In the 20th Century, the United States defeated Fascism, Nazism, and Communism. Now, a different threat challenges our world: Radical Islamic Terrorism....
We cannot let this evil continue. Nor can we let the hateful ideology of Radical Islam – its oppression of women, gays, children, and nonbelievers – be allowed to reside or spread within our own countries.
We will defeat Radical Islamic Terrorism.... Anyone who cannot condemn the hatred, oppression and violence of Radical Islam lacks the moral clarity to serve as our President....
In winning the Cold War, President Ronald Reagan repeatedly touted the superiority of freedom over communism, and called the USSR the Evil Empire. Yet, when President Obama delivered his address in Cairo [in 2009], no such moral courage could be found. Instead of condemning the oppression of women and gays in many Muslim nations, and the systematic violations of human rights, or the financing of global terrorism, President Obama tried to draw an equivalency between our human rights record and theirs....
Military, cyber and financial warfare will all be essential in dismantling Islamic terrorism. But we must use ideological warfare as well. Just as we won the Cold War, in part, by exposing the evils of communism and the virtues of free markets, so too must we take on the ideology of Radical Islam.
While my opponent accepted millions of dollars in Foundation donations from countries where being gay is an offense punishable by prison or death, my Administration will speak out against the oppression of women, gays and people of different faith. Our Administration will be a friend to all moderate Muslim reformers in the Middle East, and will amplify their voices.
This includes speaking out against the horrible practice of honor killings, where women are murdered by their relatives for dressing, marrying or acting in a way that violates fundamentalist teachings. Over 1,000 Pakistani girls are estimated to be the victims of honor killings by their relatives each year. Recently, a prominent Pakistani social media star was strangled to death by her brother on the charge of dishonoring the family. In his confession, the brother took pride in the murder and said: “Girls are born to stay home and follow traditions.”
Shockingly, this is a practice that has reached our own shores. One such case involves an Iraqi immigrant who was sentenced to 34 years in jail for running over his own daughter claiming she had become “too Westernized.” To defeat Islamic terrorism, we must also speak out forcefully against a hateful ideology that provides the breeding ground for violence and terrorism to grow....
A Trump Administration will establish a clear principle that will govern all decisions pertaining to immigration: we should only admit into this country those who share our values and respect our people. In the Cold War, we had an ideological screening test. The time is overdue to develop a new screening test for the threats we face today.
In addition to screening out all members or sympathizers of terrorist groups, we must also screen out any who have hostile attitudes towards our country or its principles – or who believe that Sharia law should supplant American law. Those who do not believe in our Constitution, or who support bigotry and hatred, will not be admitted for immigration into the country. Only those who we expect to flourish in our country – and to embrace a tolerant American society – should be issued visas....
The Ft. Hood Shooter... proclaimed that “we love death more than you love life!” These warnings signs were ignored because political correctness has replaced common sense in our society.
That is why one of my first acts as President will be to establish a Commission on Radical Islam – which will include reformist voices in the Muslim community who will hopefully work with us. We want to build bridges and erase divisions. The goal of the commission will be to identify and explain to the American public the core convictions and beliefs of Radical Islam, to identify the warning signs of radicalization, and to expose the networks in our society that support radicalization. This commission will be used to develop new protocols for local police officers, federal investigators, and immigration screeners....
But just like we couldn’t defeat communism without acknowledging that communism exists – or explaining its evils – we can’t defeat Radical Islamic Terrorism unless we do the same.
This also means we have to promote the exceptional virtues of our own way of life – and expecting that newcomers to our society do the same. Pride in our institutions, our history and our values should be taught by parents and teachers, and impressed upon all who join our society. Assimilation is not an act of hostility, but an expression of compassion. Our system of government, and our American culture, is the best in the world and will produce the best outcomes for all who adopt it.
This approach will not only make us safer, but bring us closer together as a country.
Renewing this spirit of Americanism will help heal the divisions in our country. It will do so by emphasizing what we have in common – not what pulls us apart.
This is my pledge to the American people: as your President I will be your greatest champion. I will fight to ensure that every American is treated equally, protected equally, and honored equally. We will reject bigotry and oppression in all its forms, and seek a new future built on our common culture and values as one American people.
१६ ऑगस्ट, २०१६
Donald Trump's plan to use the presidency to propound and enforce American ideology.
