|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Oct 23, 2018 21:26:48 GMT -5
We all took high school civics right? How is this not understood? Nationalism is a philosophy that places country above all else, no exceptions. That means nation before ethics, nation before personal freedoms and nation before moral principles and that kind of unswerving devotion to the state creates a dangerous individual attachment to those in power...which is the opposite of all the principles our nation was founded upon. We're not talking about some misunderstanding or something that's just thought to be a "code word" by some groups, this isn't "There are good people on both sides..."...this is saying he is a nationalist which has a very clear meaning and use and it isn't pretty. Do I need to post some pictures of what prior proud nationalists looked like? I think you know what those pictures would be of. If that’s the case, then I never want to hear the words “Democratic Socialism” ever again. To this day no one on the left can explain it to me in a comprehensive manner. Just because a country like Canada has “socialized medicine” doesn’t mean that they’re a socialist society. They’re not. Yet despite it’s repeated failings and incredible death tolls over the last century, many on the left keep pushing it as some kind of viable alternative to capitalism, which is just batsh*t insane. Just two years ago I saw multiple people on this very forum wish Fidel Castro the best of wishes when he keeled over... I’m not sure when liberals came to the conclusion that protecting this countries borders was a bad thing. They seemed to stand and applaud whenever Bill Clinton or Barack Obama would so steadfastly endorse it. But now that Trump is the overseer...Shame!! SHAME!! Democratic Socialism does not equal Stalin's Russia so there's no comparison to Nationalism...and you know that there is a difference between those two, otherwise why pick that very specific philosophy that sounds like another (socialism/stalinism) in an attempt to say it's just as bad as Nationalism ? But just in case it is a real case of misunderstanding here it is: Social Democracy doesn't aim to create a socialist state but rather to reform the inequities that can crop up in capitalist societies. This means creating programs that create a certain degree of regulation over the economy, social insurance schemes, and public pension and health programs. And I'm all for immigration laws... but there are ways to talk about enforcing them and then there are what is being said by our President. "Hey, there's a large contingent of migrants heading to our borders so I'm activating the National Guard in order to keep the peace while our agents of the border sort through and process the increased volume of requests for immigration and asylum we are expecting to come with these migrants." and then there's this: "Take your camera, go into the middle and search. You’re gonna find MS-13, you’re gonna find Middle Eastern, you’re going to find everything. And guess what? We’re not allowing them in our country. We want safety.” The difference is very clear to see. |
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Oct 23, 2018 21:39:33 GMT -5
If that’s the case, then I never want to hear the words “Democratic Socialism” ever again. To this day no one on the left can explain it to me in a comprehensive manner. Just because a country like Canada has “socialized medicine” doesn’t mean that they’re a socialist society. They’re not. Yet despite it’s repeated failings and incredible death tolls over the last century, many on the left keep pushing it as some kind of viable alternative to capitalism, which is just batsh*t insane. Just two years ago I saw multiple people on this very forum wish Fidel Castro the best of wishes when he keeled over... I’m not sure when liberals came to the conclusion that protecting this countries borders was a bad thing. They seemed to stand and applaud whenever Bill Clinton or Barack Obama would so steadfastly endorse it. But now that Trump is the overseer...Shame!! SHAME!! Democratic Socialism does not equal Stalin's Russia so there's no comparison to Nationalism. Social Democracy doesn't aim to create a socialist state but rather to reform the inequities that can crop up in capitalist societies. This means creating programs that create a certain degree of regulation over the economy, social insurance schemes, and public pension and health programs. And I'm all for immigration laws... but there are ways to talk about enforcing them and then there are what is being said by our President. "Hey, there's a large contingent of migrants heading to our borders so I'm activating the National Guard in order to keep the peace while our agents of the border sort through and process the increased volume of requests for immigration and asylum we are expecting to come with these migrants." and then there's this: "Take your camera, go into the middle and search. You’re gonna find MS-13, you’re gonna find Middle Eastern, you’re going to find everything. And guess what? We’re not allowing them in our country. We want safety.” The difference is very clear to see. Where was scenario B echoed by Trump? He’s repeatedly said that the majority of the people across the border and around the world are good, law abiding citizens...but allowing tens of thousands to flood in by the year and not expecting more than a few bad apples to tag along is somehow foolish or even racist? I dunno, seems pretty rational to me. There’s a major problem with drug/weapon/human trafficking and a massive cause of it is illegal, unlawful entry across the southern border. What’s so nuts about stating the truth? The obvious? It’s one thing to be tolerant. It’s another to be willfully ignorant just for the sake of not offending someone. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Oct 23, 2018 21:51:23 GMT -5
Democratic Socialism does not equal Stalin's Russia so there's no comparison to Nationalism. Social Democracy doesn't aim to create a socialist state but rather to reform the inequities that can crop up in capitalist societies. This means creating programs that create a certain degree of regulation over the economy, social insurance schemes, and public pension and health programs. And I'm all for immigration laws... but there are ways to talk about enforcing them and then there are what is being said by our President. "Hey, there's a large contingent of migrants heading to our borders so I'm activating the National Guard in order to keep the peace while our agents of the border sort through and process the increased volume of requests for immigration and asylum we are expecting to come with these migrants." and then there's this: "Take your camera, go into the middle and search. You’re gonna find MS-13, you’re gonna find Middle Eastern, you’re going to find everything. And guess what? We’re not allowing them in our country. We want safety.” The difference is very clear to see. Where was scenario B echoed by Trump? He’s repeatedly said that the majority of the people across the border and around the world are good, law abiding citizens...but allowing tens of thousands to flood in by the year and not expecting more than a few bad apples to tag along is somehow foolish or even racist? I dunno, seems pretty rational to me. There’s a major problem with drug/weapon/human trafficking and a massive cause of it is illegal, unlawful entry across the southern border. What’s so nuts about stating the truth? The obvious? It’s one thing to be tolerant. It’s another to be willfully ignorant just for the sake of not offending someone. It's an exact quote, not something I made up. And as I said, there's a way to say you want to enforce our immigration policies and then there's needless scaremongering. and as I posted above the difference is clear and that difference is what people are reacting to. |
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Oct 23, 2018 22:05:20 GMT -5
Where was scenario B echoed by Trump? He’s repeatedly said that the majority of the people across the border and around the world are good, law abiding citizens...but allowing tens of thousands to flood in by the year and not expecting more than a few bad apples to tag along is somehow foolish or even racist? I dunno, seems pretty rational to me. There’s a major problem with drug/weapon/human trafficking and a massive cause of it is illegal, unlawful entry across the southern border. What’s so nuts about stating the truth? The obvious? It’s one thing to be tolerant. It’s another to be willfully ignorant just for the sake of not offending someone. It's an exact quote, not something I made up. And as I said, there's a way to say you want to enforce our immigration policies and then there's needless scaremongering. and as I posted above the difference is clear and that difference is what people are reacting to. So what is this, exactly? Needless “scaremongering”? Or...the truth? Suddenly this kind of talk is demonized by the left when it seems perfectly reasonable to me and millions of others. Why? What is so drastically different than what Trump has stated? It used to be something that we could pretty much all agree upon...left, right, or center. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Oct 23, 2018 22:14:19 GMT -5
It's an exact quote, not something I made up. And as I said, there's a way to say you want to enforce our immigration policies and then there's needless scaremongering. and as I posted above the difference is clear and that difference is what people are reacting to. So what is this, exactly? Needless “scaremongering”? Or...the truth? Suddenly this kind of talk is demonized by the left when it seems perfectly reasonable to me and millions of others. Why? What is so drastically different than what Trump has stated? If you can't tell the difference between: "We are a generous and welcoming people here in the US, but those who enter the country illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law,” -President (then senator) Obama And "There are unknown Middle Easterners there, terrorists, and we need to stay safe."..."Is there proof of that Mr. President?"... "No, no there’s no proof of anything but terrorists could very well be among the group." -President Trump I don't think this conversation can continue. |
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Oct 23, 2018 22:25:39 GMT -5
So what is this, exactly? Needless “scaremongering”? Or...the truth? Suddenly this kind of talk is demonized by the left when it seems perfectly reasonable to me and millions of others. Why? What is so drastically different than what Trump has stated? If you can't tell the difference between: "We are a generous and welcoming people here in the US, but those who enter the country illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law,” -President (then senator) Obama And "There are unknown Middle Easterners there, terrorists, and we need to stay safe."..."Is there proof of that Mr. President?"... "No, no there’s no proof of anything but terrorists could very well be among the group." -President Trump I don't think this conversation can continue. So...some slightly more dressed up rhetoric from two career politicians/lawyers is what it all comes down to? Policy can just be tossed out the window? “Obama and Clinton said it more like nice guys!” is where the debate ends? Ok then... Trump Derangement Syndrome is very, very real. The diagnosis gets deeper by the day. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Oct 24, 2018 17:39:52 GMT -5
If you can't tell the difference between: "We are a generous and welcoming people here in the US, but those who enter the country illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law,” -President (then senator) Obama And "There are unknown Middle Easterners there, terrorists, and we need to stay safe."..."Is there proof of that Mr. President?"... "No, no there’s no proof of anything but terrorists could very well be among the group." -President Trump I don't think this conversation can continue. So...some slightly more dressed up rhetoric from two career politicians/lawyers is what it all comes down to? Policy can just be tossed out the window? “Obama and Clinton said it more like nice guys!” is where the debate ends? Ok then... Trump Derangement Syndrome is very, very real. The diagnosis gets deeper by the day. So, because you can't come up with a real response as to why calling oneself a Nationalist is not okay...you go for a personal remark? Interesting debating technique. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Oct 24, 2018 18:26:34 GMT -5
More great insight from Trevor Noah...
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,220 
|
Post by Confessor on Oct 24, 2018 18:32:47 GMT -5
If you can't tell the difference between: "We are a generous and welcoming people here in the US, but those who enter the country illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law,” -President (then senator) Obama And "There are unknown Middle Easterners there, terrorists, and we need to stay safe."..."Is there proof of that Mr. President?"... "No, no there’s no proof of anything but terrorists could very well be among the group." -President Trump I don't think this conversation can continue. So...some slightly more dressed up rhetoric from two career politicians/lawyers is what it all comes down to? Oh, come on...the difference between the two quotes above goes way beyond degrees of eloquence or "dressed up rhetoric". The first is acknowledging that there are those who will attempt to enter the U.S. illegally to work, and criticising them and those who exploit them, while pointing out that law breaking of that nature has no place in America. The second, is needless fear mongering by tossing out baseless accusations of there being "unknown Middle Easterners" and terrorist bogeymen among a particular group of foreign economic migrants. The former is a logical response to a real scenario, while the latter is the paranoid and irresponsible smearing of a group of immigrants, with apparently no evidence to justify it. It's perfectly fine to be against economic migrants (if you're politically so inclined), for fact-based, socio-economic reasons. It's not OK to spread inflammatory, racist untruths about a group of migrants with no evidence. Especially if you have the important and influential job of being leader of the free world! |
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Oct 25, 2018 15:12:43 GMT -5
You guys are wasting your time. Sadly, at this point most anyone who is still actively defending Trump is neither operating in good faith or willing to be persuaded. You can't reason some out of a belief they didn't reason their way into.
|
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Oct 27, 2018 13:00:51 GMT -5
I'm sure some genuinely think he's in "their corner" for not all bad reasons, but I think they're ignorant of the facts of his successful business career and background generally, watched that Apprentice show I never have maybe... Trump is a huge con job, politicians as low as some people hold that term is still higher usually than what that guy is. Elizabeth Warren's silly business is not even worth compari8ng to a molehill. I could care less, not someone I'd ever vote for (nor Bernie), but the politicians I favor are not big personalities with grand visions, they are just qualified representatives to do a job hopefully with as few strings as possible (which thanks to the big money needed these times makes that harder and harder to imagine being the case). Too bad a third party couldn't have gotten going back around when Perot surfaced, instead of Mr. Perot. It's hard to get people excited and motivated for 'middle of the road' and compromise... let's really get out there for boring but functional! Yeah!!! No hats, no balloons, no revolutions (you already had one anyway, why would you need any more if that one was successful).  |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Oct 27, 2018 20:32:31 GMT -5
“If there was an armed guard inside the temple, they would have been able to stop him”, said president Trump.
Words fail me.
Using a tragedy caused by one’s own inflamatory lies to try and score a few more points with one’s base? Really???
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Oct 27, 2018 23:40:36 GMT -5
“If there was an armed guard inside the temple, they would have been able to stop him”, said president Trump. Words fail me. Using a tragedy caused by one’s own inflamatory lies to try and score a few more points with one’s base? Really???He's proof that there's something to be said for being able to feel shame. |
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on Oct 28, 2018 2:39:37 GMT -5
[Responding to something said in the Meanwhile thread, but it seems more appropriate to say this here.]
Prince Hal observed:
Yes, and it was hardly 'senseless' - a word used in several of the statements made in response to what happened. It was in fact a fully premeditated act, with a carefully selected target that made perfect 'sense' to the perpetrator.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Oct 28, 2018 6:27:52 GMT -5
“If there was an armed guard inside the temple, they would have been able to stop him”, said president Trump. Words fail me. Using a tragedy caused by one’s own inflamatory lies to try and score a few more points with one’s base? Really???He's proof that there's something to be said for being able to feel shame. We sadly read about these shootings far too often, but we take a small level of solace that they never happen to us or near us, but for me, now that's changed. As a lifelong Pittsburgher, whose father grew up in the Squirrel Hill neighborhood where this tragedy took place and whose sister currently lives just about 5 blocks from this synagogue, this event has struck me particularly hard. Immediately after my wife got an update on her phone, as this happened near one of her company's offices and they send out a "Bronze Alert" to their employees to let them know about situations like this, her first words were "Well, let's see what Trump has to say about this", and we were of course, not at all surprised. Sure, there were the usual "this is a tragedy, this is horrible, God bless you all" platitudes from him, but then it immediately turned into a political situation with his comments about an armed guard. The person who perpetrated this action didn't walk into the synagogue on a whim. It wasn't like he woke up on Saturday morning and decided he would head down to Squirrel Hill and shoot some folks attending worship. He planned this, most likely having scoped out the building previously, and he knew how to get in and get out. Had there been an armed guard there, that person would have been the first casualty, because the shooter would have known where he was stationed and would have walked up and calmly shot the guard before moving into the rest of the building. I know that Trump and the NRAddicts like to think that we just need a return to frontier justice, where men walked around with guns on their hips and everyone was safe, and that "Die Hard" is a documentary, but the answer isn't living with guns in the hands of everyone, because that sure as hell doesn't make me feel safer. In the aftermath of this, we'll get the usual "he's mentally ill, he's an anomaly, he's not like the other gun owners", but at this point, it doesn't matter, because 11 lives are over because someone had access to guns that he probably shouldn't have had. When the common thread among mass killings is the weapon being used to commit them, maybe it's time to look at why those weapons are so easily available to the public. Heading out to worship this morning, knowing that my church won't ever face the hatred that the Jewish congregation at Tree of Life endured yesterday, and I'm sick to my stomach. Innocent lives ended by a madman with a gun, and the POTUS' answer to that is more guns, not looking at ways to end this scourge on our nation. November 2020 cannot come soon enough. I told my wife that short of the Democrats resurrecting Stalin and somehow figuring out a way to run him, I will vote Democrat for president for the first time in my life, because this country and this world cannot survive another four years of Donald Trump. |
|
