|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
Make no mistake, this man scares me here in the UK
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I thought that - but Snopes explains it:
http://www.snopes.com/white-house-web-site-trump-changes/
More worrying is the slogan "America First".
I wonder if he got it from here?
[edited by moderator to display the image]
-
Attachment: IMG_0701.JPG
(Size: 87.36KB, Downloaded 2942 times)
[Updated on: Sun, 22 January 2017 12:46] by Moderator
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
While Snopes may be correct it remains unnerving
America First is perplexing and bizarre. I propose to treat that quietly for the moment. It does seem to have unpleasant roots. But some bastards hijacked the quadri-gamma in the 1930s, and that, unfortunately, stuck
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dgt224
|
 |
Toe is in the water |
Location: USA
Registered: May 2011
Messages: 81
|
|
|
I would worry less about the stuff that's disappeared from the White House web site and more about what has replaced it, although I do worry about what the Trump administration will be accomplishing behind the scenes -- Vice President Pence is certainly no friend to minorities of any sort, and Trump's Cabinet appointments are not encouraging.
As an example of new White House web site content, the America First Energy Plan talks about tapping the shale oil and gas reserves, including those on public lands (e.g., National Parks and National Forests), and our beleagured coal industry to achieve energy independence. Not one word about renewable energy. If your home is within five meters of mean sea level for your part of the world, it might be a good idea to think about relocating uphill.
Our new President is also eager to reverse the decline in American military might; we have far too few warships and military aircraft, it would seem. Not sure what plans he has for all the new hardware he thinks we need.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
Creation of military hardware causes employment, paid for by money the USA does not have. In the broadest terms as a generalisation, this is what ruined the USSR.
Fortunately it takes far longer than one, probably two presidential terms to deploy new military might. By that time the nation will be again almost bankrupt, but the rust belt will have recovered sufficiently to start to rust away again. There will be little money left and austerity, which could have eased, will start to be required again
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't even imagine what it looks like from outside the country. I have no idea what your news says about him or American politics in general. I know the BBC America stuff is almost as slanted and biased against anything Trump as the American media is. Right now I am totally ashamed of the big press here. I can't call them mainstream anymore, because only the tightly pressed together masses of the major cities and urban centers even give a shit what CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, or the big news agencies have to say anymore. After ass kissing of anything leftist or liberal or 'Democratic party' for eight years, they've lost almost everything. Even the half-assed guys like Alex Jones get more traffic and more daily attention than any of the big four networks or the big ten news agencies. Breitbart is more popular than The New York TImes or the Wall Street Journal. WTF? When did that happen? Why? Holy shit.
Everything Trump said he'd do when he was campaigning - he is doing. Not everything, some of it takes a hell of a long time, but he's doing most of it already. That alone is impressive from any party's president.
Pence is my previous state governor, so I'm familiar with him. He's mostly pro NWO and globalist, and he didn't do a really good job here, but he wasn't a total dweeb and fascist, just a pro big-government cuck. I wasn't impressed when he was announced as Trump's running mate. I remember actually groaning out loud as I drove my car when I heard the announcement on the radio.
I'm frankly perplexed and find it bizarre that you worry about "America first." WTF? He's the president of the United States. He should be putting America first. The Prime Minister and the Queen of England should be putting UK citizens first. The Chancellor of Germany should be putting German citizens first. If they all did, their countries and their people would be better off. Every nation's leaders should be putting their countries best interests first, right next to the best interests of their countrymen.
And I'm pretty pissed the first and only example of America First posted is a century old KKK medallion. No wonder I don't drop by here as often any more. I almost want to say screw you. But who knows, maybe that's where he got it. I don't know. But I FUCKING DOUBT IT. If I were a whining, pissy, fascist leftist, I'd demand the closure of this entire website because a single post offended me and intruded on my safe space and made me feel bad. That's what they do, the fascists. Then they call the other side fascists.
America first in all presidential decisions. America's best interests first. Americans first. That's what "America First" means. He's saying his job is to put America and Americans first.
He's not quoting from a century old medallion. If he was in any way affiliated with the KKK, or what they stood for, or ever once told anyone he liked the KKK, the media would be playing it forever and forever and forever. Google Clinton and KKK and you'll see what a connection is, but the media has never brought that up. Instead, all it takes is a opinion piece in a mass media shit-rag to insinuate, and then we get KKK medallions thrown out as the reason Trump says "America First."
I think it's about time an American president said that. That he would put America first, and Americans first.
Any maybe before you 'wonder if he got it from this century old KKK medallion,' maybe you should listen to at least one entire speech from the man before you make up your mind that he's a secret KKK member and really wants to line up all the 'niggers and shoot them' while he hand-rapes all the Latino women and sells America to the Russians.
Now nationalism is racist. Now patriotism is bigotry. Now waving the American flag IN AMERICA is oppressive, hate speech, and fascist. Now "America First" spoken by the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is 'worrysome,' 'perplexing,' and 'bizzare.'
Know what a great president does first? Executes one of his campaign promises. I don't know if Trump is a great president, he's only had the job a month, and already the Democrats are literally burning down the college campuses while screaming that Trump is hate and that Trump is burning down the country. I mean, WTF moment of the century here! Trump is no hero, he is no God, unlike the comparison we had with Obama from the press and celebrities on a montly basis. He's no racist, he's no bigot, he's no secret KKK member, he's no fascist, he's no sexist, he's no communist, he is not a Russian spy. Jesus fucking Christ people. Get a fucking grip. I've seen all these and more in the American press. The big press, not the small sideliners or the wingnut fringes, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, AP, UPI, on and on and on. And Whoopie and cackle brigade and the rest of the Hollywood elite that shove their politics down the American collective throat. Know what? More people turn off award shows and the like when they go political than ever. Google it. And Whoopi shore before he adoring and clapping audience more than once that if Trump became president she would move out of the country. How many times? Promised her audience with her hand over her heart. Trump is president, she's still here. Go away.
Oh, her diatribe that Trump's cabinet is the dirtiest ever. Not one of them has ever been investigated for a civil crime. Obama's cabinet. Google it. Dirty criminals and con artists. The press hid it as much as possible. Trump, not a one has been investigated for fraud or corruption or graft or blackmail or conversion or theft or even collusion. I haven't heard of any of them ever being in trouble with the law, and believe me, if any of them had been, we'd all have heard about it. Over and over and over and over and blown up out of proportion and amplified and twisted and distorted and repeated ad nauseum infinitum. At least he isn't hiring convicts. So far his appointments have been pretty good. Even DeVos isn't as bad as the media paints her, though I think she's not a very good choice. I can think of several far more qualified and fitting. She's got some hard lines on points that Trump has already slapped her down on, so he's obviously going to keep the reigns on her if she won't play right.
I could do a huge screed right now, but I'll refrain. I've been lurking a lot lately so I don't want to go off in my first post in ages.
And I went back and added to it, so it ended up too long anyway.
One more thing... put America first Mister President!
[Updated on: Sat, 25 February 2017 08:06]
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I sort of agree with the comments about Trump. You can't fault the man for doing what he said he would do before people voted for him. Actually, you should applaud him for that, because there aren't too many politicians who follow through on campaign promises.
The problem lies with the system of democracy which is a vote for one person, a president, and where you can end up with someone elected for whom more people voted against than for.
But leaving aside numbers for and against, the system just doesn't represent the people. If you have a roughly 50/50 split, or whatever the percentages, left, right, centre, the government should represent that diversity. Consequently, power should not be invested in one person, but in a representative government.
In most cases you would end up with some sort of coalition, and extreme policies would be modified or thrown out. Democracy is the representation of the views and opinions of all the people and not a contest to win the race to power in order to impose the views of half the population over the other half. That situation is a recipe for disaster, civil unrest, and revolution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, Smokr dear.
Now why not have a nice soothing nap, and sober up a bit?
In the clear light of day, you might want to think about editing that piece down a bit. It's not exactly the kind of charitable and helpful writing style that young lurkers on here are going to find welcoming. In fact, it made even me feel rather uncomfortable: not what I hope for in "A Place of Safety".
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
Well, what it looks from here to be is alt right represented by Bannon having a substantial sway over your democratically elected president. That president seems to be truculent and combative. I can't argue with his having done what he said he would do, but he has also done what he said he would not do. The trans protections are one such.
Restarting the nuclear arms race puts me and my family in danger.
Mass deportations and refugee bans take me back to my father, who was a refugee from Nazi Germany.
Banning parts of the legitimate press, whether you consider them to be mainstream or not, is a typical act of a fascist dictator. We could have many discussions about whether Breitbart is legitimate press or a far right propaganda machine without necessarily reaching a conclusion
It also looks very much as if your democratically elected president is (a) out of his depth, (b) in some way beholden to Russia, (b) linked to some highly questionable business deals involving dirty money.
People also argued that the Kennedy family were rooted in crime, with probable justification. You with notice that I am not concerned about party politics at all here. By no means all of your presidents have been squeaky clean, perhaps none of them, though no mud seems to have stuck to Obama. Nixon was one of your less palatable ones.
I am not keen on any of our recent UK Prime Ministers, not since Harold MacMillan. Google is your friend here. UK party politics is quite awful, too. I doubt any nation comes out as truly ethical, with the possible exception of Bhutan.
What concerns me is that I trusted the USA once, now I am terrified of it.
[Updated on: Sat, 25 February 2017 10:48]
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
"NW wrote on Sat, 25 February 2017 10:44"Yes, Smokr dear.
Now why not have a nice soothing nap, and sober up a bit?
In the clear light of day, you might want to think about editing that piece down a bit. It's not exactly the kind of charitable and helpful writing style that young lurkers on here are going to find welcoming. In fact, it made even me feel rather uncomfortable: not what I hope for in "A Place of Safety".