Here's the full transcript of Trump's speech on terrorism. I've edited it down, adding boldface, to highlight the battleground that is the human mind:
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१०३ टिप्पण्या:
As Ann knows any acts or laws a president Trump enacted would have to be applied neutrally. Something tells me her Althouse Hillbillies would not like that.
A Commission! That's the ticket.
As to laws being "applied neutrally," that would certainly be a big change from the last eight years.
a new future built on our common culture and values as one American people.
People are hungry for this. Stick with this and drop the stuff about screening, which will dominate the headlines. Don't step on your best lines.
Mike Pence starts his speeches with "he is a Christian first."
Get his radical religious ass out of the country asap.
Will I see unbiased reporting about this good speech in the News?
This will work if the "reformist voices" will agree to reform the Koran itself; otherwise, not.
any acts or laws a president Trump enacted would have to be applied neutrally
Sure, ask communists and non-communists alike if they support the violent overthrow of the government of the United States.
(Actually no, we can do anything with foreigners we wish. We can apply the paper bag test if we wish. Korematsu is the law of the land.)
The interesting thing would be taking measures against those who fail the test. The optimal thing would seem to be to kill them.
It's weird that this has to be said. What happened to the melting pot?
"Melting pot" is now officially a hateful term.
Did he finally say what he's always thought and believed? Did he recently hire a better speechwriter? Do I care?
Thanks, all I new about the speech was what I read on the TV at the gym. It was on CNN. The only thing they talked about was extreme vetting.
Too much common sense on display in this speech. The PC crowd can't handle the (to them, apparent) contradiction of the R candidate defending freedom and gays and women while the D policies (and candidate) put them all at risk. It's like Mr. Mateen at the Hillary rally was a sign of the times or something!
Fucking A well told, Donald.
This is why you deserve to win. You say the things that most people are afraid to.
John Henry
The 'melting pot' for unity simile was replaced with the 'salad bowl' of diversity.
What comes out of a melting pot in a foundry or steel mill is something strong and useful. (Usually.)
But salad isn't exactly known for its durability, cohesion under stress or strength under pressure.
If you require visa applicants to read a list of American principles (freedom of religion, equal rights for women, etc.) and the applicant signs it and swears he/she agrees with them, then if later you find the immigrant involved in non-violent advocacy for contrary principles, could you charge him or her with immigration fraud and deport him?
It's our country. We can let in or exclude anybody we want.
The simple screening is no immigrants from muslim majority countries.
Muslim minorities presumably are used to diversity already.
The excerpt sounds like the Bush Freedom Agenda.
We will reject bigotry and oppression in all its forms, and seek a new future built on our common culture and values as one American people.
This last point is crucial! HUGE even :-) Previous generations of immigrants came to America and assimilated. It wasn't forced assimilation and it didn't mean giving up your own cultural traditions. If it were giving up all traditions, we wouldn't have the great culture we have now. No jazz music. No St Patrick's Day. No Tex-Mex food. Asian fusion. Our American culture is a true melting pot that makes us stronger. Assimilation was done by accepting that the culture of the country you were moving to was just that "the culture of the country".
American history, and pride in being an American were taught in the schools. Immigrant children learned historical facts and historical myths about their new "home" country. They learned along with the citizen non immigrant children. Today, however, history is not taught or is so distorted that the students learn to HATE America instead of being proud to be an American. Young adults are not only abysmally ignorant of our own history, they have zero learning in world history. For example, they don't know why we celebrate the 4th of July and can't name the participant nations in WWII or even know who fought or why.
Of course history isn't all good and there are flaws in each and every country. History can't be taught just through the lens of our current ideas and morality. You can't judge the past based on the present but need to view it in context. But, we don't allow any good to be expressed and only the flaws are hammered home.
This ignorance is on purpose. All the better to be able to feed propaganda to the ignorant public in order to control them.
The immigrants TODAY are encouraged to NOT assimilate or become one nation. Separate. Hating America, yet living here. No assimilation and if you do it is suddenly "cultural appropriation". As if cultures are preserved in amber and never change. If that were so we would all be pounding rocks and eating berries while living in caves. Ethnic groups are also taught hate and kept in ignorance. This hatred being taught is one of the main reasons for what is happening in Milwaukee, Boston, Ferguson, and in the barrios of the Mexican border States.
Trump is right to try to bring back the sense of a nation, patriotism and pride, and not just a bunch of separate hating each other groups. Our survival in the future as a country depends on this. It is probably too late, thanks to the efforts of the last 40 years to erase America through the education system and the progressive movements.
But. It is worth a try if we want to stay as a free America.
Is there a similar transcript somewhere for Hillary? A big foreign policy speech?
A compare/contrast would be instructive.
Once Written,
But Christianity, in pretty much any denomination or form, is not at odds with the American ideal of liberty and equality.
Islam, expecially in in its more virulent forms, is.
That ideal is not always practiced perfectly but it is the ideal we hold ourselves to.
John Henry
And fondue literally comes out of a melting pot. Mmmm. Wilting multi-culti lettuce or warm cheese covered bread? Ya picks your metaphors and ya go where they lead ya.
The language used in this speech clearly and concisely delineates a policy theme. This makes me wistful for a candidate who could reliably and regularly communicate like that not just in a pre-written speech, but all the time.
Instead we have a candidate who is more interested in appealing the chunk of the electorate he already won a year ago, and nobody else.
Previous generations of immigrants came to America and assimilated
And a well told to you too, DBQ. You nailed it.
John Henry
The "nice" thing about this speech - and I've only read it not listened to it - is that in many ways it highlights that Americans expect to be protected from a destructive ideology by soldiers operating elsewhere, by security that happens in the shadows, and by physical distance....and that those things did not and will not stop fascism, socialism, or islamic terrorism. It starts with and ends with cultural ideology.
We are spoiled as a nation today because we expect to be safe. We learn about the revolutionary war, WW1, WW2, and the Cold War and see America winning. We no longer practice nuclear drills in schools. The media treats talk of fear as pure politicking and not as if there is something to fear.
We see this erosion of cohesive culture in movements such as BLM, which has now resulted in targeted killings of police and rioting in reaction to a black police officer working for a black police chief killing an armed black criminal during pursuit and evasion of arrest.
Let's just hope he keeps it up. How to get it out to the public is a problem that needs to be solved.
Something tells me her Althouse Hillbillies would not like that.
That "something" is your ignorance of how other people think.
OK Trump - Now makes some effective ads. Take all of that - condense it, and run some ads during the Olympics.
In CO - Hillary is all over the Olympics with ads.
Good speech. Any candidate could have delivered it. Trump's the only one I believe would actually stick to it if elected. His foot-in-mouth disease is embarrassing, yes, but reassuring.
American ??? Does this silly xenophobic Christian Infidel mean North America or does he include the fine people of Central America and South America. He will need the Papal to approval to include America, and that means World Climate Treaty approval that pleases the UN.
Silly Trump still sees a USA with borders. His Reeducation must start fast.
"One people" sounds a little flat to my ear. "Ein Volk" has a nice ring to it, though.
“Radical Islam” is NOT the problem.
"The Problem" is the core and essential teachings of Islam which include:
1. The command for almost all Muslims to wage "perpetual war" (Jihad) against all "unbelievers" until they become Muslims OR abjectly accept the slave-like state some call dhimmitude; And,
2. The encouragement/permission/commands to those waging Jihad to use murder, genocide, rape, torture, banditry and other horrors to forward Islam or "reward" those creatures.
This speech is a good way to see #Nevertrump in their true light. They say, "He needs to stop speaking off the cuff and give us some more controlled speeches."
When he does that, they say, "Have you seen that poll out of VA? He is losing the military! Ha ha!"
At this point it should be obvious to most that #Nevertrump is a silent partner in the Hillary campaign.
Hillary loves Islam. She is owned by Middle Eastern countries that fund Islamic terrorism.
I've concluded that a big part of Trump's lack of voter appeal is his blow hard style. People need to look at the substance.
This election is totally screwed up.
Good luck convincing the nut jobs that American ideology beats 72 virgins.
And the media wastes time on the LIE told by Robby Mook that Manafort was paid millions by Russia or Ukraine.
CNN ran a story today where the son of an Israeli politician killed in the 90's. Guy said Trump is "creating the same conditions" that resulted in the death of his father. Ridiculous.
"As Ann knows any acts or laws a president Trump enacted would have to be applied neutrally."
Which part of the text do you think refers to enacted laws -- i.e. statutes?
Due process and equal protection requirements do limit the things the President does on his own too, but they don't require absolute neutrality. They tend to give way when there's a compelling government interest that requires the non-neutrality. And many things can't be litigated in courts and even when courts can deal with some things: 1. Damage may already be done and 2. Courts tend to find ways to avoid the merits of the case (with standing and political question doctrine and other forms of judicial restraint).
Good speech, flawed messenger.
