CNN’s Angela Rye: Statues of Washington, Jefferson and Lee ‘All Need to Come Down’

[Krugminator2]

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnns-angela-rye-statues-of-washington-jefferson-and-lee-all-need-to-come-down/
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/kristine-marsh/2017/08/17/cnns-rye-calls-washington-jefferson-monuments-come-down


“The heart of the problem is the way many of us were taught American history. American history is not all glorious. I love John to death, I couldn’t disagree more about George Washington. George Washington was a slave owner. We need to call slave owners out for what they are. Whether we think they were protecting American freedom or not. He wasn’t protecting my freedom. I wasn’t someone – my ancestors weren’t deemed human beings to him. To me, I don’t care if it’s a George Washington statue or a Thomas Jefferson statue or a Robert E. Lee statue, they all need to come down…I’m calling out white supremacy for what it is. And sometimes, what it is, John, are blind spots. Sometimes what it is, is not acknowledging this country was built upon a very violent past that resulted in the death and the raping and the killing of my ancestors. I’m not going to allow us to say it’s okay for Robert E. Lee but not a George Washington. We need to call it what it is.”

[jllundqu]

My god... the great purge is really here.

[acptulsa]

Cue the media saying anyone who uses cash is racist in 3... 2... 1...

[enhanced_deficit]

Is she looking for a job in Trump administration?

She just regurgitated his talking point from press conf two days ago.

[Raginfridus]

My god... the great purge is really here.Nobody's teaching America is glorious in government schools, so she's full of shit from take off. I marvel how after a century and a half of emancipation, black ringleaders today want a return to protected class, free housing, and universal healthcare.


Freedom made colored folks to lazy to work fo' a livin'. They was a heep better off in slavery days. People gettin' worse all de time. Some dese days they's gon-a have to answer fo' their sins tho'. I's tellin 'em now but don't do no good. As fo' me I allus tries to live right; does what de Bible say do an' I's gon-a get rewarded fo it sho. I belongs to de Baptist church. Am de oldest member in our church.

Since I come to Mississippi I's been right here at dis place fifty-one years de 12th day November, 1937. I's allus farmed fo' a livin' an' has also bottomed chairs, made baskets an' built dirt chimneys. They ain't many folks my age what'll get far 'nuff off de ground to build a chimney. De Lord takes care o' me tho'. Heep o' folks I's worked fo' ain't never paid me but dats up to dem an' de Lord. They de one what'll have to give account fo dat. Christ say when ever we do de thin' right no evil shall rest upon you. - freed-man Henry Murray, 1937


Character and ethic, not nice feelings, are what people need.

[acptulsa]

Is she looking for a job in Trump administration?

She just regurgitated his talking point from press conf two days ago.

Not really.

What Trump did was predict that these people are going to double down and become even more ridiculous. And what she's doing is deciding proving him right by becoming even more ridiculous is one hell of a good idea.

[Anti Federalist]

My god... the great purge is really here.

Sure is, and it's only getting started.

Now, is anybody gonna do anything about it, or just grovel and beg and apologize?

[goldenequity]

Sure is, and it's only getting started.



New Hampshire GOP Headquarters Vandalized (http://freebeacon.com/politics/new-hampshire-gop-headquarters-vandalized-word-nazis/)

http://s1.freebeacon.com/up/2017/08/nazis-1.png

========

New Orleans’ Joan Of Arc Statue Vandalized With ‘Take It Down’ (https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/08/17/new-orleans-joan-arc-statue-vandalized-take/amp/)

https://static.pjmedia.com/trending/user-content/51/files/2017/08/3631071793_b424e30d4b_o.sized-770x415xc.jpg

======

Hit List: CNN Publishes Map of Confederate Monuments in U.S. (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/08/17/hit-list-cnn-publishes-map-confederate-monuments-u-s/)


CNN posted a map on August 17 showing the location of approximately 1,500 Confederate monuments
and/or official symbols in the U.S.

New Yorker Cover Next Week Depicts Trump As A Klansman… (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/new-yorker-depicts-trump-setting-sail-with-the-kkk/article/2631891)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.washingtonexaminer.biz/web-producers/kkkboat.png

[nikcers]

Sure is, and it's only getting started.

Now, is anybody gonna do anything about it, or just grovel and beg and apologize?

Depends what you want done with it? They might purpose a brand new currency for example, to get rid of all of the racist currency.

[Krugminator2]

The press is disgusting. And Republicans as a whole don't fight back. So many Republicans just want to be friends with these people.

898279650140585984

[phill4paul]

Cue the media saying anyone who uses cash is racist in 3... 2... 1...

Had a friend on FB that stated FRN's were racist and that anyone that had them should send them to him for proper disposal. :p

[Anti Federalist]

The press is disgusting. And Republicans as a whole don't fight back. So many Republicans just want to be friends with these people.

898279650140585984

Quiet you, and get in line...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-phbpl4OOr88/UHWOmXc7xAI/AAAAAAAAAG8/1mGCSchmKlc/s1600/SAM_6410.jpg

[phill4paul]

Depends what you want done with it? They might purpose a brand new currency for example, to get rid of all of the racist currency.

Not racist. Ebony and Ivory in perfect harmony....

http://www.barcode.graphics/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/SSCC18.bmp


tattoo'd on the forehead.

[Anti Federalist]

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-17-at-6.23.44-PM.png

[Anti Federalist]

FDR, you're next, LOL

h/t heavenlyboy34

https://scontent.fphx1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p180x540/20799835_1402198079901473_5920971556060286817_n.jp g?oh=6472755e3da07d3ecb808da72efe13bf&oe=59F0C77E

[r3volution 3.0]

The basic problem with this whole thing is that everyone's seeing it as they want to see it. For instance, libertarians think the NAZIs respect Lee or Jefferson for the same reasons we do; they don't. Take a poll; I'll bet the farm that these same people love FDR, or T. Roosevelt, or other, equally repugnant statists; it's not about liberty for them, it really is about race. They actually are what the MSM accuses them of being. That was, after all, the whole impetus for the modern alt-right: "you call us racists, fine we'lll be racists." And they are.

So...why do we (libertarians) care (about them)?

http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.washingtonexaminer.biz/web-producers/kkkboat.png

Very apt, except I might have made Trump a bellows, with the MIC, Wall Street, the DNC, etc, working him.

[nikcers]

The basic problem with this whole thing is that everyone's seeing it as they want to see it. For instance, libertarians think the NAZIs respect Lee or Jefferson for the same reasons we do; they don't. Take a poll; I'll bet the farm that these same people love FDR, or T. Roosevelt, or other, equally repugnant statists; it's not about liberty for them, it really is about race. They actually are what the MSM accuses them of being. That was, after all, the whole impetus for the modern alt-right: "you call us racists, fine we'lll be racists." And they are.

So...why do we (libertarians) care (about them)?

Racism, like any form of ignorance is a disease that can effect anybody. We should not let the left and right win with the us and them narratives. We should defend the first amendment the way we defend the second amendment, you can take it from my cold dead hands.

[Krugminator2]

The basic problem with this whole thing is that everyone's seeing it as they want to see it. For instance, libertarians think the NAZIs respect Lee or Jefferson for the same reasons we do; they don't. So...why do we (libertarians) care (about them)?



I don't like Robert E. Lee. I am indifferent about whether he has a statue up. He means nothing to me. That isn't the issue. The issue is this is nothing burger. The press didn't give this kind of coverage to Obama who didn't condemn Black Lives Matter and Occupy Wall Street. 10 police officers have been shot by Black Lives Matter goons. Only 1 person was killed by a white supremacist. Ferguson, Milwaukee, and Charlotte had extensive damage done by Black Lives Matter rioters, who rioted over nothing. All three of those shootings were legitimate situations for officers to use lethal force. The press gave the assassination attempt on Steve Scalise and Republican Congressmen by a Bernie goon only a few days of extensive coverage and it was nowhere near to the extent of this. And there was almost no talk of the violent left, which is multiples larger than the violent right.

The left is made up of violent animals. These white supremacists are a much smaller fraction of the right. I hear endlessly about Colin Kaepernick. The guy wore a shirt praising Fidel Castro. The press acts like you are racist if you don't support a Communist sympathizer. A white guy in a Hitler shirt would rightly never play again and no one would question in it.

[UWDude]

So...why do we (libertarians) care (about them)?

All I care about is the truth. These statues mean very little to me. Now that the Russian lies have fizzled, deep state is playing their next card, the racist one. I have predicted for over 10 years now that race war will be the undoing of the United States. White people for too long didn't think race was the United State's biggest problem. Black people have always thought it was the biggest problem. So instead of dialogue, empty platitudes were offered.

It is too hard for white people not to see that defending confederate statues is white arrogance. It's just a statue, to a bunch of guys thought fought and died to keep black people as slaves. They were idiots then, they are idiots now. Abolitionists were the righteous, and the righteous were with the union. Every confederate statue should be replaced with statues of John Brown, Harriet Tubman, and all the other abolitionist unknown union soldiers who died for the cause of freeing the slaves. (and yes, I mean the abolitionists who joined the union army, for the sake of abolition), as well as jayhawks and others. They were the ones who truly risked their lives for the righteous cause, which was ending slavery. Every one of these people, whose lives were ended by the musket ball or cannon of a confederate are an injustice.

