Our form of gvmt has never been in greater peril.

[iguanaman]

I don't make excuses for the Donald.

Looks to me that both parties have a lot of answering to do when it comes to Russia, especially if that dossier was used for FISA warrants.

That "dossier" is looking more factual by the day. Is that why you don't like it?

A lot of the Steele dossier has since been corroborated.

 

[Port & Starboard]

That "dossier" is looking more factual by the day. Is that why you don't like it?

A lot of the Steele dossier has since been corroborated.

Where are the charges? Whether I like it or not is not important.

 

[Mr Person]

I have the same sense of this as you do, Maggie. They are going to keep it up until they succeed in bringing down a lawfully elected President of the United States and they are doing it for no other reason than they lost the election. I suspect they would be doing this to ANY Republican who won the election in 2016.

They might even spend several years claiming the Republican is lying about his place of birth and his religion so that he can destroy America and turn it into a third world country.

 

[SheWolf]

Trump is being dehumanized.

The method is to reduce him to catch phrases and labels that are reviled so that he will also be reviled.

So he is racist. No need for you to seek proof- all you need to do is hate him. Just call him a sexist. Same. Anything that is reviled is okay to attach to him at this point. There are many on this board who will, with certitude say that Trump had nothing to do with the recent release of the basketball players. They will probably use this action as further proof of his racism.

When Trump condemned the violence on BOTH sides held by the hate-filled terrorists in whatever city it was when Antifa and the KKK fought, he was called a racist.

Wait! What? THIS was the ideal example to follow. This could have been used to show the corrosive nature of blind hate in whatever guise it assumes and to publicize the shared tactics of the hate filled mobs.

Instead, our hate-filled media used this to incite the weak minded mob to reinforce the classification of Trump as a racist.

Incredible!

Obama was also accused of being a racist and reduced to many labels.

And what if unequivocal evidence emerged that both Trump and Obama are racist? It would simply mean that they are racists, and the constitution would still stand. Nobody gets impeached or removed for simply being a racist. Killing people in the streets, doesn't' become legal because a racist is in the office.

People in this thread sound like they are on the hysteria over Trump getting treated the same way many of the posters in this very thread treated Obama. Guess what, America is not in danger because people don't like the president or agree with you or the president. We also have a free press, and if elements of the free press act like "hate filled media" the constitution gives them that right. Glenn Beck said, Obama had a deep seated hatred of white people. Left, right, doesn't matter. The media is free. The people are free.

 

[iguanaman]

Where are the charges? Whether I like it or not is not important.

There will be indictments so don't worry about that. It would be better to worry about what Trump is doing to our country to please Putin.

 

[code1211]

Yes. And the right did the same **** to Obama.

And trump IS a bufoon.

Bigly. Preening jackass.

He's also lost his edge. Is declining.

His command of the language is failing.

And I'll put you down as one of those who cheers when their side does it and cries when the other side does.

Instead of condemning both for doing it.

What labels like Racist or Sexist or Old were applied to Obama? As I recall, he was pretty roundly liked and respected even though his policies and his unending divisive tactics were an ongoing disaster.

Obama was incessantly dividing the population along fault lines like rich and poor, old and young, privileged and denied, Black and White, legal and illegal and so on. That is dehumanizing as the individual is ignored. Assignment to a group is all that is needed.

In this way, the thoughts of the opposition are dismissed. Only the the described evil is left to be examined. This eliminates the possibility of compromise. How can you compromise with such evil after ti's been described?

Obama's supporters were always trying to stop any discussion of anything saying that any opposition to Obama was racism. Nothing more, nothing less.

That is what dehumanizing is.

In what way(s), on what occasions was Obama the subject of dehumanizing attacks?

Regarding your absolute support of my post with your assertions, good job! I love it when my debating partner makes my case for me.

If you have a 401K, you may have noticed that the rate of increase since the election is 10 times faster than the rate of increase over the previous decade. In your preferred parlance, that's Bigly!

 

[code1211]

Obama was also accused of being a racist and reduced to many labels.

And what if unequivocal evidence emerged that both Trump and Obama are racist? It would simply mean that they are racists, and the constitution would still stand. Nobody gets impeached or removed for simply being a racist. Killing people in the streets, doesn't' become legal because a racist is in the office.

