Jump to content


The General Election


Recommended Posts


 

 

Wow, spoken like a true Hillary supporter.

 

 

I wear that as a badge of honor. Or, at least, a badge that allows me to sleep at night.

 

 

 

 

First off, I don't want to hear anything about the Angel Moms when the media spent non-stop time covering the Khans after the DNC (and before Trump took on the Khans). They deserve just as much if not more airtime than the Khans received yet there is little coverage of them.

 

Incorrect. Mr. Khan, of his own volition (not paid and/or having his speech written by the Clinton campaign, despite whatever Fox News is pushing), chose to deride the ONE individual who decided to pigeonhole his religion (and the religion of millions more Americans, just as American as you or me) as that of an unsafe "other" that should be kept as far away from America as possible for our own safety.

 

Khan went after Trump and challenged him on the basis of his knowledge of the Constitution. Predictably, Trump threw a hissy fit and made a ridiculous, ignorant statement about Khan's treatment of his wife (who was silent because she was GRIEVING), and suggested Khan didn't have the right to challenge him in such a way. Ironically, the First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees him that very right. Either Khan was right, or Trump is an idiot. Or both.

 

Trump trotted Angel Moms out onstage to try to once again pigeonhole and broad brush another group of brown people (undocumented immigrants) as a murderous, dangerous group we need protected from. Once again, facts do not back up this portrayal of illegals; they indicate the opposite-- they're MORE law-abiding than American citizens.

 

One man went after an entire religion of folks as dangerous, anti-American, and out to get us.

 

One man went went after the first man for attacking his religion and making arguably un-Constitutional assertions.

 

Do you see the difference?

 

 

 

Now, as for immigration policy, do you approve of illegals coming across the border with no repercussion? If so please explain why you feel this is a fair policy when we have a legal immigration policy that many good people are following?

 

I'd rather we have people go through the proper channels. But I grew up around a lot of illegals, and-- I know this will strike some as weird, but stick with me-- I just thought of them as PEOPLE. Not dangerous criminals. Not lawbreaking threats to our way of life. PEOPLE. And mostly damn good people, at that.

 

So, from a human perspective, I'm not going to crap on an individual or individual(s) who migrate here from Mexico to try to live the American dream and make a better life for themselves. Especially when so much of Mexico is a cartel-infested s***hole. The empathetic being in me wants people to get away from that.

 

Why do they have any less right to a decent life than I do? Because I was lucky enough to be born here? This doesn't make sense to me, and never will.

 

 

 

Do you approve of illegals who have committed a crime from getting to stay in this country?

 

No. I don't approve of anyone committing a crime. That has not been my experience with the undocumented folks I know. They just wanted to live their life peacefully, like anyone else.

 

 

 

And do you approve of hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees from entering the country even if we do not have any background information on them?

 

You should probably take a look at Landlord's post #84 from the "Hillary: If you don't believe..." thread.

 

That's one of the more blatant lies Trump uses to prop up his ridiculous hardline Muslim ban. Besides, we only just crossed the 10K barrier a couple of days ago. And, yes, I actually do. I don't live in fear of Syrian refugees, and I trust our government to vet them with that nifty process Landlord pointed out. No system is perfect, you can never catch 100% of bad actors (despite Trump and Republicans acting like Obama is too stupid to find the "oh so easy" solution), but no I don't fear that. And they're caught in a war zone and being subjected to chemical gassing right now.

 

The human being and Christian in me wants us to help them. I know that makes me a horrible person. I'm sorry.

 

One thing that the far left outlets seem to be missing from Trumps immigration speech is that he actually softened his stance on deportation for those illegals who have not committed a crime, but his tough talk seem to blow their minds to the point they could not pick up on this point. If you go back and listen to the speech, he said that once all other points in his plan are covered, the idea of allowing these illegals to work to a path of citizenship would be entertained.

 

He also said that he was forming a deportation force and that they were ALL going to be deported.

The only one saying Trump is softening his stance are Trump and his sycophants now. The media writ large stopped after that speech.

 

 

It's clear you will only see what you want to see. Here's the difference between the Khan case and the Angel moms. In the case of the loss of Khan's son, Trump had nothing to do with his death. In fact HIllary is the one that voted in favor of the war. Meanwhile, in the case of the Angel moms, you can attribute Democratic policies toward border insecurity, sanctuary cities, etc...toward the death of their children. Big difference. And of course you are seeing little press coverage of the Angel moms and it would solidify that Trump's policy toward putting Americans first is the right policy.

 

As for illegals committing crimes, just because you have not encountered that does not mean that has not happened often. It's like me saying I've never known anyone personally who has been killed by a gun so those on the left should never worry about gun violence. Your anecdotal experience is not representative of reality.

