Total Posts:31|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Me agreeing with Sen. Lindsey Graham

TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2015 9:36:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
"You know how you make America great again? Tell Donald Trump to go to hell,"

"He's a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot,"

"He doesn't represent my party. He doesn't represents the values that the men and women who wear the uniform are fighting for. ... He's the ISIL man of the year."

http://edition.cnn.com...
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2015 9:38:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/8/2015 9:36:50 PM, TBR wrote:
"You know how you make America great again? Tell Donald Trump to go to hell,"

"He's a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot,"

"He doesn't represent my party. He doesn't represents the values that the men and women who wear the uniform are fighting for. ... He's the ISIL man of the year."

http://edition.cnn.com...

Except Lindsey Graham is wrong. Trump does represent the values of his party, as is evidenced by his poll numbers.
Tsar of DDO
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2015 9:39:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/8/2015 9:38:33 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/8/2015 9:36:50 PM, TBR wrote:
"You know how you make America great again? Tell Donald Trump to go to hell,"

"He's a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot,"

"He doesn't represent my party. He doesn't represents the values that the men and women who wear the uniform are fighting for. ... He's the ISIL man of the year."

http://edition.cnn.com...

Except Lindsey Graham is wrong. Trump does represent the values of his party, as is evidenced by his poll numbers.

I was going to split that hair, but any chance for me to agree with a republican... I will just give it to him.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2015 9:51:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/8/2015 9:36:50 PM, TBR wrote:
"You know how you make America great again? Tell Donald Trump to go to hell,"

"He's a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot,"

"He doesn't represent my party. He doesn't represents the values that the men and women who wear the uniform are fighting for. ... He's the ISIL man of the year."

http://edition.cnn.com...

lol yeah I saw that too. I hardly think 1/3 of the republican electorate is representative of the party as a whole. He's reached the extent that his bigotry can take him. Anyone that doesn't already support him obviously isn't impressed by these tactics.

The only way he won't win, though, is if carson alone or a combination of bush, fiorina, christie, and kasich drop out in time -- which is highly implausible.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2015 10:28:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/8/2015 9:51:27 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 12/8/2015 9:36:50 PM, TBR wrote:
"You know how you make America great again? Tell Donald Trump to go to hell,"

"He's a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot,"

"He doesn't represent my party. He doesn't represents the values that the men and women who wear the uniform are fighting for. ... He's the ISIL man of the year."

http://edition.cnn.com...

lol yeah I saw that too. I hardly think 1/3 of the republican electorate is representative of the party as a whole. He's reached the extent that his bigotry can take him. Anyone that doesn't already support him obviously isn't impressed by these tactics.

The only way he won't win, though, is if carson alone or a combination of bush, fiorina, christie, and kasich drop out in time -- which is highly implausible.

The real life republicans I know split about 10%-15% saying anything nice about Trump. Most of them are very ashamed and worried. Well, I think they are really more worried than anything else.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2015 11:07:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Trump is a democrat who just happens to be anti immigration. The reason he shouts about immigration so loudly is to distract from the fact that he's really a Democrat. He is pushing a single payer system, wants to raise taxes on the rich and if it weren't for him being so loud about immigration, nobody would fall for that trick.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2015 11:10:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Most of these polls are by land line telephones, and when it comes time to actually vote, you'll see Tge younger demographic more, and Bernie Sander's will do better than anybody expects, and you'll see Trump lose the primaries by a landslide
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 1:32:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/8/2015 11:07:48 PM, Wylted wrote:
Trump is a democrat who just happens to be anti immigration. The reason he shouts about immigration so loudly is to distract from the fact that he's really a Democrat. He is pushing a single payer system, wants to raise taxes on the rich and if it weren't for him being so loud about immigration, nobody would fall for that trick.

Even if your "he is a democratic" stick were true, do you think it is the democratic base that is lapping this stuff up?
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 1:43:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 1:32:00 AM, TBR wrote:
At 12/8/2015 11:07:48 PM, Wylted wrote:
Trump is a democrat who just happens to be anti immigration. The reason he shouts about immigration so loudly is to distract from the fact that he's really a Democrat. He is pushing a single payer system, wants to raise taxes on the rich and if it weren't for him being so loud about immigration, nobody would fall for that trick.

Even if your "he is a democratic" stick were true, do you think it is the democratic base that is lapping this stuff up?

Well noone is lapping up Lindsey.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 1:45:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 1:43:04 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 12/9/2015 1:32:00 AM, TBR wrote:
At 12/8/2015 11:07:48 PM, Wylted wrote:
Trump is a democrat who just happens to be anti immigration. The reason he shouts about immigration so loudly is to distract from the fact that he's really a Democrat. He is pushing a single payer system, wants to raise taxes on the rich and if it weren't for him being so loud about immigration, nobody would fall for that trick.

Even if your "he is a democratic" stick were true, do you think it is the democratic base that is lapping this stuff up?

Well noone is lapping up Lindsey.

No doubt about that. Under normal conditions I would be talking about what a fool Graham was. Now I have to talk about why a reality TeeVeeee star doesn't make a good candidate.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 1:49:26 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I agree with Lindsay Graham on those comments too. Trump is to the US what Farage is to the UK, accept without the eloquence or the accent.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 1:52:44 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/8/2015 11:10:35 PM, Wylted wrote:
Most of these polls are by land line telephones, and when it comes time to actually vote, you'll see Tge younger demographic more, and Bernie Sander's will do better than anybody expects, and you'll see Trump lose the primaries by a landslide

lol millennials -- and I feel confident saying this as I am one of them -- are by and large politically apathetic. And even among those informed enough to know and support Bernie Sanders, only a fraction will actually be enthusiastic enough to vote. On top of that, Bernie has declined in the polls in recent weeks.

For that reason I'm pretty skeptical that he's going to do any better than we're seeing, .... at least not on the basis of some outpouring from young people.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 2:38:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 1:32:00 AM, TBR wrote:
At 12/8/2015 11:07:48 PM, Wylted wrote:
Trump is a democrat who just happens to be anti immigration. The reason he shouts about immigration so loudly is to distract from the fact that he's really a Democrat. He is pushing a single payer system, wants to raise taxes on the rich and if it weren't for him being so loud about immigration, nobody would fall for that trick.

Even if your "he is a democratic" stick were true, do you think it is the democratic base that is lapping this stuff up?

If he was loud about single payer and quiet about immigration it would. It's all about where he places focus
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 3:13:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 2:38:32 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/9/2015 1:32:00 AM, TBR wrote:
At 12/8/2015 11:07:48 PM, Wylted wrote:
Trump is a democrat who just happens to be anti immigration. The reason he shouts about immigration so loudly is to distract from the fact that he's really a Democrat. He is pushing a single payer system, wants to raise taxes on the rich and if it weren't for him being so loud about immigration, nobody would fall for that trick.

Even if your "he is a democratic" stick were true, do you think it is the democratic base that is lapping this stuff up?

If he was loud about single payer and quiet about immigration it would. It's all about where he places focus

1) democrats hated him long beorebthis run. 2) its not our history to elect actors. 3) he is all yours.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 3:28:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 3:13:44 PM, TBR wrote:
At 12/9/2015 2:38:32 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/9/2015 1:32:00 AM, TBR wrote:
At 12/8/2015 11:07:48 PM, Wylted wrote:
Trump is a democrat who just happens to be anti immigration. The reason he shouts about immigration so loudly is to distract from the fact that he's really a Democrat. He is pushing a single payer system, wants to raise taxes on the rich and if it weren't for him being so loud about immigration, nobody would fall for that trick.

Even if your "he is a democratic" stick were true, do you think it is the democratic base that is lapping this stuff up?

If he was loud about single payer and quiet about immigration it would. It's all about where he places focus

1) democrats hated him long beorebthis run. 2) its not our history to elect actors. 3) he is all yours.