I have no pity for any confederate soldier. At best they should have stayed out of the war.
And then, after the Union was done forcing (muh states rights!) the south to treat black people like people, and lo and behold, some great black politicians came from the south, (and the race issue could have been solved then, in the 1870's) when it was under Union rule... ....once the Union gave the southern states their rights back, what did they do? Put down the black man... ...again.

But Americans are still too blind. They will defend these statues and that confederate flag, like they don't know what it represents to the "winners", who became the losers after the civil war losers got their "states rights" back.

So the agitation for divide and conquer has found its perfect home, in the destruction of confederate statues.
This is how the deep state did in Ukraine as well. They had their neo-nazis go after Ukrainian soviet statues, and tear them down. This made the establishment/russian sympathizers/eastern ukrainians defend soviet statues, and therefore forced them to defend communism, which nobody in Ukraine really wanted to do, since Ukraine had a bad time with communism. Now the pro-russians are russian agents, and communists opposed to free trade with Europe... viola, nationalist Euro-maidan.

Same tactic being used here, oldest tactic in the book. Divide and conquer. By forcing white people and a smattering of others to defend confederate statues, they are forcing them to defend white racism. It is a losing proposition.

However....

I used to marvel at the genius of Putin. I used to wish the US had a leader as politically shrewd as he is.

Now we have Donald J. Trump. He is very different from Putin. Putin is methodical and political, trained in KGB political magic. Trump is evolved in the cauldron of New York back-knifing. By now, how Trump fights is pure instinct. If they ever even corner him, they will find him ten times more dangerous than he is now. I don't think they ever will corner him though. He is that good... ...and he has an army of fervent volunteers behind him.

And Trump does one thing by nature, and that is win. He knows the game being played right now. He will counter, and it will be a slow poison drip that the left will not even know they are infected with until it is too late. The beauty of this poison, is while the left focuses on the new found strength in its voice, the poison is in their knees. They will feel more and more bold in their voice, until their knees suddenly give, and they realize: they can't cash the checks their mouths were writing. They will be on the ground begging for their literal lives, and nobody likes beggars.

We have their playbook. And in usual deep state arrogance, they think they don't need to be sneaky, because they have the best technology. Time and time again, they have ignored reality. This will be the last time.



http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.washingtonexaminer.biz/web-producers/kkkboat.png

Very apt,

Says you. *yawn*


except I might have made Trump a bellows, with the MIC, Wall Street, the DNC, etc, working him.

Yes, mmm hmmm. I see, and maybe a better use of negative space. And I would have chosen fuscia or perriwinkle. Also, I think it would be best to have trumps head in the lower right qudrant blowing left, since Americans see left as backwards. Perhaps have a poem from Mayou Angelo beneath. Make the waters stormier too. And mayeb some clouds in the sky. Instead of chalk, they should.....

...seriously, nobody cares what you think.

[UWDude]

Robert E Lee Elementary in Baton Rouge is looking for a name change. They asked the kids, here are the nominees:
http://www.fox7austin.com/news/local-news/129799454-story


Donald J. Trump Elementary: 45 nominations
Robert E. Lee Elementary: 34 nominations
Russell Lee Elementary: 32 nominations
Harper Lee Elementary: 30 nominations
Elisabet Ney Elementary: 15 nominations


some runner ups:

Idiocaracy Elementary (Yes Idiocracy is misspelled. Not sure if that is intentional.)
John Cena Elementary School
Drew Brees Elementary
Bruce Lee Elementary
Adolf Hitler School for Friendship and Tolerance (With 8 nominations.)
Schoolie Mcschoolface

[LibertyEagle]

So...why do we (libertarians) care (about them)?



Hey rev. Those advocating for world government, such as yourself, do not fit in the libertarian slot.

5833

[Mordan]

All I care about is the truth. These statues mean very little to me. Now that the Russian lies have fizzled, deep state is playing their next card, the racist one. I have predicted for over 10 years now that race war will be the undoing of the United States. White people for too long didn't think race was the United State's biggest problem. Black people have always thought it was the biggest problem. So instead of dialogue, empty platitudes were offered.

It is too hard for white people not to see that defending confederate statues is white arrogance. It's just a statue, to a bunch of guys thought fought and died to keep black people as slaves. They were idiots then, they are idiots now. Abolitionists were the righteous, and the righteous were with the union. Every confederate statue should be replaced with statues of John Brown, Harriet Tubman, and all the other abolitionist unknown union soldiers who died for the cause of freeing the slaves. (and yes, I mean the abolitionists who joined the union army, for the sake of abolition), as well as jayhawks and others. They were the ones who truly risked their lives for the righteous cause, which was ending slavery. Every one of these people, whose lives were ended by the musket ball or cannon of a confederate are an injustice.

I have no pity for any confederate soldier. At best they should have stayed out of the war.
And then, after the Union was done forcing (muh states rights!) the south to treat black people like people, and lo and behold, some great black politicians came from the south, (and the race issue could have been solved then, in the 1870's) when it was under Union rule... ....once the Union gave the southern states their rights back, what did they do? Put down the black man... ...again.

But Americans are still too blind. They will defend these statues and that confederate flag, like they don't know what it represents to the "winners", who became the losers after the civil war losers got their "states rights" back.

So the agitation for divide and conquer has found its perfect home, in the destruction of confederate statues.
This is how the deep state did in Ukraine as well. They had their neo-nazis go after Ukrainian soviet statues, and tear them down. This made the establishment/russian sympathizers/eastern ukrainians defend soviet statues, and therefore forced them to defend communism, which nobody in Ukraine really wanted to do, since Ukraine had a bad time with communism. Now the pro-russians are russian agents, and communists opposed to free trade with Europe... viola, nationalist Euro-maidan.

Same tactic being used here, oldest tactic in the book. Divide and conquer. By forcing white people and a smattering of others to defend confederate statues, they are forcing them to defend white racism. It is a losing proposition.

However....

I used to marvel at the genius of Putin. I used to wish the US had a leader as politically shrewd as he is.

Now we have Donald J. Trump. He is very different from Putin. Putin is methodical and political, trained in KGB political magic. Trump is evolved in the cauldron of New York back-knifing. By now, how Trump fights is pure instinct. If they ever even corner him, they will find him ten times more dangerous than he is now. I don't think they ever will corner him though. He is that good... ...and he has an army of fervent volunteers behind him.

And Trump does one thing by nature, and that is win. He knows the game being played right now. He will counter, and it will be a slow poison drip that the left will not even know they are infected with until it is too late. The beauty of this poison, is while the left focuses on the new found strength in its voice, the poison is in their knees. They will feel more and more bold in their voice, until their knees suddenly give, and they realize: they can't cash the checks their mouths were writing. They will be on the ground begging for their literal lives, and nobody likes beggars.

We have their playbook. And in usual deep state arrogance, they think they don't need to be sneaky, because they have the best technology. Time and time again, they have ignored reality. This will be the last time.




Says you. *yawn*



Yes, mmm hmmm. I see, and maybe a better use of negative space. And I would have chosen fuscia or perriwinkle. Also, I think it would be best to have trumps head in the lower right qudrant blowing left, since Americans see left as backwards. Perhaps have a poem from Mayou Angelo beneath. Make the waters stormier too. And mayeb some clouds in the sky. Instead of chalk, they should.....

...seriously, nobody cares what you think.

always enjoy reading you. +1

[Madison320]

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnns-angela-rye-statues-of-washington-jefferson-and-lee-all-need-to-come-down/
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/kristine-marsh/2017/08/17/cnns-rye-calls-washington-jefferson-monuments-come-down

I'll make Angela Rye a deal. We take down her symbols of historical slavery but at the same type we eliminate forms of actual current slavery. For example the income tax and discrimination laws.

[Madison320]

Very apt, except I might have made Trump a bellows, with the MIC, Wall Street, the DNC, etc, working him.

No it's not. I don't like Trump but he doesn't appear to be a racist.

[r3volution 3.0]

I don't like Robert E. Lee. I am indifferent about whether he has a statue up. He means nothing to me. That isn't the issue. The issue is this is nothing burger. The press didn't give this kind of coverage to Obama who didn't condemn Black Lives Matter and Occupy Wall Street. 10 police officers have been shot by Black Lives Matter goons. Only 1 person was killed by a white supremacist. Ferguson, Milwaukee, and Charlotte had extensive damage done by Black Lives Matter rioters, who rioted over nothing. All three of those shootings were legitimate situations for officers to use lethal force. The press gave the assassination attempt on Steve Scalise and Republican Congressmen by a Bernie goon only a few days of extensive coverage and it was nowhere near to the extent of this. And there was almost no talk of the violent left, which is multiples larger than the violent right.

The left is made up of violent animals. These white supremacists are a much smaller fraction of the right. I hear endlessly about Colin Kaepernick. The guy wore a shirt praising Fidel Castro. The press acts like you are racist if you don't support a Communist sympathizer. A white guy in a Hitler shirt would rightly never play again and no one would question in it.

Yes, the BLM types are monstrous.

My point was that their twins opponents in the brown shirts are equally so, and any libertarian sympathy for them is badly misplaced.


Racism, like any form of ignorance is a disease that can effect anybody. We should not let the left and right win with the us and them narratives. We should defend the first amendment the way we defend the second amendment, you can take it from my cold dead hands.

Neither of the socialist gangs involved in this escalating street fight give a damn about free speech.

...and there is no reason for any libertarian to be defending/cheering/giving a damn about either of them.


No it's not. I don't like Trump but he doesn't appear to be a racist.

The cartoon doesn't show Trump being a racist, it shows him fueling racist politics, and is therefore most apt.


Hey rev. Those advocating for world government, such as yourself, do not fit in the libertarian slot.

5833


But, for the liberal, the world does not end at the borders of the state. In his eyes, whatever significance national boundaries have is only incidental and subordinate. His political thinking encompasses the whole of mankind. The starting-point of his entire political philosophy is the conviction that the division of labor is international and not merely national. He realizes from the very first that it is not sufficient to establish peace with in each country, that it is much more important that all nations live at peace with one another. The liberal therefore demands that the political organization of society be extended until it reaches its culmination in a world state that unites all nations on an equal basis. For this reason he sees the law of each nation as subordinate to international law, and that is why he demands supranational tribunals and administrative authorities to assure peace among nations in the same way that the judicial and executive organs of each country are charged with the maintenance of peace within its own territory

[Anti Federalist]

The cartoon doesn't show Trump being a racist, it shows him fueling racist politics, and is therefore most apt.

Just out of curiosity, what do you think he should do?

Apologize harder?

Have whoever that fellow was that was driving the Challenger drug out and dragged through the streets until dead, like they do in Haiti?

Or do like they do in modern day Germany and have him order the FBI to round up everybody that ever logged onto , say, StormFront?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass here, I'm asking, seriously.

And do you honestly think it would make the slightest difference?

[r3volution 3.0]

Just out of curiosity, what do you think he should do?

Renounce all of his nationalistic policies and statements, acknowledge that he is an ignoramus and charlatan, and resign.

[Anti Federalist]

Renounce all of his nationalistic policies and statements, acknowledge that he is an ignoramus and charlatan, and resign.

Gotcha.

[specsaregood]

I predict Trump or maybe governors putting up security around the monuments to statism in the not so distant future.

[misterx]

Renounce all of his nationalistic policies and statements, acknowledge that he is an ignoramus and charlatan, and resign.

So it's not the substance of what he's done that bothers you, it's the style.:rolleyes:

[r3volution 3.0]

So it's not the substance of what he's done that bothers you, it's the style.:rolleyes:

Policywise, Trump hasn't really done anything since taking office (i.e. he's just maintained the status quo).

PR-wise, he's done a lot: e.g., apropos to this thread, promoted and normalized nationalism.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

The new American history: Thomas Jefferson and George Washington sailed to the Americas where they killed all the Chinese and enslaved the Blacks, then put Jews into ovens.

[Madison320]

The cartoon doesn't show Trump being a racist, it shows him fueling racist politics, and is therefore most apt.



I can barely remember any instances of Trump talking about race. Especially compared to his predecessor, it's not even close.

[r3volution 3.0]

I can barely remember any instances of Trump talking about race. Especially compared to his predecessor, it's not even close.

His initial rise in the polls in the summer of 2015 was a result of him calling Mexicans rapists. The whole campaign from that moment on was based on themes of that kind: re Mexicans, Arabs, even Chinese to some extent (tl;dr all your problems are the result of foreigners). I don't know whether Trump is a racist (I doubt he really cares one way or another, as with other issues), but he certainly panders to them: and that's why the alt-righters/neo-NAZIs have gained so much ground in the last year or so.

[Dark_Horse_Rider]

All I care about is the truth. These statues mean very little to me. Now that the Russian lies have fizzled, deep state is playing their next card, the racist one. I have predicted for over 10 years now that race war will be the undoing of the United States. White people for too long didn't think race was the United State's biggest problem. Black people have always thought it was the biggest problem. So instead of dialogue, empty platitudes were offered.

It is too hard for white people not to see that defending confederate statues is white arrogance. It's just a statue, to a bunch of guys thought fought and died to keep black people as slaves. They were idiots then, they are idiots now. Abolitionists were the righteous, and the righteous were with the union. Every confederate statue should be replaced with statues of John Brown, Harriet Tubman, and all the other abolitionist unknown union soldiers who died for the cause of freeing the slaves. (and yes, I mean the abolitionists who joined the union army, for the sake of abolition), as well as jayhawks and others. They were the ones who truly risked their lives for the righteous cause, which was ending slavery. Every one of these people, whose lives were ended by the musket ball or cannon of a confederate are an injustice.

I have no pity for any confederate soldier. At best they should have stayed out of the war.
And then, after the Union was done forcing (muh states rights!) the south to treat black people like people, and lo and behold, some great black politicians came from the south, (and the race issue could have been solved then, in the 1870's) when it was under Union rule... ....once the Union gave the southern states their rights back, what did they do? Put down the black man... ...again.

But Americans are still too blind. They will defend these statues and that confederate flag, like they don't know what it represents to the "winners", who became the losers after the civil war losers got their "states rights" back.

So the agitation for divide and conquer has found its perfect home, in the destruction of confederate statues.
This is how the deep state did in Ukraine as well. They had their neo-nazis go after Ukrainian soviet statues, and tear them down. This made the establishment/russian sympathizers/eastern ukrainians defend soviet statues, and therefore forced them to defend communism, which nobody in Ukraine really wanted to do, since Ukraine had a bad time with communism. Now the pro-russians are russian agents, and communists opposed to free trade with Europe... viola, nationalist Euro-maidan.

Same tactic being used here, oldest tactic in the book. Divide and conquer. By forcing white people and a smattering of others to defend confederate statues, they are forcing them to defend white racism. It is a losing proposition.

However....

I used to marvel at the genius of Putin. I used to wish the US had a leader as politically shrewd as he is.

Now we have Donald J. Trump. He is very different from Putin. Putin is methodical and political, trained in KGB political magic. Trump is evolved in the cauldron of New York back-knifing. By now, how Trump fights is pure instinct. If they ever even corner him, they will find him ten times more dangerous than he is now. I don't think they ever will corner him though. He is that good... ...and he has an army of fervent volunteers behind him.

And Trump does one thing by nature, and that is win. He knows the game being played right now. He will counter, and it will be a slow poison drip that the left will not even know they are infected with until it is too late. The beauty of this poison, is while the left focuses on the new found strength in its voice, the poison is in their knees. They will feel more and more bold in their voice, until their knees suddenly give, and they realize: they can't cash the checks their mouths were writing. They will be on the ground begging for their literal lives, and nobody likes beggars.

We have their playbook. And in usual deep state arrogance, they think they don't need to be sneaky, because they have the best technology. Time and time again, they have ignored reality. This will be the last time.




Says you. *yawn*



Yes, mmm hmmm. I see, and maybe a better use of negative space. And I would have chosen fuscia or perriwinkle. Also, I think it would be best to have trumps head in the lower right qudrant blowing left, since Americans see left as backwards. Perhaps have a poem from Mayou Angelo beneath. Make the waters stormier too. And mayeb some clouds in the sky. Instead of chalk, they should.....

...seriously, nobody cares what you think.

"Abolitionists were the righteous, and the righteous were with the union." - From your post

So by this reasoning, where does Wounded Knee and the numerous atrocities that followed ( as well as theft of land and broken promises ) fit under this idea ?

Also, pretty sure Lysander Spooner was not with the union . . .

sorry, but it seems a far too simple and dangerous assessment, IMO

[Jamesiv1]

Robert E Lee Elementary in Baton Rouge is looking for a name change. They asked the kids, here are the nominees:
http://www.fox7austin.com/news/local-news/129799454-story


Donald J. Trump Elementary: 45 nominations
Robert E. Lee Elementary: 34 nominations
Russell Lee Elementary: 32 nominations
Harper Lee Elementary: 30 nominations
Elisabet Ney Elementary: 15 nominations


some runner ups:

Idiocaracy Elementary (Yes Idiocracy is misspelled. Not sure if that is intentional.)
John Cena Elementary School
Drew Brees Elementary
Bruce Lee Elementary
Adolf Hitler School for Friendship and Tolerance (With 8 nominations.)
Schoolie Mcschoolface
I like Schoolie McSchoolface lol

[dannno]

His initial rise in the polls in the summer of 2015 was a result of him calling Mexicans rapists.

Fake news.

He said that Mexico was sending their criminals and their rapists, and the Mexican government was actively sending ex-cons to the US at the time. That is what he was referencing. There were articles about it that had recently come out about it. So Donald Trump was correct, not racist.

The fact that you cannot pick out the most obvious and basic fake news tells me that you aren't a good person to look to for advice about current political events.

[acptulsa]

So in your world, Trump didn't win the first few primaries he won by promising to put thirty million back to work by deporting three million illegal aliens?

Oh, yeah, and by building a trillion dollar wall for free which isn't getting built and which Mexico can't afford anyway.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Robert E Lee Elementary in Baton Rouge is looking for a name change. They asked the kids, here are the nominees:


+++

some runner ups:

Idiocaracy Elementary (Yes Idiocracy is misspelled. Not sure if that is intentional.)
John Cena Elementary School
Drew Brees Elementary
Bruce Lee Elementary
Adolf Hitler School for Friendship and Tolerance (With 8 nominations.)
Schoolie Mcschoolface




The majic is back in Ba-tahn Rooj! Those crazy kids!!




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVK3y4MmVa4

[r3volution 3.0]

@Trumpcuck @dannno (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=10908)


They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people

That means most immigrants are rapists (contra "some" who are "good people).

Does Trump actually believe that? Who knows (he is very thick, of course...).

Did he say it to win the nationalists to his side? Probably (if there was any strategy behind the statement, this would have been it).

Did it have that effect? Definitely (he led the polls a month later, after doubling down on this theme)

[Krugminator2]

Policywise, Trump hasn't really done anything since taking office (i.e. he's just maintained the status quo).

PR-wise, he's done a lot: e.g., apropos to this thread, promoted and normalized nationalism.

Seems like credit should be given when it is due.

http://reason.com/archives/2017/05/16/the-deregulator
http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2017/06/07/trump-regulation-slowdown-000446
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/339140-trump-follows-through-on-deregulation-but-at-what-cost
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/27/trump-binges-deregulation-axes-4-obama-era-rules/
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/07/business/trump-deregulation-teams-transportation-department.html

http://static.politico.com/d0/0b/2bb593b44bbab74cd3c32cdb8235/major-regsjpg.jpg

"Trump Administration, Reversing Trend, Sheds 11,000 Federal Employees in Six Months"


"Not since 2013 have federal agencies slashed jobs on such a large scale. That was when sequestration, triggered by the 2011 Budget Control Act, forced agencies to take drastic measures to cut costs. Agencies shed nearly 57,000 jobs that year, the largest drop off in any single year since 1997. "
http://www.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2017/08/trump-administration-reversing-trend-sheds-11000-feds-six-months/140025/
https://infogram.com/federal-jobs-added-each-year-in-thousands-1g4qpzl4vv0521y

[r3volution 3.0]

http://static.politico.com/d0/0b/2bb593b44bbab74cd3c32cdb8235/major-regsjpg.jpg

Trivial

Let me know when Trump's presidency is visible on either of these charts:

https://regulatorystudies.columbian.gwu.edu/sites/regulatorystudies.columbian.gwu.edu/files/downloads/CFR_pages.JPG

http://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/~/media/infographics/2016/05/bg3127/bg-red-tape-rising-2016-chart-2-825.jpg

[dannno]

@Trumpcuck @dannno (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=10908)



That means most immigrants are rapists (contra "some" who are "good people).

Does Trump actually believe that? Who knows (he is very thick, of course...).

Did he say it to win the nationalists to his side? Probably (if there was any strategy behind the statement, this would have been it).

Did it have that effect? Definitely (he led the polls a month later, after doubling down on this theme)

Why did you mispell what he said? Oh ya.. because YOU ARE FAKE NEWS


He said they are sending their rapists.. he did not say they're rapists... and even if he did mean they are rapists, he was referring to the criminals the Mexican government was sending.

Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you?

[Madison320]

His initial rise in the polls in the summer of 2015 was a result of him calling Mexicans rapists.

Wow. Ok.

[dannno]

Wow. Ok.

Ya I'm really sick of blatent MSM propaganda being propagated on this forum..

In the other thread we have rpfocus excusing leftist political violence, I think that is borderline against the forum guidelines.

[r3volution 3.0]

@Trumpcuck @dannno (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=10908)

No, he was referring to immigrants, as any non-Trumpcuck with a triple digit IQ can plainly see.

@Madison320 (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=37914)

What is it you find incredible? That Trump said Mexicans are rapists, or that such rhetoric propelled his campaign?

[acptulsa]

...you $#@!in nut.


...I think that is borderline against the forum guidelines.

Me too.

And that was just for posting an Ahnowd Schwahtzeneggah vid.

[Anti Federalist]

His initial rise in the polls in the summer of 2015 was a result of him calling Mexicans rapists. The whole campaign from that moment on was based on themes of that kind: re Mexicans, Arabs, even Chinese to some extent (tl;dr all your problems are the result of foreigners). I don't know whether Trump is a racist (I doubt he really cares one way or another, as with other issues), but he certainly panders to them: and that's why the alt-righters/neo-NAZIs have gained so much ground in the last year or so.

You've forgotten the whole Don Black thing.

Now, what if Mexican illegals really did have a higher rate of rapes directly attributed to them?

[r3volution 3.0]

You've forgotten the whole Don Black thing.

Was there some news event about him during the primary that I forget, or do you just mean the existence of Stormfront/KKK in general?


Now, what if Mexican illegals really did have a higher rate of rapes directly attributed to them?

If you're asking whether Nazism would thereby be justified, or its recent rise made less problematic, negative.

[Anti Federalist]

Was there some news event about him during the primary that I forget, or do you just mean the existence of Stormfront/KKK in general?

You don't recall that Don Black, notorious NAZI, founder of StormFront, donated money to the Paul campaign?

$500 IIRC.

And that Paul refused to return the money or denounce him sufficiently (or so the howling AntiFa mob of the time said), thereby tainting Paul as an alleged NAZI as well?

This was in 2007.


If you're asking whether Nazism would thereby be justified, or its recent rise made less problematic, negative.

I am asking if this is a racist statement:

"After studying crime data, it has become clear that Mexican illegal immigrants have been found to commit a higher proportion of rapes than the general population as a whole"

[AuH20]

You don't recall that Don Black, notorious NAZI, donated money to the Paul campaign?

And that Paul refused to return the money or denounce him sufficiently, thereby tainting Paul as an alleged NAZI as well?

This was in 2007.



I am asking if this is a racist statement:

"After studying crime data, it has become clear that Mexican illegal immigrants have been found to commit a higher proportion of rapes than the general population as a whole"

Stats can't be racist. Or rape trees for that matter.

https://willswordsofwisdom.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/rape-tree-1.jpeg

[r3volution 3.0]

You don't recall that Don Black, notorious NAZI, donated money to the Paul campaign?

And that Paul refused to return the money or denounce him sufficiently, thereby tainting Paul as an alleged NAZI as well?

This was in 2007.

Sure, I remember.

Does this relate somehow to the statement of mine you were responding to (i.e. Trump caused the recent NAZI resurgence)?

Surely you aren't saying that Ron refusing to give back a donation = Trump spewing anti-immigrant rhetoric non-stop for a year?


I am asking if this is a racist statement:

"After studying crime data, it has become clear that Mexican illegal immigrants have been found to commit a higher proportion of rapes than the general population as a whole"

Of course not

[Anti Federalist]

Trivial

Let me know when Trump's presidency is visible on either of these charts

SCOTUS appointment?

Pulling out of Paris Climate Accords?

Officially rolling back regulatory burdens on oil and gas production? (I'm in the business and we're getting murdered because what I produce needs a metric fuck ton of technology and capital...land drilling and production is much cheaper especially under new rules from this administration. Or do you want to start paying $4 a gallon for gas again? It would put me back to work.)

EPA head appointment?

Rolling back individual mandate requirements of ObamaCare, as much as could be done via EO?

I've never been a Trump fan, all you have to do is look at my history.

I wrote in Ron Paul.

But credit where it is due, all of the above, from a limited government perspective, are good things.

Your hate is irrational and blinding you

[r3volution 3.0]

SCOTUS appointment?

Which has thus far resulted in which reductions in the size and scope of government?


Pulling out of Paris Climate Accords?

Dead anyway

Officially rolling back regulatory burdens on oil and gas production? (I'm in the business and we're getting murdered because what I produce needs a metric fuck ton of technology and capital...land drilling and production is much cheaper especially under new rules from this administration. Or do you want to start paying $4 a gallon for gas again? It would put me back to work.)

That falls under the trivial category.

You can find token deregulation like this in just about any administration.


EPA head appointment?

Again, concrete results?


Rolling back individual mandate requirements of ObamaCare, as much as could be done via EO?

...while trying to push a garbage Obamacare Lite bill through Congress.


But credit where it is due, all of the above, from a limited government perspective, are good things.

They are PR things to elicit reactions just such as yours, and which, in the long view, are not even a bump on the road to serfdom.

[acptulsa]

Which has thus far resulted in which reductions in the size and scope of government?

Nope. But...

I, like you, hate to grovel like a good little serf and thank Massah Donald for greatly slowing the rate of growth of the Octopus. I want it stopped. Indeed, I want it rolled back. I want it to shrink. It has not yet done that. It hasn't even completely stopped growing.

That said, he has dialed things back more than any other administration in my lifetime. It hasn't stopped growing yet, so I can't say we 're pointed the right direction at last. But some credit is due for retarding the growth, and no one does his credibility service by petulantly refusing to give that modicum of due credit.

Ron Paul he ain't. But it turns out there was an appreciable difference between him and the Wicked Witch of the West after all. That doesn't mean the 7D Chess Crowd deserves a pass when they say he's only threatening to conquer Venezuela to prevent McCain from nuking them and painting the stripes. Just means he might prove to have been the slightly lesser evil after all.

The Titanic is still accelerating toward the iceberg. But at least it's no longer accelerating toward the iceberg at full throttle. It ain't worth popping a champagne cork over. But one isn't remiss to pop the top on a Miller High Life.

[Anti Federalist]

Sure, I remember.

Does this relate somehow to the statement of mine you were responding to (i.e. Trump caused the recent NAZI resurgence)?

Surely you aren't saying that Ron refusing to give back a donation = Trump spewing anti-immigrant rhetoric non-stop for a year?

No, I am saying two things to rebut what you said:

A) No, NAZIS are not "gaining ground", they have always been here, in tiny numbers and for whatever reasons, they seem to like the limited government message we have.

B) The best course of action to address that was Ron's. Take their money, dismiss them as irrelevant and move on. Shrieking and raising hell and causing dissension and bad blood amongst the few of us that "we" have, serves no purpose, other to embolden the enemies of peace, liberty and limited government. This is the point I was trying to make in the other thread, this is the point that I am trying make with the pictures of those asshole pseudo X-stians marching around Africa in slave collars with shirts that read "So Sorry": nothing you say or do will be enough. You and me and everybody here are already "tainted". To the random leftist mobs out there, you are as much a NAZI as a Trump supporter or Stormfronter. So am I. So is everybody else here.

You called me a "Vichy Libertarian" in another thread.

For fuck's sake don't you be a Quisling Libertarian.

Don't join the people hollering for our heads on a stick (and no, that's not hyperbole, there are plenty of people who want us, quite literally, dead).

There's no NAZIs here, and we all know it, nobody is annexing Canada, blitzing Mexico City or blitzkrieging Cuba for "living space" or shoving people into gas chambers or concentration camps.

I've said for years, and said it again just recently, that this country and it's people need to go our separate ways, there are irreconcilable differences between us.

I've said for years it would probably take a fight.

God in heaven help us all, it looks like it might be coming down to that.

We've got a short window for everybody in the country to back the fuck off, shut the fuck up and calm the fuck down...I'm willing...I'll tone down the rhetoric from myself...and then maybe a discussion can start about how to go our ways in peace.

Please keep in mind that this has nothing at all to do with Trump or his policies or what he says or thinks.

This is me, Anti Federalist, making a public statement, that I'm willing to tone down and calm down and see if anybody can talk rationally here, here meaning not RPF but America, the place where, for better or worse, I live, and in many ways, love.

See if we can discuss what needs to happen, before somebody does something fucking stupid and this whole mess blows up in our face.


Of course not

Good, I'm glad you agree.

[Anti Federalist]

They are PR things to elicit reactions just such as yours, and which, in the long view, are not even a bump on the road to serfdom.

I'm a tiny minority, who didn't vote for him or support him.

Most people want all those things.

If it's all a PR stunt he'd be doing the opposite of all those things.

[UWDude]

So it's not the substance of what he's done that bothers you, it's the style.:rolleyes:

No, it's the substance. revolution hates nationalism because he is a globalist. So he hates Trump.


You don't recall that Don Black, notorious NAZI, founder of StormFront, donated money to the Paul campaign?

$500 IIRC.

And that Paul refused to return the money or denounce him sufficiently (or so the howling AntiFa mob of the time said), thereby tainting Paul as an alleged NAZI as well?

This was in 2007.

I remember that.

[nikcers]

No, it;s the substance. revolution hates nationalism because he is a globalist. So he hates Trump.
Why not just call people that hate Trump Trumpist?

[Anti Federalist]

Ron Paul he ain't. But it turns out there was an appreciable difference between him and the Wicked Witch of the West after all. That doesn't mean the 7D Chess Crowd deserves a pass when they say he's only threatening to conquer Venezuela to prevent McCain from nuking them and painting the stripes. Just means he might prove to have been the slightly lesser evil after all.

The Titanic is still accelerating toward the iceberg. But at least it's no longer accelerating toward the iceberg at full throttle. It ain't worth popping a champagne cork over. But one isn't remiss to pop the top on a Miller High Life.

And maybe, just maybe, if all the fucking hysteria stopped, the constant drama and hiring and firing and revolving door like a god damn game show, maybe, just maybe, some real rollback of government could occur.

Rand has his ear, for fuck's sake, if all the screeching would cease maybe he could be heard.

[Krugminator2]

Which has thus far resulted in which reductions in the size and scope of government?

They are PR things to elicit reactions just such as yours, and which, in the long view, are not even a bump on the road to serfdom.


Let's say Gary Johnson got elected instead. I would have been thrilled at that. That said what actions would he have taken that would have gone beyond what Trump is doing? I am not saying in any way Trump is good philosophically. I just don't think most of the stuff he is bad on will ever be policy minus what Sessions will do to weed and civil liberties. But I think there is a high likelihood Johnson would have appointed a far worse justice than Gorsuch given his comments on judges and in particular Weld's affinity for liberal judges. Mulvaney is about as good as it gets for budget director. Given that Johnson is probably/definitely on the carbon tax train and Weld being a green energy lobbyist, he wouldn't have appointed someone as solid as Pruitt to the EPA.

As long as Trump doesn't get involved in Syria in a serious way and passes tax reform, I think he will have earned my vote. I am pleasantly surprised that things have gone this well on the actual issues. I see Trump as kind of a Warren Harding equivalent. Historians will hate him, but an objective reading shows that he wasn't so bad for small government people.


Again, concrete results?

As far as Pruitt, he seems pretty aggressive in hacking away at the EPA. There was thing he did with California he did a few months back.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2017/07/pruitt_s_deregulations_won_t_hold_up_in_court.html

[Krugminator2]

Rand has his ear, for $#@!'s sake, if all the screeching would cease maybe he could be heard.


That's another thing. Rand influenced Trump to stop his horrible neocon Sec of State picks. That's kind of a big deal. John Bolton could have easily been the guy calling the shots on North Korea right now. There was no other Republican in the field who Rand would have had that kind of influence with. The first person to endorse Rand is Trump's head of the Office of Budget Management. The guy who wrote Rand's budget, John Gray, who was a Rand Senate staffer, is the guy who is in charge of working out the budget details for Trump. The guy in charge of the EPA is a guy Rand coauthored this article with and likely would have been Rand's EPA choice. http://thehill.com/opinion/op-ed/234685-epa-water-rule-is-blow-to-americans-private-property-rights

You can call it small potatoes but the federal government has cut 11000 jobs so far, which is unprecedented without some kind of outside force pushing. I think it is important to celebrate these kinds of victories. This is not Hillary Clinton who was pushing free college and banning Uber.

[Anti Federalist]

That's another thing. Rand influenced Trump to stop his horrible neocon Sec of State picks. That's kind of a big deal. John Bolton could have easily been the guy calling the shots on North Korea right now. There was no other Republican in the field who Rand would have had that kind of influence with. The first person to endorse Rand is Trump's head of the Office of Budget Management. The guy who wrote Rand's budget, John Gray, who was a Rand Senate staffer, is the guy who is in charge of working out the budget details for Trump.

You can call it small potatoes but the federal government has cut 11000 jobs so far, which is unprecedented without some kind of outside force pushing. I think it is important to celebrate these kinds of victories. This is not Hillary Clinton who was pushing free college and banning Uber.

Again, was not a fan, was very much opposed, did not vote for him.

But the facts are the facts.

Policy wise we are in a much better place than we would have been under Clinton.

[nikcers]

Rand has his ear
Rand has to support the Republican president otherwise he won't be electable in the republican party.- they also have to throw Rand Paul a bone other wise he could be a giant thorn in their side he doesn't have Trump's ear other then Rand Paul had been grabbing his ear and pulling him on issues because that's what Rand Paul does. Rand Paul has a lot of power in the Republican party- some would say he helped create the Republican majority. Even if it was a democrat president though he would be participating and fighting the good fight. Remember his influence / filibusters on NDAA and bombing Syria?

[r3volution 3.0]

Let's say Gary Johnson got elected instead. I would have been thrilled at that. That said what actions would he have taken that would have gone beyond what Trump is doing?

First, I'm not a fan of Johnson, he was a distant second choice after Rand. That said, what would Johnson have done? He would have TRIED to dismantle a large part of the federal government, and end foreign interventions, and reign in the police state. Would he have succeeded? Who knows. But TRUMP ISN'T EVEN TRYING; rather to the contrary.


As long as Trump doesn't get involved in Syria in a serious way...I think he will have earned my vote.

He's more involved in Syria than Obama/Hillary was, so...


I see Trump as kind of a Warren Harding equivalent.

That is a grievous insult to Warren Harding.

[r3volution 3.0]

That said, he has dialed things back more than any other administration in my lifetime.

I don't know how you could believe that.


A) No, NAZIS are not "gaining ground"

Surely you jest....

The very fact that someone like Bannon was in the WH at all demonstrates the point.

...though one need look no further than the transformation of RPF or other major libertarian venues in the last two years.


B) The best course of action to address that was Ron's. Take their money, dismiss them as irrelevant and move on.

:confused: You think that's the approach Trump has taken...? Contra my claim that he's pandered to them?


This is the point I was trying to make in the other thread, this is the point that I am trying make with the pictures of those asshole pseudo X-stians marching around Africa in slave collars with shirts that read "So Sorry": nothing you say or do will be enough. You and me and everybody here are already "tainted". To the random leftist mobs out there, you are as much a NAZI as a Trump supporter or Stormfronter. So am I. So is everybody else here.

Yes, I know, you want to make common cause with them. My point is that that is asinine.


Don't join the people hollering for our heads on a stick (and no, that's not hyperbole, there are plenty of people who want us, quite literally, dead).

I haven't; you have.


There's no NAZIs here...

Most former Paulites have become sympathetic to the alt-right/NAZIs, along with huge numbers of other people "on the right."

They are the largest faction of the GOP at this point, hence Trump is President.

If you don't want that trend to continue, I suggest, you know, not supporting it...


I'm a tiny minority, who didn't vote for him or support him.

Most people want all those things.

If it's all a PR stunt he'd be doing the opposite of all those things.

Why did Obama "go through the budget line by line" in his first months in office?

[Anti Federalist]

Yeah, well, I tried.

[UWDude]

...though one need look no further than the transformation of RPF or other major libertarian venues in the last two years.

I could hardly stand this place three years ago, because of the racism. Are you saying white nationalism decreased under Obama, the first black president?

All people are ghettoizing into their own ideological extremes. That's not because of Trump. It is because of the internet.

[acptulsa]

That is a grievous insult to Warren Harding.

Agreed! That's the man that eradicated the Wilson/House Socialism! He de-nationalized the railroads! Damn.


I don't know how you could believe that.

I don't know how you can't. Reagan began by finishing what Carter started in creating the ED. And if he's out of the running, who's left?


Why did Obama "go through the budget line by line" in his first months in office?

So he knew who to hit up for brib--er, I mean campaign contributions?

[r3volution 3.0]

I don't know how you can't. Reagan began by finishing what Carter started in creating the ED. And if he's out of the running, who's left?

Trump has yet to sign a budget, so there's nothing to compare.

On taxes? Again, nothing's been done.

On regulation, who was better? Bush (W), believe it or not.

...so what are talking about here?


So he knew who to hit up for brib--er, I mean campaign contributions?

Because he wanted to placate people who care (at least at a very superficial level) about wasteful spending.

[acptulsa]

On regulation, who was better? Bush (W), believe it or not.

The same Dubya who had the PATRIOT Act far enough along by August that he could have it through Congress and signed by Halloween?

Get the fuck out.

[r3volution 3.0]

The same Dubya who had the PATRIOT Act far enough along by August that he could have it through Congress and signed by Halloween?

Get the fuck out.

I said he eliminated regulations.

...not sure what the PATRIOT Act (which Trump fully supports, of course) has to do with it.

[Krugminator2]

T

On regulation, who was better? Bush (W), believe it or not.



No he wasn't.

http://reason.com/archives/2008/12/10/bushs-regulatory-kiss-off

"Obama's assertions to the contrary, the 43rd president was the biggest regulator since Nixon."

"It takes a lot of bureaucrats to create and enforce all those regulations. In eight years, Bush increased the federal government's regulatory staff by 91,196 employees. Clinton cut it by 969. "

[r3volution 3.0]

No he wasn't.

http://reason.com/archives/2008/12/10/bushs-regulatory-kiss-off

"Obama's assertions to the contrary, the 43rd president was the biggest regulator since Nixon."

"It takes a lot of bureaucrats to create and enforce all those regulations. In eight years, Bush increased the federal government's regulatory staff by 91,196 employees. Clinton cut it by 969. "

The number of pages of federal regulation dropped during W's tenure, as per the chart I posted earlier. That's not the best metric, nor is the number of staff at regulatory agencies (the best metric would be impact on GDP, but that's hard to come by), but it's the one being touted in defense of Trump ("he eliminated X number of regulations...").

[acptulsa]

That said, he has dialed things back more than any other administration in my lifetime.

I don't know how you could believe that.


I said he eliminated regulations.

...not sure what the PATRIOT Act (which Trump fully supports, of course) has to do with it.

So, I can't say Trump has dialed things back more than any other president in my lifetime because some hypothetical mashup of seven other administrations, if you pick and choose the right category from each one, theoretically did better in each category.

https://i.imgflip.com/xt58h.jpg

[r3volution 3.0]

So, I can't say Trump has dialed things back more than any other president in my lifetime because some hypothetical mashup of seven other administrations, if you pick and choose the right category from each one, theoretically did better in each category.

https://i.imgflip.com/xt58h.jpg

I can't be moving the goalposts when you never set any in the first place...

Tell me, what metric are you using to say that Trump has reduced the rate of growth of the state more than any recent POTUS?

Is it just anecdotes or what?

[acptulsa]

I can't be moving the goalposts when you never set any in the first place...

Tell me, what metric are you using to say that Trump has reduced the rate of growth of the state more than any recent POTUS?

Is it just anecdotes or what?

It's the fact that he has actually, so far, reduced the rate of growth.

That really isn't a hard standard to meet. He didn't have to jump very high to clear the hurdle.

[r3volution 3.0]

I can't be moving the goalposts when you never set any in the first place...

Tell me, what metric are you using to say that Trump has reduced the rate of growth of the state more than any recent POTUS?

Is it just anecdotes or what?It's the fact that he has actually, so far, reduced the rate of growth.

That really isn't a hard standard to meet. He didn't have to jump very high to clear the hurdle.

Of what?

[nikcers]

I can't be moving the goalposts when you never set any in the first place...

Tell me, what metric are you using to say that Trump has reduced the rate of growth of the state more than any recent POTUS?

Is it just anecdotes or what?
It's just based on how Trump frames the narrative on his effective policy. Trump has the ability to go from credible to incredible in a heartbeat. I don't mean incredible like in a good way, I mean doublethink. The same people who think he is a mastery strategist also think he is really ignorant on really obvious things that any functioning adult who lived into their golden years would know.

He then takes this to a new level with his art of the deal bullshit where he makes people think that we are getting a good deal because he didn't INCREASE troops in Afghanistan, he just kept them there. He makes people think we are getting a good deal because he didn't INCREASE regulations. He makes people think that we are getting a good deal because he didn't INCREASE Obamacare

[acptulsa]

Of what?

You can keep this up all night, can't you?

Well I can't.


He then takes this to a new level with his art of the deal bull$#@!... He makes people think we are getting a good deal because he didn't INCREASE regulations.

Don't look now, but he has you doing it. Trump did INCREASE regulations.

[specsaregood]

Again, was not a fan, was very much opposed, did not vote for him.

But the facts are the facts.

Policy wise we are in a much better place than we would have been under Clinton.

and lets not forget Syria, it seems trump really did give up on that mess. no way would Clinton have done that.

[nikcers]

he has you doing it. Trump did INCREASE regulations.
http://i.imgur.com/UoSQWI3.gif

[r3volution 3.0]

You can keep this up all night, can't you?

Well I can't.

It's not a trick question or something. I'm simply asking you define what you mean you say he "reduced the rate of growth of the state." If I said "Tony Romo increased the awesomeness of the Cowboys by 51.74%" that would be a meaningless statement without defining "awesomeness," and in a quantifiable way.

If all you're talking about is the fact that fewer new regulations were implemented so far by Trump than were implemented by some of his predecessors over a comparable period in their terms, per the chart posted earlier, well fine, that's true, but then my response (to repeat myself) is BIG WHOOP. Adding a couple dozen fewer regulations than would otherwise have been added means nothing when you already have nearly 200,000 PAGES of regulations. Number of regulations isn't a very good metric to begin with (because different regulations have different effects: 1 regulation might cost 1000x more than 50 others), so it's only really useful for large scale changes. If you go from 200,000 to 150,000 pages of regs, odds are the total regulatory burden declined. If you go from 200,000 to 200,001, instead of from 200,000 to 200,003, that doesn't really tell you anything.

Bottom line: Trump hasn't really done anything, he's just maintained the status quo.

[CaptainAmerica]

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnns-angela-rye-statues-of-washington-jefferson-and-lee-all-need-to-come-down/
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/kristine-marsh/2017/08/17/cnns-rye-calls-washington-jefferson-monuments-come-down

walmart, home depot, best buy, target,lowes,apple .......macys, jcpenny,sears.....etc. etc. need to come down, they sell slave labor chinese death camp made products.

[UWDude]

It's not a trick question or something. I'm simply asking you define what you mean you say he "reduced the rate of growth of the state." If I said "Tony Romo increased the awesomeness of the Cowboys by 51.74%" that would be a meaningless statement without defining "awesomeness," and in a quantifiable way.

If all you're talking about is the fact that fewer new regulations were implemented so far by Trump than were implemented by some of his predecessors over a comparable period in their terms, per the chart posted earlier, well fine, that's true, but then my response (to repeat myself) is BIG WHOOP. Adding a couple dozen fewer regulations than would otherwise have been added means nothing when you already have nearly 200,000 PAGES of regulations. Number of regulations isn't a very good metric to begin with (because different regulations have different effects: 1 regulation might cost 1000x more than 50 others), so it's only really useful for large scale changes. If you go from 200,000 to 150,000 pages of regs, odds are the total regulatory burden declined. If you go from 200,000 to 200,001, instead of from 200,000 to 200,003, that doesn't really tell you anything.

Bottom line: Trump hasn't really done anything, he's just maintained the status quo.

Under trump, as of a month ago, 96 regulations were removed, and 15 new ones implemented, which is better than his "2 regulations removed for every new regulation enacted" guideline.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/trump-eliminates-800-obama-regulations/

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-kills-16-regulations-for-every-new-one-crushing-2-for-1-goal/article/2629177

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/donald-trump-six-months-barack-obama-savings/2017/08/08/id/806522/

[r3volution 3.0]

Under trump, as of a month ago, 96 regulations were removed, and 15 new ones implemented

Wow!

At that rate, it'll only take about half a century to repeal the regulations issued in 2016!

[nobody's_hero]

Wow!

At that rate, it'll only take about half a century to repeal the regulations issued in 2016!

Nah, Trump's only gonna be in office, at most 8 years. Afterwards, we can start again rapidly going the wrong direction, instead of just moving very, very slowly in the right one.

[Anti Federalist]

Nah, Trump's only gonna be in office, at most 8 years. Afterwards, we can start again rapidly going the wrong direction, instead of just moving very, very slowly in the right one.

At the rate things are going right now, he'll be lucky to be alive 8 months from now.

[acptulsa]

It's not a trick question or something. I'm simply asking you define what you mean you say he "reduced the rate of growth of the state." If I said "Tony Romo increased the awesomeness of the Cowboys by 51.74%" that would be a meaningless statement without defining "awesomeness," and in a quantifiable way.

If all you're talking about is the fact that fewer new regulations were implemented so far by Trump than were implemented by some of his predecessors over a comparable period in their terms, per the chart posted earlier, well fine, that's true, but then my response (to repeat myself) is BIG WHOOP. Adding a couple dozen fewer regulations than would otherwise have been added means nothing when you already have nearly 200,000 PAGES of regulations. Number of regulations isn't a very good metric to begin with (because different regulations have different effects: 1 regulation might cost 1000x more than 50 others), so it's only really useful for large scale changes. If you go from 200,000 to 150,000 pages of regs, odds are the total regulatory burden declined. If you go from 200,000 to 200,001, instead of from 200,000 to 200,003, that doesn't really tell you anything.

Bottom line: Trump hasn't really done anything, he's just maintained the status quo.

This is the post that kicked off your seven hour cross examination of me. Did you read more than the first twenty-six words of it?


Nope. But...

I, like you, hate to grovel like a good little serf and thank Massah Donald for greatly slowing the rate of growth of the Octopus. I want it stopped. Indeed, I want it rolled back. I want it to shrink. It has not yet done that. It hasn't even completely stopped growing.

That said, he has dialed things back more than any other administration in my lifetime. It hasn't stopped growing yet, so I can't say we 're pointed the right direction at last. But some credit is due for retarding the growth, and no one does his credibility service by petulantly refusing to give that modicum of due credit.

Ron Paul he ain't. But it turns out there was an appreciable difference between him and the Wicked Witch of the West after all. That doesn't mean the 7D Chess Crowd deserves a pass when they say he's only threatening to conquer Venezuela to prevent McCain from nuking them and painting the stripes. Just means he might prove to have been the slightly lesser evil after all.

The Titanic is still accelerating toward the iceberg. But at least it's no longer accelerating toward the iceberg at full throttle. It ain't worth popping a champagne cork over. But one isn't remiss to pop the top on a Miller High Life.

Because you tied up all my time pissing me off with you silly-assed and more-than-mildly-irritating Socratic Interrogation just to drag me kicking and screaming to the very point I made in the very post that you used to kick this very odyssey off.

Now that I fully understand just how thorough a commie you are, and how little respect you have for my time and to what degree you consider it community property, that you would waste this much of it just to drag me kicking and screaming to a conclusion I reached years ago, I do hope you understand if the next time you ask me a question I completely ignore it.


I suggest you reread my original post, as many times necessary for you to understand the error of your ways.

This probably means a good dozen times.

Report back when you've completed your assignment.

What's good for the ganders is good for you, too, goose.

[LibertyEagle]

@Trumpcuck @dannno (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=10908)



That means most immigrants are rapists (contra "some" who are "good people).

Does Trump actually believe that? Who knows (he is very thick, of course...).

Did he say it to win the nationalists to his side? Probably (if there was any strategy behind the statement, this would have been it).

Did it have that effect? Definitely (he led the polls a month later, after doubling down on this theme)

Stop lying, Rev. Trump never said that. You are attempting to use Saul Alinsky tactics on the members of this forum. I have no idea why you have been permitted this long to continue.

[Madison320]

@Trumpcuck @dannno (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=10908)

No, he was referring to immigrants, as any non-Trumpcuck with a triple digit IQ can plainly see.

@Madison320 (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=37914)

What is it you find incredible? That Trump said Mexicans are rapists, or that such rhetoric propelled his campaign?

Both.

"When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best," Trump said. "They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

I'm pro liberty and I see a lot of problems with Trump in this regard. You are not pro liberty. You are anti Trump. Trump's statements following the Charlottesville incident were one of the few times he's gotten it right yet even then you complain.

[Southron]

Had a little mini red terror last night where I live around Confederate statues. Citizens had to guard statues themselves. A few that were left for police to guard got defaced.

[r3volution 3.0]

Both.

"When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best," Trump said. "They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

Yes, that's what he said, as I quoted it earlier. Now let's try to figure out why you can't appreciate its meaning:

1. What group is Trump talking about in the first place? Is the "[people] Mexico sends" some special sub-group of immigrants which the Mexican government is encouraging to cross the border, or is it Mexican immigrants in general? It's Mexican immigrants in general. This "Mexico sends" language is typical of anti-immigrant types, ala "we're importing immigrants." It's meant to obscure the fact that the immigrants are people, making choices; anti-immigrants types would rather characterize them as pawns in someone's nefarious scheme.

2. And what does he say about Mexican immigrants? He says "[they] have lots of problems...They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." Now, if *some* are good people, what are the rest? He makes it quite clear: "they’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists."

That's about all the time I'm willing to devote to exegesis of this grade schooler's speech, so, if you still don't get it, I don't know what to tell you.


I'm pro liberty and I see a lot of problems with Trump in this regard.

Good


You are not pro liberty.

:rolleyes:


You are anti Trump.

As is every pro-liberty person, by definition.


Because you tied up all my time pissing me off with you silly-assed and more-than-mildly-irritating Socratic Interrogation just to drag me kicking and screaming to the very point I made in the very post that you used to kick this very odyssey off.You seem confused by your own writing.

In your first post, which you just quoted, you said:

"he has dialed things back more than any other administration in my lifetime"

That is false, which is what I'm trying to "drag [you] kicking and screaming" to acknowledge.


Now that I fully understand just how thorough a commie you are, and how little respect you have for my time and to what degree you consider it community property, that you would waste this much of it just to drag me kicking and screaming to a conclusion I reached years ago, I do hope you understand if the next time you ask me a question I completely ignore it.

Fear not, there will be no such questions, about this or any other topic.

[Madison320]

That's about all the time I'm willing to devote to exegesis of this grade schooler's speech, so, if you still don't get it, I don't know what to tell you.


Do you at least agree that his initial response was correct? Where he basically blamed both sides? Or do you think he should've only condemned the alt right protestors?

[acptulsa]

You seem confused by your own writing.

In your first post, which you just quoted, you said:

"he has dialed things back more than any other administration in my lifetime"

That is false, which is what I'm trying to "drag [you] kicking and screaming" to acknowledge.

Instead of dragging me around and trying to piecemeal together a rebuttal out of this aspect of this administration and that aspect of another administration, try refuting the claim with overarching and irrefutable fact some time.

And good luck with that.

[r3volution 3.0]

Do you at least agree that his initial response was correct? Where he basically blamed both sides? Or do you think he should've only condemned the alt right protestors?

It's true that both sides are monstrous and should be condemned. However, when you have a history of friendly relations with the one side, and it was that same side which just killed somebody, in the incident in question, playing the objective observer and blaming both sides is a joke - or, rather, a PR move. That statement was Trump simultaneously doing the "Presidential" dance and winking at his alt-right supporters. The same would be true if the shoe were on the other foot. Suppose there had been a right/left riot of some kind in 2015, in which the left killed one of the right. If Obama came out with a "well, everyone's to blame" comment, the right would have gone ballistic, and reasonably so.

P.S. Keep in mind, I don't care what Trump says, about any topic, at all, except insofar as it has real effects on things. I have no "moral outrage" over anything Trump said/didn't say re the riot, as the left pretends to have. My only interest in the whole affair is that the alt-right not be further emboldened, that it even retreat, so that we can regain lost ground in the GOP. That's the upshot of all this. Towards the culture war issues that everyone's hopped up about (muh racism, muh diversity, whatever), I give exactly zero (0) shits, one way or another. I think it's a giant waste of time and energy, which is why I want these people off the political stage.

[Swordsmyth]

It's true that both sides are monstrous and should be condemned. However, when you have a history of friendly relations with the one side, and it was that same side which just killed somebody, in the incident in question, playing the objective observer and blaming both sides is a joke - or, rather, a PR move. That statement was Trump simultaneously doing the "Presidential" dance and winking at his alt-right supporters. The same would be true if the shoe were on the other foot. Suppose there had been a right/left riot of some kind in 2015, in which the left killed one of the right. If Obama came out with a "well, everyone's to blame" comment, the right would have gone ballistic, and reasonably so.

P.S. Keep in mind, I don't care what Trump says, about any topic, at all, except insofar as it has real effects on things. I have no "moral outrage" over anything Trump said/didn't say re the riot, as the left pretends to have. My only interest in the whole affair is that the alt-right not be further emboldened, that it even retreat, so that we can regain lost ground in the GOP. That's the upshot of all this. Towards the culture war issues that everyone's hopped up about (muh racism, muh diversity, whatever), I give exactly zero (0) $#@!s, one way or another. I think it's a giant waste of time and energy, which is why I want these people off the political stage.

The truth is the truth, If both sides are at fault he SHOULD say it, Obummer would never have said it but if he had nobody should have complained.

[Madison320]

It's true that both sides are monstrous and should be condemned. However, when you have a history of friendly relations with the one side, and it was that same side which just killed somebody, in the incident in question, playing the objective observer and blaming both sides is a joke - or, rather, a PR move. That statement was Trump simultaneously doing the "Presidential" dance and winking at his alt-right supporters. The same would be true if the shoe were on the other foot. Suppose there had been a right/left riot of some kind in 2015, in which the left killed one of the right. If Obama came out with a "well, everyone's to blame" comment, the right would have gone ballistic, and reasonably so.

First of all there's good reason to believe the driver may have acted in self defense. Second we don't know his connection with the alt right. Imagine if a black guy was was driving towards a KKK mob, the KKK mob starts hitting the car with bats and the black driver took off into the crowd and killed someone. You think Obama should come out and condemn black violence?

I think the worst thing Trump did was during his followup news conference he called the driver a murderer. Do you think the president should be declaring someone guilty, before the trial? Especially in light of the evidence?

[Ender]

First, I'm not a fan of Johnson, he was a distant second choice after Rand. That said, what would Johnson have done? He would have TRIED to dismantle a large part of the federal government, and end foreign interventions, and reign in the police state. Would he have succeeded? Who knows. But TRUMP ISN'T EVEN TRYING; rather to the contrary.



He's more involved in Syria than Obama/Hillary was, so...



That is a grievous insult to Warren Harding.

That's definitely a grievous insult to Warren Harding. Harding was one of the best, and most forgotten, presidents of the 20th century.

Trump's a spoiled brat that can't keep his friggin' mouth shut about ANYTHING. His insane babble's intentions seems to be keeping everyone on "sides" and fighting each other so that everyone totally misses the big picture and what is really going on with the US, wars, and more & more freedom loss.

JMHPOV

[r3volution 3.0]

First of all there's good reason to believe the driver may have acted in self defense.

I see no reason to believe that.


Second we don't know his connection with the alt right.

He's second from the left in the first photo:

https://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/news/world/2017/08/13/alleged-charlottesville-driver-photographed-with-hate-group-symbol/fields-logo.jpg.size.custom.crop.1086x700.jpg

Another view:

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.3407239.1502598317!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_750/fields13n-6-web.jpg

So, he's standing with NAZIs, at a NAZI rally, in a NAZI uniform, carrying a NAZI shield.

There have since been reports that he openly expressed pro-NAZI views in highschool.

Conclusion? Yea, he's a NAZI.

[Madison320]

I see no reason to believe that.


Did you see the video of his car being struck before he accelerated?

You didn't answer my question. Imagine if a black guy was was driving towards a KKK mob, the KKK mob starts hitting the car with bats and the black driver took off into the crowd and killed someone. You think Obama should come out and condemn black violence?

You didn't answer my second question either so I'll ask it again. Do you think the president should be declaring someone guilty, before the trial? Especially in light of the evidence?

[r3volution 3.0]

Did you see the video of his car being struck before he accelerated?

The video I've seen shows him driving rapidly some dozens of yards down an empty street towards a crowd.

I see the crowd swarm his car after the collision, not before.

Begins at 0:12


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-Plzx73K68


You didn't answer my question. Imagine if a black guy was was driving towards a KKK mob, the KKK mob starts hitting the car with bats and the black driver took off into the crowd and killed someone. You think Obama should come out and condemn black violence?

Probably not (self-defense is very fact-specific and hard to discuss hypothetically), but that isn't what occurred in Charlottesville.


Do you think the president should be declaring someone guilty, before the trial? Especially in light of the evidence?

I have no problem at all with the the President or anyone else stating the obvious.

He still gets a trial, of course.

[Madison320]

The video I've seen shows him driving rapidly some dozens of yards down an empty street towards a crowd.

I see the crowd swarm his car after the collision, not before.


At :16 a guy on the left hits his car. That's before he accelerates.





Probably not (self-defense is very fact-specific and hard to discuss hypothetically), but that isn't what occurred in Charlottesville.



So you're admitting if the roles were reversed, you'd think he was innocent?




I have no problem at all with the the President or anyone else stating the obvious.

He still gets a trial, of course.

A fair trial?

[Aratus]

I see no reason to believe that.



He's second from the left in the first photo:

https://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/news/world/2017/08/13/alleged-charlottesville-driver-photographed-with-hate-group-symbol/fields-logo.jpg.size.custom.crop.1086x700.jpg

Another view:

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.3407239.1502598317!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_750/fields13n-6-web.jpg

So, he's standing with NAZIs, at a NAZI rally, in a NAZI uniform, carrying a NAZI shield.

There have since been reports that he openly expressed pro-NAZI views in highschool.

Conclusion? Yea, he's a NAZI.


I agree. He clearly drove into a crowd of people more
than two blocks from him, when he was in his vehicle.

[r3volution 3.0]

At :16 a guy on the left hits his car. That's before he accelerates.

By 0:16 he's already at the crowd, feet away/seconds from the collision.

That doesn't explain why he was driving toward the crowd rapidly in the first place.


So you're admitting if the roles were reversed, you'd think he was innocent?

No. I said that if a driver runs people over after being swarmed by a mob, that's probably self-defense.

And that that scenario is not what occurred in Chartlottesville.


A fair trial?

Fair as he'd have gotten regardless

[Aratus]

I like Joan of Arc.

In today's climate,

FDR's public statues

could end up in a

New Deal museum,

Next to Jefferson

and Andy Jackson...

[Madison320]

By 0:16 he's already at the crowd, feet away/seconds from the collision.

That doesn't explain why he was driving toward the crowd rapidly in the first place.



No. I said that if a driver runs people over after being swarmed by a mob, that's probably self-defense.

And that that scenario is not what occurred in Chartlottesville.



Fair as he'd have gotten regardless

Let's see what comes out at the trial, shall we?

[r3volution 3.0]

Let's see what comes out at the trial, shall we?

That we shall.

[Aratus]

He admired Jefferson and Jackson, he served under W.Wilson during WW1
And when at Columbia, after Harvard, he was exposed to the Dunning school
on Reconstruction. Do not egg on today's Democrats. Do keep in mind FDR's
ancestors knew Alexander Hamilton. He let Eleanor champion civil rights...

[Aratus]

Aratus looks up.
AF knows politicians
are inconsistent
But ideologues aren't

[Anti Federalist]

I like Joan of Arc.

The Idiot Mob® does not.

Joan of Arc statue in French Quarter tagged with 'Tear It Down' graffiti

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/05/joan_of_arc_statue_graffiti_te.html

[JustinTime]

And the day before when Trump asked if this will end with Washington and Jefferson statues being removed, the media nyucked it up mocking him and saying that was crazy, two days later this woman, some pastor in Chicago, and some actor Ive never heard of but apparently with quite a Twitter following all call for exactly that.

Trump makes these people look like Baghdad Bob, remember Saddam Hussein's spokesman who said there were no US tanks in Baghdad and they were right behind him? Sad situation, I hated that war but I did get a chuckle out of Bob's misfortune.

Anyhow, its scary to think that so many Americans cant see that Trump is 100% right. This *is* designed to erase our history and replace it with new, Marxist type stuff.

[Ender]

The Idiot Mob® does not.

Joan of Arc statue in French Quarter tagged with 'Tear It Down' graffiti

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/05/joan_of_arc_statue_graffiti_te.html

How come this isn't sexist? :confused: