Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Antifa [Mod Warning on post #1 - updated 08/08/19]

13031333536184

Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭mynamejeff


    If this is the case, Donald trump thinks ilhan Omar is multiple people.

    So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe,

    Do you think that Donald Trump is under the impression that ilhan Omar is multiple people?

    If yes, do you think he is fit to be president?

    If no, then you agree that he was talking about all four women, including the three born and raised in the US.


    i think you are being intentionally obtuse and are ignoring the obvious and easily understood answer i have given to a question you asked , your shinny new profile might be effecting that ability .

    i dont care who is american president as im not american nor live in america .

    do you think he was talking about the one who was born in the still lawless and war torn country ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Since other Trump supporters are struggling to tell us, perhaps you can answer what countries Trump wants us born and raised citizens to "go home" to then?
    See post #1585 and #1571. No need for me to repeat it.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,137 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    mynamejeff wrote: »
    i think you are being intentionally obtuse and are ignoring the obvious and easily understood answer i have given to a question you asked , your shinny new profile might be effecting that ability .

    i dont care who is american president as im not american nor live in america .

    do you think he was talking about the one who was born in the still lawless and war torn country ?




    He was (by using the plural) referring to the four congresswomen.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 136 ✭✭FartyBlartFast


    notobtuse wrote: »
    You seem to be ignoring my question despite replying, so I'll ask again...


    I see you're using the 'majority of American citizens' line. If you're using approval ratings to back this up, should Trump leave the US too, along with mitch McConnell and the vast majority of all elected officials on both sides of the aisle as they are below 50% approval too?

    Or is it somehow different in the case of these four non white women?
    First, NYC does not represent the majority of American citizens.
    But Cortez does represent them, in her district at least. They elected her. End of.
    Second, if Trump cared more about select groups than Making America Great Again, yes, IMO he should 'go back' to where he came from...
    Since Trump does it care about liberals, democrats, journalists and so on. He has been explicitly, repeatedly clear on this. You are arguing that Trump go back where he came from.

    Pretty much every single politician in the US represents and cares about selected groups, so as per you just about every politician should "go back" to where they came from.

    You appear to be a supporter of Trump as us president (correct me if I am wrong here!) yet also want him to leave the US permanently and sooner rather than later.

    But where did Trump come from again? I'll give you a hint, Cortez is elected to represent a district there.

    And the same for nearly all of those politicians.

    Seriously man, you're tying yourself in knots here to justify something you are incapable of justifying.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 136 ✭✭FartyBlartFast


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Since other Trump supporters are struggling to tell us, perhaps you can answer what countries Trump wants us born and raised citizens to "go home" to then?
    See post #1585 and #1571. No need for me to repeat it.
    Neither of those even attempted to answer that question. I replied to them to show and state as much.

    It's very telling how eager you are to not dire tly answer this question under any circumstances.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 136 ✭✭FartyBlartFast


    mynamejeff wrote: »
    If this is the case, Donald trump thinks ilhan Omar is multiple people.

    So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe,

    Do you think that Donald Trump is under the impression that ilhan Omar is multiple people?

    If yes, do you think he is fit to be president?

    If no, then you agree that he was talking about all four women, including the three born and raised in the US.


    i think you are being intentionally obtuse and are ignoring the obvious and easily understood answer i have given to a question you asked , your shinny new profile might be effecting that ability .

    i dont care who is american president as im not american nor live in america .

    do you think he was talking about the one who was born in the still lawless and war torn country ?
    He was referring to them in the plural. You dont refer to multiple people when only addressing one.

    Do you think donald trump is under the impression that ilhan Omar is multiple people (as he referred to 'congresswomen' not 'congresswoman'), from multiple countries (as he said "their countries" not "her country")? Yes or no.

    Come on, try giving a direct answer here. It won't hurt to try just once.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Since Trump does it care about liberals, democrats, journalists and so on. He has been explicitly, repeatedly clear on this. You are arguing that Trump go back where he came from.

    Pretty much every single politician in the US represents and cares about selected groups, so as per you just about every politician should "go back" to where they came from.

    You appear to be a supporter of Trump as us president (correct me if I am wrong here!) yet also want him to leave the US permanently and sooner rather than later.

    But where did Trump come from again? I'll give you a hint, Cortez is elected to represent a district there.

    And the same for nearly all of those politicians.

    Seriously man, you're tying yourself in knots here to justify something you are incapable of justifying.
    Trumps policies are benefiting everyone... Republicans, Democrats, Latinos, Blacks, Whites, Journalists, Rich and Poor... and everyone in-between. EVERYONE!

    At this point Trump can return to were he comes from after he completes his second term as POTUS.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Neither of those even attempted to answer that question. I replied to them to show and state as much.

    It's very telling how eager you are to not dire tly answer this question under any circumstances.
    I believe they did answer that question. You just seem not to like the answer I provided.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 136 ✭✭FartyBlartFast


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Since Trump does it care about liberals, democrats, journalists and so on. He has been explicitly, repeatedly clear on this. You are arguing that Trump go back where he came from.

    Pretty much every single politician in the US represents and cares about selected groups, so as per you just about every politician should "go back" to where they came from.

    You appear to be a supporter of Trump as us president (correct me if I am wrong here!) yet also want him to leave the US permanently and sooner rather than later.

    But where did Trump come from again? I'll give you a hint, Cortez is elected to represent a district there.

    And the same for nearly all of those politicians.

    Seriously man, you're tying yourself in knots here to justify something you are incapable of justifying.
    Trumps policies are benefiting everyone... Republicans, Democrats, Latinos, Blacks, Whites, Journalists, Rich and Poor... and everyone in-between. EVERYONE!

    At this point Trump can return to were he comes from after he completes his second term as POTUS.
    So you don't want Trumps rules paying to Trump?

    He has been explicitly clear that he is only looking out for select groups. Repeatedly.

    He does not represent, nor does he want to represent, nor does he have the approval of, over half the nation. By your own standards that means he should "go back" to whatever country he came from. Problem is, like Cortez, oresslry and tlaib he is from the USA so that makes no sense.

    This is like when Trump supporters were claiming unemployment was nearly 40% in 2016. Which means it is still around 35% or more now. It's almost as if Trump supporters parrot things they don't understand or believe, for no other reason than Trump said it.

    So what countries did he want Tlaib, Cortez, McConnell, Pelosi, Pressly, and several hundred other US politicians -including himself--to go back to, and why?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 136 ✭✭FartyBlartFast


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Neither of those even attempted to answer that question. I replied to them to show and state as much.

    It's very telling how eager you are to not dire tly answer this question under any circumstances.
    I believe they did answer that question. You just seem not to like the answer I provided.
    So quote where they actually answered it. That will prove me wrong.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    So quote where they actually answered it. That will prove me wrong.

    "The point of his “go back where they came from” tweet (as I took it) was to highlight to the American people where the loyalties of these congresswomen stand… which does not appear to be with the majority of American CITIZENS."

    The point made by Trump was symbolic. If you care more about the plight of people from other countries, or self-indulgent groups here, than the 'overall' American citizens... then go do something about it, not telling me what I should do.

    I think we'll be arguing over this type of stuff for two of my daughters in the coming years. The older one will probably be a republican congresswoman in about 10 years and the youngest a liberal senator at some point. The oldest is currently a politician and the youngest is attending American University in Washington, DC, know for producing ambassadors, members of Congress and the Senate. She would like to intern with AOC in 2020... WHERE HAVE I FAILED! tongue.png

    I'm not too happy most Congressional interns are required to sign nondisclosure agreements (NDA's) while working for either Democratic or Republican lawmakers. The NDA’s do not provide exceptions or protection for reporting sexual harassment, discrimination or abuse. And the documents in many cases continue to apply after the interns leave Capitol Hill. But if you want to get ahead in politics I guess you need to play the game.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 136 ✭✭FartyBlartFast


    notobtuse wrote: »
    So quote where they actually answered it. That will prove me wrong.

    "The point of his “go back where they came from” tweet (as I took it) was to highlight to the American people where the loyalties of these congresswomen stand… which does not appear to be with the majority of American CITIZENS."
    The question was..."Since other Trump supporters are struggling to tell us, perhaps you can answer what countries Trump wants us born and raised citizens to "go home" to then?"

    Your quote above doesn't even attempt to answer that. Not one single country listed as to where they should" go back" to. Not a single one.


    This is not a matter of me "disagreeing" with your answer, because you did not provide one.

    Your "answer" was as relevant as someone asking you what you want for dinner and you reply by telling then trucks are red to draw attention to themselves in congested traffic.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    The question was..."Since other Trump supporters are struggling to tell us, perhaps you can answer what countries Trump wants us born and raised citizens to "go home" to then?"

    Your quote above doesn't even attempt to answer that. Not one single country listed as to where they should" go back" to. Not a single one.


    This is not a matter of me "disagreeing" with your answer, because you did not provide one.

    Your "answer" was as relevant as someone asking you what you want for dinner and you reply by telling then trucks are red to draw attention to themselves in congested traffic.
    Again, Trump's tweet was symbolic... Go help others first if you're more concerned about them over the majority of American citizens, before telling my how to live my life and what our country should do for them. It's not such a hard concept to grasp.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,137 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Again, Trump's tweet was symbolic... Go help others first if you're more concerned about them over the majority of American citizens, before telling my how to live my life and what our country should do for them. It's not such a hard concept to grasp.




    Symbolic of racist nativism.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 136 ✭✭FartyBlartFast


    notobtuse wrote: »
    The question was..."Since other Trump supporters are struggling to tell us, perhaps you can answer what countries Trump wants us born and raised citizens to "go home" to then?"

    Your quote above doesn't even attempt to answer that. Not one single country listed as to where they should" go back" to. Not a single one.


