itsbob
I bowl overhand
Where do you get that I assumed it was me you were talking about, I thought it was funny and ironic you'd call ANYONE a dumbass.. Including AOC.. or Gump.
You people are terrible with assumption making..
It's maddening
- Thread starter vraiblonde
- Start date
You people are terrible with assumption making..
itsbob
I bowl overhand
You spelled anti gun liberal wrong.
But I'm assuming there are millions of non-muslims around the world that would disagree with you.. or do they not count because they don't look like you??
What is you point exactly
Michelle was NEVER PROUD OF HER COUNTRY
That is YOUR Supposition, Trump does not Hate America
This_person
Well-Known Member
In context, I think he was saying, "STFU, your ideas are bad and have led to bad situations in other countries."
However, it is hilarious that people who couldn't decipher Trump's context and focused on his actual words are now focusing on what they think the context is.
If anything, that hypocrisy simply points out all the bad character traits of those people.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
and you ask 'what are we spinning?'
come on bob, who do you think he was talking about?
its pretty sad, but they have been all in for trump since before the election. If they let the least bit of reality into their world view they will see trump for what he is. They cant have that.
I still don't see what is so wrong about saying 'of course he was talking about those 4 bitches, and he said something stupid in the process'.
that's what happened, unless you are a trumper, and then its 4D chess
Never let it be said that repetition marketing doesn't work. Our "news" media proves daily that indeed it does.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
As I said before, there's enough bad things about these women where simply pointing those things out should be enough. Instead, Trump does this.
The context here is quite clear.
This_person
Well-Known Member
That was the same opinion of others previously.
Yooper
Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
Some (not so) random comments.
1. Without getting all parable-ly again, one should realize the same language about Trump not being Presidential and not unifying was the same stuff Southern Democrat (and some northern Republican) politicians said about Lincoln. In fact, their reactions to Lincoln's inauguration are remarkably similar to the Democrat and #NeverTrump reaction to Trump's inauguration. Even in the ad hominem attacks (on both person and spouse)! Finally, even in this the similarities are remarkable (look at the intro to the speech):
When one part of the country/a political party is in open revolt against the laws and government of the country, then the President cannot possibly be unifying. The President really has only two choices: capitulate or fight back. The burden of unifying is on the party in revolt (Democrats back in 1860, Democrats today). But the President unifying? Logically impossible and really just code for "we want you to capitulate." The "unifying" trope is just plain silly if the expectation is that the President is the one to be doing it.
2. Doesn't matter if Trump named or didn't name The Squad. Everyone knew exactly about whom he was talking. What does matter is that the ENTIRE tweet thread was a massive troll job/take-the-bait exercise. The Squad couldn't resist taking the bait and put Speaker Pelosi (specifically) and the Democrats (in general) in the unenviable position of having to "pick a side." If Pelosi and the Dems don't support The Squad these AbFab ladies are marginalized; if she and they do support The Squad they've proved the point that the Democrat Party is all about the undoing of the United States. Frankly, not a good look for the Dems. And it makes the contrast (and thus, choice) between alternatives a stark one (something Speaker Pelosi doesn't want to see happen; she wants to keep it all blurred).
Anyway, and again, without getting all "parable-ly," this was the point of my Patton post in another thread: Trump takes the initiative and persuades in order to control the conversation (just as Patton did to control the flow of the battle).
3. Just like the (hot) Civil War 150+ years back, this current (currently cold) Civil War is far from over. This was not a one and done event; merely another in a series of skirmishes going back 3-4 years (for Trump) and much longer (for opposing visions of what America should be). So just like The Empire, the Dems will strike back.
So keep your (figurative) powder dry, folks. This ain't gonna be over for some time. I certainly hope the Dems recover from their collective madness because I don't want to be moved from being concerned about figurative powder to being concerned about the real stuff.
--- End of line (MCP)
1. Without getting all parable-ly again, one should realize the same language about Trump not being Presidential and not unifying was the same stuff Southern Democrat (and some northern Republican) politicians said about Lincoln. In fact, their reactions to Lincoln's inauguration are remarkably similar to the Democrat and #NeverTrump reaction to Trump's inauguration. Even in the ad hominem attacks (on both person and spouse)! Finally, even in this the similarities are remarkable (look at the intro to the speech):
When one part of the country/a political party is in open revolt against the laws and government of the country, then the President cannot possibly be unifying. The President really has only two choices: capitulate or fight back. The burden of unifying is on the party in revolt (Democrats back in 1860, Democrats today). But the President unifying? Logically impossible and really just code for "we want you to capitulate." The "unifying" trope is just plain silly if the expectation is that the President is the one to be doing it.
2. Doesn't matter if Trump named or didn't name The Squad. Everyone knew exactly about whom he was talking. What does matter is that the ENTIRE tweet thread was a massive troll job/take-the-bait exercise. The Squad couldn't resist taking the bait and put Speaker Pelosi (specifically) and the Democrats (in general) in the unenviable position of having to "pick a side." If Pelosi and the Dems don't support The Squad these AbFab ladies are marginalized; if she and they do support The Squad they've proved the point that the Democrat Party is all about the undoing of the United States. Frankly, not a good look for the Dems. And it makes the contrast (and thus, choice) between alternatives a stark one (something Speaker Pelosi doesn't want to see happen; she wants to keep it all blurred).
Anyway, and again, without getting all "parable-ly," this was the point of my Patton post in another thread: Trump takes the initiative and persuades in order to control the conversation (just as Patton did to control the flow of the battle).
3. Just like the (hot) Civil War 150+ years back, this current (currently cold) Civil War is far from over. This was not a one and done event; merely another in a series of skirmishes going back 3-4 years (for Trump) and much longer (for opposing visions of what America should be). So just like The Empire, the Dems will strike back.
So keep your (figurative) powder dry, folks. This ain't gonna be over for some time. I certainly hope the Dems recover from their collective madness because I don't want to be moved from being concerned about figurative powder to being concerned about the real stuff.
--- End of line (MCP)
Last edited:
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
There was never a context that Mexico wouldn't actually pay for the wall. Now that it's clear the wall will be paid for by Americans, the sentiment is "No one actually believed Mexico would pay for a wall". For example.
This_person
Well-Known Member
There's never a mention by name of the congresswomen of whom Trump speaks, but it is assumed, for example.
We can do this all day.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Trump loves this country and the constitution that governs it. He's not bashing our law enforcement, ICE, and border agents as being a bunch of Nazi thugs. He's not calling illegal immigrant detention centers 'concentration camps'. He is simply trying to enforce the law. Has acted in the interest of the majority of Americans regardless of skin color, not the minority. And since the word 'minority is likely to be a trigger word for you; when I say 'minority', I'm not talking about minority groups like African-Americans or Latinos. I'm talking about middle American - the middle class.
The Gang of 4 year olds and their ilk complete disregards laws that don't suit them, and have no interest in how the constitution applies to them. They have done everything to disparage our LE at every level by calling them the worst that has ever existed on our modern earth. People that would die trying to protect all of them. It's obvious they need an education on Nazi Germany and what those concentration camps really were. They scream racism at every opportunity, watering down the real meaning of it. Nancy Pelosi can attest to that.
Trump criticizes aspects of this country that have little interest in enforcing laws that don't suit their purpose. Democrats are in power to change laws they don't like. But, they'd rather promote the thwarting of those laws. The likes of The Gang of 4 year olds refuse to condemn ANTIFA. Omar stop just short of praising terrorist groups. Tlaib says "We're going to impeach that mfer". Few things are more unAmerican than calling for the impeachment of a sitting president that has committed no crime.
If you don't like this duly elected president, then win the next election. But stop trying to get rid of him through nefarious means, just because you don't like him. Or leave the country if you feel you can't get your way through lawless ways.
kwillia
n/a
Long before he was elected, never once did I think he meant Mexico would write a check, but rather the money for the wall would come from changes in policies with Mexico.
To me it was obvious, because he cannot control them, but had high hopes congress would support him in controlling what WE, America, do.
I dont' think it was racist at all.
In fact I'd bet he'd recommend many white people like Nancy, Chuck or Dianne to go with them.
Many white people wanted to go to Canada after the 2016 election, but Canada said stay away.