Trump Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Bay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Forget the

“I think these are good people…”, the border is a warzone and should be controlled, people are exploited crossing over, criminals come over. That’s just the facts.
 
Forget the

“I think these are good people…”, the border is a warzone and should be controlled, people are exploited crossing over, criminals come over. That’s just the facts.
I don’t think any candidate is against border control; the ones other than Trump, are for control, just not a wall that keeps getting higher and higher in Trump’s over-active imagination.
 
People smuggling is rampant on the border, if one likes open borders, they may inadvertently aid organized crime.

Immigrants through Mexico have been massacred; so despite the do-gooder talk, I think those who would let the illegal immigration continue, somewhat imperil innocents.
This should not continue…
 
Most of the Mexicans I know are wonderful people, too. Most of them would take in a stranger even if it put a burden on them.

However, I’m sure there are “bad apples” in every barrel, Mexicans included.

My point was that we can’t make “blanket statements” as Trump did.
Immigrants vary a great deal in their characters and in how they see this country and its people. When it comes to Mexican immigrants, it’s really mixed.

Admitting in advance that this is anecdotal, I have known a significant number of those who were formerly illegal and became legal, and those who were illegal and remain so. I know some who have been here longer than my own ancestors have been.

Among the recent arrivals, there are those who are as good as any on the face of the earth. Kindly, generous, open, wishing to be sociable despite the language barrier. There is a significant number, however that deliberately remains apart; a “country within a country”. Many teach or influence their children to remain apart and sometimes sullen toward native-born. Perhaps in a few generations that will all change, but among many, it hasn’t yet and seems pretty intractable.

Admitting these are generalizations, I have yet to meet a recently-arrived Mexican who has any use for black Americans whatever, and the antipathy is mutual and far stronger than the mild distances white and black Americans maintain between each other. Nor do Mexicans, generally, have any use for the “Indios” who come from Guatemala or even from those parts of Mexico where there are a lot of pure Indians, like Yucatan. I have seen a Hispanic nun vigorously bawl out a Hispanic Catholic congregation after Mass for this kind of thing.

On the other hand, when it comes to assimilation, Mexicans exceed most other Hispanics generally. They seem already to have absorbed parts of the culture here before they got here. But there is a price they pay, which is a degree of rejection by their own people. There isn’t much “in between” for them. One either joins the “white” culture or stays within the culture of “La Raza”. The whole race thing is, to me, a mess. “Indios” are not welcome within “La Raza”, and “pure Spanish” (yes, I have heard some of them refer to themselves as such) don’t really want to be considered part of “La Raza”.

One needs to keep in mind that the Hispanics I know are all from south of the border. There are no Cubans or Puerto Ricans here. Very few South Americans.

Finally, anybody who doesn’t think there are a lot of criminals among them really doesn’t know much about them. That seems to come with a rush of indiscriminate immigration from anywhere. There are no few Russian criminals who have come here to prey, first, on their own nationals, then on everyone else.
 
Agreed.
When asked about the legality of waterboarding, Trump said the U.S. needs to change its laws because he would “absolutely” go beyond waterboarding. “I’d go further, I’d listen to the military people, but I’d go further. And by the way, torture works,” he said.
First, no, it doesn’t. Second, for those who like to pretend that waterboarding isn’t torture, hope you’re not planning to vote for Trump. There doesn’t seem to be any such hedging on his part.

And apparently, it doesn’t work for our soldiers either:
“Our interrogations used approved techniques. We filed paperwork, followed guidelines and obeyed the rules. But with every prisoner forced up against a wall, or made to stand naked in a cold cell, or prevented from falling asleep for significant periods of time, we felt less and less like decent men. And we felt less and less like Americans.”
 
Let’s hope one is as vocal per pro-abortion politicians, dismemberment abortions and so on. It appears some people quite openly support politicians that are for this torture and killing versus throwing water up someone’s nose.

So, perhaps, one can repeat this per the DNC candidates.
 
Agreed.

First, no, it doesn’t. Second, for those who like to pretend that waterboarding isn’t torture, hope you’re not planning to vote for Trump. There doesn’t seem to be any such hedging on his part.

And apparently, it doesn’t work for our soldiers either:
Great post. 👍

Waterboarding isn’t torture, and torture doesn’t work. Nicely said, Grace.
 
Let’s hope one is as vocal per pro-abortion politicians, dismemberment abortions and so on. It appears some people quite openly support politicians that are for this torture and killing versus throwing water up someone’s nose.