--
I think we should allow Smokr to express his feelings even so, NW. It is probably my fault for starting the thread in the first place.
The piece is hostile, but not to the "global us", and he had a need to say this to us all, though I appreciate he did single you out 'somewhat' over the KKK motif. And yet were Trump's parents not at least KKK sympathisers?
Perhaps he might turn it from rhetoric into calm logic, but would that truly achieve anything?
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Registered: February 2015
Messages: 73
|
|
|
I just don't like Trump as a person or his views in general, the way he conducts himself and talks to people is very hard to form any kind of respect towards him
However, saying that, while i don't really understand how the american system works (i mean didn't way more people vote for Hilary? like millions more people?) but the fact is, he is the President of the united states now, so i don't agree with all these protests and attempts to kick him out of office, people should accept what has happened and come together and hopefully, something can be done to bring the country back together again
I know people say he will ruin the country and to be honest, some of the things he says, support that, but what people forget and what the courts have proved with his immigrant policy thing he tried to force into effect, America isn't run by one person, he can't just make up laws and things like that, so while he may come up with some really awful ideas, those will quickly be shot down by congress/senate or the courts
So yeah, i really think Trump was a poor choice as president, but then again, while i thought Hilary would probably be better at the job, she wasn't exactly a great choice either, so i really feel sorry for American's because i think they had two of the poorest candidates possible to choose from
I would also like to say, that i don't really like seeing people posting on here and swearing and using caps to try and get their points across, i just don't think people need to be that aggressive and hostile, because when i see that kind of thing, it just distracts me from any valid and insightful points that they might be making, for me, i've always believed that if you have a point or opinion that is worthy enough to share, than you don't need to be aggressive or hostile while making it
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote:timmy wrote on Sat, 25 February 2017 05:47Well, what it looks from here to be is alt right represented by Bannon having a substantial sway over your democratically elected president. That president seems to be truculent and combative. I can't argue with his having done what he said he would do, but he has also done what he said he would not do. The trans protections are one such.
No protections were removed. Schools that don't need a trans bathroom will no not have their money taken away if they don't build one. That's about the only real difference. Any school that wants or needs one, will still be as able as before to have one.
Restarting the nuclear arms race puts me and my family in danger.
Hyperbole. Trump is talking tough. That's what you do when you want to lead a country. Do you want drill instructors that mollycoddle recruits? He is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces. If he looks weak. like Obama did, he would get walked all over, like Obama did. He is walking tall and carrying a big stick. It was Obama who made it entirely possible for Iran to go nuclear with his 'treaty' instead of keeping the sanctions in place if they tried. Now they can go ahead and do what they want, and they inspect themselves! THEY INSPECT THEMSELVES! Not yelling, pointing that incredible unbelievable fact out clearly. Obama trusts Iran to inspect themselves for illicit uranium enrichment activities instead of the UN panel that complained that Iran was enriching uranium despite the fact they were not supposed to be. Thanks Obama. Trump talks like a leader and he gets called a Russian spy.
Mass deportations and refugee bans take me back to my father, who was a refugee from Nazi Germany.
Mass deportations of people here illegally. ILLEGALLY. I am not yelling, I am making that point very clear. IL-LEGAL. They snuck in. I don't want anyone sneaking in.ISIS wants to kill us by the truckload, like they do in Europe, and Obama wants to ignore the southern border and let anyone who wants come and go across it. And the deportations are of those who have committed crimes while here after sneaking in illegally. Good. They come here illegally, they commit crimes, our laws say they can't stay, the court tells them to leave, but they stay. Trump is saying, "No, our laws are clear, you broke them at least twice and were told to leave, you didn't, so now you are being removed." Good.
The ban is temporary. Do you know that, or are you going with the unstated assumption by the press that it's permanent? It is a temporary measure while better vetting is done of the people coming here from those seven countries with no government and no records of who these people wanting to come here are. That is the big 'ban' Trump wanted. To keep those people on hold while we figure out who the hell they are and where the hell they really came from.
Want to see why? Look at Paris, Berlin, London. Waves of migrants and waves of violence. Trump doesn't want that here too. He wants to stop people coming here who don't want to become American, they want to shit on the streets and rape kids and behead people. Look at the migrants in Europe. Look at the faces. Why are there so many men of fighting age? And why are they Muslim? And why do they vandalize and deface public spaces? They are not there to assimilate and live a better life, they are there to take lives. Not all, of course, but far too many.
Trump throws down a temporary halt until we can vett these people, and the libtards call it a ban. And of course it's a Muslim ban. Not because of the religion standing, but because it's the hatefull factions of Islam that want to behead anyone who even types the name Mohammed, or draws him, or even says they don't follow Islam. Screw that.
I'm also sick of being told that everyone in any other part of the world has a right to come to America in any way and at any time they want. No they don't. No one has any right to travel to another country. Has no one ever heard of immigration? Of VISAs? Of legal immigration? Of travel VISAs? Employment VISAs? Every country has had a border since the first two countries formed next to each other. It has never been legal to cross into Canada without going through customs at the border. That goes for Mexico too. Every country. But now we have libtards on television claiming Trump is the first person to ever prevent anyone who wants to coming into America. How fucking insane is that?
Obama did the exact same thing more than once, but where was the outrage then? I bet not one of you know that Obama did it. Do you? Google it.
Banning parts of the legitimate press, whether you consider them to be mainstream or not, is a typical act of a fascist dictator. We could have many discussions about whether Breitbart is legitimate press or a far right propaganda machine without necessarily reaching a conclusion
He in no way banned any press. He no longer will allow these lying bastards to sit in on his press conferences and disrupt them. They can watch the conference along with the rest of us and continue making blatantly false statements all they want, but now they won't be able to disrupt. The presidential briefings are an invite only event. The president has always had the complete right and responsibility to invite who he chooses of the press. There is no 'right to attend' a presidential press briefing. Identification is issued by the White House at the discretion of the President and his press secretary. It has always been that way. Period. Obama never so much as invited anyone who didn't parrot his line, and invited some press only once and never again, but there was no outcry or outrage against his decisions on that. Trump has allowed CNN and others to attend and disrupt long enough, and now he's said 'enough'.
It also looks very much as if your democratically elected president is (a) out of his depth, (b) in some way beholden to Russia, (b) linked to some highly questionable business deals involving dirty money.
(a) out of his depth Please describe how so. He's made business deals with every major company and country on the planet. More than once! He's already met most of the world leaders face to face. He's done business in their countries and with their politicians and business leaders. More than once!
(b) in some way beholden to Russia - In what ways? Please describe how. There is no evidence, circumstantial or otherwise, only innuendo and opinions that are being irresponsibly thrown around. Lies, if you like.
(b) linked to some highly questionable business deals involving dirty money - You mean C of course. LOL Typos suck. So do lies. How so? If so, we would have facts and charges galore being bandied about each and every day, over and over. There is no evidence, circumstantial or otherwise. If there were, we would have had them during the primary or the final election cycles. This is more innuendo and opinion being bandied about recklessly in a desperate effort to hurt the guy who's done nothing wrong except beat Hillary Clinton and take the government away from Obama's left behind cronies who are committing treason by leaking sensitive information.
People also argued that the Kennedy family were rooted in crime, with probable justification. You with notice that I am not concerned about party politics at all here. By no means all of your presidents have been squeaky clean, perhaps none of them, though no mud seems to have stuck to Obama. Nixon was one of your less palatable ones.
No mud stuck to Obama? Wow, I had no idea anyone here was so clueless on that socialist fascist pinko commie.
I am not keen on any of our recent UK Prime Ministers, not since Harold MacMillan. Google is your friend here. UK party politics is quite awful, too. I doubt any nation comes out as truly ethical, with the possible exception of Bhutan.
Politicians suck. Finally we get a president that isn't a politician, that has never been charged with a crime, who's never stolen money entrusted to him, who can profitably run multiple businesses within the law, and he's demonized and painted with every foul lie imaginable. He's not perfect, he probably has skeletons in his closet, but dear God in Heaven, he's so far from being a crooked Clinton that it's amazing he hasn't been assassinated yet.
What concerns me is that I trusted the USA once, now I am terrified of it.
--
What concerns me, is that you are suddenly frightened of a country that is finally being led by someone without a criminal background and who isn't a career politician, and you probably don't even know why you're terrified of it. Obama was raised by Frank Marshall Davis. An avowed and self-admitted communist and socialist. A real scumbag, too. Research him. He's scum. And this guy raised Obama. Obama says so in his autobiography. He also says the most beautiful thing he has ever heard is the morning call to Muslim prayer. Obama said that! Google it and watch him say it! You shoud have been terrified when Obama was in charge. I was.
I'll tell you why you're terrified now. Because the press is telling you to be. Think about that. The press is telling you Trump is a Russian spy, a misogynist, a homophobe, a sexist, a racist, and a fascist. And many, many, many other things. Now, why would they tell you he is a Russian spy, a misogynist, a homophobe, a sexist, a racist, and a fascist? And many, many, many other things? And where is any kind of even slightly coincidental evidence of any of that? If he was, we would have video and audio and text proving it being thrown at us by the media day and night in print and online and on broadcasts. Even if there were a little something they could use, they would use it. There isn't.
The one thing was a woman who claimed she was fondled by Trump years ago, who now says that isn't true and the press is overblowing it. She says so!
And the one bad thing against Trump is the one bit of audio of him saying, "Grab her by the pussy!" Something every man has said in his lifetime between friends. Which is what this was, him and a buddy having what they thought was a private talk, and the only thing the press could pull out of that conversation was the line, "You should grab her by the pussy." Well la te da.
You're terrified because you are swallowing the lies.
If Trump ever turns out to be a Russian spy, or any of these insane things, fine, I'll accept that. But there is no evidence of any of it. Nothing. The only evidence is that he likes women. Well, anyone remember Bill Clinton? At least there aren't four women whom he's mauled filing claims against Trump. All Trump did was talk macho with a buddy about hot women. And even then, his comments are amazingly tame compared to what you hear between most of us on this very site.
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"NW wrote on Sat, 25 February 2017 05:44"Yes, Smokr dear.
Now why not have a nice soothing nap, and sober up a bit?
In the clear light of day, you might want to think about editing that piece down a bit. It's not exactly the kind of charitable and helpful writing style that young lurkers on here are going to find welcoming. In fact, it made even me feel rather uncomfortable: not what I hope for in "A Place of Safety".
--
If ideas are now considered unsafe, then maybe I should stop posting here entirely. When standing up for a president who's done absolutely nothing illegal or even wrong is considered uncharitable and unhelpful, then maybe we just coddle the young too much.
Youth need to see that it's acceptable to stand up against what you know is wrong. They need to see that differing ideas are one thing, but shutting down someone simply because you don't agree is entirely another.
I'm sick of sitting silently while liars get free reign and spread lies like a plague. Politics is an avoidable part of life. It doesn't matter if you ignore it or not, it still goes on. If you don't participate, you have no right to complain when things go all wonky. And right now, America is literally at war with itself. We have libtards claiming Trump is a fascist while they wear bellaclavas and hit people with truncheons because they have a differing opinion. WTF?
Fascism is ruling by violence. Authoritarian nationalism. "You are a NAZI or you are a Jew collaborator" said the famous NAZI poster. The image was of a German soldier bashing the skull of an obvious Jewish man. That is Fascism.
That is what these college kids are doing, and they are calling Trump a fascist as they do it. Fucking insanity.
Oh, and you have to love the new Oxford definition of Fascism. Go ahead. Go to https://en.oxforddictionaries.com and search Fascism. Laugh your ass off, or cry. One or the other.
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dgt224
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Location: USA
Registered: May 2011
Messages: 81
|
|
|
"Smokr wrote on Sun, 26 February 2017 00:25"
Oh, and you have to love the new Oxford definition of Fascism. Go ahead. Go to https://en.oxforddictionaries.com and search Fascism. Laugh your ass off, or cry. One or the other.
It's not clear to me that the current OED definition of fascism is significantly different from definitions elsewhere. What, precisely, is it about their definition that exercises you so? If you want a longer or more focused discussion, the Wikipedia article goes on for pages, but the OED is a dictionary, not an encyclopedia. (It's right there in the name, after all.) If you study the history of fascist governments (and there have been more than a few), not all have ruled primarily through violence; violence is commonly associated with fascism, but it is not a defining characteristic.
As for your assertions that rumors of the President's ties to Russia, business conflicts of interest, and other alleged failings are just that -- rumors, with no supporting evidence at all: If things continue as they have, we'll never know, will we? So far every attempt to get Congress to investigate those allegations has been defeated by the Republican majority. The President hasn't been investigated and found to be innocent of these alleged failings; the party that nominated him will not allow him to be investigated. He is the only President in modern times to refuse to release his tax returns, despite his promises to do so.
It is entirely possible that Donald Trump is quite fit to serve as President, and it would be fairly easy for him to establish that fact. A Congressional investigation would ultimately be controlled by the Republican majority, so it's not like he would be subjecting himself to a hostile tribunal. So why doesn't he just say to Congress, "Investigate and get it over with, so we can get down to business without all these distractions"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My problem with the Oxford definition is that the inclusion of the words 'right-wing' clearly denoting a left-wing bias. Fascism is neither really left or right and can be considered one or the other or even both. But not to Oxford. Only right-wingers can be fascists.
The reason there have been no investigations is that you have to bring evidence or standing to begin an investigation. You can't just say something and demand an investigation, or congress would do nothing but investigate. The rules require evidence and substantiation. I won't use caps... there is no evidence or substantiation to bring standing to place any request for an investigation committee to be form, let alone any investigation. Period. If there were, there would be speeches for an investigatory committee in the Senate or House with evidence to justify it. They can't provide any facts or evidence, so they can't even get a vote to form a committee to begin an investigation - because their cries of crimes are based on hate an not any kind or type of fact or evidence. Geee, imagine that. It's just all rhetoric and lies and innuendo, and it gets passed around so often that people forget the fact that they aren't facts.
I've lived that in school. Some of you have. I was called a faggot for no reason other than I wasn't in the popular cliques. No one had a clue I really was, but that's beside the fact they called me a faggot over and over in front of the other kids, laughing and pushing, and I had no evidence of absence to offer even if I wasn't really gay. You can't prove a negative.
Trump can't prove he's not a Russian spy because he's not a Russian spy.
He can't prove he's not a racist because he's not a racist.
If he was a Russian spy or a racist, the world would be constantly inundated with even the weakest evidence. Instead, we're inundated with rumor and innuendo and lies.
I think all elected officials from city to county to state to federal level should disclose their taxes in the year they first run for office and for every year they are in office BY LAW. But since there is no law, if he doesn't want to show his taxes, he doesn't have to. Though I wish he would. I can tell you one thing with absolute certainty... if he cheated so much as a dollar on his taxes the IRS would already have hauled him into court in as public a manner as possible many months ago, the instant the Democratic party became worried that Trump might have a chance.
[Updated on: Sun, 26 February 2017 07:46]
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And that will be all for tonight. Doctor Who is on, State of Decay, a Tom Baker, and best of all, an Adric episode!!!
Good night!
And if I've pissed anyone off, jump in when you feel like it.
Spirited debate is the life-blood of liberty.
[Updated on: Sun, 26 February 2017 07:50]
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P.S.
Let this be a debate on the topic at hand.
"So this is what a great president does first"
It was the same thing that happened on Inauguration Day since .gov went online. The outgoing admin removed their stuff to /Archive/expresident's name" and the incoming admin started up with a fresh, empty site. Except when Obama got his second term, because that Inauguration Day the site remained the same and only changed a little.
So, basically, nothing new or unusual happened. So what's the point of asking why it happened this time just like it's always happened between administrations? And why did the media, who of anyone should know all this, went and made a big deal about it? And even pointed out certain 'terms' that were 'removed' when EVERYTHING was removed? I mean, WTF?
Lie, distraction, innuendo (LGBT and the other 'term' hinting those 'terms' were particularly removed when EVERYTHING was removed)
[Updated on: Sun, 26 February 2017 08:05]
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P.P.S.
Sorry I'm so verbose. I should find a story to work on.
But I'm fired up about my country's predicament.
I'm a centrist. I like some Dem things and I like some Repub things. I'm a bit liberal and I'm a bit conservative. I like some of the Libertarian view too, but it's too constricting overall.
The conservatives and the Republicans both hate the Department of Education, a Democrat/Liberal crowning jewel. Constitutionally it shouldn't exist, but it could so long as it's advisory only and had no powers to make any laws or regulations. But it does exist, and it makes not only regulations but laws de facto. It rules the schools run by the states through financial blackmail. I want a federal Department of Education, but I want one that can't dictate or spend or allot. It should be an advisory board of maybe twelve or maybe one per state, elected from the school boards and faculties of the states. It should coordinate and advise, and cost less than a small school to run. But it's a massive money sink and exerts total control over every school in the nation. Yes, even the private schools. Yes, even home schooling.
It costs about $70,000,000,000 a year and was formed in 1979. The preceding offices were tiny and advisory and powerless and started about 1860. And kids learned Latin and Classic Literatures and Greek and other languages and math and the history of the greatest nation on Earth and were smart enough to build that nation to even greater status. That was then...
sigh
And lastly, I was never a Trump supporter. The guy I wanted wouldn't run, and he's doing a job that needs done right now anyway and shouldn't be distracted by running for president. YouTube and search Trey Gowdy. Of those who ran, party not considered, I wanted Paul.
[Updated on: Sun, 26 February 2017 09:36]
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
"Quote:"What concerns me, is that you are suddenly frightened of a country that is finally being led by someone without a criminal background and who isn't a career politician, and you probably don't even know why you're terrified of it.
No. I am frightened of that leader who appears not to have a stain on his character, not of your country which is simply going through a dark period. I am frightened because my father and his family had to flee their homeland and escaped the Holocaust because of another leader without a stain on his character, one who exhibits very similar tendencies.
I am aware of Godwin's Law. In December 2015, Godwin commented on the Nazi and fascist comparisons being made by several articles on Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, saying that "If you're thoughtful about it and show some real awareness of history, go ahead and refer to Hitler when you talk about Trump. Or any other politician."
I am thoughtful about it. I show real awareness of history. I see Adolf Hitler in Trump. Fortunately for the world today, much as it pains me to appear to praise Hitler, a person who ought never to receive the smallest praise, he was a better orator and leader than Trump will ever be. Thus there is more hope.
[Updated on: Sun, 26 February 2017 10:44]
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Registered: February 2015
Messages: 73
|
|
|
Quote:Smokr wrote on Sun, 26 February 2017 05:13
"Quote:"timmy wrote on Sat, 25 February 2017 05:47Well, what it looks from here to be is alt right represented by Bannon having a substantial sway over your democratically elected president. That president seems to be truculent and combative. I can't argue with his having done what he said he would do, but he has also done what he said he would not do. The trans protections are one such.
No protections were removed. Schools that don't need a trans bathroom will no not have their money taken away if they don't build one. That's about the only real difference. Any school that wants or needs one, will still be as able as before to have one.
Restarting the nuclear arms race puts me and my family in danger.
