq. You might recall I've linked you to direct video evidence of this several times.
Anyways, I see this whole battle as one between negative and positive energy.
Oh, I believe you like to think this is true, but it isn't. I've shown you tons of examples of how negative you get when people ask you tough questions. A few weeks ago you tried to pretend you were operating by the Golden Rule, until I showed you several examples of you not doing that at all, at which point you admitted you didn't think you should have to hold to it if others didn't...which totally isn't how the Golden Rule works at all. So that was bunk. And so is this revisionist framing about positivity and negativity.
Iroquois
03-02-17, 01:48 AM
Most of the nationally broadcast media rolled out the carpet for her the whole election, practically handing it to her. And she certainly wasn't obsessed over here, anywhere near as much as Trump was. Her voters spent more time dumping on Trump than talking about her, and Trump's voters spent way more time being favorable about Trump than flooding Hillary with negativity. The activity here reflects that, Hillary's thread didn't get much activity bc it seemed her voters hated Trump more than they liked her, and Trump's voters like him more than they hated Hillary.
I was under the impression that, in the interest of coming across as "fair and balanced", the media's attempts to apply equal levels of scrutiny to both candidates led to the whole "e-mails" thing being blown up as used as a major indictment of Hillary that was comparable to pretty much any of the worst things Trump had been responsible for or claimed to do. This naturally fed into the existing narrative among various sub-groups that neither candidate was any better than the other.
Usually what people try to hammer President Trump for is that he swings back when people attack him. He and McCain had a back-and-forth prior to when he said he likes soldiers who weren't captured. If we're talking about people's only move, well- taking Trump out of context while disregarding for the situation- that's a major part of the manipulation playbook his attackers use. People want him to shut up while they criticize him. He was only ever lukewarm about the war in Iraq, the only quote I've seen was with Howard Stern way back in the early 2000's Factcheck.org (http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/donald-trump-and-the-iraq-war/)
http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n617/frankog10/trump%20iraq_zpsvi2xvqzg.png
That isn't resounding support for a war like his enemies claim. That's what enemies do, they frame a person out of context to try and destroy them, I've experienced it before myself- not here though. Well, people did try to destroy the Nostromo brand here, for liking Trump, but not that way.
As for all those complaints that any media outlets presenting anything critical of him were "fake news"?
Anyways, I see this whole battle as one between negative and positive energy. President Trump is going to continue to win it, because, his enemies are devoting all their energy towards negativity directed at him, they'd be wiser to aim their energy in a constructive form towards some other politician who can rival him in the next election. That's what Trump's enemies didn't really do in 2016, they used all their effort trying to bring him down instead of directing it towards promotion to someone they like. The argument was always "Not Trump" instead of, "Here is why it should be this person instead." Where is that other person? It's easy to weigh Donald Trump against some imaginarily perfect ideal candidate, yet where is that candidate? Find him/her, and promote that, that's what I'd do if I hated President Trump so much
The issue with this line of thinking is that by framing it as a simple "positive-negative" thing, it cuts out a lot of the nuance and introspection necessary to processing something as complicated as politics. The reason why so much negativity was/is aimed at Trump is because he stands out as someone who may just be the most imperfect individual to ever become a Presidential candidate, so he had to be stopped no matter what - it's a pity that that wasn't enough of a reason to mobilise people into voting against him (not just in terms of popular votes but also in terms of the electoral college), but at least the silver lining is that maybe people won't be so complacent now and will actually support those who would challenge him and his administration.
More importantly, where exactly is this "positive energy" for Trump coming from? Party-first Republicans looking to get back into power by any means necessary? The KKK and other assorted fringe groups who see his ascendancy as a means for their hatred to be legitimised? Middle Americans who see him as the only viable option for destroying The Terrorists regardless of any collateral damage he may cause while in office? The Russians? The positivity is meaningless if it doesn't come with standards, and if the only standard is "making America great again" then that should also be held to scrutiny over when America stopped being "great" and what it would supposedly take to restore it to that particular standard of greatness.
Nostromo87
03-02-17, 02:31 AM
Most of the nationally broadcast media rolled out the carpet for her the whole election, practically handing it to her. And she certainly wasn't obsessed over here, anywhere near as much as Trump was. Her voters spent more time dumping on Trump than talking about her.
*thread implodes in a supernova of irony*
How's that? The Hillary thread had only 26 pages, while Trump's had 185, and most of those were you guys trying to make sure he was presented negatively around the clock.
The activity here reflects that
This isn't borne out by the exit polls, which show a sizable number of Trump's voters disapproved of him.
It seems like your pontifications about this stuff never describe reality or jibe with the facts: they're just things you'd like to believe are true, because they sound nice.
Are those the same exit polls from election day that reflected the whole media-notion that it didn't look good for Trump?
So it's okay to insult him for being a POW...? Yes or no? Or does McCain having a "back-and-forth" with him mean Trump is absolved from having to be a decent human being?
It means if the point is to be complete and accurate you should place Trump's quotes in the accurate timeline of when they are spoken, in the aftermath of of an argument between he and McCain, a candidate who failed the Republican party in the 2008 election. Trump said "I like soldiers who weren't captured." I see it as the Trump personality, it's like General George S. Patton who he regards highly, people hate him for that, and people hated General Patton for mouthing off too. Trump did win an election, and John McCain did not.
http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n617/frankog10/trump%20iraq_zpsvi2xvqzg.png
That isn't resounding support for a war like his enemies claim.
This is really dishonest:
1. He said he was AGAINST it, not that he was lukewarm. Therefore, in admitting he was lukewarm, you just admitted he lied, right?
2. Why do you think you can sidestep this lie by claiming some people (who? when?) said it was "resounding"? Even if you actually elaborated (which you almost never do), you won't have changed the lie; just the subject.
3. I was talking about Libya, not Iraq. You might recall I've linked you to direct video evidence of this several times.
If someone responds in a lukewarm fashion in their support for a war, and we all want to be all about nuance, then you can't frame it as some giant lie. A person can be in favor of action against an enemy, yet disagree with the methods enacted. And then their enemies can use that against them later, and just because someone else held the reins in directing affairs. I've seen this in other spheres apart from politics/war.
Anyways, I see this whole battle as one between negative and positive energy. President Trump is going to continue to win it, because, his enemies are devoting all their energy towards negativity directed at him, they'd be wiser to aim their energy in a constructive form towards some other politician who can rival him in the next election. That's what Trump's enemies didn't really do in 2016, they used all their effort trying to bring him down instead of directing it towards promotion to someone they like. The argument was always "Not Trump" instead of, "Here is why it should be this person instead." Where is that other person? It's easy to weigh Donald Trump against some imaginarily perfect ideal candidate, yet where is that candidate? Find him/her, and promote that, that's what I'd do if I hated President Trump so much
Oh, I believe you like to think this is true, but it isn't. I've shown you tons of examples of how negative you get when people ask you tough questions. A few weeks ago you tried to pretend you were operating by the Golden Rule, until I showed you several examples of you not doing that at all, at which point you admitted you didn't think you should have to hold to it if others didn't...which totally isn't how the Golden Rule works at all. So that was bunk. And so is this revisionist framing about positivity and negativity.
And I responded with examples (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1630486#post1630486) for how my responses were provoked by prior attacks. I mean, this is about ensuring that MoFo is anti-Trump all the time on here.
Nostromo87
03-02-17, 02:37 AM
My reasoning is great, MoFos are just programmed to think Yoda has to be right all the time
My reasoning is great, MoFos are just programmed to think Yoda has to be right all the time
Oh Noooo. I had no idea coming to this forum meant my mind was under the control of someone. I thought only my dentist did that when he gave me Nitrous Oxide :dizzy:
christine
03-02-17, 03:25 AM
My reasoning is great, MoFos are just programmed to think Yoda has to be right all the time
No that's just silly. This is a place where there's a wide range of political views presented by people with strong opinions, and I've seen plenty of people over the years disagreeing with him. I'm pretty sure I have at some points, but he's always returned with well thought out, interesting points that make you think whether or not you agree with him.
I'm interested in the situation in the US as it affects the whole world as well as people I care about within the US.
Iroquois
03-02-17, 03:28 AM
See, it's this kind of conspiracy-theory thinking that just doesn't help at all. Yoda and I disagree on a lot of things (flick back about 20 pages in this thread to see us argue about protestors, for example), but we both happen to more or less agree that Trump deserves most (if not all) of the criticism that's been aimed at him since he started running for President (and the same goes for many other anti-Trump users). I already mentioned this the other day when you brought up people being paid to hate Trump, but you seem more willing to believe that any and all anti-Trump sentiment is the result of deliberate conspiracy than if it was just what people genuinely thought.
In short:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMqZ2PPOLik
https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/mt/2017/02/GettyImages_632781806/lead_960.jpg?1488225747
The State of Trump's State Department
Anxiety and listless days as a foreign-policy bureaucracy confronts the possibility of radical change
The flags in the lobby of the State Department stood bathed in sunlight and silence on a recent afternoon. “It’s normally so busy here,” marveled a State Department staffer as we stood watching the emptiness. “People are usually coming in for meetings, there’s lots of people, and now it’s so quiet.” The action at Foggy Bottom has instead moved to the State Department cafeteria where, in the absence of work, people linger over countless coffees with colleagues. (“The cafeteria is so crowded all day,” a mid-level State Department officer said, adding that it was a very unusual sight. “No one’s doing anything.”) As the staffer and I walked among the tables and chairs, people with badges chatted over coffee; one was reading his Kindle.
“It just feels empty,” a recently departed senior State official told me.
This week began with reports that President Donald Trump’s budget proposal will drastically slash the State Department’s funding, and last week ended with White House adviser and former Breitbart head Stephen Bannon telling the attendees of the annual Conservative Political Action Conference that what he and the new president were after was a “deconstruction of the administrative state.” At the State Department, which employs nearly 70,000 people around the world, that deconstruction is already well underway.
In the last week, I’ve spoken with a dozen current and recently departed State Department employees, all of whom asked for anonymity either because they were not authorized to speak to the press and feared retribution by an administration on the prowl for leakers, or did not want to burn their former colleagues. None of these sources were political appointees. Rather, they were career foreign service officers or career civil servants, most of whom have served both Republican and Democratic administrations—and many of whom do not know each other. They painted a picture of a State Department adrift and listless.
Sometimes, the deconstruction of the administrative state is quite literal. After about two dozen career staff on the seventh floor—the State Department’s equivalent of a C suite—were told to find other jobs, some with just 12 hours’ notice, construction teams came in over President’s Day weekend and began rebuilding the office space for a new team and a new concept of how State’s nerve center would function. (This concept hasn’t been shared with most of the people who are still there.) The space on Mahogany Row, the line of wood-paneled offices including that of the secretary of state, is now a mysterious construction zone behind blue tarp.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/03/state-department-trump/517965/?utm_source=atltw
Usually what people try to hammer President Trump for is that he swings back when people attack him. He and McCain had a back-and-forth prior to when he said he likes soldiers who weren't captured. If we're talking about people's only move, well- taking Trump out of context while disregarding for the situation- that's a major part of the manipulation playbook his attackers use. People want him to shut up while they criticize him.
No, the vast majority of the criticisms directed at Trump have had nothing to do with such matters. His comments toward McCain would have ruined most politicians, but with Trump such nonsense is so overwhelming his critics have had to let those types of things slide for the most part.
How's that? The Hillary thread had only 26 pages, while Trump's had 185, and most of those were you guys trying to make sure he was presented negatively around the clock.
The level of hatred toward Hillary has been unreal. People call her evil and the devil, even on this site, even by people who don't lean Right. If you haven't noticed that, you don't get out much. Lots and lots of people despise her. As for why her thread is only 26 pages long is because she's boring. What's there to talk about? Her critics yammer about the emails, Benghazi, and maybe what she said about Bill's accusers. Oh, and how she used a legitimate charity to get rich. There's not much to talk about beyond that. Most her critics have only a cursory understanding of those issues, but they aren't very interesting, and the more you learn about them, the less incriminating they become. It's better not to know so much, so it's easier to say she should be locked up.
Of course, it's all beside the point. Trump won the election, so Hillary is irrelevant. Maybe she is the devil, but she ain't the president. Trump, on the other hand, is an endless goldmine of corruption, failure, incompetence, recklessness, vanity and narcissism, dishonesty, disgusting behavior, and possibly treasonous dealings. Don't expect any of us to shut up because it hurts your feelings.
How's that? The Hillary thread had only 26 pages, while Trump's had 185, and most of those were you guys trying to make sure he was presented negatively around the clock.
The irony is that you tried to answer virtually every criticism of Trump by talking about Hillary, obviously.
Are those the same exit polls from election day that reflected the whole media-notion that it didn't look good for Trump?
Nope: exit polls before vote returns are notoriously unreliable. But it's good to know you're prepared to use any inaccurate poll to dismiss any inconvenient one.
It means if the point is to be complete and accurate you should place Trump's quotes in the accurate timeline of when they are spoken, in the aftermath of of an argument between he and McCain, a candidate who failed the Republican party in the 2008 election. Trump said "I like soldiers who weren't captured." I see it as the Trump personality, it's like General George S. Patton who he regards highly, people hate him for that, and people hated General Patton for mouthing off too. Trump did win an election, and John McCain did not.
