Poll of the Day > How is MAGA racist again?

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3
Lokarin 08/27/19 2:06:15 PM #51:	None of this was the intention of my topic, guys --- "Salt cures Everything!" My YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/Nirakolov/videos <cite>Lokarin posted [p:926613452] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>None of this was the intention of my topic, guys</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SunWuKung420 08/27/19 2:07:22 PM #52:	MAGA is racist because the redhatters are primarily ill-informed and highly prejudice due to propaganda spewed by an extremely bigoted president. --- I'd rather die helping others survive than be all alone, UNSCATHED, after all others have fallen -DEC <cite>SunWuKung420 posted [p:926613502] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>MAGA is racist because the redhatters are primarily ill-informed and highly prejudice due to propaganda spewed by an extremely bigoted president.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 08/27/19 2:08:32 PM #53:	Lokarin posted... None of this was the intention of my topic, guys --- More malicious than mischievous <cite>Mead posted [p:926613561] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Lokarin posted... </cite> <quote>None of this was the intention of my topic, guys</quote> </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 08/27/19 2:16:04 PM #54:	Broken_Zeus posted... You have an unhealthy obsession with writing off evidence that directly refutes your stupid, s*ty arguments as whataboutism. No I don't. I have a perfectly healthy obsession with writing off whataboutism as whataboutism. I call it "acknowledging empirical reality," and it's a major part of how I live my life. By definition, if you respond to "X is bad!" with "this other guy did X," without doing anything to address the actual point of X being bad, that's whataboutism. If you think X is fine, defend X. If you agree that X is bad, don't treat it as a chance to take shots at some other guy who did X in the past, treat it as a chance to agree and do whatever you can to stop X. That you struggle with this concept is the unhealthy obsession with whataboutism to which I was referring. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:926613864] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Broken_Zeus posted...</cite> <quote>You have an unhealthy obsession with writing off evidence that directly refutes your stupid, s*ty arguments as whataboutism. </quote> No I don't. I have a perfectly healthy obsession with writing off whataboutism as whataboutism. I call it "acknowledging empirical reality," and it's a major part of how I live my life. By definition, if you respond to "X is bad!" with "this other guy did X," without doing anything to address the actual point of X being bad, that's whataboutism. If you think X is fine, defend X. If you agree that X is bad, don't treat it as a chance to take shots at some other guy who did X in the past, treat it as a chance to agree and do whatever you can to stop X. That you struggle with this concept is the unhealthy obsession with whataboutism to which I was referring.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheWorstPoster 08/27/19 2:16:53 PM #55:	SunWuKung420 posted... MAGA is racist because the redhatters are primarily ill-informed and highly prejudice due to propaganda spewed by an extremely bigoted president. Ill informed? Propaganda? Bigoted? First of all, from what I have seen, Trump supporters seem to be MORE informed about political issues than Democrats. Secondly, the mainstream media is twisting the news left-to-right in order to slander Trump, even if it is something that Obama did years ago, on top of censorship of conservative voices on YouTube, Twitter, Google, and Facebook. Google even had a memo leaked last year exposing their plan on censoring conservatives just after the 2016 elections to ensure that this doesn't happen again. Also, finally, I have this: <cite>TheWorstPoster posted [p:926613890] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>MAGA is racist because the redhatters are primarily ill-informed and highly prejudice due to propaganda spewed by an extremely bigoted president.</quote> Ill informed? Propaganda? Bigoted? First of all, from what I have seen, Trump supporters seem to be MORE informed about political issues than Democrats. Secondly, the mainstream media is twisting the news left-to-right in order to slander Trump, even if it is something that Obama did years ago, on top of censorship of conservative voices on YouTube, Twitter, Google, and Facebook. Google even had a memo leaked last year exposing their plan on censoring conservatives just after the 2016 elections to ensure that this doesn't happen again. Also, finally, I have this: </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 08/27/19 2:19:14 PM #56:	adjl posted... A pragmatic appeal to racist (or at least xenophobic) sentiments. Xenophobic's fine in my eyes morally, but I don't think that applies either. There's no call to kick out wealthy Mexicans making jobs in America, the issue is to do with potential harm from illegal practices. This is typical right wing cautiousness. adjl posted... Do you think that anyone who doesn't see MAGA for the empty, meaningless pathos it is isn't unintelligent? They're normal, emotionally-driven humans. Most people don't feel the need to talk politics, but when one guy says "I'll help you!" and the other side calls you a racist, it's easy to jump on board with the supportive side. adjl posted... You're saying this all like it's a good thing. It's a neutral thing. I'd rather people be clearer and nuanced, but it's standard practice to throw this shit about so one side isn't worse than another for using it. adjl posted... It really rather baffles me how many people think "____ isn't a race so this isn't racism!" actually addresses the point being made. If the broadened use of the term bothers you that much, just mentally replace the word "racism" with "prejudicial discrimination on the basis of religion/culture/ethnicity" and carry on with your life. It's not prejudicial to say Islam is, as a general rule, against western society. It's not prejudice to say that Islam is where many recent terror attacks were from. This means it's not prejudice to say Islam ain't so good. It's not the whole picture or even remotely nuanced, but it is based on reason and experience. You probably shouldn't use words that aren't even slightly accurate. It makes you look disingenuous to throw weighted words around to slander baselessly. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:926613991] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted...</cite> <quote>A pragmatic appeal to racist (or at least xenophobic) sentiments. </quote> Xenophobic's fine in my eyes morally, but I don't think that applies either. There's no call to kick out wealthy Mexicans making jobs in America, the issue is to do with potential harm from illegal practices. This is typical right wing cautiousness. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>Do you think that anyone who doesn't see MAGA for the empty, meaningless pathos it is isn't unintelligent?</quote> They're normal, emotionally-driven humans. Most people don't feel the need to talk politics, but when one guy says "I'll help you!" and the other side calls you a racist, it's easy to jump on board with the supportive side. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>You're saying this all like it's a good thing. </quote> It's a neutral thing. I'd rather people be clearer and nuanced, but it's standard practice to throw this shit about so one side isn't worse than another for using it. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>It really rather baffles me how many people think "____ isn't a race so this isn't racism!" actually addresses the point being made. If the broadened use of the term bothers you that much, just mentally replace the word "racism" with "prejudicial discrimination on the basis of religion/culture/ethnicity" and carry on with your life.</quote> It's not prejudicial to say Islam is, as a general rule, against western society. It's not prejudice to say that Islam is where many recent terror attacks were from. This means it's not prejudice to say Islam ain't so good. It's not the whole picture or even remotely nuanced, but it is based on reason and experience. You probably shouldn't use words that aren't even slightly accurate. It makes you look disingenuous to throw weighted words around to slander baselessly.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TyVulpine 08/27/19 2:23:23 PM #57:	TheWorstPoster posted... SunWuKung420 posted... MAGA is racist because the redhatters are primarily ill-informed and highly prejudice due to propaganda spewed by an extremely bigoted president. Ill informed? Propaganda? Bigoted? First of all, from what I have seen, Trump supporters seem to be MORE informed about political issues than Democrats. Secondly, the mainstream media is twisting the news left-to-right in order to slander Trump, even if it is something that Obama did years ago, on top of censorship of conservative voices on YouTube, Twitter, Google, and Facebook. Google even had a memo leaked last year exposing their plan on censoring conservatives just after the 2016 elections to ensure that this doesn't happen again. Also, finally, I have this: I love how people point to a country that is NOT part of the US and rave about how Trump did something in it that has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the US. Also, look up Vera Coking and how Trump tried to use eminent domain to take her home. Does "Some fine people" when talking about white supremacists ring a bell? Also, the low black unemployment happened under Obama, not Trump. Trump simply inherited what Obama did. --- Fall down, go boom... Life is like a box of chocolates. Most of it is crap. <cite>TyVulpine posted [p:926614165] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>TheWorstPoster posted...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>MAGA is racist because the redhatters are primarily ill-informed and highly prejudice due to propaganda spewed by an extremely bigoted president.</quote> Ill informed? Propaganda? Bigoted? First of all, from what I have seen, Trump supporters seem to be MORE informed about political issues than Democrats. Secondly, the mainstream media is twisting the news left-to-right in order to slander Trump, even if it is something that Obama did years ago, on top of censorship of conservative voices on YouTube, Twitter, Google, and Facebook. Google even had a memo leaked last year exposing their plan on censoring conservatives just after the 2016 elections to ensure that this doesn't happen again. Also, finally, I have this: </quote> I love how people point to a country that is NOT part of the US and rave about how Trump did something in it that has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the US. Also, look up Vera Coking and how Trump tried to use eminent domain to take her home. Does "Some fine people" when talking about white supremacists ring a bell? Also, the low black unemployment happened under Obama, not Trump. Trump simply inherited what Obama did.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 08/27/19 2:26:01 PM #58:	Kyuubi4269 posted... They're normal, emotionally-driven humans. By which you mean they're letting emotions get in the way of rational thought. Do you consider that intelligent? Kyuubi4269 posted... It's a neutral thing. It really isn't. Making vague emotional appeals to prey on stupid people isn't something anyone in power should be doing, regardless of who's doing it. Kyuubi4269 posted... It's not prejudicial to say Islam is, as a general rule, against western society. It is prejudicial, however, to use that as a basis to discriminate against Muslims. By definition. Kyuubi4269 posted... You probably shouldn't use words that aren't even slightly accurate. I consider "functionally identical" to qualify as more than slightly accurate, especially in the absence of a succinct term that would be more optimally specific. Anyone who doesn't understand the point being made despite the suboptimal word choice doesn't actually understand why racism is bad in the first place. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:926614265] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>They're normal, emotionally-driven humans. </quote> By which you mean they're letting emotions get in the way of rational thought. Do you consider that intelligent? Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>It's a neutral thing.</quote> It really isn't. Making vague emotional appeals to prey on stupid people isn't something anyone in power should be doing, regardless of who's doing it. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>It's not prejudicial to say Islam is, as a general rule, against western society.</quote> It is prejudicial, however, to use that as a basis to discriminate against Muslims. By definition. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>You probably shouldn't use words that aren't even slightly accurate.</quote> I consider "functionally identical" to qualify as more than slightly accurate, especially in the absence of a succinct term that would be more optimally specific. Anyone who doesn't understand the point being made despite the suboptimal word choice doesn't actually understand why racism is bad in the first place.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheWorstPoster 08/27/19 2:27:52 PM #59:	TyVulpine posted... Does "Some fine people" when talking about white supremacists ring a bell? You mean the part where he was talking ABOUT the people who came there to peacefully protest the statue, and explicitly stated that he was NOT talking about the White Supremacists? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs" data-time=" Watch the whole thing <cite>TheWorstPoster posted [p:926614343] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>Does "Some fine people" when talking about white supremacists ring a bell?</quote> You mean the part where he was talking ABOUT the people who came there to peacefully protest the statue, and explicitly stated that he was NOT talking about the White Supremacists? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs" data-time=" Watch the whole thing</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 08/27/19 2:34:56 PM #60:	TyVulpine posted... Also, the low black unemployment happened under Obama, not Trump. Trump simply inherited what Obama did. Ah yes, my favorite partisan shill defense. "Everything positive under the current administration is because of the previous administration. Everything bad is because of the current administration I hate." Let's conveniently pick whatever suits our narrative TheWorstPoster posted... Watch the whole thing They arent interested in facts. If they were, they wouldnt keep parroting this crap that's been debunked for ages. They just plug their ears. On another note, I saw where someone had the idea to simply move Confederate statues to museums though and I think that's a good idea that could appease most people <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:926614639] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>Also, the low black unemployment happened under Obama, not Trump. Trump simply inherited what Obama did.</quote> Ah yes, my favorite partisan shill defense. "Everything positive under the current administration is because of the previous administration. Everything bad is because of the current administration I hate." Let's conveniently pick whatever suits our narrative TheWorstPoster posted...</cite> <quote>Watch the whole thing</quote> They arent interested in facts. If they were, they wouldnt keep parroting this crap that's been debunked for ages. They just plug their ears. On another note, I saw where someone had the idea to simply move Confederate statues to museums though and I think that's a good idea that could appease most people</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Lokarin 08/27/19 2:40:17 PM #62:	Mead posted... Lokarin posted... None of this was the intention of my topic, guys I thought this meme was suppose to be Tommy Lee Jones looking over a newspaper --- "Salt cures Everything!" My YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/Nirakolov/videos <cite>Lokarin posted [p:926614868] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>Lokarin posted... </cite> <quote>None of this was the intention of my topic, guys</quote> </quote> I thought this meme was suppose to be Tommy Lee Jones looking over a newspaper</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheWorstPoster 08/27/19 2:41:17 PM #63:	OhhhJa posted... They arent interested in facts. If they were, they wouldnt keep parroting this crap that's been debunked for ages. They just plug their ears. On another note, I saw where someone had the idea to simply move Confederate statues to museums though and I think that's a good idea that could appease most people My bet is that he refuses to go to 1:55 in the video, and instead listens to talking points by MSM heads after the fact who pretends what Trump said at 1:55 never happened, or he will claim that BECAUSE CNBC showed the speech in full one time, that his Fake News claim is fake? He probably will refuse to watch the video, and out of ignorance, claim what Trump said never happened, in order to claim victory in his flawed (and false) argument, because he is scared that he would be wrong. <cite>TheWorstPoster posted [p:926614905] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>They arent interested in facts. If they were, they wouldnt keep parroting this crap that's been debunked for ages. They just plug their ears. On another note, I saw where someone had the idea to simply move Confederate statues to museums though and I think that's a good idea that could appease most people</quote> My bet is that he refuses to go to 1:55 in the video, and instead listens to talking points by MSM heads after the fact who pretends what Trump said at 1:55 never happened, or he will claim that BECAUSE CNBC showed the speech in full one time, that his Fake News claim is fake? He probably will refuse to watch the video, and out of ignorance, claim what Trump said never happened, in order to claim victory in his flawed (and false) argument, because he is scared that he would be wrong.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 08/27/19 2:43:38 PM #64:	adjl posted... By which you mean they're letting emotions get in the way of rational thought. Do you consider that intelligent? They're average in an intelligent species, it's pretty prejudice to judge them as mentally slow because they agree with a slogan for reasons you don't even know. adjl posted... It really isn't. Making vague emotional appeals to prey on stupid people isn't something anyone in power should be doing, regardless of who's doing it. Okay, the world is shit, Trump is not more shit than any other group for doing it still. adjl posted... It is prejudicial, however, to use that as a basis to discriminate against Muslims. By definition. By definition, a person must have no reason or experience, and knowing a person's highest authority does not like you is a good reason to not like them. adjl posted... I consider "functionally identical" to qualify as more than slightly accurate, especially in the absence of a succinct term that would be more optimally specific. It's not even applicable, don't talk shit. Instead of crying "That's racist!" you can just say "That's something I don't understand and it scares me!". adjl posted... Anyone who doesn't understand the point being made despite the suboptimal word choice doesn't actually understand why racism is bad in the first place. Your "point" is to use an emotionally evocative word to slander your opponent to deliver social harm. We understand what it means, so find it deeply distasteful you would throw it around so casually. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:926614981] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted...</cite> <quote>By which you mean they're letting emotions get in the way of rational thought. Do you consider that intelligent? </quote> They're average in an intelligent species, it's pretty prejudice to judge them as mentally slow because they agree with a slogan for reasons you don't even know. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>It really isn't. Making vague emotional appeals to prey on stupid people isn't something anyone in power should be doing, regardless of who's doing it.</quote> Okay, the world is shit, Trump is not more shit than any other group for doing it still. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>It is prejudicial, however, to use that as a basis to discriminate against Muslims. By definition.</quote> By definition, a person must have no reason or experience, and knowing a person's highest authority does not like you is a good reason to not like them. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>I consider "functionally identical" to qualify as more than slightly accurate, especially in the absence of a succinct term that would be more optimally specific.</quote> It's not even applicable, don't talk shit. Instead of crying "That's racist!" you can just say "That's something I don't understand and it scares me!". adjl posted...</cite> <quote>Anyone who doesn't understand the point being made despite the suboptimal word choice doesn't actually understand why racism is bad in the first place.</quote> Your "point" is to use an emotionally evocative word to slander your opponent to deliver social harm. We understand what it means, so find it deeply distasteful you would throw it around so casually.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Phantom_Nook 08/27/19 2:45:35 PM #65:	OhhhJa posted... They arent interested in facts. Ironic, coming from a Trump supporter. --- Posted with GameRaven 3.5.1 <cite>Phantom_Nook posted [p:926615065] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>They arent interested in facts. </quote> Ironic, coming from a Trump supporter.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FrndNhbrHdCEman 08/27/19 2:47:33 PM #66:	adjl posted... Broken_Zeus posted... You have an unhealthy obsession with writing off evidence that directly refutes your stupid, s*ty arguments as whataboutism. No I don't. I have a perfectly healthy obsession with writing off whataboutism as whataboutism. I call it "acknowledging empirical reality," and it's a major part of how I live my life. By definition, if you respond to "X is bad!" with "this other guy did X," without doing anything to address the actual point of X being bad, that's whataboutism. If you think X is fine, defend X. If you agree that X is bad, don't treat it as a chance to take shots at some other guy who did X in the past, treat it as a chance to agree and do whatever you can to stop X. That you struggle with this concept is the unhealthy obsession with whataboutism to which I was referring. Damn. Took his ass to school. OhhhJa posted... "Everything positive under the current administration is because of the previous administration. Everything bad is because of the current administration I hate." Let's conveniently pick whatever suits our narrative I mean that's cause it almost always is. Administrations don't see an immediate effect short of trade deals. --- Official nosy neighbor and gossip https://imgur.com/uGKwGsK <cite>FrndNhbrHdCEman posted [p:926615140] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted...</cite> <quote>Broken_Zeus posted...</cite> <quote>You have an unhealthy obsession with writing off evidence that directly refutes your stupid, s*ty arguments as whataboutism. </quote> No I don't. I have a perfectly healthy obsession with writing off whataboutism as whataboutism. I call it "acknowledging empirical reality," and it's a major part of how I live my life. By definition, if you respond to "X is bad!" with "this other guy did X," without doing anything to address the actual point of X being bad, that's whataboutism. If you think X is fine, defend X. If you agree that X is bad, don't treat it as a chance to take shots at some other guy who did X in the past, treat it as a chance to agree and do whatever you can to stop X. That you struggle with this concept is the unhealthy obsession with whataboutism to which I was referring.</quote> Damn. Took his ass to school. OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>"Everything positive under the current administration is because of the previous administration. Everything bad is because of the current administration I hate." Let's conveniently pick whatever suits our narrative </quote> I mean that's cause it almost always is. Administrations don't see an immediate effect short of trade deals.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 08/27/19 2:51:55 PM #67:	FrndNhbrHdCEman posted... I mean that's cause it almost always is. Administrations don't see an immediate effect short of trade deals. Yeah I'm just referring to people without any kind of knowledge on a particular subject just conveniently attribute whatever to a certain administration because it suits their agenda Phantom_Nook posted... Ironic, coming from a Trump supporter. Get new material <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:926615334] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>FrndNhbrHdCEman posted...</cite> <quote>I mean that's cause it almost always is. Administrations don't see an immediate effect short of trade deals.</quote> Yeah I'm just referring to people without any kind of knowledge on a particular subject just conveniently attribute whatever to a certain administration because it suits their agenda Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote>Ironic, coming from a Trump supporter.</quote> Get new material</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Phantom_Nook 08/27/19 3:02:47 PM #68:	OhhhJa posted... Phantom_Nook posted... Ironic, coming from a Trump supporter. Get new material I'm sorry, would you like some alternative facts instead? --- Posted with GameRaven 3.5.1 <cite>Phantom_Nook posted [p:926615738] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote> Ironic, coming from a Trump supporter.</quote> Get new material</quote> I'm sorry, would you like some alternative facts instead?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheWorstPoster 08/27/19 3:03:59 PM #69:	Phantom_Nook posted... I'm sorry, would you like some alternative facts instead? You are the one trying to twist things to suit a political agenda. We are the ones who only want accounts for things that actually happens. <cite>TheWorstPoster posted [p:926615777] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote> I'm sorry, would you like some alternative facts instead?</quote> You are the one trying to twist things to suit a political agenda. We are the ones who only want accounts for things that actually happens.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 08/27/19 3:04:57 PM #70:	Kyuubi4269 posted... They're average in an intelligent species, it's pretty prejudice to judge them as mentally slow because they agree with a slogan for reasons you don't even know. I don't need to know their reasons to know that MAGA is hollow, meaningless pathos and that anyone who doesn't see that isn't doing too much actual thinking on the matter. Kyuubi4269 posted... Okay, the world is s*, Trump is not more s* than any other group for doing it still. Yeah, pretty much. Everyone engaging in such practices deserves the same criticism. Trump's doing them very publicly, therefore he's drawing more criticism. Kyuubi4269 posted... By definition, a person must have no reason or experience, and knowing a person's highest authority does not like you is a good reason to not like them. If you pre-emptively judge the role their religion plays in their life, sure. But then that's prejudice. Whee! Kyuubi4269 posted... It's not even applicable, don't talk s*. It's functionally identical, don't fixate on irrelevant trivialities. The salient point is the prejudicial discrimination, not the specific personal characteristic upon which it's based. Kyuubi4269 posted... Your "point" is to use an emotionally evocative word to slander your opponent to deliver social harm. No, my point is that typing six characters/saying three syllables is substantially more efficient than typing 51 characters/saying 17 syllables (in the case of religion; "culture" is fewer, "ethnicity" is more) to communicate a functionally identical point. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:926615815] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>They're average in an intelligent species, it's pretty prejudice to judge them as mentally slow because they agree with a slogan for reasons you don't even know.</quote> I don't need to know their reasons to know that MAGA is hollow, meaningless pathos and that anyone who doesn't see that isn't doing too much actual thinking on the matter. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Okay, the world is s, Trump is not more s than any other group for doing it still.</quote> Yeah, pretty much. Everyone engaging in such practices deserves the same criticism. Trump's doing them very publicly, therefore he's drawing more criticism. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>By definition, a person must have no reason or experience, and knowing a person's highest authority does not like you is a good reason to not like them.</quote> If you pre-emptively judge the role their religion plays in their life, sure. But then that's prejudice. Whee! Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>It's not even applicable, don't talk s*.</quote> It's functionally identical, don't fixate on irrelevant trivialities. The salient point is the prejudicial discrimination, not the specific personal characteristic upon which it's based. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Your "point" is to use an emotionally evocative word to slander your opponent to deliver social harm.</quote> No, my point is that typing six characters/saying three syllables is substantially more efficient than typing 51 characters/saying 17 syllables (in the case of religion; "culture" is fewer, "ethnicity" is more) to communicate a functionally identical point.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Phantom_Nook 08/27/19 3:05:54 PM #71:	TheWorstPoster posted... We are the ones who only want accounts for things that actually happens. No, you just blindly take what your cult leader makes up as fact. --- Posted with GameRaven 3.5.1 <cite>Phantom_Nook posted [p:926615857] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheWorstPoster posted...</cite> <quote>We are the ones who only want accounts for things that actually happens.</quote> No, you just blindly take what your cult leader makes up as fact.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 08/27/19 3:06:18 PM #72:	Phantom_Nook posted... OhhhJa posted... Phantom_Nook posted... Ironic, coming from a Trump supporter. Get new material I'm sorry, would you like some alternative facts instead? Is running your mouth without actually saying anything your schtick? <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:926615875] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote> Ironic, coming from a Trump supporter.</quote> Get new material</quote> I'm sorry, would you like some alternative facts instead?</quote> Is running your mouth without actually saying anything your schtick?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TyVulpine 08/27/19 3:09:48 PM #73:	TheWorstPoster posted... TyVulpine posted... Does "Some fine people" when talking about white supremacists ring a bell? You mean the part where he was talking ABOUT the people who came there to peacefully protest the statue, and explicitly stated that he was NOT talking about the White Supremacists? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs" data-time=" Watch the whole thing "Some fine people on both sides". What part of that do you not understand? He clearly called white supremacists "some fine people" --- Fall down, go boom... Life is like a box of chocolates. Most of it is crap. <cite>TyVulpine posted [p:926616001] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>TheWorstPoster posted...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>Does "Some fine people" when talking about white supremacists ring a bell?</quote> You mean the part where he was talking ABOUT the people who came there to peacefully protest the statue, and explicitly stated that he was NOT talking about the White Supremacists? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs" data-time=" Watch the whole thing</quote> "Some fine people on both sides". What part of that do you not understand? He clearly called white supremacists "some fine people"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FrndNhbrHdCEman 08/27/19 3:10:47 PM #74:	Phantom_Nook posted... TheWorstPoster posted... We are the ones who only want accounts for things that actually happens. No, you just blindly take what your cult leader makes up as fact. Gotta say he does seem like the type. --- Official nosy neighbor and gossip https://imgur.com/uGKwGsK <cite>FrndNhbrHdCEman posted [p:926616051] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheWorstPoster posted...</cite> <quote>We are the ones who only want accounts for things that actually happens.</quote> No, you just blindly take what your cult leader makes up as fact.</quote> Gotta say he does seem like the type.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheWorstPoster 08/27/19 3:11:25 PM #75:	TyVulpine posted... "Some fine people on both sides". What part of that do you not understand? He clearly called white supremacists "some fine people" This is proof that you didn't watch the whole video, thus validating this post I made earlier. TheWorstPoster posted... My bet is that he refuses to go to 1:55 in the video, and instead listens to talking points by MSM heads after the fact who pretends what Trump said at 1:55 never happened, or he will claim that BECAUSE CNBC showed the speech in full one time, that his Fake News claim is fake? He probably will refuse to watch the video, and out of ignorance, claim what Trump said never happened, in order to claim victory in his flawed (and false) argument, because he is scared that he would be wrong. You are way too predictable. <cite>TheWorstPoster posted [p:926616074] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>"Some fine people on both sides". What part of that do you not understand? He clearly called white supremacists "some fine people"</quote> This is proof that you didn't watch the whole video, thus validating this post I made earlier. TheWorstPoster posted...</cite> <quote>My bet is that he refuses to go to 1:55 in the video, and instead listens to talking points by MSM heads after the fact who pretends what Trump said at 1:55 never happened, or he will claim that BECAUSE CNBC showed the speech in full one time, that his Fake News claim is fake? He probably will refuse to watch the video, and out of ignorance, claim what Trump said never happened, in order to claim victory in his flawed (and false) argument, because he is scared that he would be wrong. </quote> You are way too predictable.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TyVulpine 08/27/19 3:13:23 PM #76:	TheWorstPoster posted... TyVulpine posted... "Some fine people on both sides". What part of that do you not understand? He clearly called white supremacists "some fine people" This is proof that you didn't watch the whole video, thus validating this post I made earlier.. Nice handwaving. 1:05 "You had VERY FINE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES". Exactly as I said he said. But then again, what else could anyone expect from IYOCAR? --- Fall down, go boom... Life is like a box of chocolates. Most of it is crap. <cite>TyVulpine posted [p:926616151] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>TheWorstPoster posted...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>"Some fine people on both sides". What part of that do you not understand? He clearly called white supremacists "some fine people"</quote> This is proof that you didn't watch the whole video, thus validating this post I made earlier..</quote> Nice handwaving. 1:05 "You had VERY FINE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES". Exactly as I said he said. But then again, what else could anyone expect from IYOCAR?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 08/27/19 3:18:19 PM #77:	adjl posted... If you pre-emptively judge the role their religion plays in their life, sure. But then that's prejudice. Whee! Oh it's so unrealistic that somebody would take their faith seriously. It's entirely reasonable, so once again, you're talking out of your ass. adjl posted... It's functionally identical, don't fixate on irrelevant trivialities. The salient point is the prejudicial discrimination, not the specific personal characteristic upon which it's based. Why would you not just say it's discriminatory then? That postmodernist bs can fuck right off, you know what you're doing and it's disgusting. adjl posted... No, my point is that typing six characters/saying three syllables is substantially more efficient than typing 51 characters/saying 17 syllables (in the case of religion; "culture" is fewer, "ethnicity" is more) to communicate a functionally identical point. You're arguing with me excessively verbosely so you have no grounds to argue expedience. Again, you're acting maliciously and it's disgusting. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:926616391] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted...</cite> <quote>If you pre-emptively judge the role their religion plays in their life, sure. But then that's prejudice. Whee!</quote> Oh it's so unrealistic that somebody would take their faith seriously. It's entirely reasonable, so once again, you're talking out of your ass. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>It's functionally identical, don't fixate on irrelevant trivialities. The salient point is the prejudicial discrimination, not the specific personal characteristic upon which it's based.</quote> Why would you not just say it's discriminatory then? That postmodernist bs can fuck right off, you know what you're doing and it's disgusting. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>No, my point is that typing six characters/saying three syllables is substantially more efficient than typing 51 characters/saying 17 syllables (in the case of religion; "culture" is fewer, "ethnicity" is more) to communicate a functionally identical point.</quote> You're arguing with me excessively verbosely so you have no grounds to argue expedience. Again, you're acting maliciously and it's disgusting.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 08/27/19 3:23:48 PM #78:	TyVulpine posted... TheWorstPoster posted... TyVulpine posted... Does "Some fine people" when talking about white supremacists ring a bell? You mean the part where he was talking ABOUT the people who came there to peacefully protest the statue, and explicitly stated that he was NOT talking about the White Supremacists? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs" data-time=" Watch the whole thing "Some fine people on both sides". What part of that do you not understand? He clearly called white supremacists "some fine people" Case in point. Like I said before, people like ty arent interested in facts. They just parrot CNN talking points over and over hoping that it will eventually stick. And it does for a lot of folks I guess. If you repeat a lie long enough, people will begin to believe it <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:926616631] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>TheWorstPoster posted...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>Does "Some fine people" when talking about white supremacists ring a bell?</quote> You mean the part where he was talking ABOUT the people who came there to peacefully protest the statue, and explicitly stated that he was NOT talking about the White Supremacists? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs" data-time=" Watch the whole thing</quote> "Some fine people on both sides". What part of that do you not understand? He clearly called white supremacists "some fine people"</quote> Case in point. Like I said before, people like ty arent interested in facts. They just parrot CNN talking points over and over hoping that it will eventually stick. And it does for a lot of folks I guess. If you repeat a lie long enough, people will begin to believe it</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 08/27/19 3:24:05 PM #79:	TyVulpine posted... Some fine people on both sides". What part of that do you not understand? He clearly called white supremacists "some fine people" Or more accurately, that there were some people who are fine on both sides, not the white supremacists he exempted lol Of course, this just ignores that the message to begin with was just political twaddle to show the president noticed the event happened. To say nothing is to look callous and disinterested in the people, to pick a side is to give somebody ammo; the sensible approach was to stay impartial. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:926616645] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>Some fine people on both sides". What part of that do you not understand? He clearly called white supremacists "some fine people"</quote> Or more accurately, that there were some people who are fine on both sides, not the white supremacists he exempted lol Of course, this just ignores that the message to begin with was just political twaddle to show the president noticed the event happened. To say nothing is to look callous and disinterested in the people, to pick a side is to give somebody ammo; the sensible approach was to stay impartial.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 08/27/19 3:25:56 PM #80:	Kyuubi4269 posted... Or more accurately, that there were some people who are fine on both sides, not the white supremacists he exempted lol You wont convince him. He believes that because some white supremacists showed up to the rally that everyone that was there was a white supremacist. He's incapable of thinking people can be individuals and not part of a group. Being part of a group is his life. Makes it easier for him. He doesnt have to think for himself <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:926616720] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Or more accurately, that there were some people who are fine on both sides, not the white supremacists he exempted lol</quote> You wont convince him. He believes that because some white supremacists showed up to the rally that everyone that was there was a white supremacist. He's incapable of thinking people can be individuals and not part of a group. Being part of a group is his life. Makes it easier for him. He doesnt have to think for himself</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 08/27/19 3:27:23 PM #81:	He's the kind of guy who would believe that if a group of white supremacists showed up to a street fighter tournament that all street fighter players are white supremacists <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:926616783] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>He's the kind of guy who would believe that if a group of white supremacists showed up to a street fighter tournament that all street fighter players are white supremacists</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheWorstPoster 08/27/19 3:28:22 PM #82:	TyVulpine posted... Nice handwaving. 1:05 "You had VERY FINE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES". Exactly as I said he said. 1:55 Trump "You know what, it's fine. You're changing history, you're changing culture, and you had people, and I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis or the White Nationalists, because they should be condemned totally, but you had many people in that group, other than Neo-Nazis and White Nationalists ok? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had some troublemakers, and you seen them come with the black outfits, and with the helmets, with the baseball bats, you had a lot of bad people in the other group." Reporter "Who had the press treated unfairly, I couldn't see what you were saying, you were saying the press treated White Nationalists unfairly, I just don't understand what you're saying?" Trump "No. No. There were people in that rally, and I looked the night before, if you look, there were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. I'm sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day it looked like they had some rough bad people, Neo-Nazis, White Nationalists, whatever you want to call them, but you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest, and very legally protest, because I don't know if you know, they had a permit, the other group didn't have a permit, so I only tell you this, there are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country, a horrible moment, but there are two sides to the country." <cite>TheWorstPoster posted [p:926616831] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>Nice handwaving. 1:05 "You had VERY FINE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES". Exactly as I said he said.</quote> 1:55 Trump "You know what, it's fine. You're changing history, you're changing culture, and you had people, and I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis or the White Nationalists, because they should be condemned totally, but you had many people in that group, other than Neo-Nazis and White Nationalists ok? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had some troublemakers, and you seen them come with the black outfits, and with the helmets, with the baseball bats, you had a lot of bad people in the other group." Reporter "Who had the press treated unfairly, I couldn't see what you were saying, you were saying the press treated White Nationalists unfairly, I just don't understand what you're saying?" Trump "No. No. There were people in that rally, and I looked the night before, if you look, there were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. I'm sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day it looked like they had some rough bad people, Neo-Nazis, White Nationalists, whatever you want to call them, but you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest, and very legally protest, because I don't know if you know, they had a permit, the other group didn't have a permit, so I only tell you this, there are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country, a horrible moment, but there are two sides to the country."</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 08/27/19 3:34:28 PM #83:	TheWorstPoster posted... TyVulpine posted... Nice handwaving. 1:05 "You had VERY FINE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES". Exactly as I said he said. 1:55 Trump "You know what, it's fine. You're changing history, you're changing culture, and you had people, and I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis or the White Nationalists, because they should be condemned totally, but you had many people in that group, other than Neo-Nazis and White Nationalists ok? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had some troublemakers, and you seen them come with the black outfits, and with the helmets, with the baseball bats, you had a lot of bad people in the other group." Reporter "Who had the press treated unfairly, I couldn't see what you were saying, you were saying the press treated White Nationalists unfairly, I just don't understand what you're saying?" Trump "No. No. There were people in that rally, and I looked the night before, if you look, there were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. I'm sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day it looked like they had some rough bad people, Neo-Nazis, White Nationalists, whatever you want to call them, but you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest, and very legally protest, because I don't know if you know, they had a permit, the other group didn't have a permit, so I only tell you this, there are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country, a horrible moment, but there are two sides to the country." "So WhAt YoUrE SaYiNg Is YoU LoVe NaZiS?" <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:926617077] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>TheWorstPoster posted...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>Nice handwaving. 1:05 "You had VERY FINE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES". Exactly as I said he said.</quote> 1:55 Trump "You know what, it's fine. You're changing history, you're changing culture, and you had people, and I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis or the White Nationalists, because they should be condemned totally, but you had many people in that group, other than Neo-Nazis and White Nationalists ok? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had some troublemakers, and you seen them come with the black outfits, and with the helmets, with the baseball bats, you had a lot of bad people in the other group." Reporter "Who had the press treated unfairly, I couldn't see what you were saying, you were saying the press treated White Nationalists unfairly, I just don't understand what you're saying?" Trump "No. No. There were people in that rally, and I looked the night before, if you look, there were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. I'm sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day it looked like they had some rough bad people, Neo-Nazis, White Nationalists, whatever you want to call them, but you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest, and very legally protest, because I don't know if you know, they had a permit, the other group didn't have a permit, so I only tell you this, there are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country, a horrible moment, but there are two sides to the country."</quote> "So WhAt YoUrE SaYiNg Is YoU LoVe NaZiS?"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Phantom_Nook 08/27/19 3:50:38 PM #84:	OhhhJa posted... Phantom_Nook posted... OhhhJa posted... Phantom_Nook posted... Ironic, coming from a Trump supporter. Get new material I'm sorry, would you like some alternative facts instead? Is running your mouth without actually saying anything your schtick? If it was, would you worship me like you do with Trump? --- Posted with GameRaven 3.5.1 <cite>Phantom_Nook posted [p:926617706] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote> Ironic, coming from a Trump supporter. </quote> Get new material </quote> I'm sorry, would you like some alternative facts instead?</quote> Is running your mouth without actually saying anything your schtick?</quote> If it was, would you worship me like you do with Trump?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
EvilMegas 08/27/19 3:52:33 PM #85:	I like that you same guys always have the same argument everytime. --- Official King of Black People https://imgur.com/Zk3VS3o http://imgur.com/a/UeQiE https://imgur.com/aSnCUuI <cite>EvilMegas posted [p:926617784] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>I like that you same guys always have the same argument everytime.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Lokarin 08/27/19 3:53:42 PM #86:	EvilMegas posted... I like that you same guys always have the same argument everytime. I don't, I wanted to learn things --- "Salt cures Everything!" My YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/Nirakolov/videos <cite>Lokarin posted [p:926617830] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>EvilMegas posted...</cite> <quote>I like that you same guys always have the same argument everytime.</quote> I don't, I wanted to learn things</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
EvilMegas 08/27/19 3:55:57 PM #87:	No you didn't. Mainly because you asked here. --- Official King of Black People https://imgur.com/Zk3VS3o http://imgur.com/a/UeQiE https://imgur.com/aSnCUuI <cite>EvilMegas posted [p:926617904] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>No you didn't. Mainly because you asked here.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 08/27/19 4:22:21 PM #88:	Phantom_Nook posted... OhhhJa posted... Phantom_Nook posted... OhhhJa posted... Phantom_Nook posted... Ironic, coming from a Trump supporter. Get new material I'm sorry, would you like some alternative facts instead? Is running your mouth without actually saying anything your schtick? If it was, would you worship me like you do with Trump? You seem to be way more fixated on trump that I could ever fathom being <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:926618948] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote> Ironic, coming from a Trump supporter. </quote> Get new material </quote> I'm sorry, would you like some alternative facts instead?</quote> Is running your mouth without actually saying anything your schtick?</quote> If it was, would you worship me like you do with Trump?</quote> You seem to be way more fixated on trump that I could ever fathom being</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SKARDAVNELNATE 08/27/19 6:29:32 PM #89:	adjl posted... The reasons to be concerned about immigration are as follows: 1. Immigrants will drain the country's limited resources, leaving less available for native-born citizens 2. Immigrants will take jobs away from native-born citizens by working for lower wages The former has nothing to do with illegal immigrants This is why it's necessary to control the influx of immigrants. There is a certain number that can be allowed at a time. Particularly for a 3rd reason, to allow immigrants time to integrate without fracturing the existing society too much. If you don't restrict immigration to a manageable size each reason in this list will create it's own unique problems. adjl posted... Laws have no inherent value. "It's the law!" is not a valid defense of anything on its own. Correct, laws have no inherent value. Laws serve as a means to promote or restrict behaviors in society. The USA has a rather orderly and stable society compared to other nations. It's this quality which attracts people from other parts of the world. That's why it's all the more necessary to have laws which preserve that stability. Thus, why people would want laws obeyed and violations addressed. Lest their society becomes more like the parts of the world that people are leaving. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:926623713] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted...</cite> <quote>The reasons to be concerned about immigration are as follows: 1. Immigrants will drain the country's limited resources, leaving less available for native-born citizens 2. Immigrants will take jobs away from native-born citizens by working for lower wages The former has nothing to do with illegal immigrants</quote> This is why it's necessary to control the influx of immigrants. There is a certain number that can be allowed at a time. Particularly for a 3rd reason, to allow immigrants time to integrate without fracturing the existing society too much. If you don't restrict immigration to a manageable size each reason in this list will create it's own unique problems. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>Laws have no inherent value. "It's the law!" is not a valid defense of anything on its own.</quote> Correct, laws have no inherent value. Laws serve as a means to promote or restrict behaviors in society. The USA has a rather orderly and stable society compared to other nations. It's this quality which attracts people from other parts of the world. That's why it's all the more necessary to have laws which preserve that stability. Thus, why people would want laws obeyed and violations addressed. Lest their society becomes more like the parts of the world that people are leaving.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TyVulpine 08/27/19 6:48:39 PM #90:	Immigrants will take jobs away from native-born citizens by working for lower wages Funny, I havent exactly seen lines of native-born Americans lining up for menial construction jobs or sanitation jobs or jobs at 7-Elevens. --- Fall down, go boom... Life is like a box of chocolates. Most of it is crap. <cite>TyVulpine posted [p:926624392] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Immigrants will take jobs away from native-born citizens by working for lower wages Funny, I havent exactly seen lines of native-born Americans lining up for menial construction jobs or sanitation jobs or jobs at 7-Elevens.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheWorstPoster 08/27/19 6:51:14 PM #91:	OhhhJa posted... TheWorstPoster posted... TyVulpine posted... Nice handwaving. 1:05 "You had VERY FINE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES". Exactly as I said he said. 1:55 Trump "You know what, it's fine. You're changing history, you're changing culture, and you had people, and I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis or the White Nationalists, because they should be condemned totally, but you had many people in that group, other than Neo-Nazis and White Nationalists ok? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had some troublemakers, and you seen them come with the black outfits, and with the helmets, with the baseball bats, you had a lot of bad people in the other group." Reporter "Who had the press treated unfairly, I couldn't see what you were saying, you were saying the press treated White Nationalists unfairly, I just don't understand what you're saying?" Trump "No. No. There were people in that rally, and I looked the night before, if you look, there were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. I'm sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day it looked like they had some rough bad people, Neo-Nazis, White Nationalists, whatever you want to call them, but you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest, and very legally protest, because I don't know if you know, they had a permit, the other group didn't have a permit, so I only tell you this, there are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country, a horrible moment, but there are two sides to the country." "So WhAt YoUrE SaYiNg Is YoU LoVe NaZiS?" I love it how TyVulpine is ignoring this <cite>TheWorstPoster posted [p:926624472] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>TheWorstPoster posted...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>Nice handwaving. 1:05 "You had VERY FINE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES". Exactly as I said he said.</quote> 1:55 Trump "You know what, it's fine. You're changing history, you're changing culture, and you had people, and I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis or the White Nationalists, because they should be condemned totally, but you had many people in that group, other than Neo-Nazis and White Nationalists ok? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had some troublemakers, and you seen them come with the black outfits, and with the helmets, with the baseball bats, you had a lot of bad people in the other group." Reporter "Who had the press treated unfairly, I couldn't see what you were saying, you were saying the press treated White Nationalists unfairly, I just don't understand what you're saying?" Trump "No. No. There were people in that rally, and I looked the night before, if you look, there were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. I'm sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day it looked like they had some rough bad people, Neo-Nazis, White Nationalists, whatever you want to call them, but you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest, and very legally protest, because I don't know if you know, they had a permit, the other group didn't have a permit, so I only tell you this, there are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country, a horrible moment, but there are two sides to the country."</quote> "So WhAt YoUrE SaYiNg Is YoU LoVe NaZiS?"</quote> I love it how TyVulpine is ignoring this</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SunWuKung420 08/27/19 6:51:32 PM #92:	TyVulpine posted... Immigrants will take jobs away from native-born citizens by working for lower wages Funny, I havent exactly seen lines of native-born Americans lining up for menial construction jobs or sanitation jobs or jobs at 7-Elevens. Or in kitchens or doing lawns or working on farms... Basically all the hard jobs. --- I'd rather die helping others survive than be all alone, UNSCATHED, after all others have fallen -DEC <cite>SunWuKung420 posted [p:926624483] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>Immigrants will take jobs away from native-born citizens by working for lower wages Funny, I havent exactly seen lines of native-born Americans lining up for menial construction jobs or sanitation jobs or jobs at 7-Elevens.</quote> Or in kitchens or doing lawns or working on farms... Basically all the hard jobs.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TyVulpine 08/27/19 7:01:32 PM #93:	SunWuKung420 posted... TyVulpine posted... Immigrants will take jobs away from native-born citizens by working for lower wages Funny, I havent exactly seen lines of native-born Americans lining up for menial construction jobs or sanitation jobs or jobs at 7-Elevens. Or in kitchens or doing lawns or working on farms... Basically all the hard jobs. I used to know three native born white brothers that had a landscaping company (the youngest eventually went off to college leaving his older two Bros to run the company) --- Fall down, go boom... Life is like a box of chocolates. Most of it is crap. <cite>TyVulpine posted [p:926624805] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>SunWuKung420 posted...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>Immigrants will take jobs away from native-born citizens by working for lower wages Funny, I havent exactly seen lines of native-born Americans lining up for menial construction jobs or sanitation jobs or jobs at 7-Elevens.</quote> Or in kitchens or doing lawns or working on farms... Basically all the hard jobs.</quote> I used to know three native born white brothers that had a landscaping company (the youngest eventually went off to college leaving his older two Bros to run the company)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 08/27/19 7:03:22 PM #94:	Immigrants dont take jobs anymore, automation is taking all the jobs #YangGang --- More malicious than mischievous <cite>Mead posted [p:926624870] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Immigrants dont take jobs anymore, automation is taking all the jobs #YangGang </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Sahuagin 08/27/19 7:52:06 PM #95:	stupid beta button throws away your post. sigh... really need to start using notepad instead Lokarin posted... How is MAGA racist again? not sure if it is or isn't but it's definitely an easy thing to say if you don't want to make an actual argument, which is a pretty common theme coming from the left these days. it is true though that the strengthening of the right is also strengthening (or at least emboldening) certain right wing groups that are racist. lots of juicy places to jump in, but I'll pick this one since it seems the most interesting so far: adjl posted... If you pre-emptively judge the role their religion plays in their life, sure. But then that's prejudice. Whee! - judging people based on their ideological beliefs is not unreasonable or immoral - muslims will happily tell you how much they support the worst parts of their religious teachings, and will even happily tell you that there are no moderate muslims: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRUHwQW9nyQ" data-time=" --- *The truth basks in scrutiny.* https://imgur.com/GMouTGs http://projecteuler.net/profile/Sahuagin.png <cite>Sahuagin posted [p:926626705] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>stupid beta button throws away your post. sigh... really need to start using notepad instead <cite>Lokarin posted...</cite> <quote>How is MAGA racist again?</quote> not sure if it is or isn't but it's definitely an easy thing to say if you don't want to make an actual argument, which is a pretty common theme coming from the left these days. it is true though that the strengthening of the right is also strengthening (or at least emboldening) certain right wing groups that are racist. lots of juicy places to jump in, but I'll pick this one since it seems the most interesting so far: adjl posted...</cite> <quote>If you pre-emptively judge the role their religion plays in their life, sure. But then that's prejudice. Whee!</quote> - judging people based on their ideological beliefs is not unreasonable or immoral - muslims will happily tell you how much they support the worst parts of their religious teachings, and will even happily tell you that there are no moderate muslims: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRUHwQW9nyQ" data-time="</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FrndNhbrHdCEman 08/27/19 8:13:43 PM #96:	Sahuagin posted... - muslims will happily tell you how much they support the worst parts of their religious teachings, and will even happily tell you that there are no moderate muslims Lumping people together. How classy of you. --- Official nosy neighbor and gossip https://imgur.com/uGKwGsK <cite>FrndNhbrHdCEman posted [p:926627585] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Sahuagin posted...</cite> <quote>- muslims will happily tell you how much they support the worst parts of their religious teachings, and will even happily tell you that there are no moderate muslims</quote> Lumping people together. How classy of you.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
dvdjedi 08/28/19 10:48:39 AM #97:	TyVulpine posted... PKMNsony posted... As someone with less white in me than native American in Elizabeth Warren, I've never felt a bit of racism that white liberals keep telling me I'm supposed to feel from Trump. \_()_/ Ask the Puerto Ricans that asked Trump for help after the hurricane wiped out roads to remote parts of the island and all the stuff sat on tarmacs because relief couldn't reach them if Trump's not racist. Also, ask Trump when he plans on paying Puerto Rico that $33 million he still owes for the golf course. Oh Trump helped those U.S. citizens in Puerto Rico. Proof below. --- "People have got to know whether or not their president is a crook." Richard Nixon (November 17, 1973) <cite>dvdjedi posted [p:926650046] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>TyVulpine posted...</cite> <quote>PKMNsony posted...</cite> <quote>As someone with less white in me than native American in Elizabeth Warren, I've never felt a bit of racism that white liberals keep telling me I'm supposed to feel from Trump. \_()_/</quote> Ask the Puerto Ricans that asked Trump for help after the hurricane wiped out roads to remote parts of the island and all the stuff sat on tarmacs because relief couldn't reach them if Trump's not racist. Also, ask Trump when he plans on paying Puerto Rico that $33 million he still owes for the golf course.</quote> Oh Trump helped those U.S. citizens in Puerto Rico. Proof below. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 08/29/19 9:30:00 AM #98:	Kyuubi4269 posted... Oh it's so unrealistic that somebody would take their faith seriously. If by "take their faith seriously," you mean "follow every single rule and tenet their religion has," then yes, it is unrealistic. Nobody from any religion does that. With many religions, it's physically impossible to do that. If by "take their faith seriously," you mean "rely on their faith for advice on how to live their life better," then that is a much more realistic expectation, but not one that allows you to assume that any given Muslim wants to orchestrate the downfall of Western society. Quite simply, consider how many Muslims exist that aren't terrorists, and practice a more moderate interpretation of Islam. Even if you are going to make assumptions about people instead of getting to know them first, the odds are not in favour of assuming that Muslims are terrorists. Kyuubi4269 posted... Why would you not just say it's discriminatory then? Because it was discriminatory for me to decide not to cut up a peach and put it on my cereal this morning. Logically speaking, discrimination is such a broad concept that the term is virtually meaningless without context, and if somebody needs to be told their discrimination is wrong, context is unable to provide them with that meaning. That makes it exceedingly easy to handwave away. Being unable to explain why religious discrimination isn't functionally identical to racism, however, is a much harder position to be in. I like making the bastards squirm. As I said earlier, it's also a decent test for identifying whether or not a person actually understands why racism is bad. Kyuubi4269 posted... You're arguing with me excessively verbosely so you have no grounds to argue expedience. Persuasive arguing is a time for expanding. I'm not going to sacrifice clarity for expedience here, because the whole reason I'm making this argument is to explain it in detail. That would defeat the purpose. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... This is why it's necessary to control the influx of immigrants. Oh, sure. Completely open borders are generally pretty impractical. The argument, however, then becomes "too many people are coming in uncontrolled and we need to limit that" not "people are coming in illegally and we need to stop that." The attitude from many is that even one illegal immigrant is too many, when the fact that the US has continued to function just fine despite having a whole lot more than that for its entire existence demonstrates that that is not remotely the case. Ergo, there's not much grounds for the massive crackdown on illegal immigration that the "build the wall" crowd wants. Sahuagin posted... - judging people based on their ideological beliefs is not unreasonable or immoral It is if you presume those beliefs instead of ascertaining them directly. Sahuagin posted... - muslims will happily tell you how much they support the worst parts of their religious teachings, and will even happily tell you that there are no moderate muslims Some muslims. Blanket statements are stupid. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:926692162] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Oh it's so unrealistic that somebody would take their faith seriously.</quote> If by "take their faith seriously," you mean "follow every single rule and tenet their religion has," then yes, it is unrealistic. Nobody from any religion does that. With many religions, it's physically impossible to do that. If by "take their faith seriously," you mean "rely on their faith for advice on how to live their life better," then that is a much more realistic expectation, but not one that allows you to assume that any given Muslim wants to orchestrate the downfall of Western society. Quite simply, consider how many Muslims exist that aren't terrorists, and practice a more moderate interpretation of Islam. Even if you are going to make assumptions about people instead of getting to know them first, the odds are not in favour of assuming that Muslims are terrorists. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Why would you not just say it's discriminatory then?</quote> Because it was discriminatory for me to decide not to cut up a peach and put it on my cereal this morning. Logically speaking, discrimination is such a broad concept that the term is virtually meaningless without context, and if somebody needs to be told their discrimination is wrong, context is unable to provide them with that meaning. That makes it exceedingly easy to handwave away. Being unable to explain why religious discrimination isn't functionally identical to racism, however, is a much harder position to be in. I like making the bastards squirm. As I said earlier, it's also a decent test for identifying whether or not a person actually understands why racism is bad. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>You're arguing with me excessively verbosely so you have no grounds to argue expedience.</quote> Persuasive arguing is a time for expanding. I'm not going to sacrifice clarity for expedience here, because the whole reason I'm making this argument is to explain it in detail. That would defeat the purpose. SKARDAVNELNATE posted...</cite> <quote>This is why it's necessary to control the influx of immigrants.</quote> Oh, sure. Completely open borders are generally pretty impractical. The argument, however, then becomes "too many people are coming in uncontrolled and we need to limit that" not "people are coming in illegally and we need to stop that." The attitude from many is that even one illegal immigrant is too many, when the fact that the US has continued to function just fine despite having a whole lot more than that for its entire existence demonstrates that that is not remotely the case. Ergo, there's not much grounds for the massive crackdown on illegal immigration that the "build the wall" crowd wants. Sahuagin posted...</cite> <quote>- judging people based on their ideological beliefs is not unreasonable or immoral</quote> It is if you presume those beliefs instead of ascertaining them directly. Sahuagin posted...</cite> <quote>- muslims will happily tell you how much they support the worst parts of their religious teachings, and will even happily tell you that there are no moderate muslims</quote> Some muslims. Blanket statements are stupid.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 08/29/19 9:59:13 AM #99:	adjl posted... If by "take their faith seriously," you mean "follow every single rule and tenet their religion has," then yes, it is unrealistic. Nobody from any religion does that. With many religions, it's physically impossible to do that. If by "take their faith seriously," you mean "rely on their faith for advice on how to live their life better," then that is a much more realistic expectation, but not one that allows you to assume that any given Muslim wants to orchestrate the downfall of Western society. The faith tells that to live your life properly, you are to manipulate infidels to be compliant and to destroy competing beliefs. If you follow the general spirit of Islam, you are going to be hostile to other cultures or be garbage in your own community. Religion isn't just a set of friendly play rules with a different regional aesthetic, there's a great level of depth to it, and Islam is an example of when it is harmful. adjl posted... Because it was discriminatory for me to decide not to cut up a peach and put it on my cereal this morning. Logically speaking, discrimination is such a broad concept that the term is virtually meaningless without context It's worse than meaningless when you add false context, it's misleading, and in your case, slanderous. adjl posted... and if somebody needs to be told their discrimination is wrong, context is unable to provide them with that meaning. Discrimination isn't inherently wrong; you discriminate between drinking milk or drinking bleach, in this context it's outright necessary. Racism is only bad discrimination because it's taking a visual aspect and attributing false characteristics that have nothing to do with it. An example of discrimination that is not inherently bad is nationalism. If a person is not a native of the nation, then they inherently do not understand the culture and beliefs of the nation as well as a native. It is reasonable to assume that the same values have not been instilled in them and to be cautious. The assumptions made are reasonable and justify discrimination. adjl posted... Being unable to explain why religious discrimination isn't functionally identical to racism, however, is a much harder position to be in. Race does not shape the content of your character, religion does. It's very simple for most of us. adjl posted... Persuasive arguing is a time for expanding. I'm not going to sacrifice clarity for expedience here, because the whole reason I'm making this argument is to explain it in detail. That would defeat the purpose. To be clear would be to not use your "shortcut" of crying racism and explicitly state what discrimination you see and have an issue with. Crying racism when you know it's inaccurate is dirty and you know it. adjl posted... The argument, however, then becomes "too many people are coming in uncontrolled and we need to limit that" not "people are coming in illegally and we need to stop that." Those are the exact same thing. It is illegal to immigrate without proper regulation, thus illegal immigrants are uncontrolled. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:926692933] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted...</cite> <quote>If by "take their faith seriously," you mean "follow every single rule and tenet their religion has," then yes, it is unrealistic. Nobody from any religion does that. With many religions, it's physically impossible to do that. If by "take their faith seriously," you mean "rely on their faith for advice on how to live their life better," then that is a much more realistic expectation, but not one that allows you to assume that any given Muslim wants to orchestrate the downfall of Western society.</quote> The faith tells that to live your life properly, you are to manipulate infidels to be compliant and to destroy competing beliefs. If you follow the general spirit of Islam, you are going to be hostile to other cultures or be garbage in your own community. Religion isn't just a set of friendly play rules with a different regional aesthetic, there's a great level of depth to it, and Islam is an example of when it is harmful. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>Because it was discriminatory for me to decide not to cut up a peach and put it on my cereal this morning. Logically speaking, discrimination is such a broad concept that the term is virtually meaningless without context</quote> It's worse than meaningless when you add false context, it's misleading, and in your case, slanderous. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>and if somebody needs to be told their discrimination is wrong, context is unable to provide them with that meaning.</quote> Discrimination isn't inherently wrong; you discriminate between drinking milk or drinking bleach, in this context it's outright necessary. Racism is only bad discrimination because it's taking a visual aspect and attributing false characteristics that have nothing to do with it. An example of discrimination that is not inherently bad is nationalism. If a person is not a native of the nation, then they inherently do not understand the culture and beliefs of the nation as well as a native. It is reasonable to assume that the same values have not been instilled in them and to be cautious. The assumptions made are reasonable and justify discrimination. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>Being unable to explain why religious discrimination isn't functionally identical to racism, however, is a much harder position to be in.</quote> Race does not shape the content of your character, religion does. It's very simple for most of us. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>Persuasive arguing is a time for expanding. I'm not going to sacrifice clarity for expedience here, because the whole reason I'm making this argument is to explain it in detail. That would defeat the purpose.</quote> To be clear would be to not use your "shortcut" of crying racism and explicitly state what discrimination you see and have an issue with. Crying racism when you know it's inaccurate is dirty and you know it. adjl posted...</cite> <quote>The argument, however, then becomes "too many people are coming in uncontrolled and we need to limit that" not "people are coming in illegally and we need to stop that." </quote> Those are the exact same thing. It is illegal to immigrate without proper regulation, thus illegal immigrants are uncontrolled.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SKARDAVNELNATE 08/29/19 11:21:28 AM #100:	adjl posted... SKARDAVNELNATE posted... This is why it's necessary to control the influx of immigrants. Oh, sure. Completely open borders are generally pretty impractical. The argument, however, then becomes "too many people are coming in uncontrolled and we need to limit that" not "people are coming in illegally and we need to stop that." The attitude from many is that even one illegal immigrant is too many, when the fact that the US has continued to function just fine despite having a whole lot more than that for its entire existence demonstrates that that is not remotely the case. Ergo, there's not much grounds for the massive crackdown on illegal immigration that the "build the wall" crowd wants. I'm not sure what you're arguing here. It seems like we're in agreement that there needs to be a limit of how many people enter the US and when. But do you think illegals will obey that limit? Since they don't enter through official channels there is no way of knowing how many cross the boarder until after the fact. Many of them aren't found out until years later. How would you maintain that limit? Let's suppose the number of permitted entries could be adjusted accordingly? Without knowing the number of illegal entries for a given time the offset value is unknown. Further the number of illegal entries may be greater than the target total. If the US discovers the limit is exceeded should it close the boarder to permitted entries? While the illegal entries continue to occur a balance will never be reached to allow the entry points to open again? Even if there were a means of tracking how many people crossed the boarder and when, as it occurs, that doesn't account for who. There are some people who should not be allowed entry. As such it is true that even one illegal immigrant is too many since the US doesn't know who that illegal immigrant is or why this person didn't go through official channels. Lastly, I don't believe the US is functioning just fine. The are many problems to address of which immigration is just one. Race relations declined during the Obama administration. The Democrats are pushing for ever more censorship and ignoring due process. There's talk of an ongoing culture war. There is actual fighting in the streets sparked by a domestic terrorist group. If there was ever a time when US society needed to integrate it's fractured component it was in 1969, 1985, and today. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:926695711] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted...</cite> <quote>This is why it's necessary to control the influx of immigrants.</quote> Oh, sure. Completely open borders are generally pretty impractical. The argument, however, then becomes "too many people are coming in uncontrolled and we need to limit that" not "people are coming in illegally and we need to stop that." The attitude from many is that even one illegal immigrant is too many, when the fact that the US has continued to function just fine despite having a whole lot more than that for its entire existence demonstrates that that is not remotely the case. Ergo, there's not much grounds for the massive crackdown on illegal immigration that the "build the wall" crowd wants.</quote> I'm not sure what you're arguing here. It seems like we're in agreement that there needs to be a limit of how many people enter the US and when. But do you think illegals will obey that limit? Since they don't enter through official channels there is no way of knowing how many cross the boarder until after the fact. Many of them aren't found out until years later. How would you maintain that limit? Let's suppose the number of permitted entries could be adjusted accordingly? Without knowing the number of illegal entries for a given time the offset value is unknown. Further the number of illegal entries may be greater than the target total. If the US discovers the limit is exceeded should it close the boarder to permitted entries? While the illegal entries continue to occur a balance will never be reached to allow the entry points to open again? Even if there were a means of tracking how many people crossed the boarder and when, as it occurs, that doesn't account for who. There are some people who should not be allowed entry. As such it is true that even one illegal immigrant is too many since the US doesn't know who that illegal immigrant is or why this person didn't go through official channels. Lastly, I don't believe the US is functioning just fine. The are many problems to address of which immigration is just one. Race relations declined during the Obama administration. The Democrats are pushing for ever more censorship and ignoring due process. There's talk of an ongoing culture war. There is actual fighting in the streets sparked by a domestic terrorist group. If there was ever a time when US society needed to integrate it's fractured component it was in 1969, 1985, and today.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 08/29/19 11:25:17 AM #101:	You control immigration by making the process of applying for citizenship more appealing than trying to circumvent the legal process Trump ran for president while illegal immigration was at a 50 year low but because of his boneheaded tactics of making all methods of immigration more obtuse and cruel to deter people from coming from what he calls shithole countries weve seen the numbers skyrocket if you want less illegal immigration then Trump is the worst person you could have elected to control it --- More malicious than mischievous <cite>Mead posted [p:926695875] in How is MAG... [t:77967600]...</cite> <quote>You control immigration by making the process of applying for citizenship more appealing than trying to circumvent the legal process Trump ran for president while illegal immigration was at a 50 year low but because of his boneheaded tactics of making all methods of immigration more obtuse and cruel to deter people from coming from what he calls shithole countries weve seen the numbers skyrocket if you want less illegal immigration then Trump is the worst person you could have elected to control it </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3

Poll of the Day > How is MAGA racist again? (+) Yeah! (+)

Poll of the Day > How is MAGA racist again?