People in this thread sound like they are on the hysteria over Trump getting treated the same way many of the posters in this very thread treated Obama. Guess what, America is not in danger because people don't like the president or agree with you or the president. We also have a free press, and if elements of the free press act like "hate filled media" the constitution gives them that right. Glenn Beck said, Obama had a deep seated hatred of white people. Left, right, doesn't matter. The media is free. The people are free.

You asked who was being dehumanized. I responded. I made no mention of the First Amendment or the rights it gaurantees.

What point are you making now? The same one I made previously?

My previous point: The methodology of propaganda is to dehumanize your enemy. The First Amendment protects the rights of propagandists as well as real, ethical journalists.

Do you disagree that propaganda is published as straight news right now, everyday? If yes, watch a half hour of FOX and and a half hour of CNN and tell me there is not difference in the coverage of current events.

I put forth an example on Trump condemning the violence on both sides of the confrontation between the hate filled Klan types and the hate filled Antifa types.

On more than one occasion, Obama took a side in a racially charged dispute and was applauded. Trump condemns the hate without taking a side and is condemned AS A RACIST!

IF taking a side based solely on Race is ethically good or condemning hate is ethically bad, I'm confused on the ethics that allows these positions to be supported, ethically, by the reporting.

 

[What if...?]

What labels like Racist or Sexist or Old were applied to Obama? As I recall, he was pretty roundly liked and respected even though his policies and his unending divisive tactics were an ongoing disaster.

Obama was incessantly dividing the population along fault lines like rich and poor, old and young, privileged and denied, Black and White, legal and illegal and so on. That is dehumanizing as the individual is ignored. Assignment to a group is all that is needed.

In this way, the thoughts of the opposition are dismissed. Only the the described evil is left to be examined. This eliminates the possibility of compromise. How can you compromise with such evil after ti's been described?

Obama's supporters were always trying to stop any discussion of anything saying that any opposition to Obama was racism. Nothing more, nothing less.

That is what dehumanizing is.

In what way(s), on what occasions was Obama the subject of dehumanizing attacks?

Regarding your absolute support of my post with your assertions, good job! I love it when my debating partner makes my case for me.

If you have a 401K, you may have noticed that the rate of increase since the election is 10 times faster than the rate of increase over the previous decade. In your preferred parlance, that's Bigly!

Commie Muslim Kenyan, fake birth certificate provider ,traitor.

FFS.,

 

[JMR]

The Liberals are just mad because they lost to a political nobody.

Liberals are a very varied bunch so there are numerous reasons they might be mad. Personally I am mad because a very nasty little man who has contempt for everyone (yes even you little guy who sings his praises) except himself, and has never demonstrated an ounce of moral leadership or any other for that matter, rode to victory on the hate train. It makes me sick. Yes, even sicker than Hillary haters could ever become. But do carry on.

 

[JMR]

Well, you missed or ignored the point completely.

Propaganda does not attempt to prove your enemy is wrong. It attempts to prove they are inhuman.

AFTER this is accomplished, THEN ALL of the lies and distortions are acceptable.

Very good explanation for why some Americans have come to believe the concept of "Fake News" Now anything that is reported is obviously not true. Donald may do as he pleases.

 

[MaggieD]

Very good explanation for why some Americans have come to believe the concept of "Fake News" Now anything that is reported is obviously not true. Donald may do as he pleases.

Anything reported as coming from anonymous sources with no corroboration should be highly suspect. And in today’s partisan world? It shouldn’t even be picked up by MSM.

“Four women, all highly placed within the State Department and wishing to remain anonymous for fear of reprisal, reported that Hillary Clinton sexually harassed them and blackmailed them into compromising positions while she was Secretary of State.”

Ripley’s Believe It or Not.

 

[JMR]

Anything reported as coming from anonymous sources with no corroboration should be highly suspect.

True, I would agree. But then the news outlet doing the reporting knows who the anonymous source is and whether there is corroboration. Then I judge by the past reliability of the news source. If I see it on World Net or Brietbart, I assume its BS. But that was not my point. My point was that many Americans, and I'd venture to guess many here, believe Donald when he claims that anything reported by NYT or CNN or Washington Post, or numerous other highly respected news organization are FAKE and his version of reality is to be accepted as the truth. NO QUESTIONS ASKED....alternative facts are the facts of the day. The freedom we enjoy is dependent on the freedom of the press, and the ability of the population to evaluate what they read or listen to.

 

[MaggieD]

True, I would agree. But then the news outlet doing the reporting knows who the anonymous source is and whether there is corroboration. Then I judge by the past reliability of the news source. If I see it on World Net or Brietbart, I assume its BS. But that was not my point. My point was that many Americans, and I'd venture to guess many here, believe Donald when he claims that anything reported by NYT or CNN or Washington Post, or numerous other highly respected news organization are FAKE and his version of reality is to be accepted as the truth. NO QUESTIONS ASKED....alternative facts are the facts of the day. The freedom we enjoy is dependent on the freedom of the press, and the ability of the population to evaluate what they read or listen to.

I think you under-estimate Trump supporters.

 

[Dirt Sands]

From Newsweek:




Whose “paranoid claim” is it now??


The Left excuses Obama’s failure to send in the cavalry when he supposedly found out the SHOCKING fact that the Russians were meddling in our election. He didn’t want to reveal it for political reasons. Simple as that. Why doesn’t the Left see that?? Politics!! And you and others are more than willing to read that analysis and agree that was a good reason!! Are you KIDDING me??


And, as this link makes clear, Obama did nothing to expose it in a prominent way. He put political interests ahead of the “shocking revelation” that the Russians were currently and actively SUPPOSEDLY interfering in our most sacred right. The right to vote. Our right to choose.


Yet, and STILL, our entire Federal security force on task couldn’t and STILL can’t identify specifically how it was happening and couldn’t stop it. Hundreds of billions of budget dollars spent on national security and STILL the best we’ve got is “the Russians meddled.” And the NEXT best thing we have is that “It’s Trump’s fault. He colluded.” [BOLD]Even FURTHER, our investigation is starting from the premise that he DID and desperately trying to make the pieces fit.[/BOLD]


Using Trump as the excuse, his saying he might not accept the results, HC calling that “HORRIFYING.” Saying his statement is frightening. A threat to the very core of our Republic! Yet who is it that is not accepting the results?? Who is it that is tearing this nation apart?? The Democrats... led by standard bearer HC.


Is the left as HORRIFIED that the DNC purposefully got rid of Bernie? It did. We all know. No, of course not. THAT was CLEARLY an effective disenfranchisement of the American people’s right to choose. And not one powerful Leftist gives a damn.


What we’ve got here is a coupe attempt. A desperate and seemingly pretty effective run at destroying the opposition, destroying the POTUS and delegitimizing the election itself. And our politicians, desperate to keep their jobs, holding up a finger in the wind to see which way it’s blowing and deciding their loyalties NOT on what is best for this COUNTRY. Oh, no! “What’s the best way for me to retain my seat.”


Believe this old lady. Our nation, our form of government and its survival has never been in greater peril in all its history.

Discussion?

That's exactly why we need better politicians. I'd say blame the voters. Blame the reasons why people vote the way they do. The system is as strong as ever.

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk

 

[JMR]

I think you under-estimate Trump supporters.

Nothing would make me happier! I am glad to hear that the main stream press is now regarded highly and that Trump's attempts to make them the enemy of the people have failed.

 

[RAMOSS]

Anything reported as coming from anonymous sources with no corroboration should be highly suspect. And in today’s partisan world? It shouldn’t even be picked up by MSM.

“Four women, all highly placed within the State Department and wishing to remain anonymous for fear of reprisal, reported that Hillary Clinton sexually harassed them and blackmailed them into compromising positions while she was Secretary of State.”

Ripley’s Believe It or Not.

You do realize that anonymous sources is what the Watergate scandal break. If the sources in the white house were not given the protection of secrecy, the story would not beak at all.

 

[MaggieD]

You do realize that anonymous sources is what the Watergate scandal break. If the sources in the white house were not given the protection of secrecy, the story would not beak at all.

I do understand that. And those tips were able to be corroborated independently. But today’s media is different, I think. I do agree with you though.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

From Newsweek:




Whose “paranoid claim” is it now??


The Left excuses Obama’s failure to send in the cavalry when he supposedly found out the SHOCKING fact that the Russians were meddling in our election. He didn’t want to reveal it for political reasons. Simple as that. Why doesn’t the Left see that?? Politics!! And you and others are more than willing to read that analysis and agree that was a good reason!! Are you KIDDING me??


And, as this link makes clear, Obama did nothing to expose it in a prominent way. He put political interests ahead of the “shocking revelation” that the Russians were currently and actively SUPPOSEDLY interfering in our most sacred right. The right to vote. Our right to choose.


Yet, and STILL, our entire Federal security force on task couldn’t and STILL can’t identify specifically how it was happening and couldn’t stop it. Hundreds of billions of budget dollars spent on national security and STILL the best we’ve got is “the Russians meddled.” And the NEXT best thing we have is that “It’s Trump’s fault. He colluded.” [BOLD]Even FURTHER, our investigation is starting from the premise that he DID and desperately trying to make the pieces fit.[/BOLD]


Using Trump as the excuse, his saying he might not accept the results, HC calling that “HORRIFYING.” Saying his statement is frightening. A threat to the very core of our Republic! Yet who is it that is not accepting the results?? Who is it that is tearing this nation apart?? The Democrats... led by standard bearer HC.


Is the left as HORRIFIED that the DNC purposefully got rid of Bernie? It did. We all know. No, of course not. THAT was CLEARLY an effective disenfranchisement of the American people’s right to choose. And not one powerful Leftist gives a damn.


What we’ve got here is a coupe attempt. A desperate and seemingly pretty effective run at destroying the opposition, destroying the POTUS and delegitimizing the election itself. And our politicians, desperate to keep their jobs, holding up a finger in the wind to see which way it’s blowing and deciding their loyalties NOT on what is best for this COUNTRY. Oh, no! “What’s the best way for me to retain my seat.”


Believe this old lady. Our nation, our form of government and its survival has never been in greater peril in all its history.

Discussion?

This post doesn't make any sense. Are you blaming Obama for not acting against Russian interference? If so shouldn't you blame Trump who is the sitting president who has even more information about Russian interference?

The DNC rigging the election is unimportant. The RNC tried to rig the election against Trump. Trump said so and it was true. Political parties always have favorite candidates but ultimately voters choose. The RNC tried to get Jeb Bush elected and instead voters chose a totally incompetent unstable man as their nominee.

The DNC "rigged" the election because Bernie is too far to the left. I'm pretty sure you agree that Bernie's is too far to the left. So, what's the problem? Political parties have always tried to steer voters away from extreme candidates.

Forget about the election and Russian interference for a moment. Russia has been proven to be using hackers, Twitter bots and fake news stories to sew division and unrest in the U.S. and U.S. allies. This is not merely interfering in the hopes of promoting a favorable candidate. They have been attempting to destabilize our government but creating civil conflict. Why is Trump not critical of Vladimir Putin? Why would our tough president meekly ask Putin and then accept his word?

You are right that our government has never been in greater peril but the peril comes from a president who is compromised by a foreign power. Trump's business ties with Russia are well known.

Trump is a danger to this country and should be removed by Congress. That's the rational response.

 

[MaggieD]

This post doesn't make any sense. Are you blaming Obama for not acting against Russian interference? If so shouldn't you blame Trump who is the sitting president who has even more information about Russian interference?

The DNC rigging the election is unimportant. The RNC tried to rig the election against Trump. Trump said so and it was true. Political parties always have favorite candidates but ultimately voters choose. The RNC tried to get Jeb Bush elected and instead voters chose a totally incompetent unstable man as their nominee.

The DNC "rigged" the election because Bernie is too far to the left. I'm pretty sure you agree that Bernie's is too far to the left. So, what's the problem? Political parties have always tried to steer voters away from extreme candidates.

Forget about the election and Russian interference for a moment. Russia has been proven to be using hackers, Twitter bots and fake news stories to sew division and unrest in the U.S. and U.S. allies. This is not merely interfering in the hopes of promoting a favorable candidate. They have been attempting to destabilize our government but creating civil conflict. Why is Trump not critical of Vladimir Putin? Why would our tough president meekly ask Putin and then accept his word?

You are right that our government has never been in greater peril but the peril comes from a president who is compromised by a foreign power. Trump's business ties with Russia are well known.

Trump is a danger to this country and should be removed by Congress. That's the rational response.

Well, of course, I don’t agree with much of your post. You are wrong about me and Bernie. Put against Trump, I would have voted for him. One POTUS is not going to make that much difference as to where we’re headed. Unless, of course, it’s Trump.

 

[poweRob]

Right...

The ONLY thing that slowed and stopped the negotiations was Haldeman.

RU Nuts?

How many years were spent "negotiating" the shape and size of the table?

4 months I believe.

 

[Vern]

Did you get pissed off when Obama ignored The Constitution?

ah, the classic conservative "wah wah something something constitution" narrative from conservatives. er uh ap, did you know that the Bush policy that caused the Bush Mortgage Bubble was ruled unconstitutional? yea, your conservative masters didn't think you could handle that bit of reality. You guys are like the kid who believes in Santa Claus until he's 15 because his parents didn't think he could handle the truth.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Bush-Era Preemption Rule — But Decision is Too Late To Impact Subprime Mortgage Mess

..a regulation adopted by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) under President George W. Bush that preempted state efforts to enforce fair lending laws against branches of national banks. The regulation prevented states from enforcing their own laws against predatory lending and discriminatory credit practices – including the types of practices that directly resulted in last year’s subprime mortgage crisis — and was part of an aggressive effort by the Bush Administration to use federal preemption to trump important state laws that protect consumers, the environment, and public health and safety.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Bush-Era Preemption Rule -- But Decision is Too Late To Impact Subprime Mortgage Mess | Constitutional Accountability Center

I'm sorry you had to learn the truth from me.

 

[Dirt Sands]

Why is it that people think our system is so breakable? We've survived Watergate, an assassinated Kennedy, Vietnam, dropping Nukes, the civil war, and Bush stealing the election from Gore. Are you all crying wolf or do you really believe your own BS. This country can absorb 100 times more turmoil than the present day. Just deal with it. I will go to bed tonight and I will sleep well knowing I will wake up in the morning. [emoji88]

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk

 

[apdst]

ah, the classic conservative "wah wah something something constitution" narrative from conservatives. er uh ap, did you know that the Bush policy that caused the Bush Mortgage Bubble was ruled unconstitutional? yea, your conservative masters didn't think you could handle that bit of reality. You guys are like the kid who believes in Santa Claus until he's 15 because his parents didn't think he could handle the truth.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Bush-Era Preemption Rule — But Decision is Too Late To Impact Subprime Mortgage Mess

..a regulation adopted by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) under President George W. Bush that preempted state efforts to enforce fair lending laws against branches of national banks. The regulation prevented states from enforcing their own laws against predatory lending and discriminatory credit practices – including the types of practices that directly resulted in last year’s subprime mortgage crisis — and was part of an aggressive effort by the Bush Administration to use federal preemption to trump important state laws that protect consumers, the environment, and public health and safety.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Bush-Era Preemption Rule -- But Decision is Too Late To Impact Subprime Mortgage Mess | Constitutional Accountability Center

I'm sorry you had to learn the truth from me.

The housing bubble started long before Bush 43 took office. There's no surprise that you would keep telling that lie. Did you even read the link, before you posted it? :lamo

 

[Vern]

The housing bubble started long before Bush 43 took office. There's no surprise that you would keep telling that lie. Did you even read the link, before you posted it? :lamo

er uh Ap, your obedient "wah wah it started before Bush" narrative doesn't address the fact that it was unconstitutional. Remember, your narrative was "wah wah something something constitutional" Now I realize this is pointless but you could please explain what made you post "Did you even read the link, before you posted it?". I think its just another dishonest deflecting conservative dodge but I want to give you a chance to cut and run from it so I know its just another dishonest deflecting conservative dodge. thanks in advance.

 

[BitterPill]

Russia is an Alpha and the USA is a Beta. Logic follows that is. Because how can Obama be interfering in Russia's democracy but Putin kick Obama's butt in interfering in US democracy?

But Russia was no more interfering in US democracy than the USA has been interfering in Russian democracy.







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




Good for the Russians. Cuba, Russia, and China are not countries the USA can just bully around. The USA can go down to Argentina and indirectly threaten its female President--as it did--with assassination and blame it on Islamic terrorist (as it indicated it would). But the USA can't bully Russia.

Russian 'democracy' - that's rich with irony.

We need to be more like the Russians, not less. We need to make Trump president for life. Only then will America be great again!

MAGA, baby, MAGA!

PS RT rocks!