So basically, it’s ok if Trump lashes out, because the OT forum allows Frink to lash out. I guess that’s a sort of Modus Ponens.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/09/us/arizona-guadalupe-garcia-de-rayos-protests/index.html
ICE: Case worked its way through system.
ICE officials, however, said the case had been working its way through the system and that the time for Garcia de Rayos to be deported had come. “Ms. Garcia’s immigration case underwent review at multiple levels of the immigration court system, including the Board of Immigration Appeals, and the judges held she did not have a legal basis to remain in the U.S.,” ICE said in a statement. “ICE will continue to focus on identifying and removing individuals with felony convictions who have final orders of removal issued by the nation’s immigration courts.”
Wait, I thought CNN was fake news?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-putin-idUSKBN15O2A5
In his first call as president with Russian leader Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump denounced a treaty that caps U.S. and Russian deployment of nuclear warheads as a bad deal for the United States, according to two U.S. officials and one former U.S. official with knowledge of the call.
When Putin raised the possibility of extending the 2010 treaty, known as New START, Trump paused to ask his aides in an aside what the treaty was, these sources said.
[slams head into desk repeatedly]
Don’t worry Frink… it’s Reuters so I’m sure DT will confirm that it’s fake news.
For the Trump supporters here… do you support his stand on asset forfeiture?
You mean his stand of being ignorant of it?
https://reason.com/blog/2017/02/09/trump-does-not-know-what-civil-forfeitur
Wow! That’s amazing. Nobody’s telling him that it means taking anything - cash, cars, whatever (and then keeping it even if the person is found innocent). This is a great example of how easy it must be to manipulate the Donald.
For the Trump supporters here… do you support his stand on asset forfeiture? I understand that it is pro-law-enforcement, but isn’t it also against conservative ideals on personal property and limits on government power?
It is my belief that law enforcement should at least be able to put a legal hold on property until they can ascertain the validity of the legal issue. This way it would protect the interest of each side while allowing the process to work as intended. I believe that the intent of his stand is to take the burden off of the taxpayers.
Except that under the current system, if you’re found not guilty (or even if you’re not charged), the burden is on you to hire a lawyer and PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE in order to get your stuff back. Few lawyers are willing to take such cases because proving one’s innocence is often impossible. Asset forfeiture is considered income and part of budget planning in many areas.
For the Trump supporters here… do you support his stand on asset forfeiture? I understand that it is pro-law-enforcement, but isn’t it also against conservative ideals on personal property and limits on government power?
Jetrell, you decry the lack of proper debate here. Some time ago I tried having a discussion with you, and since then I’ve decided not to try again. Debate was impossible, as the most basic laws of logic (modus ponens, etc.) seemed absent. By contrast most others here, even those with whom I disagree much more strongly, such as Ferris, do share a basis in verbal reasoning. If people don’t always respond to you, it may be out of frustration. My apologies for being so blunt.
Why? Why does he do this? Why does he lie when we all know the truth? What is wrong with him?
I believe that this is going to be the new mode of politics, and that it is here to stay. Trump has shown that what works in advertising on most buyers also works on most voters. Namely, it doesn’t matter what you say - all that matters is how you make the listener feel. There is absolutely no requirement for veracity whatsoever. There is nothing “wrong” with him - the discovery has begun a new era. Dark times ahead, that’s my opinion.
both the far-left and the far-right are every bit as despicable as they claim each other are.
False Equivalence™
I think that the far-left and far-right are both despicable and I think that both are a threat to American freedoms. Maybe in different ways, but both are despicable and threatening enough that I don’t prefer either.
Can you give a common example of something you consider to be “far left” and “a threat to American freedoms”? I ask because I consider myself pretty far to the left, and am not sure who I am threatening.
You can’t be that far left. He’s talking about those who would seek to impose Leftist policies on others, as Marx advocated.
I actually do think I’m pretty far to the left, by today’s standards. For example, people today seem to think that Obamacare is way left, but to me it seems quite centrist because it still retains a for-profit system at its base. Single payer would be much further to the left, and that’s what I believe would be better.
I agree.
Such as…? Who are these people and what are they advocating here in the U.S.?
I don’t think MFM is talking about the libertarian left, but rather the authoritarian left. The type of people who advocate for hate speech laws, for example.
Ok, that’s a better example. So, I know there was a hate-speech proposal in Quebec last year that drew some fire. Do you know if there were any such proposals here in the U.S. recently? I don’t remember that being one of the topics in any of the debates (maybe I’m not remembering).
both the far-left and the far-right are every bit as despicable as they claim each other are.
False Equivalence™
I think that the far-left and far-right are both despicable and I think that both are a threat to American freedoms. Maybe in different ways, but both are despicable and threatening enough that I don’t prefer either.
Can you give a common example of something you consider to be “far left” and “a threat to American freedoms”? I ask because I consider myself pretty far to the left, and am not sure who I am threatening.
have you ever protested in a manner that delayed an ambulance? I think that is the kind of extremist he is talking about.
How is protesting in a manner that delayed an ambulance specifically “far left”? Couldn’t a “far right” protester delay an ambulance? I was hoping for some examples that were specifically “far left”.
Okay, let me rephrase the question. Have you ever, while protesting some leftish cause, protested in a manner that delayed an ambulance?
Still not a good example. Protesting badly is not a left-wing policy. The leftist policy being advocated isn’t what blocked the ambulance.
Furthermore, protesting badly isn’t even necessarily “far left” or “far right”. Someone could protest badly AGAINST a far left or far right policy.
both the far-left and the far-right are every bit as despicable as they claim each other are.
False Equivalence™
I think that the far-left and far-right are both despicable and I think that both are a threat to American freedoms. Maybe in different ways, but both are despicable and threatening enough that I don’t prefer either.
Can you give a common example of something you consider to be “far left” and “a threat to American freedoms”? I ask because I consider myself pretty far to the left, and am not sure who I am threatening.
You can’t be that far left. He’s talking about those who would seek to impose Leftist policies on others, as Marx advocated.
Such as…? Who are these people and what are they advocating here in the U.S.?
I actually do think I’m pretty far to the left, by today’s standards. For example, people today seem to think that Obamacare is way left, but to me it seems quite centrist because it still retains a for-profit system at its base. Single payer would be much further to the left, and that’s what I believe would be better. I suppose that would threaten people’s freedom to not have health insurance?
I’m actually not trying to be sarcastic. It’s an honest question. I’d like to know how my beliefs are threatening people’s freedoms.
both the far-left and the far-right are every bit as despicable as they claim each other are.
False Equivalence™
I think that the far-left and far-right are both despicable and I think that both are a threat to American freedoms. Maybe in different ways, but both are despicable and threatening enough that I don’t prefer either.
Can you give a common example of something you consider to be “far left” and “a threat to American freedoms”? I ask because I consider myself pretty far to the left, and am not sure who I am threatening.
have you ever protested in a manner that delayed an ambulance? I think that is the kind of extremist he is talking about.
How is protesting in a manner that delayed an ambulance specifically “far left”? Couldn’t a “far right” protester delay an ambulance? I was hoping for some examples that were specifically “far left”.
both the far-left and the far-right are every bit as despicable as they claim each other are.
False Equivalence™
I think that the far-left and far-right are both despicable and I think that both are a threat to American freedoms. Maybe in different ways, but both are despicable and threatening enough that I don’t prefer either.
Can you give a common example of something you consider to be “far left” and “a threat to American freedoms”? I ask because I consider myself pretty far to the left, and am not sure who I am threatening.
Will anyone blame the evil which causes refugees?
I did, but it didn’t help them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VAWFGPXgEs
Airport Trump Protestor Gives Interview REGRETS It Immediately!!
As usual, reality is more complex:
http://www.snopes.com/trump-immigration-order-obama/
Stinky-Dinkins said:
People like me are savoring this in silence.
Perhaps his policies will help you. There will be winners and losers.
generalfrevious said:
We will not survive this.
If you want to persuade people on THIS forum, you shouldn’t use a line from the prequels. 😃
[from Washington Post article]…
“It’s a huge deal, because in the end you really can’t govern, and you can’t persuade people, if you do not have a common basis of fact.”
Sadly, I don’t believe this is the case anymore. Politicians seemed to have made a discovery: that having a basis for one’s claims is utterly irrelevant. You can say whatever you want, win elections, and govern, without any common basis of fact whatsoever. What IS required today is to capture a sufficient number of people’s imagination and effectively utilize their emotions. I don’t think this is going away soon… in fact, it was discovered by advertisers in the 1940s. It just took Washington a bit of time to catch up. And the implications going forward are quite serious, quite unpredictable, and almost certainly not good.
Why is it necessary to explain to Luke about the map?
Jetrell Fo said:
I believe Hillary Clinton to be just as guilty as Edward Snowden, of what they’re accused of, breaking Federal Law.
So, there’s this particular law, called “Federal Law”, and both of them broke that same law?
D.C. is a heavily democrat city, as evidenced by the high levels of educated people.
But what about the crime rate and the poverty levels? As well as those in New York, New Jersey, Oakland, Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, Dallas, New Orleans, Atlanta, etc. etc.
In an earlier thread, you asked about this, and I answered by providing a long list of low crime, high standard of living cities that were primarily democratic. Of course you ignored it.
When using Adblock browser, the top menu (“news”, “discussions”, etc.) doesn’t appear. So, to get to the forum, you have to type in www.originaltrilogy.com/discussions
Never heard of it.
- Kung Fu Panda
Can’t help it man, I love that movie!