 

Regarding allowing illegals in this country, having empathy for those in the world struggling is a fine stance to take...but that assumes we have addressed all the challenges that our citizens are struggling with first. When we have income inequality on the rise, and more Americans than ever on food stamps, coupled with a growing debt problem that will hinder our ability to continue to offer programs like Social Security, we must fix our own issues for our own citizens first. Plus, our laws do not allow for illegals to come here whenever they want. It's AGAINST THE LAW. If you don't like the law, focus your energy on electing representatives to change that law. Until then, it will continue to remain a violation of laws we have established as a sovereign nation.

Link to comment

Trump's outreach to the black community continues, with a speech to a black congregation today in which he got a standing ovation. I'm sure some on the left will continue to criticize for his outreach. Perhaps this time it will be that there weren't enough blacks in the audience, or they were just Christian African Americans.

 

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/09/video-donald-trump-receives-standing-ovation-detroit-great-faith-ministries-church/

Link to comment

Trump's outreach to the black community continues, with a speech to a black congregation today in which he got a standing ovation. I'm sure some on the left will continue to criticize for his outreach. Perhaps this time it will be that there weren't enough blacks in the audience, or they were just Christian African Americans.

 

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/09/video-donald-trump-receives-standing-ovation-detroit-great-faith-ministries-church/

You and your conservative news sources.

  • Fire 1
Link to comment

It's clear you will only see what you want to see. Here's the difference between the Khan case and the Angel moms. In the case of the loss of Khan's son, Trump had nothing to do with his death. In fact HIllary is the one that voted in favor of the war. Meanwhile, in the case of the Angel moms, you can attribute Democratic policies toward border insecurity, sanctuary cities, etc...toward the death of their children. Big difference. And of course you are seeing little press coverage of the Angel moms and it would solidify that Trump's policy toward putting Americans first is the right policy.

 

 

I saw that the Angel Moms were labeled a hate group today because the shameless way Trump brought them out on stage to try to bastardize illegal immigrants. You can take issue with the media creating that narrative, but I take issue with Trump using them as a political prop, as well. So we can both take something to dislike out of this.

 

 

 

As for illegals committing crimes, just because you have not encountered that does not mean that has not happened often. It's like me saying I've never known anyone personally who has been killed by a gun so those on the left should never worry about gun violence. Your anecdotal experience is not representative of reality.

What is reality, exactly? Why should the Angel Mom's anecdotal evidence count any more than my own?

 

The reality is Trump continues to distort reality and lie about the threat posed to us by illegal immigrants.

 

Here's some reading for you to do about that.

 

The Mythical Connection Between Immigrants and Crime

 

Surprise! Donald Trump is wrong about immigrants and crime.

 

Immigrants are Less Likely to be Criminals than Native-Born

 

Public Study: Illegal Immigrants Commit Less Crime Than Americans

 

Immigration and Crime-- What the Research Says

 

(Just in case the Washington Post is too ​liberal for you, I included links from the WSJ, Judicial Watch, and the Cato Institute)

 

 

Regarding allowing illegals in this country, having empathy for those in the world struggling is a fine stance to take...but that assumes we have addressed all the challenges that our citizens are struggling with first. When we have income inequality on the rise, and more Americans than ever on food stamps, coupled with a growing debt problem that will hinder our ability to continue to offer programs like Social Security, we must fix our own issues for our own citizens first. Plus, our laws do not allow for illegals to come here whenever they want. It's AGAINST THE LAW. If you don't like the law, focus your energy on electing representatives to change that law. Until then, it will continue to remain a violation of laws we have established as a sovereign nation.

 

What the hell is Donald Trump's plan to fix income inequality? He wants to slash taxes on the rich by almost 7%. And cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 15%. At least that's the tax plan his advisors finally spit out and that he's currently running on. Lord knows it'll probably be different this time next week.

 

Furthermore, how is that supposed to remedy our debt problem? Less tax revenue is going to make that pretty damn tough unless we slash everything. Is it going to "unleash" the economy? And how is he going to address that food stamps issue? I've heard him complain about it and tout that stat all day long. What's he going to do about it.

 

Again, I've explained my stance on illegal immigrants. They should have a bridge to citizenship. The more sane people on the right believe that. The hardline knuckleheads want to kick everyone out. Gotta follow that Constitution to the letter, it's not a living document, dontcha know?!

 

I'd have an easier time taking those hardliners seriously in their stance if it wasn't a bunch of old, paunchy white dudes completely comfortable in their own circumstances.

