Labeling Millions of People

[Old_Trapper70]

You bemoaned trump NOT ruling out nuclear arms. I point out that you only hurt yourself ruling things out.
Having no response you take a silly tangent as you always do.
Looks like hrc isn't the only one with no memory

Intelligent people actually point out what they are referring to when asking a question. I know that doesn't apply to you, however, Trump was not "ruling out" the use of nuclear weapons, the fool was talking of using them. It is the same as his comments about shooting the "little boats" of the Iranians if they made "gestures" at an American ship. The coward wants a war just like Bush did. They need it to prove they are "men" since they were too cowardly to go fight themselves. And if you have any children, or grandchildren,m you love then you better be prepared to lose them if this asshole gets in office. The you too can be a Gold Star member as my GF is.

 

[clair02]

I find it totally sad that these are the only choices there are, and I am especially disappointed in Hillary, the way she makes it seem that only people with the same views as her are fit to walk this earth. We don't all have to have the same political views as her.

 

[Reddie]

Hillary Clinton said that half of Trump's supporters are deplorable and that they're racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. She had no right to say that.

She apologized but that . . . accusing Trump's supporters of being racist isn't the way to win the support of whites who may not want to be labeled racist because they support Trump. Question though is, will America and the obsession with race transform the US into what Nazi Germany was? History does repeat itself after all.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

I find it totally sad that these are the only choices there are, and I am especially disappointed in Hillary, the way she makes it seem that only people with the same views as her are fit to walk this earth. We don't all have to have the same political views as her.

Why was it "sad"? Do you agree with the KKK, Aryan Nation, White Nationalists, etc.? Trump won't disavow them, and they are supporting him along with ISIS, Russia, and China. Do you agree with them?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-white-supremacists_us_55dce43ee4b08cd3359dc41a

 

[dogtowner]

She apologized but that . . . accusing Trump's supporters of being racist isn't the way to win the support of whites who may not want to be labeled racist because they support Trump. Question though is, will America and the obsession with race transform the US into what Nazi Germany was? History does repeat itself after all.

As is always the case with her the "apology" is immediately followed by a slightly altered version of the same thing. This was no exception.

 

[dogtowner]

Why was it "sad"? Do you agree with the KKK, Aryan Nation, White Nationalists, etc.? Trump won't disavow them, and they are supporting him along with ISIS, Russia, and China. Do you agree with them?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-white-supremacists_us_55dce43ee4b08cd3359dc41a

It's sad that some people can't comprehend the difference betweend politics and cultural matters.
Does anyone care that hrc won't disavow BLM over its antisemitism, Muslims for their views regarding homosexuals or her KKK fans ?
This country has serious problems and they represent the bigger fish to fry. Wedge issues need to go to the back burner.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

It's sad that some people can't comprehend the difference betweend politics and cultural matters.

Tell me they aren't intertwined.

Does anyone care that hrc won't disavow BLM over its antisemitism, Muslims for their views regarding homosexuals or her KKK fans ?

What KKK fans? More lies. As to the other, she does disavow such groups when they express such ideas. You just never take the time to look.

[quote[This country has serious problems and they represent the bigger fish to fry. Wedge issues need to go to the back burner.[/QUOTE]

Right. Character does not matter to the Trumpkins.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

As is always the case with her the "apology" is immediately followed by a slightly altered version of the same thing. This was no exception.

And Trump does otherwise? Oh yes, Trump doesn't even bother to apologize. He just lies more.

 

[dogtowner]

Tell me they aren't intertwined.

They are not intertwined.
Civil rights law exists and it's not going away.
Economic policy has bankrupted the country. Foreign policy has created a powder keg world.
Rule of law is dead.
Four more years is unacceptable

What KKK fans? More lies. As to the other, she does disavow such groups when they express such ideas. You just never take the time to look.

http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/looks-like-hillarys-got-the-white-supremacist-vote-sewed-up

She says nothing, her campaign does after the fact.

This country has serious problems and they represent the bigger fish to fry. Wedge issues need to go to the back burner.

Right. Character does not matter to the Trumpkins.

And it does for hrc fans ? Hilarious

 

[Old_Trapper70]

They are not intertwined.
Civil rights law exists and it's not going away.

Civil rights law only exists because of politics. Civil rights as an example.

Economic policy has bankrupted the country. Foreign policy has created a powder keg world.
Rule of law is dead.
Four more years is unacceptable

Then why do you support Trump when he is sure to accomplish all of the above?

http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/looks-like-hillarys-got-the-white-supremacist-vote-sewed-up

She says nothing, her campaign does after the fact.

Not quite the same as Trump retweeting a White Supremacists tweet, of hiring a White Nationalist as his delegate in Ca., or making a member of the altright (Steve Bannon) as his campaign manager.

Now, if you had read the article you would have seen this question asked:

"Now you could certainly make the case that Mrs. Clinton was just shaking hands with random people who showed up at her campaign event. Or just with people who happened to be hanging out buying ice cream on a hot day. You could make that case.

If you were to try to make that case to me, I would expect you to explain just WHY the campaign immediately deleted the tweet.

If it was so innocent, why hide it?

The question is a little like, “If there was nothing to hide in those zillions of emails, why delete them and destroy the hard drive?”

And the answer is just as easy, because fools, and bigots, like you would make a conspiracy out of it, lie about it, and use it to ignore the support Trump gets from racists.

And it does for hrc fans ? Hilarious

No, it is sad, and pathetic, just as you are.

BTW, where is the proof that the guy was a racist aside from some tattoo that could mean anything?

 

[dogtowner]

Civil rights law only exists because of politics. Civil rights as an example.



Then why do you support Trump when he is sure to accomplish all of the above?



Not quite the same as Trump retweeting a White Supremacists tweet, of hiring a White Nationalist as his delegate in Ca., or making a member of the altright (Steve Bannon) as his campaign manager.

Now, if you had read the article you would have seen this question asked:

"Now you could certainly make the case that Mrs. Clinton was just shaking hands with random people who showed up at her campaign event. Or just with people who happened to be hanging out buying ice cream on a hot day. You could make that case.

If you were to try to make that case to me, I would expect you to explain just WHY the campaign immediately deleted the tweet.

If it was so innocent, why hide it?

The question is a little like, “If there was nothing to hide in those zillions of emails, why delete them and destroy the hard drive?”

And the answer is just as easy, because fools, and bigots, like you would make a conspiracy out of it, lie about it, and use it to ignore the support Trump gets from racists.



No, it is sad, and pathetic, just as you are.

BTW, where is the proof that the guy was a racist aside from some tattoo that could mean anything?

Could mean anything? Spare me...

If you read carefully you might see the word "rights" in there. Rights are also dealt with extensively in the constitution.
Not cultural, constitutional which is the core of politics.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Could mean anything? Spare me...

If you read carefully you might see the word "rights" in there. Rights are also dealt with extensively in the constitution.
Not cultural, constitutional which is the core of politics.

Strange and convoluted reasoning you have there. Are you saying the fight over civil rights, voting rights, integrated marriages, etc. was NOT political?

"Could mean anything" If one has a tiger tattoo on his arm does that make him Chinese? Maybe a whole string of tattoos makes one a gang member.

You draw a lot of false conclusions from your short sighted bigotry.

 

[dogtowner]

Strange and convoluted reasoning you have there. Are you saying the fight over civil rights, voting rights, integrated marriages, etc. was NOT political?

"Could mean anything" If one has a tiger tattoo on his arm does that make him Chinese? Maybe a whole string of tattoos makes one a gang member.

You draw a lot of false conclusions from your short sighted bigotry.

My point of course that rights were/are the core of political.

Tigers are not unique to PRC as of the census there were 7 in china. India tops the list with 2200+.
Had you read the article you would have learned her people scrubbed that as soon as a litreat person was capable of reading it.
And of course a mentor of hers was a grand dragon, the late senator from WVa

 

[Old_Trapper70]

My point of course that rights were/are the core of political.

Then you were just being your usual stupid self when you posted this:

"They are not intertwined.
Civil rights law exists and it's not going away."

Tigers are not unique to PRC as of the census there were 7 in china. India tops the list with 2200+.
Had you read the article you would have learned her people scrubbed that as soon as a litreat person was capable of reading it.
And of course a mentor of hers was a grand dragon, the late senator from WVa

Oh yes, I read that, and if you were capable of comprehension you would have seen where I posted such, and answered the question asked. The question still remains, what proof, aside from a tattoo, do you have that the guy was a white supremacist?

 

[dogtowner]

Then you were just being your usual stupid self when you posted this:

"They are not intertwined.
Civil rights law exists and it's not going away."



Oh yes, I read that, and if you were capable of comprehension you would have seen where I posted such, and answered the question asked. The question still remains, what proof, aside from a tattoo, do you have that the guy was a white supremacist?

Ok this is clearly over your head.
Rights were in question not bigotry.
It's not against the constitution to have a bias and civil rights didn't change that.