You can say that, but it's completely beside the point. Look at his policies. One such being single payer healthcare
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 3:29:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 3:28:39 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/9/2015 3:13:44 PM, TBR wrote:
At 12/9/2015 2:38:32 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/9/2015 1:32:00 AM, TBR wrote:
At 12/8/2015 11:07:48 PM, Wylted wrote:
Trump is a democrat who just happens to be anti immigration. The reason he shouts about immigration so loudly is to distract from the fact that he's really a Democrat. He is pushing a single payer system, wants to raise taxes on the rich and if it weren't for him being so loud about immigration, nobody would fall for that trick.

Even if your "he is a democratic" stick were true, do you think it is the democratic base that is lapping this stuff up?

If he was loud about single payer and quiet about immigration it would. It's all about where he places focus

1) democrats hated him long beorebthis run. 2) its not our history to elect actors. 3) he is all yours.

You can say that, but it's completely beside the point. Look at his policies. One such being single payer healthcare

I am not disagreeing with that. I am saying, we would have kicked this a$$ to the curb before he announced.
thett3
Posts: 14,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 3:29:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Lol Lindsey Graham logic: A moratorium on Muslim immigration is horribly offensive and goes against our core values. Bombing the middle east incessantly and murdering untold numbers of civilians, overwhelmingly Muslims, is okay, though. Funding Islamists who at this point serve only to prevent the legitimate government of Syria from defeating ISIS is a humanitarian policy.

Do you people not get how controlled our narrative is? This proposal is far less offensive and far less destructive to Muslims than what the other candidates are suggesting.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 3:31:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 3:29:54 PM, thett3 wrote:
Lol Lindsey Graham logic: A moratorium on Muslim immigration is horribly offensive and goes against our core values. Bombing the middle east incessantly and murdering untold numbers of civilians, overwhelmingly Muslims, is okay, though. Funding Islamists who at this point serve only to prevent the legitimate government of Syria from defeating ISIS is a humanitarian policy.

Do you people not get how controlled our narrative is? This proposal is far less offensive and far less destructive to Muslims than what the other candidates are suggesting.

Haven't seen any indication that Trump wants to bomb them LESS.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 3:32:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 3:29:54 PM, thett3 wrote:
Lol Lindsey Graham logic: A moratorium on Muslim immigration is horribly offensive and goes against our core values. Bombing the middle east incessantly and murdering untold numbers of civilians, overwhelmingly Muslims, is okay, though. Funding Islamists who at this point serve only to prevent the legitimate government of Syria from defeating ISIS is a humanitarian policy.

Do you people not get how controlled our narrative is? This proposal is far less offensive and far less destructive to Muslims than what the other candidates are suggesting.

I think the exact quote is - "Bomb the hell out of them!"
thett3
Posts: 14,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 3:34:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 3:31:53 PM, TBR wrote:
At 12/9/2015 3:29:54 PM, thett3 wrote:
Lol Lindsey Graham logic: A moratorium on Muslim immigration is horribly offensive and goes against our core values. Bombing the middle east incessantly and murdering untold numbers of civilians, overwhelmingly Muslims, is okay, though. Funding Islamists who at this point serve only to prevent the legitimate government of Syria from defeating ISIS is a humanitarian policy.

Do you people not get how controlled our narrative is? This proposal is far less offensive and far less destructive to Muslims than what the other candidates are suggesting.

Haven't seen any indication that Trump wants to bomb them LESS.

Trump is open to allowing Russia to finish off ISIS. He's also complained many times about how we are funding these Syrian rebels and we have absolutely no idea what they stand for or who they are--this NEVER works out historically. Trump seemed open to supporting Assad because we can't fight everybody, rather than funding rebels groups whose sole effect in the Syrian conflict is to be a thorn in Assad's side and keep him from defeating ISIS, the scourge of the levant.

The other candidates on both sides except for maybe Rand Paul will have none of this. Now you tell me which is more offensive.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
thett3
Posts: 14,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 3:36:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 3:32:48 PM, TBR wrote:
At 12/9/2015 3:29:54 PM, thett3 wrote:
Lol Lindsey Graham logic: A moratorium on Muslim immigration is horribly offensive and goes against our core values. Bombing the middle east incessantly and murdering untold numbers of civilians, overwhelmingly Muslims, is okay, though. Funding Islamists who at this point serve only to prevent the legitimate government of Syria from defeating ISIS is a humanitarian policy.

Do you people not get how controlled our narrative is? This proposal is far less offensive and far less destructive to Muslims than what the other candidates are suggesting.

I think the exact quote is - "Bomb the hell out of them!"

There is a difference between bombing legitimate military targets--like oil fields providing revenue for ISIS--and accepting the collateral damage that comes with that and funding groups that destroy stability in the middle east and then using that as an excuse to bomb it.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
thett3
Posts: 14,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 3:41:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
But say I accept that Trump wants to kill muslim civilians just as much as the other candidates, which I don't. Why the outcry now? Is this just the straw that broke the camels back?

Or, could it be, that the narrative we are fed is controlled and you guys bought right into it? That none of you actually care about muslims, but rather you saw the media sh!t show and instinctively felt the urge to virtue signal against Trump because it feels good and allows you to stick it to those icky bigots?
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 4:24:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 3:29:54 PM, thett3 wrote:
Lol Lindsey Graham logic: A moratorium on Muslim immigration is horribly offensive and goes against our core values. Bombing the middle east incessantly and murdering untold numbers of civilians, overwhelmingly Muslims, is okay, though. Funding Islamists who at this point serve only to prevent the legitimate government of Syria from defeating ISIS is a humanitarian policy.

Do you people not get how controlled our narrative is? This proposal is far less offensive and far less destructive to Muslims than what the other candidates are suggesting.

What does U.S. policy toward the syrian civil war have to do with rejecting Muslims from the country? They're not even comparable issues -- it's not as if you're comparing the relative offensiveness or destructiveness of two policies trying to achieve the same end. One has the end of securing our interests in the region (that is -- a syrian president with weaker ties to Russia, an end to the refugee crisis, and destruction of the Islamic State), and the other has the end of protecting Americans at home (to describe it charitably).

What makes his proposal offensive isn't just that it wouldn't achieve anything or deter home-grown terrorism, but that it would alienate Muslims here and all over the world, and send an embarrassing message about the extent to which we're willing to change our values out of fear.

And even if you believe we ought to perceive the campaign against Assad and the airstrikes as something offensive to Muslims (which, doesn't make sense, but let's grant that it does for the purposes of this question), in what way does that suggest that the Senator can't call Trump out for what he is?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
thett3
Posts: 14,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 4:34:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 4:24:23 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 12/9/2015 3:29:54 PM, thett3 wrote:
Lol Lindsey Graham logic: A moratorium on Muslim immigration is horribly offensive and goes against our core values. Bombing the middle east incessantly and murdering untold numbers of civilians, overwhelmingly Muslims, is okay, though. Funding Islamists who at this point serve only to prevent the legitimate government of Syria from defeating ISIS is a humanitarian policy.

Do you people not get how controlled our narrative is? This proposal is far less offensive and far less destructive to Muslims than what the other candidates are suggesting.

What does U.S. policy toward the syrian civil war have to do with rejecting Muslims from the country? They're not even comparable issues -- it's not as if you're comparing the relative offensiveness or destructiveness of two policies trying to achieve the same end. One has the end of securing our interests in the region (that is -- a syrian president with weaker ties to Russia, an end to the refugee crisis, and destruction of the Islamic State), and the other has the end of protecting Americans at home (to describe it charitably).

Because none of these people care about Muslims. At all. If they did they would be calling out our insane Middle East policy. But that wouldn't give them the same points for virtue singaling as this does.

I can't believe how you dont grasp this. It's not even a nuanced argument--all these people talking about how great Muslims are and how much they care about Muslims are perfectly content to support policies that cause them to die in droves as long is it's far away so we can pretend that it isn't happening.


What makes his proposal offensive isn't just that it wouldn't achieve anything or deter home-grown terrorism, but that it would alienate Muslims here and all over the world, and send an embarrassing message about the extent to which we're willing to change our values out of fear.

Lmao


And even if you believe we ought to perceive the campaign against Assad and the airstrikes as something offensive to Muslims (which, doesn't make sense, but let's grant that it does for the purposes of this question), in what way does that suggest that the Senator can't call Trump out for what he is?
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 4:48:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 3:41:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
But say I accept that Trump wants to kill muslim civilians just as much as the other candidates, which I don't. Why the outcry now? Is this just the straw that broke the camels back?

Or, could it be, that the narrative we are fed is controlled and you guys bought right into it? That none of you actually care about muslims, but rather you saw the media sh!t show and instinctively felt the urge to virtue signal against Trump because it feels good and allows you to stick it to those icky bigots?

Well lets see... Yea, Trump is a nasty bigot - check. Yea, trump has inclinations to stay the course on endless bombing of the M.E. - check. What is the controversy here?
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 5:13:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 4:34:29 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/9/2015 4:24:23 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 12/9/2015 3:29:54 PM, thett3 wrote:
Lol Lindsey Graham logic: A moratorium on Muslim immigration is horribly offensive and goes against our core values. Bombing the middle east incessantly and murdering untold numbers of civilians, overwhelmingly Muslims, is okay, though. Funding Islamists who at this point serve only to prevent the legitimate government of Syria from defeating ISIS is a humanitarian policy.

Do you people not get how controlled our narrative is? This proposal is far less offensive and far less destructive to Muslims than what the other candidates are suggesting.

What does U.S. policy toward the syrian civil war have to do with rejecting Muslims from the country? They're not even comparable issues -- it's not as if you're comparing the relative offensiveness or destructiveness of two policies trying to achieve the same end. One has the end of securing our interests in the region (that is -- a syrian president with weaker ties to Russia, an end to the refugee crisis, and destruction of the Islamic State), and the other has the end of protecting Americans at home (to describe it charitably).

Because none of these people care about Muslims. At all. If they did they would be calling out our insane Middle East policy. But that wouldn't give them the same points for virtue singaling as this does.

I can't believe how you dont grasp this. It's not even a nuanced argument--all these people talking about how great Muslims are and how much they care about Muslims are perfectly content to support policies that cause them to die in droves as long is it's far away so we can pretend that it isn't happening.

Yes, I heard you the first time. The main thrust of my response was that you speak as thought there's no difference between the expressed intent to profile and exclude an entire religion because of who they are, and causing deaths within that group collaterally by our involvement in a regional conflict (the goals of which are unrelated to the fact that these people are Muslim).

You want a consistent policy, not one that co-opts moral concerns when politically expedient. I understand that. But I think the differences in intention between the policies you're comparing shows that it isn't fair to characterize the senator's statement in that way.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
thett3
Posts: 14,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 5:19:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 5:13:05 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 12/9/2015 4:34:29 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/9/2015 4:24:23 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 12/9/2015 3:29:54 PM, thett3 wrote:
Lol Lindsey Graham logic: A moratorium on Muslim immigration is horribly offensive and goes against our core values. Bombing the middle east incessantly and murdering untold numbers of civilians, overwhelmingly Muslims, is okay, though. Funding Islamists who at this point serve only to prevent the legitimate government of Syria from defeating ISIS is a humanitarian policy.

Do you people not get how controlled our narrative is? This proposal is far less offensive and far less destructive to Muslims than what the other candidates are suggesting.

What does U.S. policy toward the syrian civil war have to do with rejecting Muslims from the country? They're not even comparable issues -- it's not as if you're comparing the relative offensiveness or destructiveness of two policies trying to achieve the same end. One has the end of securing our interests in the region (that is -- a syrian president with weaker ties to Russia, an end to the refugee crisis, and destruction of the Islamic State), and the other has the end of protecting Americans at home (to describe it charitably).

Because none of these people care about Muslims. At all. If they did they would be calling out our insane Middle East policy. But that wouldn't give them the same points for virtue singaling as this does.

I can't believe how you dont grasp this. It's not even a nuanced argument--all these people talking about how great Muslims are and how much they care about Muslims are perfectly content to support policies that cause them to die in droves as long is it's far away so we can pretend that it isn't happening.

Yes, I heard you the first time. The main thrust of my response was that you speak as thought there's no difference between the expressed intent to profile and exclude an entire religion because of who they are, and causing deaths within that group collaterally by our involvement in a regional conflict (the goals of which are unrelated to the fact that these people are Muslim).

There is a difference. Destroying their existence and lives due to our insane Middle East policy is far worse than not letting certain groups immigrate. There is no comparison.

Graham is one of the most hawkish senators there is. If he were elected president he would cause more suffering to Muslims than Trump would by far. Graham and everyone else in the political establishment is content to continue our policy of destabilizing the Middle East, effectively funding radical Islam, and toppling everywhere the secular strongmen who keep it in check. Trump would stop that...but he also has reservations about the compatibility of certain cultures with American culture. What a bigot!

Please. These people don't care about Muslims. They never have and they never will. They care about virtue singaling and it's disgusting.


You want a consistent policy, not one that co-opts moral concerns when politically expedient. I understand that. But I think the differences in intention between the policies you're comparing shows that it isn't fair to characterize the senator's statement in that way.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 5:20:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
And in case the importance of eschewing bigotry as a principle is lost on you or at least something you're never going to agree to,...then I think TBR's argument is probably much better than mine. Trump offers existing policy plus bigotry, so it's hard to see why he's any better.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
thett3
Posts: 14,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 5:28:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 5:20:59 PM, 000ike wrote:
And in case the importance of eschewing bigotry as a principle is lost on you or at least something you're never going to agree to,...then I think TBR's argument is probably much better than mine. Trump offers existing policy plus bigotry, so it's hard to see why he's any better.

He does not. Have you listened to anything he's been saying?

Trump is against funding radical Islamist rebels who are fighting against Assad because we have no idea who they are and what they stand for. Trump is okay with letting Russia take out ISIS. Trump understands that Assad isn't a nice guy but the alternative is far worse and that we can't fight everyone and it would be okay to conditionally support Assad to help defeat ISIS.

The other candidates would rather continue to fund the rebels who hamper Assad's efforts to destroy ISIS and perpetually bomb the region than actually solve the problem. In terms of how their policies will effect Muslims there is no question at all that Trump would be better than anyone else.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2015 5:44:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2015 5:28:05 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/9/2015 5:20:59 PM, 000ike wrote:
And in case the importance of eschewing bigotry as a principle is lost on you or at least something you're never going to agree to,...then I think TBR's argument is probably much better than mine. Trump offers existing policy plus bigotry, so it's hard to see why he's any better.

He does not. Have you listened to anything he's been saying?

Trump is against funding radical Islamist rebels who are fighting against Assad because we have no idea who they are and what they stand for. Trump is okay with letting Russia take out ISIS. Trump understands that Assad isn't a nice guy but the alternative is far worse and that we can't fight everyone and it would be okay to conditionally support Assad to help defeat ISIS.

The other candidates would rather continue to fund the rebels who hamper Assad's efforts to destroy ISIS and perpetually bomb the region than actually solve the problem. In terms of how their policies will effect Muslims there is no question at all that Trump would be better than anyone else.

What Donald Trump is against is funding the rebels and deposing Assad. Regardless of what he's said about Russia, he's repeated on multiple occasions he does believe it's also our responsibility to "take out ISIS" and family members of terrorists. If that doesn't mean ground troops near the region, then it probably means sustained airstrikes.

In any case, Obama and Kerry have already shown some rhetorical signs that they may be willing to suspend their support for rebel groups in order to work with Russia.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault