Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

President Trump: Making America Great Again...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Northwestcoug View Post
    Pshaw. Apparently you've never heard of the Clinton Foundation.
    "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
    "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
    "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
      Just wanted to beat UT to the punch!
      "...you pointy-headed autopsy nerd. Do you think it's possible for you to post without using words like "hilarious," "absurd," "canard," and "truther"? Your bare assertions do not make it so. Maybe your reasoning is too stunted and your vocabulary is too limited to go without these epithets."
      "You are an intemperate, unscientific poster who makes light of very serious matters.”
      - SeattleUte

      Comment


      • Originally posted by BlueK View Post
        On RealClearPolitics you can find at least a half-dozen new Pro-Trump apology pieces linked on there every day, along with a few articles arguing on the other side. It's interesting that on this taking kids at the border away from their parents story that it is deathly silent on the pro-Trump side over there.

        The pro-Trump side will pretty much defend anything. But, they're not talking about that. From some casual conversations I've had recently, I'm finding most people don't even know about it. That's sad, because this is a truly barbaric practice.
        It is barbaric.

        What is the requirement of the law for situations like these? My understanding is the adults should be jailed according to the law because they are illegally entering the US. What then are we supposed to do with the children they bring with them?
        "Discipleship is not a spectator sport. We cannot expect to experience the blessing of faith by standing inactive on the sidelines any more than we can experience the benefits of health by sitting on a sofa watching sporting events on television and giving advice to the athletes. And yet for some, “spectator discipleship” is a preferred if not primary way of worshipping." -Pres. Uchtdorf

        Comment


        • Originally posted by BlueK View Post
          Here's one I have a problem with. I have seen the clip where Trump uses those words. It's not that clear he was only talking about one or the other. Yes, he can make the argument he was referring to MS-13. The only problem is, if you watch it, he uses the word "animals" right AFTER talking about illegals in general but at least 4-5 seconds BEFORE he throws in MS-13. It could be classic Trump doublespeak to satisfy both the KKK/White supreamcist and the everyday Joe factions of his support at the same time. He does that a lot. He talks off the cuff, of course. You can make a credible argument he was calling all illegals animals and then caught himself and made it sound more palatable.

          47. May 16, 2018:
          The New York Times’ Julie Hirschfeld Davis, AP, CNN’s Oliver Darcy and others excerpted a Trump comment as if he had referred to immigrants or illegal immigrants generally as “animals.” Most outlets corrected their reports later to note that Trump had specifically referred to members of the murderous criminal gang MS-13.
          I honestly don't think trump is as racist as many make him out to be. I do believe he's OK engaging those who ARE hardcore racists. But I think he sees it as building a coalition of supporters without regard to how they're seen.

          But as far as this particular incident - I just think he's dumb and doesn't think things through or organize this thoughts before he starts talking. And I think that's a common occurrence with Trump, so that listening to him is sometimes like listening to my wife one of those times when she jumps through 5 different topics in her head and just keeps on going without ever telling me she's swapped topics, leaving me lost and confused. I suspect Trump was thinking MS13 when he started calling them animals - whether he actually said it out loud or not. But maybe I give him too much credit.

          Originally posted by BlueK View Post
          This one is definitely a stretch. The typo/mistake makes a stronger case FOR Trump than against him. Trump's whole thing on trade is about the poor little US and how no one buys our products, but we buy theirs. The truth in this case actually argues against Trump's position. Then again, this is a journalist and I won't assume she's an expert on the topic, so I'll give her a little bit of a pass on this. Or should I?

          50. June 1, 2018
          In a story about Trump tariffs, AP reported the dollar value of Virginia’s farm and forestry exports to Canada and Mexico was $800. It’s $800 million.

          I'm not trying to be a pain in the butt. Sure it's their job to try to get the facts right and perfection is the only acceptable standard. I get that.

          That's not a credible excuse for the kind of lies Trump tells which can be easily discovered by finding a video from a couple of months ago that proves the lie.
          Again - I don't think this is about excusing or not excusing Trump and his lies. I think this is about holding themselves to the same standard they want to hold Trump to.

          The reality is that the press has better credibility to call out Trump when they don't make mistakes themselves. (Calle it lies, mistakes, whatever - it really doesn't matter. If you aren't accurate then whatever your saying, whether it's a lie or a mistake, results is a lack of trust and confidence.)

          I've beaten this dead horse a bajillion times, but I'll hit it once more...

          There is enough to dislike about Trump that it is both disappointing and discouraging when way too often hyperbole and stretching the facts and/or resorting to jumping to conclusions or making assumptions about what he may have meant is used to crack on him. And every once in a while he may actually do something that is OK - which is often simply ignored by his critics and detractors.

          How much more powerful would it be to give him credit for what little he may do right, ignore the stuff that really could be justified or interpreted either way - or at least report it without saying more about what he meant than the original comment, and then really hit him hard on the obvious problems and issues.

          In our way too partisan world, he can do no wrong according to some and no right according to others. Neither side is taken seriously. If someone would just appear to be objective instead of taking one side or the other - they'd gain a lot of fans in guys like me.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Eddie View Post
            I honestly don't think trump is as racist as many make him out to be.
            Never attribute to maliciousness what can be fully explained by stupidity.
            "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
            "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
            "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
              Never attribute to maliciousness what can be fully explained by stupidity.
              Does anyone really doubt that Trump uses racism in others to his own advantage? I think that in itself is pretty disgusting. There is a reason the white supremacist elements of society have rallied to Trump. Whether Trump really is a racist in his heart or not, he is clearly doing things that make those people feel like he is one of them. Am I wrong?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by BlueK View Post
                Does anyone really doubt that Trump uses racism in others to his own advantage? I think that in itself is pretty disgusting. There is a reason the white supremacist elements of society have rallied to Trump. Whether Trump really is a racist in his heart or not, he is clearly doing things that make those people feel like he is one of them. Am I wrong?
                There isn’t much moral difference, in fact it’s almost worse because it’s less honest. Ftr, I do think he is racist and there is plenty in his past to suggest that.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by frank ryan View Post
                  There isn’t much moral difference, in fact it’s almost worse because it’s less honest. Ftr, I do think he is racist and there is plenty in his past to suggest that.
                  For a few decades we weren't seeing overt racists running for office within the GOP. Under Trump we are.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Moliere View Post
                    It is barbaric.

                    What is the requirement of the law for situations like these? My understanding is the adults should be jailed according to the law because they are illegally entering the US. What then are we supposed to do with the children they bring with them?
                    Need to build that danged wall. Problem solved.

                    You're actually pretty funny when you aren't being a complete a-hole....so basically like 5% of the time. --Art Vandelay
                    Almost everything you post is snarky, smug, condescending, or just downright mean-spirited. --Jeffrey Lebowski

                    Anyone can make war, but only the most courageous can make peace. --President Donald J. Trump
                    You furnish the pictures, and I’ll furnish the war. --William Randolph Hearst

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Moliere View Post
                      It is barbaric.

                      What is the requirement of the law for situations like these? My understanding is the adults should be jailed according to the law because they are illegally entering the US. What then are we supposed to do with the children they bring with them?
                      First of all, it's not a legal requirement to jail someone for crossing the border illegally any more than the police has to cart you off to jail for being caught driving too fast. Get caught driving 100 in your neighborhood in a 35 mph zone and you probably would be taken to jail.

                      Also, under the previous rules they were not breaking up families. They detained them together if needed.

                      Also, many of these are applicants for asylum which is a process for applying to enter LEGALLY. Whether they have a good case or not, it doesn't seem right to treat people like criminals right off the bat and take their children from them out of spite when there is a legal application process on the books that they are requesting to follow. Under the previous administration they could apply for this from their own country. Under Trump that has been taken away. Pure stupidity.

                      As of what I read yesterday, there are currently two immigration bills being discussed in the House, and even the most conservative of the two would ban the practice of taking kids away from their parents. It's thought that the more moderate one could have the votes to pass. It's not clear that Trump would support either. He probably wouldn't, if I were to guess.

                      Commando can correct me if I'm wrong.
                      Last edited by BlueK; 06-14-2018, 12:48 PM.

                      Comment


                      • The Republicans no longer the party of ideas? This article seems to me to be a pretty accurate description of what the party has become:

                        Last night the national chair of the Republican Party tweeted:
                        "Complacency is our enemy. Anyone that does not embrace the @realDonaldTrump agenda of making America great again will be making a mistake."

                        "I am a Republican. I've been proud of that my entire adult life...I was proud because I believed Republican policies were better for people, yes. But I was mostly proud because we were the "party of ideas."
                        Liberty, limited government, low taxes, fewer regulations, law and order, family first, national security -- from Reagan on, we were the party of ideas, and Democrats were the party of identity politics.

                        When the great ideas are gone, or when the leader of the party has neither affection nor use for them, all that's left behind is rank demagoguery. When you can no longer elucidate the ideas, or when they are too damaging to openly acknowledge, all you can do is simply make threats, demand loyalty.

                        That's what the party chair did. Out loud. In plain sight.

                        With Republicans all too eager to table their principles for this president, here's what we know they WILL support, either directly or through tacit silence:

                        Protectionist policies that invite trade wars with our allies.
                        Ripping families apart at the border, separating mothers from their infants and children.
                        A $4.4 trillion budget that increases the deficit to $1 trillion next year.
                        A stated equivalence between white supremacists and those who would oppose them.
                        Apologism for the human rights violations of brutal dictators.
                        A smear campaign against the FBI and our intelligence officers.

                        If this is the "agenda" Ms. McDaniel insists I support, the answer is of course no. The question is, why would any Republican?"

                        https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/14/opini...ion/index.html

                        By the way, the tweet comes off sounding kind of threatening, doesn't it? By "making a mistake," what is she trying to imply? I'm sure if Debbie Washerbucket Schultz had said the exact same thing about Obama's agenda that Republicans would have taken it VERY well, right?
                        Last edited by BlueK; 06-14-2018, 02:00 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by BlueK View Post
                          The Republicans no longer the party of ideas? This article seems to me to be a pretty accurate description of what the party has become:

                          Last night the national chair of the Republican Party tweeted:
                          "Complacency is our enemy. Anyone that does not embrace the @realDonaldTrump agenda of making America great again will be making a mistake."

                          By the way, the tweet comes off sounding kind of threatening, doesn't it? By "making a mistake," what is she trying to imply? I'm sure if Debbie Washerbucket Schultz had said the exact same thing about Obama's agenda that Republicans would have taken it VERY well, right?
                          Interesting comparison.

                          I'll flash through the various talk radio shows while driving from time to time - just curious about what is being said since I don't spend much time watching news or looking at news sites online. Scary thought - but I probably get most of my political news in particular right here on CS.

                          Anyway - I caught Glen Beck for a few minutes talking about the future of the GOP. Essentially he said that Trump took the GOP and was turning it into the Trump party. He compared that to Obama (as you just did) and said that Obama turning the Dem's into the Obama party really did them in, and ultimately led to Trump's election. And if the GOP allows Trump to reform their party after him, they'll see a similar result once he's gone - with a wild swing to the Dem's and the GOP losing both senate and house seats in Congress as well as losing state government positions all across the US - similar to what happened when Obama left office.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BlueK View Post
                            First of all, it's not a legal requirement to jail someone for crossing the border illegally any more than the police has to cart you off to jail for being caught driving too fast. Get caught driving 100 in your neighborhood in a 35 mph zone and you probably would be taken to jail.

                            Also, under the previous rules they were not breaking up families. They detained them together if needed.

                            Also, many of these are applicants for asylum which is a process for applying to enter LEGALLY. Whether they have a good case or not, it doesn't seem right to treat people like criminals right off the bat and take their children from them out of spite when there is a legal application process on the books that they are requesting to follow. Under the previous administration they could apply for this from their own country. Under Trump that has been taken away. Pure stupidity.

                            As of what I read yesterday, there are currently two immigration bills being discussed in the House, and even the most conservative of the two would ban the practice of taking kids away from their parents. It's thought that the more moderate one could have the votes to pass. It's not clear that Trump would support either. He probably wouldn't, if I were to guess.

                            Commando can correct me if I'm wrong.
                            I’m a novice in this whole immigration thing so take my ignorant thoughts for just that, ignorant. But what are we supposed to do when a family shows up at the border and crosses illegally into the US? Should we just turn them back and hope they continue walking back to Mexico or their own country? Should we detain them pending a hearing/court order to send them back? Should we just let them walk on in?

                            I guess I’m confused at the liberal plan for immigration. Do they want to just open the borders and let people pass through at will? If so, what is a country? Or are the liberals okay with enforcing immigration laws as long as the immigration process is opened way up, which would still seem to be a bit of a problem. I guess I’ve never heard a rational plan from a liberal because they are so busy trashing Trump to actually formulate or deliver a workable solution.
                            "Discipleship is not a spectator sport. We cannot expect to experience the blessing of faith by standing inactive on the sidelines any more than we can experience the benefits of health by sitting on a sofa watching sporting events on television and giving advice to the athletes. And yet for some, “spectator discipleship” is a preferred if not primary way of worshipping." -Pres. Uchtdorf

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by BlueK View Post
                              First of all, it's not a legal requirement to jail someone for crossing the border illegally any more than the police has to cart you off to jail for being caught driving too fast. Get caught driving 100 in your neighborhood in a 35 mph zone and you probably would be taken to jail.

                              Also, under the previous rules they were not breaking up families. They detained them together if needed.

                              Also, many of these are applicants for asylum which is a process for applying to enter LEGALLY. Whether they have a good case or not, it doesn't seem right to treat people like criminals right off the bat and take their children from them out of spite when there is a legal application process on the books that they are requesting to follow. Under the previous administration they could apply for this from their own country. Under Trump that has been taken away. Pure stupidity.

                              As of what I read yesterday, there are currently two immigration bills being discussed in the House, and even the most conservative of the two would ban the practice of taking kids away from their parents. It's thought that the more moderate one could have the votes to pass. It's not clear that Trump would support either. He probably wouldn't, if I were to guess.

                              Commando can correct me if I'm wrong.

                              Yeah there is no such requirement that the kids be separated from parents. That's new and that's done not by any requirement of the law, but perhaps due to a loophole that ALLOWS it if there is some suspicion of child trafficking. Of course, in the immigration context, parents are routinely charged with "child smuggling" when they unlawfully carry a child across the border. I believe this is what the current administration is conflating with 'trafficking' to justify family separation.

                              Of course, the entire reason for family separation is to discourage asylum applicants from pursuing their claim. Sessions himself has been "assigning" immigration appeals to himself and handing down published, precedent decisions that are undoing 20+ years of established case law to further this goal of disassembling asylum. Remember that this guy is a f*king racist and would do anything to keep brown people from coming here. Now this POS is citing the bible, pontificating that laws were established by God etc. but that's a different rant.

                              Obama was not peaches and cream on immigration, either. Typically liberal or non-conservative executives may safely throw immigrants to the wolves in order to build political capital with the other side of the aisle without too much blowback-- totally worked for Clinton, too. However, the travesty under Obama a few short years ago was called "family detention,' where entire families were detained for years--albeit together--while their case was in process. Kids spending their second, third, and fourth birthdays in detention, never having tasted or not remembering freedom.

                              Asylum applicants are not detained by mandatory operation of law. They are detained on the discretion of ICE, who acts at the pleasure and on the specific directives of the president. Normally they are 'paroled' into the country under certain supervisory conditions, given a court date, etc. Normally when women with babes in arms apply for asylum at the border, they are given documents, given 'humanitarian parole,' and are released to an address of family here in the U.S. or a women's shelter-- not put in the slammer and have their babies ripped from their arms like Sessions and Trump prefer.

                              Anyway- yeah this shit is totally on purpose and is brand new- not 'old law' like Trump and his sycophants are currently insisting. Trump can choke and die.
                              Last edited by Commando; 06-14-2018, 03:50 PM.
                              "I'm anti, can't no government handle a commando / Your man don't want it, Trump's a bitch! I'll make his whole brand go under,"

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Moliere View Post
                                . I guess I’ve never heard a rational plan from a liberal because they are so busy trashing Trump to actually formulate or deliver a workable solution.
                                It may have been because you have never bothered to ask. Most of us "liberals" have been screaming from the top of our fucking lungs for the better part of 15 years for various well-articulated plans for immigration reform that would solve most of what seems to ail you. All of which, by the way, are swiftly batted down by conservatives in the House or the Senate who fear losing their seat more than they want to fix a humanitarian problem.
                                "I'm anti, can't no government handle a commando / Your man don't want it, Trump's a bitch! I'll make his whole brand go under,"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X