Link to comment

Life gave us a great commentary on regulations today. 5.6 magnitude earthquake strikes Oklahoma, tremors are felt hundreds of miles away, but there are no deaths and very little property damage. Why? Because regulations stipulate that buildings are constructed to sufficient strength that they don't collapse.

 

Contrast that with the 5.6 magnitude quake from 2014 in Yunnan Province in China where over 9,000 homes were destroyed. Or the 2012 Yunnan earthquake that killed more than 80 people. Or the 2008 earthquake from Sichuan that killed more than 40 people.

 

Regulations serve a purpose.

  • Fire 4
Link to comment

Life gave us a great commentary on regulations today. 5.6 magnitude earthquake strikes Oklahoma, tremors are felt hundreds of miles away, but there are no deaths and very little property damage. Why? Because regulations stipulate that buildings are constructed to sufficient strength that they don't collapse.

 

Contrast that with the 5.6 magnitude quake from 2014 in Yunnan Province in China where over 9,000 homes were destroyed. Or the 2012 Yunnan earthquake that killed more than 80 people. Or the 2008 earthquake from Sichuan that killed more than 40 people.

 

Regulations serve a purpose.

 

 

NO THEY DON'T !!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111ONEONEONE.

 

THEY HURT CAPITALISM. THEY HURTS OUR ECONOMY! FREE MARKET. NO LIMITS. FREEDOM. USA! USA! USA!

Link to comment

Life gave us a great commentary on regulations today. 5.6 magnitude earthquake strikes Oklahoma, tremors are felt hundreds of miles away, but there are no deaths and very little property damage. Why? Because regulations stipulate that buildings are constructed to sufficient strength that they don't collapse.

 

Contrast that with the 5.6 magnitude quake from 2014 in Yunnan Province in China where over 9,000 homes were destroyed. Or the 2012 Yunnan earthquake that killed more than 80 people. Or the 2008 earthquake from Sichuan that killed more than 40 people.

 

Regulations serve a purpose.

 

 

I realize my posts talked about regulations, that was my fault, I should have said excessive regulations, those are hurting the economy.. like the EPA regulations regarding man made climate change, which is why VW is in the mess the are in. TDI's before 2009 are ok to drive, but all of a sudden after 2008, regulations made it so that car manufacturers had to cheat. it isn't just Volkswagen.

Link to comment

 

It's clear you will only see what you want to see. Here's the difference between the Khan case and the Angel moms. In the case of the loss of Khan's son, Trump had nothing to do with his death. In fact HIllary is the one that voted in favor of the war. Meanwhile, in the case of the Angel moms, you can attribute Democratic policies toward border insecurity, sanctuary cities, etc...toward the death of their children. Big difference. And of course you are seeing little press coverage of the Angel moms and it would solidify that Trump's policy toward putting Americans first is the right policy.

 

 

I saw that the Angel Moms were labeled a hate group today because the shameless way Trump brought them out on stage to try to bastardize illegal immigrants. You can take issue with the media creating that narrative, but I take issue with Trump using them as a political prop, as well. So we can both take something to dislike out of this.

 

 

 

As for illegals committing crimes, just because you have not encountered that does not mean that has not happened often. It's like me saying I've never known anyone personally who has been killed by a gun so those on the left should never worry about gun violence. Your anecdotal experience is not representative of reality.

What is reality, exactly? Why should the Angel Mom's anecdotal evidence count any more than my own?

 

The reality is Trump continues to distort reality and lie about the threat posed to us by illegal immigrants.

 

Here's some reading for you to do about that.

 

The Mythical Connection Between Immigrants and Crime

 

Surprise! Donald Trump is wrong about immigrants and crime.

 

Immigrants are Less Likely to be Criminals than Native-Born

 

Public Study: Illegal Immigrants Commit Less Crime Than Americans

 

Immigration and Crime-- What the Research Says

 

(Just in case the Washington Post is too ​liberal for you, I included links from the WSJ, Judicial Watch, and the Cato Institute)

 

 

Regarding allowing illegals in this country, having empathy for those in the world struggling is a fine stance to take...but that assumes we have addressed all the challenges that our citizens are struggling with first. When we have income inequality on the rise, and more Americans than ever on food stamps, coupled with a growing debt problem that will hinder our ability to continue to offer programs like Social Security, we must fix our own issues for our own citizens first. Plus, our laws do not allow for illegals to come here whenever they want. It's AGAINST THE LAW. If you don't like the law, focus your energy on electing representatives to change that law. Until then, it will continue to remain a violation of laws we have established as a sovereign nation.

 

What the hell is Donald Trump's plan to fix income inequality? He wants to slash taxes on the rich by almost 7%. And cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 15%. At least that's the tax plan his advisors finally spit out and that he's currently running on. Lord knows it'll probably be different this time next week.

 

Furthermore, how is that supposed to remedy our debt problem? Less tax revenue is going to make that pretty damn tough unless we slash everything. Is it going to "unleash" the economy? And how is he going to address that food stamps issue? I've heard him complain about it and tout that stat all day long. What's he going to do about it.

 

Again, I've explained my stance on illegal immigrants. They should have a bridge to citizenship. The more sane people on the right believe that. The hardline knuckleheads want to kick everyone out. Gotta follow that Constitution to the letter, it's not a living document, dontcha know?!

 

I'd have an easier time taking those hardliners seriously in their stance if it wasn't a bunch of old, paunchy white dudes completely comfortable in their own circumstances.

 

 

Nobody ever said that illegals are more likely to commit crimes. You are missing the entire point. If they weren't here, we would (and should) not have any crimes from illegals, period. There would be no angel moms if we had followed the current laws on the book as their children would still be alive today. What Trump and many in this nation are seeking is for the government to do its job. The number one job of a government is to keep its citizens safe...well before any entitlement or social justice program. A government must also adhere to the laws that have been implemented, and we are not following those laws today.

Link to comment

 

 

It's clear you will only see what you want to see. Here's the difference between the Khan case and the Angel moms. In the case of the loss of Khan's son, Trump had nothing to do with his death. In fact HIllary is the one that voted in favor of the war. Meanwhile, in the case of the Angel moms, you can attribute Democratic policies toward border insecurity, sanctuary cities, etc...toward the death of their children. Big difference. And of course you are seeing little press coverage of the Angel moms and it would solidify that Trump's policy toward putting Americans first is the right policy.

 

 

I saw that the Angel Moms were labeled a hate group today because the shameless way Trump brought them out on stage to try to bastardize illegal immigrants. You can take issue with the media creating that narrative, but I take issue with Trump using them as a political prop, as well. So we can both take something to dislike out of this.

 

 

 

As for illegals committing crimes, just because you have not encountered that does not mean that has not happened often. It's like me saying I've never known anyone personally who has been killed by a gun so those on the left should never worry about gun violence. Your anecdotal experience is not representative of reality.

What is reality, exactly? Why should the Angel Mom's anecdotal evidence count any more than my own?

 

The reality is Trump continues to distort reality and lie about the threat posed to us by illegal immigrants.

 

Here's some reading for you to do about that.

 

The Mythical Connection Between Immigrants and Crime

 

Surprise! Donald Trump is wrong about immigrants and crime.

 

Immigrants are Less Likely to be Criminals than Native-Born

 

Public Study: Illegal Immigrants Commit Less Crime Than Americans

 

Immigration and Crime-- What the Research Says

 

(Just in case the Washington Post is too ​liberal for you, I included links from the WSJ, Judicial Watch, and the Cato Institute)

 

 

Regarding allowing illegals in this country, having empathy for those in the world struggling is a fine stance to take...but that assumes we have addressed all the challenges that our citizens are struggling with first. When we have income inequality on the rise, and more Americans than ever on food stamps, coupled with a growing debt problem that will hinder our ability to continue to offer programs like Social Security, we must fix our own issues for our own citizens first. Plus, our laws do not allow for illegals to come here whenever they want. It's AGAINST THE LAW. If you don't like the law, focus your energy on electing representatives to change that law. Until then, it will continue to remain a violation of laws we have established as a sovereign nation.

 

What the hell is Donald Trump's plan to fix income inequality? He wants to slash taxes on the rich by almost 7%. And cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 15%. At least that's the tax plan his advisors finally spit out and that he's currently running on. Lord knows it'll probably be different this time next week.

 

Furthermore, how is that supposed to remedy our debt problem? Less tax revenue is going to make that pretty damn tough unless we slash everything. Is it going to "unleash" the economy? And how is he going to address that food stamps issue? I've heard him complain about it and tout that stat all day long. What's he going to do about it.

 

Again, I've explained my stance on illegal immigrants. They should have a bridge to citizenship. The more sane people on the right believe that. The hardline knuckleheads want to kick everyone out. Gotta follow that Constitution to the letter, it's not a living document, dontcha know?!

 

I'd have an easier time taking those hardliners seriously in their stance if it wasn't a bunch of old, paunchy white dudes completely comfortable in their own circumstances.

 

 

Nobody ever said that illegals are more likely to commit crimes. You are missing the entire point. If they weren't here, we would (and should) not have any crimes from illegals, period. There would be no angel moms if we had followed the current laws on the book as their children would still be alive today. What Trump and many in this nation are seeking is for the government to do its job. The number one job of a government is to keep its citizens safe...well before any entitlement or social justice program. A government must also adhere to the laws that have been implemented, and we are not following those laws today.

 

 

That's the beautiful thing about government. We all think it should function differently. Prioritize different things.

 

Vote your interests in the fall. I'll do the same. We'll see what America wants.

Link to comment

 

Life gave us a great commentary on regulations today. 5.6 magnitude earthquake strikes Oklahoma, tremors are felt hundreds of miles away, but there are no deaths and very little property damage. Why? Because regulations stipulate that buildings are constructed to sufficient strength that they don't collapse.

Contrast that with the 5.6 magnitude quake from 2014 in Yunnan Province in China where over 9,000 homes were destroyed. Or the 2012 Yunnan earthquake that killed more than 80 people. Or the 2008 earthquake from Sichuan that killed more than 40 people.

Regulations serve a purpose.

 

 

I realize my posts talked about regulations, that was my fault, I should have said excessive regulations, those are hurting the economy.. like the EPA regulations regarding man made climate change, which is why VW is in the mess the are in. TDI's before 2009 are ok to drive, but all of a sudden after 2008, regulations made it so that car manufacturers had to cheat. it isn't just Volkswagen.

They did not have to cheat. Their engineers elected to cheat. Plenty of other manufacturers did not do this. Further more these regulations level the playing field. If they are forced to meet the same regs no one can neglect health and safety to boost the bottom line over a competitor. You really think the indusrty would move to cleaner more efficient cars if the government didn't pushed them to?
Link to comment

 

 

Life gave us a great commentary on regulations today. 5.6 magnitude earthquake strikes Oklahoma, tremors are felt hundreds of miles away, but there are no deaths and very little property damage. Why? Because regulations stipulate that buildings are constructed to sufficient strength that they don't collapse.

Contrast that with the 5.6 magnitude quake from 2014 in Yunnan Province in China where over 9,000 homes were destroyed. Or the 2012 Yunnan earthquake that killed more than 80 people. Or the 2008 earthquake from Sichuan that killed more than 40 people.

Regulations serve a purpose.

 

I realize my posts talked about regulations, that was my fault, I should have said excessive regulations, those are hurting the economy.. like the EPA regulations regarding man made climate change, which is why VW is in the mess the are in. TDI's before 2009 are ok to drive, but all of a sudden after 2008, regulations made it so that car manufacturers had to cheat. it isn't just Volkswagen.

They did not have to cheat. Their engineers elected to cheat. Plenty of other manufacturers did not do this. Further more these regulations level the playing field. If they are forced to meet the same regs no one can neglect health and safety to boost the bottom line over a competitor. You really think the indusrty would move to cleaner more efficient cars if the government didn't pushed them to?

 

 

 

Sure they would if the buying public forced them. Government isn't the answer to everything, shocker for some, I know.

 

Capitalism has always done a good job of pushing companies to change... Without government control!

 

EDIT: Like I said before, I know all about the situation.. I have two of those cars.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

Life gave us a great commentary on regulations today. 5.6 magnitude earthquake strikes Oklahoma, tremors are felt hundreds of miles away, but there are no deaths and very little property damage. Why? Because regulations stipulate that buildings are constructed to sufficient strength that they don't collapse.

Contrast that with the 5.6 magnitude quake from 2014 in Yunnan Province in China where over 9,000 homes were destroyed. Or the 2012 Yunnan earthquake that killed more than 80 people. Or the 2008 earthquake from Sichuan that killed more than 40 people.

Regulations serve a purpose.

 

I realize my posts talked about regulations, that was my fault, I should have said excessive regulations, those are hurting the economy.. like the EPA regulations regarding man made climate change, which is why VW is in the mess the are in. TDI's before 2009 are ok to drive, but all of a sudden after 2008, regulations made it so that car manufacturers had to cheat. it isn't just Volkswagen.

They did not have to cheat. Their engineers elected to cheat. Plenty of other manufacturers did not do this. Further more these regulations level the playing field. If they are forced to meet the same regs no one can neglect health and safety to boost the bottom line over a competitor. You really think the indusrty would move to cleaner more efficient cars if the government didn't pushed them to?

 

Sure they would if the buying public forced them. Government isn't the answer to everything, shocker for some, I know.

 

Capitalism has always done a good job of pushing companies to change... Without government control!

 

EDIT: Like I said before, I know all about the situation.. I have two of those cars.

Really? What do you call companies who are doing somehing that causes cancer, know about it, and continue to donit until they're caught. Did they stop causing cancer due to healthy competition or because they were caught?

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...