P45 Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 Also Cruz isn't big government. He's a tea party man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 Marco Rubio's despairing response to being asked if he could support Donald Trump as the Republican nominee: https://twitter.com/joesonka/status/708674789943218177 Suspect some of the nasty undercurrent that goes with any US presidential election is getting to him. Do some googling of Rubio and the phrase "bubble boy" and you will quickly find what is flying just below the radar in mainstream media terms at the moment, and in the age of the internet every Cletus the Slack-jawed Yokel type from coast to coast will be hearing about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 Trump is allowed to say most Mexican immigrants are rapists, drug dealers and murderers, which is not only politically incorrect, but a total lie. He wasn't punished for it, just got a load more votes. Trump didn't say "most" illegal Mexican were rapists, drug dealer and murders, but that a lot of them were for it to be considered a problem. Using the NAPALT argument (Not All People Are Like That) does not discredit the issue. It just gives cover to things which are clearly wrong and immoral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 Trump didn't say "most" illegal Mexican were rapists, drug dealer and murders, I don't think there's room to interpret this in any other way: “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists, and some, I assume, are good people.†Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 I don't think there's room to interpret this in any other way: Ok, I've had a look into it, because the circumstances you've presented demands it. Here's the full quote... “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best. They’re sending people that have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems. They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists, and some, I assume, are good people. but I speak to border guards and they're telling us what we're getting" When Trump said that, he was talking about a subset of Mexicans who had entered the country illegally. Here's how that was reported... "Trump's claim that illegal Mexican immigrants are 'rapists'." - New York Times "He called Latino immigrants 'criminals' and 'rapists'.'" - Huffington Post "He referred to Mexicans as 'rapists'." - The Washington Post "Trump's comment that Mexican immigrants are 'rapists'." - Time Magazine "Trump called Mexican immigrants rapists and criminals" - Associated Press "branding Mexican immigrants as immigrants as criminals and rapists." - Hollywood Reporter "Trump defends calling Mexican immigrants 'rapists'." - CBS News It's clearly dishonest and based on their dislike of Trump and preference for Hillary Clinton. Which is done purely for the political and economic benefit of those who control the media. Trump is referring to illegal Mexican's; not all Mexican's or ones that have come to the U.S. legally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 There is nothing in that full quote that suggests it is restricted to illegal immigrants. And even if it were limited to that it would be both staggeringly wrong and still racist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 "some, I assume, are good people" Says it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 That should have disqualified him from being a serious contender, along with the lunatic halt to Muslim immigration stuff, but this is a party that has had David Duke as an elected reprentative in the past and deliberately pursued Nixon's southern strategy as their path to power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 There is nothing in that full quote that suggests it is restricted to illegal immigrants. And even if it were limited to that it would be both staggeringly wrong and still racist. Trump did not say all or most illegal Mexicans were all these pejorative things. BTW, the term you're looking for is "xenophobic". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 BTW, the term you're looking for is "xenophobic". American latinos aren't taking it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 Trump did not say all or most illegal Mexicans were all these pejorative things. BTW, the term you're looking for is "xenophobic". You are of course correct. He didn't say that. He didn't distinguish between legal and illegal Mexicans at all. So he was smearing legal migrants too. Hurrah! He listed drug-dealing, crime and rape and then hastily acknowledged that "some" might be nice people. This means that he thinks "most" are not nice people, and infers that they are respectively, drug-dealers, criminals and rapists. Also, no, the word I'm looking for is racist. He's also a xenophobe but that's besides the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yank Mike Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 Some mental pictures from this. All the nutters are out for Trump. Proper Nazi salutes all over the shop. I read a decent point that the right don't want the Trump rally to be disrupted but applauded the capture of the federal building in Oregon by a bunch of militia. So, that was a capture of an unoccupied building miles and miles from the closest city. It was after a completely unjust sentencing of ranchers under anti-terrorism legislation. The judge ignored mandatory minimums as unjust and the Obama Justice Dept appealed to enforce long term sentences on folks who had a different view on how to stop wildfires from threatening their land (it worked) and a small allegedly illegal hunt. A jury for the original case that the judge considered a miscarriage of justice was bused in from the city where people wouldn't understand the different theories of how to deal with rural western forest fires. This was after years of problems where the government had tried to force these ranchers to sell off their land by closing off roads and other such measures. The occupiers didn't hurt anyone and were trying to draw attention to an injustice in a small town that would have been otherwise ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Archer (Raconteur) Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 Ffs he was a Tory c**t. He riled the Dees, that's good enough for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yank Mike Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 Trump, Birmingham Alabama 21/11 Trump, Cedar Rapids Iowa 1/2 Trump, Las Vegas 22/2 Trump, Warren Michigan 4/3 So, you think invading a private event to make a point is legitimate protest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yank Mike Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 What is it that people are banned from saying because of "political correctness"? Apparently arguing against open borders and illegal immigration and suggesting that Islam has something to do with Islamic terrorism if you are in Chicago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 So, you think invading a private event to make a point is legitimate protest? Absolutely, certainly not justifying incitement of violence. It's called Freedom of Speech, not Freedom to Punch People. Comes under some clause in the American constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny van Axeldongen Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 I'd like to get one of those "Make America Great Again" baseball caps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 I'd like to get one of those "Make America Great Again" baseball caps. $40 from DonaldTrumpFundshisOwnCampaign.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yank Mike Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 Absolutely, certainly not justifying incitement of violence. It's called Freedom of Speech, not Freedom to Punch People. Comes under some clause in the American constitution. Where does it stop? Fake patients at an abortion clinic disrupting normal business? Christians at a rock show shouting down the band? Protestants causing disruption in the middle of Catholic churches? Christians in general doing the same at Muslim mosques? The proper role of protests in a democratic society which respects freedom of speech and freedom of assembly is to register your voice but not to disrupt what other people are doing with their equal freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny van Axeldongen Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 $40 from DonaldTrumpFundshisOwnCampaign.com They're not allowed to sell them to non-US folk unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.