Anyone else becoming terrified of Liberals.

Professor Moriarty

FA Hayek wrote: »

Trump is not far right, as I mentioned in another post, do you really think a born and bred New Yorker living on the upper East side, is a secret member of the Klan or a Neo-Nazi?

People get upset when big nets are cast calling all left wingers/liberals SJW's or snowflakes, yet here far-right is a catch all term.

Trump has as much in common with the average New Yorker as the Queen of England has with the average Cockney.

PopePalpatine

Walter H Price wrote: »

The polarization and widening division of society as a whole at the moment is very unsettling. I'm not one for conspiracy theories or any of that stuff , but i do believe the media is having a massive impact on this widening division through very biased and emotive reporting.

You are really left looking and thinking where has the neutrality in the media gone and what is the end game of having people so viciously divided on issues of such little relevance to them e.g Trump or any of the American election campaign

Yep, let's just ignore Trump tarring any negative polls about him as "FAKE NEWS".

eire4

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Yep, let's just ignore Trump tarring any negative polls about him as "FAKE NEWS".

Yes and shame on anybody in the media calling him out on his many outright lies. Ridiculous.
I am no fan of the media in the US given how much they benefit from citizens united financially they are very much part of the problem and part of the reason why the US political system is broken and dysfunctional in terms of serving the best interests of the vast majority of Americans. But given how the current Trump administration reminds me of Newspeak from 1984 every time one them is talking it would be very difficult for the media not to call them out on at least some of their obvious lies.

scruffy66

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Trump has as much in common with the average New Yorker as the Queen of England has with the average Cockney.

Good to see you put the Queen and Trump on the same level, now we're getting some where.
Did you see this half time Super Bowl interview Trump did with fox's Bill o
Reilly . Now Bill has to be one of the most dislikable Human beings alive, even more than Trump but is Trump the first American President to move away from
The idea of American Elitism and to say straight up that the U.S. Have killed
just as much as other countries and that they are just as responsible for
world instability .
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XbIdPUX7zg8

eire4

scruffy66 wrote: »

Good to see you put the Queen and Trump on the same level, now we're getting some where.
Did you see this half time Super Bowl interview Trump did with fox's Bill o
Reilly . Now Bill has to be one of the most dislikable Human beings alive, even more than Trump but is Trump the first American President to move away from
The idea of American Elitism and to say straight up that the U.S. Have killed
just as much as other countries and that they are just as responsible for
world instability .
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XbIdPUX7zg8

True enough. Although now Conway his Newspeak like mouth piece has been walking those comments back saying that he only meant in Iraqi.

Brian?

KingBrian2 wrote: »

MightyMandarin wrote: »

The far right is Trump. He is stirring up religious discrimination.

Trump is a populist. He has many liberal positions. Many many liberal positions.

Trump has the best liberal positions, they're incredibly liberal, incredible.

FA Hayek

MightyMandarin wrote: »

I'll call him far-right, fascist etc.

He is a far right fascist, but not Nazi. Err, ok. Kinda proving my point really but go ahead.

Professor Moriarty

FA Hayek wrote: »

He is a far right fascist, but not Nazi. Err, ok. Kinda proving my point really but go ahead.

I doubt if even the Donald knows what political principles he believes in simply because he doesn't appear to have any. Which is understandable considering he only became a politician three weeks ago.

MightyMandarin

FA Hayek wrote: »

He is a far right fascist, but not Nazi. Err, ok. Kinda proving my point really but go ahead.

How does that prove your point at all? Fascism and Nazism are heavily linked but not the same thing.

MightyMandarin

All of this hysteria about liberals, yet Trump supporters are driving fleets of military vehicles around Kentucky.

Listen to popular followers of him aswell. Alex Jones even said he'd 'die for Trump'.

I'd be as worried about these American jihadists as I would the Islamic ones.

demfad

Trump is a vessel for his handlers and backers. When you talk of Trump's social policies you really must examine the social policies of white supremacist Stephen Bannon; The Mercers and religious Statists the CNP; the dominionist evangelical movement etc.
For foreign policy you need to look at Stephen Bannons small State multipolar world order: No EU, less federalism in USA, or no USA. Bannons views are based on his idol Alex Dugin. As Trump is being blackmailed by Vladimir Putin the foreign policy will be and has been as pro-Russian as possible in Trumps position. Drop sanctions and attack the EU.
For disinformation and methodology look at what Vladymir Surkov did in Russia and how other autocracies were formed.
When sanctions are dropped and the EU is gone, Putin will be happy to pull the plug on Trump or to let Bannon bring the establishment down and destroy government.

BTW: Happy to back up any of this with reliable reference.

KingBrian2

Good to know the liberals in America have already made up their mind about Trump even as it is early days exactly like how Conservatives accused Obama the do nothing President of being a Marxist, Kenyan Socialist long before election even came to conclusion. US Democrats are still looking for votes i see.

MightyMandarin

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Good to know the liberals in America have already made up their mind about Trump even as it is early days exactly like how Conservatives accused Obama the do nothing President of being a Marxist, Kenyan Socialist long before election even came to conclusion. US Democrats are still looking for votes i see.

Hardly early days when he's been in 2 weeks and already he's signed more than a dozen EO's, fired an Attorney General, banned hundreds of thousand's from entering the US based entirely on their religion, questioned the legitimacy of a Judge, ripped up several trade deals, put some terrible people in powerful positions, convinced the speaker of Parliament to declare that he's not welcome in Westminster and even declared that any polls which are unfavourable to him are fake... and that's just him.

His administration has also been caught lying through their teeth on numerous occasions, most notably with infamous 'inauguration attendance figures', managed to conjure up an 1984-esque term: 'Alternative facts' and made up an entire 'Massacre' which never happened.

Don't know what you mean by 'early days'; this type of stuff wouldn't happen in an 8yr presidency of most presidents yet it took Donald 2 weeks.

KingBrian2

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Hardly early days when he's been in 2 weeks and already he's signed more than a dozen EO's, fired an Attorney General, banned hundreds of thousand's from entering the US based entirely on their religion, questioned the legitimacy of a Judge, ripped up several trade deals, put some terrible people in powerful positions, convinced the speaker of Parliament to declare that he's not welcome in Westminster and even declared that any polls which are unfavourable to him are fake... and that's just him.

His administration has also been caught lying through their teeth on numerous occasions, most notably with infamous 'inauguration attendance figures', managed to conjure up an 1984-esque term: 'Alternative facts' and made up an entire 'Massacre' which never happened.

Don't know what you mean by 'early days'; this type of stuff wouldn't happen in an 8yr presidency of most presidents yet it took Donald 2 weeks.

Early days usually being first few weeks. Certainly knows how to illicit a reaction out of the usual crowd. We saw the protesters gathering momentum very quickly. Don't imagine the journalists decided to interview those people like they portrayed the Tea Party movement not that the Tea Party movement was any good. Those liberal protesters are too busy engaging in violent demonstrations.

Suryavarman

FA Hayek wrote: »

Trump is not far right, as I mentioned in another post, do you really think a born and bred New Yorker living on the upper East side, is a secret member of the Klan or a Neo-Nazi?

People get upset when big nets are cast calling all left wingers/liberals SJW's or snowflakes, yet here far-right is a catch all term.

Trump is racist, authoritarian, nationalistic and corporatist. He's a proto-fascist just like his political idol Putin.

FA Hayek

MightyMandarin wrote: »

I'd be as worried about these American jihadists as I would the Islamic ones.

Well then you are a fool to think that, as the former have killed tens of thousands all over the world the past couple of years, have formed a terrorist state named ISIS, a state that takes sex slaves and throws homosexuals off buildings, yet people driving a few humvee's around Kentucky is the equivalent of this in the US.

FA Hayek

MightyMandarin wrote: »

How does that prove your point at all? Fascism and Nazism are heavily linked but not the same thing.

It proves that you are making up labels to suit your argument. Logic goes out the window to be replaced with hysteria.

listermint

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Early days usually being first few weeks. Certainly knows how to illicit a reaction out of the usual crowd. We saw the protesters gathering momentum very quickly. Don't imagine the journalists decided to interview those people like they portrayed the Tea Party movement not that the Tea Party movement was any good. Those liberal protesters are too busy engaging in violent demonstrations.

Brian you were really burned by that posters response.tbh I would have gone to ground after that. Fair play for coming back. But that was just a dire response to the points he made.

You skirted them all .

Where is the rebuttal.

FA Hayek

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Hardly early days when he's been in 2 weeks and already he's signed more than a dozen EO's, fired an Attorney General, banned hundreds of thousand's from entering the US based entirely on their religion, questioned the legitimacy of a Judge, ripped up several trade deals, put some terrible people in powerful positions, convinced the speaker of Parliament to declare that he's not welcome in Westminster and even declared that any polls which are unfavourable to him are fake... and that's just him.
.

That is factually wrong, All people from these 7 states,whether Muslim, Christian or whatever are banned for the time being, 90 days I think with the exception of Syria. The ban was based on nationality. At least get your facts straight.

MightyMandarin

FA Hayek wrote: »

That is factually wrong, All people from these 7 states,whether Muslim, Christian or whatever are banned for the time being, 90 days I think with the exception of Syria. The ban was based on nationality. At least get your facts straight.

I thought that initially, except that

Sec.5 (b) of the order clearly states

(b) Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual's country of nationality.

and 5 (e) states

(e) Notwithstanding the temporary suspension imposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may jointly determine to admit individuals to the United States as refugees on a case-by-case basis, in their discretion, but only so long as they determine that the admission of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest -- including when the person is a religious minority in his country of nationality facing religious persecution, when admitting the person would enable the United States to conform its conduct to a preexisting international agreement, or when the person is already in transit and denying admission would cause undue hardship -- and it would not pose a risk to the security or welfare of the United States.

So no, it does not affect Christians as much as Muslims from these countries as there exceptions made for them. It most certainly is a 'muslim' ban.

MightyMandarin

FA Hayek wrote: »

It proves that you are making up labels to suit your argument. Logic goes out the window to be replaced with hysteria.

No. I called him a fascist as he fits the characteristics of a fascist. I didn't call him a Nazi as he does not fit characteristics of a nazi.

No hysteria here.

MightyMandarin

FA Hayek wrote: »

Well then you are a fool to think that, as the former have killed tens of thousands all over the world the past couple of years, have formed a terrorist state named ISIS, a state that takes sex slaves and throws homosexuals off buildings, yet people driving a few humvee's around Kentucky is the equivalent of this in the US.

I am no fool as I don't wake up fearing either of them. I also like to remind myself that terrorists don't always quote Islamic Hadiths and in fact they often are followers of the people you support, funnily enough.

Brian?

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Good to know the liberals in America have already made up their mind about Trump even as it is early days exactly like how Conservatives accused Obama the do nothing President of being a Marxist, Kenyan Socialist long before election even came to conclusion. US Democrats are still looking for votes i see.

Liberals in America made their mind up about Trump well before he was elected. Now every day he does something to reinforce their decision.

What do you expect them to do? Stand back and say nothing? It's a bizarre idea that he should be given time.

Brian?

FA Hayek wrote: »

That is factually wrong, All people from these 7 states,whether Muslim, Christian or whatever are banned for the time being, 90 days I think with the exception of Syria. The ban was based on nationality. At least get your facts straight.

There's a large slice of irony here. The ban is weighted against Muslims in favour of Christians. Thems the facts horse, straight as you like.

El_Duderino 09

KingBrian2 wrote:

Good to know the liberals in America have already made up their mind about Trump even as it is early days exactly like how Conservatives accused Obama the do nothing President of being a Marxist, Kenyan Socialist long before election even came to conclusion. US Democrats are still looking for votes i see.

Am I correct in saying you were one of he trump supporters who was sure he would behave honourably once he took office. Would you say that has happend?

ancapailldorcha

Stop the name calling please. Any more will warrant a sanction.

Carlos Orange

Brian? wrote: »

There's a large slice of irony here. The ban is weighted against Muslims in favour of Christians. Thems the facts horse, straight as you like.

It is in favour of persecuted minority religious groups. Some of them are christian , some of them are not.

Brian?

psinno wrote: »

It is in favour of persecuted minority religious groups. Some of them are christian , some of them are not.

The ban is weighted against Muslims. Let's agree on that so.

Carlos Orange

Brian? wrote: »

The ban is weighted against Muslims. Let's agree on that so.

I haven't paid much attention to what is happening in Sudan these days but most of the countries on the list seem like failed states with weak or non existent central governments. Except Iran , I think Americans are still upset about the hostage crisis there in the 70s. So more weighted against people from failing states.

What failing/failed states do you think are missing?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

MightyMandarin

psinno wrote: »

I haven't paid much attention to what is happening in Sudan these days but most of the countries on the list seem like failed states with weak or non existent central governments. Except Iran , I think Americans are still upset about the hostage crisis there in the 70s. So more weighted against people from failing states.

What failing/failed states do you think are missing?

Stop deflecting to countries which aren't included, although I could talk about how Saudi Arabia isn't included despite all the terrorists and money originating from there.

This order is specifically designed to discriminate muslims from the countries included. That is religious discrimination plain and simple.

Carlos Orange

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Obama was against gay marriage too until he wasn't. He also wanted to renegotiate NAFTA. According to him anyway.

demfad

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

We say Trump is a fascist/autocrat/racist/kleptocrat based on his campaign rhetoric, his actual policies and his autocratic and kleptocratic actions as president.
If you can point out where Clinton's campaign promises or previous actions in Government points towards fascism then please do.
Your hearsay about unknown reports about groups who might have made mild claims amount to nothing. Please show integrity of argument.

MightyMandarin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

"You're completely right, but instead of admitting that, I'm just gonna bring up Hillary for the bazillionth time to throw some smoke in the air so we can end up discussing the candidate who lost instead of the person who's clearly far more relevant". That's basically what you're saying.

And yet one of these is termed a "liberal" and the other is termed a "proto-fascist," largely because of partisan politics. This shows that these kinds of labels are often emotive and not based on a thorough investigation of fact.

I didn't see him term Hillary a liberal and yes that term is incorrect, as she's been proven to swing her policies whichever way the wind blows. But again, Hillary is not relevant, and neither is Mitt Romney (who's a republican who I could bring up to compare to her). The labels given to Trump however are true imo, and I don't any attempt her to disprove this.

I don't personally see how any proponent of big-government solutions can genuinely be called "liberal." Even if a politician genuinely believes that she is using the power of the state for good, she is still relying on an authoritarian and coercive structure to accomplish her allegedly noble goals, which is de facto illiberal.

Oh...Hillary...again. Yeah, what you're saying is correct, but it's just another attempt to distract and divert from the point. Care to disprove the 'proto fascist' label been given to Trump? Or do you just want to make it a Hillary thread?

Hank Scorpio

demfad wrote: »

We say Trump is a fascist/autocrat/racist/kleptocrat based on his campaign rhetoric, his actual policies and his autocratic and kleptocratic actions as president.
If you can point out where Clinton's campaign promises or previous actions in Government points towards fascism then please do.
Your hearsay about unknown reports about groups who might have made mild claims amount to nothing. Please show integrity of argument.

Obama and Bill Clinton said the exact same things about deporting illegals and removing benefits. They also specifically talked about increasing border security.

Would you describe going into foreign nations and executing their leaders a trait of fascism out of interest?

MightyMandarin

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Obama and Bill Clinton said the exact same things about deporting illegals and removing benefits. They also specifically talked about increasing border security.

16years of office between them and yet not a muslim ban or a wall with Mexico between them. Shouldn't we judge politicians on what they do, not just what they say?

Hank Scorpio

MightyMandarin wrote: »

16years of office between them and yet not a muslim ban or a wall with Mexico between them. Shouldn't we judge politicians on what they do, not just what they say?

Exactly, they both failed on their illegal immigration and border security promises.

donal na gealla

Well...that escalated pretty quickly. I live in North Cork. Can't move here for scary liberals. * Sarcasm alert :-)

MightyMandarin

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Exactly, they both failed on their illegal immigration and border security promises.

Well what exactly counts as success in your opinion? Zero illegal immigrants in the country? Is there a country on the planet that has zero illegal immigrants?

Hank Scorpio

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Well what exactly counts as success in your opinion? Zero illegal immigrants in the country? Is there a country on the planet that has zero illegal immigrants?

Whatever success is, it isn't this.

MightyMandarin

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Whatever success is, it isn't this.

... I figured I'd get an absolute nonsense answer. I shouldn't have expected anything more from you.

Hank Scorpio

MightyMandarin wrote: »

... I figured I'd get an absolute nonsense answer. I shouldn't have expected anything more from you.

My answer is perfectly reasonable. They promised to cut funding and stop/deport illegals and the Country went in the opposite direction. You won't stop asking questions or drag things off topic to point score, not going to be dragged down by that anymore. Ta Ta.

Brian?

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Why are you bringing up Hillary? I don't think anyone is here is claiming she was a liberal. She was just less right wing than Trump on social and immigration issues.

Trump is an authoritarian on social and immigration issues and an economic protectionist. As a libertarian I'm surprised you have any common ground with him. Or maybe you don't?

Calling a Trump a fascist may be hyperbole, but his right hand man is actually a fascist IMO. Steve Bannon is a "white nationalist" and a horrible human being. By surrounding himself with people like this Trump is inviting the fascist label IMO.

Brian?

psinno wrote: »

I haven't paid much attention to what is happening in Sudan these days but most of the countries on the list seem like failed states with weak or non existent central governments. Except Iran , I think Americans are still upset about the hostage crisis there in the 70s. So more weighted against people from failing states.

What failing/failed states do you think are missing?

I don't think any are missing. I don't think the ban should exist. What's your point?

demfad

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Obama and Bill Clinton said the exact same things about deporting illegals and removing benefits. They also specifically talked about increasing border security.

I'm not interested in what you said they said. I am interested in what they DID.

Did they promise and bring in a Muslim ban?
Did they take away protections for domestic violence?
Did they withdraw white supremacist terror groups as official terorist organisations only looking now at Islamist groups?
Did they put in a white supremacist as most powerful advisor to the president?
Did they put in an AG who lost previous attempts at federal posts due to racist comments?

Would you describe going into foreign nations and executing their leaders a trait of fascism out of interest?

This type of comment is the reason why Politics on boards should raise standards on posting and substantiation. Can you give solid substantiation that an American president executed a foreign leader?

Hank Scorpio

demfad wrote: »

I'm not interested in what you said they said. I am interested in what they DID.

They failed in what they promised to do with regards illegal immigration/federal funding/border security and Trump might succeed, and you're using that to attack Trump. That is bad really screwed up logic.

You also asked for an example of supposed Fascism from a previous administration and I pointed out Obama/Bill Clinton ( probably others don't have time to check ) spouted the exact same things Trump said about illegal immigration solutions.

I didn't say I agreed with everything Trump has done, but as the usual when I answer a question I get met with another 5.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

marienbad

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Is that really true though Permabear ? every losing party since the year dot has complained about the other side misusing power . And then they get on with governing as best they can , or at least they used to .

But have we ever seen the like of the total opposition for its own sake and at every level during Obama's presidency ?

Hank Scorpio

demfad wrote: »

I'm not interested in what you said they said. I am interested in what they DID.

1-Did they promise and bring in a Muslim ban?
2-Did they take away protections for domestic violence?
3-Did they withdraw white supremacist terror groups as official terorist organisations only looking now at Islamist groups?
4-Did they put in a white supremacist as most powerful advisor to the president?
5-Did they put in an AG who lost previous attempts at federal posts due to racist comments?

I'll answer your questions because some of the things mentioned I haven't see before and I'm interested in seeing proof.

1. It's not a Muslim ban because the vast majority of Muslims won't be effected and it's temporary. I don't necessarily agree with the Countries chosen. Polls show in Europe 55% of people are in favor of an outright Muslim ban, and a recent Politico poll shows 55% of people in the US agree with his EO.

2- Link? I don't see a thing about this anywhere.

3- http://www.snopes.com/trump-terror-watch-program/ According to this you're wrong

4 - Do you have any examples of Bannon of being a White supremacist besides being involved with Breitbart? I think he's hard right for sure, but I've never seen any actual evidence of White supremacy.

5 - What racist comments did Sessions make? I know he was a major player in taking down the Klan.

Can you give solid substantiation that an American president executed a foreign leader?

WMD, overthrowing Saddam

Permabear

This post has been deleted.