Hyperbole. Trump is talking tough. That's what you do when you want to lead a country. Do you want drill instructors that mollycoddle recruits? He is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces. If he looks weak. like Obama did, he would get walked all over, like Obama did. He is walking tall and carrying a big stick. It was Obama who made it entirely possible for Iran to go nuclear with his 'treaty' instead of keeping the sanctions in place if they tried. Now they can go ahead and do what they want, and they inspect themselves! THEY INSPECT THEMSELVES! Not yelling, pointing that incredible unbelievable fact out clearly. Obama trusts Iran to inspect themselves for illicit uranium enrichment activities instead of the UN panel that complained that Iran was enriching uranium despite the fact they were not supposed to be. Thanks Obama. Trump talks like a leader and he gets called a Russian spy.
Mass deportations and refugee bans take me back to my father, who was a refugee from Nazi Germany.
Mass deportations of people here illegally. ILLEGALLY. I am not yelling, I am making that point very clear. IL-LEGAL. They snuck in. I don't want anyone sneaking in.ISIS wants to kill us by the truckload, like they do in Europe, and Obama wants to ignore the southern border and let anyone who wants come and go across it. And the deportations are of those who have committed crimes while here after sneaking in illegally. Good. They come here illegally, they commit crimes, our laws say they can't stay, the court tells them to leave, but they stay. Trump is saying, "No, our laws are clear, you broke them at least twice and were told to leave, you didn't, so now you are being removed." Good.
The ban is temporary. Do you know that, or are you going with the unstated assumption by the press that it's permanent? It is a temporary measure while better vetting is done of the people coming here from those seven countries with no government and no records of who these people wanting to come here are. That is the big 'ban' Trump wanted. To keep those people on hold while we figure out who the hell they are and where the hell they really came from.
Want to see why? Look at Paris, Berlin, London. Waves of migrants and waves of violence. Trump doesn't want that here too. He wants to stop people coming here who don't want to become American, they want to shit on the streets and rape kids and behead people. Look at the migrants in Europe. Look at the faces. Why are there so many men of fighting age? And why are they Muslim? And why do they vandalize and deface public spaces? They are not there to assimilate and live a better life, they are there to take lives. Not all, of course, but far too many.
Trump throws down a temporary halt until we can vett these people, and the I have used a deprecated word in order to indicate a person of different political persuasion from me who might be termed 'liberal' by others not knowing their political persuasions call it a ban. And of course it's a Muslim ban. Not because of the religion standing, but because it's the hatefull factions of Islam that want to behead anyone who even types the name Mohammed, or draws him, or even says they don't follow Islam. Screw that.
I'm also sick of being told that everyone in any other part of the world has a right to come to America in any way and at any time they want. No they don't. No one has any right to travel to another country. Has no one ever heard of immigration? Of VISAs? Of legal immigration? Of travel VISAs? Employment VISAs? Every country has had a border since the first two countries formed next to each other. It has never been legal to cross into Canada without going through customs at the border. That goes for Mexico too. Every country. But now we have I have used a deprecated word in order to indicate a person of different political persuasion from me who might be termed 'liberal' by others not knowing their political persuasions on television claiming Trump is the first person to ever prevent anyone who wants to coming into America. How fucking insane is that?
Obama did the exact same thing more than once, but where was the outrage then? I bet not one of you know that Obama did it. Do you? Google it.
Banning parts of the legitimate press, whether you consider them to be mainstream or not, is a typical act of a fascist dictator. We could have many discussions about whether Breitbart is legitimate press or a far right propaganda machine without necessarily reaching a conclusion
He in no way banned any press. He no longer will allow these lying bastards to sit in on his press conferences and disrupt them. They can watch the conference along with the rest of us and continue making blatantly false statements all they want, but now they won't be able to disrupt. The presidential briefings are an invite only event. The president has always had the complete right and responsibility to invite who he chooses of the press. There is no 'right to attend' a presidential press briefing. Identification is issued by the White House at the discretion of the President and his press secretary. It has always been that way. Period. Obama never so much as invited anyone who didn't parrot his line, and invited some press only once and never again, but there was no outcry or outrage against his decisions on that. Trump has allowed CNN and others to attend and disrupt long enough, and now he's said 'enough'.
It also looks very much as if your democratically elected president is (a) out of his depth, (b) in some way beholden to Russia, (b) linked to some highly questionable business deals involving dirty money.
(a) out of his depth Please describe how so. He's made business deals with every major company and country on the planet. More than once! He's already met most of the world leaders face to face. He's done business in their countries and with their politicians and business leaders. More than once!
(b) in some way beholden to Russia - In what ways? Please describe how. There is no evidence, circumstantial or otherwise, only innuendo and opinions that are being irresponsibly thrown around. Lies, if you like.
(b) linked to some highly questionable business deals involving dirty money - You mean C of course. LOL Typos suck. So do lies. How so? If so, we would have facts and charges galore being bandied about each and every day, over and over. There is no evidence, circumstantial or otherwise. If there were, we would have had them during the primary or the final election cycles. This is more innuendo and opinion being bandied about recklessly in a desperate effort to hurt the guy who's done nothing wrong except beat Hillary Clinton and take the government away from Obama's left behind cronies who are committing treason by leaking sensitive information.
People also argued that the Kennedy family were rooted in crime, with probable justification. You with notice that I am not concerned about party politics at all here. By no means all of your presidents have been squeaky clean, perhaps none of them, though no mud seems to have stuck to Obama. Nixon was one of your less palatable ones.
No mud stuck to Obama? Wow, I had no idea anyone here was so clueless on that socialist fascist pinko commie.
I am not keen on any of our recent UK Prime Ministers, not since Harold MacMillan. Google is your friend here. UK party politics is quite awful, too. I doubt any nation comes out as truly ethical, with the possible exception of Bhutan.
Politicians suck. Finally we get a president that isn't a politician, that has never been charged with a crime, who's never stolen money entrusted to him, who can profitably run multiple businesses within the law, and he's demonized and painted with every foul lie imaginable. He's not perfect, he probably has skeletons in his closet, but dear God in Heaven, he's so far from being a crooked Clinton that it's amazing he hasn't been assassinated yet.
What concerns me is that I trusted the USA once, now I am terrified of it.
--
What concerns me, is that you are suddenly frightened of a country that is finally being led by someone without a criminal background and who isn't a career politician, and you probably don't even know why you're terrified of it. Obama was raised by Frank Marshall Davis. An avowed and self-admitted communist and socialist. A real scumbag, too. Research him. He's scum. And this guy raised Obama. Obama says so in his autobiography. He also says the most beautiful thing he has ever heard is the morning call to Muslim prayer. Obama said that! Google it and watch him say it! You shoud have been terrified when Obama was in charge. I was.
I'll tell you why you're terrified now. Because the press is telling you to be. Think about that. The press is telling you Trump is a Russian spy, a misogynist, a homophobe, a sexist, a racist, and a fascist. And many, many, many other things. Now, why would they tell you he is a Russian spy, a misogynist, a homophobe, a sexist, a racist, and a fascist? And many, many, many other things? And where is any kind of even slightly coincidental evidence of any of that? If he was, we would have video and audio and text proving it being thrown at us by the media day and night in print and online and on broadcasts. Even if there were a little something they could use, they would use it. There isn't.
The one thing was a woman who claimed she was fondled by Trump years ago, who now says that isn't true and the press is overblowing it. She says so!
And the one bad thing against Trump is the one bit of audio of him saying, "Grab her by the pussy!" Something every man has said in his lifetime between friends. Which is what this was, him and a buddy having what they thought was a private talk, and the only thing the press could pull out of that conversation was the line, "You should grab her by the pussy." Well la te da.
You're terrified because you are swallowing the lies.
If Trump ever turns out to be a Russian spy, or any of these insane things, fine, I'll accept that. But there is no evidence of any of it. Nothing. The only evidence is that he likes women. Well, anyone remember Bill Clinton? At least there aren't four women whom he's mauled filing claims against Trump. All Trump did was talk macho with a buddy about hot women. And even then, his comments are amazingly tame compared to what you hear between most of us on this very site.
