President Trump & the USA

[lifted*fox]

how anybody can remotely argue in favour of Trump and his administration at this point is beyond me. 

 

same with Boris / Conservative party UK.

 

racist, xenophobic - argue which all day long. whatever the result, neither is acceptable and neither country is showing a progressive attitude in terms of being world leaders.

 

going backwards so fast it's alarming, quite frankly.

 

"if you don't like it, there's worse places to live" doesn't wash as an argument either. we should be continually striving to be better, more progressive, more accepting, more helpful to those in need. not just ****ing shrug it off because 'there's worse places' / 'go back to where you came from'. 

 

absolutely ****ing appalling. 

Edited 18 July 2019 by lifted*fox

[Carl the Llama]

6 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

I will say fair enough about Omar rumours.

 

You did say you think you've never used the word racist in regarss to Trump whilst stating in the same post "if it walks like a racist supporting..."

 

Come on, thats an implication that Trump is racist right there. Along with saying "racial undertones". Also calling Prussian racist supporting which he obviously isnt.

 

But because he supports Trump he is racist. You have to play fair with this

Racist supporting = supporting a racist, not being racist and supporting someone. It is an implication that Trump is racist, you are correct on that, but it's not accusing MC of being racist.  This is an important distinction.

 

The "racial undertones" refers to things like his famous Mexican rapists monologue.  You surely can't deny that one?

 

In the same post I concluded that:

Quote

Unfortunately the recent tweets are too blatant for it to be described as anything else so I'm dropping the caution for this one because it's clear as day

To be clear this means that I'm openly declaring Trump to be a racist at this point, yes.  The whole point of my message that you've quoted is to say that Trump has forfeited his benefit of the doubt.

 

I haven't called MC Prussian a racist.

 

Hopefully that clears things up because I'm not really sure where you think I'm being unfair or contradictory.

Edited 18 July 2019 by Carl the Llama

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

2 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Racist supporting = supporting a racist, not being racist and supporting someone. It is an implication that Trump is racist, you are correct on that, but it's not accusing MC of being racist.  This is an important distinction.

 

The "racial undertones" refers to things like his famous Mexican rapists monologue.  You surely can't deny that one?

 

In the same post I concluded that:

To be clear this means that I'm openly declaring Trump to be a racist at this point, yes.  The whole point of my message that you've quoted is to say that Trump has forfeited his benefit of the doubt.

 

I haven't called MC Prussian a racist.

 

Hopefully that clears things up because I'm not really sure where you think I'm being unfair or contradictory.

I knew you were going to draw that distinction. Seems a bit of an empty one to me. If you say i support racists im going to take that as you saying im racist. Why would i support racists if i wasnt?

 

He wasnt calling all Mexicans rapists. He was talking about the rapists in the caravans, or was it the criminal element within illegal immigrants? Not sure. Either way, plenty of Mexicans in America didnt find it racist because they know he was talking about Mexican rapists and not Mexicans

 

Majority of women are getting raped en route illegally to the US btw. And a third of the kids are not actually related to the people they come with. To deny there is a significant criminal element is wrong.  Yes his language is provocative, doesnt fall nicely on delicate ears...

 

I and many others dont believe Trump is a racist. Its a subjective opinion you and many others have along with the msm

 

 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

12 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

how anybody can remotely argue in favour of Trump and his administration at this point is beyond me. 

 

same with Boris / Conservative party UK.

 

racist, xenophobic - argue which all day long. whatever the result, neither is acceptable and neither country is showing a progressive attitude in terms of being world leaders.

 

going backwards so fast it's alarming, quite frankly.

 

"if you don't like it, there's worse places to live" doesn't wash as an argument either. we should be continually striving to be better, more progressive, more accepting, more helpful to those in need. not just ****ing shrug it off because 'there's worse places' / 'go back to where you came from'. 

 

absolutely ****ing appalling. 

But these women arent doing that. They arent doing anything positive. I dont see you guys coming on here criticising AOC for her concentration camp comments which funnily enough preceded an attack on an ICE facility

 

Trump is actually doing an ok job of working in Americans interests with the economy and trying to sort the border issues

 

Judge them by their fruits

[lifted*fox]

8 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

I knew you were going to draw that distinction. Seems a bit of an empty one to me. If you say i support racists im going to take that as you saying im racist. Why would i support racists if i wasnt?

 

you (or others) might support Trump because of the effect he's having on the economy for example, and not support his 'racist' views - but you're still supporting a racist.

 

that's your choice. if you're happy to support a racist because it puts more money in your pocket, more power to you. but it is what it is. 

 

Edited 18 July 2019 by lifted*fox

[Detroit Blues]

Sure, if Trump had one "incident," maybe you could say that Trump isn't a racist, that his statements were taken out of context, etc. But at what point would you concede that Donald Trump is racist? (Straight out of Wikipedia). 

 

• In 1973 the U.S. Department of Justice sued Trump Management, Donald Trump and his father Fred, for discrimination against African Americans in their renting practices.The impetus for the suit was the Trumps' alleged refusal to "rent apartments in one of his developments to African-Americans", violating the Fair Housing Act.
   
• The Trump Organization was sued again in 1978 for violating terms of the 1975 settlement by continuing to refuse to rent to black tenants; Trump and his lawyer Roy Cohn denied the charges. In 1983 the Metropolitan Action Institute noted that two Trump Village properties were still over 95% White.

• In October 2016, when Trump campaigned to be president, he said that Central Park Five were guilty and that their convictions should never have been vacated, attracting criticism from the Central Park Five themselves and others. Republican Senator John McCain retracted his endorsement of Trump, citing in part "outrageous statements about the innocent men in the Central Park Five case."Yusuf Salaam, one of the five defendants, said that he had falsely confessed out of coercion, after having been mistreated by police while in custody. Filmmaker Ken Burns, who directed the documentary The Central Park Five that helped clear the names of the accused, called Trump's comments "the height of vulgarity" and "out and out racism".
   

  In June 2019 in response to Ken Burns' documentary and the Netflix miniseries When They See Us Donald Trump stood by his previous statements, saying "You have people on both sides of that. They admitted their guilt. If you look at Linda Fairstein and if you look at some of the prosecutors, they think that the city should never have settled that case. So we'll leave it at that". 

• In his 1991 book Trumped! John O'Donnell quoted Trump as saying:

  I've got black accountants at Trump Castle and at Trump Plaza. Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys wearing yarmulkes.... Those are the only kind of people I want counting my money. Nobody else... Besides that, I tell you something else. I think that's guy's lazy. And it's probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks.

• During the early 1990s, competition from an expanding Native American casino industry threatened his Atlantic City investments. During this period Trump claimed without evidence that they had fallen under mob control and implied that they were not in fact owned by Native Americans based on their appearance

• In 2011, Trump revived the already discredited Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories that had been circulating since Obama's 2008 presidential campaign,and, for the following five years, he played a leading role in the so-called "birther movement". In Trump's first speech at CPAC in February 2011, credited with launching his political career within the Republican Party, he claimed that Obama "came out of nowhere. In fact, I'll take it even further: The people who went to school with him, they never saw him. They don't know who he is. It's crazy."After Obama released his long-form birth certificate in 2011, Trump claimed the certificate was a fraud

• Following the announcement (of running for president), most of the media's attention focused on Trump's comment on illegal immigration: "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best... They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with [them]. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

• Trump frequently revised proposals to ban Muslim travel to the United States in the course of his presidential campaign. In late July 2016, NBC News characterized his position as: "Ban all Muslims, and maybe other people from countries with a history of terrorism, but just don't say 'Muslims'."[9] (Rudy Giuliani said on Fox News that Trump tasked him to craft a "Muslim ban" and asked Giuliani to form a committee to show him "the right way to do it legally"

• In 2013, the State of New York filed a $40 million civil suit against Trump University alleging that the company had made false statements and defrauded consumers. Two class-action civil lawsuits were also filed naming Trump personally as well as his companies. During the presidential campaign, Trump criticized Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel who oversaw those two cases, alleging bias in his rulings because of his Mexican heritage. Trump said that Curiel would have "an absolute conflict" due to his Mexican heritage which led to accusations of racism. Speaker of the House and a Trump supporter, Republican Paul Ryan commented, "I disavow these comments. Claiming a person can't do the job because of their race is sort of like the textbook definition of a racist comment. I think that should be absolutely disavowed. It's absolutely unacceptable."

• At a rally in Birmingham, Alabama on November 21, 2015, Trump falsely claimed that he had seen television reports about "thousands and thousands" of Arabs in New Jersey celebrating as the World Trade Center collapsed during the 9/11 attacks. In an interview with George Stephanopoulos, Trump doubled-down on the assertion, insisting that "there were people that were cheering on the other side of New Jersey, where you have large Arab populations"

• In August 2016 Trump campaigned in Maine, which has a large immigrant Somali population. At a rally he said, "We've just seen many, many crimes getting worse all the time, and as Maine knows — a major destination for Somali refugees — right, am I right?" Trump also alluded to risks of terrorism, referring to an incident in June 2016 when three young Somali men were found guilty of planning to join the Islamic State in Syria. 
   

  In Lewiston, home to the largest population of Maine Somalis, the police chief said Somalis have integrated into the city and they have not caused an increase in crime; crime is actually going down, not up. 

• Prior to and during the 2016 campaign, Trump used his political platform to spread disparaging messages against various racial groups. Trump claimed, "the overwhelming amount of violent crime in our cities is committed by blacks and Hispanics,"that "there's killings on an hourly basis virtually in places like Baltimore and Chicago and many other places,"that "There are places in America that are among the most dangerous in the world. You go to places like Oakland. Or Ferguson. The crime numbers are worse. Seriously," and retweeted a false claim by White nationalists that 81% of White murder victims were killed by Black people. During the campaign Trump was found to have retweeted the main influencers of the #WhiteGenocide movement over 75 times, including twice that he retweeted a user with the handle @WhiteGenocideTM. Trump also falsely claimed that, "African American communities are absolutely in the worst shape they've ever been in before. Ever, ever, ever," that "You go into the inner cities and you see it's 45 percent poverty, African Americans now 45 percent poverty in the inner cities,"and that "African Americans and Hispanics are living in hell. You walk down the street and you get shot.

• Trump also suggested that evangelicals shouldn't trust Ted Cruz because Cruz is Cuban and that Jeb Bush "has to like the Mexican illegals because of his wife," who is Mexican American.

• In June 2017, Trump called together a staff meeting to complain about the number of immigrants who had entered the country since his inauguration. The New York Times reported that two officials at the meeting state that when Trump read off a sheet stating that 15,000 persons had visited from Haiti, he commented, "They all have AIDS," and when reading that 40,000 persons had visited from Nigeria, he said that after seeing America the Nigerians would never “go back to their huts." Both officials who heard Trump's statements relayed them to other staff members at the time, but the White House has denied that Trump used those words and some of the other officials present claim not to remember them being used

• The U.S. Department of Justice concluded that Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio oversaw the worst pattern of racial profiling in U.S. history. The illegal tactics that he was using included "extreme racial profiling and sadistic punishments that involved the torture, humiliation, and degradation of Latino inmates". The DoJ filed suit against him for unlawful discriminatory police conduct. He ignored their orders and was subsequently convicted of contempt of court for continuing to racially profile Hispanics. Calling him "a great American patriot", President Trump pardoned him soon afterwards, even before sentencing took place

• In his initial statement on the (Charlottesville ) rally, Trump did not denounce white nationalists but instead condemned "hatred, bigotry, and violence on many sides". His statement and his subsequent defenses of it, in which he also referred to "very fine people on both sides", suggested a moral equivalence between the white supremacist marchers and those who protested against them, leading some observers to state that he was sympathetic to white supremacy.
   

  Two days later, following a wave of disapproval that met his initial remarks, Trump delivered a prepared statement, saying "Racism is evil, and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs."^[However, the next day he defended the original rally, stating, “You had people in that group who were protesting the taking down of what to them is a very, very important statue...You're changing history; you're changing culture," and again placed blame on the counterprotesters in affirming, "I think there's blame on both sides. And I have no doubt about it. You had a group on one side that was bad and you had a group on the other side that was also very violent. No one wants to say that, but I’ll say it right now: You had a group on the other side that came charging in without a permit and they were very, very violent.”Former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke praised Trump's remarks in a tweet: "Thank you President Trump for your honesty & courage to tell the truth about #Charlottesville & condemn the leftist terrorists in BLM/Antifa."

• icking up on the (Elizabeth Warren) controversy, Trump has frequently referred to her as "Pocahontas", including at a White House event where he addressed Native American veterans who served in the US military during World War II. Warren responded: "It was deeply unfortunate that the President of the United States cannot even make it through a ceremony honoring these heroes without throwing out a racial slur." Speaking on PBS NewsHour, Mark Shields commented, "It's one thing when Donald Trump uses Pocahontas to attack or taunt one senator, Elizabeth Warren. This, quite frankly, is beyond that. I mean, this is racial. It's racist. It is."
   

  The General Secretary of the Alliance of Colonial Era Tribes, John Norwood, said Trump's nickname for Warren is "insulting to all American Indians" and "smacks of racism", adding that Trump should "stop using our historical people of significance as a racial slur against one of his opponents."

•  

  In an intelligence briefing on hostages held by a terrorist group in Pakistan, Trump repeatedly interrupted the briefing to ask an Asian-American intelligence analyst who specializes in hostage situations "where are you from?" After she told him she was from New York he asked again and she clarified that she was from Manhattan. He pressed with the question until she finally told him that her parents were Korean. Trump then asked one of his advisers why "the pretty Korean lady" was not negotiating for him with North Korea
   
• On January 11, 2018, during an Oval Office meeting about immigration reform, commenting on immigration figures from El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, and African countries, Trump reportedly said: "Those shitholes send us the people that they don't want", and suggested that the US should instead increase immigration from "places like Norway" and Asian countries

• In August 2018, Trump sent a tweet stating that he had ordered the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to look into land seizures and the mass killing of white farmers in South Africa, acting on a racist conspiracy theory. In fact, farming organisation AgriSA had recently reported that the murder rate on farms had declined to the lowest level in twenty years, one-third of the level recorded in 1998. In response, the Anti-Defamation League issued a statement:
   

  It is extremely disturbing that the President of the United States echoed a long-standing and false white supremacist claim that South Africa’s white farmers are targets of large-scale, racially-motivated killings by South Africa’s black majority. We would hope that the President would try to understand the facts and realities of the situation in South Africa, rather than repeat disturbing, racially divisive talking points used most frequently by white supremacists

 

But I am pretty sure I know what the typical FT response will be... deflection. I'm sure one democrat somewhere did something bad, so it's okay for the president of the united states to be racist. I'm sure you would not mind the leader of your country to hate (or think less of) the people of your ethnic or racial group.  

 

[lifted*fox]

imo there's several 'closeted' xeno/racist-y types on FT but the closet door is so open the hinges have busted off, the door is on the floor and all the clothes have fallen out.

[Carl the Llama]

9 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

But these women arent doing that. They arent doing anything positive. I dont see you guys coming on here criticising AOC for her concentration camp comments which funnily enough preceded an attack on an ICE facility

 

Trump is actually doing an ok job of working in Americans interests with the economy and trying to sort the border issues

 

Judge them by their fruits

Now that's a subjective opinion.  Trump being racist?  Pretty objective by this point.  And why would anybody criticise calling a concentration camp a concentration camp?  The Nazi's death camps don't have a monopoly on the term, the allies had concentration camps too.  Here's the Merriam-Webster definition:

Quote

A place where large numbers of people (such as prisoners of war, political prisoners, refugees, or the members of an ethnic or religious minority) are detained or confined under armed guard.

That sounds exactly like the facilities Trump's ICE agents are operating.

 

 

Do you mind providing us a few examples of Trump's fruits for us to judge?

 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

1 minute ago, lifted*fox said:

 

you (or others) might support Trump because of the effect he's having on the economy for example, and not support his 'racist' views - but you're still supporting a racist.

 

that's your choice. if you're happy to support a racist because it puts more money in your pocket, more power to you. but it is what it is. 

 

Yes, that makes sense

 

But if i dont think he's racist im not going to agree am I?

 

The squad, on the other hand, dont care about american values, they want to limit people's notion of what tjey can say based on the prescribed views they believe they should have based on things like ethnicity.  That is truly racist. 

 

Heard a speech where one was saying something like "if you are black, we dont want you unless you want to represent your people. If you are muslim, we dont want you unless you represent muslims" etc...   i cant find the speech atm but will try

 

They want to define everything through race. Much more troubling than anything Trump says

 

 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

1 minute ago, Carl the Llama said:

Now that's a subjective opinion.  Trump being racist?  Pretty objective by this point.  And why would anybody criticise calling a concentration camp a concentration camp?  The Nazi's death camps don't have a monopoly on the term, the allies had concentration camps too.  Here's the Merriam-Webster definition:

That sounds exactly like the facilities Trump's ICE agents are operating.

 

 

Do you mind providing us a few examples of Trump's fruits for us to judge?

 

Jesus christ. You really think its comparable?

 

Trump didnt set the facilities up anyway. And they wouldnt be so under prepared if dems had supported funding earlier. But no, they denied there was a crisis and called Trump a scare monger or whatever

 

I posted an article earlier that characterised his presidency thus far. Give it a read

[Carl the Llama]

1 minute ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Jesus christ. You really think its comparable?

 

Trump didnt set the facilities up anyway. And they wouldnt be so under prepared if dems had supported funding earlier. But no, they denied there was a crisis and called Trump a scare monger or whatever

 

I posted an article earlier that characterised his presidency thus far. Give it a read

Do I think what's comparable?  Nazi death camps and border detention centres?  Of course not 

and I've not claimed otherwise.  I've merely pointed out that a concentration camp is a concentration camp.

 

 

Dems support funding for less alienating methods of dealing with refugees.  They refuse to provide more funds to people who are choosing not to spend their funds providing basic amenities like toothpaste to detainees. 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

Just now, Carl the Llama said:

Do I think what's comparable?  Nazi death camps and border detention centres?  Of course not 

and I've not claimed otherwise.  I've merely pointed out that a concentration camp is a concentration camp.

 

 

Dems support funding for less alienating methods of dealing with refugees.  They refuse to provide more funds to people who are choosing not to spend their funds providing basic amenities like toothpaste to detainees. 

AOC claimed it though.  She used the term 'Never again'.  I assume you are aware of this term?

[MC Prussian]

48 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

how anybody can remotely argue in favour of Trump and his administration at this point is beyond me. 

 

same with Boris / Conservative party UK.

 

racist, xenophobic - argue which all day long. whatever the result, neither is acceptable and neither country is showing a progressive attitude in terms of being world leaders.

 

going backwards so fast it's alarming, quite frankly.

 

"if you don't like it, there's worse places to live" doesn't wash as an argument either. we should be continually striving to be better, more progressive, more accepting, more helpful to those in need. not just ****ing shrug it off because 'there's worse places' / 'go back to where you came from'. 

 

absolutely ****ing appalling. 

Backwards in what regard? You're just dishing out meaningless platitudes and generalizations.

 

The US have become less and less racist and homophobic over the past few years and decades:

https://psmag.com/social-justice/americans-are-becoming-less-racist-and-homophobic

 

The US of A are in an economically prosperous situation right now, thanks in part to Trump. Latino and African American unemployment rates are down massively. No new wars started, pulling out of Syria, no intervention in Venezuela or Iran. Historic meeting with North Korea.

 

And all you can talk about is a Tweet. A Tweet.

[Carl the Llama]

Just now, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

AOC claimed it though.  She used the term 'Never again'.  I assume you are aware of this term?

As far as I know her meaning was dependent on the bill not enforcing improved conditions but continuing to fund these camps that don't provide sufficient care when they have funding.

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

4 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

As far as I know her meaning was dependent on the bill not enforcing improved conditions but continuing to fund these camps that don't provide sufficient care when they have funding.

What does discontinuing the camps mean?  No borders?

 

And I like how you have completely avoided acknowledging how shitty it was of her to use the phrase Never Again, which is synonymous with the holocaust.  That alone could be said to incite the man with the gun who firebombed the place

 

Thats why she couldnt condemn the attack probably, because she would then have to answer questions as to her inflammatory rhetoric

 

I doubt AOC is aware tbf, think she is just a giant idiot

Edited 18 July 2019 by AlloverthefloorYesNdidi

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Backwards in what regard? You're just dishing out meaningless platitudes and generalizations.

 

The US have become less and less racist and homophobic over the past few years and decades:

https://psmag.com/social-justice/americans-are-becoming-less-racist-and-homophobic

 

The US of A are in an economically prosperous situation right now, thanks in part to Trump. Latino and African American unemployment rates are down massively. No new wars started, pulling out of Syria, no intervention in Venezuela or Iran. Historic meeting with North Korea.

 

And all you can talk about is a Tweet. A Tweet.

Can only speak for myself here Prussian, but I'm happy to talk about policy, such as:

 

- Repealing the Climate Action plan and pulling out of the Paris Agreement - a probable net long term negative for the majority of people in both the US and the world

- Gutting the EPA including rewriting existing environmental protection laws, approving two new oil pipelines, proposing reviews of the Clean Water and Clean Power plans and planning to allow oil drilling in all offshore areas - a probable long term negative for the majority of people in the US.

- Selling national park land for "development", read: drilling - a probable short term negative for the majority of people in the US

- Approving Supreme Court judges that give a clear message to individual states that Roe v Wade is possible to be challenged at some point in the new future - a possible long term negative for the majority of people in the US, provided the majority of people in the US are for abortion rights (which at the present time they are).

- Seeking to replace the Affordable Care Act (which is by no means brilliant itself) with a purely market-based system that would still impoverish a great many people simply because they were unlucky enough to get sick or injured - a probable long term negative for the majority of people in the US

 

....but for some reason these policy points seem to be getting ignored in discussion on here when brought up, despite repeated willingness to discuss them. Why?

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

Can only speak for myself here Prussian, but I'm happy to talk about policy, such as:

 

- Repealing the Climate Action plan and pulling out of the Paris Agreement - a probable net long term negative for the majority of people in both the US and the world

- Gutting the EPA including rewriting existing environmental protection laws, approving two new oil pipelines, proposing reviews of the Clean Water and Clean Power plans and planning to allow oil drilling in all offshore areas - a probable long term negative for the majority of people in the US.

- Selling national park land for "development", read: drilling - a probable short term negative for the majority of people in the US

- Approving Supreme Court judges that give a clear message to individual states that Roe v Wade is possible to be challenged at some point in the new future - a possible long term negative for the majority of people in the US, provided the majority of people in the US are for abortion rights (which at the present time they are).

- Seeking to replace the Affordable Care Act (which is by no means brilliant itself) with a purely market-based system that would still impoverish a great many people simply because they were unlucky enough to get sick or injured - a probable long term negative for the majority of people in the US

 

....but for some reason these policy points seem to be getting ignored in discussion on here when brought up, despite repeated willingness to discuss them. Why?

Have you got these on a permanent clipboard leicsmac?

I think you can strike off the Paris Agreement one at least. And the Affordable Care Act, which was a disaster

[Carl the Llama]

2 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

What does discontinuing the camps mean?  No borders?

 

And I like how you have completely avoided acknowledging how shitty it was of her to use the phrase Never Again, which is synonymous with the holocaust.  That alone could be said to incite the man with the gun who firebombed the place

 

Thats why she couldnt condemn the attack probably, because she would then have to answer questions as to her inflammatory rhetoric

 

I doubt AOC is anti-semitic tbf, think she is just a giant idiot

 Never again isn't an antisemitic term is it?  If anything it's the opposite I'd have thought, it's a declaration of solidarity, in this instance with the roughly treated detainees of border concentration camps.

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

2 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

 Never again isn't an antisemitic term is it?  If anything it's the opposite I'd have thought, it's a declaration of solidarity, in this instance with the roughly treated detainees of border concentration camps.

I had a brain fart there and was half thinking about something else I was reading, my mind inserted a completely irrelavant word, edited it as soon as I re-read it

 

So forget that.  Do you think she was right to use the term Never Again?  Do you concede she was invoking the holocaust regarding these camps that people are flocking to?  As far as I remember Jews werent running to the camps in droves from far and wide.  Pretty sure they were forced there agains their will

Edited 18 July 2019 by AlloverthefloorYesNdidi

[leicsmac]

Just now, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Have you got these on a permanent clipboard leicsmac?

I think you can strike off the Paris Agreement one at least. And the Affordable Care Act, which was a disaster

Damn right I have, and I will continue to do so until someone points out either exactly why they are promising policies for the future of the US, or admit that they are bad policies and actually contribute the required criticism for them. Ignoring them isn't going to make them go away.

 

And no, I'm not going to strike the Paris one simply because it lacks teeth or doesn't provide an adequate framework (that's not the reason Trump pulled out of it and that should be blatantly obvious considering his administration have proposed absolutely nothing to replace it) and I'm not going to strike the ACA one simply because it was a sticking plaster on a gaping wound (because what this administration proposes is worse in terms of guaranteeing affordable healthcare for everyone). Revoking a bad policy and then replacing it with something worse - or not replacing it at all - doesn't negate questions being asked about the policy itself.

 

 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

Just now, leicsmac said:

Damn right I have, and I will continue to do so until someone points out either exactly why they are promising policies for the future of the US, or admit that they are bad policies and actually contribute the required criticism for them. Ignoring them isn't going to make them go away.

 

And no, I'm not going to strike the Paris one simply because it lacks teeth or doesn't provide an adequate framework (that's not the reason Trump pulled out of it and that should be blatantly obvious considering his administration have proposed absolutely nothing to replace it) and I'm not going to strike the ACA one simply because it was a sticking plaster on a gaping wound (because what this administration proposes is worse in terms of guaranteeing affordable healthcare for everyone). Revoking a bad policy and then replacing it with something worse - or not replacing it at all - doesn't negate questions being asked about the policy itself.

 

 

I would argue revoking a bad policy is better than leaving it there.  Ive heard accounts that ACA made things worse, added on costs through extra bureaucracy

 

Just because these Acts sound nice doesnt mean they are good.  Shouldnt keep something just because its politically correct.  A strong politician doesnt give in to things just because they sound nice

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

I would argue revoking a bad policy is better than leaving it there.  Ive heard accounts that ACA made things worse, added on costs through extra bureaucracy

 

Just because these Acts sound nice doesnt mean they are good.  Shouldnt keep something just because its politically correct.  A strong politician doesnt give in to things just because they sound nice

And by the same token, revoking the Acts and replacing them with something worse (or nothing at all in the case of Paris) is worse than leaving them there. Which is what has happened.

 

Anyway, like I said, I'm going to wait most patiently for a proper discussion on those policies - especially when folks say they want to discuss policy and then choose not to.

[urban.spaceman]

Just one of these scandals would have killed off any other President or ended any other politician’s career. The outrage just does not work on Trump, it never did. And while everyone’s getting outraged about the new vile thing he did or said, he’s in the Oval Office with a hard on laughing his arse off. 

 

And people fall for it every ****ing time. 

 

Stop getting outraged. Stop giving him what he wants. Stop calling him a racist, stop calling him a fascist. None of it works and it only emboldens the cvnt and his craziest supporters. 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

5 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Just one of these scandals would have killed off any other President or ended any other politician’s career. The outrage just does not work on Trump, it never did. And while everyone’s getting outraged about the new vile thing he did or said, he’s in the Oval Office with a hard on laughing his arse off. 

 

And people fall for it every ****ing time. 

 

Stop getting outraged. Stop giving him what he wants. Stop calling him a racist, stop calling him a fascist. None of it works and it only emboldens the cvnt and his craziest supporters. 

Even as someone who likes Trump I would agree with this

 

If politicians and the media spent more time honestly assessing policies and their effects it would serve the people a lot better

 

I'm not even sure if its been mentioned on here that whilst all this has been going on Trump has made a move to cancel asylum from Central American countries.  This isnt getting a lot of media time because they are talking about his tweets, its incredible

[CosbehFox]

10 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Stop getting outraged. Stop giving him what he wants. Stop calling him a racist, stop calling him a fascist. None of it works and it only emboldens the cvnt and his craziest supporters. 

it's hard not to get outraged. There's history of him sharing time and friendship with child rapists.