2016 Election -- Part II
Poll
 | 57 votes (47.89%) | ||
| | 33 votes (27.73%) | ||
| | 12 votes (10.08%) | ||
| | 10 votes (8.4%) | ||
| | 4 votes (3.36%) | ||
| | 3 votes (2.52%) |
119 members have voted
I agree, and in a sane world where the press has freedom to report other people's words without judging the veracity of those words, it would never even be an issue. However, in February, Donald Trump threatened to "open up the libel laws" to allow him to sue media outlets for critical articles. Right now, libel against a public figure (which obviously includes a presidential candidate) must be false statements made with actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth. If Trump wants to "open up" libel laws, what would that look like? In January he threatened to sue the Washington Post after a critical (but truthful) article about his Atlantic City casino bankruptcies. So is he proposing to expand defamation to include the truth? It is a cornerstone of libel law that "truth is the ultimate defense against libel." If that goes away, we're not talking about libel anymore, we're talking about lèse majesté.Quote: RSIMO I think it'd be difficult for the newspaper to be responsible for that. If DJT said "HRC has AIDS" and a news group made a story on that, do you think DJT would be responsible or the news? I'd think DJT would be. Same thing if a person had such a sign, I'd think the person would be mostly responsible. (Although definitely would be poor judgement and not the "best" [moral/ethically] for the news group to post such a photo.)
http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/world-view-donald-trump-poses-serious-threat-to-press-and-free-speech-1.2560412
Quote: FaceI wouldn't compare myself to the black man. For sure, I can go to Guelph and blend right in, let my white power lead me to the promised land. Same goes for pretty much any town in the US and Canada. But I don't live in Guelph, nor any town in the US and CAN. I live here, and here there is every bit of racial hate you describe. Worse, even, because half breed. And no matter how many times I tell my face it's white, my nose still skews left and my orbital remains cracked. Of course, both of those features came by way of my refusal to roll over, so maybe you do have a point...
The sentence "Integrity is a luxury to some" just about makes my ears bleed (Anger coming, don't take offense, I love boymimbo). I mean,...OK, first, no. Integrity is free. You are allowed as much as you can possibly produce. It cannot be given to you nor taken from you. It is yours to create, hold, and own. It's one of the few things that are truly "yours". It's a big part of what makes you "you". And though I get your point and where you were going, I still find it a dangerous opinion to hold. Because what are you saying if you tell folks it's OK to sacrifice their integrity? What is that sentiment other than permission for this type of horses#$% to flourish?
I'm not saying it's easy. I won't even say it's smart; you have your way and I have mine, and by just about any single measurable metric, you're doing a damn sight better than I am. But your daughter's about that age to be entering this segment of the world, if my broken memory serves. She's at that age where she couldn't really afford to sacrifice an opportunity, should one present itself. If given the choice to pursue her path in the face of abuse OR bin it all to stand strong, would you encourage HER to suck it up?
I dunno. But I do know there's a reason we all know the names Ghandi, Parks, Tubman, and it sure as s#$% wasn't because they rolled over. I don't mean to demonize or condemn those who haven't stood. I've got moments like that, too, somewhen in my past. But I damn sure wish to inspire those who don't stand to begin, and would like some like minded folks there to have my back those moments when I feel like rolling. If you want change, you have to do the work. Consider this a pregame locker talk.
Nothing really changes, despite MLK's eloquent speeches, until after the riots in Baltimore 1953 MLK gave a speech at a black church. 1956 speech at a fraternity on Morgan state campus. 1958 Honorary degree from Morgan State. 1963 8,000 hear a speech at Civic Center 1964 heads voter registration drive in Baltimore 1965 Speech ar SLC conference 1968 Cancels visit to Baltimore to go to Memphis April 4 6:01 PM Well, you know. Riots don't start in seriousness till Saturday, last until Thursday AM.
Suddenly there is a need to recognize the injustices that blacks faced at that time. 48 years later and well, you know, I will let terrapin explain how much better things are for young black men and women who have benefited from the largess of the Democratic Party.
http://archives.ubalt.edu/bsr/timeline/timeline.html
1956 Speech at a fraternity on Morgan State campus
\Quote: FaceI wouldn't compare myself to the black man. For sure, I can go to Guelph and blend right in, let my white power lead me to the promised land. Same goes for pretty much any town in the US and Canada. But I don't live in Guelph, nor any town in the US and CAN. I live here, and here there is every bit of racial hate you describe. Worse, even, because half breed. And no matter how many times I tell my face it's white, my nose still skews left and my orbital remains cracked. Of course, both of those features came by way of my refusal to roll over, so maybe you do have a point...
The sentence "Integrity is a luxury to some" just about makes my ears bleed (Anger coming, don't take offense, I love boymimbo). I mean,...OK, first, no. Integrity is free. You are allowed as much as you can possibly produce. It cannot be given to you nor taken from you. It is yours to create, hold, and own. It's one of the few things that are truly "yours". It's a big part of what makes you "you". And though I get your point and where you were going, I still find it a dangerous opinion to hold. Because what are you saying if you tell folks it's OK to sacrifice their integrity? What is that sentiment other than permission for this type of horses#$% to flourish?
I'm not saying it's easy. I won't even say it's smart; you have your way and I have mine, and by just about any single measurable metric, you're doing a damn sight better than I am. But your daughter's about that age to be entering this segment of the world, if my broken memory serves. She's at that age where she couldn't really afford to sacrifice an opportunity, should one present itself. If given the choice to pursue her path in the face of abuse OR bin it all to stand strong, would you encourage HER to suck it up?
I dunno. But I do know there's a reason we all know the names Ghandi, Parks, Tubman, and it sure as s#$% wasn't because they rolled over. I don't mean to demonize or condemn those who haven't stood. I've got moments like that, too, somewhen in my past. But I damn sure wish to inspire those who don't stand to begin, and would like some like minded folks there to have my back those moments when I feel like rolling. If you want change, you have to do the work. Consider this a pregame locker talk.
Okay, what I meant to say is that the ability to "use their integrity in circumstances is a luxury to some". Face it, what you did was a bold and courageous move, and not many people have the financial ability or courage to do that.
As for my daughter, she has done both, had integrity, and sucked it up. It's learning to be wise and knowing when integrity matters over anything else. But she has been abused. Yet she still continues to suck it up because if she reacted in the way that she should whenever any male does an inappropriate action towards her, she would not get anything done.
Quote: boymimbo\
Okay, what I meant to say is that the ability to "use their integrity in circumstances is a luxury to some". Face it, what you did was a bold and courageous move, and not many people have the financial ability or courage to do that.
As for my daughter, she has done both, had integrity, and sucked it up. It's learning to be wise and knowing when integrity matters over anything else. But she has been abused. Yet she still continues to suck it up because if she reacted in the way that she should whenever any male does an inappropriate action towards her, she would not get anything done.
I sincerely hope you and Mister Tire Iron had a conversation with that young man.
Quote: FDEAD3709
Suddenly there is a need to recognize the injustices that blacks faced at that time. 48 years later and well, you know, I will let terrapin explain how much better things are for young black men and women who have benefited from the largess of the Democratic Party.
Well, the "largess of the Democratic Party," as you put it, has been consistent support for racial equality and civil rights for the otherwise disenfranchised, starting with the Civil Rights era and continuing today. Obviously, there's no way to prove it, but I can only imagine what life would be like if the Republicans had been completely in charge (as opposed to sometimes and sometimes not) in the last fifty years. Maybe black people's lives would be the living hell that Trump says it already is.
While things are far from perfect and inequality is still rampant, I think a black person in the US in 2016 is orders of magnitude better off than a black person in 1956. For one thing, President, Secretary of State, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, US senator, US congressperson, UN ambassador...were not realistic career goals for a young black man (or woman) back then.
Quote: FDEAD3709I sincerely hope you and Mister Tire Iron had a conversation with that young man.
Yeah, nothing like violence to teach someone that violence is wrong.
Quote: JoeshlabotnikWell, the "largess of the Democratic Party," as you put it, has been consistent support for racial equality and civil rights for the otherwise disenfranchised, starting with the Civil Rights era and continuing today. Obviously, there's no way to prove it, but I can only imagine what life would be like if the Republicans had been completely in charge (as opposed to sometimes and sometimes not) in the last fifty years. Maybe black people's lives would be the living hell that Trump says it already is.
While things are far from perfect and inequality is still rampant, I think a black person in the US in 2016 is orders of magnitude better off than a black person in 1956. For one thing, President, Secretary of State, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, US senator, US congressperson, UN ambassador...were not realistic career goals for a young black man (or woman) back then.
You may find this hard to believe, but a black male 20-24 in Baltimore is looking for a job, not to be President. Unemployment rate for blacks in that age group 37%.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/29/news/economy/baltimore-economy/
Quote: FDEAD3709You may find this hard to believe, but a black male 20-24 in Baltimore is looking for a job, not to be President. Unemployment rate for blacks in that age group 37%.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/29/news/economy/baltimore-economy/
And what would his job prospects have been in 1956? (before those evil Democrats and their civil rights nonsense came along)
Quote: onenickelmiracleIt's true the media is united against Trump. You cannot even see a negative Hillary story. If there is ever one, they just go through the motions and you don't see it again. It's less credible when you see it as ganging up and piling on, then you question what the real motives are.
Well, when you "see something as" something it's not, well, yeah, you might have a distorted view of things. I mean, "you cannot even see a negative Hillary story"?????? I guess YOU can't because you have your eyes closed. I don't think I've read a single front section of the paper without there being some article about her foundation, her health, and of course EMAILS EMAILS EMAILS BENGHAZI BENGHAZI BENGHAZI. The media have been chewing on her like a dog on a bone.
Do you maybe possibly kinda sorta think that all the negative media stories about Trump have anything to do with the horrible things he says, does, and has said and done? Naaah. it's all stinkin liburral media bias.
The fact of the matter is that the media have been VERY soft on Trump, tsk-tsking about the horrible things he says then moving right along. They've had Hillary under a microscope for years. I think they've actually strained to portray this as a close race, so they give Trump multiple passes and leap on anything Hillary says. But his latest eruptions have been pretty hard for them to ignore.
But is poor Twumpie feeling picked on? It's sure beginning to sound that way. They won't let him win, even though he deserves to. Cheaters! Cheaters! Cheaters! WAAAAAAAH!
Quote: Joeshlabotnik
The fact of the matter is that the media have been VERY soft on Trump, tsk-tsking about the horrible things he says then moving right along.
I'm not sure they can keep up. He distracts from his last poo flinging by flinging new poo.
Quote: Joeshlabotnik"Bill Clinton bombed them too"? (The Iraq war didn't start until well after he left office.)
Bill bombed Iraq in 1993, 1996, 1998 and after. Foreign Policy
Quote: JoeshlabotnikHe imposed sanctions that killed hundreds of thousands of people? How do you kill people with sanctions, anyway?
The sanctions denied Iraq chlorine which makes water purification impossible.
Most of the 500,000 who died were children who died from acute dehydration due to gastritis.
Despite growing opposition, the US and Britain pressured the UN to keep the sanctions in place.
Albright has since apologized for her comment.
NYT
NYT Magazine
Quote: JoeshlabotnikAnd how did the Clintons "deregulate the media"? (And why would that necessarily be a bad thing?).
Bill Clinton deregulated the media with the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
I've mentioned why it was bad in previous posts.
Common Cause
Quote: boymimboAs for speaking fees, etc, they are paid what the market bears.
Read this article and tell me this was't a payoff: NYT
Putin is building his nuclear arsenal with uranium mined in Wyoming.
The next time we see it, it will be on the tip of a nuclear warhead.
Quote: boymimboAnd Trump has not given any kind of policy speeches as how he will treat banks,...
Yes he has.
CNN
Quote: boymimboMexicans are rapists, ...
He never said that. This is what I meant by billionaire Obe Wan Kenobe's controlling minds.
You're one of their victims victim.
Enter any one of his buildings and you will find Mexicans working in them.
If he believed Mexicans were rapists as you say, do you think he would employ them in the same buildings where his wife, daughters and daughters in law live?
Salon
Quote: TankoHe never said that. This is what I meant by billionaire Obe Wan Kenobe's controlling minds.
You're one of their victims victim.
Enter any one of his buildings and you will find Mexicans working in them.
If he believed Mexicans were rapists as you say, do you think he would employ them in the same buildings where his wife, daughters and daughters in law live?
Salon
Quote: TrumpWhen Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.
Trump Announces Presidential Bid
Same quote in the salon article. What the salon article is disputing is that trump said ALL Mexicans were rapists.
It does say that among the Mexicans that come here are criminals and rapists, so yeah, if he actually believed the things that he said himself, or if he actually said all Mexicans were rapists, I would find it surprising that he employed them. Which did he assume them to be when he hired them?
Quote: TankoBill bombed Iraq in 1993, 1996, 1998 and after.
The sanctions denied Iraq chlorine which makes water purification impossible.
Bill Clinton deregulated the media with the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
Well, like most of the babbling we've seen from conservatives on this issue, what you said is a mixture of half-truths, distortions, and outright falsehoods.
Yes, "Bill bombed Iraq." Technically, you're correct. The armed forces of the United States made punitive strikes against Iraqi forces that were violating the terms of the Gulf War cease fire, and Bill was commander in chief. So you COULD state it as if Bill had personally climbed into a B-52 bomber and ridden a bomb all the way to Ground Zero, waving his cowboy hat, I'm puzzled as to why you're painting those military strikes as something horrible and heinous, to the point where WE SHOULDN'T ELECT THE WOMAN WHO WAS FIRST LADY AT THE TIME. I mean, HUH???
The sanctions were imposed by the United Nations. And Iraq had domestic supplies of chlorine and the manufacturing capability to create the necessary chemicals. Remember, the gasses they used to kill the Kurds were produced and used domestically. It's certainly possible that Saddam used what supplies he had to build weapons rather than chlorinate his nation's water, but how is that Bill Clinton's (or the UN's fault)? And just FYI--water purification, even on a large scale, is quite possible by any one of half a dozen methods that do not need chlorine.
Your last statement is simply stupid. Presidents do NOT create legislation, In any event, you didn't tell us what about the Act was so horrible (I thought Republicans LIKED deregulation).
Really, rabid partisanship that distorts your outlook doesn't do you any favors.
Quote: Tanko
Putin is building his nuclear arsenal with uranium mined in Wyoming.
Russia has domestic supplies of uranium that are roughly five times the size of ours. Soviet Russia built its huge nuclear arsenal with domestic uranium alone. Also, it's not like uranium isn't easily obtainable from any of a dozen sources. It's used in commercial and industrial applications worldwide.
Quote: JoeshlabotnikReally, rabid partisanship that distorts your outlook doesn't do you any favors.
Perhaps your best comment since you joined the board. It applies to most, close to all, on both sides here. Your writing is not exactly fair and balanced in any sense. Glad to see that you recognize that!!
Quote: JoeshlabotnikReally, rabid partisanship that distorts your outlook doesn't do you any favors.
Perhaps your best comment since you joined the board. It applies to most, close to all, on both sides here. Your writing is not exactly fair and balanced in any sense. Glad to see that you recognize that!!
Quote: RonCPerhaps your best comment since you joined the board. It applies to most, close to all, on both sides here. Your writing is not exactly fair and balanced in any sense. Glad to see that you recognize that!!
I totally agree with you--I do NOT sound like Fox "News"!
I' m sure that your own partisanship makes you automatically see everything I post as unfair. Probably the difference is that when I say that Trump is a horrible person and should never be President, I'm not being partisan--I'm being human. Whereas I think that if someone supports Trump--or at least doesn't denounce him--the kindest thing you can say about that person is that he has partisan blinders on (as opposed to actually agreeing with The Donald).
I'm sure you interpret my resisting the idea that Hillary is an evil, scheming witch as clear evidence of my partisan. bias and lack of objectivity. You're wrong if you think that, and in fact, I don't like Hillary very much. I do respect her, though, and the choice between her and trump isn't even close.
Quote: ck1313Joe when you say "Trump is a horrible person" maybe you should look in the mirror. Almost every post you have on here is "Trump like." If someone disagrees with you you try and tell them how stupid they are and how smart you are. You're a bully and not much different then Trump. I hope you just act like this when you're hiding behind your computer and not in front of actual people. People like you are the reason liberals get a bad rap. Liberalism is about helping people and making things better for everyone. You're not nice and seem to want to destroy anyone who disagrees with you. You may hate Trump but you are a lot like him.
It was the same when he posted as mkl654321
Quote: ck1313Joe when you say "Trump is a horrible person" maybe you should look in the mirror. Almost every post you have on here is "Trump like." If someone disagrees with you you try and tell them how stupid they are and how smart you are. You're a bully and not much different then Trump. I hope you just act like this when you're hiding behind your computer and not in front of actual people. People like you are the reason liberals get a bad rap. Liberalism is about helping people and making things better for everyone. You're not nice and seem to want to destroy anyone who disagrees with you. You may hate Trump but you are a lot like him.
This is the precise reason why I do not care for this thread, but it is also the reason that I tend to give this thread a little bit of leeway since it is one that deals with very personal, and therefore subjective, issues.
However, this post clearly crosses the line into direct personal insult, on multiple occasions. Please consider this a public Warning (no Suspension) and a reminder to everyone that I am watching this thread, will continue to do so, and while I do grant a little bit of leniency with respect to the Rules as pertains this thread, posts of the above nature will absolutely no longer be tolerated.
Quote: AussieIt was the same when he posted as mkl654321
No IP match, I would like to request that you do not make such accusations. In the future, if you suspect someone of having multiple accounts, please PM one of the Administrators in Green and state such in the PM. Action will be taken accordingly if it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be the case.
Quote: ck1313Joe when you say "Trump is a horrible person" maybe you should look in the mirror. Almost every post you have on here is "Trump like." If someone disagrees with you you try and tell them how stupid they are and how smart you are. You're a bully and not much different then Trump. I hope you just act like this when you're hiding behind your computer and not in front of actual people. People like you are the reason liberals get a bad rap. Liberalism is about helping people and making things better for everyone. You're not nice and seem to want to destroy anyone who disagrees with you. You may hate Trump but you are a lot like him.
You have not the vaguest notion of who I am or what I'm like. And I find it risible that you accuse me of all these things and then hurl mud at me.
I get a lot of personal attacks on this forum from Trumpers when I attack their tin god. I'll put your post in the same general category for now, though I don't know if you're a Trumper or not. And yes verify, I am a vociferous critic of that horrible man and the horrible people who support him. You see that as my being a big old mean meanie-head. I see it as my civic duty to oppose Trump and Trumpers.
Quote: JoeshlabotnikI totally agree with you--I do NOT sound like Fox "News"!
I' m sure that your own partisanship makes you automatically see everything I post as unfair. Probably the difference is that when I say that Trump is a horrible person and should never be President, I'm not being partisan--I'm being human. Whereas I think that if someone supports Trump--or at least doesn't denounce him--the kindest thing you can say about that person is that he has partisan blinders on (as opposed to actually agreeing with The Donald).
I'm sure you interpret my resisting the idea that Hillary is an evil, scheming witch as clear evidence of my partisan. bias and lack of objectivity. You're wrong if you think that, and in fact, I don't like Hillary very much. I do respect her, though, and the choice between her and trump isn't even close.
Actually, you are wrong. I don't see everything you post as unfair. I do find your hyperbole (well, at least I hope it is hyperbole...) pretty out there when it comes to proposing the elimination of all Republicans/Conservatives in a Hitler-esque fashion. No one else does that here. Your comments here often sound kind of like those that would come from people that it seems like you would disdain...
Quote: Mission146No IP match
This makes me LOL. After a 6 year absence I would have been shocked if there was.
Lots of people act like that -- and worse -- when they're behind a computer. Just read the comments section on CNN. Very few act like that in public, but Trump does. He admitted to ogling a 68-year-old woman's backside and told a crowd of thousands that he wasn't impressed.Quote: ck1313Joe when you say "Trump is a horrible person" maybe you should look in the mirror. Almost every post you have on here is "Trump like." If someone disagrees with you you try and tell them how stupid they are and how smart you are. You're a bully and not much different then Trump. I hope you just act like this when you're hiding behind your computer and not in front of actual people. People like you are the reason liberals get a bad rap. Liberalism is about helping people and making things better for everyone. You're not nice and seem to want to destroy anyone who disagrees with you. You may hate Trump but you are a lot like him.
Come on. That's a far sight from making anonymous jibes on the Internet, don't you think? In what bizarro-world reality is it okay for a presidential candidate to announce that he was checking out a grandmother's rear end -- and didn't like it?
Quote: RonCActually, you are wrong. I don't see everything you post as unfair. I do find your hyperbole (well, at least I hope it is hyperbole...) pretty out there when it comes to proposing the elimination of all Republicans/Conservatives in a Hitler-esque fashion. No one else does that here. Your comments here often sound kind of like those that would come from people that it seems like you would disdain...
Well, you're much too intelligent to have taken those things at face value, so I view your pious objection to them as disingenuous at best.
And yeah, there are extreme statements flying all around this election season. I suppose my statements have been extreme at times because I'm outraged and appalled at how many people support that horrible man. No matter what the outcome of the election is, I'm sickened by how many redneck, bigoted Joe Sixpacks there are out there and the political power that a shameless demagogue can wield by appealing to them.
I am trying to see the shitstorm dog's breakfast of an election we're having as ultimately beneficial in that it may result in the destruction of the Republican Party, but for now, what chills my blood is the thousands of people still lining up to kiss Donald's boots at hate rallies. And yeah, there are times when I'd like to see a nuclear accident just upwind of one of those rallies. These people are worse than useless; their existence on this planet is a net negative for humanity. Sorry, but I've known too many good and decent people whose lives were affected by racism, bigotry, sexism, and yes, stupidity. I have no patience for a crowd of idiots chanting hate slogans.
And yes, you may see a contradiction here. But there really isn't one. I hate these people because of what they do. They hate others because of what those others ARE.
Quote: TankoHe never said that. This is what I meant by billionaire Obe Wan Kenobe's controlling minds.
Quote: Donald Trump, July 6, 2015When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
You're right. He said "They're rapists". The subject of they is "Mexico sends its people". He didn't say Mexicans were rapists. He said "They're rapists".
I can't account for Trump's relaxation of logic and why he would let people he calls rapists work in his buildings. Trump seems to be having problems with logic nowadays. Anyone with a sense of logic knows that with the assistance of the liberal media, unless of course, the media is somehow substituting television speeches with different words.
Quote: ck1313Joe when you say "Trump is a horrible person" maybe you should look in the mirror. Almost every post you have on here is "Trump like." If someone disagrees with you you try and tell them how stupid they are and how smart you are. You're a bully and not much different then Trump. I hope you just act like this when you're hiding behind your computer and not in front of actual people. People like you are the reason liberals get a bad rap. Liberalism is about helping people and making things better for everyone. You're not nice and seem to want to destroy anyone who disagrees with you. You may hate Trump but you are a lot like him.
Bingo! Spot on about everything. That's why I blocked him. Well, that and the fact that he horribly misunderstands what people say and then argues against that, instead of what they actually said.
From what I understand, the facts don't support that intuition and illegals are not particularly likely to commit crimes (other than illegal immigration).
Also, very similar reasoning could be, and I'm sure was, applied to Italians, Irish and Poles.
We started off as a bunch of religious wack jobs that nobody else wanted to deal with, in fact.
But, he didn't suggest that Mexicans were more likely to rape because of their ethnicity. It's because they are "not their best." The lower strata of Mexican society. Not because of skin color or something.
Trump says many horrible things. I don't get the fascination with trying to pin things he didn't say on him, or act like it's his fault if David Duke says something favorable about him.
Quote: MichaelBluejayBingo! Spot on about everything. That's why I blocked him. Well, that and the fact that he horribly misunderstands what people say and then argues against that, instead of what they actually said.
Well, if you endorse these awful things that ck1313 said about me, then perhaps you should get the same warning from the moderator, though it's not up to me. You don't have to be so nasty just because you and I disagree.
Quote: RigondeauxWhat Trump said about rapists makes some intuitive sense.
But, he didn't suggest that Mexicans were more likely to rape because of their ethnicity. It's because they are "not their best." The lower strata of Mexican society. Not because of skin color or something.
Actually, in singling out Mexico and Mexicans, he made that very implication. He didn't say that Canada or Vietnam or France or whoever weren't sending us their best and that that is a problem. He implied that the not-the-best people that Mexico "sends us" were absolute scum of the earth.
Also, I wonder why no one has pointed out that Mexico doesn't "send us" those immigrants. They aren't gathered up by the Mexican government and flung across the border. They come as the result of individual decisions. To say Mexico "sends them to us" is to misstate the situation drastically. In fact, it's much more accurate to say that we attract them, with plenty of jobs that no one else will take and pay 3-5 times what they could make back home, and yes, lax immigration policies.
Quote: JoeshlabotnikWell, if you endorse these awful things that ck1313 said about me, then perhaps you should get the same warning from the moderator, though it's not up to me. You don't have to be so nasty just because you and I disagree.
I am going to suggest that agreeing with and quoting direct personal insults almost rises to the level of making a direct personal insult, but as you suggested, I am just going to reiterate my warning on this one that I am watching this thread and that further personal insults will not be tolerated. I do expect the discussion to get heated due to the very personal nature of our political beliefs, it's not objective and provable such as math, but we do need to keep it civil...all parties involved.
Quote: JoeshlabotnikActually, in singling out Mexico and Mexicans, he made that very implication. He didn't say that Canada or Vietnam or France or whoever weren't sending us their best and that that is a problem. He implied that the not-the-best people that Mexico "sends us" were absolute scum of the earth.
Also, I wonder why no one has pointed out that Mexico doesn't "send us" those immigrants. They aren't gathered up by the Mexican government and flung across the border. They come as the result of individual decisions. To say Mexico "sends them to us" is to misstate the situation drastically. In fact, it's much more accurate to say that we attract them, with plenty of jobs that no one else will take and pay 3-5 times what they could make back home, and yes, lax immigration policies.
I'm pretty sure that Trump emphasized and explicitly claimed, the first rally he had on the border after announcing his candidacy, (paraphrasing ) that the Mexican government was in fact dumping their undesirables on us in an organized and deliberate effort, which was his justification for making them pay for the wall. Also repeated at a rally out West a few days later.
I could be wrong, but i remember my jaw dropping when I heard him say that, given his need to be a responsible candidate and not misrepresent the US on something. Of course, he's topped the outrageous things he was saying then a hundred times, so it all gets jumbled together. I'll see if I can find a transcript or report.
Quote: ck1313Joe when you say "Trump is a horrible person" maybe you should look in the mirror. Almost every post you have on here is "Trump like." If someone disagrees with you you try and tell them how stupid they are and how smart you are. You're a bully and not much different then Trump. I hope you just act like this when you're hiding behind your computer and not in front of actual people. People like you are the reason liberals get a bad rap. Liberalism is about helping people and making things better for everyone. You're not nice and seem to want to destroy anyone who disagrees with you. You may hate Trump but you are a lot like him.
Thank you for articulating what I've been thinking for the last few months. I just had a wonderful golf game with Terapined and, his general political philosophy is similar to Joe Shlabot's. Ed is just able to get out his thoughts without making someone opposed to him cringe!
I've been thinking for quite a while that Joe Shlabot might actually be Donald Trump! The equivalencies and how they treat people who disagree with them is striking!
Edit- I really know that Joe is not Donald.....
Quote: JoeshlabotnikWell, if you endorse these awful things that ck1313 said about me, then perhaps you should get the same warning from the moderator, though it's not up to me. You don't have to be so nasty just because you and I disagree.
The wording was not perfect but it looks like it was meant as an attack on your writing, not you personally. I certainly don't know you personally and I don't think many (or any) here know you or have met you. You did make, and get away, with some personal insults here along the way before ever getting suspended. The moderators are giving some leeway here and that was what kept some of your earlier posts from getting you suspended. Your last sentence says it all:
"You don't have to be so nasty just because you and I disagree."
Joeshlabotnik 10/16/2016
If your writing had followed that policy from the beginning, a lot of this stuff would never have happened. Moderators would not have needed to become involved and you still would have been able to attack Trump without dumping mass insults (as opposed to personal ones; they were in there, too) on everyone who is even entertaining the idea of voting for Big Orange.
Quote: SOOPOOThank you for articulating what I've been thinking for the last few months. I just had a wonderful golf game with Terapined and, his general political philosophy is similar to Joe Shlabot's. Ed is just able to get out his thoughts without making someone opposed to him cringe!
I've been thinking for quite a while that Joe Shlabot might actually be Donald Trump! The equivalencies and how they treat people who disagree with them is striking!
Edit- I really know that Joe is not Donald.....
Had a great time on the golf course with SOOPOO
Unlike me, SOOPOO got game. I was quite impressed :-)
anyway
SNL parodying Presidents and candidates is a rich tradition
All the Presidents and candidates get it and laugh along
except of course Donald Trump
You can just picture him simmering, angry and going to the phone.
He tweeted "Watched Saturday Night Live hit job on me. Time to retire the boring and unfunny show. Alec Baldwin portrayal stinks. Media rigging election!"
Its all a joke Donald. sheesh. I find his lack of understanding humor a bit scary
It's actually a huge compliment to Hillary: the idiotic right wingers like Hannity and whichever Klan member is currently running Breitbart are constantly pushing her nonexistent health maladies. Then they can't explain why she did so well at both debates, so they pretend like she must have been on drugs!
He constantly hits her on "stamina," and yet she has better stamina than he does.
Meanwhile Trump is the one who sniffled through two entire debates and practically fell asleep near the end of the first one.
But both sides are justified with the insults , neither deserves our vote and it's sad the only reason most people are voting for either one is fear of the other hurting their lifestyle.
He states that Hillary is drugged for the debates, states that the entire media is out to get him. Consider what the mainstream media did against Bill in the 1990s when the sex allegation surfaced. They found other people who claimed to have had sexual relationships with him. The same thing that happened to Bill back then is happening to the Donald now, and it is because of him that he digs his own political grave.
I think some people are confused as to what to do with the Wikileaks. On one hand, it is a completely illegal enterprise to steal emails and then publish them on the internet. But Trump, not seeing the irony, encourages the espionage. I wonder how he would feel if it were a US Citizen doing that hacking, or if they suddenly decided to hack Guliani's or the RNC's email. Espionage is espionage, not to be condoned by anyone, and certainly not to be encouraged.
It seems that under Trump, freedom of the press would be curtailed. He states he will change libel law. This "freedom of the press" curtailment was something that the Right was afraid of when Obama became president. There were claims that Rush and Hannity would be off the air and that conservative radio would be off the air. None of that happened.
Coziness of the press goes on both sides. The NYT asks the Clinton campaign for comment before a story breaks just like it asks the Trump campaign for comment.
I can't wait for 23 days to pass and for the windbag to no longer be a threat.
(yeah and I know she endorsed Donald, but so did a bunch of others)
Quote: rxwineWhile it pains me to say it, I'd rather have Sarah Palin as President over the Donald. Why? Because I think she might actually listen to advisors for one thing. She actually has maintained a sense of humor. And she wouldn't be up at 3am making retaliatory tweets to the last person who dissed her.
(yeah and I know she endorsed Donald, but so did a bunch of others)
Sarah Palin is dumb as a box of rocks, but at least she tried to learn.
Trump has no interest in learning anything.
Nicole Wallace, who worked on the McCain campaign in 2008, said Sarah Palin would pass out at night with a highlighter in her hand going over notes and trying to learn the issues.
I can't imagine Trump ever putting that much effort into anything other than promoting himself.
Quote:Giuliani on rigged election: 'Dead people generally vote for Democrats'
Quote: RonCThe wording was not perfect but it looks like it was meant as an attack on your writing, not you personally.
(Quote from that poster): Joe when you say "Trump is a horrible person" maybe you should look in the mirror. Almost every post you have on here is "Trump like." If someone disagrees with you you try and tell them how stupid they are and how smart you are. You're a bully and not much different then Trump. I hope you just act like this when you're hiding behind your computer and not in front of actual people. People like you are the reason liberals get a bad rap. Liberalism is about helping people and making things better for everyone. You're not nice and seem to want to destroy anyone who disagrees with you. You may hate Trump but you are a lot like him. (end quote)
Ron, this is why I disagree with you so often. You're all too willing to distort reality to make a point. I count several personal attacks in this guy's post, including "you're a bully" (HUH??) and "you're not nice." I don't see any attack on my writing--this is all personal.
It's extremely hypocritical of you to scold me for the tone of my posts and then try to be an apologist for the above poster. If you object to nasty language, then you should object to this guy's post as well as anything you didn't like about my posts. On the other hand, if the REAL reason you've been criticizing me is because you don't agree with me, it makes perfect sense that you're apologizing for him.
Quote: BozIf Trump is a member here we should be seeing a lot of suspensions coming for all the insults toward him from those who fear him. And yes, it would be the same if Hillary was a member here.
But both sides are justified with the insults , neither deserves our vote and it's sad the only reason most people are voting for either one is fear of the other hurting their lifestyle.
I don't think you can reduce opposition to Trump to just those who are afraid of him or who think their lives would be adversely affected if he were elected. There are quite a few (as in, tens of millions) who are simply disgusted by his behavior and/or realize he is utterly unqualified to be President.
I see in your post, though, more of the false equivalence fallacy--that neither Hillary nor Trump is suitable. Even if you don't like Hillary and think that she (and her rapist husband Bill!!!!!!!!!) would ruin the country, she's still a far better choice than Trump.
I still can't see how anyone could possibly think that the OO would make even a halfway decent President, or for that matter, how anybody could possibly think that Hillary wouldn't.