--
I think you defend Trump too much, i know you didn't vote for him and wasn't your choice, but you're pretty much brushing all criticism of him aside and saying everything negative said about him is false and that's just not true, there are so many interviews, where we can both here and see his lies and true personality and that's why i don't like him, i'm not talking about what papers write about him, because less face it, the papers/media will do everything they can to twist facts and stories, they're about as trustworrthy as your average politician
But back to Trrump, throughout his campaign he pretty much changed his views and opinions almost weekly, depending on who he was speaking to and he would say some outrages things and then at the next rally or whatever they're called, either flat out deny he said it or express the opposite of what he had said and he did this a lot, at least the ones that i saw
Things that i struggle to accept for him as a person
1) he actively researched the tax laws to the extent, that he figured out how to avoid paying any tax, now while not illegal, in my opinion it make me question his morales, especially as a big part of his campaign focused on looking after the little people/working class (i may have the wrong words here, sorry if i do) which is all fine, but these people that he is fighting for, are people on low income, who work all sorts of hours and struggle to make a living, yet they still pay their taxes, how can you really say you're a man of the people, if you went above and beyond to avoid paying taxes, even if you did it within the law, he even said on one of those presidential debates, i think it was the 3rd one, but it might have been the second, when Hilary was talking about him avoiding tax, he made an off the cuff remark, that was basically "Because I'm smart" now that could have just been one of those moments where you're just saying something to be petty, we all do it in debates/arguments, but when you're running for president and on national tv and being watched around the world, i don't think you should be making that kind of remark, because what i took from that, is him saying he didn't pay tax, because he is smart, which implies those that do pay tax are stupid, that's what it sounded like to me, even if i don't think that was his intention, it still came across like that
He talked about foreign imports and how they've crippled the USA industry, yet he used a hell of a lot of foreign imports over the past few decades, most notably chinese steel, so to hear him being so against it and how he thinks it's wrong that foreign imports are being used, is beyond hypocritical in my opinion and I'm pretty sure, if he never ran for president, he would still be using those imports over home grown supplies
He talks about immigrants nad jobs, yet like all big businesses, he has took advantage of the cheaper wages of immigrants over american workers, because from a business PoV, you have to be cost effective and hiring cheaper labor is good business, as long as they can actually do the work, so again, while he talks big about this, it's only because he was running for president, so i really don't trust what he says when it comes to things like that
The fact he was a very, very close friend to the Clinton's before he ran for president, is another thing not to forget, this man invited them to his wedding only a few years earlier and the way he turned on them (whether they're horrible people or not and they are definitely not good people) shows what he will do to achieve his goals, he also talked a lot about the Clinton foundation (even if i have no real idea what that actually is) and from what i heard from him in rallies and interviews, he pretty much condemned it and made it out ot be something negative, yet before he ran for president, he had invested quite a lot of money into it, going well into the millions, so again like above, it makes you question his credibility, when he can just change his opinion just to suit whatever his goal is at any given time
I also don't like what he has been caught saying either, even though a lot of what the media has foused on was a long time ago, he still said it and he hasn't really shown any remorse for those things, sure he's said sorry and stuff, but none of those seemed sincere, not to me anyway and the main two i will mention, are the grabbing the pussy one, which you mentioned yourself, for me, that was disgusting, but okay, it was a long time ago, but for me, why it is a big deal, is his reaction to it, he never really showed remorse, he did a lot of "I'm sorry" "i respect woman" "no one respects woman more than i do" "It was lockeer room banter" not once did i hear him say this and think he meant it, those were throwaway apologies, especially the locker room banter remark, i've been in plenty of locker rooms (can anyone say that and not be paranoid about it sounding dirty? lol) and yeah, there are your typical guy talk, but the stuff Donald said and even though the sound wasn't great, you could tell that he not only meant what he was saying, but also that he had done it, of course i could be wrong, very wrong, but what i took from it, it really did sound like he had done it several times and that it wasn't just banter
The second one is where he is walking down some stairs in one of his casino's and some girl scouts are going in the other direction, now the picture and sound aren't the best in the clip that was shown, but you can hear what he says and the way he says it, but i just want to make it clear, i don't think he is a paedophile or has any attraction to children, this isn't about that, it's just about how innappropriate his comment was and also the fact he doesn't realise how innappropriate it is... and while i can't remember it word for word, it went something like "Wow, look at her, just look at her, it's just crazy to think in 8-10 years, i'm going to be dating her" like i said not word for word, but without finding the video (which is lazy of me i guess) i can't remember word for word, but the point is, i find it very disturbing that any adult would look at a child and even think about how they could be dating them in a few years time, especially when the child is around 10-12 years old, i just find that more than a little creepy, but again, i do want to point out that the video was poor quality and when it's poor quality, you can misunderstand it and the context could be lost, although i struggle to see what context could justify that sentence, it's possible
Also the sheer amount of false information he used throughout his compaign and even when he was corrects and his claims were proven to be false, he still used them and repeated them in his raliies and it did make me laugh the other week, when he accused the media of fake news, because while he was right, it was the pot calling the kettle hot (or whatever version of that saying you grew up with) i mean if you're going to call people up on something, at least pick something that you don't do yourself
So yeah, there are many other things, but i won't go into it too deep because at the end of the day Trump is president, it's what America voted and it's done, so while i don't like the man and i really believe he can't be trusted (he may not be a politician, but trust me, that doesn't make him any better than a politician) i think people just need to get on with it, congress/senate and the courts will keep him from doing anything stupid and yeah, he says some controvesial things and stuff and he really needs to stop using twitter like he does to take little pot shots at people, but he is the president and despite what i said above, i think he will do some good things, not saying he is going to be a great president, but i think he will do some things that will have a positive impact on america
It will definitely be interesting in 4 years time, to see this topic again and see if peoples opinions have changed or whether we were right or wrong about him, well for me it will be interesting anyway
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Registered: February 2015
Messages: 73
|
|
|
Quote:dgt224 wrote on Sun, 26 February 2017 06:49
Quote:Smokr wrote on Sun, 26 February 2017 00:25
Oh, and you have to love the new Oxford definition of Fascism. Go ahead. Go to https://en.oxforddictionaries.com and search Fascism. Laugh your ass off, or cry. One or the other.
It's not clear to me that the current OED definition of fascism is significantly different from definitions elsewhere. What, precisely, is it about their definition that exercises you so? If you want a longer or more focused discussion, the Wikipedia article goes on for pages, but the OED is a dictionary, not an encyclopedia. (It's right there in the name, after all.) If you study the history of fascist governments (and there have been more than a few), not all have ruled primarily through violence; violence is commonly associated with fascism, but it is not a defining characteristic.
As for your assertions that rumors of the President's ties to Russia, business conflicts of interest, and other alleged failings are just that -- rumors, with no supporting evidence at all: If things continue as they have, we'll never know, will we? So far every attempt to get Congress to investigate those allegations has been defeated by the Republican majority. The President hasn't been investigated and found to be innocent of these alleged failings; the party that nominated him will not allow him to be investigated. He is the only President in modern times to refuse to release his tax returns, despite his promises to do so.
It is entirely possible that Donald Trump is quite fit to serve as President, and it would be fairly easy for him to establish that fact. A Congressional investigation would ultimately be controlled by the Republican majority, so it's not like he would be subjecting himself to a hostile tribunal. So why doesn't he just say to Congress, "Investigate and get it over with, so we can get down to business without all these distractions"?
--
I have to admit, that i find the Republicans and Trump's stance on his tax returns and ties to Russia to be quite amusing and i say that because of how they almost hounded Obama to provide proof (his birth certificate) to prove that he was in fact born in the united states and they did this because they called into question whether he was fit for office and that if he had nothing to hide from the people, he should be more than happy to prove them (the republicans and Trump) wrong and show his birth certificate
But now that they have a republican president, attempts to get him to show his tax returns and to show he has nothing to hide, have been blocked by them and i just find that amusing because they've done a complete 180 on their beliefs, i mean what happened to all those people almost forcing Obama to show his birth certificate, when it comes to Trump releasing his tax returns, because in their own words, that they repeated many, many times, including Trump, "if he has nothing to hide from the people, he should be more than happy to prove it"
Of course i don't really think he has anything to hide in terms of his tax returns, i think if anything, it would shock us more if he released them and he has paid any kind of tax, i know i would be surprised by that
As for his links with Russia, i have no really idea what to think about it or what it would really mean, i imagine there is a lot of talk between presidents and senators ect with other foriegn counterparts that we never and will never know about and i guess i show my naitivity here, but i don't really understand the consequences if it is proven he does have links with them, so if anyone could enlighten me, i wouldn't mind being educated on that
Btw, like in other posts about Trump that i have made, i don't like the guy, i don't have much respect for him, but i do respect that he is the president (i'm english btw, so i know i don't have much right to talk about american politics) he was voted in, the same way every other president was and he will follow the same rules as those before him and have to jump through the same hoops, so yeah, while i have little respect for him as a person, there is every chance he could surprise everyone and be a very good president, only time will tell though, but i'm not going to write his chances off completely
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
I started this by expressing my legitimate fear, albeit one created by a perfectly normal transition of power.
We had a small, though reasonable dialogue about that. My own fear eased, though remained, especially as I see some protections in a nation of which I am not a part, stripped away from things I believe in. This has been done by a democratically elected president and majority party. I don't have to like that, but, should I choose to campaign in some manner against it, I have other avenues than here.
One of our number has expressed, in my view counter to the netiquette here, a strongly held opinion to the contrary. I support his right to express his opinion, but am disappointed by the manner of expression. Indeed, that has caused me to learn more of the behind the scenes administration of this forum, an area I prefer not to tread.
We all have a right to opinions, and they have, I think, been expressed with clarity. Where they have been expressed with emotion, I accept that. My post was emotional at the head. What I do not accept is where they have been expressed with words that are deprecated. Those so deprecated have a right to express their opinions untrammelled by insults.
[Updated on: Sun, 26 February 2017 12:58]
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote:I am afraid I disagree with you over your president, though acknowledge that he was democratically elected.
It was Sweden he referred to. There was nothing happening in Sweden. There was also nothing happening in Denmark
"We've got to keep our country safe. You look at what's happening in Germany. You look at what's happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers. They're having problems like they never thought possible. You look at what's happening in Brussels. You look at what's happening all over the world. Take a look at Nice. Take a look at Paris."
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump My statement as to what's happening in Sweden was in reference to a story that was broadcast on @FoxNews concerning immigrants & Sweden.4:57 PM - 19 Feb 2017
He was referring to the masses of immigrants taken in without vetting, so many of which are causing so much trouble. Overcrowding, poor conditions, and violence. The press insisted
"Nothing happened last night in Sweden." He was talking about the infamous report that one station aired, because no other media station here will even talk about the mess. Fox does and the rest of the media ignore it and even try to say 'nothing happened' and 'Trump lies'.
There was also no Bowling Green Massacre ~ Conway lied
Here, a newspaper actually tells the truth. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/5/kellyanne-con way-correctly-spoke-about-bowling-gre/
There were no Atlanta attacks ~ Spicer lied
Even CNN has corrected this one. Why are you still believing it? Be sure to watch the little video and see for yourself. http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/08/politics/spicer-alleged-atlant a-terror-attack-trnd/
There was no Swedish incident ~ Trump lied
Already corrected this above.
There is now an enhanced nuclear arms race ~ Trump. That one is true
Really? President-elect Trump told MSNBC that if a new arms race occurred, "We will outmatch them at every pass and outlast them all."
Now that has turned into "Trump is starting an enhanced nuclear arms race."
That one is not true, either.
Your president needed to keep credibility. He could easily have done, but he chose not to. This is not a matter of party politics. I have no horse in the US race. It is a matter of truth and lies.
