Half-baked Republican Presidential Fruitcakes (and fellow confections)

MrPudding

robindch wrote: »

Meanwhile, our Republican Presidential Fruitcakes - all stunned to relative silence by the sheer horror of the Planned Parenthood murders and the urgent, days-long search to find an idea and a person to blame - suddenly find voice again, full and strong. This time, having located with a haste which some might find indecent, the person and the idea behind the USA's latest mass-murder:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34998776

"We are at war". Really? You sure? So why did you vote AGAINST a proposal to ban the sale of weapons to persons ON THE FCUKING TERRORIST WATCH LIST? You fcuking mealy mouthed morons.

MrP

Hotblack Desiato

robindch wrote: »

Meanwhile, our Republican Presidential Fruitcakes - all stunned to relative silence by the sheer horror of the Planned Parenthood murders and the urgent, days-long search to find an idea and a person to blame - suddenly find voice again, full and strong. This time, having located with a haste which some might find indecent, the person and the idea behind the USA's latest mass-murder:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34998776

Their selective concern is entirely reprehensible. Americans shooting Americans in the name of Jeesus somehow isn't terrorism. Terrorism is something those funny light brown types do. :rolleyes:

Overheal

Jimmy Bottlehead

Nodin wrote: »

Islamophobia + American Jesus + Republican Party =

“I know it’s not politically correct to say,” she began. “But every nation that has fallen has fallen because they are anti-God. We have no future if we keep going like this. Except beheadings.”


“I believe he’s a Muslim and wanting Muslims to take over our nation. One nation under Allah instead of one nation under God! But if everyone prays and turns from their wicked ways, then God has promised to answer our prayers. That’s why we need a man of faith.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...html?tid=sm_fb

After reading that article, it bothers me that people with such an utterly insane world view are actually allowed vote and decide what happens to other people.

JPNelsforearm

MrPudding wrote: »

"We are at war". Really? You sure? So why did you vote AGAINST a proposal to ban the sale of weapons to persons ON THE FCUKING TERRORIST WATCH LIST? You fcuking mealy mouthed morons.

MrP

They werent on the "terrorist watchlist", it was a no fly list, which anyone can be put on, its utterly corrupt and impossible/expensive to get off and would simply be a loophole for the federal government enforce gun bans.

Also the Islamic terrorists had twenty odd bombs, nor where they on a no fly list, I dont think a single person on the no fly list has shot up a place with a legally held weapon. toal red herring from Obama who wont call out Islamic terrorism for what it is.

Walter Bishop

Nodin wrote: »

IOne nation under Allah instead of one nation under God!

It's almost as if he doesn't realise that God and Allah are in fact supposed to be the same deity.

Nodin

Walter Bishop wrote: »

It's almost as if he doesn't realise that God and Allah are in fact supposed to be the same deity.

I'll paraphrase the oft given reply -

'We do not worship the same deity, for Allah is a pagan moon god' (pronounce god as "Gawd" for best effect.

The Black Oil

The latest pronouncement from the presidential campaign of Donald Trump calls for the U.S. to refuse to let any Muslim — from anywhere — into the United States.



I'm sorry, Donald, I'm afraid I can't do that.

Nodin

The Black Oil wrote: »

The latest pronouncement from the presidential campaign of Donald Trump calls for the U.S. to refuse to let any Muslim — from anywhere — into the United States.



I'm sorry, Donald, I'm afraid I can't do that.

Considering there's a well known part of the constitution that was (and probably still is) hammered into their wee heads at an early age that would clearly rule that utterly out, I'd say he's fully aware that it can't be done. Which of course makes him an even worse ratbag.

Links234

Trumplestiltskin also wants to close up the internet... I kid you not. http://www.theverge.com/2015/12/7/9869308/donald-trump-close-up-the-internet-bill-gates

"We're losing a lot of people because of the internet," Trump said. "We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."

The Black Oil

Heard Trump's spokesperson on the BBC. She made sure to drop in a few references to Christians being persecuted.

robdonn

The Black Oil wrote: »

Heard Trump's spokesperson on the BBC. She made sure to drop in a few references to Christians being persecuted.

The poor, poor Christian minority in America....

KomradeBishop

Not quite Republican but close enough:
"Galt's Gulch" in Chile, a Libertarian/Rand-fantasy-inspired experiment in building a real life Libertopian commune, has collapsed as an elaborate fraud which wiped out all investors (who'd have guessed...) - now relying on the Chilean state to save them:
https://www.dollarvigilante.com/blog/2015/12/07/whatever-happened-to-galts-gulch-chile.html

Reminds me of the title of George Akerlof's new book 'Phishing for Phools'.

Nodin

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Not quite Republican but close enough:
"Galt's Gulch" in Chile, a Libertarian/Rand-fantasy-inspired experiment in building a real life Libertopian commune, has collapsed as an elaborate fraud which wiped out all investors (who'd have guessed...) - now relying on the Chilean state to save them:
https://www.dollarvigilante.com/blog/2015/12/07/whatever-happened-to-galts-gulch-chile.html

Reminds me of the title of George Akerlof's new book 'Phishing for Phools'.

...parts of that remind me of a well known series of video games, non-intellectual that I am.

robindch

Public Service Announcement

No idea whether it's facebook tying natural language to graph search or what, but if you type in "my friends who like donald trump" into the "Search FaceBook" edit box at the top of the usual fb page as viewed on a regular desktop browser, you'll get a list of your friends who've fb-liked Donald J Trump's page.

Conveniently, next to the list (if any) of your friends who've done this, there's a 'Friends' button with a tick just to the left to indicate that you're friends with the person there. If you hover the mouse over this button, a menu will appear and the last item in that menu is "Unfriend" which you can click to remove this person from your list of friends.

FaceBook really has thought of everything.

Trent Houseboat

In fairness, I follow The Donald on twitter on account of how ridiculous he is.

I'm still not convinced that many of the people who say they'll vote for him are not actually trying to squeeze as much comedy gold out of his as possible. A bit like Carrie winning prom queen, this could end badly for everyone involved.

MrPudding

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

In fairness, I follow The Donald on twitter on account of how ridiculous he is.

I'm still not convinced that many of the people who say they'll vote for him are not actually trying to squeeze as much comedy gold out of his as possible. A bit like Carrie winning prom queen, this could end badly for everyone involved.

The people saying they are going to vote for him are too stupid to even consider what you have suggested.

MrP

robindch

Sarah Palin has a crush on that nice Marion Marechal-Le Pen. A "political crush" of course, not the other kind. And compares her to Joan of Arc. Palin went on to say that she'd like a job as Energy Secretary during a Trump presidency.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35097760

PopePalpatine

Just starting now, Reggie Yates (who presented "Extreme Russia") is presenting an episode of "Extreme UK", featuring a movement called "Men Going Their Own Way".

robindch

A twitteratus makes a fair point while introducing two new words into English language:

Thargor

robindch wrote: »

Sarah Palin has a crush on that nice Marion Marechal-Le Pen. A "political crush" of course, not the other kind. And compares her to Joan of Arc. Palin went on to say that she'd like a job as Energy Secretary during a Trump presidency.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35097760

Give us a short paragraph on Joan of Arc there Sarah, big hero of yours, Im sure you must know a few facts? Same question for Le Pen, just a short paragraph about her will do so we know you know what you're on about...

Custardpi

robindch wrote: »

A twitteratus makes a fair point while introducing two new words into English language:

Fair point but it's likely that such twitter abuse (not saying it isn't deserved) will simply add to the bunker mentality of Trump supporters as they see liberals ganging up to attack them. Slanging matches on Twitter & elsewhere are likely as not to motivate the "real Americans" who support Trump, Palin et al to get out the vote.

Thargor wrote:

Give us a short paragraph on Joan of Arc there Sarah, big hero of yours, Im sure you must know a few facts? Same question for Le Pen, just a short paragraph about her will do so we know you know what you're on about...

That's advanced level stuff there. Ask her something more reasonable e.g. to locate France on a map.

Nodin

Custardpi wrote: »

Fair point but it's likely that such twitter abuse (not saying it isn't deserved) will simply add to the bunker mentality of Trump supporters as they see liberals ganging up to attack them. Slanging matches on Twitter & elsewhere are likely as not to motivate the "real Americans" who support Trump, Palin et al to get out the vote.
.

Tbh given the kind of rhetoric they respond to, they've probably sealed themselves into the lower levels.

robindch

Custardpi wrote: »

That's advanced level stuff there. Ask her something more reasonable e.g. to locate France on a map.

I'd start off with the easy stuff and ask her to say what a map is, or why one might need one.

KomradeBishop

Poll: 30% of GOP voters support bombing Agrabah, the city from Aladdin
Almost one-third of Republican primary voters would support bombing the fictional kingdom of Agrabah, according to a report released by Public Policy Polling on Friday.

More than 530 Republican primary voters were polled this week on their support for Republican candidates and foreign policy issues including banning Muslims from entering the US, Japanese internment camps from the second world war and bombing Agrabah, the kingdom from Disney’s animated classic, Aladdin.

In its poll, Public Policy Polling asked the 532 Republicans: “Would you support or oppose bombing Agrabah?” While 57% of responders said they were not sure, 30% said they supported bombing it. Only 13% opposed it.

Public Policy Polling also polled Democratic primary voters: only 19% of them said they would support bombing Agrabah, while 36% said they would oppose it.
...

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/18/republican-voters-bomb-agrabah-disney-aladdin-donald-trump

feargale

Putin has just put it on record that he likes Trump.

pH

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Poll: 30% of GOP voters support bombing Agrabah, the city from Aladdin
Almost one-third of Republican primary voters would support bombing the fictional kingdom of Agrabah, according to a report released by Public Policy Polling on Friday.

More than 530 Republican primary voters were polled this week on their support for Republican candidates and foreign policy issues including banning Muslims from entering the US, Japanese internment camps from the second world war and bombing Agrabah, the kingdom from Disney’s animated classic, Aladdin.

In its poll, Public Policy Polling asked the 532 Republicans: “Would you support or oppose bombing Agrabah?” While 57% of responders said they were not sure, 30% said they supported bombing it. Only 13% opposed it.

Public Policy Polling also polled Democratic primary voters: only 19% of them said they would support bombing Agrabah, while 36% said they would oppose it.
...

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/18/republican-voters-bomb-agrabah-disney-aladdin-donald-trump

It's very weasely isn't it - using "support" conveying the idea that someone (presumably in the US government) thinks that it's necessary to bomb Agrabah, do you "support" them - so it's framed as an issue about supporting the government and "our troops" etc or opposing them.

Also, I'm not entirely sure where all the snide and jeering comes from - that people can't recognize the name of a fictional country used in a 1992 cartoon - the imbeciles!, or that they're expected to know there isn't a town/province/region in Syria/Afghanistan/Libya/Iraq etc. called "Agrabah"?

The rest of the article is hardly any better - a rag of a newspaper that's been championing banning people from the UK because of their beliefs/politics is shocked when Trump wants to ban people from the US because of their beliefs!

KomradeBishop

So ignorance mixed with partisan support is now an excuse for supporting the bombing of an unknown (or in this case fictional...) faraway city - just because it sounds remotely Arab?

Come on - missing the point here would take a near-deliberate effort. It shows up how ridiculously ignorant and bloodthirsty a portion of the US public is willing to be (if the sample holds true), in subservience to their party/government.

pH

KomradeBishop wrote: »

So ignorance mixed with partisan support is now an excuse for supporting the bombing of an unknown (or in this case fictional...) faraway city - just because it sounds remotely Arab?

Come on - missing the point here would take a near-deliberate effort. It shows up how ridiculously ignorant and bloodthirsty a portion of the US public is willing to be (if the sample holds true), in subservience to their party/government.

Bloodthirsty how? If the question was "should we bomb X" then I'd agree, the the framing wasn't like that.

The problem is that as humans, so everyday conversations don't have to be legal contracts we read a lot of hidden meaning into statements, if someone from a reputable polling company asked that me that question I'd presume:

A/ "Support" here means "agree with" or possibly "wouldn't object to" -
B/ support who? again without more information I'd take it that the "bombing" would be done by my democratically elected US government - we're not talking about supporting bombing of Agrabah by ISIS or a militia
C/ All things being equal my democratically elected government isn't doing it for sh1ts and giggles - they have military reasons for the bombings.
D/ "bombing" - again without further information I'd assume it was was usual planes/missiles vs command/control/military targets - NOT carpet bombing the city with Incendiary a la Dresden or nuking it like Hiroshima.

So yes I can see how many would view this stupid "trick" question in terms of supporting their governments decisions and troops as opposed to "oh! any chance to kill muslims should be taken", but like I said if you don't make the same assumptions as me you can read it as:

"I'd be personally willing to join a militia and carpet bomb the civilians of Agrabah for no other reason than they're Muslims" - which is indeed is bloodthirsty but is an unreasonable reading of what's being asked.

Nodin

pH wrote: »

It's very weasely isn't it - using "support" conveying the idea that someone (presumably in the US government) thinks that it's necessary to bomb Agrabah, do you "support" them - so it's framed as an issue about supporting the government and "our troops" etc or opposing them.

Also, I'm not entirely sure where all the snide and jeering comes from - that people can't recognize the name of a fictional country used in a 1992 cartoon - the imbeciles!, or that they're expected to know there isn't a town/province/region in Syria/Afghanistan/Libya/Iraq etc. called "Agrabah"?

The rest of the article is hardly any better - a rag of a newspaper that's been championing banning people from the UK because of their beliefs/politics is shocked when Trump wants to ban people from the US because of their beliefs!

Missing the point, I think. Doesn't it strike you as even slightly worrying that people would "support" automatically bombing a place they knew absolutely nothing about?