So, perhaps, one can repeat this per the DNC candidates.
The hypocrisy is stunning,isn’t it?:eek:
 
Agreed.

First, no, it doesn’t. Second, for those who like to pretend that waterboarding isn’t torture, hope you’re not planning to vote for Trump. There doesn’t seem to be any such hedging on his part.

And apparently, it doesn’t work for our soldiers either:
Glad to see one sees partial birth abortion proponents like Clinton and Sanders in this same light.
 
Let’s hope one is as vocal per pro-abortion politicians, dismemberment abortions and so on. It appears some people quite openly support politicians that are for this torture and killing versus throwing water up someone’s nose.

So, perhaps, one can repeat this per the DNC candidates.
THANK you!
 
Great post. 👍

Waterboarding isn’t torture, and torture doesn’t work. Nicely said, Grace.
Thanks! Although I definitely believe that waterboarding is torture. I only meant to note that in contrast to some here who believe it isn’t, a candidate for whom they might vote does believe it’s torture. And he’s fine with it even with that label.

But it’s a good thing that torture isn’t a non-negotiable because it’s a non-issue in current elections. :rolleyes:
 
Thanks! Although I definitely believe that waterboarding is torture. I only meant to note that in contrast to some here who believe it isn’t, a candidate for whom they might vote does believe it’s torture. And he’s fine with it even with that label.

But it’s a good thing that torture isn’t a non-negotiable because it’s a non-issue in current elections. :rolleyes:
Then Trump can’t be criticized, he wants it to be legal. Seems the Sanders viewpoint says at least abortion is legal and safe.

Well, waterboarding is safe so what is the problem? Nobody gets killed with it.

Perhaps we should look up that word “consistency”.
 
Glad to see one sees partial birth abortion proponents like Clinton and Sanders in this same light.
I’m aware of your belief that abortion is the only issue that needs to be considered this election.

(If you’re speaking directly to me, the second person pronoun is good – no need to generalize and call me “one.”)
 
Glad to see one sees partial birth abortion proponents like Clinton and Sanders in this same light.
You are wrong:

Q: Are there circumstances when the government should limit choice?

LAZIO: I had a pro-choice record in the House, and I believe in a woman’s right to choose. I support a ban on partial-birth abortions. Senator Moynihan called it “infanticide.” Even former mayor Ed Koch agreed that this was too extreme a procedure. This is an area where I disagree with my opponent. My opponent opposes a ban on partial-birth abortions.

CLINTON: My opponent is wrong. I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions, including partial-birth abortions, so long as the health and life of the mother is protected. I’ve met women who faced this heart-wrenching decision toward the end of a pregnancy. Of course it’s a horrible procedure. No one would argue with that. But if your life is at stake, if your health is at stake, if the potential for having any more children is at stake, this must be a woman’s choice.

ontheissues.org/2008/Hillary_Clinton_Abortion.htm
 
You are wrong:

CLINTON: But if your life is at stake, if your health is at stake, if the potential for having any more children is at stake, this must be a woman’s choice.

ontheissues.org/2008/Hillary_Clinton_Abortion.htm
So it is OK to have a partial birth abortion if your health is at stake or if the potential for having any more children is at stake? It is OK to put a knife in the head of a child? I can’t go along with such a disgusting scenario.
 
You are wrong:

Q: Are there circumstances when the government should limit choice?

LAZIO: I had a pro-choice record in the House, and I believe in a woman’s right to choose. I support a ban on partial-birth abortions. Senator Moynihan called it “infanticide.” Even former mayor Ed Koch agreed that this was too extreme a procedure. This is an area where I disagree with my opponent. My opponent opposes a ban on partial-birth abortions.

CLINTON: My opponent is wrong. I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions, including partial-birth abortions, so long as the **health **and life of the mother is protected. I’ve met women who faced this heart-wrenching decision toward the end of a pregnancy. Of course it’s a horrible procedure. No one would argue with that. But if your life is at stake, if your **health **is at stake, if the potential for having any more children is at stake, this must be a woman’s choice.

ontheissues.org/2008/Hillary_Clinton_Abortion.htm
Health reasons mean ANY reason at all. Learn what the SCOTUS ruling said.
 
I don’t think any candidate is against border control; the ones other than Trump, are for control, just not a wall that keeps getting higher and higher in Trump’s over-active imagination.
Lily, I did hear Hillary asked how tall a wall must be built to keep the internet out? I can only assume Trump must be recalculating his measurements on that one. The builder that he is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top