Yes it is, and who tells the truth and who lies?
He is now the most powerful man in the world and yet he is not trusted by the world.
He was trusted enough by world leaders and world business leaders to do business with them for decades in nearly every country in the world. Now he's the president, he is suddenly not trusted?
In many ways we are back to the days when Kennedy and Kruschev were in negotiations over the missiles in Cuba, except Trump is playing the part of Kruschev and the rest of the world is wondering how on earth to negotiate with him, since he lies.
"Since he lies."
Does he? Show me some more of his lies and I'll show you some more lies by the far left-wing media that is supposed to be a bastion of truth and information.
It does not make it comfortable to be a global citizen knowing that a man I cannot trust and who presents to the world no skill whatsoever with diplomacy has control of the nuclear launch codes and cannot be countermanded
Why can't you trust him? What's he done that you can't trust him? I trust him as much as any politician, I don't. But he's done nothing he said he wouldn't, and he's doing what he said he would. And the more the biased media attacks him, the more I wonder why, and the more I see they are the ones that lie, lie, lie.
I can see why folk voted for change. I am simply very unsure that knew that they voted for a man of such a thin skin and such little temperament for being a statesman. I am also sure that they did not vote for Steve Bannon.
Bannon? You want to worry about a president's advisor, you should have been deeply worried about Obama's. FBI files revealed that the dad, maternal grandpa and father-in-law of President Obama's trusted senior advisor, Valerie Jarrett, were all hardcore Communists under investigation by the U.S. government.
I don't mind disagreeing with you at all here or by email. When you disagree on the forum please be a little more circumspect than you have been in the way you present your case.
I will not be 'more circumspect.' All I've done is point out the constant barrage of lies and violence being executed by the extreme left wing nutjobs who are making the ill-informed watchers of the lying media burn their own schools and riot in the streets over those lies. However I will stop using certain 'trigger' words that upset some people and invade their 'safe space.'
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote:timmy wrote on Sun, 26 February 2017 05:42
"Quote:"What concerns me, is that you are suddenly frightened of a country that is finally being led by someone without a criminal background and who isn't a career politician, and you probably don't even know why you're terrified of it.
No. I am frightened of that leader who appears not to have a stain on his character, not of your country which is simply going through a dark period. I am frightened because my father and his family had to flee their homeland and escaped the Holocaust because of another leader without a stain on his character, one who exhibits very similar tendencies.
I am aware of Godwin's Law. In December 2015, Godwin commented on the Nazi and fascist comparisons being made by several articles on Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, saying that "If you're thoughtful about it and show some real awareness of history, go ahead and refer to Hitler when you talk about Trump. Or any other politician."
I am thoughtful about it. I show real awareness of history. I see Adolf Hitler in Trump. Fortunately for the world today, much as it pains me to appear to praise Hitler, a person who ought never to receive the smallest praise, he was a better orator and leader than Trump will ever be. Thus there is more hope.
--
Please show me these 'very similar tendencies'. Show me some parallels between Trump and Hitler.
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think you defend Trump too much, i know you didn't vote for him and wasn't your choice, but you're pretty much brushing all criticism of him aside and saying everything negative said about him is false and that's just not true, there are so many interviews, where we can both here and see his lies and true personality and that's why i don't like him, i'm not talking about what papers write about him, because less face it, the papers/media will do everything they can to twist facts and stories, they're about as trustworrthy as your average politician
I'm not brushing anything aside. I'm proving the lies to be lies. Show me where I brush anything aside without evidence of it's fallacy.
But back to Trrump, throughout his campaign he pretty much changed his views and opinions almost weekly, depending on who he was speaking to and he would say some outrages things and then at the next rally or whatever they're called, either flat out deny he said it or express the opposite of what he had said and he did this a lot, at least the ones that i saw
Show me a single instance where Trump changed a stance on any topic, let alone weekly. That should be very easy and take no time at all. I'm sure the press will have done that for us by now, don't you?
Things that i struggle to accept for him as a person
1) he actively researched the tax laws to the extent, that he figured out how to avoid paying any tax, now while not illegal, in my opinion it make me question his morales, especially as a big part of his campaign focused on looking after the little people/working class (i may have the wrong words here, sorry if i do) which is all fine, but these people that he is fighting for, are people on low income, who work all sorts of hours and struggle to make a living, yet they still pay their taxes, how can you really say you're a man of the people, if you went above and beyond to avoid paying taxes, even if you did it within the law, he even said on one of those presidential debates, i think it was the 3rd one, but it might have been the second, when Hilary was talking about him avoiding tax, he made an off the cuff remark, that was basically "Because I'm smart" now that could have just been one of those moments where you're just saying something to be petty, we all do it in debates/arguments, but when you're running for president and on national tv and being watched around the world, i don't think you should be making that kind of remark, because what i took from that, is him saying he didn't pay tax, because he is smart, which implies those that do pay tax are stupid, that's what it sounded like to me, even if i don't think that was his intention, it still came across like that
Are you saying that you think Trump does his own taxes? It IS smart to pay as little in taxes as possible. I do it, my family members do it, my friends do it, my coworkers do it. I am not going to be mad any anyone else who pays as little as legally mandated. Why do you hold it against him? Do you voluntarily pay more in taxes than you have to?
He talked about foreign imports and how they've crippled the USA industry, yet he used a hell of a lot of foreign imports over the past few decades, most notably chinese steel, so to hear him being so against it and how he thinks it's wrong that foreign imports are being used, is beyond hypocritical in my opinion and I'm pretty sure, if he never ran for president, he would still be using those imports over home grown supplies
So you don't know that he's demanded that the new pipeline be built using only US steel?
He talks about immigrants nad jobs, yet like all big businesses, he has took advantage of the cheaper wages of immigrants over american workers, because from a business PoV, you have to be cost effective and hiring cheaper labor is good business, as long as they can actually do the work, so again, while he talks big about this, it's only because he was running for president, so i really don't trust what he says when it comes to things like that
Does Trump hire every waiter and bellboy at every restaurant and hotel? Does he do the interviews? Or is he a little busy for that researching tax laws between filling out his taxes?
The fact he was a very, very close friend to the Clinton's before he ran for president, is another thing not to forget, this man invited them to his wedding only a few years earlier and the way he turned on them (whether they're horrible people or not and they are definitely not good people) shows what he will do to achieve his goals, he also talked a lot about the Clinton foundation (even if i have no real idea what that actually is) and from what i heard from him in rallies and interviews, he pretty much condemned it and made it out ot be something negative, yet before he ran for president, he had invested quite a lot of money into it, going well into the millions, so again like above, it makes you question his credibility, when he can just change his opinion just to suit whatever his goal is at any given time
He liked the Clintons and invited them his wedding. He liked the Clinton Foundation until it's dirty laundry got aired and then he no longer gave to that charity, while still giving more to charities than most of us earn. He used to be a Democrat - Google "Why Trump left Democratic party"
I also don't like what he has been caught saying either, even though a lot of what the media has foused on was a long time ago, he still said it and he hasn't really shown any remorse for those things, sure he's said sorry and stuff, but none of those seemed sincere, not to me anyway and the main two i will mention, are the grabbing the pussy one, which you mentioned yourself, for me, that was disgusting, but okay, it was a long time ago, but for me, why it is a big deal, is his reaction to it, he never really showed remorse, he did a lot of "I'm sorry" "i respect woman" "no one respects woman more than i do" "It was lockeer room banter" not once did i hear him say this and think he meant it, those were throwaway apologies, especially the locker room banter remark, i've been in plenty of locker rooms (can anyone say that and not be paranoid about it sounding dirty? lol) and yeah, there are your typical guy talk, but the stuff Donald said and even though the sound wasn't great, you could tell that he not only meant what he was saying, but also that he had done it, of course i could be wrong, very wrong, but what i took from it, it really did sound like he had done it several times and that it wasn't just banter
Should he have cried on stage? He apologized for being recorded secretly while having a private conversation when he said, "you got to grab them by the pussy" while talking about how to get lucky with a woman. Oh my. I've said far worse. So Trump isn't a prude. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about getting blow-jobs in the White House while he was the president. I thought that was all a bunch of bull too. So the prez got blown in the Oval Office. She was willing and they were consenting adults. It was cheating on his wife, and that was pretty sleazy.
The second one is where he is walking down some stairs in one of his casino's and some girl scouts are going in the other direction, now the picture and sound aren't the best in the clip that was shown, but you can hear what he says and the way he says it, but i just want to make it clear, i don't think he is a paedophile or has any attraction to children, this isn't about that, it's just about how innappropriate his comment was and also the fact he doesn't realise how innappropriate it is... and while i can't remember it word for word, it went something like "Wow, look at her, just look at her, it's just crazy to think in 8-10 years, i'm going to be dating her" like i said not word for word, but without finding the video (which is lazy of me i guess) i can't remember word for word, but the point is, i find it very disturbing that any adult would look at a child and even think about how they could be dating them in a few years time, especially when the child is around 10-12 years old, i just find that more than a little creepy, but again, i do want to point out that the video was poor quality and when it's poor quality, you can misunderstand it and the context could be lost, although i struggle to see what context could justify that sentence, it's possible
I want to see and hear this. Show us.
Also the sheer amount of false information he used throughout his compaign and even when he was corrects and his claims were proven to be false, he still used them and repeated them in his raliies and it did make me laugh the other week, when he accused the media of fake news, because while he was right, it was the pot calling the kettle hot (or whatever version of that saying you grew up with) i mean if you're going to call people up on something, at least pick something that you don't do yourself
Show us one example of Trump claiming false information during his campaign. Then show me where he was 'corrected' and refused to accept that. This should be easy and done for you already. All you should have to do is cut and paste.
