Will Kanye be in Hillary's cabinet?

[New Pal Boiler]

This would be unbelievable if it wasn't the Clintons:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-donor-sensitive-intelligence-board/story?id=39710624

The only unbelievable thing about this story is that a mainstream media outlet actually spent 5 years working on it, and then actually ran it.

Cue the Clinton apologists explaining how a stock broker actually did Belong on this board. And how Trump is a xenophobe and a racist...GO!

 

[qazplm]

Well Trump certainly is a xenophobe and a racist, not sure a stock broker belonged on that board, looks like a political favor was done. Of course, that's not something "only the Clintons do" it's pretty ubiquitous in politics. But hey, if you want to vote for a xenophobe and racist because Clinton plays politics as usual, feel free.

And if the thought is, well Trump would never do any kind of quid pro quo like this or put unqualified folks on boards...well...

LMAO.

This argument might work with a remotely pure/clean opponent with an R next to his name. But you don't have that guy on your side this time, do you? You've got a guy who does anything and everything to get an extra buck, to win, to get what he wants. You've got "the Clintons," the only difference is, he's the know-nothing, xenophobic, racist version of "the Clintons."

So, if I'm going to get corrupt either way, and yep Clinton's, just like the vast majority of politicians have corruptness going on, I'll take the non-xenophobic, non-racist, non-misogynist version that knows some stuff over the alternative. That's the problem with nominating Trump, you lose all of your attacks against "the Clintons."

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Well Trump certainly is a xenophobe and a racist, not sure a stock broker belonged on that board, looks like a political favor was done. Of course, that's not something "only the Clintons do" it's pretty ubiquitous in politics. But hey, if you want to vote for a xenophobe and racist because Clinton plays politics as usual, feel free.

And if the thought is, well Trump would never do any kind of quid pro quo like this or put unqualified folks on boards...well...

LMAO.

This argument might work with a remotely pure/clean opponent with an R next to his name. But you don't have that guy on your side this time, do you? You've got a guy who does anything and everything to get an extra buck, to win, to get what he wants. You've got "the Clintons," the only difference is, he's the know-nothing, xenophobic, racist version of "the Clintons."

So, if I'm going to get corrupt either way, and yep Clinton's, just like the vast majority of politicians have corruptness going on, I'll take the non-xenophobic, non-racist, non-misogynist version that knows some stuff over the alternative. That's the problem with nominating Trump, you lose all of your attacks against "the Clintons."

LOL- swing and a miss. A political favor is hiring a donor's kid to fetch coffee and answer phones at a campaign office, not letting a stock broker sit on the International Security Advisory Board because he bundled $100,000 in campaign donations.

Trump, jackass that he is, has never betrayed the trust of the country like the Clintons.

 

[Purdue97]

Well Trump certainly is a xenophobe and a racist, not sure a stock broker belonged on that board, looks like a political favor was done. Of course, that's not something "only the Clintons do" it's pretty ubiquitous in politics. But hey, if you want to vote for a xenophobe and racist because Clinton plays politics as usual, feel free.

And if the thought is, well Trump would never do any kind of quid pro quo like this or put unqualified folks on boards...well...

LMAO.

This argument might work with a remotely pure/clean opponent with an R next to his name. But you don't have that guy on your side this time, do you? You've got a guy who does anything and everything to get an extra buck, to win, to get what he wants. You've got "the Clintons," the only difference is, he's the know-nothing, xenophobic, racist version of "the Clintons."

So, if I'm going to get corrupt either way, and yep Clinton's, just like the vast majority of politicians have corruptness going on, I'll take the non-xenophobic, non-racist, non-misogynist version that knows some stuff over the alternative. That's the problem with nominating Trump, you lose all of your attacks against "the Clintons."

Do you even know what a xenophobe is?

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Trump, jackass that he is, has never betrayed the trust of the country like the Clintons.

Trump has never had the opportunity to do so, either, but there are any number of small-time business partners whose trust he has betrayed. I've never understood this argument in favor of Trump. It's like saying, "gr8indoorsman is a better basketball coach than Matt Painter because he's never lost in the first round of the NCAA tournament!"

And based on what he says, yes, I agree with qaz that Trump is a xenophobe, at least that's what his public persona indicates. I doubt that's true in reality, but as with all things Trump, we don't actually know.

 

[qazplm]

Do you even know what a xenophobe is?

Probably a guy who spends the majority of his time trying to block multiple different foreign groups from coming into the country, probably a guy who calls groups "the Blacks" or "the Latinos," or talks about how he doesn't want a Black guy "counting his money" and prefers a Jew do it (and yes, he said both of those things) because racism and xenophobia usually go hand in hand, but why am I wasting my time with you...again?

 

[qazplm]

Trump has never had the opportunity to do so, either, but there are any number of small-time business partners whose trust he has betrayed. I've never understood this argument in favor of Trump. It's like saying, "gr8indoorsman is a better basketball coach than Matt Painter because he's never lost in the first round of the NCAA tournament!"

And based on what he says, yes, I agree with qaz that Trump is a xenophobe, at least that's what his public persona indicates. I doubt that's true in reality, but as with all things Trump, we don't actually know.

I think Trump thinks "there are good ones." He's told women that men are better than women but a good woman is better than a good man because she works harder (as if that's a compliment). I suspect he thinks the same way about different races (there are some "good ones"). He's a guy who puts people and things into discrete buckets. Blacks do this, Hispanics do that, women are like this, Muslims like that.

 

[BoilerJS]

I think Trump thinks "there are good ones." He's told women that men are better than women but a good woman is better than a good man because she works harder (as if that's a compliment). I suspect he thinks the same way about different races (there are some "good ones"). He's a guy who puts people and things into discrete buckets. Blacks do this, Hispanics do that, women are like this, Muslims like that.

At least Trump made his millions through the private sector. Was it legal, probably. Was it all ethical? The Clintons made their millions while being public servants. Was it legal? The FBI is determining that right now. Was it ethical?
Trump is not a racist. He has foot in mouth syndrome.
The Clintons have been found to be liars time and time again.
History may be set. The first husband and wife to be impeached.

 

[Purdue97]

Probably a guy who spends the majority of his time trying to block multiple different foreign groups from coming into the country, probably a guy who calls groups "the Blacks" or "the Latinos," or talks about how he doesn't want a Black guy "counting his money" and prefers a Jew do it (and yes, he said both of those things) because racism and xenophobia usually go hand in hand, but why am I wasting my time with you...again?

xen·o·phobe
(zĕn′ə-fōb′, zē′nə-)
n.
A person who is fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or of people from different countries or cultures.

SO there is the accepted definition. I would not call someone who had two different wives from foreign countries, had/has major business dealing with Middle Easterners and Asians, and has a Chinese bank in one of his buildings a xenophobe. One can call him a lot of names that he has likely earned, xenophobe does not fit. Even your example of a Jew counting his money over a black guy is not xenophobic for Trump is not Jewish. Racist possibly, definite stereotyping. Hardly seems fearful or contemptuous of foreign countries or cultures. And you get caught up in one Trump says, but hten cherry pick certain quotes. He has said Mexicans/CA can come back in/come in, but he wants it done legally. Also his statements on refugees from Syria/middle easterners involved the word temporarily. So nice hyperbole.

 

[Purdue97]

I think Trump thinks "there are good ones." He's told women that men are better than women but a good woman is better than a good man because she works harder (as if that's a compliment). I suspect he thinks the same way about different races (there are some "good ones"). He's a guy who puts people and things into discrete buckets. Blacks do this, Hispanics do that, women are like this, Muslims like that.

The last sentence is stereotyping and/or generalization. Not xenophobe.

