His Flatulence hits the crazy button

[Jimmy Higgins]

Neither are always wrong.

Obama always gave a specific reason for doing it. And it was something recommended by others.

This is a dictate simply pulled from Trump's ass.

You must see that, you're kissing it.

Are you assuming my political orientation? I'm non-binary. That's very politically incorrect on your part.

Yup, you aren't binary. You also aren't well read on the positions of people here either.

 

[Malintent]

Billionaire Republican donor Charles Koch likens Donald Trump's Muslim ban to Adolf Hitler's policies in Nazi Germany

This ought to be interesting. The Koch brothers are always wrong, Trump is always wrong, they are on opposite sides of this issue. Therefore both sides are always wrong?

I suppose that might be the case. When Obama halted immigration from various Muslim countries six different times, nobody said a word. Trump does it once, everyone loses their mind.

Trump halted everyone from those countries that weren't born in the US. That is a far cry from implementing deeper investigations into individuals seeking asylum.

It's like if Trump promised to stop crime in Chicago, dropped a nuke on the city, and then you respond to that with, "no one has improved the crime rate in Chicago better than Trump has".

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Billionaire Republican donor Charles Koch likens Donald Trump's Muslim ban to Adolf Hitler's policies in Nazi Germany

This ought to be interesting. The Koch brothers are always wrong, Trump is always wrong, they are on opposite sides of this issue. Therefore both sides are always wrong?

I suppose that might be the case. When Obama halted immigration from various Muslim countries six different times, nobody said a word. Trump does it once, everyone loses their mind.

Trump halted everyone from those countries that weren't born in the US. That is a far cry from implementing deeper investigations into individuals seeking asylum.

It's like if Trump promised to stop crime in Chicago, dropped a nuke on the city, and then you respond to that with, "no one has improved the crime rate in Chicago better than Trump has".

But Jason isn't supporting Trump. He is just waving his Libertarian boner around to show how superior he is to liberals who supported* policies that Trump is moving forward with.

* supporting in the sense of either through hyperbole or not at all.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Orders.

There are differences of course but nonetheless there was a pause. Trump extended this to Green Card Holders which is more extreme. I would think that Green Card holders should be reconsidered on case by case basis. Those with Visas could also be vetted and given consideration.

Nonetheless there was a pause but with Trump's more extreme.

That's the point: "extreme". There is utility in understanding what *false equivalence* is and why it cannot be acceptable to use it as an arguing point. Now, most people don't understand what it is, and that's why we are where we are right now.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

So, not Saudi Arabia? I'm against this ban on every level, but if you're going be doing it in order to be preventing terrorist attacks in the US, banning the people from the place which makes the most terrorist attacks in the US would seem to be a good start.

Excellent point. It kind of undercuts the whole anti-terrorism message eh?

 

[Elixir]

So, not Saudi Arabia? I'm against this ban on every level, but if you're going be doing it in order to be preventing terrorist attacks in the US, banning the people from the place which makes the most terrorist attacks in the US would seem to be a good start.

Excellent point. It kind of undercuts the whole anti-terrorism message eh?

Spicer, trying to preserve said message: "B-b-b-ut we're LOOKING AT adding countries..."

 

[blastula]

Some congressional Republicans have come out against the ban.

Whip Count: Here’s where Republicans stand on Trump’s controversial travel ban - The Washington Post

Here is the current breakdown in each chamber:

SENATE: 8 opposed, 15 have reservations, 5 support

HOUSE: 16 opposed, 23 have reservations, 79 support

 

[untermensche]

Neither are always wrong.

Obama always gave a specific reason for doing it. And it was something recommended by others.

This is a dictate simply pulled from Trump's ass.

You must see that, you're kissing it.

Are you assuming my political orientation? I'm non-binary. That's very politically incorrect on your part.

I don't care about your insane orientation that has no connection to the real world.

You are here with your head in Trump's ass spewing ignorant talking points.

A person's colors are seen in what and who they defend.

You defend a capricious idiotic and destructive ban.

With the feeble "Obama did it too", when he didn't do anything close to this.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Are you assuming my political orientation? I'm non-binary. That's very politically incorrect on your part.

I don't care about your insane orientation that has no connection to the real world.

You are here with your head in Trump's ass spewing ignorant talking points.

A person's colors are seen in what and who they defend.

You defend a capricious idiotic and destructive ban.

With the feeble "Obama did it too", when he didn't do anything close to this.

I think I understand your garbled post.

Start with your premise "Obama is the essence of good". Add my comment "Trump is acting like Obama" and you can wrongly conclude that I'm saying something good about Trump.

Start with your premise "It is either Trump or Obama". Add my comment "I criticize both" and you see "I criticize only one of them and that is Obama" and you can wrongly conclude that I'm in favor of Trump.


As crudely as he put it, Jimmy is fairly close to describing my position. I'm not defending the ban. I'm laughing at the hypocrisy of those opposing under Trump what was supported under Obama. Like you. It doesn't matter to you what the policy is, it only matters who proposes it. If Obama does it that makes it good, if Trump does the same that makes it bad. That's you. That's all you.



Of course, pointing out liberal hypocrisy is anti-liberal, making me some sort of Trump supporter, right? What a spectacular Trumpertantrum you are having. You need to go sit in the corner until you calm down. I'm sure having people laugh at you is so triggering.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I don't care about your insane orientation that has no connection to the real world.

You are here with your head in Trump's ass spewing ignorant talking points.

A person's colors are seen in what and who they defend.

You defend a capricious idiotic and destructive ban.

With the feeble "Obama did it too", when he didn't do anything close to this.

I think I understand your garbled post.

Start with your premise "Obama is the essence of good". Add my comment "Trump is acting like Obama" and you can wrongly conclude that I'm saying something good about Trump.

Actually, you are off the rails in suggesting untermensche thinks Obama is the essence of good. That is a strawman you keep dragging out and can't actually defend.

Start with your premise "It is either Trump or Obama". Add my comment "I criticize both"...

You haven't really criticized Trump here. You just enter in these threads and derail by saying "But Obama..." Your criticism has hardly been bipartisan, while untermensche has been pretty vocal against both Trump and Obama. I mean seriously, if you think unter feels Obama is the "essence of good", you are clearly not reading anyone's posts and are just using your Libertarian Smug powers to roll out preconceived strawman arguments.

 

[untermensche]

I don't care about your insane orientation that has no connection to the real world.

You are here with your head in Trump's ass spewing ignorant talking points.

A person's colors are seen in what and who they defend.

You defend a capricious idiotic and destructive ban.

With the feeble "Obama did it too", when he didn't do anything close to this.

I think I understand your garbled post.

Start with your premise "Obama is the essence of good". Add my comment "Trump is acting like Obama" and you can wrongly conclude that I'm saying something good about Trump.

Start with your premise "It is either Trump or Obama". Add my comment "I criticize both" and you see "I criticize only one of them and that is Obama" and you can wrongly conclude that I'm in favor of Trump.


As crudely as he put it, Jimmy is fairly close to describing my position. I'm not defending the ban. I'm laughing at the hypocrisy of those opposing under Trump what was supported under Obama. Like you. It doesn't matter to you what the policy is, it only matters who proposes it. If Obama does it that makes it good, if Trump does the same that makes it bad. That's you. That's all you.



Of course, pointing out liberal hypocrisy is anti-liberal, making me some sort of Trump supporter, right? What a spectacular Trumpertantrum you are having. You need to go sit in the corner until you calm down. I'm sure having people laugh at you is so triggering.

There is no "liberal hypocrisy" here.

You are a simple minded fool aping a stupid right-wing talking point that has no connection to reality.

Obama did place bans when there was evidence of a problem and at the request of intelligence personnel.

This ban was pulled directly from Trump's ass based on NO FACTS.

That is what you support here with your stupidity. Harmful actions based on no facts.

Your ilk are dangerous. And with a madman as president these are dangerous times.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Your ilk are dangerous.

People who forsake the false either-or, and oppose both Trump AND Obama, are dangerous to partisans such as yourself. You wrote one thing that was correct. You must defend the status-quo at all costs.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Your ilk are dangerous.

People who forsake the false either-or, and oppose both Trump AND Obama, are dangerous to partisans such as yourself. You wrote one thing that was correct. You must defend the status-quo at all costs.

 

[untermensche]

Your ilk are dangerous.

People who forsake the false either-or, and oppose both Trump AND Obama, are dangerous to partisans such as yourself. You wrote one thing that was correct. You must defend the status-quo at all costs.

You spread right-wing trash.

You are the only partisan here.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

People who forsake the false either-or, and oppose both Trump AND Obama, are dangerous to partisans such as yourself. You wrote one thing that was correct. You must defend the status-quo at all costs.

You spread right-wing trash.

You are the only partisan here.

You can't tell the difference between someone who opposes both, and someone who opposes just one of them. You think that someone who opposes Trump is right-wing because he also opposes Obama.

You call people trash for supporting someone they oppose. You illustrate the thoroughness of your understanding of politics through resorting to name-calling to replace your complete lack of ability to respond otherwise.

Yes, I am a partisan, just not for the party you want me to be a partisan of. You can't tell the difference between what I am and right-wing. This is because you have the belief that anything you disagree with, no matter how varied, is "right wing".

It would be pitiful if it weren't so funny.

Go back to AOL chat rooms.

 

[untermensche]

You spread right-wing trash.

You are the only partisan here.

You can't tell the difference between someone who opposes both, and someone who opposes just one of them. You think that someone who opposes Trump is right-wing because he also opposes Obama.

You call people trash for supporting someone they oppose. You illustrate the thoroughness of your understanding of politics through resorting to name-calling to replace your complete lack of ability to respond otherwise.

Yes, I am a partisan, just not for the party you want me to be a partisan of. You can't tell the difference between what I am and right-wing. This is because you have the belief that anything you disagree with, no matter how varied, is "right wing".

It would be pitiful if it weren't so funny.

Go back to AOL chat rooms.

You are spewing idiotic right-wing nonsense.

You can't repeat Republican talking points and then claim impartiality.

What Trump did was insane. There is no basis for it.

When Obama temporarily halted refugees it was based on actual warnings and based on the advise of intelligence experts.

You are playing a child's game.

Throwing up a fallacious smoke screen to avoid talking about the issue at hand.

Not a word in all your hand waving about the issue at hand. Trump's insane ban based on no intelligence asked for by no one.

 

[Elixir]

You can't tell the difference between someone who opposes both, and someone who opposes just one of them. You think that someone who opposes Trump is right-wing because he also opposes Obama.

You call people trash for supporting someone they oppose. You illustrate the thoroughness of your understanding of politics through resorting to name-calling to replace your complete lack of ability to respond otherwise.

Yes, I am a partisan, just not for the party you want me to be a partisan of. You can't tell the difference between what I am and right-wing. This is because you have the belief that anything you disagree with, no matter how varied, is "right wing".

It would be pitiful if it weren't so funny.

Go back to AOL chat rooms.

You are spewing idiotic right-wing nonsense.

You can't repeat Republican talking points and then claim impartiality.

What Trump did was insane. There is no basis for it.

When Obama temporarily halted refugees it was based on actual warnings and based on the advise of intelligence experts.

You are playing a child's game.

Throwing up a fallacious smoke screen to avoid talking about the issue at hand.

Not a word in all your hand waving about the issue at hand. Trump's insane ban based on no intelligence asked for by no one.

I think Jason identifies as a Libertarian... could be wrong, but he isn't exactly falling over backwards trying to clear that up.

 

[untermensche]

You are spewing idiotic right-wing nonsense.

You can't repeat Republican talking points and then claim impartiality.

What Trump did was insane. There is no basis for it.

When Obama temporarily halted refugees it was based on actual warnings and based on the advise of intelligence experts.

You are playing a child's game.

Throwing up a fallacious smoke screen to avoid talking about the issue at hand.

Not a word in all your hand waving about the issue at hand. Trump's insane ban based on no intelligence asked for by no one.

I think Jason identifies as a Libertarian... could be wrong, but he isn't exactly falling over backwards trying to clear that up.

This has nothing to do with what people think they are.

This is about people spewing fallacious Republican, FOX NEWS, arguments.

 

[Elixir]

I think Jason identifies as a Libertarian... could be wrong, but he isn't exactly falling over backwards trying to clear that up.

This has nothing to do with what people think they are.

This is about people spewing fallacious Republican, FOX NEWS, arguments.

Yeah, but no slightly ovoid peg likes being hammered into a round hole...

 

[bleubird]

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...dumb-deal-australia-refugee-resettlement-live
Great diplomacy!