First: you didn't answer the question. I asked if it was okay, and you said the quote needs context. So with that context...is what he said okay? Yes or no?
Second: in addition to not answering, you throw out a bunch of meaningless chaff. McCain lost in 2008...and? And that means the standard for how we honor him as a POW changes? :skeptical: If not, then what does it have to do with the point?
Third: please, compare General Patton to a draft dodger again.
If someone responds in a lukewarm fashion in their support for a war, and we all want to be all about nuance, then you can't frame it as some giant lie.
Sure you can: if the person repeats, over and over, that they were against it from the start. You don't need a resounding claim to lie resoundingly about it.
Also, you again didn't answer the question: is it a lie? You're trying to downplay it by knocking down the straw men of "resounding support" and "giant lie," but that's just a way to have something to contradict, even though the question I asked didn't say "resounding" or "giant." So you've changed the question, and the subject, into something you can argue with.
A person can be in favor of action against an enemy, yet disagree with the methods enacted.
But this isn't what he said. He pretends he was never in favor of it at all.
Also: you ignored the Libya stuff again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nyg2PG3QrxM
I'm pretty sure this qualifies as "resounding."
And I responded with examples (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1630486#post1630486) for how my responses were provoked by prior attacks.
And I responded by pointing out that that isn't how the Golden Rule works (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1630488#post1630488). It's not "do unto others as you would have them to do you...unless they're asking for it."
"I didn't do that" and "I was provoked" are mutually exclusive claims.
General Patton has to be turning in his grave after hearing himself compared to Trump. :eek:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ZNkvemDYDFo/TT-GOH9QmaI/AAAAAAAABm0/Ko8YiQkQmkk/s1600/82patton90.JPG
ash_is_the_gal
03-02-17, 10:01 AM
My reasoning is great, MoFos are just programmed to think Yoda has to be right all the time
whyyy are you even here? i don't get it. why come onto a forum you think is completely brainwashed? if i felt that way, i wouldn't be here.
My reasoning is great, MoFos are just programmed to think Yoda has to be right all the time
I'm not originally a MoFo and am a newcomer here and still think that everything Yoda said to you is right and that everything you stated is wrong, so...yeah--just thought I'd drown that little theory of yours. :yup:
No, the vast majority of the criticisms directed at Trump have had nothing to do with such matters. His comments toward McCain would have ruined most politicians, but with Trump such nonsense is so overwhelming his critics have had to let those types of things slide for the most part.
The level of hatred toward Hillary has been unreal. People call her evil and the devil, even on this site, even by people who don't lean Right. If you haven't noticed that, you don't get out much. Lots and lots of people despise her. As for why her thread is only 26 pages long is because she's boring. What's there to talk about? Her critics yammer about the emails, Benghazi, and maybe what she said about Bill's accusers. Oh, and how she used a legitimate charity to get rich. There's not much to talk about beyond that. Most her critics have only a cursory understanding of those issues, but they aren't very interesting, and the more you learn about them, the less incriminating they become. It's better not to know so much, so it's easier to say she should be locked up.
Of course, it's all beside the point. Trump won the election, so Hillary is irrelevant. Maybe she is the devil, but she ain't the president. Trump, on the other hand, is an endless goldmine of corruption, failure, incompetence, recklessness, vanity and narcissism, dishonesty, disgusting behavior, and possibly treasonous dealings. Don't expect any of us to shut up because it hurts your feelings.
And it downright frightens me how Trump and his supporters tell those of us who don't like him to basically "shut up". Uh...last I checked, it's our right as Americans to voice our opinions.
Anyone else getting more and more of this "dictatorship" feel from this? This is how dictatorships are: blind praise and worship and negative opinions against the leader not allowed/frowned upon.
And the most frightening aspect of it is this: many of his supporters seem to WANT this to turn into a dictatorship--with the way they want the media and negative people silenced, that's the very first step toward asking for a dictatorship in my view.
whyyy are you even here? i don't get it. why come onto a forum you think is completely brainwashed? if i felt that way, i wouldn't be here.
He enjoys the arguments and riling people up, of course. In short--he's a troll.
And it downright frightens me how Trump and his supporters tell those of us who don't like him to basically "shut up". Uh...last I checked, it's our right as Americans to voice our opinions.
Its funny how sensitive Trump supporters are of him being criticized. Its like, the past 30 years the media and public have been merciless to all Presidents. No matter how popular, even Reagan, there are detractors, and the criticism comes. No exceptions.
Its funny how sensitive Trump supporters are of him being criticized. Its like, the past 30 years the media and public have been merciless to all Presidents. No matter how popular, even Reagan, there are detractors, and the criticism comes. No exceptions.
I see it as a combination of things:
-Several of his supporters are people who are built up with rage over Obama's administration as well as the rise of PC. They see Trump as the remedy for all that and it triggers them into a rage-filled reaction at the very NOTHING of someone wanting to stop Trump
-Many of his supporters are, in fact, actually lacking in faith of him and are looking for reasons--anything to cling to--to see him as their "hero". Their anger and overprotectiveness of Trump is an outward illustration of their own insecurities they harbor for the man but will never admit. In short--they want many of the things Trump wants, have their doubts of him delivering, and angrily defend him out of hopes of him succeeding in his endeavors.
It also has to do with Trump's behavior. Most people are fickle-minded. They're followers. They choose a person to follow and, in the process, conform to that person, modeling their own behaviors after said person. Trump wants the media silenced, so his followers adopt that way of thinking. Trump yells "fake news" and his supporters (most of whom probably never uttered those words "fake news" in their lives) start screaming "fake news" at all anti-Trump dialogues. Trump whines--his supporters whine. This is how people are. It's why the term "sheeple" came about. It's why people like Hitler had followers/people willing to die for him. People are easily manipulated. All it takes is a man willing to become a leader who tells enough people enough of what they want to hear. The end result? They stop thinking for themselves and, rather, start thinking within the model they conformed their minds to.
This is all true. It's one of the greatest weaknesses of humanity, really.
whyyy are you even here? i don't get it. why come onto a forum you think is completely brainwashed? if i felt that way, i wouldn't be here.
Because he doesn't actually think this. Just like he actually does care what people here think. It just sounds better to pretend otherwise. And unfortunately we've reached the point where "sounds better"--instead of "is true"--is the primary criteria for deciding whether or not to say something.
ash_is_the_gal
03-02-17, 10:54 AM
It just sounds better to pretend otherwisei think it sounds delusional but ok
i think it sounds delusional but ok
That's trolls for ya.
They stop thinking for themselves and, rather, start thinking within the model they conformed their minds to..
I no longer think for myself. The lil green dude owner of this house infiltrated my brain with his jedi mind trick as I slept and demanded I set up 100 sock accounts to go through this thread and rep every one of his comments multiple times. Puhlease, you could have let me sleep just a few minutes more, Yoda. I was having a nightmare that trump and hillary were bumping uglies in the pizzagate 'kill room' down in the basement that does not exist. Best horror movie I've seen for a while, but I woke up before the twist where they lay back smoking and eating little wee children on their pepperoni pizza..
Nostromo87
03-02-17, 11:31 AM
I just sit back and wonder if you guys are ever going to get tired of talking about someone you hate so much.. That's why I don't understand- instead of devoting so much of your lives to someone you hate- why can't you guys find some politician to talk about you actually like?
What would that look like?
I no longer think for myself. The lil green dude owner of this house infiltrated my brain with his jedi mind trick as I slept and demanded I set up 100 sock accounts to go through this thread and rep every one of his comments multiple times. Puhlease, you could have let me sleep just a few minutes more, Yoda. I was having a nightmare that trump and hillary were bumping uglies in the pizzagate 'kill room' down in the basement that does not exist. Best horror movie I've seen for a while, but I woke up before the twist where they lay back smoking and eating little wee children on their pepperoni pizza..
Gee, thanks....now you've given me all kinds of visuals I wish I could purge from my mind. :eek:
I just sit back and wonder if you guys are ever going to get tired of talking about someone you hate so much.. That's why I don't understand- instead of devoting so much of your lives to someone you hate- why can't you guys find some politician to talk about you actually like?
What would that look like?
Because Trump is our current president and, therefore, the talk of the town...kind of like how, when Obama was president, people wouldn't shut up about HIM. That's history.
Oh, and you're obviously trolling in this thread, so it's fun to poke you and watch you react. :yup:
ash_is_the_gal
03-02-17, 11:36 AM
I just sit back and wonder if you guys are ever going to get tired of talking about someone you hate so much.. That's why I don't understand- instead of devoting so much of your lives to someone you hate- why can't you guys find some politician to talk about you actually like?
What would that look like?because he's the leader of the country i live in, maybe?
I just sit back and wonder if you guys are ever going to get tired of talking about someone you hate so much.. That's why I don't understand- instead of devoting so much of your lives to someone you hate- why can't you guys find some politician to talk about you actually like?
What would that look like?
I dont hate him. I actually like talking about him, the same way I like discussing old lady road ragers and soccer mums who cant park their huge urban assault vehicles in the shopping centre car prk. It's fun.
I just sit back and wonder if you guys are ever going to get tired of talking about someone you hate so much..
If he stops doing things worth hating, sure.
That's why I don't understand- instead of devoting so much of your lives to someone you hate- why can't you guys find some politician to talk about you actually like?
See above responses: the politicians I like aren't the ones with the power to significantly effect our lives right now, dude. He's the President, but apparently you object to him being scrutinized like one.
By the way, it's really noticeable that these "state of the thread" responses always seem to pop up right when I'm pressing you on difficult questions. The reason you've decided to "wonder" about this meta-level stuff is because it allows you to duck the McCain question, and the Iraq straw man stuff, and the outright lie about Libya. Why don't you shock me by actually following through on these claims, for once?
Gee, thanks....now you've given me all kinds of visuals I wish I could purge from my mind. :eek:
What can I say, my dear friend, I had to share the joy for you and Mrs Dt. I'm nice like that.
Where does nostromo stand on the BS conspiracy theory started by his beloved Trump supporters about Hillary and Pizzagate? That thing was utterly absurd. I know someone who works for a pedo cyber crime task force and I sent some stuff and asked if ll the agents pissed themselves laughing at such idiocy. Answer Hellz Yeah!
If he stops doing things worth hating, sure.
See above responses: the politicians I like aren't the ones with the power to significantly effect our lives right now, dude. He's the President, but apparently you object to him being scrutinized like one.
By the way, it's really noticeable that these "state of the thread" responses always seem to pop up right when I'm pressing you on difficult questions. The reason you've decided to "wonder" about this meta-level stuff is because it allows you to duck the McCain question, and the Iraq straw man stuff, and the outright lie about Libya. Why don't you shock me by actually following through on these claims, for once?
Of course, there's also the "little" matter of this being our American right to talk about him any which way we please. That's why it's America. Telling people to shut up and stop expressing their opinions will only have the opposite effect. This is America and it is our right to say what we will about our president. That's why he's a PRESIDENT and not a king/dictator despite how much Trump and his followers would like him to be.
Nostromo87
03-02-17, 11:53 AM
So I just went and looked at Obama's threads, there were 5 of them, and they added up to 123 pages of content. And that's after his entire eight years were completed.
Just this one and the Donald Trump for President? thread add up to 221 pages already, one month into his presidency. Extrapolate that pace out to eight years and we're looking over 2,000+ pages of content.
That's a whole new level of obsession
Right, and the fact that his entire campaign strategy was based around saying outrageous things to provoke responses had nothing to do with it. :suspicious: This is the same thing you do with media coverage: you pretend that the actual candidate/person has no role in how they're covered. But it's obviously a reflection of how they conduct themselves.
Also: doesn't this logic mean you're obsessed with him, too? And obsessed with what we think about him, since you keep responding to it?
Also: who cares? Okay, say I'm obsessed. Don't care. Answer the questions, please.
So I just went and looked at Obama's threads, there were 5 of them, and they added up to 123 pages of content. And that's after his entire eight years were completed.
Just this one and the Donald Trump for President? thread add up to 221 pages already, one month into his presidency. Extrapolate that pace out to eight years and we're looking over 2,000+ pages of content.
That's a whole new level of obsession
OMG. Just laughed so hard I fell off my chair. This is my new favourite mofo thread. You should be a comedian. I heart you.
So I just went and looked at Obama's threads, there were 5 of them, and they added up to 123 pages of content. And that's after his entire eight years were completed.
Just this one and the Donald Trump for President? thread add up to 221pages already, one month into his presidency. Extrapolate that pace out to eight years and we're looking over 2,000+ pages of content.
That's a whole new level of obsession
For someone accusing others of obsession, you're sure sounding like an obsessed person yourself, given your presence on these "221 pages" you're complaining about. Just sayin'....:yup:
Answer the questions, please.
Do you have this copied to you clipboard? You're going to need it...many times.
It's almost insulting that he expects this to work. Like, you think if I show you proof Trump lied about his position on multiple wars, you can just say "wow you talk about Trump a lot," and the question magically goes away? Are you kidding me?
OMG. Just laughed so hard I fell off my chair. This is my new favourite mofo thread. You should be a comedian. I heart you.
Nostro is worth far more than 221 laughs.:cage:
It's almost insulting that he expects this to work. Like, you think if I show you proof Trump lied about his position on multiple wars, you can just say "wow you talk about Trump a lot," and the question magically goes away? Are you kidding me?
Why have you failed to brainwash just one person on this board, Master Yoda???
Why have you failed to brainwash just one person on this board, Master Yoda???
Because a certain politician beat me to the punch.
It's almost insulting that he expects this to work. Like, you think if I show you proof Trump lied about his position on multiple wars, you can just say "wow you talk about Trump a lot," and the question magically goes away? Are you kidding me?
We had posters like this all the time where I came from. This kid is following all the usual cues: strawman, deflection, spin, cherry-picking content to reply to in his posts, attempting to turn posters against each other, etc.
You can throw whatever you'd like at this kid--he'll keep spinning and spinning like a globe. :yup:
It must have been something they put on
that pizza.
Because a certain politician beat me to the punch.
You could always build a wall to keep him out. :cage:
ash_is_the_gal
03-02-17, 12:11 PM
Just this one and the Donald Trump for President? thread add up to 221 pages already, one month into his presidency. Extrapolate that pace out to eight years and we're looking over 2,000+ pages of content.
oh we forgot to tell you, the amount of responses in a thread about current presidents correlates to how much money they are costing taxpayers.
29216
now answer Yoda's damn questions.
FYI: those numbers aren't right, anyway: he just searched for "Obama," but most of the discussion came in threads without his name in them: like here (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=17068) and here (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=29854). Totals another 61 pages. And that's not counting the many, many threads about the bailout and healthcare (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=25841) that were largely about Obama's policies, too.
It's also silly to extrapolate posts during an election as if they would continue apace during an administration. Elections generate a lot more discussion, since that's the time at which point have to actually choose.
But, again, this is all just another version of "hey! Look over there!" We got the obligatory first round of dodges, and now that I've pressed him on them, we get the predictable pivot away from specifics. It's utterly predictable.
FYI: those numbers aren't right, anyway: he just searched for "Obama," but most of the discussion came in threads without his name in them: like here (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=17068) and here (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=29854). Totals another 61 pages. And that's not counting the many, many threads about the bailout and healthcare (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=25841) that were largely about Obama's policies, too.
It's also silly to extrapolate posts during an election as if they would continue apace during an administration. Elections generate a lot more discussion, since that's the time at which point have to actually choose.
But, again, this is all just another version of "hey! Look over there!" We got the obligatory first round of dodges, and now that I've pressed him on them, we get the predictable pivot away from specifics. It's utterly predictable.
Like I said--spin and spin and spin, strawman, cherry picking and "alternative facts". Oops! I was just topical! :D
And it downright frightens me how Trump and his supporters tell those of us who don't like him to basically "shut up". Uh...last I checked, it's our right as Americans to voice our opinions.
Anyone else getting more and more of this "dictatorship" feel from this? This is how dictatorships are: blind praise and worship and negative opinions against the leader not allowed/frowned upon.
I also dislike this trend, but I see it plenty from the left, as well. As a Libertarian, I am usually under attack from members of both major parties whenever I engage in political discussion. Character attacks are rampant on both sides, from what I can tell, as well and a tendency to attempt to undercut credibility with ad hominem attacks. I rarely get into a conversation where just the issues are the focus, with facts and empirical evidence used as talking points. Too many times, it's confirmation bias, arguments from alleged authority, ad hominem character assassination, dunning-kruger fueled nonsense, pigeon superstition...the list goes on!
Balanced, critical conversation is a rarity these days, pure and simple. And for the record, I rarely see Chris fall into any of the above traps. The guy is a shrewd debate opponent. Also for the record, I have come down on the opposite side of arguments with him plenty of times, so I am far from programmed.
I also dislike this trend, but I see it plenty from the left, as well. As a Libertarian, I am usually under attack from members of both major parties whenever I engage in political discussion. Character attacks are rampant on both sides, from what I can tell, as well and a tendency to attempt to undercut credibility with ad hominem attacks. I rarely get into a conversation where just the issues are the focus, with facts and empirical evidence used as talking points. Too many times, it's confirmation bias, arguments from alleged authority, ad hominem character assassination, dunning-kruger fueled nonsense, pigeon superstition...the list goes on!
Balanced, critical conversation is a rarity these days, pure and simple. And for the record, I rarely see Chris fall into any of the above traps. The guy is a shrewd debate opponent. Also for the record, I have come down on the opposite side of arguments with him plenty of times, so I am far from programmed.
Political debates are a toxic, toxic thing, for sure.
I've been called "DemoRat", "Libtard" and "Hillary lover" many times now for voicing my dislike of Trump and, the thing is, I'm none of those things.
Political debates are a toxic, toxic thing, for sure.
I've been called "DemoRat", "Libtard" and "Hillary lover" many times now for voicing my dislike of Trump and, the thing is, I'm none of those things.
Because it's much easier to ascribe a stance to someone and then attack it than actually take the time to understand the nuances of their actual position. ;)
so I am far from programmed.
Yoda programmed you to think like that. Havent you seen Westworld???
ash_is_the_gal
03-02-17, 12:59 PM
I also dislike this trend, but I see it plenty from the left, as well. As a Libertarian, I am usually under attack from members of both major parties whenever I engage in political discussion. Character attacks are rampant on both sides, from what I can tell, as well and a tendency to attempt to undercut credibility with ad hominem attacks. I rarely get into a conversation where just the issues are the focus, with facts and empirical evidence used as talking points. Too many times, it's confirmation bias, arguments from alleged authority, ad hominem character assassination, dunning-kruger fueled nonsense, pigeon superstition...the list goes on!
Balanced, critical conversation is a rarity these days, pure and simple. And for the record, I rarely see Chris fall into any of the above traps. The guy is a shrewd debate opponent. Also for the record, I have come down on the opposite side of arguments with him plenty of times, so I am far from programmed.
it's when our President tries to silence people by using his supporters as leverage that makes this scary on a different level, though. don't remember that happening before a Trump presidency, on the left or the right.
Because it's much easier to ascribe a stance to someone and then attack it than actually take the time to understand the nuances of their actual position. ;)
Well said.
christine
03-02-17, 01:07 PM
I just sit back and wonder if you guys are ever going to get tired of talking about someone you hate so much.. That's why I don't understand- instead of devoting so much of your lives to someone you hate- why can't you guys find some politician to talk about you actually like?
What would that look like?
Seriously though, Trump has obviously created such polarisation of opinion in your country that there's no wonder there's a lot of discussion. I wouldn't call it obsession, I would call it downright concern by the American people who didn't vote for him. Concern for your country and what the future holds under such a strange and impulsive person. Put aside Hilary Clinton, there's no point talking about her now, let's concentrate on Trump who is actually your leader. Your leader. His lack of transparency on his own taxes and business dealings alone would make me seriously worried. His obfuscation is a triumph - do you even know what he's talking about half the time? that's not a great look for diplomacy or directness in dealings with other countries.
The amont of concern on this website is only reflecting the amount of chat on other media You should be worried. I would be if I was American, in fact I am anyway.
Someone went into my Obama thread? ;)
it's when our President tries to silence people by using his supporters as leverage that makes this scary on a different level, though. don't remember that happening before a Trump presidency, on the left or the right.
Well put. He's even encouraged his supporters to do several of the things they've done.
I also find it scary how Trump has done NOTHING to condemn the KKK praising him or all the racist attacks and...has he even said a single word about that Indian man who was murdered by the racist drunk?
The fact alone that racists are running amuck, doing things like this, shows that they feel they've been given a free pass to act like that...and Trump doesn't condemn ANY of it. THAT is the example he sets...
Linky to the indian man who got killed, deat? I havent seen that reported here yet.
Heres a Trump absolutely deserving of respect...
Behind scenes, Ivanka encouraged Trump’s change of tone: sources
http://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAnH75r.img?h=732&w=1019&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=407&y=219
Ivanka Trump, her husband Jared Kushner applaud another guest saluted by President Donald Trump during his speech to Congress.
Behind the scenes at the White House, U.S. President Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka was a key advocate for the more measured, less combative tone he struck in his speech to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night, officials said.
The biggest speech of Trump's month-old presidency was the product of a 10-day effort with his top aides.
While he unveiled no significant changes to policy, the tone of Trump's speech was a far cry from his bleak "American carnage" inaugural address when he took office on Jan. 20.
The Republican president dropped some of the fierce rhetoric that had been a staple of his first weeks in office. He called for national unity and avoided a repeat of his attacks on Democratic opponents and media organizations.
Polls conducted immediately after the speech showed a clear majority of Americans approved of the softer approach and aides described Trump as buoyed by the reception.
A senior White House official said Ivanka Trump made recommendations for the speech during a brainstorming session in the Oval Office on Sunday, helping her father decide on a new approach aimed at easing concerns over whether he had the right temperament to govern effectively.
"He had a lot of voices around him giving him ideas and suggestions that he incorporated, but he really set out to achieve that optimistic tone and that was something she was supportive of. She encouraged him to do that," one official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
"She had a role," said another. "She helped set the tone."
Ivanka Trump also persuaded her father to speak favorably about affordable child care and paid family leave, policies she has long backed and which could draw support from Democrats in Congress, said another official with some knowledge of how the speech evolved.
"Her fingerprints are visible on the tone, but especially on those parts of it like maternity leave that matter to her," the official said.
Ivanka Trump, 35, the president's older daughter, has emerged as an influential informal adviser for her father, particularly on issues important to women and minorities.
After his election victory last November, she stepped away from her business interests in New York to move to Washington and is frequently seen at her father's events.
A White House official said Trump was the principal author of the speech but had a lot of help in drafting it, including from his daughter.
Trump made the final changes to his speech during a marathon session on Tuesday, working closely with Vice President Mike Pence, chief strategist Steve Bannon, chief of staff Reince Priebus and chief speechwriter Stephen Miller.
Ivanka Trump's husband, Jared Kushner, is a senior White House adviser with particular interest in trade deals and Middle East diplomacy.
The couple have been among the president's closest confidants since his election campaign, and Kushner also helped in the drafting of the speech to Congress.
Others involved in the last round of deliberations were White House aides Hope Hicks, Kellyanne Conway and Sean Spicer. Ivanka Trump was not in the sessions on Tuesday.
Ivanka Trump accompanied her father to Dover Air Base in Delaware on Feb. 1 to welcome home the remains of U.S. Navy SEAL William "Ryan" Owens, who was killed in a raid on al Qaeda in Yemen.
At the speech on Tuesday, Owens' widow, Carryn Owens, wept openly when Trump led the crowd in applauding her husband's service. Standing next to her was Ivanka Trump.
Presidential historian Thomas Alan Schwartz of Vanderbilt University said it was hard to find a similar example in recent history of a presidential daughter having a big influence.
"It's a way of reaching out on social issues and social welfare issues or issues that sometimes the Republicans are less identified with," he said.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/behind-scenes-ivanka-encouraged-trump’s-change-of-tone-sources/ar-AAnHcdz?li=BBnb7Kz
Nostromo87
03-02-17, 01:16 PM
"The time for small thinking is over. The time for trivial fights- is behind us. We just need the courage to share the dreams that fill our hearts, the bravery to express the hopes that stir our souls, and the confidence to turn those hopes and those dreams into action. From now on, America will be empowered by our aspirations, not burdened by our fears. Inspired by the future, not bound by failures of the past, and guided by a vision not blinded by our doubts. I am asking all citizens to embrace this renewal of the American Spirit.
I am asking all members of Congress to join me in dreaming big, and bold, and daringly for our country.
I am asking everyone watching tonight to seize this moment, believe in yourselves, believe in your future, and believe once more- in America.
Thank you. God Bless You. And God Bless the United States"
~President Donald J. Trump. February 28th, 2017
http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n617/frankog10/Trump1_zpstwia7eej.jpg
http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n617/frankog10/Trump02_zpsx2xk8wml.jpg
Linky to the indian man who got killed, deat? I havent seen that reported here yet.
Read it if you dare: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/02/24/indian-man-killed-in-possibly-racial-shooting-at-kansas-bar.html
Hang on, I need to grab my tinfoil ht before i read anything by sewer rats employed by uncle murdoch. I really loathe that man. I break out in hives - seriously.
Hang on, I need to grab my tinfoil ht before i read anything by sewer rats employed by uncle murdoch. I really loathe that man. I break out in hives - seriously.
Just remember--it's fake news if it's negative against Trump and real news if it praises Trump. :cage:
Read it if you dare: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/02/24/indian-man-killed-in-possibly-racial-shooting-at-kansas-bar.html
WTH is wrong with people.
TJLamb0518
03-02-17, 01:28 PM
All I'm going to say is I was a 30+ year Republican, my first election was Reagan in 84. My very liberal family and I had an agree to disagree philosophy so we did not argue all the time.
However, between Trump getting the nomination despite being an absolutely abhorrent human being (his comments about Mexicans, women and his own daughter...a relationship I find entirely too creepy) more interested in his own brand than leading the country and the so-called leadership of the party showing the backbone of jellyfish (remember how Rubio and Ryan and all the others derided Trump before the nomination and how they stumped for him after?) caused me to actually become an independent in September.
Because a the end of the day, I'm an American first and my political preferences are a distant second.
I'm saying that now because I suspect by the end of the summer, no one will dare admit they're an American.
And no, I did not vote for Hillary either. Sorry, but if someone hands you a vial off anthrax and a vial of smallpox, the sane answer is to not take either of them.
TJLamb0518
03-02-17, 01:30 PM
WTH is wrong with people.
Well, first off....we have not evolved into having claws or armor plating.
Second, the naughty bits are on the outside and are exposed to attack.
Thirdly, we have no natural camouflage.
Oh, wait....you did not mean as a species.
WTH is wrong with people.
You may not want to know what people's COMMENTS were in some of the articles about this story. Well, read on if you dare:
-"Good. A new American job just opened up for IT."
-"They should give that man a medal."
-"They should take that guy out of jail, take him to the hospital and let him finish the job by killing the two surviving friends. More jobs will open up then."
-"We should do that to all the other immigrants."
Did I mention that the comment about letting him "finish the job" got over 120 "likes" on Yahoo new article? Yeah...sick people out there. THIS is what our new president inspires with his rhetoric: violence and racism against immigrants. And it's VERY telling when you see that he does NOT condemn these random violent acts.
That's just so distressing. Think I'll slink back to my travel stories for some escapism.
All I'm going to say is I was a 30+ year Republican, my first election was Reagan in 84. My very liberal family and I had an agree to disagree philosophy so we did not argue all the time.
However, between Trump getting the nomination despite being an absolutely abhorrent human being (his comments about Mexicans, women and his own daughter...a relationship I find entirely too creepy) more interested in his own brand than leading the country and the so-called leadership of the party showing the backbone of jellyfish (remember how Rubio and Ryan and all the others derided Trump before the nomination and how they stumped for him after?) caused me to actually become an independent in September.
Because a the end of the day, I'm an American first and my political preferences are a distant second.
I'm saying that now because I suspect by the end of the summer, no one will dare admit they're an American.
And no, I did not vote for Hillary either. Sorry, but if someone hands you a vial off anthrax and a vial of smallpox, the sane answer is to not take either of them.
I keep hearing people mention how he has a creepy relationship with his daughter but I don't understand what they mean. I must have missed someone along the way--what happened that caused people to think that? Now I'm curious.
As for everything else--I'm still trying to process in my mind how so many people love this man and how anyone could think this "wall" is a good idea.
That's just so distressing. Think I'll slink back to my travel stories for some escapism.
That it is, my friend. That it is. Do I have to worry now about someone pulling a gun on my wife? She's Asian but people have mistook her for Mexican and Arab before--both of which are prime targets for all the racists out there. Scary times.
TJLamb0518
03-02-17, 01:46 PM
I keep hearing people mention how he has a creepy relationship with his daughter but I don't understand what they mean. I must have missed someone along the way--what happened that caused people to think that? Now I'm curious.
As for everything else--I'm still trying to process in my mind how so many people love this man and how anyone could think this "wall" is a good idea.
"I don't think Ivanka would do that inside the magazine. Although she does have a very nice figure. I've said that if Ivanka weren't my daughter, perhaps I would be dating her."
“Don’t you think my daughter’s hot? She’s hot, right?”
“My daughter, Ivanka. She’s 6 feet tall, she’s got the best body. She made a lot money as a model—a tremendous amount.”
“Let me tell you one thing: Ivanka is a great, great beauty. Every guy in the country wants to go out with my daughter. But she’s got a boyfriend.”
On Howard Stern, Trump replies in the affirmative when host Howard Stern asks him if he can call Ivanka "a piece of ass”.
Trump: “My daughter is beautiful, Ivanka."
Stern: “By the way, your daughter…”
Trump: “ - she’s beautiful"
Stern: “Can I say this? A piece of ass.”
Trump: “Yeah.”
“She's actually always been very voluptuous,”
“After I met Ivanka and praised her to her father, he said, ‘Yeah, she's really something, and what a beauty, that one. If I weren't happily married and, ya know, her father . . .’”
“Is it wrong to be more sexually attracted to your own daughter than your wife?”
So, who else is throwing up in their mouths?
I know. Just shaking my head. I seriously considered overseas adoption at one point. Right now I'm glad I pulled back on that idea. I worry about my lovely Iranian neighbour. She'd be fine in this neighbourhood wearing hijab but it's some other areas of sydney she'd be open to having her hijb ripped off, and she's not even a practising muslim anymore. She just has a cultural attachment to the headscarf. So much freaking fear and xenophobia around the world.
On Howard Stern, Trump replies in the affirmative when host Howard Stern asks him if he can call Ivanka "a piece of ass”.
Trump: “My daughter is beautiful, Ivanka."
Stern: “By the way, your daughter…”
Trump: “ - she’s beautiful"
Stern: “Can I say this? A piece of ass.”
Trump: “Yeah.”
So, who else is throwing up in their mouths?
Oh, wow...
So, who else is throwing up in their mouths?
We got all of that here. He is skin crawly.
TJLamb0518
03-02-17, 01:48 PM
I know. Just shaking my head. I seriously considered overseas adoption at one point. Right now I'm glad I pulled back on that idea. I worry about my lovely Iranian neighbour. She'd be fine in this neighbourhood wearing hijab but it's some other areas of sydney she'd be open to having her hijb ripped off, and she's not even a practising muslim anymore. She just has a cultural attachment to the headscarf. So much freaking fear and xenophobia around the world.
Well, I'm not adopting you.
I know. Just shaking my head. I seriously considered overseas adoption at one point. Right now I'm glad I pulled back on that idea. I worry about my lovely Iranian neighbour. She'd be fine in this neighbourhood wearing hijab but it's some other areas of sydney she'd be open to having her hijb ripped off, and she's not even a practising muslim anymore. She just has a cultural attachment to the headscarf. So much freaking fear and xenophobia around the world.
*Sigh* It's as if we're finally starting to de-evolve as a society, you know? A return to barbarism. I mean--we've been this way a long long time but it's worse than ever these days and we seem to have hit a steep decline relatively quickly.
TJLamb0518
03-02-17, 01:51 PM
Oh, wow...
Seriously, given all the horrific things he said during the campaign....how poorly run was Hillarys' campaign that she couldn't beat him?? Hillary was the BvS of politics....it was hers to win and she still screwed it up.
We got all of that here. He is skin crawly.
Well, since we're all already throwing up in our mouths, I might as well clinch it with this:
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-QV0p2NhuHgw/V9KACxoqEeI/AAAAAAABFm0/m_nOt09QhkUGMmDqhce3KP1TpU-Ufv-7gCLcB/s1600/trump%2Bclown.jpg
The time for trivial fights- is behind us.
Yeah, when I look up the word "trivial," deciding when we should go to war is the first definition that comes up.
http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/b0/b0ccf5dcf41e3a3f4b63e290bdb0dc465715aa6bbc8154f4a399d3079654f08f.jpg
The situation's simple: I've presented you with proof of my claims, and simple questions about yours. You've changed the subject and refuse to address the proof. Everything else is just you kicking up dust to distract from that.
Well, I'm not adopting you.
Well fine. I wont make you a fluffy chinese omlette and bring you a cold fosters.
Seriously, given all the horrific things he said during the campaign....how poorly run was Hillarys' campaign that she couldn't beat him?? Hillary was the BvS of politics....it was hers to win and she still screwed it up.
.....No way would such an election even exist 20 years ago. Trump never would have even made it to the finals. It took a combination of a gradual dumbing down of our society, pent up anger and racist rage and PC being driven down our throats to cause Trump to be elected. Terrible, terrible time in our history...and we're only one month into the presidency...
Well fine. I wont make you a fluffy chinese omlette and bring you a cold fosters.
Chinese omelets? Now I'm hungry! :D
The hate was always there. Trump just lifted the lid on it. And I'm not pointing the finger at you 'Muricans. We've had fallout here over it. It's the global hive mentality.
The hate was always there. Trump just lifted the lid on it. And I'm not pointing the finger at you 'Muricans. We've had fallout here over it. It's the global hive mentality.
Amazing, isn't it? All that innovation. All that progression as a society. How far we've come since the dark ages. All the knowledge....and our society still suffers from an overabundance of moronic racism. Something so simpleminded as racism. Amazing.
Technology gets better. People don't.
Technology gets better. People don't.
But technology eg social media has made it worse.
Amazing, isn't it? All that innovation. All that progression as a society. How far we've come since the dark ages. All the knowledge....and our society still suffers from an overabundance of moronic racism. Something so simpleminded as racism. Amazing.
I think I told you about my father's second wife. Toxic xenophobe. Back then the new wave of refugees was Vietnamese. God the bile that woman spewed about them was incredible. When she wasnt being poisonous about boat people, she was slagging off my dad for having 'bog irish' ancestry. Why he married her is beyond me. I think he was so inlove with my mother he chose his next wife who was the polar opposite.
This current state here is very upsetting. There have been massive inroads here about multiculturalism. All of a sudden we've gone backwards.
Think I prefer living in my bubble.
I think I told you about my father's second wife. Toxic xenophobe. Back then the new wave of refugees was Vietnamese. God the bile that woman spewed about them was incredible. When she wasnt being poisonous about boat people, she was slagging off my dad for having 'bog irish' ancestry. Why he married her is beyond me. I think he was so inlove with my mother he chose his next wife who was the polar opposite.
This current state here is very upsetting. There have been massive inroads here about multiculturalism. All of a sudden we've gone backwards.
Think I prefer living in my bubble.
Yeah, you told me. I don't know her and already don't like her. :bored:
As for your bubble comment--yeah...I'm sure most of us feel that way.
Yeah, you told me. I don't know her and already don't like her. :bored:
As for your bubble comment--yeah...I'm sure most of us feel that way.
I dont like her either. Such a relief when she divorced my father. Never had to deal with her again. And miraculously, he stopped being a bigot immediately. Fancy that. She is a chernobyl waste cloud.
TJLamb0518
03-02-17, 02:27 PM
Think I prefer living in my bubble.
Young John Travolta, is that you???
Young John Travolta, is that you???
Was he a bubble boy?
TheGothamCat
03-02-17, 02:29 PM
President Trump's latest address to Congress seems to have won over a lot of people with him paying tribute to a fallen Navy Seal and his widow. In fact the only people who still criticized him were the usual left winded nut jobs, so I'd say he's still doing a pretty good job at keeping his promises to make this country safe and booting those illegal immigrants out of here.
TJLamb0518
03-02-17, 02:37 PM
Was he a bubble boy?
PHILISTINE!!!
He was the O.G. Bubble Boy!
TJLamb0518
03-02-17, 02:39 PM
President Trump's latest address to Congress seems to have won over a lot of people with him paying tribute to a fallen Navy Seal and his widow. In fact the only people who still criticized him were the usual left winded nut jobs, so I'd say he's still doing a pretty good job at keeping his promises to make this country safe and booting those illegal immigrants out of here.
I think he finally acted in a way somewhat resembling a President, but one good rehearsed speech tells me less about him than his off the cuff, unrehearsed remarks do. If I rehearse enough, I can give you a presentation on cranial surgery....doesn't mean you want me opening up your skull on an operating table.....
ash_is_the_gal
03-02-17, 03:12 PM
Well fine. I wont make you a fluffy chinese omlette and bring you a cold fosters.
...can you adopt me?
and, so this isn't just a nothing post, holy crap @ those quotes about Ivanka. i knew he'd said he would date her but i didn't know about all that other cringey shet
ash_is_the_gal
03-02-17, 03:16 PM
Was he a bubble boy?
29220
...can you adopt me?
and, so this isn't just a nothing post, holy crap @ those quotes about Ivanka. i knew he'd said he would date her but i didn't know about all that other cringey shet
Sure for sure. Come on down. I made that for us last night. Husband kinda went all googly eyed so I gave him a hot cross bun for dessert.
Yeah look, trump is a disgusting pig, and that's an insult to pigs. WTF is he teaching young guys how to behave towards women. Beggars belief. I'm just waiting for a joke about domestic violence, or comments about slut shaming and rape.
Citizen Rules
03-02-17, 03:19 PM
Could we stay on topic please.
We are on topic. You're not, though. What do you think of trumpty???
TJLamb0518
03-02-17, 03:29 PM
Could we stay on topic please.
There's only so many ways you can say "He's nuts" and "I'm worried"....
John McClane
03-02-17, 03:31 PM
I can't wait until he pushes a policy through that affects the constituents that supported/voted for him: that's when s*** will get real.
ash_is_the_gal
03-02-17, 03:32 PM
^half of them are already losing their healthcare, but they seem to be happy about it, so? dunno about that.
TJLamb0518
03-02-17, 03:35 PM
^half of them are already losing their healthcare, but they seem to be happy about it, so? dunno about that.
You mean the same people who (and no, I'm not kidding) were supporting getting rid of Obamacare and did not care because THEY were already covered by the Affordable Care Act.
Chew on that and weep for America.
Who wants a new nightmare tonight? I'm happy to oblige!
http://www.la-critica.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/trump-naranja.jpg
The lips arent trout pouty enough, deat.
John McClane
03-02-17, 04:23 PM
^half of them are already losing their healthcare, but they seem to be happy about it, so? dunno about that.I was thinking more along the lines of his talk about slashing the EPA budget: a water crisis like they had in Flint, Michigan will do a world of hurt.
I can't wait until he pushes a policy through that affects the constituents that supported/voted for him: that's when s*** will get real.
Tax time next year is a good start for that!
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.