 

[Purdue97]

Trump has never had the opportunity to do so, either, but there are any number of small-time business partners whose trust he has betrayed. I've never understood this argument in favor of Trump. It's like saying, "gr8indoorsman is a better basketball coach than Matt Painter because he's never lost in the first round of the NCAA tournament!"

And based on what he says, yes, I agree with qaz that Trump is a xenophobe, at least that's what his public persona indicates. I doubt that's true in reality, but as with all things Trump, we don't actually know.

Well this coming from the person that does not think Clinton is a demagogue even though many examples were given of her being one.

Hard for me to see how one can actually defend one over the other if same type litmus tests are given.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Trump has never had the opportunity to do so, either, but there are any number of small-time business partners whose trust he has betrayed. I've never understood this argument in favor of Trump. It's like saying, "gr8indoorsman is a better basketball coach than Matt Painter because he's never lost in the first round of the NCAA tournament!"

And based on what he says, yes, I agree with qaz that Trump is a xenophobe, at least that's what his public persona indicates. I doubt that's true in reality, but as with all things Trump, we don't actually know.

Bad analogy. Preferring an unproven AD candidate like Brian Cardinal or Pete Quinn over a known failure like Morgan Burke is a much better one. We know Hillary will place her interests above ours, we don't yet know that about Trump.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Well Trump certainly is a xenophobe and a racist, not sure a stock broker belonged on that board, looks like a political favor was done. Of course, that's not something "only the Clintons do" it's pretty ubiquitous in politics. But hey, if you want to vote for a xenophobe and racist because Clinton plays politics as usual, feel free.

And if the thought is, well Trump would never do any kind of quid pro quo like this or put unqualified folks on boards...well...

LMAO.

This argument might work with a remotely pure/clean opponent with an R next to his name. But you don't have that guy on your side this time, do you? You've got a guy who does anything and everything to get an extra buck, to win, to get what he wants. You've got "the Clintons," the only difference is, he's the know-nothing, xenophobic, racist version of "the Clintons."

So, if I'm going to get corrupt either way, and yep Clinton's, just like the vast majority of politicians have corruptness going on, I'll take the non-xenophobic, non-racist, non-misogynist version that knows some stuff over the alternative. That's the problem with nominating Trump, you lose all of your attacks against "the Clintons."

Well Trump certainly is a xenophobe and a racist, not sure a stock broker belonged on that board, looks like a political favor was done. Of course, that's not something "only the Clintons do" it's pretty ubiquitous in politics. But hey, if you want to vote for a xenophobe and racist because Clinton plays politics as usual, feel free.

And if the thought is, well Trump would never do any kind of quid pro quo like this or put unqualified folks on boards...well...

LMAO.

This argument might work with a remotely pure/clean opponent with an R next to his name. But you don't have that guy on your side this time, do you? You've got a guy who does anything and everything to get an extra buck, to win, to get what he wants. You've got "the Clintons," the only difference is, he's the know-nothing, xenophobic, racist version of "the Clintons."

So, if I'm going to get corrupt either way, and yep Clinton's, just like the vast majority of politicians have corruptness going on, I'll take the non-xenophobic, non-racist, non-misogynist version that knows some stuff over the alternative. That's the problem with nominating Trump, you lose all of your attacks against "the Clintons."

still think Trump's a xenophobe for wanting to stop importing thousands of sharia-law Muslims into this country?

Most of the terror attacks in the last decade were children of Muslim immigrants: Ft hood, San Bernadino, Orlando, Chattanooga, and on and on...

Here's where you change the subject and bring up the NRA, or Kansas, or whatever...

 

[kescwi]

still think Trump's a xenophobe for wanting to stop importing thousands of sharia-law Muslims into this country?

Most of the terror attacks in the last decade were children of Muslim immigrants: Ft hood, San Bernadino, Orlando, Chattanooga, and on and on...

Here's where you change the subject and bring up the NRA, or Kansas, or whatever...

It stops being xenophobia when you put data on the table that proves the vast majority of lives will be better in this country without Muslims or illegal Hispanics.

Show me how my life will be better, this shooting didnt effect me, so what outside of fear can you give me that says America will be a better place? Without being able to do that, you're a xenophobe.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

It stops being xenophobia when you put data on the table that proves the vast majority of lives will be better in this country without Muslims or illegal Hispanics.

Show me how my life will be better, this shooting didnt effect me, so what outside of fear can you give me that says America will be a better place? Without being able to do that, you're a xenophobe.

sounds like the attitude of most of Germany in the 1930s. Put your head back in the sand, or better yet, read this:

https://pjmedia.com/blog/first_they_came_for_the_gays/

Bruce Bawer is a liberal, gay American living in Oslo, and wrote this piece 8 1/2 years ago. If you want the US to turn into Amsterdam, we're on the right track.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

It stops being xenophobia when you put data on the table that proves the vast majority of lives will be better in this country without Muslims or illegal Hispanics.

Show me how my life will be better, this shooting didnt effect me, so what outside of fear can you give me that says America will be a better place? Without being able to do that, you're a xenophobe.

Here's some data for you: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/

The shooter's parents are from Afganistan, and so they believe in sharia law, which permits killing homosexuals.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

It stops being xenophobia when you put data on the table that proves the vast majority of lives will be better in this country without Muslims or illegal Hispanics.

Show me how my life will be better, this shooting didnt effect me, so what outside of fear can you give me that says America will be a better place? Without being able to do that, you're a xenophobe.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

 

[kescwi]

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Please clarify here because if you're attempting to equate an attack in Orlando to Nazi terror using the poem by Martin Niemoller that blows past irony straight to depravity and is pretty disgusting. I mean you honestly want to condemn an entire religion and its followers, a billion of whom have hurt no one, and use that poem to justify it, or did you post for some other reason?

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Please clarify here because if you're attempting to equate an attack in Orlando to Nazi terror using the poem by Martin Niemoller that blows past irony straight to depravity and is pretty disgusting. I mean you honestly want to condemn an entire religion and its followers, a billion of whom have hurt no one, and use that poem to justify it, or did you post for some other reason?

I posted it because you said this shooting didn't effect you. It was even bold and underlined. If you can't read, then don't bother responding. The poem is about inaction and apathy, that's what I was equating, not the end results of the aggressors. A third grader could figure out that my post was directed at your attitude of torpidity.

 

[kescwi]

I posted it because you said this shooting didn't effect you. It was even bold and underlined. If you can't read, then don't bother responding. The poem is about inaction and apathy, that's what I was equating, not the end results of the aggressors. A third grader could figure out that my post was directed at your attitude of torpidity.

How could I have stopped the actions of a lunatic? Please tell me what I'm apathetic about? I can feel sorrow for the familys of the victims but that's about it, it's not apathy but reality.

But please enlighten my third grade mind about the "they" who will eventually be coming after me. Is it Floridians, gun owners...? Who are the "they" you feel I should take action to stop?

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

How could I have stopped the actions of a lunatic? Please tell me what I'm apathetic about? I can feel sorrow for the familys of the victims but that's about it, it's not apathy but reality.

But please enlighten my third grade mind about the "they" who will eventually be coming after me. Is it Floridians, gun owners...? Who are the "they" you feel I should take action to stop?

See this is the attitude...spectacularly shallow thinking to try to make it about guns or gays. Pathetic left wing tactics will not work on an independent mind. This is about people who hate YOU. They hate America. It's so obvious that there is a sorrow beyond the victims. A sorrow for a country full of "free" people who look at this and say "wow that's terrible" and that's the end of it. A country who refuses to challenge these religious ideals in the name of political correctness. If a white man had slaughtered 50 black people, he would be rightly derided and persecuted as a racist or bigot. But it's different for a muslim? This was about guns or gays!? You have been brainwashed beyond all reason if you believe that for a second. You could not have stopped it, true. But there IS such a thing as radical islam and I will not be a trained monkey with my hands over my eyes pretending it doesn't exist.

 

[lbodel]

LOL- swing and a miss. A political favor is hiring a donor's kid to fetch coffee and answer phones at a campaign office, not letting a stock broker sit on the International Security Advisory Board because he bundled $100,000 in campaign donations.

Trump, jackass that he is, has never betrayed the trust of the country like the Clintons.

I mean, you realize every President has appointed friends and donors to be ambassadors? Do you remember Michael Brown leading FEMA? How do you think he got that job...

Do I agree with this? Not really. I'd rather a random be on a volunteer board than someone be an official ambassador or lead a federal agency with zero experience though....

 

[gr8indoorsman]

xen·o·phobe
(zĕn′ə-fōb′, zē′nə-)
n.
A person who is fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or of people from different countries or cultures.

Being a xenophobe does not necessarily mean he is fearful or contemptuous of all things that are different. I think his statements regarding Mexicans and Muslims square up exceptionally well with the accepted definition of xenophobia, thus I think it's accurate to call him a xenophobe.

Recall that the Nazis weren't distrusting of everyone not exactly like them in all the same ways, but their blaming of the Jews for all things wrong with Germany was definitely xenophobic, and I don't think anyone would defend the Nazis as it pertains to xenophobia.

I am not trying to parallel Trump with Hitler - though that usually wins the thread! - merely point out that one can be a xenophobe but still be accepting of some other foreign persons/cultures they find acceptable.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Hard for me to see how one can actually defend one over the other if same type litmus tests are given.

EXACTLY my point in this thread.

We know who Hillary is because she's spent the last 30 years in public service. We don't like her.

We have no idea who Trump is because he's too busy telling us what we want to hear, and we have no public service record off of which to base any judgment.

I can deal with Hillary's ethical issues in office. I have no idea to what lengths Trump will go, but based on his public statements and persona, I don't want to find out.

I guess you are probably right about Hillary's demagoguery, but we can see through it because we know who she is. The same does not apply to Donald Trump. As I've said two dozen times before, "Better the devil you know."

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Bad analogy. Preferring an unproven AD candidate like Brian Cardinal or Pete Quinn over a known failure like Morgan Burke is a much better one. We know Hillary will place her interests above ours, we don't yet know that about Trump.

Well, except that no one finds Brian Cardinal or Pete Quinn completely intolerable and they don't make public statements to the effect of, "Mexicans aren't good football players, so we're not going to recruit them" or something like that.

Though I would say that I'm every bit as qualified to be Purdue's head basketball coach as Trump is to be President. We both have a loose idea of what the job is about and enough knowledge of policy and procedures to fake our way through it, but in reality, neither of us would have one f'ing clue of what we're doing. The difference is, I could be fired after one season!

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Well, except that no one finds Brian Cardinal or Pete Quinn completely intolerable and they don't make public statements to the effect of, "Mexicans aren't good football players, so we're not going to recruit them" or something like that.

Though I would say that I'm every bit as qualified to be Purdue's head basketball coach as Trump is to be President. We both have a loose idea of what the job is about and enough knowledge of policy and procedures to fake our way through it, but in reality, neither of us would have one f'ing clue of what we're doing. The difference is, I could be fired after one season!

They're both awful candidates, but at this point, I am judging them by their actions, not their words. I have voted against Trump once already, and may end up doing so again. Or not voting at all.

The AD analogy is better, in my opinion, because it's more of a generalist/executive role, versus a highly specialized job like B1G head basketball coach.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

They're both awful candidates, but at this point, I am judging them by their actions, not their words. I have voted against Trump once already, and may end up doing so again. Or not voting at all.

Right now I'd vote for Hillary (as I did in the CA primary to stick a fork in Bernie), but would be more open to providing a third party with momentum than I would be open to voting for Trump at this point.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

The difference is, I could be fired after one season!

Not at Purdue!

 

[kescwi]

See this is the attitude...spectacularly shallow thinking to try to make it about guns or gays. Pathetic left wing tactics will not work on an independent mind. This is about people who hate YOU. They hate America. It's so obvious that there is a sorrow beyond the victims. A sorrow for a country full of "free" people who look at this and say "wow that's terrible" and that's the end of it. A country who refuses to challenge these religious ideals in the name of political correctness. If a white man had slaughtered 50 black people, he would be rightly derided and persecuted as a racist or bigot. But it's different for a muslim? This was about guns or gays!? You have been brainwashed beyond all reason if you believe that for a second. You could not have stopped it, true. But there IS such a thing as radical islam and I will not be a trained monkey with my hands over my eyes pretending it doesn't exist.

I knew exactly who you meant and the problem isn't my hands over my eyes pretending anything. Evil exists, and always will, my problem is with how a nation would go about stopping the fraction of 1% of Muslims who are threat without trampling on the rights of the remain +99% of law abiding, productive, Muslim Americans.

Where, when, how... would it come to an end? How could you ever be certain you've stopped all threats? See to me that's the problem, it sounds better, it makes where the logic takes you more palatable I guess, to say it's simply radical Islam you're after but the realty is once you start down the path there is no stopping point and all Muslims would be viewed a threat eventually.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

I knew exactly who you meant and the problem isn't my hands over my eyes pretending anything. Evil exists, and always will, my problem is with how a nation would go about stopping the fraction of 1% of Muslims who are threat without trampling on the rights of the remain +99% of law abiding, productive, Muslim Americans.

Where, when, how... would it come to an end? How could you ever be certain you've stopped all threats? See to me that's the problem, it sounds better, it makes where the logic takes you more palatable I guess, to say it's simply radical Islam you're after but the realty is once you start down the path there is no stopping point and all Muslims would be viewed a threat eventually.

No one is arguing this. No one is saying they will make it all end. People are saying minimize the risk, recognize the actual problem, and quit shipping these loons over here by the 10's of thousands. There's no law or right that says we have to let every tom dick and harry into the country. If you want to have a properly functioning free society you can't inundate it with whack jobs from the stone age who can't figure out how to live and let live. How much closer does it have to get to you before doing something is an option? If we keep doing nothing as a country whack jobs on the other end of the spectrum are going to have a reaction and then it WILL be a direct threat to the every day peace loving people of this country.

 

[kescwi]

No one is arguing this. No one is saying they will make it all end. People are saying minimize the risk, recognize the actual problem, and quit shipping these loons over here by the 10's of thousands. There's no law or right that says we have to let every tom dick and harry into the country. If you want to have a properly functioning free society you can't inundate it with whack jobs from the stone age who can't figure out how to live and let live. How much closer does it have to get to you before doing something is an option? If we keep doing nothing as a country whack jobs on the other end of the spectrum are going to have a reaction and then it WILL be a direct threat to the every day peace loving people of this country.

Okay so your solution is no more Muslims allowed in the country, you would vote against going any further than that? You would advocate respecting the rights of all Muslim Americans currently living here, even though this lunatic was already here, if we simply put a stop to anymore Muslim immigration?

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Okay so your solution is no more Muslims allowed in the country, you would vote against going any further than that? You would advocate respecting the rights of all Muslim Americans currently living here, even though this lunatic was already here, if we simply put a stop to anymore Muslim immigration?

I have said as much before. Yes, I advocate respecting the rights of Americans. Yes, it is appropriate to be considerably more picky about who we let in, that should be part of the approach. But that is only one step. And other areas need to be considered.

 

[kescwi]

I have said as much before. Yes, I advocate respecting the rights of Americans. Yes, it is appropriate to be considerably more picky about who we let in, that should be part of the approach. But that is only one step. And other areas need to be considered.

What areas?

 

[Purdue97]

Being a xenophobe does not necessarily mean he is fearful or contemptuous of all things that are different. I think his statements regarding Mexicans and Muslims square up exceptionally well with the accepted definition of xenophobia, thus I think it's accurate to call him a xenophobe.

Recall that the Nazis weren't distrusting of everyone not exactly like them in all the same ways, but their blaming of the Jews for all things wrong with Germany was definitely xenophobic, and I don't think anyone would defend the Nazis as it pertains to xenophobia.

I am not trying to parallel Trump with Hitler - though that usually wins the thread! - merely point out that one can be a xenophobe but still be accepting of some other foreign persons/cultures they find acceptable.

I guess a lot of this is just interpretation of the word. I view his words on Mexicans and Muslims(especially today he ramped them up) as more a demagogue because he is playing to what many people especially right now want to hear. Even though just about everyone knows what he plans/wants to do/talks about doing, much of it cannot be done.

The one thing his rhetoric seemed to do was pull Hilary to the right on these issues which IMO is not a bad thing. She actually said something today about Kuwait, Qatar, SA etc putting them on notice that it is well past time for them to crack down on their wealthy citizens financing terror groups. This is a bit of a catch 22, and a pretty difficult task to accomplish or address but at least it is on the discussion table/front page now. I never thought this topic got enough are time the last 15 years.

And if anyone is wondering why it is difficult-1) Some of those countries finance our debt 2) Some of these groups fighting ISIS and funded by wealthy individuals have significant terror ties. Just not always black and white with these groups/individuals.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

What areas?

I would be in favor of a wait time when buying weapons, particularly semi auto rifles. This would allow 2 things. More thorough background checks and a cool off period for angry people buying weapons. I would suggest at least 30 days and would support 60. It would also be nice to see mental health make a return in this country. This guy had some warning signs. Also we have a trillion dollar waste of space known as DHS. Maybe they could do something useful. A guy that's been interviewed twice by the fbi buying a couple weapons within a tight window should have been flagged.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

I view his words on Mexicans and Muslims(especially today he ramped them up) as more a demagogue because he is playing to what many people especially right now want to hear. Even though just about everyone knows what he plans/wants to do/talks about doing, much of it cannot be done.

While I trust that you and some of the other conservatives here understand that what he plans/wants/talks about is impossible, I believe there is a majority of his support base does not, much like Bernie Sanders. They're both populist candidates with very different ideology (or in Trump's case, proclaimed ideology anyway). The drum I keep beating, and that you hint at here is that we don't really know what Trump thinks or will do, and that - to me - is unnerving, particularly with the rhetoric he's spewing.

As I've said, I don't trust either of them, but I have a pretty good sense of Hillary. I think Trump is far more liberal than he's letting on and I think a bunch of people are being duped... but I don't know...

 

[lbodel]

I would be in favor of a wait time when buying weapons, particularly semi auto rifles. This would allow 2 things. More thorough background checks and a cool off period for angry people buying weapons. I would suggest at least 30 days and would support 60. It would also be nice to see mental health make a return in this country. This guy had some warning signs. Also we have a trillion dollar waste of space known as DHS. Maybe they could do something useful. A guy that's been interviewed twice by the fbi buying a couple weapons within a tight window should have been flagged.

You realize most of what you said has either been attempted, failed, etc.? It is literally impossible to pass any sort of gun law in congress.

Obama literally 2 weeks ago talked about suspected ISIS sympathizers being able to buy guns no questions asked in a town hall because it won't be passed in Congress:
"He told (the town hall questioner) that he had just come from the Situation Room and learned of citizens within the United States who were ISIS sympathizers. But because of the NRA, Obama said, “we’re allowed to put them on the no-fly list when it comes to airlines” but not “prohibit those people from buying a gun.”

Now, any one of these ISIS-sympathizers could “walk in to a gun store or a gun show right now and buy as much — as many weapons and ammo as he can,” Obama said."

The sad part is, Obama is clearly talking about this situation two weeks ago, yet Trump is out there basically (at best) saying he doesn't care.

Also, this is down to local laws - but did you know in Florida, you can be an AR rifle easier than a handgun? WTF.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

You realize most of what you said has either been attempted, failed, etc.? It is literally impossible to pass any sort of gun law in congress.

Obama literally 2 weeks ago talked about suspected ISIS sympathizers being able to buy guns no questions asked in a town hall because it won't be passed in Congress:
"He told (the town hall questioner) that he had just come from the Situation Room and learned of citizens within the United States who were ISIS sympathizers. But because of the NRA, Obama said, “we’re allowed to put them on the no-fly list when it comes to airlines” but not “prohibit those people from buying a gun.”

Now, any one of these ISIS-sympathizers could “walk in to a gun store or a gun show right now and buy as much — as many weapons and ammo as he can,” Obama said."

The sad part is, Obama is clearly talking about this situation two weeks ago, yet Trump is out there basically (at best) saying he doesn't care.

Also, this is down to local laws - but did you know in Florida, you can be an AR rifle easier than a handgun? WTF.

Who gets to decide which US citizens get put on the No Buy list?

Maybe the same folks who had the IRS harassing Tea Party groups?

Maybe Eric Holder, Valerie Jarrett, or Loretta Lynch?

No thanks.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

You realize most of what you said has either been attempted, failed, etc.? It is literally impossible to pass any sort of gun law in congress.

Obama literally 2 weeks ago talked about suspected ISIS sympathizers being able to buy guns no questions asked in a town hall because it won't be passed in Congress:
"He told (the town hall questioner) that he had just come from the Situation Room and learned of citizens within the United States who were ISIS sympathizers. But because of the NRA, Obama said, “we’re allowed to put them on the no-fly list when it comes to airlines” but not “prohibit those people from buying a gun.”

Now, any one of these ISIS-sympathizers could “walk in to a gun store or a gun show right now and buy as much — as many weapons and ammo as he can,” Obama said."

The sad part is, Obama is clearly talking about this situation two weeks ago, yet Trump is out there basically (at best) saying he doesn't care.

Also, this is down to local laws - but did you know in Florida, you can be an AR rifle easier than a handgun? WTF.

Why would you assume I don't know this? lol...I am a gun owner, though not an NRA member, and work for the Army. Every day I handle more Soldier equipment then most people see in their entire lives. I don't agree with obama. I'm not into prohibition of anything. So clearly he has not proposed what I proposed although you are right it is very likely to be put down in congress. I'm ok with the current laws, though I could support more if done correctly and not shifting all power to the stupid bumbling feds. I would rather have laws too lax than too restrictive because a gun is not evil. I understand this whack job could have just as easily used a bomb. He probably would have done more damage. People who are hell bent on doing this are extremely difficult to stop which is why it's important to not let them live here in the first place and try to identify crazies. I also understand a few citizens with their own weapons cornered this fellow in the bathroom. The only thing that stops an armed man is another armed man. Ask the eagles of death metal what their stance on carrying a gun is after the paris attack.

 

[patj11288]

Its always so enjoyable to hear from society's poor and/or uneducated/ignorant whites who now believe the cards are stacked against them by status quo politicians. In reality, however, they only have themselves to blame for being either too lazy or too stupid, despite having all of the benefits of white privilege for god knows how many generations, to effectively compete in a modern globalized economy.

You think Papa Trump is going to save your bull shit manufacturing jobs, kick out all the minorities that scare you, and restore the United States to some fantasized Utopian past where everyone was "free" to live as they pleased without big brother looking over their shoulder (except "the blacks," "the hispanics," and "the Arabs")? He is not.