    This is not a matter of me "disagreeing" with your answer, because you did not provide one.

    Your "answer" was as relevant as someone asking you what you want for dinner and you reply by telling then trucks are red to draw attention to themselves in congested traffic.
    Again, Trump's tweet was symbolic... Go help others first if you're more concerned about them over the majority of American citizens, before telling my how to live my life and what our country should do for them. It's not such a hard concept to grasp.
    And still no country mentioned. They should just go back to their countries which are... Uuuhhhh... Somewhere symbolic.

    Whats more, you also think Trump should leave the US for this symbolic, make uppey place as he also does not represent the majority of Americans. And the same for a good 95% of all politicians on their side of the aisle. Or have you shifted those goalposts again in the back of arguing yourself into another corner that makes no sense?


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,939 ✭✭✭20Cent


    The behaviour of thugs cannot be tolerated. Whom ANTIFA say they are against is totally irrelevant as against the fact that they may not exercise violence to intimidate and thwart others, to block legal and peaceful demonstrations, to attack and assault others. No one has a right to assault others and to riot. The label "anti-fascist" makes zero difference as against committing crimes. Labelling religion <insert brand> as the ONE TRUE RELIGION doesn’t justify its members from chopping off the heads of unbelievers if they do not convert.


    Most of us on here value order. There cannot be freedom, peace, security or justice with anonymous and armed mobs roaming the streets, disrupting the gatherings of others, hounding and harassing others, and getting away with crimes while authorities stand down and allow them to act violently. I expect American voters may have something to say about this next election.


    Who does not understand this? Among others, members of ANTIFA do not. "Crow, who was involved with ANTIFA for almost 30 years, said members use violence as a means of self-defense and they believe property destruction does not equate to violence."

    Attacking a speaker on a University campus or attacking attendees to their speech is not self defence. False, mistaken and stupid beliefs about self defence are no excuse for criminality. ANTIFA is disturbing the peace, beating up on people, throwing Molotov cocktails and disrupting gatherings. None of that is self defence, because no one has attacked them.


    Here is the kernel of their mistaken and criminal thinking:


    "The idea in ANTIFA is that we go where they (right-wingers) go. That hate speech is not free speech. That if you are endangering people with what you say and the actions that are behind them, then you do not have the right to do that.

    "And so we go to cause conflict, to shut them down where they are, because we don't believe that Nazis or fascists of any stripe should have a mouthpiece.
    "


    Who appointed or hired ANTIFA to identify the "right-wingers"? Who anointed them to decide that these right-wingers were enemies who were "endangering people"? Who gave them the power to label other groups as NAZIs or "fascists of any stripe"? Who authorised them to suppress the speech of their targets by violent means? Who gave ANTIFA the right to "cause conflict" and "shut them down where they are"?


    Nice speech there chief.
    It would have sent the nazis packing in 1945.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,365 ✭✭✭✭rossie1977


    notobtuse wrote: »
    It is good of Trump to keep AOC in the news and highlighting just how dangerous of America her platform is. But that is the primary.

    When it comes to the general election Pelosi is right... a glass of water with a 'D' behind it would have won those districts.

    Which of her proposals do you think is the most dangerous to the US as a whole?

    hannity-ocasio-cortez.jpg?resize=768%2C432&ssl=1


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    And still no country mentioned. They should just go back to their countries which are... Uuuhhhh... Somewhere symbolic.

    Whats more, you also think Trump should leave the US for this symbolic, make uppey place as he also does not represent the majority of Americans. And the same for a good 95% of all politicians on their side of the aisle. Or have you shifted those goalposts again in the back of arguing yourself into another corner that makes no sense?
    If you’re going to be pedantic then more can play that game. Where did trump stay they should go to other countries? Did he name any names of these members of Congress? Perhaps he simply meant they could take a break from Congress and go back to their cushy homes in DC in order to craft some work these other countries could use to improve their own conditions. If you're going to be pedantic be prepared to have it come back at you.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 199 ✭✭Il Fascista


    rossie1977 wrote: »
    Which of her proposals do you think is the most dangerous to the US as a whole?

    hannity-ocasio-cortez.jpg?resize=768%2C432&ssl=1

    Abolishing immigration enforcement alone is highly dangerous.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Billy Mays wrote: »
    Funny how you lads seem to be concentrating solely on Omar here just cos she's the only one who wasn't born in the states

    Incorrect, I referred to AOC also, as she was the one posting Instagram clips where she had said the Trump administration were acting like fascists and likened the border detention facilities to Nazi concentration camps (something the recent Antifa firebomber parroted in his manifesto). She knows the line of comparison she was drawing when she said that crap. Shows the level of respect she must have for Americans that died fighting actual Nazis.
    Telling people of colour to go back to where they came from is the definition of racism. Yous bang on about lefties having Trump Derangement Syndrome but it's as much a thing on the right. Some people are so deranged when it comes to supporting Trump that they'll literally defend anything he says or does, including outright racism.

    He has spoken to Piers Morgan in similar fashion on the issue of the right to bear arms. I believe he said sort out your own country with regards to knife crime before lecturing him about gun laws and so I have no doubt if Piers was a member of congress he'd be making similar remarks and telling him to go back home. This 'women of colour' crap is just the usual leftie nonsense trying to paint people as victims so liberals can position themselves as saintly.
    George Conway wrote a good op-ed on this yesterday. I expect you'll just dismiss it though as he probably has Trump Derangement Syndrome aswell

    "Trump is a racist..." great headline, but Don Lemon got there first, multiple times. I read it last night as it happens, Rose McGowan tweeted it.

    As for the contend of the article, it's just the usual bleeding heart liberal nonsense, the crux of which is the predictable 'I remember the first time someone told me to go back to where I came from'. Yeah, we heard it multiple times over the last few days and it's just said to try and make readers see Trump's comments out of context..... as ever. It's been happening for three bloody years, what's new:

    He mocks a journalist who's disabled and it's twisted that he mocked him because he was disabled. He says he didn't know Meghan Markle was nasty [about him, obviously] and it's twisted that he meant he didn't know Meghan was nasty as a person. He references that some of the Mexican migrants that illegally cross the border are rapists, and gets accused of calling all Mexicans rapists. He calls MS-13 animals and it's twisted that he's calling all immigrants animals. He says there was fine people on both sides in Charlottesville and gets accused of referring to Neo Nazis as fine people... and on and on and on and that's without even getting into the Russian Collusion hoax nonsense and all the misrepresentations of what he said during that whole debacle.

    Not saying that's the case every single time, or that I agree with everything he has ever said, I don't, but nine times out of ten the outrage about what Trump has said will be where his comments have been deliberately stripped of context in order to make him look as racist and misogynistic as possible. All politically motivated, of course.

    If Trump only attacked "people of colour" I might be sympathetic to the notion that he is a racist at heart, but that's far from the case as everyone knows fine well he attacks all and sundry, he's indiscriminate. If he avoided "people of colour" socially or even with regards to his policies, I might be sympathetic to the notion that he's a racist, but that's far from the case also. So you will have to forgive me for seeing this latest hysterical outrage to be as just as politically motivated as all the rest of them.

    The problem is that the media in western society is infested with far left liberals who couldn't give a crap about the truth. All they want to do is push their leftist agenda down society's throat on a daily basis and people are bloody sick of it. You (collective you) slam Fox News as being a poor source but yet have no trouble posting up links from CNN who are the most shamefully corrupt media outfit on the damn planet. There has been many positive things to report on about the Trump administration but it's largely all been ignored because it doesn't fit the racist narrative that the mainstream media are intent on peddling. All they want to do is amplify negativity about Trump.

    Even celebrating the 4th of July was condemned by them. Had Obama done you can be sure they'd have been saying how awesome the airshow was. Trump did it though and so it was a horrible spectacle.

    You'd also swear the Mexican border had always ran smoothly with little issues the way the liberal media are carrying on, but that ain't true.........



    Everyone remember a few weeks ago when a video went viral of a lawyer supposedly arguing that the Trump administration shouldn't have to provide toothbrushes and shower facilities at border detention facilities? How it was disgraceful that this could go on, how human rights were being violated and it was all just another reason why Trump should be impeached? Then suddenly the story died. Wonder why? Well, it turned out the lawyer was actually appointed during the Obama administration and the case was filed under his tenure too. In other words those conditions existed under his watch also. Yeah, genuine outrage my ass, but that's far from the only proof of that, let's look at some headlines during the Obama era in relation to the border & illegal immigration shall we:

    obama2.jpg

    of1.jpg

    of3.jpg

    All the above articles / photos are from the Obama years and they have one thing in common and that is that none of them are from mainstream media sources and that's because the mainstream media pretty much gave Obama a free ride. They didn't amplify these stories to the hysterical level we are seeing today now Trump is in office and that shows you that the current outrage is not genuine at all, nor even close to it, it's fake, just a political tool.

    Tim Young hits the nail on the head here:

    https://twitter.com/TimRunsHisMouth/status/1150394155899731969
    It's hard to believe with today's current media acting like Trump was the first American president ever to deport an illegal alien, but in certain circles during the Obama years (the ones mainstream media didn't give a voice to) he was actually known as the 'Deporter-In-Chief':
    Barack Obama: The Deporter-In-Chief

    There has been much talk about US President-elect Donald Trump’s hardline stance on immigration.

    But Trump will be inheriting a well-oiled deportation infrastructure from the Obama administration, which has deported 2.5 million people - more than every single US president of the 20th century combined.

    In this week’s Reality Check, Mehdi Hasan exposes the deporter-in-chief’s legacy on deportation.

    The retort from the left to the above is very predictable of course: "Oh, so if it happened under Obama, it's fine, is that it??"

    No, it's not fine, no matter what administration the situation needs to be solved but it's needs to be reported in an honest way, not with photo shoots at border fences and pretend wailing. Do liberals think the world is stupid or something, maybe, and maybe they're right, sadly, but the truth is congress have been saying for over a year and half that there was no humanitarian crisis at the border and that Trump was "manufacturing" it, as they refused funding time and time again. Then all of a sudden when they can't deny it any longer they switch position, claim they never denied there was a crisis, they did.

    So let's cut the bullshit. The outrage is exaggerated and totally disproportionate, all designed to paint Trump to be as racist as they possibly can. 'Make America White Again' I heard some of the unfunny liberal left "comedians" saying on US chat shows last night. Well, let's take a look at that accusation a little more closer with a Fox clip (I know, God forbid, right - but you might like it as Trump gets called a racist a few times) as it shows just how the mainstream media operate, as on the day Trump was doing something positive, signing an executive order which hopes to see more investment into low development areas, they couldn't have cared less:



    Not the only positive story which mainstream media tended to under report whenever it didn't suit their shameful narrative, there was also the First Step Act which, while reported, was nothing like it would have been had Lord Obama been in the Oval.......

    https://twitter.com/DanKEberhart/status/1148346520552562692
    Oh, and liberals don't have the monopoly on compassion by the way, nor egalitarian thinking. White liberals constantly, and pretentiously, whining about how "people of color" have been offended might have worked very well for a long time but society is slowly but surely waking up and seeing that for what it is. Black people especially are calling out liberal pandering more than they ever have. Candace Owen, Larry Elder to name two that are quite vocal about it but I shall leave you with the following few tweets from two black Americans to show you that not all "people of colour" have been manipulated by the liberal left in America.

    https://twitter.com/RealDark_Kent/status/1151039575437074432
    https://twitter.com/TheOfficerTatum/status/1150771394617102336


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,137 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    rossie1977 wrote: »
    Which of her proposals do you think is the most dangerous to the US as a whole?


    Medicare for all. The Horror...........The Horror


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    rossie1977 wrote:
    Which of her proposals do you think is the most dangerous to the US as a whole?

    Abolishing ice probably.

    Housing as a human right is pretty bizarre.

    What women's rights is she looking to bring in? Is it positive discrimination? If so, then that's terrible


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 136 ✭✭FartyBlartFast


    notobtuse wrote: »
    If you’re going to be pedantic then more can play that game.
    No problem, here is how you give a direct answer. Take notes, and maybe try it sometime:
    Where did trump stay they should go to other countries?
    right here...

    So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!
    Did he name any names of these members of Congress?
    Indeed he has, at least two of them he has confirmed.

    ".....Congresswomen, who I truly believe, based on their actions, hate our Country. Get a list of the HORRIBLE things they have said. Omar is polling at 8%, Cortez at 21%."
    Perhaps he simply meant they could take a break from Congress and go back to their cushy homes in DC in order to craft some work these other countries could use to improve their own conditions. If you're going to be pedantic be prepared to have it come back at you.
    DC is outside of the USA now, is it? Are any of these representatives for DC? Did any of them grow up in DC?

    What next? Maybe he was suggesting they go to their local Chinese restaurant and fix the till, because it's broken and people are getting away without paying their full bills, so it's full of crime too. I wouldn't put it past you at this rate.

    Loving the irony in your username, though.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,280 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Trumps mother grew up in poverty in Scotland and couldn’t speak English only Scots Gaelic. His father was german.
    His two wives are from the eastern bloc. His son and daughter are children of immigrants directly. As is he.



    Him telling anyone to ‘go home’ is both racist and hilariously hypocritical


    You realise that though right?

    Wheb trump uses his heratige to win an argument / votes like AOC has regularly done trying to win latin votes , then we can talk


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Trumps mother grew up in poverty in Scotland and couldn’t speak English only Scots Gaelic. His father was german.
    His two wives are from the eastern bloc. His son and daughter are children of immigrants directly. As is he.

    Wait, I thought he was a racist..... but now you're pointing out he has married two non-nationals and his children are born of an immigrant?

    I think you might be undermining your own arguments there.
    Him telling anyone to ‘go home’ is both racist and hilariously hypocritical

    You realise that though right?

    There isn't an ounce of hypocrisy in what you cited, not an ounce.

    See what you're doing is focusing solely on the 'Go back' bit as if Trump just heard there were some politicians who were immigrants, or born of immigrants, and told them to 'Go back to whence you came' for no other reason .... but that's far from what occurred. These people have spoken about the USA as if it has a fascist government, and treats those seeking asylum no better than Nazis treated jews....... THAT'S what fueled his comments and so you can't just call him a hypocrite based on the fact that he has immigrant parents, married a non-national and had children with them, that's absurd..... if anything he is in the perfect position to call these people out for what they said given that, as you point out, he has so much in common with them, but yet doesn't speak about the USA in the disgraceful manner in which they have done.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    Wheb trump uses his heratige to win an argument / votes like AOC has regularly done trying to win latin votes , then we can talk

    He doesn’t use his heritage. He uses his skin colour. Daily.
    He even got confused only last month about where his father was born and what nationality he was.
    I don’t think AOC is trying to ‘win votes’. She’s not in the running for anything.
    She’s just calling out his racism. Way to sidestep what I asked you though


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,137 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    Wait, I thought he was a racist..... but now you're pointing out he has married two non-nationals and his children are born of an immigrant?

    I think you might be undermining your own arguments there.

    .


    As they're caucasians no, he isn't.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,939 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Abolishing immigration enforcement alone is highly dangerous.

    It doesn't say abolish immigration enforcement Il Fascista.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 136 ✭✭FartyBlartFast


    20Cent wrote: »
    Abolishing immigration enforcement alone is highly dangerous.

    It doesn't say abolish immigration enforcement Il Fascista.
    A lot of people forget that ICE only came into existence in 2003. If I am correct, that is primarily what they want disbanded.

    It's hard to disagree when they are running concentration camps, and have outrageously racist Facebook pages with 9,800 members compared to 20,000 employees that their head is also a member of (before it got closed down).

    Of course, that same head of ice who was in that group condemned it before it was public knowledge that she was also a part of it. Because like many Trump supporters, she wants you to know that she is totally not a racist and doesn't approve of the things she herself takes part in.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    20Cent wrote: »
    It doesn't say abolish immigration enforcement Il Fascista.


    Be fair. They have to make a lot of stuff up to make a point. I imagine it's hard work.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,137 ✭✭✭Odhinn



    See what you're doing is focusing solely on the 'Go back' bit as if Trump just heard there were some politicians who were immigrants, or born of immigrants, and told them to 'Go back to whence you came' for no other reason .... but that's far from what occurred. These people have spoken about the USA as if it has a fascist government, and treats those seeking asylum no better than Nazis treated jews....... THAT'S what fueled his comments and so you can't just call him a hypocrite based on the fact that he has immigrant parents, married a non-national and had children with them, that's absurd..... if anything he is in the perfect position to call these people out for what they said given that, as you point out, he has so much in common with them, but yet doesn't speak about the USA in the disgraceful manner in which they have done.




    ................so there's a list of opinions that Americans aren't allowed hold?


    You realise that Trump constantly negatively referred to the current state of the USA in his election campaign and in his inaugaration speech?


  • Registered Users Posts: 881 ✭✭✭one armed dwarf


    People keep saying that these tweets are being taken out of context. They say it all the time with Trump. But what is the correct context then?

    By specifically invoking the idea that these women come from other countries which are in a desperate state (3 out of 4 are American born), that they should go back and fix them before they're qualified to speak.

    How is that not racist or at least xenophobic? What is the context that doesn't lead to the interpretation he made the tweet thinking of their skin colour (they can't be American because they are brown) or the place of birth of their parents?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,254 ✭✭✭Billy Mays


    Former White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci has said that Trump's tweets were racist and unacceptable

    Obviously he's taking them out of context aswell and the Boards.ie Donald Trump fan club know better


  • Registered Users Posts: 253 ✭✭VicMackey1


    This is an interview with a delusional antifa activist. It's a cnn interview so don't expect any hard-hitting questions to be asked. It is funny but it does show that antifa has no interest in peaceful protest.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,635 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    rossie1977 wrote: »
    Which of her proposals do you think is the most dangerous to the US as a whole?

    https://i1.wp.com/contemptor.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/hannity-ocasio-cortez.jpg


    Practically all of it. It's based on an economic system with a proven record of failure. i.e. Socialism. Not defending the current system, they do have a massive social and corporate welfare system (especially the MIC) that will eventually meet its reckoning as well. They do have the freedom to implement much of that at state level, they don't because it will quickly cripple the individual states, why they think it will work at Federal level is beyond me. Individual states like Illinois have already pushed the self destruct button. The current system is not perfect, none ever are, but people keep pursing cradle to grave socialism as a panacea to all, well eventually the capital reserve gets eaten up and insolvency looms.

    The current theory of how they intend to pay for all this is Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) or I prefer to call it the magic money theory. Expect to see MMT being pushed as part of monetary reform package over the next decade.

    The twits who gave us zero/negative interest rate policy and quantitative easing are now retiring and the MMT crowd are pushing their nonsense into the vacuum.

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 900 ✭✭✭Midlife


    Practically all of it. It's based on an economic system with a proven record of failure. i.e. Socialism. Not defending the current system, they do have a massive social and corporate welfare system (especially the MIC) that will eventually meet its reckoning as well. They do have the freedom to implement much of that at state level, they don't because it will quickly cripple the individual states, why they think it will work at Federal level is beyond me. Individual states like Illinois have already pushed the self destruct button. The current system is not perfect, none ever are, but people keep pursing cradle to grave socialism as a panacea to all, well eventually the capital reserve gets eaten up and insolvency looms.

    The current theory of how they intend to pay for all this is Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) or I prefer to call it the magic money theory. Expect to see MMT being pushed as part of monetary reform package over the next decade.

    The twits who gave us zero/negative interest rate policy and quantitative easing are now retiring and the MMT crowd are pushing their nonsense into the vacuum.

    Errr, is that not all you though. Her policies are more social leaning and you just filled in the rest.

    What's wrong with tax the rich and support the middle and working class a bit more?

    That works in lots of places.


  • Registered Users Posts: 900 ✭✭✭Midlife


    People keep saying that these tweets are being taken out of context. They say it all the time with Trump. But what is the correct context then?

    By specifically invoking the idea that these women come from other countries which are in a desperate state (3 out of 4 are American born), that they should go back and fix them before they're qualified to speak.

    How is that not racist or at least xenophobic? What is the context that doesn't lead to the interpretation he made the tweet thinking of their skin colour (they can't be American because they are brown) or the place of birth of their parents?

    Side by side with the birther thing, you'd have to be a clown at this stage to be denying the obvious.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,511 ✭✭✭Sweetemotion


    Midlife wrote: »
    What's wrong with tax the rich and support the middle and working class a bit more?

    The rich just leave town and the tax is then put on the middle and working class.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,635 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    Midlife wrote: »
    Errr, is that not all you though. Her policies are more social leaning and you just filled in the rest.

    What's wrong with tax the rich and support the middle and working class a bit more?

    That works in lots of places.


    Cortez is just a pretty looking front woman for the Democratic Socialists of America.. The Socialists had a conference in Chicago a few weeks ago. Here are some of the points from an observer.

    What’s clear from my observations at Socialism 2019 is that traditional Marxists have successfully melded their ideology with the identity politics and culture war issues that animate modern liberalism—despite still being quite far from the beliefs of the average citizen.
    <Snip>
    5. The Green Movement Is Red

    It’s perhaps no surprise that an openly socialist member of Congress is pushing for the Green New Dealwhich would essentially turn the U.S. into a command-and-control economy reminiscent of the Soviet Union.

    Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti recently said, according to The Washington Post: “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all.”

    Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Chakrabarti asked Sam Ricketts, climate director for Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who is running for president in the Democratic primary. “Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”

    Economic transformation barely disguised as a way to address environmental concerns appears to be the main point.

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,635 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    The rich just leave town and the tax is then put on the middle and working class.


    Under our current system the rich become powerful, under Socialism the powerful become rich.

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 900 ✭✭✭Midlife


    Cortez is just a pretty looking front woman for the Democratic Socialists of America.. The Socialists had a conference in Chicago a few weeks ago. Here are some of the points from an observer.

    Sorry, are you serious? Did you watch that youtube video?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭kunst nugget


    Midlife wrote: »
    Errr, is that not all you though. Her policies are more social leaning and you just filled in the rest.

    What's wrong with tax the rich and support the middle and working class a bit more?

    That works in lots of places.


    Cortez is just a pretty looking front woman for the Democratic Socialists of America.. The Socialists had a conference in Chicago a few weeks ago. Here are some of the points from an observer.


    An article called 'I Went to a Socialism Conference. Here Are 6 Shocking Things I Learned.' gives out about clickbait communism...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,635 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    Midlife wrote: »
    Sorry, are you serious? Did you watch that youtube video?

    Yes and I watched the follow up to that as well. They are not hiding anything as he says the information is there in plain sight put out by the activists behind her.

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭The Late Late Show


    America is clearly a mess today and it has become convenient to blame certain presidents and administrations for this, that and the other. Clearly, the April 9th 2018 to date regime in America is one of the worst if not THE worst ever. John Bolton especially is an odious guy with history of troublemaking going back years. But, as much as I dislike him and his regime, many of the problems were there all along. Sure, he has made some of the problems worse and sure he has reversed positive diplomacy but a lot of the mess that is modern America stems from an earlier time. Early (pre-9th April 2018) Trump, Obama, Bush 2, Clinton, Bush 1, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, etc. You can go right back and see many of the same problems in these as you do in the Bolton regime. The Bolton regime may well be more obnoxious than anything leading American from 1933 to 8th April 2018 but it did not invent a lot of the problems.

    Middle East wars involving America have been going on pretty much since Carter. Even before this, the cold war has been going on creating proxy wars in Latin America and Africa. If guys like Mike Pompeo are consumed by rabid anti-communism, they were raised on a diet of rabid anti-communist propaganda during the 1970s and 1980s ranging from government officials to Chuck blooming Norris. If there is an immigration crisis and a drug crisis in Central America, it was stoked by support for the likes of the Contras and sanctions against 'communist' Latin American countries.

    The Bolton regime quit the Iran deal and it was wrong. But the US also broke their deals with Libya, Iraq and others too. The moral of the story is Republicans and Democrats alike have been building up to what we have today and plenty bad deeds were done under the name of respected presidents. For example, LBJ gets praise for his civil rights on one hand but also oversaw a government that committed war crimes in Vietnam.

    Not defending America here but some people who assume America is goodie goodie have to realise it is a superpower just like the USSR was or the British Empire was. Superpowers do not become superpowers by being nice and America has hidden their nasty side well at times but like all superpowers, America can be BOTH a force for a greater good and a greater evil at the same time often.


  • Registered Users Posts: 253 ✭✭VicMackey1


    The democrats really need to go easy with the racist accusations, especially the likes of AOC. It seems that anyone that questions her agenda will be branded a racist. The party who created the kkk calling everyone else racists is pretty ironic.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,133 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    VicMackey1 wrote: »
    The democrats really need to go easy with the racist accusations, especially the likes of AOC. It seems that anyone that questions her agenda will be branded a racist. The party who created the kkk calling everyone else racists is pretty ironic.

    AOCs chief of staff was accused of singling out the only native American Congress woman for special abuse, by the house democrats twitter account no less.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    VicMackey1 wrote: »
    The democrats really need to go easy with the racist accusations, especially the likes of AOC. It seems that anyone that questions her agenda will be branded a racist. The party who created the kkk calling everyone else racists is pretty ironic.

    It’s really not. There’s a racist in the Whitehouse. The GOP has been the go-to party for the KKK since the southern strategy kicked in - fifty years ago now. But Trump is hardly a discreet racist - never has been. This new nonsense is no more offensive than his birther nonsense before he was elected. He’s such low hanging fruit for anyone concerned with racism.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,635 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    Not defending America here but some people who assume America is goodie goodie have to realise it is a superpower just like the USSR was or the British Empire was. Superpowers do not become superpowers by being nice and America has hidden their nasty side well at times but like all superpowers, America can be BOTH a force for a greater good and a greater evil at the same time often.


    I can broadly agree with some of the things you have written above. America in the aftermath of World War II built the world as we know it today and generally for the better (Many countries economies were totally wrecked in the aftermath and look at them today) at a price to themselves. All empires are money losing entities in the long term and all go bankrupt to be replaced with a nascent superpower. In recent history both the Spanish and British empires went bust. The American administrations since the end of the cold war have decided they now want to reorder the theirs and the worlds affairs since the effects of those policies are now working against their interests and they have decided to flip the board so as to speak. We in Ireland are not isolated from this empire and also have to deal with the competing interests of France and Germany via the EU.



    The Muslim Brotherhood as auxiliaries of the Pentagon
    by Thierry Meyssan

    206726-10-4-c078c.jpg


    The Turko-Irish El Mehdi El Hamid El Hamdi, known as « Mahdi Al-Harati », a CIA agent present in the Freedom Flotilla, kisses President Erdogan, who came to visit him in hospital. He would later become the number 2 of the Free Syrian Army.

    source



    Epstein and the Explosive Crisis of the Deep State
    Charles Hugh Smith

    The end of World War II was a critical juncture. The proper role of the U.S. in the postwar era was up for grabs, and over the course of a few years, the CIA and other intelligence agencies were established and the doctrine of containment of the Soviet Union became the dominant narrative, a narrative that held with remarkable consistency for four decades until the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991.

    This collapse was another critical juncture, and debates over America's role in this "unipolar era" were finally settled in favor of the geopolitical-activist ideology of neoconservatism (Neocons).

    This globalist ideology led to a variety of policy disasters and is now discredited in many circles, and has been under attack within the Deep State for some time. This is the divided Deep State I've written about for the past five years.

    Is the Deep State Fracturing into Disunity?
    (March 14, 2014)

    Is the Deep State at War--With Itself? (December 14, 2016)


    The failures of Neocon globalism have ushered in another critical juncture. What is America's proper role in a multi-polar world that is fracturing across multiple faultlines? This critical juncture is a manifestation of a broader profound political disunity in America and many other nations.

    The corporate media has obligingly portrayed this profound political disunity as a contest between "good globalism" and "bad populism," a clear attempt to smear all those who see the dark side of globalism as a threat to the nation and indeed the world. This bias reflects the continued dominance of the Neocon-globalist camp.

    source

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 900 ✭✭✭Midlife


    Yes and I watched the follow up to that as well. They are not hiding anything as he says the information is there in plain sight put out by the activists behind her.


    Wow, you are serious. Can you geniunly not see through those videos?

    The half truths, the editing, the comments out of context??

    Really? You're a grown up, right?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,280 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Under our current system the rich become powerful, under Socialism the powerful become rich.

    Theres also the converse approach.
    The idea in many peoples heads is that these charismatic, creative, business people would all be brought down to the level of everyone else under communism/ socialism. Not thrive as high level party officials, generals, corrupt black market traders or any other manor of thrive against adversity. Would they get their dream where denis o brien becomes a factory worker and waits in the bread line , not a chance


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement