Prelude to the Apocalypse

[Obscura]

lol at the ass-hurt Ed [...] Hard to believe you still claim that there was some conspiracy to invent ties between Ayers and Obama, after I posted factual evidence to the contrary. Extra lol at your rationalization of the fraud himself: I suppose as long as nobody gets hurt, it's ok to set off bombs in the Pentagon and Capitol. Get a grip. Do you have to go to such lengths to protect Obama that you have to defend some two-bit rich daddy's-boy terrorist "h- he wasn't that bad, guys! Ch- ch- check the facts!" I don't know what your dog in this fight is, but it can't be a healthy one. If we want to bring up the politics of past associations, why stop at only one or two bad eggs? I know plenty of people who protested the Vietnam war who didn't have to resort to their cushion of personal family influence to shield themselves from the law. Bottom-line: Ayers is a delusional fraud not worthy of attention, much like David Duke.

Cognitive dissonance ultimately drives the champions of both left and right insane.

"The media reported on the connection between Duke and Trump! Oh BTW, when the same media reported on the connection between Obama and an unrepentant terrorist, and pointed out that he went to a church run by a radical racist, it's all a right-wing conspiracy!"

"The left wing is trying to demolish the Constitution by making laws that restrict freedom! Oh BTW, I think that the Constitution is not a living document even though it outlines a process for amending it, and that it has an invisible clause that makes Jesus the real supreme leader of the land."

Or, just look at the post that Ed just ninja'd me with. Claiming to hear dog whistles from every single sentence every Republican says... but no way any Democrat would ever use a dog whistle! Nope, my side is morally pure, and never stoops to such things!

Both sides fall prey to the same cognitive mistakes that they accuse the other side of, since humans are humans, no matter what side of the political spectrum they fall on. If you don't realize this, you're stupid. And, to be fair, I'm not going to name names, but it's not just the left that have proven themselves to be stupid in this thread -- several champions of the right have, as well.

[Ed Oscuro]

Yes, I'm sure that putting things in context - like the fact that the FBI of the period was actually murderous, while Ayers wasn't, and the FBI institution spent years trying to shrug off their complicity in murders, while Ayers has expressed regret, regardless of the lies you spout - is too much for you. My point of making these statements isn't to defend planting bombs anywhere - it's to expose your lies about the record.

Once again, the issue here is that Trump and Duke are natural fits. Duke is still representing the KKK. Trump is still preaching racism and promising to institutionalize it. Sanders, Clinton, and Obama are not going to promote the violent tactics from the radical fringe from 50 years ago. That's just obvious. What isn't obvious is what Trump actually will try to do as President because of his bipolar campaigning in the extremes of groveling for endorsements and pretending to be a strong superman who will "make America great again" on the backs of our marginalized peoples.

Your "savior" doesn't want you.
Get in the plane and go home.

[Obscura]

Trump is still preaching racism and promising to institutionalize it.

Nope. Preaching agaisnt immigration from groups that have proven troublesome isn't the same thing as preaching racism against U.S. citizens of certain races (which is what the KKK advocates). Again, you do the exact same thing you accuse others of, and you're too stupid to see it.

And I've already told you Trump isn't my savior. I'd much rather see Sanders win, and I'd prefer Clinton over any of the Republican field (although, in practice, they would be the same thing).

[Opus131]

Once again, the issue here is that Trump and Duke are natural fits.

Yes because being against immigration and looking out for the interests of your countrymen is totally synonymous with white supremacism.

Duke is still representing the KKK. Trump is still preaching racism and promising to institutionalize it

Can you define what representing the KKK and preaching racism means, exactly? Because this days just by looking at white people as human beings can easily be classified as racism.

In fact, the only racism that is still openly accepted is racism against whites:

http://www.salon.com/2015/12/22/white_m ... t_partner/

You don't suppose a lot of people support Trump because of the sentiments expressed in this article, do you?

[Ed Oscuro]

We should target criminals; targeting by ethnic groups is useless and our top anti-terrorism experts say as much. And Muslim citizens aren't all immigrants, you fool. But thanks for letting us know you think this sorry event was a good model for the 21st century. That happened without due process of law, and Trump has made it clear he would like to see it happen again, though he knows it won't.

[Ed Oscuro]

Can you define what representing the KKK and preaching racism means, exactly?

You don't think that being a Grand Dragon of the KKK means that David Duke represents the KKK? So you don't know who David Duke is, either. That's great! You and Trump can go congratulate each other on your brilliant slipperiness - and I'm not going to vote for you for President either.

Now stop trying to waste my time.

[Opus131]

We should target criminals;

Nonsense, what we should do is go after the people who report crimes committed by immigrants:

https://www.rt.com/news/333442-whistleb ... stigation/

[EmperorIng]

Again, you do the exact same thing you accuse others of, and you're too stupid to see it.

This talking over one another's points and jumping to conclusions is frustrating but I guess natural. It makes it hard to carry out a conversation in the thread, to be sure.

Can you define what representing the KKK and preaching racism means, exactly?

You don't think that being a Grand Dragon of the KKK means that David Duke represents the KKK? So you don't know who David Duke is, either. That's great! You and Trump can go congratulate each other on your brilliant slipperiness - and I'm not going to vote for you for President either.

Now stop trying to waste my time.

The post doesn't (or didn't) seem to initially make a huge distinction between Trump and Duke "representing" the KKK. One of the two does, obviously.

Maybe you'll fall back on the words of a certain secretary, "What difference does it make?"

[Ed Oscuro]

Opus131, Obscura, Ing: Who is going to take the prize for shitposter of the month? Opus131's latest offensive looks like a desperate gambit that'll be tough to match!

Again, you do the exact same thing you accuse others of, and you're too stupid to see it.

This talking over one another's points and jumping to conclusions is frustrating but I guess natural. It makes it hard to carry out a conversation in the thread, to be sure.

Sorry, lying and being ignorant of the record is not "carrying out a conversation."

[Obscura]

"Everyone who doesn't agree with me is shitposting."

Such an incredible argument. Amazing intellectual prowess on display there.

[Ed Oscuro]

I've already pointed out your strawmanning, Ing's inability to follow an argument, and Opus131 seems to be high; I'm not sorry that this hardly warrants a lengthy response.

Or, you know, you could just go back to what I've wrote and try to engage with it instead of lobbing one-liners that make you feel good in lieu of "substance."

To be sure, when dealing with Trump, the basic facts of what is being discussed are "always negotiable." It's hard to say who really disagrees with what when such basic things can't even be determined.

Get in the plane and go home.

[Obscura]

So, you're now claiming that you didn't say "Trump is still preaching racism and promising to institutionalize it."? You're now claiming that you didn't say that it's ridiculous for people to claim that the left can also speak in code and use dog whistles?

You might want to learn what "strawman" means.

[EmperorIng]

I'm not sorry that this hardly warrants a lengthy response.

Something I thought I'd never see you write!

To be sure, when dealing with Trump, the basic facts of what is being discussed are "always negotiable."

Funnily enough, I figured out, long before these types of articles or the CNN debate, that his goofy rhetoric on immigration is still by default the most moderate of the top three GOP candidates, because Trump was always consistent in vowing to make the current illegal immigrants (without criminal records) legal and permanently "securing" the border.

[Opus131]

Can you define what representing the KKK and preaching racism means, exactly?

You don't think that being a Grand Dragon of the KKK means that David Duke represents the KKK? So you don't know who David Duke is, either. That's great! You and Trump can go congratulate each other on your brilliant slipperiness - and I'm not going to vote for you for President either.

Now stop trying to waste my time.

Well, you got to ask those questions since you people are pretty much trying to claim Trump is KKK.

Amusingly enough, this being the internet, we can actually see what David Duke himself has to do say on the subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XUvSzaxMic

Now i'm not buying for a second that this guy isn't a racist anymore. I think he just changed his tune because he realized the KKK was a dead end, but he does bring an interesting point regarding Robert Byrd:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd



Is Obama KKK too?

In short, this is just an obvious guilty by association tactic and a poor one at that. For all we know Charles Manson may endorse Trump but that doesn't mean Trump supports murderers, does it?

[Ed Oscuro]

OK, finally, something sensible.

Yes, Trump isn't the KKK. But it is the 21st century, and anybody who's running for President needs to get around these kinds of "gotcha" issues (in the case of Obama, that meant dedicating an entire speech to the issue of Wright in order to clear the air, instead of dodging the issue) - and in the case of Duke and the KKK, it's still relevant, especially when Trump's rhetoric seems to match some of the KKK's stated policy goals. He simply should have been ready for this, as it's fairly simple to say you don't stand for racism. I can understand why he wouldn't want to get into a spat with them, but the issue was so straightforward that he should have been able to say something reasonable immediately, instead of getting himself in yet another mess. He could easily have turned away the question if he was hell-bent on not saying anything bad about Duke or the KKK, or he could have simply denounced the KKK - but instead he was indecisive. And people still believe this guy's a brilliant negotiator?

Sometimes the President has to be decisive, and Trump clearly wasn't. Trump could do a lot of damage as President in trying to have it both ways on the world stage - we can't afford international incidents because he wouldn't make up his mind or had to backtrack later.

[Xyga]

Everybody is K-K-Kungfu fighting.

[Opus131]

I disagree. I think Trump was showing decisiveness by refusing to bow down to an obvious compliance test by the PC brigade. They might as well have asked him if he ever stopped beating his wife.

This is how you deal with the PC police. Every time they accuse of being a racist, or a sexist, or anything like that, you just say "in your opinion" and move on. Trump doesn't have to denounce the KKK if he doesn't want to. The accusation holds no water and shouldn't even be taken into consideration.

[Rob]

The accusation holds no water and shouldn't even be taken into consideration.

Indeed, we should just look at his character as revealed by the things he says and does.

[CIT]

Can't believe there are actually people on this Forum who support this doofus. I've lost all respect...

[Opus131]

Well, it is either him or the illuminati, erm, i mean Hillary. Take your pick.

[BulletMagnet]

Dude, you can't be serious. Talk about having your biases inform your reality.

By all means, enlighten me. This I have to hear.

EDIT: Oh, and before I forget, behold your rabidly liberal media, slavishly devoted to ganging up on poor helpless Trump, and totally not run by a bunch of avaricious, sociopathic hedonists just like him.

[Durandal]

The accusation holds no water and shouldn't even be taken into consideration.

Indeed, we should just look at his character as revealed by the things he says and does.

Calling for stricter apprehension against illegal immigrants? I don't know how anti-immigration stances are synonymous with racism.

[Ed Oscuro]

We're not looking for an absolute equivalence. Trump has gone way beyond that; he's called for deporting all Muslims and shutting down mosques. He said that Mexicans that come to America aren't the best. So yes, in this case, we have racism and an anti-immigration stance together. They don't have to be, but in this case they clearly are.

[louisg]

We're not looking for an absolute equivalence. Trump has gone way beyond that; he's called for deporting all Muslims and shutting down mosques. He said that Mexicans that come to America aren't the best. So yes, in this case, we have racism and an anti-immigration stance together. They don't have to be, but in this case they clearly are.

Which, I will add, is a shock to us all.

[Obscura]

We're not looking for an absolute equivalence. Trump has gone way beyond that; he's called for deporting all Muslims and shutting down mosques.

Nope; in fact, he specifically said that his stance on Muslim immigrants does not apply to those that are already living here: http://www.economist.com/blogs/democrac ... mp-muslims

More useful reading: http://wonkette.com/596204/correction-d ... o-the-moon

Let me guess -- you're also one of those retards who confused things that Tina Fey said while parodying Sarah Palin on SNL with things that Sarah Palin actually said, aren't you?

[Bananamatic]

Trump has gone way beyond that; he's called for deporting all Muslims and shutting down mosques.

deus vult

[EmperorIng]

We're not looking for an absolute equivalence. Trump has gone way beyond that; he's called for deporting all Muslims and shutting down mosques. He said that Mexicans that come to America aren't the best. So yes, in this case, we have racism and an anti-immigration stance together. They don't have to be, but in this case they clearly are.

I think the Muslim ban comments are beyond stupid, but you twist things when you say "deport all Muslims" - he called for a "temporary" (whatever that means) stoppage of accepting Muslim immigrants into the US. Cruz actually had the (imo) more sensible proposal of halting the acceptance of migrants and refugees in countries controlled by IS for something like 3 years. I think there needs to be a reasonable overview of our current screening processes (there are likely things to be tightened up), and a greater effort to create sustainable refugee camps in the ME (like how a majority of Arab countries refuse to take in refugees - wouldn't want to stop that lucrative proxy war with Iran).

Trump doesn't really talk about a lot of things, but the things he does keep on repeating are how the problem is not "Mexicans" but "illegal immigrants." And that Mexico looks the other way when criminals/illegals cross the border (which is true). I'll admit that it's all pretty stupidly worded. All in all, I'm sympathetic to people who want to come to the US and start a new life, but legal processes need to take precedence over looking the other way at illegal immigration (which leads to exploitation of illegal labor and unfair competition for citizens, not to mention a drain on our already depleted economy). Of course, the issue of dealing with expired visas is its own unique and looming concern. However I admit I don't know enough about the subject to offer solutions.

[Hagane]

People like Trump want to be harder on Mexican illegals because it will be easier to dispose of them after they are done exploiting them on their factories for slave wages, and to get easy votes. It has nothing to do with unfair competition with locals; that's just a stunt that will bring votes from middle and working class right wing voters that, ironically, will be the most damaged by the policies of someone like Trump. Finding scapegoats to put the blame on always works.

[quash]

Obama has been a great 1980's republican.

One of the great many things I will continue to wonder about the paradigm of modern American leftism is how Obama still receives praise for his progressivism. Better yet, how he's been able to avoid any significant backlash from the stunt he pulled in Syria. I guess having a (D) next to your name can make all the difference when it comes to whether or not you get labeled as an oil hungry war monger.

[BryanM]

Like I've said, we're fucked in the head.

I've even argued before with right wing guys that go "Obama only became president because he's black." While that's still a ridiculous argument for the two general elections, I guess this year has proven without a doubt that is 100% true of why he won the primary in 2008.

Can't be a naive little hippy child about these things. People are horrible. The media just made Donald Trump president just like they made W president. Good day. See ya'all in hell.