Reply With Quote
I am quite fine with your "calling me out" on this since it looks like he's already melted down over it.
You just wanted to make a snarky comment and hope nobody would call you out on it.
I am quite fine with your "calling me out" on this since it looks like he's already melted down over it.
wow you sure showed him
In bizarro news
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/firs...smtyp=cur&_r=0
Looks like the nigs are starting to realize skin be@ners are a threat to their gibsmedats
Has anyone seen any polls on the feelings of African-Americans towards wet backs?
Donald Trump’s Police State
But over the last three months, in listening to plans of the Republican presidential front-runner and the views of his increasingly thuggish followers, I’m starting to have some dark fears should Donald Trump become president.
Take him at his word — albeit, a worthless thing given his propensity for telling outright lies and not backing down when called on them — Donald Trump’s reign would be a police state. He has now outlined a series of measures that would make the United States an authoritarian nightmare. Trump is no longer entertaining, or diversionary. He’s a billionaire brute, his bluster getting more ominous by the day.
“We’re going to have to do things that we never did before,” he said in the demagogic spiral following the Paris attacks. “And some people are going to be upset about it, but I think that now everybody is feeling that security is going to rule.”
What’s he talking about? In his words, he wants to implement “the unthinkable.”
Let’s start with his most far-reaching crush of cruelty, the Trump promise to create a huge “deportation force” to storm into homes, churches, schools and businesses and round up all 11 million undo ented immigrants. In doing so, he would need an army of agents to go door-to-door, breaking up families, and snagging many citizens caught up the in the mass sweeps.
As his jackbooted minions grab legal Americans (the children born in this country, citizens per the 14th amendment) and separate them from their illegal parents, he will place them — where? In foster homes? In detention centers? In concentration camps?
He says it will take only two years for him to disrupt nearly every community in the United States, destroying thousands of businesses in the process. “I’m going to remove them so fast your head would spin.”
To go with his Deportation Force, Trump would send another wave of federal authorities out to identify, track and monitor Muslims in America. All of them? He hasn’t said. He’s building his police state on the fly. But in just a few days he went from saying he would “strongly consider” closing houses of worship (mosques), to saying he would have “absolutely no choice” but to shut them down.
As for tracking Muslims through some kind a database, he’s been squishy, but also unequivocal, saying, “I would certainly implement that.”
For those fleeing war and religious persecution from the butchers of the Islamic State, sorry if you’re Syrian — Trump would deport those already vetted refugees, mostly women and young children.
To further clamp down in this land of the formerly free, Trump could borrow a few police state ideas from his fellow Republican presidential candidates. Mike Huckabee has suggested using federal agents to invade doctors’ offices and homes, physically preventing women from ending a pregnancy.
Ben Carson has said would consider unleashing a new force in academia, using the Department of Education to root out and punish schools foisting “political correctness” on young minds.
But if all the fragile college students clamoring for trigger warnings want something to send them straight to their padded safety rooms, they should attend a Trump public event.
These rallies are scary spectacles of rabid brown shirts in Dockers. His followers cheer while others pummel protesters, or spit on them. A few days ago in Alabama, a black protester was punched and kicked by his supporters. Trump suggested the man had it coming.
Like any good authoritarian — Soviet or banana republic — Trump concocts plots and dark doings to scare the quivering masses. And no one on the public stage is better at the Big Lie this year than Trump.
PolitiFact found that 75 percent of his so-called factual statements are “mostly or entirely false.” The other 25 percent were “half true” or “mostly true.” His score in the flat-out “true” column was zero.
But that doesn’t stop him. The more lies he tells, the more popular he is with a large part of the Republican base that lives in a world of made-up horror and blunt force solutions.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/11/27...tate.html?_r=1
We have Trump suckers right here on Spurstalk, the lowest common denominator ignorant paranoid, s of America.
btw, all you people who think the vast majority of cops are "good people", just wait until Trump is President and tells the cops to help, under threat of prosecution of dereliction of duty, the DHS domestic army to start rounding up the immigrants and Muslims. They'll happily slip into their psychological brown shirts, slip on the psychological SS armbands, and get to work.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 11-28-2015 at 09:55 AM.
