Reply With Quote
I tell you though, as far as refugees, it's much better to simply deny them visas and entry than doing what was done to the Japs with the internment camps, etc.
In a nuts , they should speak thinking with their pockets first instead of being genuine and speaking their minds?
I think for the most part they're grown ups and can make that decision by themselves. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion and expressing it, no matter how much anybody else disagrees.
I tell you though, as far as refugees, it's much better to simply deny them visas and entry than doing what was done to the Japs with the internment camps, etc.
Pretty much. These guys can do whatever they want, the problem is that it's a celebrity culture in America and everyone tunes in whenever these celebrities do as much as take a . I stopped giving a years ago when I realized that these "Sports Analysts" on TV like Screaming A, Cowherd, etc all of a sudden decided that they were experts in EVERY field when they would veer off into politics debate. These guys have to make a living so every week they pick a random topic and start pulling stuff out of their buttcheeks.
I think the last show I ever listened to was Cowherd debating whether or not Rush belonged in the Rock and Roll HOF. He clearly had no idea what he was talking about and was just throwing on the wall in order to see what stuck.
So you're the only one who questions everything? So special, such a pity that youre talent is wasted on spurstalk
Worried about people looking stupid? Unfortunately you have a lot of work ahead of you. People have the right to look stupid, just as you have the right to laugh at them, help them, or go on with your life. People have made careers out of looking stupid but somehow I doubt you were this upset over your average reality TV show "star" career
You do know the patriot act was passed after 9/11 and things are no longer done the same way? In fact you are proving my point for me, having all the laws on the world won't make you safer if they aren't properly enforced, the 9/11 guys should have been caught by the old system, nevermind afterwards with dhs and the patriot act. Still you are willing to punish people for being born in the same country as a criminal or believing in the same God as a criminal, before they've personally done anything wrong, a true defender of the Cons ution and justice you are. Funny though that is the same logic terrorists use to justify attacking innocents.
With Trash's election, and You People being positive about Pootin and Russia, it very clear that people are crazily suggestible, can be influenced, so obviously, even if they don't give a or just a tiny , they, and You People, are suckers for propaganda, fake news, and celebs, like Trash.
Having been totally conned by Trash, You People are trying to normalize him, while everyday he's proving to everybody else he is, and always has been, totally ABnormal, mentally disordered, even a malignant narcissist.
1. No, I'm not worried about people looking stupid. I'm just surprised at the ones who share their uninformed ignorance on a larger scale. This isn't about people who disagree with me, its about people who don't want or don't take the time to understand what the facts are.
2. You are making wild assumptions about me. I think more than Obama being the first minority elected President, Trump has shown that ANYBODY can become President. I didn't vote for him, in fact, I didn't vote at all out of my personal protest of the 2 party system. I think both candidates sucked and I didn't feel like wasting my time writing in some name that wasn't going to win. I think Trump's persona is reprehensible, he's an egomaniac and his temperament is troubling. His method of negotiating is to bully and intimidate from a position of leverage. There's a real danger of alienating our allies by acting this way and provoking our enemies. However, in no way would I have preferred Hillary to be President. I am thrilled she lost.
Your comments are really making my point. Trump issued a TEMPORARY Executive Order, he didn't come up with a new law banning people based on their race or religious beliefs. That's complete spin by both media and disgruntled people or groups who hate that Donald Trump was voted President.
Punished or inconvenienced? Was anybody put in jail or fined? Ramzi bin al-Shibh one of the 9/11 facilitators who attempted to be part of the plot to blow up American planes was denied a Visa 4 times. He wasn't denied because the government had information linking him to terrorists, he was denied because he came from Yemen - a country that was in poor economic shape. The US government felt that he was a risk to over-stay his tourist or student visa. This kind of thing happens all the time. Was Ramzi punished? He was certainly pissed he couldn't get in. It's the government's responsibility to protect us from terrorism and to control illegal immigration. If people want to come to our country they are going to have to deal with situations that may inconvenience them. If they don't like it, they can stay where they are.
You never answered my previous question. What crimes did the 9/11 terrorists "personally" commit before blowing up 4 airplanes and killing nearly 3000 people? What crimes did the people who provided financial support for them "personally" commit against the United States? Do you have an answer or are you content to look at things simplistically?
Athletes and celebs are fully en led to give their opinions, tbh..why wouldn't they? Most of them have millions of followers on social media, they can easily convey their message and influence and push any agenda they please, who wouldn't take advantage of such power?
If you're influenced by celebs or get triggered by their opinion, that speaks more about you than them, tbh..it isn't difficult to ignore a video or change the website..
Lol, this thread is a perfect example of how people read what they want to read, hear what they want to hear, and believe what they want to believe. The very first line of this thread reads: "Everyone is en led to their opinions, but I would have thought athletes and celebrities would educate themselves before speaking their minds publicly ". My point was never that they weren't en led to their opinions, nor should they NOT voice them publicly. Only that I was surprised that they don't do so without educating themselves first.Athletes and celebs are fully en led to give their opinions, tbh..why wouldn't they? Most of them have millions of followers on social media, they can easily convey their message and influence and push any agenda they please, who wouldn't take advantage of such power?
If you're influenced by celebs or get triggered by their opinion, that speaks more about you than them, tbh
Unless you were making a generalized statement and not directing your comments at me, then you would also realize that not only am I not influenced by what a celebrity or athlete believes, I rarely believe what so-called experts say on the news. That goes for spinsters, talking-heads whose purpose is to incite conflict OR politicians that tow the party line.
You followed up this opinion with a semantic argument about the Trump immigration EO and a dubious connection to Obama pulled straight out of right wing garbage sites.
Basically what you said is "They need to educate themselves from the sources where I get my opinions." Or, better yet, "They should read Drudge first."
This is perfect. In order to read the EO, I googled the following: "Executive Order temporary ban". The first link to have the EO in its entirety was one from CNN. Word for Word - the Executive Order - not some political hack's opinion, the actual EO.
As far as I'm concerned, Drudge is as much a slanted, right wing website as Foxnews.com - filled with what neocons and Right Wingers hope readers will believe.
What semantic argument are you saying I made? Spell it out. You won't and you cant because you're just another uneducated, ignoramus who chooses to read what they want to read. You saw what I clearly wrote and then said I meant the following: "They need to educate themselves from the sources where I get my opinions." Or, better yet, "They should read Drudge first."
I never said any of that. I literally wrote "Relying solely on the media to educate one's self is a recipe for failure. The media has lost credibility as objective news sources and any reliance on them to foster one's opinions is foolhardy. The lack of objectivity and the inclusion of so much spin from print media and television is sickening."
I never named a channel or a newspaper. You made all that up about me because you're one of the sheep who believes what you're told by <Insert the news channel, celebrity, athlete, website or newspaper of your choice> who GIVES YOU your opinion. , for all I know you rely on Pop's opinion to form your own. Grow the up and become you're own person and don't come back at me with your weak-ass nonsense. Got me all pissed off over here.
Last edited by tmtcsc; 02-02-2017 at 10:11 PM.
I read the EO too. It's a selective Muslim ban.
I'm sorry if I made assumptions about your sources. It's just your whole rant sounded pretty classic right-wing-newsy, from the excessive attention to celebrity comments to the blanket distrust of all "Media." Following with the whole "it's not really a Muslim ban oh and by the way, Obama named these countries first" talking points that we've all heard the past few days, you can understand why I might assume you were another Drudge parrot.
I'm glad you're not, and I appreciate you doing your own due diligence even if I disagree with your conclusions.
Nope. Try again.
No thanks, I already know your only argument is the part about religious minorities facing persecution. Which is basically what makes it a ban with a religious test. Trump himself said Christians would be prioritized. If you have more to add, feel free to do it in the other thread where you left the discussion.
In the meantime, let me know when we make an exception for a Sunni or a Shia being persecuted by the other. Or for that matter, a Yazidi.
Athletes and celebs are fully en led to give their opinions, tbh..why wouldn't they? Most of them have millions of followers on social media, they can easily convey their message and influence and push any agenda they please, who wouldn't take advantage of such power?
If you're influenced by celebs or get triggered by their opinion, that speaks more about you than them, tbh
Thanks, and I appreciate your apology. Sorry for the name-calling. This stuff can get emotional. My hope was that the administration would have reviewed our Visa Waiver program first. The program allows residents of 38 different countries to enter the United States without a Visa or undergoing the same stringent vetting process as refugees or Visa applicants. Obama and Congress tried to address some of the security gaps but it wasn't enough.
The biggest flaw is that they didn't issue any timelines for these partner countries to share terrorist intelligence or criminal activity with us of their citizens trying to enter the United States. Without this information, we are at serious risk of letting a potential terrorist enter - one that could have easily been detected.
Trump's Executive Order addressing refugees gives me some hope:
Trump gave Homeland Security, the Secretary of State and Director of National Intelligence, 30 days to review the 7 countries listed in the E.O. (Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Ethiopia & Somalia) and give hm a report on which governments of those countries are not giving us the information we have requested of their refugees.
After they give Trump said report, the administration will then give any country not in compliance, 60 days to provide the information requested.
Homeland Security, SOS and DNI will then supply Trump with a list of the countries who complied within the 60 days. If I understand correctly, those who do will have the temporary ban lifted and those who don't will most likely remained banned.
Perhaps the Trump administration will address the Visa Waiver Program next and apply similar timelines. I see his Refugee E.O. as more of an audit of security measures - which is what Trump should have sold it as - and done so with tact. But....he doesn't give a about diplomacy and tries to come off as a hard-ass.
Last edited by tmtcsc; 02-03-2017 at 01:13 AM.
Dude, your reaction is wrong and way behind. C'mon man, read up and keep up.
God forbid people practice their right to freedom of speech
Where and when did I complain about celebs / athletes making their opinions public?
Where did I say I voted for Donald Trump or idolize Reagan?
Lol, Fake News in your post. Read before you type.
Who said they shouldn't? Please provide quote of text of me writing they shouldn't give their opinions.
So my posts are news?
At least Trump and Reagan ran for political office. They had the resources and name recognition, and they used them to do something about their complaints. Most of these celebrities just want to virtue-signal and whine without lifting a finger to change anything.
Likewise, I disagree with Al Franken's political views, but I respect his involvement in politics far more than Sarah Silverman's Twitter meltdowns, Poop's press conference rants, or Alec Baldwin's quadrennial threats to move to Canada.
Sure, but not everybody with a political opinion needs to run for office. In fact, people gravitated to Trump BECAUSE he hadn't been involved in politics and governing, but now suddenly being in government is an admirable trait?
Your posts are alternative facts to what I wrote. Yes - Fake News.So my posts are news?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