So yeah, there are many other things, but i won't go into it too deep because at the end of the day Trump is president, it's what America voted and it's done, so while i don't like the man and i really believe he can't be trusted (he may not be a politician, but trust me, that doesn't make him any better than a politician) i think people just need to get on with it, congress/senate and the courts will keep him from doing anything stupid and yeah, he says some controvesial things and stuff and he really needs to stop using twitter like he does to take little pot shots at people, but he is the president and despite what i said above, i think he will do some good things, not saying he is going to be a great president, but i think he will do some things that will have a positive impact on america
I agree with this paragraph almost completely.
It will definitely be interesting in 4 years time, to see this topic again and see if peoples opinions have changed or whether we were right or wrong about him, well for me it will be interesting anyway
LOL Yes it will. I hope we manage to do so.
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This entire thread is a matter of truth and lies. I'm not a 'yuge' Trump supporter, I never stumped for him. But I can not sit idle while the press lies so vindictively and so outrageously about this guy who so far is doing exactly what he was elected to do. That's not even the big deal of it all. The BIG DEAL is that the press is lying their butts off, and those lies are prompting the less informed who do not research on their own to take to the streets and riot and burn their college campuses, BASED ON THOSE MEDIA LIES.
In fact, what we have here, is the media fomenting a national crisis based on lies.
Americans are turning on each other and destroying their own infrastructure, attacking each other in the streets, burning and looting, over media lies and bias.
I'm watching Americans literally destroy each other over lies by the press.
I don't think I'm going to far in saying the press is attempting a coup and revolution on lies just because they lost the election.
Yes, I say the media lost the election. Can any of you argue against that? The media wanted Clinton. They put out fake polls saying Clinton was tens of points ahead of Trump and Trump had no chance. They kissed Hillary's butt and demonized Trump. They put out fake polls. They got discredited, and now they just want to kill Trump, even if they burn down the entire country.
I refuse to sit silent and let it happen. I love my country, and I don[t want to see it burned down one college campus at a time. Though, frankly, most of these colleges are hotbeds of communism and socialism and fascism, and I'd rather they keep going until they burn out through the lies and crap they spew and not get burned down.
[Updated on: Sun, 26 February 2017 21:56]
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe what really pissed me off so much was that I came to IOMFATS and see a post by a guy I like and admire, who I respect, asking a question that as so, well, stupid.
"So this is what a great president does first?"
Well, yes. And no.
Trump had nothing to do with it. Obama's admin was still in control, and all they did was what is always done during a transition. Trump had no hand in it. At all. And it was perfectly normal.
LGBT rights, Obama's climate change agenda, and civil rights topics were not removed. Yet the post clearly says they were removed. No they weren't. Period. Lie. The entire site was migrated, in accordance with standard procedures.
So what? So what we get is an insinuation that the first thing that Trump did upon being inaugurated was to remove LGBT rights, climate change, and civil rights from America.
But I come here to that post. That wasn't enough. The very next post asks the question, "Did Trump get 'America First' from the KKK?
Really? Trump is in the KKK? I would think a few Democrats would be aware of that, since the KKK was started, was run, and still is, by people in the Democratic party, not the Republican. Research it.
The third post claims the phrase "America First" is perplexing and bizarre, and that if worries the poster.
Holy freaking crap. This from a guy I like and think of as thoughtful and considerate. WTF?
An American president saying he will put American and American interests first is perplexing and bizarre? Since when? How so?
Just because we're coming out of eight years of Obama's constant apologizing for America and insisting we are the cause of all the world's problems doesn't mean that it's true.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
[Updated on: Sun, 26 February 2017 22:33]
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
Quote:I will not be 'more circumspect.' All I've done is point out the constant barrage of lies and violence being executed by the extreme left wing nutjobs who are making the ill-informed watchers of the lying media burn their own schools and riot in the streets over those lies. However I will stop using certain 'trigger' words that upset some people and invade their 'safe space.'
Trust me on this. You will be more circumspect, and will be less antagonistic. Otherwise you will be opting to depart from here, something I will enforce because you will have made that free choice. It will happen quietly, and there will be no return. Please consider this carefully and post with far less antagonism, and avoid pejorative words of all types.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Registered: February 2015
Messages: 73
|
|
|
Honestly, your replies to my posts are a little childish, there is a lot of "show me" and "prove it to me" stuff coming from you, but i think you fail to grasp what i was trying to say and just read a little of each part and commented on it, everything i wrote was quite balanced, i only commented on what i knew about and had seen for myself in the interviews and rallies and debates he took part in and gave my opinion on those and i made it clear my points were opinions
I don't feel like i need to find videos to prove anything to you either, those videos are easy to find for anyone, just a few key words in google or bing and you should be good to go, but it's not something i am going to do, i'm just not that passionate about this subject to prove something
If you watched any of his rallies, i'm english and live in england and even i saw some of them, you will be able to find for yourself, where he contradicted himself quite often, so it's up to you if you want to look into that or not, no one is forcing you either way
Things like taxes, it isn't a case of paying as little tax as you can, i think most will do that within the law, but i think he took it to extremes and the fact he won't release his tax returns at all, indicates that he hasn't just paid the bare minimum and also, when you're trying to come across as a man of the people, it doesn't look that good when the president hasn't paid any taxes for however many years, i mean what kind of example is that to set? so yeah, he might have paid taxes and he might have nothing to hide, but just like he was saying when he was questioning Obama's place of birth, if he has nothing to hide, why not show his tax returns? just for an outsider like me, i don't know why he would hide them
About the steel, i have no idea about what he's ordered now, but that wasn't the point i made at all, i said that he's used foreign imports for years, a couple of his buildings are made using chinese steel, so with that in mind, his talk about foreign imports during his campaign, were more than a little hypercritical, that's all i am calling into question, not that he never uses usa materials at all, just that he definitely exploited foreign imports, so it's hard to take him seriously when he is condemning the affects they've have home based manufacturing
Your response to what i said about the use of cheap labor that he took advantage of is also very childish and if you read what i wrote, than you would know that i wasn't singling Trump out or saying that all he did was hire cheap labor, i was just pointing out, that like the foreign imports, it's hard to take what he preached when he was campaigning about how it's crippled american workers and things like that, when he's guilty of doing it himself and while he may not be interviewing people and that kind of thing,, he owns the company, it's his company and it's very naive to think that he doesn't know what's going on and if he doesn't, than maybe he should be taking a closer look at things, also the little dig about he tax thing, i really don't think that was necessary, i feel like you'rre taking everything that's being said personally as some kind of attack on you and you're acting defensively for some reason
The part about him not coming across as sincere about the things he has been caught on video/audio saying, again your response comes across as very defensive and a bit childish, it's like you again didn't read what i wrote, but skimmed across it and just reacted to parts off it, the part in question was also very opinion heavy on my part and i said that many times, also, just to answer your question, someone doesn't have to cry or make a big show and dance about something to be sincere, he could truly be sorry about those things he said, but to me and like i said before, for me personally, i never felt like he was being sincere (again, my opinion, not fact, just how he came across to me personally)
As for the Clinton foundation, like i said, i don't know much about it, but someone as smart and intelligent as Trump (i may not like the guy on a personal level, but people who think that he is dumb are very naive) wouldn't donate millions and millions on a foundation without knowing about it and as for him just being close to the Clinton's, they were close friends, but he turned on them during his campaign, he questioned Bill's time in office and Hilary's time as a senator, he did that a lot, but there is an interview he did in 2008 and i know that's quite a long time ago, where he praises and defends both Bills time in office (he even says he thought he did a fantastic job) he also praised Hilary and what she had done in her time as a senator and he even mentioned the Clinton Foundation and how wonderful it is, so yeah, for me and again, this is just my opinion, he is not a man to be trusted, especially if he can turn on people he considered a friend so quickly
Trump isn't a good person, not in my opinion anyway, but in life, you don't need to be a good person to do your job and i think in a lot of ways, his personality will help him as president, as much as it could hold him back at times and i think over the 4 years, we will see him grow into the role and i really do hope he surprises everyone and America progresses
i know i said i wouldn't provide links, but here are a couple that i find interesting and i think are relavant to what i've said
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qhRfEDqlv0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2Obeu_VYY4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not like I can stop these kids from burning down their campuses or from rioting in the streets when they're told the president is insane, in control of a massive nuclear arsenal he wants to make even bigger, is a racist and a bigot, beats his wife, thinks all women are sex objects, slept with his daughter, and is only biding his time before he destroys the world.
I'm not going to change a mind about joining a riot to shut down some speaker's event and threaten his life wearing paramilitary clothing.
Seriously. And why bother fighting it on a site that I enjoy for reasons that it gets me away from politics.
The last thing I want to do is be a spokesperson for the Republican party. I can't stop the press from printing what they want to print, and I can't keep people from believing it and acting on it.
Whatever happens will happen if I post at a million sites about it.
I'm going to smoke a bowl, think about what I'm going to do when my name comes up in the layoffs, which start next week, and ignore the news. To hell with it.
This is a battle I don't care to fight that hard. I'm no online opinion writer and I don't want to be. I don't want to spend so much time figuring out what's made up and what's not. I'm just worried that I've seen the start of the end. I've never seen such bigotry and hatred spewed at someone so constantly and so outrageously. Openly calling out for violent riots and bloodshed in the streets. Over what?
Go ahead. The guy's no saint, but he's no Clinton, and they're just pissed they couldn't foist her onto us, so they're trying to make him worse than the Clintons. And people are sucking it up and going nuts.
Maybe it's time to invest in dry goods and a remote home.
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dgt224
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Location: USA
Registered: May 2011
Messages: 81
|
|
|
"Smokr wrote on Sun, 26 February 2017 02:42"My problem with the Oxford definition is that the inclusion of the words 'right-wing' clearly denoting a left-wing bias. Fascism is neither really left or right and can be considered one or the other or even both. But not to Oxford. Only right-wingers can be fascists.
Actually, the definition you link to is consistent with the general use of "left wing" and "right wing" in political science circles. Fascism is one of the extremes of the right, while communism is one of the extremes of the left. Getting upset that a dictionary associates one group of bad guys with the side you prefer is no more rational than it would be for me to get upset that the political science nerds label libertarians (like myself) as right-wing. Perhaps it's just that I've seen so much libertarian propaganda complaining about the limitations of the whole left-right paradigm, but I find it very difficult to care very much about those labels.
And for the record I would like to correct my previous message, which identified the definition in question as coming from the OED. It does not; it is from an on-line dictionary associated with Oxford University, but the actual OED (at www.oed.com) has a much more nuanced definition, which discusses fascism during the period between the two World Wars and then includes this: "(later also) an extreme right-wing political ideology based on the principles underlying this system." So again, saying that fascism is right-wing, which is not the same as saying that right-wing is fascist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dgt224
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Location: USA
Registered: May 2011
Messages: 81
|
|
|
"Smokr wrote on Sun, 26 February 2017 02:42"The reason there have been no investigations is that you have to bring evidence or standing to begin an investigation. You can't just say something and demand an investigation, or congress would do nothing but investigate. The rules require evidence and substantiation. I won't use caps... there is no evidence or substantiation to bring standing to place any request for an investigation committee to be form, let alone any investigation. ...
Democratic Senators have requested that the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations undertake an investigation of the alleged ties between the Trump administration and the Russian government. Under the Rules of Procedure of that subcommittee, an investigation can be undertaken with the joint approval of the Chairman and the Ranking Minority Member of the subcommittee; so far all such requests have been denied by the Republican Chairman of the subcommittee. If you read the Rules of Procedure (see the PDF here - from two years ago, but that's the latest version linked from senate.gov) you'll see that there is no requirement to show evidence or standing in order to begin an investigation.
It would be trivial for President Trump to ask the Chairman of the subcommittee to accept such a request; I presume that if he did so in order to lay to rest the various claims of undue Russian influence in the election and in administration actions since the inauguration, the investigation would take place. If there is indeed no evidence, it should not take much investigation to establish that fact. If, as has been reported in the media, various intelligence agencies have reported evidence of Russian meddling in the election, the subcommittee should be evaluating those reports; if the media reports are false, establishing a Senate investigation into the subject should make that clear in short order.
I find it quite troubling that the Senate has the power to investigate the question of Russian influence and chooses not to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jackboy
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Location: North UK
Registered: August 2016
Messages: 69
|
|
|
I have great pleasure in agreeing with you William - Except for the bit about applause for the current tenant of the White House. In the interests only of balance, I would not applause him, ever.
He has an awful habit of talking from the hip, and one day, he will get not only the USA, (whom I happen to care for), but also, all of us in the West into a lot of trouble. Perhaps even 'The last great war Humankind will ever see'.
It's all very well for people to say the election of that person is an internal issue;
whilst in denial of the World outside. But as a member of that World, I'll say just remember what happens when too much power is given (or taken) to one individual.
(EG: Stalin, Hitler, Amin, Saddam, Pol Pot-head, di d, di da, di da. And at times even Cameron.
His policies were responsible for thousands of deaths, when he declared war on ALL those on Benefits,
The Disabled and Old; and once nearly my own).
I just want to see the record straight.
All the best.
Jack.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jackboy
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Location: North UK
Registered: August 2016
Messages: 69
|
|
|
I agree Timmy.
BTW- my previous post was just an effort at Balance.
But it would be a shame to see things break down to a wild debate with nobody listening to anyone.
However I know you won't allow that. I DO consider this a 'Safe Place' and a friendly place,
in which to share; and enjoy all the works of fellow members.
God bless the 'Place of Safety' - and all who sail in her.
Jack.
[Updated on: Tue, 28 February 2017 19:03] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
Quote:Jackboy wrote on Tue, 28 February 2017 18:59I agree Timmy.
BTW- my previous post was just an effort at Balance.
But it would be a shame to see things break down to a wild debate with nobody listening to anyone.
However I know you won't allow that. I DO consider this a 'Safe Place' and a friendly place,
in which to share; and enjoy all the works of fellow members.
God bless the 'Place of Safety' - and all who sail in her.
Jack.
--
Well, Jack, we start by deprecating 'debate' which has winners and losers. In a debate we try hard to win for our side.
Instead we discuss, which, at first, seems similar, but is different in that there are no losers. INstead there is the chance to persuade rather than to cajole.
We have spats sometimes. They pass, usually as quickly as this spat has. Smokr and others remain welcome to offer opinions, with the proviso that they are offered thoughtfully and well. However difficult the topic we are able to approach it with sense and knowledge that we have done our best to offend no-one. Well, with the exception of those who abuse children.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jackboy
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Location: North UK
Registered: August 2016
Messages: 69
|
|
|
Oh yes, absolutely.
And while we're about it, I wish our American friends would stop sending their little second-hand gifts,
such as Hurricanes Doris and Ewen? Luckily I seem to have slept through the worst of either one LOL.
Jack.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Registered: February 2015
Messages: 73
|
|
|
I agree with you in that regard Smokr, thats why despite my personal opinion of Trump and i stand by that opinion
I think people need to accept that he is tge president and stop trying to undermine him and while they dont have to like or respect him,m i do think they should respect that he is the president and judge him for what he does over the next 4 years
I think the news/media are doing a poor job in what theyre focusing on and when people see those things they react to it, of course he could go down as the worst president in your history, his personality does appear to support that
But i do believe he should be given a chance, because again he is the president and i know people have a right to protest and express their opinions, ive done just that in my posts here
But i do believe that while we may not like him, he does have tge potential to do good and make some good changes and i also believe that when he attempts to do something stupid or tries to pass unethical new rules/laws tge senate/congress and the courts will step in, just like they did with that executive order on those immagrants being blocked from entering the country
So yeah, i may not like him on a persobal level, but i think he could surprise people and i hope people give him a chance and not write him off straight away, although they may be proven right, until he actually does something dangerous or unethical and then that is tge time to protest and question if he is fit for office
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
"Matthew wrote on Wed, 01 March 2017 15:41"I think people need to accept that he is tge president and stop trying to undermine him and while they dont have to like or respect him,m i do think they should respect that he is the president and judge him for what he does over the next 4 years
--
Part of democracy and the entire democratic process is lawful protest. One cannot just sit by and be grateful for an elected president when one does not agree. The ballot box comes past but rarely. Personal protest may be performed every day. What if one sees an opportunity for the legitimate and lawful protest for or against something? What if one sees the opportunity to use the law of the land to overturn a president, a government?
If one perceives major injustice, tyranny, in one's president, government, surely it is one's duty to seek to overturn that using all lawful means?
If one is a US citizen I believe the 2nd Amendment actually requires one to do that, and is lawful, though how one invokes it I have no idea.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Registered: February 2015
Messages: 73
|
|
|
Quote:timmy wrote on Wed, 01 March 2017 21:56
"Matthew wrote on Wed, 01 March 2017 15:41"I think people need to accept that he is tge president and stop trying to undermine him and while they dont have to like or respect him,m i do think they should respect that he is the president and judge him for what he does over the next 4 years
--
Part of democracy and the entire democratic process is lawful protest. One cannot just sit by and be grateful for an elected president when one does not agree. The ballot box comes past but rarely. Personal protest may be performed every day. What if one sees an opportunity for the legitimate and lawful protest for or against something? What if one sees the opportunity to use the law of the land to overturn a president, a government?
If one perceives major injustice, tyranny, in one's president, government, surely it is one's duty to seek to overturn that using all lawful means?
If one is a US citizen I believe the 2nd Amendment actually requires one to do that, and is lawful, though how one invokes it I have no idea.
--
No argument against what you've said, but as of right now, Trump hasn't really done anything as president, that i would say calls into question his ability to be president, if/when he does, than i hope the people and those in power do protest and call him into question and if he makes serious errors of judgment that puts lives of people in danger directly, than he should be held accountable
But like i've said, i don't like Trump, i really don't, but so far, he hasn't done anything in office, that tells me he is unsuitable and he should be judged on what he does in office and how he conducts himself
Personally, i think he has a high chance of going down in history as the worst president of the united states, but at the same time, he's only just begun and maybe, just maybe, he could prove myself and a lot of people wrong, but he needs to be given the chance and whether he takes that chance or not, is down to him
I doon't think i madde it clear enough in my other post, but to clarify, i don't think people should stop protesting or expressing their opinions, but some of it, at least what's been reported and what we've seen online and on the news ect, i think goes a bit too far, there are way, way more peaceful and sensible protests happening and i think it's a shame we don't get more coverage of those, but i guess those don't get the viewing figures that the more animated and somwhat hostile protests can obtain
So yeah, protesting is good and everyone's right, but there is a right way to protest and a wrong way and when people do it the wrong way, i think it almost becomes as bad as the thing they're protesting, but that's just a personal opinion
Out of curiosity, has a president ever been removed from office before? I'm English so i really don't know if it's ever happened, but i am curious about it
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
I have seen enough, Matthew.
Last night Trump exploited the wife of the Navy SEAL that he, as Commander in Chief, ordered in to the Yemen, focussing in her grief in the joint address to Congress. He also threw his generals under the bus by saying, as Commander in Chief, that it was their fault and they "lost" Petty Officer Ryan.
The buck stops at the Commander in Chief.
Ignore any lying, any GOP or DNC politics, any accusations of links to Russia, Any nepotism, any appointing billionaires to the swamp he is meant to be draining, any misogynism This "It wasn't ME" approach to the huge responsibility of being President of the United States alone says he is unfit to serve. It is not to early in his presidency to make that statement
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