How Donald Trump courted the right-wing fringe to conquer the GOP
But in fact, Trump spent years methodically building and buying support for himself in a vast, right-wing counter-establishment — one that exists entirely outside the old party infrastructure and is quickly becoming just as powerful.
These forces have asserted themselves repeatedly in the fight over the future of the Republican Party. But Trump came to understand their power earlier than most. When no one was watching, he was assuming command of this Fringe Establishment, building an army of activists and avatars that he would eventually deploy in his scorched-earth assault on the GOP’s old guard, on his rivals in the primary field — and, as an early test case in the winter of 2014, on me.
The American right has always contained a combative, nativist fringe, where radicals and kooks bend world events to fit their conspiracy theories. There were the John Birch Society newsletters of the 1970s and ’80s; the AM talk-radio shows of the ’90s; the world-government chat rooms and e-mail chain letters around the turn of the millennium; and the vibrant, frenzied blogosphere of amateur muckrakers of the mid-2000s. (Anyone wondering whether the phenomenon is ideologically exclusive need look no further than George W. Bush’s presidency, when the left-wing Web teemed with crazed speculation that the White House had orchestrated the 9/11 attacks.)
But in the Obama era, the reach and power of this segment has increased dramatically. The fringe has swelled with new Web sites, radio stations, confabs, causes, pressure groups, celebrities and profit-making businesses noisily pitching themselves to the tea party. An entire right-wing media ecosystem has sprung up, where journalist-warriors flood social media with rumors of sharia law coming to suburbia and hype a fast-approaching “race war” in America targeting whites. The Republican establishment — a loose coalition of party committees, moderate donors and business interests — once hoped to harness this tremendous new energy to recapture the White House.
Instead, the Fringe Establishment is the one doing the harnessing. In 2013, for example, a fierce conservative backlash organized by lobbying groups and right-wing media torpedoed a bipartisan immigration bill, in part with a campaign of misinformation, and sent its Republican champion, Sen. Marco Rubio, scrambling to the right on the issue. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a Rhodes scholar once hailed as a conservative brainiac, ran for president this year by attacking nonexistent Muslim “no-go zones” in Britain and touting endorsements from “Duck Dynasty” stars. Right-wing support transformed an icon of African American achievement, Ben Carson, into a leading presidential candidate whose stump routine has included Nazi analogies and suggestions that Muslims are unfit for the presidency.
Some Republicans have made their careers by mastering the new machinery of the movement. When a group of conservative elites quietly huddled with lawmakers one evening in 2013 to lay out their “defund Obamacare” plan, Sen. Ted Cruz positioned himself as the public face of the campaign. It hardly mattered whether he believed that their government-shutdown would actually gut the health-care law; few, if any, of the architects did. (“I don’t think you could find a single person in that room who really believed the plan would work,”
But in this era of democratized media and deregulated political money, the fringe owns a much greater share of the cash and the clout. Trump was among the first players to realize that.
But this year’s groundswell wasn’t totally spontaneous. Over the past four years, Trump has been laying its foundations with a careful campaign of cultivation. In this, he was far ahead of most of his presidential opponents.
He spent his birthday in 2013 speaking at a gathering of conservative Christians and has contributed generously to a variety of right-wing outfits — particularly organizations that host political conferences populated by TV cameras.
Trump also worked to win over Breitbart, a crusading right-wing Web site that wields tremendous influence within a certain hyper-aggrieved class of conservative activists.
quoted him blowing off his wedding anniversary to fly to Florida. (“There are a lot of good-looking women here,” he leaned in and told me during a poolside lunch.)
Trump’s fantastical perspective was being accepted as reality in the Fringe Establishment, and the consequences were real.
It was a foretaste of how the fables Trump repeats on the campaign trail — about Muslims, Mexican immigrants, African Americans — become accepted truths in certain corners of the right.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...b1f_story.html
... "accepted truths in certain corners of the right" and by ST rightwingnuts.
Donny T serving up the FUD to a slave state
Donald Trump: 'There's Something We Don't Know About' Obama…
“We can’t close our eyes. I don’t know what’s wrong with Obama, he wants to close his eyes and pretend it’s not happening. Why is he so emphatic on not solving the problem? There’s something we don’t know about. There’s something we don’t know about.”
He went on to urge attendees to report their neighbors if they’re su ious of them, adding, “most likely you’ll be wrong and that’s okay.”
The birther presidential candidate previously said that “some people think” Obama wants to bring in Syrian refugees because he has “evil intentions.”
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/trump-theres-something-we-dont-know-about-obama
GOP’s -bent on tearing us apart: A decades-long strategy to win by divisiveness now leads to President Donald Trump
Republican candidates for the presidential nomination claim that
Democrats kill babies and harvest their organs to sell them,
insist the U.S. is at war with an “evil state of consciousness,”
compare Muslims to rabid dogs, and
call for closing mosques and registering Muslims.
These are not fringe candidates. They are the front-runners.
American politics has descended from principle into tribalism.
The descent began in 1968. That year’s presidential election looked to be a principled fight, with Democrats Hubert Humphrey and Robert F. Kennedy articulating a vision of an inclusive America in which the government expanded efforts to guarantee equality.
For their part, Republican managers understood that they had a problem. The two sides of the Republican Party were too far apart to be cinched together by any national vision.
On the one hand, moderate Eisenhower voters believed in using the federal government to promote equality of opportunity, although they were nervous the Johnson administration’s War on Poverty had gone too far.
On the other hand, Movement Conservatives who had backed Barry Goldwater in 1964 rejected the principles of the New Deal.
They wanted the government to stop meddling with the social welfare legislation that they insisted was a redistribution of tax dollars from hardworking white people to lazy African-Americans.
To win the 1968 election, Richard Nixon’s team adopted the Southern Strategy, sacrificing black rights to cement Movement Conservative white voters to the Republican Party.
...
http://www.salon.com/2015/11/29/gops..._donald_trump/
"We're Not Racists!"
Racism is at the very heart, very foundation of Repug politics.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 12-02-2015 at 06:54 AM.
The GOP has a memo on handling Donald Trump, nominee. Would it work?
GOP lawmakers have drafted a seven-page memo for Republican candidates in other races. It rests on a crucial assumption that nominee Trump would be more restrained than candidate Trump has proven to be.
It’s a seven-page memo drawn up by National Republican Senatorial Committee head Ward Barker that discusses how to prepare for 2016 by “understanding the environment and recognizing the Trump phenomenon.”
Basically, the message is that down-ballot GOP candidates should try to profit from what is beneficial to the party in the Trump message, and avoid the bad. The former means adopting some of his tough messages, such as the need to confront China and his blunt talk about US problems.
Much of the GOP would rally around nominee Trump, after all. They’d have little choice. The same party figures now running around trying to block his chances would suddenly see new virtues in the billionaire, points out Jonathan Chait in New York Magazine.
on Wednesday he appeared on the radio show of right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones,who has long insisted that 9/11 was an inside job.
The Jones interview basically amounted to a finger-based insult “to all those establishment Republicans hoping he’ll straighten out or fall by the wayside,”
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...-Would-it-work
Is Donald Trump a Fascist?
manifests at least seven of the hallmarks of fascism identified by the Italian polymath Umberto Eco. They include:
a cult of action,
a celebration of aggressive masculinity,
an intolerance of criticism,
a fear of difference and outsiders,
a pitch to the frustrations of the lower middle class,
an intense nationalism and
resentment at national humiliation, and
a “popular elitism” that promises every citizen that they’re part of “the best people of the world.”
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/12/03/opinion/campaign-stops/is-donald-trump-a-fascist.html
yes, Donny T is classless, trashy, racist, jingoist, nativist, chauvinist fascist.
His followers would fall in right behind <Godwin>
One yuuuuuge mistake: Donald Trump just delivered an anti-Semitic speech to the Republican Jewish Coalition
The GOP front-runner prattled off a series of offensive stereotypes about Jews before a room full of nothing but Jews
“Stupidly, you want to give me money,” he began. But he added that “you’re not going to support me because I don’t want your money,” suggesting that Jews are unwilling to back people whose purse-strings they can’t control, a classic anti-Semitic trope.
In his humble way, he spoke of how much the Jews love him, especially in Israel. “They look at my wall, and it’s loaded up” with awards from Jewish groups, he boasted, before adding that “the Christians are catching up, though, they’re catching up.”
“Is there anyone in this room who doesn’t negotiate deals?” he later asked. “Probably more than any room I’ve ever spoken.” You know — because it’s full of Jews.
His most powerful misstep, however, occurred when he waffled on the question of whether Jerusalem should remain undivided. “I don’t know if Israel has the commitment to make it,” he said. Time’s Zeke Miller said that at that point, “you could hear a pin drop.”
http://www.salon.com/2015/12/03/one_yuuuuuge_mistake_donald_trump_just_delivered_a n_anti_semitic_speech_to_the_republican_jewish_coa lition/
Last edited by boutons_deux; 12-04-2015 at 11:14 AM.
For all you emotionally primitive, intellectually stunted "good Germans" on ST:
95,000 Words, Many of Them Ominous, From Donald Trump’s Tongue
The transcriptions yielded 95,000 words and several powerful patterns, demonstrating how Mr. Trump has built one of the most surprising political movements in decades and, historians say, echoing the appeals of some demagogues of the past century.
Mr. Trump’s breezy stage presence makes him all the more effective because he is not as off-putting as those raging men of the past, these experts say.
The most striking hallmark was Mr. Trump’s constant repe ion of divisive phrases, harsh words and violent imagery that American presidents rarely use, based on a quan ative comparison of his remarks and the news conferences of recent presidents, Democratic and Republican. He has a particular habit of saying “you” and “we” as he inveighs against a dangerous “them” or unnamed other — usually outsiders like illegal immigrants (“they’re pouring in”), Syrian migrants (“young, strong men”) and Mexicans, but also leaders of both political parties.
Mr. Trump appears unrivaled in his ability to forge bonds with a sizable segment of Americans over anxieties about a changing nation, economic insecurities, ferocious enemies and emboldened minorities (like the first black president, whose heritage and intelligence he has all but encouraged supporters to malign).
“ ‘We vs. them’ creates a threatening dynamic, where ‘they’ are evil or crazy or ignorant and ‘we’ need a candidate who sees the threat and can alleviate it,”
In another pattern, Mr. Trump tends to attack a person rather than an idea or a situation, like calling political opponents “stupid” (at least 30 times), “horrible” (14 times), “weak” (13 times) and other names, and criticizing foreign leaders, journalists and so-called anchor babies.
The specter of violence looms over much of his speech, which is infused with words like kill, destroy and fight. For a man who speaks off the cuff, he always remembers to bring up the Islamic State’s “chopping off heads.” And he has expressed enthusiasm for torturing enemies beyond waterboarding.
“Maybe he should have been roughed up.”
“Such statements and accusations make him seem like a guy who can and will cut through all the b.s. and do what in your heart you know is right — and necessary,”
Mr. Trump uses rhetoric to erode people’s trust in facts, numbers, nuance, government and the news media, according to specialists in political rhetoric.
He promises to “bomb the ” out of enemies — invoking Hiroshima and Nagasaki — and he says he would attack his political opponents “10 times as hard” as they criticize him.
This pattern of elevating emotional appeals over rational ones is a rhetorical style that historians, psychologists and political scientists placed in the tradition of political figures like Goldwater, George Wallace, Joseph McCarthy, Huey Long and Pat Buchanan,
“His entire campaign is run like a demagogue’s — his language of division, his cult of personality, his manner of categorizing and maligning people with a broad brush,”
“If you’re an illegal immigrant, you’re a loser. If you’re captured in war, like John McCain, you’re a loser. If you have a disability, you’re a loser. It’s rhetoric like Wallace’s — it’s not a kind or generous rhetoric.”
“And then there are the winners, most especially himself, with his repeated references to his wealth and success and intelligence,” said Ms. Mercieca, noting a particular remark of Mr. Trump’s on Monday in Macon, Ga. (“When you’re really smart, when you’re really, really smart like I am — it’s true, it’s true, it’s always been true, it’s always been true.”)
