Poll

12 votes (60%)
3 votes (15%)
5 votes (25%)
3 votes (15%)
3 votes (15%)
1 vote (5%)
1 vote (5%)
4 votes (20%)
4 votes (20%)
5 votes (25%)

20 members have voted

777
777
  • Threads: 31
  • Posts: 727
Joined: Oct 7, 2015
August 4th, 2016 at 5:46:13 AM permalink
Quote: Joeshlabotnik

Just to be clear, I define "going too far" as doing something that will lose him the support of even Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and Joe B. (Belch) Sixpack. I still believe--despite, I admit, all evidence to the contrary so far--that there is SOMETHING that even his worshippers won't be able to tolerate.

I was originally going to list some of the most recent horrible things he's said, but between then and now, he said several more. It's getting so the "Trump Jerk Saying of the Day" should be a daily feature column in the newspaper. So please base your answers on the most recent Trump spew!



YouTube Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gBRXOAtyc8

Or

NYT Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/04/us/politics/donald-trump-supporters.html?_r=0

WARNING: This short video clip of 3:11 long is rated NC-17 by me due to its hatred, violence and language contents.

The video may be appropriated for the audience on this forum; however, it is absolutely necessary to show the video here because it adds value to the current 2016 hot political debates in this forum.

Scenes in this video, especially at the 0:31 to 0:52, and the 2:37 contents give me a flashback of AZD and RonC.

Sadly, Trump is a true reflection of his supporters and vice versa.
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7237
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
August 4th, 2016 at 5:48:56 AM permalink
Yeah, don't see the confederate flag down here much anymore. Just on trucks and as a part of the MS state flag. And, really, the people driving those trucks are not just limited government individual freedom types. Among the many ways that you can tell that - they're never not white.

Also, I'd be willing to bet that the PC crowd is not sitting around thinking of derogatory nicknames for Trump supporters. You can either have the PC argument, or you can complain about the nicknames. But the nicknames are not PC, so you can't have both...

And, Nixon's "I'm not a crook" line was about his tax returns. Both candidates in this cycle have issues. And both candidates have unflattering comparisons to Nixon. But, that line is much more closely related to Trump's issues than it is to Clinton's.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
terapined
terapined
  • Threads: 89
  • Posts: 6092
Joined: Dec 1, 2012
August 4th, 2016 at 6:36:03 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

It was formed for many reasons. The flag still represents the area regionally. And it is a general symbol of not wanting to be controlled by a strong, centralized government.


?????
I rarely see it down here in the south
terapined
terapined
  • Threads: 89
  • Posts: 6092
Joined: Dec 1, 2012
August 4th, 2016 at 6:39:44 AM permalink
Quote: TwoFeathersATL

The American Civil War was not fought over Slavery. Anyone who believes that has been deceived by the way history is taught in a 'simple fashion' in our classrooms, or they just are ignorant of the facts.
Anyone who believes that Slavery was not one of the primary causes for the division that grew between the Northern and Southern States is equally mis-informed.


???????

It was slavery
After the south lost, they tried to rewrite the history books saying it was about state rights
The North won, could care less about the history books
It was about slavery.
It was the most valuable commodity in the South
Joeshlabotnik
Joeshlabotnik
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 943
Joined: Jul 27, 2016
August 4th, 2016 at 7:49:31 AM permalink
Quote: terapined

???????

It was slavery
After the south lost, they tried to rewrite the history books saying it was about state rights
The North won, could care less about the history books
It was about slavery.
It was the most valuable commodity in the South



To help you with your ????:

The WAR was started by the South, basically a preemptive strike against the North, who they thought was going to invade and conquer them eventually. It was therefore a military, not a diplomatic decision. From the North's viewpoint, the war was not to abolish slavery--it was to bring the rebel states back into the Union by force.

In point of fact, the SECESSION (NOT the war) was about state's rights. The South saw itself as being bullied by the North and (wrongly) perceived that slavery would be abolished under a peacetime Lincoln administration. They argued that the states had the right to secede. They were actually correct--the Constitution doesn't prohibit secession.

While the South thought that the North was trying to abolish slavery and was frightened that Lincoln would be a rabid abolitionist, that would never have happened had the South stayed in the Union. They would have had more than enough political power to prevent the passage of a constitutional amendment banning slavery. Therefore, abolishing slavery was not a goal of the North in 1861. It became a stated goal later, and even then, the Emancipation Proclamation applied ONLY to territory actually occupied by Union forces--a small fraction of the Confederacy in 1862.

Furthermore, the North included many slave owners. Three states that did not secede were slave states. Also, Lincoln said in a speech in 1862 that his goal was to reunify the country and if that could be done without abolishing slavery, he would do that. Bottom line, the South was scared of a ghost and pulled the trigger unnecessarily. It's not even a certainty that the North would have started a hot war after the South seceded. The South forced the issue by attacking Federal military installations, including, of course, Fort Sumter. The North may have, and perhaps should have, left the South to fester as an ignorant, fetid, slaveholding agricultural backwater. Certainly, the South has been a net negative ever since it was dragged kicking and screaming back into the Union.

So the war was not "about slavery." Slavery was not in danger, and the cooler heads in the South knew that. However, in human society in general and the South in particular, cooler heads rarely prevail.
Joeshlabotnik
Joeshlabotnik
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 943
Joined: Jul 27, 2016
August 4th, 2016 at 8:06:22 AM permalink
Quote: 777


Sadly, Trump is a true reflection of his supporters and vice versa.



That was really, really disgusting. Thank you, however, for posting it. These gatherings of loathsome human garbage show the absolute worst of humanity. Their behavior is beyond repulsive.

I'm reminded of the Two Minutes' Hate in "1984" and yes, the Nuremberg rallies. These people are stimulating each other, like some mass mutual masturbation of hate. How sad and pathetic that these people find personal fulfillment only by screaming filth and cheering for a truly awful person.

Two things stand out for me. One is the big lie that common decency is political correctness, and therefore, you don't have any obligation to act decently. The other is the old guy who says he supports Trump because he is pining for the society he grew up in, as if Trump could turn back the clock somehow. I understand that that long-ago time when he could still get it up seems like nirvana to him now. But it's GONE, as is all of the past. We can't return to it, and we shouldn't want to.

This video makes me want to gather all those people up, sterilize them, and then deport them to--I know, Mexico! They'd be happy there. One thing for sure: I never want to live in a redneck/flyover state. The thought of interacting with any of these people--or God forbid, accidentally TOUCHING one--makes my skin crawl.
rxwine
rxwine
  • Threads: 209
  • Posts: 12166
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
August 4th, 2016 at 1:42:03 PM permalink
Quote: Joeshlabotnik

So the war was not "about slavery." Slavery was not in danger, and the cooler heads in the South knew that. However, in human society in general and the South in particular, cooler heads rarely prevail.



My only comment is, winners write history and losers try to rewrite it. Who is right?

Quote:

In fact, Loewen said, the original documents of the Confederacy show quite clearly that the war was based on one thing: slavery. For example, in its declaration of secession, Mississippi explained, "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery — the greatest material interest of the world … a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization." In its declaration of secession, South Carolina actually comes out against the rights of states to make their own laws — at least when those laws conflict with slaveholding. "In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals," the document reads. The right of transit, Loewen said, was the right of slaveholders to bring their slaves along with them on trips to non-slaveholding states.

In its justification of secession, Texas sums up its view of a union built upon slavery: "We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable."

The myth that the war was not about slavery seems to be a self-protective one for many people, said Stan Deaton, the senior historian at the Georgia Historical Society.



http://www.livescience.com/13673-civil-war-anniversary-myths.html
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
  • Jump to: