There was criticism yes, but it wasn't in the same universe of what we are seeing now. Riots, endless silly protests, open media war, the entertainment industry threatening to stop entertaining.
Speaking of media war...
Thoughts on Trumps ban on Muslims entering US
- Thread starter hollywood
- Start date
There was criticism yes, but it wasn't in the same universe of what we are seeing now. Riots, endless silly protests, open media war, the entertainment industry threatening to stop entertaining.
Speaking of media war...
Eff em'. Let em' eat fish heads.
#BIFF
https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...o-followed-the-rules/514841/?utm_source=atltw
#BIFF
https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...o-followed-the-rules/514841/?utm_source=atltw
Why do you guys do this? Muslim ban is as dishonest as hands up don't shoot. Progressives are needed as a caounter balance to meany pants conservatives but you commit suicide with these dishonest labels that take ten seconds to disprove. What's the motivation to make your biggest marketing slogans not true?
Keith Ellison just doubled down. Religious ban. He is still saying it after the cuck on face the nation called him out. It's just a stupid strategy.
Our constitution only protects the religious freedoms of US citizens living in the US. The religious angle is the only angle they have and they are trying thru this angle to make it an emotional issue. Problem is laws have no emotions and they have no standing on this issue.
Hell, Obama ended the 'wet foot dry foot' policy on his way out the door effectively ending any Cuban refugee policy. Where was the left's riots then?
F em. Start arresting and trying the rioters with felony crimes.
F em. Start arresting and trying the rioters with felony crimes.
Obama can get away with it because by default his skin color makes him pure of heart and all knowing when it comes to racism and any other matter that concerns the treatment of people. If you are white you are a privleged racist, if you are a minority you are free to bend the laws in any manner you want in the name of social justice and call white people all the nasty names you want.
Cons need to jump all over this hard.
1. It's not a blanket Muslim ban per se.
2. It is a suspension on both immigration and refugee programs from five primarily Muslim countries (with an exception for non-Muslims).
3. It does apply to individuals from those enumerated countries with green cards and already approved visas...both already in the country.
4. It doesn't apply to several other predominately Muslim countries that have obviously sent terrorists to our shores.
My concerns are:
1. That the temporary and indefinite suspensions become per se permanent bans. That would be a bad public policy IMO...;
2. The application of the order to green card and visa holders in the country without due process hearings does violate the constitution IMO;
3. The reaction from the left and the Trumpies is reflective of the cheerleading for your team at all costs culture that politics have become. There is little room for rational analysis and reasoned engagement and discussion....only sloganeering and meme warfare from both sides.
I'm not feeling good about what's going on in general....that's my gut level reaction.
2. It is a suspension on both immigration and refugee programs from five primarily Muslim countries (with an exception for non-Muslims).
3. It does apply to individuals from those enumerated countries with green cards and already approved visas...both already in the country.
4. It doesn't apply to several other predominately Muslim countries that have obviously sent terrorists to our shores.
My concerns are:
1. That the temporary and indefinite suspensions become per se permanent bans. That would be a bad public policy IMO...;
2. The application of the order to green card and visa holders in the country without due process hearings does violate the constitution IMO;
3. The reaction from the left and the Trumpies is reflective of the cheerleading for your team at all costs culture that politics have become. There is little room for rational analysis and reasoned engagement and discussion....only sloganeering and meme warfare from both sides.
I'm not feeling good about what's going on in general....that's my gut level reaction.
It's at least 50/50 that someone on your side did this.
@syskatine
Are you being intellectually honest in the implied endorsement of the content in the links and images you are sharing?
Real question. I don't need a long-winded reply.
Are you being intellectually honest in the implied endorsement of the content in the links and images you are sharing?
Real question. I don't need a long-winded reply.
To JD's 2nd concern: I think we all agree here. The action was an overreach and shouldn't stand. That being said, my guess was it was unintentional regarding current visa holders.
Either way, that section has to go.
Either way, that section has to go.
I'd say more like 75 25 it was the left, based on past observations at the last five to 10 years.
My "side" is whoever prosecutes the arsonist. I'd say it's 80% likelihood of a Texas, self-identifying conservative. If it is a non-Trump supporter I'll still hold off admitting anything until we confirm O'Keefe isn't up to another frame job.
I thought the left was against profiling and guilty until proven innocent.
That's not what you were implying is it? You posted that with intent to make conservatives look bad.
The dick that faked the crap painted on his garage door was from Texas.
Well I've shared a lot of stuff -- what specifically? The Nazi thing is just mirroring right wing, bat shit over-reaction, but the fire and anti Muslim stuff is invocative of Krystalnacht so I get why they come up with it, too.
We need a thread about the new political debate being me memes. You touched on it some weeks ago. I disagreed with your premise (liberals abuse them) but agreed at how compelling they are. Then alpha kind of touched on the social media thing. What if memes are now more compelling/convincing than a TV ad?
Thank you. I tried, but the CNN length broke me and just don't have the ability or time to dig in any time soon and compare and constrast. The FAQ link says where I just randomly flipped:
"What are the new eligibility requirements for Visa Waiver Program (VWP) travel that will be added to the ESTA application in June 2016?
Under the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 (the Act), and DHS’s implementation of it, nationals of VWP countries who have traveled to, or been present in, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen on or after March 1, 2011, are no longer eligible for travel or admission to the United States under the VWP.
This restriction does not apply to VWP travelers whose presence in Libya, Somalia, or Yemen was to perform military service in the armed forces of a program country, or in order to carry out official duties as a full-time employee of the government of a program country. We recommend those who have traveled to the three countries listed above for military/official purposes bring with them appropriate documentation when traveling through a U.S. port of entry.
The vast majority of VWP-eligible travelers will not be affected by these additional restrictions made under the Act. "
That's apples to Friday's oranges at first blush.
Biff just turned thousands of lives upside down and he didn't have to, or care to prevent it from happening. Even if you agree with the policy, he doesn't give a shit about innocent people.
If it's making exceptions to any minority religion in those countries then it is in fact a Muslim ban. I don't know if that's the case yet or not since there is so much noise vs signal, and this seems so poorly planned that nobody really knows what's going on.
Can we please just figure out what the hell is going on? Just a few months for a non Muslim president who might just want to get his bearings and clear all the land mines left for him by Barack obama.
It would have been funny if Kenya was on this list.
It would have been funny if Kenya was on this list.
Maybe. However, until fairly recently, most conservatives/repubes/non-libs used to just go along and keep their powder dry when faced with things they disagreed with. It was the way the system worked---you went along with the new law, court decree (flag burning), EO or whatever you disagreed with. That changed in this country with the dems' repugnant and despicable treatment of Clarence Thomas' confirmation.
Still, it's not the right which reacts to unfavorable legislation or rulings by rioting, destroying property, savagely beating our opponents or mimicking the vitriol (Ashley Judd). No clearer contrast to this is the response by the right to Obama's campaign, election and inauguration compared to the left's reaction to Trump's. Or the women's march last weekend v the Right to Life march this week.
Yes, the right began more forcefully objecting to these changes but it was done civilly. The proximate cause of this incivility and anarchy began on the left.
WTF are you talking about?
Indonesians weren't banned....and I expressly said it wasn't a Muslim ban and expressly said it only applied to five specific countries.
You didn't mentioned the Middle Eastern countries it doesn't apply to that have clearly had citizens commit attacks against the US for some reason either.
This is just more demonization of anyone that questions your guy and an attempt to paint veryone that does with the same brush of the most extreme edges of the group of people that are questioning.
If you really need me to say it:
-I haven't rioted.
-I haven't destroyed any property.
-Vitriol....offensive or combative words alone....are protected by the 1st Amendment whether I agree with what they are saying or not.
-I object to and disavow rioting, destruction of property.
My statements about cheerleading were clearly and expressly applicable to both sides. Your response was nothing more than "yeah....but the other side is worse".
Maybe he should get his bearings before signing a bunch of EO's? Maybe have a plan for those trying to enforce them before doing it?
You're the FIRST one in this thread that has expressly said that particular action was an overreach and shouldn't stand.
Let's see if we do, in fact, "all agree here" on that....my bet is we don't.
I've read several reports this EO didn't undergo the usual legal review by legal subject matter experts before being issued.....probably "fake news" though.
He is your President to, not just "our guy". He is President of the US. He is our guy for all of us, like it or not.
So is it an indirect assumption about your position is that you are the only one capable of being neutral? Where you so neutral you did not vote? If you did not vote how can you past judgment on those that nutted up and voted? If you voted for Johnson that was like abstaining from a role call vote, in which abstaining is a no vote. We had 2 real choices, not 3. Only way in this election to remain neutral was to not vote for any candidate at all and voting for Johnson was as good as not voting, some did that claiming the high road, but that was done by people incapable of making a choice on election day and then can sit back and criticize both sides despite having no back bone to making their vote count.
A bunch of Americans would have loved a true moderate choice from either party, one with some leanings both ways. The extreme left created Trump, he was needed to defeat the left. He was needed to move the country back to enforcing our laws and being a President for all people, not just the LGBT's and minorities. The extreme left has to be crushed before we can become a more moderate country.
On the surface this looks clumsy. I'm
Not going to fault him in this hysterical moment.
People are being evaluated case by case right now. They will be in their mosques cussing Jews in no time don't worry.
I agree that it is poorly planned. But let's be honest - it is radical Muslims and them alone which need to be filtered from our immigration process. I think we all would support something fair and Constitutional that actually works and protects Americans.
I don't think it was poorly planned. I think you err on the side of caution until you get a complete understanding of all players. Then you start peeling back the things that you don't require to protect your people.
I like this approach much better than Germanys willful destruction of its culture.
I like this approach much better than Germanys willful destruction of its culture.