“Part of his argument is that if you believe in American exceptionalism, you should vote for me,”
Mr. Trump often makes that point when he criticizes his Republican rivals, though he also pretends that he is not criticizing them.
“All of ’em are weak, they’re just weak,” Mr. Trump said in New Hampshire on Tuesday of his fellow candidates.
“I think they’re weak, generally, you want to know the truth. But I won’t say that, because I don’t want to get myself, I don’t want to have any controversies. So I refuse to say that they’re weak generally, O.K.? Some of them are fine people. But they are weak.”
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/12/06...ps-tongue.html
http://www.theamericanconservative.c...with-em-hawks/I think the right label, for both Cruz and Trump, is “To With Them Hawk,” a coinage invented by John Derbyshire back in 2006. That’s a bit bersome as labels go, but we need one, and I think this one will do, because it expresses the degree to which the defining aspect of the rising hawkish dispensation is not really caring what happens as a result of American actions, provided those actions are plainly aimed at killing our opponents.
Donald Trump's new gun policy lines up perfectly with the NRA's agenda
Here's what Trump wrote in 2000: "I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons."
And here's the position he took Friday:
Gun and magazine bans are a total failure. That’s been proven every time it’s been tried. Opponents of gun rights try to come up with scary sounding phrases like "assault weapons", "military-style weapons" and "high capacity magazines" to confuse people. What they’re really talking about are popular semi-automatic rifles and standard magazines that are owned by tens of millions of Americans. Law-abiding people should be allowed to own the firearm of their choice. The government has no business dictating what types of firearms good, honest people are allowed to own.
By Trump's logic, he was one of the people trying to confuse voters back in 2000.
The rest of his gun platform, which joins immigration on a list of two policies he's outlined on his website, could have come straight from an NRA legislative briefing.
Trump favors:
- Enforcing existing laws on gun crimes
- Fixing the background-check system rather than expanding it
- Fixing the nation's "broken mental health laws"
- Establishing a nationwide system in which concealed-carry permits from one state are recognized in all states. Trump notes that he has such a permit.
- Ensuring members of the military can be armed on bases and at recruiting centers
Here's what the NRA and its top officials say on these issues:
- "Every possible aspect of acquisition, possession, transport, transfer of a firearm by criminals demands harsh and swift punishment under existing law."
- "NRA opposes expanding background check systems at the federal or state level."
- "We thank Senator Cornyn for his leadership in standing up to the Obama administration and introducing legislation that will take meaningful steps towardfixing America’s broken mental health system."
- "Our fundamental right to self-defense does not stop at a state's borders. Law abiding citizens should be able to exercise this right while traveling across state lines."
- "It's outrageous that members of our armed services have lost their lives because the government has forced them to be disarmed in the workplace."
So, Trump's platform on gun control is virtually indistinguishable from the NRA's agenda at the federal level. That's a good place to be in a Republican primary. But if he loses, he can always go the Charlton Heston route and become the group's public face.
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/19/9356549...gun-policy-NRA
Donald Trump vows to personally ‘knock out’ terrorists: ‘If I’m in there with a gun we’re going down shooting’
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/12/dona...down-shooting/
And the Good Germans went wild!
The Time Donald Trump Tried to Get Mike Tyson Out of Going to Prison for Rape
In October, GOP front-runner Donald Trump got a surprise endorsement from infamous boxer Mike Tyson. "He should be president of the United States," Tyson told the Huffington Post. " yeah, big time!" Tyson said he liked Trump's business instincts: "The guy is winning fair and square, he's not bribing anybody."
Trump and Tyson are old friends who did business together in the late 1980s, when the real estate mogul promoted and hosted several of Tyson's fights at his Atlantic City casinos and even fashioned himself for a time as the boxer's "business adviser." And in a largely forgotten episode, Trump came to the boxer's aid during one the darkest moments of Tyson's career—his 1992 conviction for raping a beauty queen. To save the champ from being locked up, Trump pitched a highly controversial proposal that would essentially allow Tyson to buy his way out of prison. To some observers, it looked like Trump was engaging in a form of bribery—or at least attempting to rig the system.
Over the years, Tyson's bouts had been highly lucrative for Trump's casinos, which paid millions in order to host the fights but reaped millions more in revenues from the surge in gambling that resulted during these highly anticipated events. In 1991, Tyson seemed destined for one of the biggest fights of his career, a face-off with then-heavyweight champion Evander Holyfield. As the groundwork was laid for this epic bout, it seemed like Trump might lose this event to his compe ors in Las Vegas.
Then Tyson was arrested and convicted of raping 18-year-old Desiree Washington in Indianapolis.
Suddenly, not only did Holyfield want to bow out of the fight, but Tyson faced the prospect of up to 60 years in prison. But Trump had an idea for saving Tyson andTyson-Holyfield match. On February 13, 1992—the day Tyson's sentencing was postponed for later in the month—Trump told a Newsday reporter that he thought a deal should be struck that would allow Tyson to serve no prison time, retain his boxing license, and fight Holyfield. In exchange for Tyson's freedom, he proposed that a cut of the fight's proceeds go to Desiree Washington and perhaps another share could go to victims of "rape and abuse" in Indiana. Trump told Newsday:
As everybody knows, I am very strong on the death penalty and for the strongest of sanctions and hardest of disciplines for anyone. But far more people can be helped by allowing the tremendous sums of money from his fights to be put into funds used for rape victims.
Trump expounded on his proposal at a press conference the following day, as reported by the Associated Press:http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...n-time-of-rape
Now you could always say, 'Well, then, rich people are going to be able to buy themselves (out of trouble). That's not necessarily true. This is a case that's unique... The case could be made, well, you shouldn't be allowed to buy yourself out, as perhaps the prosecutor would say... But a lot more people can benefit by what I'm suggesting than by throwing a man in jail, virtually with no money—because by the time this ends he won't have any money—by throwing a man in jail, virtually penniless.
Instead, you let him go out, he would have made between $15 million and $30 million in his next fight: tremendous amount of money, tremendous amount of good (it) can be doing... ( for Donny T!
Millions and millions of dollars could pour in to help people that were truly hurt, that won't have anything and that will live penniless without it. And I think a lot people, a lot of people, can be helped if this is properly handled.
Donny T. trying to keep making $10Ms from not imprisoning a rapist, confirming DT's profound disrespect for women.
No Law Is Above Donny T's $Bs
Based Trump with a common sense approach to mudslime immigration. http://bigstory.ap.org/article/b0f4f...ms-entering-us
This guy is a nutcase.
Now he wants to ban all Muslims period. Guy has no clue whatsoever.
He's really not clueless. It's calculated. He knows what his supporters want to hear especially the idiot non-educated voting block of that party. The same voters who believed Saddam and Al Qaeda were one and the same. The same voters who felt the country was safer after Saddam was overthrown. He's taking advantage of that loser caste of that political party.
This will only make him grow stronger even the beans and nigs want Muslims out of here
I'm starting to buy what was said a while back. I dont know if it was here or somewhere else. That this dude is just saying outrageous just so peopel can say this dude and move on with his pathetic self.
But we are proving him wrong with our collective idiocy. Only in America folks.
Is this legit?This will only make him grow stronger even the beans and nigs want Muslims out of here
Hispanics shouldn't thred this water. They're next on the hit list.
I don't know why it is so hard for most of you to believe that a large percentage of the population don't want Syrian refugees here? I think people who do are crazy - why would you want to invite more possible radicalized islamists here? Why take the chance? The FBI is already stretched to its limits hunting down what's going on now much less having thousands more here that they have to keep track of. And if you think that out of the thousands of muslims that come over, not one of them is radicalized, you're the one who's naive.
Trump is just voicing what many are thinking and are afraid of saying. At this point, I don't think it matters what he says - what people want is someone who will fight for them and not be afraid of speaking up and always being politically correct. I used to think that I would never vote for some one like Trump - he's the typical ugly, brash American who thinks his sh*t isn't stink - but that's what people want - they are tired of climate change, multiculturalism, BLM, illegal immigration being shoved down their throats.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