Next step will be an amplified and extended three+ minutes hate both toward and from from Trump/Trumpsters. The wild card will be any violence in the interim.
OR
Crickets.
According to Dilbert Guy, Godzilla has told Team HRC to amp up the fear of Trump. Here's the Trump response. If he stays on message relentlessly, he will win. I don't think he can do that either.
Nice for someone to finally address the problem straight on. The speechwriter team for this will go to enshrinement in some future DC circles.
"It's weird that this has to be said. What happened to the melting pot?"
More intellectually lazy folks can draw academic checks within the diaspora of diversity than they can from a single Melting Pot Studies program.
Finally, Trump is speaking sensibly on immigration. I strongly disagree with him about immigration, but he's no longer saying outrageous things about "NO MOOSE LIMBS ALLOWED!!!1!" He's narrowing his position and proposing a plausible scheme to restrict immigration from the Muslim world. I think most Americans understand the desirability of keeping out extremists. Democrats offer no solutions, just criticism of Trump. So this is a smart move by Trump. Let the Democrats explain what they intend to do.
What would Hillary do? I don't think defending the importation of 10,000 Syrian "refugees" is going to win her much support.
An excellent speech all around. He needs to give this everywhere he goes.
Eric the Fruit Bat said...
Good luck convincing the nut jobs that American ideology beats 72 virgins.
8/16/16, 10:32 AM
Napalm would help.
Klavan says you don't want 72 virgins anyway. You want one virgin and 71 party girls.
Due process and equal protection requirements do limit the things the President does on his own too, but they don't require absolute neutrality.
All this doesn't apply to immigration at all. We can keep out anybody.
The point of immigration isn't to benefit foreigners but to benefit us.
If they get something from it too, well that's a good voluntary transaction. Presumably they don't apply if they don't.
The net benefit from majority muslim immigration is a cost, not a benefit. So shut those out.
Jeez, what a load of tosh.
Replace "Radical Islam" with "Black Americans" and you have the story of racism and bigotry of white Americans against black Americans.
Muslim or Islamic countries around the world are fighting against Radical Islam because groups like ISIS have killed far more Muslims than non-Muslims and are an existential threat to them.
What on earth does Trump bring to this fight that hasn't already been tried or is currently being worked on? Nothing. Trump is a blowhard.
Yes, trump will win by establishing that Obama and clinton fail to stand up for the rights of women and gay persons around the world. democrats just do it in Indiana and texas where they have too many rights like abortion and marriage.
Around the world? How about Orlando? You have the killer's father up on stage behind you at a rally? You lose the killer's accomplice wife and say Oops? Heckuva job, Demmies!
Trump bring to this fight that hasn't already been tried or is currently being worked on? Nothing. Trump is a blowhard.
Well, he is a blowhard, but what he brings is a preference for plain speaking over politically correct falsehoods.
Assume whatever percentages of "good" vs. "bad" Muslims you like - there's no denying the fact that large-scale Muslim immigration means more violence against innocent Americans than would otherwise be the case. Perhaps it's worth it, perhaps not, but the dishonest pretense that it isn't true is something that only Trump - in his arrogant, thin-skinned, blowhard-y fashion - has the character to avoid.
It's a long time ago and I do not remember for certain if I had to make some positive declaration about subscribing to "American values," but negatively, I had to provide certification from my hometown police of having no criminal record, being of "good moral character," and positively having had no association with any communists or communist activities, which gave rise some undue hilarity and tactless comments from the police office staff that sticks in my mind.
And then, of course, there is reciting the oath of allegiance before receiving citizenship.
So "screening" is not a new thing.
Anyway, I thought about this before coming over and decided this was a one-way street, and I would not be crying in my beer about lutefisk, which I thoroughly abhor anyway.
"One people" sounds a little flat to my ear. "Ein Volk" has a nice ring to it, though.
Godwin's Law strikes again.
trump will win by establishing that Obama and clinton fail to stand up for the rights of women and gay persons around the world.
He probably won't win, but demonstrating the indifference that Obama and Clinton evince toward women when there's no political benefit is itself a good thing.
Pookie Number 2 said...
Something tells me her Althouse Hillbillies would not like that.
That "something" is your ignorance of how other people think.
Pookie FTW! Yes but they never learn. Some asshats believe all the stereotypes they hear about conservatives. Reality has a way of "resetting" those viewpoints, but it takes a willingness to face facts.
I just fondly recall how the Democrats were the ones who were pushing eugenics to "purify" the white race, imprisoning Americans of Japanese descent, manning the firehoses, creating the Jim Crow laws and gun control to keep the black man down, advocating for slavery, filibustering the CRA 1964 (we looking at you Albert Gore Sr.!) and funding Planned Parenthood for the express purpose of limiting the black population.
Meanwhile us hillbillies are the happiest, most well-adjusted, most generous (with their own money), most accepting of other cultures and races when compared to self-described "progressives" as measured by Pew etc.
So fuck off hater!
Tolerance made America great. Selective exclusion including "=" and abortion rites have placed America on a progressive slope.
If Jason (10:27am) thinks "'Ein Volk' has a nice ring to it", that makes him the Nazi. Own goal! The rest of us prefer "one people" for obvious and unexceptionable reasons. To be intellectually consistent, Jason needs to avoid flying except in turboprops, since Nazis invented the jet airplane, or driving on Interstate highways, since Nazis invented the limited-access superhighway. Perhaps he's Amish and already does that. Oops! In that he case, he probably speaks German - like a Nazi!
Tolerance made America great. Selective exclusion including "=" and abortion rites have placed America on a progressive slope.
Tolerance is often a good thing, but liberty is what made America great.
I heard this..and they way he repeated "extreme", and thought he handed his opposition the talking point.
But this is such a logic failed approach:
Blogger Unknown said...
Replace "Radical Islam" with "Black Americans" and you have the story of racism and bigotry of white Americans against black Americans.
--
Yes..absolutely..mirror image...if you have a funhouse mirror brain.
It just occurred to me, thinking about silly people who claim Christianity is somehow incompatible with American values:
Did Jesus invent separation of church and state? I can't think of an earlier expression of the basic concept than "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's". Can anyone else? The Greeks and Romans certainly didn't believe in any such thing: they all had state religions.
I cannot find much wrong in those comments.
Mike Pence starts his speeches with "he is a Christian first."
Get his radical religious ass out of the country asap.
Let's compare deaths caused by Christianity and deaths caused by Islam. All you have to do is name the deaths where the killer chanted "Praise be to Jesus" or The Lord's Prayer. All I have to do is name the deaths where the killer chanted "Allahu Akbar".
Wonder what list will be longer.
It's weird that this has to be said. What happened to the melting pot?
Multiculturalism.
What on earth does Trump bring to this fight that hasn't already been tried or is currently being worked on? Nothing. Trump is a blowhard.
Assimilation is opposed, vigorously, by Progressives.
Yes, trump will win by establishing that Obama and clinton fail to stand up for the rights of women and gay persons around the world. democrats just do it in Indiana and texas where they have too many rights like abortion and marriage.
For Obama and Clinton, the right to marriage trumps, by a wide margin, the right to not be killed.
This also means we have to promote the exceptional virtues of our own way of life – and expecting that newcomers to our society do the same. Pride in our institutions, our history and our values should be taught by parents and teachers, and impressed upon all who join our society.
Trump understands this basic fact: ideologically speaking, you can't fight something with nothing.
If we don't "believe" in the virtues of our society, who will? There is much of the rest of the world who takes an "Awww, shucks" humility or constant sniping masquerading as a sense of virtue as simply lack of will.
the irony of that statement, amir was steered by shinbet, almost from the getgo somewhat like the bureau did in garland,
From an interesting column by Republican ex-speechwriter Michael Gerson:
Here is something for Reince Priebus, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell and other Republican leaders to consider. At high schools and colleges with Latino or Muslim students, spray-painting “Trump 2016” on a wall or poster is properly taken as a racially charged incident. When white students chant “Trump! Trump!” at a basketball game against a team including minorities, it is properly taken as a racial taunt. Young people understand the logo of the Republican nominee — the very name of the Republican presidential candidate — as conveying a message of exclusion.
American values and ideology? But I thought American was little more than a racist, sexist, homophobic land of inbred backward hillbilly yokels--certainly not someplace you'd feel proud of many times over the course of your life. What a weirdo this Trump fellow is!
Once written, twice... said...
As Ann knows any acts or laws a president Trump enacted would have to be applied neutrally. Something tells me her Althouse Hillbillies would not like that.
Why? Prosecutorial discretion, motherfuckers! Yeah, come on, get the hell with it already.
The Executive has broad discretion to set priorities and direct spending as they see fit. The work of government is largely done through agencies the Executive controls. If the Executive decides that--just to make up a crazy example--certain people should be guaranteed that their lawbreaking won't be punished 'cause they're the right kinda people, well that's just a priority babycakes. Oh, you'd like to sue for equal treatment? Sorry, not only don't you have standing to do so, but also the judge (appointed by whom, do you think?) recognizes that where cases don't involve fundamental rights (and what are those again, anyway) they must defer to the wisdom and will of the Executive and their agencies.
Remember when you guys dug a hole, shot "rule of law" in the head, and buried that sad mess? It seems like it was right after that concept stopped being a useful tool to attack a Republican (GWBush if I remember correctly). Now equal application of legal statues, the ability to predict whether your actions will be illegal ex-post, the pretense that legal and administrative bodies (DOJ, IRS, EPA, etc) take actions neutrally w/r/t partisanship or ideological belief...all that's gone, man. Where have you been?
The fact that these new rules might mean some bad times if someone like Trump is elected, well, too bad, sucka.
Tolerance is often a good thing, but liberty is what made America great.
Liberty was realized through tolerance.
Normalization of behaviors with redeeming value. Rejection of behaviors that are a threat to the individual and society. Tolerance of everything else.
That said, the prerequisite for liberty is men and women capable of self-moderating, responsible behavior.
Glenn Reynolds sees what I see: http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/08/15/elite-populist-uprising-populist-trump-brexit-merkel-immigrants-glenn-reynolds/88718374/
The question is: Will the Hillbillies be smart enough to overcome the establishment Republicans ("Lindsey Graham says Trump cannot win"), the media and the grafters on the Crooked Hillary gravy train?
As usual with Trump, plenty to quibble about, as many commenters here do, but the essence is more right than wrong. And I am again reminded of George Orwell: "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." Been reminded of that a lot this year, indeed, for the whole Obama administration.
"Trump" is a racist taunt but "Hillbilly" isn't. It is not conservatives who are killing the Enlightenment.
Unknown: "Muslim or Islamic countries around the world are fighting against Radical Islam because groups like ISIS have killed far more Muslims than non-Muslims and are an existential threat to them."
This is the only talking that explains the folly of Hillary/Obama policy toward Muslim refugees and radical Islam.
Fighting ISIS now equals "fighting against Radical Islam," because we all know that ISIS sprang fully formed from the forehead of the Sphinx. Before ISIS there was no al Qaeda, no Wahhabists, no Muslim Brotherhood, no IMU, no Hezbollah, no IJU, etc. In fact, none of the 80 or so radical Islamic groups existed. Right?
Wrong! Nearly all those groups/movements predate ISIS and have existed with the tacit approval or tolerance of Muslim governments unless pressure from the non-Muslim world made it temporarily uncomfortable. It is simply a lie that most, or even many, Muslim governments are fighting against radical Islam - a lie perpetuated by taqiyya and insane Democrats.
"Lunacy is becoming the new norm. If Hillary is elected it will be mandatory."
Liberty was realized through tolerance.
I don't know what this means. Liberty is freedom from tyrannical government, and it has nothing to do with whether the citizenry is ('are'? I think 'is') tolerant.
That said, the prerequisite for liberty is men and women capable of self-moderating, responsible behavior.
I disagree. Liberty is a right with no prerequisites. It can be abused by people with no self-control, to the detriment of common culture, but the right to liberty endures regardless.
Here's one for AprilApple, right up her alley.
Michael Moore: Trump Is Self-Sabotaging His Campaign Because He Never Really Wanted the Job in the First Place
He's running for president to get a better deal for "The Apprentice."
Donald Trump never actually wanted to be president of the United States. I know this for a fact. I’m not going to say how I know it. I’m not saying that Trump and I shared the same agent or lawyer or stylist, or if we did, that would have anything to do with anything. And I’m certainly not saying I ever overheard anything at those agencies or in the hallways of NBC or anywhere else. But there are certain people reading this right now, they know who they are, and they know that every word in the following paragraphs actually happened.
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/trump-self-sabotage-campaign?src=newsletter1061977
Liberty was realized through tolerance.
Liberty, in the US, was realized through intolerance. Intolerance of taxation without representation and economic oppression.
We are speaking of two different perspectives. I am not arguing rights but rather their realization.
Liberty was realized through tolerance.
Tolerance of people to each other (e.g. libertarian principle). The government is a special corporate entity that is assigned or accrues authority over the people. The tolerance of this entity toward the people is an issue in itself.
the prerequisite for liberty is men and women capable of self-moderating, responsible behavior.
Liberty is a natural right that is lost (e.g. totalitarianism, anarchy) without men and women capable of self-moderating, responsible behavior. For example, abortion is also a natural right, but it is proscribed in civilized societies in order to create a disincentive to wanton taking of human life.
So Trump really doesn't want to be President and is a Clinton stalking horse?
A GOP Congressman hinks Trump Is Trying To Lose To Help Clinton.
Republican Rep. Carlos Curbelo, one of the first congressman to say he would not vote for Donald Trump in November, says he believes the Republican nominee is trying to lose on purpose to help Hillary Clinton.
The Florida congressman added that Trump should step aside to allow another Republican to assume the nomination.
“To all my passionate friends who are Trump supporters,” he continued. “And I understand why, there are a lot of people who are angry and frustrated in this country, they really don’t like Hillary Clinton for some obvious reasons — put together his recent conduct together with the fact he’s a close friend of the Clintons, they attended his wedding, the pictures are there to prove it. Donald Trump spoke to Bill Clinton three weeks before launching his campaign. I mean, again, I don’t have any hard proof, it may be nothing, but is this the conduct of someone who is trying to win? I just, I don’t see it.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/a-gop-congressman-thinks-trump-is-trying-to-lose-to-help-cli?utm_term=.byNlnKEML#.hmKm4OdD9
The number of things 'Unknown' "know[s] for a fact" or confidently predicts WILL happen is getting tiresome. We get it. Whatever 'facts' will help Hillary and harm Trump are (in your stated opinion) true, and everything else is false. I suppose you have to keep posting your stupid crap to keep getting paid, but you and your paymaster should know that it's counterproductive: by this point, your stupid, boring, repetitious not-even-arguments-but-assertions make people more likely (or in some cases less unlikely) to vote for Trump.
Insect Politics
http://www.getridofthings.com/pests/beetles/get-rid-of-weevils/
I am pleased and honored to be the one to tell you that yes, you have eaten weevils. I know it’s a disgusting thought (or an invigorating one, no judgement), but there’s really nothing to be done about it. Most people are never even aware that it has happened. It might have simply been their eggs. It could, however, have been little bits of exoskeleton, maybe a leg or two, or possibly even the entire nasty weevil . . . or at least its larvae. With something as common as weevils, it’s pretty much unavoidable. They can be found in nearly any prepackaged food you buy that contains any sort of grain. I’m talkin’ cookies, crackers, biscuits, cake mixes, pastas, breakfast cereals, anything. This is due to the fact that weevils lay their eggs in, you guessed it, political blogs..
I don't think Trump minds at all if Hillary is president. I don't think he cares what he's done to the party. He is the only guy who could have gotten Hillary elected, and was happy to serve.
He has expanded the Overton window though. I am voting 3rd party. Stein is kinda hot, so I may vote for her.
As someone who is pretty "ab"-similated in some sense . . . well, it's actually that while lots of people around me have slowly assimilated towards American norms over the course of their lives, I basically haven't, so while I started out more assimilated than they, I've ended up dramatically less assimilated.
Anyhow
As someone who is not particularly assimilated towards American norms, this is not really what I like to hear. And of course, America has a long tradition of peculiar insular populations, whether it be the Quakers or Hasidic Jews. Some of those populations may involve hostility to gays, or hostility to womens' liberation or whatever. And that's actually okay -- that's the reality of diversity.
For me, I'd dial that all way, way back. Do you believe apostasy should be illegal or punishable by death or violence? Do you believe blasphemy should be illegal or punishable by death or violence? Do you believe that homosexual intercourse should be punishable by death or violence? Do you believe adultery should be punishable by death or violence? Do you believe fornication should be punishable by death or violence? If yes, then America is not the place for you.
And yes, obviously I'm drawing the lines differently for thoughtcrime versus actions. Apostasy and Blasphemy deserve much more absolute protection than homosexuality, adultery, and fornication. And because I think that, Trump would probably say I oughtn't be allowed into the country. That's why I want it dialed way back.
Once written, twice... said...
"Mike Pence starts his speeches with "he is a Christian first."
Get his radical religious ass out of the country asap."
Why? Is his christian ass preventing you from practicing your fascism?
Now, now, Rusty! You know how we Christians impinge upon the rights of everyone else in this country. It's easy to see from the internet and television just how much destructive influence Christians have. ;-)
Once written, twice... said...
"Mike Pence starts his speeches with "he is a Christian first."
Get his radical religious ass out of the country asap."
And in this one sentence, Once encapsulates a set in concrete dogma of the Left since the Enlightenment:
ALL religions are functionally equivalent.
The fact that this is theological, philosophical, ecclesiological, sociological, & historical nonsense doesn't faze them a bit. If any thought even remotely similar to this ever escaped your lips in an upper level religious studies class you'd be laughed out of class. But, yet, this idea has unquestioned currency on the liberal/lefty street.
Even Bill Maher, in many ways a staunch adherent to this line of thought, is starting to figure out "Well, maybe Islam is different....".
ALL religions are functionally equivalent.
All religious/moral philosophies seek to prescribe and proscribe behavior. Some are more selective (e.g. pro-choice) and divergent (e.g. liberalism) than others.
Judging an individual by his "skin color" and judging a philosophy by its political correctness is very much in compliance with [class] diversity thinking (e.g. racist, sexist).
Judging a human life by its selective value is a basic tenet of the Pro-Choice religion. Well, that, and doctrines that conflate logical domains for leverage and profit.
For everyone who thinks Trump is trying to throw the election to Clinton:
Vote for him anyway! That'll really mess him up.
If everyone who does not want Hillary Clinton to win, votes for Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton will lose with the fire of a thousand suns.
What was the point of this post? Aren't there other forums available for accessing - let alone reading - Trump's long, rambling, unexpurgated diatribes? If one was feeling masochistic enough, that is.
"Even Bill Maher, in many ways a staunch adherent to this line of thought, is starting to figure out..."
Starting to....?
I still might vote for him, even though I think he is a con man who caught a wave, because Hillary the warmongering, lying, access peddling, influence auctioneer, is worse.
I wonder how Comey feels today after Bill threw him under the bus. He grew up wanting to be Efram Zimbalist Jr, he ends up as Boss Hogg. That's what the Clintons will do to a man.
I wonder how Comey feels today after Bill threw him under the bus. He grew up wanting to be Efram Zimbalist Jr, he ends up as Boss Hogg. That's what the Clintons will do to a man.
At least he hasn't 'committed suicide'. Yet.
Absolutely 100% correct. Trump nailed it, for anyone with a lick of common sense.
@R&B,
Even Bill Maher, in many ways a staunch adherent to this line of thought, is starting to figure out..."
Starting to....?
Yes, only starting to. Maher has known for some time that Islam is different, but he seems to be unable to proceed to the next step & understand that ALL faiths (& even within the major faiths) are very different from one another, and just what that might mean historically & sociologically.
Trump is giving a great speech in Wisconsin tonight by the way. Maybe he's woken up and is going to take the black vote seriously. That will upset some apple carts.
I think he has always taken the black vote seriously, without being patronizing and paternalistic.
Okay okay okay.
You are a gay man, caught in the Arab Muslim World.
You thought you were just there on business.
Now you are to be sentenced to whipping and/or death from a tall height.
Which President do you think will actually go balls-out to save you -- Hillary or Trump?
I would love serious answers.
I am Laslo.
"who support bigotry and hatred"
Could hover around the SJW/PC margins, depending on the metrics used.
"I think he has always taken the black vote seriously, without being patronizing and paternalistic."
Is it possible to talk about Black America without being patronizing and paternalistic?
Because are we not then talking about the Imaginary Black People that White People Like To Pretend Exist?
Yeah, I'm just kicking hornets' nests.
I am Laslo.
They do exist, Laslo, but not typically in the subculture of the inner cities.
And the answer is Trump, of course.
Trump goes to West Bend which is 99% white to try to appeal to black folks after insulting them first. The chicken shit should've gone to Milwaukee.
The chicken shit should've gone to Milwaukee.
He did. Today.
Where's our chicken shit prez?
Or Sharpton? I guess the scene became less attractive when it became (slightly) know that the cop and the deceased were black and had attended the same high school.
There are a lot of things you can call Trump but chicken shit is not one of them.
Here is something for Reince Priebus, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell and other Republican leaders to consider. At high schools and colleges with Latino or Muslim students, spray-painting “Trump 2016” on a wall or poster is properly taken as a racially charged incident. When white students chant “Trump! Trump!” at a basketball game against a team including minorities, it is properly taken as a racial taunt. Young people understand the logo of the Republican nominee — the very name of the Republican presidential candidate — as conveying a message of exclusion.
So, change everything based on the assumptions of total fucking idiots?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा