I agreed, I came across this the other day and signed off immediately.
1 Like
Anyone else think it’s possible that Trump may not completely want to be CIC?
With his non stop self sabotage I think he may at least subconsciously not be completely up to the task. I suspect that now that it is a legitimate possibility he may be having second thoughts considering the weight of the position
(Places tin foil hat securely atop head) the more this election goes on the more I think he’s a plant by the Clinton Machine…
2 Likes
Oh, I think that’s very possible.
I think he would love to lose the election, write a (ghostwritten) book about how the system was rigged against him, and spend the next decade collecting appearance and speaking fees as “former Republican Presidential candidate Donald J. Trump” to holler the same crap he’s been spewing for the last year.
4 Likes
That’s exactly I imagined as well, I’m sure his ego has lead him to fantasize about the position but with reality sinking in I think he may feel much more comfortable as a disgruntled outsider.
I disagree. He has waaaaaaaay to much pride. If he were going to do something like that, he would do something deliberate and face saving.
I am afraid the debates are going to end up being “Fuck You!”, “Oh yeah, well Fuck You and that fake titty whore”. “No you cannot say Fuck You, I said Fuck You!”, “I am a woman and I could can say Fuck You when ever I want to mother fucker!”, “Well you fucked everybody except Bill, he had to order out!”
Also, one thing that I can’t help but chuckle at this:
Trump answered a question “What sacrifices have you made for your country?” with the following:
“I’ve created thousands and thousands of jobs, tens of thousands of jobs, built great structures, had tremendous success”
Note: this isn’t a “who’s done the worst thing” post (we’ve spent plenty of time debating the worst, most awful thing that the respective candidates have done), I just found it humorous that he doesn’t understand none of those things are sacrifices.
3 Likes
He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth after all.
True, but most of us haven’t sacrificed anything for this country. And the reporter who asked the question, unless they are a vet, hasn’t sacrificed shit for the country either.
Those who sacrifice for the country are in the military. They are the only ones who can claim they have made sacrifices for the country and not even all of them, but most of them.
Truth is, part of the success of this country is we have the best military in the world protecting it so the rest of us can go about our business and just live in this safe space.
Places where everybody is required to sacrifice for the country are horrible dictatorships who oppress the people.
It is hard to argue that creating business and providing jobs isn’t a good thing for people in the country, though.
It’s nit picking. If you aren’t in the military, you haven’t sacrificed for your country…
All reasonable points - I just thought it was funny that part of his answer to “What sacrifices have you made for this country?” included that he has “built great structures” (as though he personally built them) and that he has “had tremendous success.”
Also - at risk of taking us down an ugly path (again) on this thread, I would question whether the business he has created and jobs he’s provided are all that great. Certainly, “creating jobs” is a good thing for society in a vacuum, but he has a long, well-documented history of not paying contractors that he’s hired and/or paying them well below agreed-upon rates and just counting on them not having the legal resources to nail him for it.
Had we not gone to war, the Khans would not have had to make such a sacrifice.
Trump could have flipped the script, and ask the dad why he supports a candidate who voted to send his son to his death.
That’s got nothing to do with the Khans, though.
It actually does, because the crux to the dad’s argument is the sacrifice (loss of his son).
Edited - would the dad have anything to talk shit about if his son was not sent to war ? Most likely not.
The decision to go to war in Iraq has absolutely nothing at all to do with the Khan’s. Their son was ordered to go, period.
The fact that, in hindsight, people want to argue we shouldn’t have gone is irrelevant. We went. Capt. Khan went and died for his country. Trying to use some catch 22 doesn’t change that and let’s not forget Trump has flip-flopped on this issue too.
His son, also a Muslim I’m presuming here, would still have, again assuming here, served his country by joining the Armed Forces. The fact that he died is not the point. The point is that a Muslim put the uniform on like the rest of us and served with honor.
The decision to go to war has to do with candidate Hillary Clinton, who voted the same as the evil GW Bush. This is a gauge as to her judgment with foreign policy. Let’s not forget that Obama rode this same train right into the White House in 2008, I don’t see a problem with Trump doing the same thing.
The fact that the son served is without question honorable, but it deflates the idea of sacrifice. He was also more than likely killed by a Muslim, but oh that hate-Whitey train is still going full speed ahead.
Again, the decision to go to war in Iraq has zero to do with the Khans. The argument that the war in Iraq was unfounded does not in any way, shape, or form deflate the Khan’s sacrifice.
Also, Trump supported the war before he didn’t support the war.
How is one radical Muslim killing an American Muslim part of the “hate-whitey train”?
Hillary chose Khan to speak about a sacrifice that didn’t need to happen. Yes the Khans made the ultimate sacrifice, why he is calling out Trump is beyond me when he had nothing to do with the sacrifice.
As far as the hate-Whitey train, the son is dead because of some of what Trump is saying, not because of a lack of American diversity that Democrats preach. You cannot hug a terrorist when he is shooting at you, trying to blow you up, or drive a truck up your ass.
1 Like
Just about everything that is objectionable about the war and its run-up – and there is much – has to do with the case as presented by the Bush administration throughout the year prior to the Iraq Resolution vote. Had the push not been constructed (as everybody found out only later) with such an admixture of error and bad faith – had the intelligence and facts not been “fixed around the policy” – things would have been much different. Cinton vis-a-vis Iraq will never be Bush or Cheney vis-a-vis Iraq. It won’t work because it doesn’t have anything to do with reality.
And either way, it certainly doesn’t have anything to do with the Gold Star mother over whom Trump chose to spend the last few days repeatedly faceplanting.
[quote]
If restrictions on Muslim immigration had been in place decades ago, Mr. Khan said, neither he, a lawyer with an advanced degree from Harvard Law School; his wife, Ghazala, who taught Persian at a Pakistani college before raising three boys in the Washington suburbs; their eldest son, Shaharyar, who was a top student at the University of Virginia and a co-founder of a biotechnology company; nor Captain Khan, who posthumously earned the Bronze Star, along with a Purple Heart, for saving the lives of his men, would have been allowed to settle here.[/quote]
That’s the thing about idiocy of a certain epic sweep: when you propose a policy regarding all Muslim immigrant families, you expose yourself to the counter-example of any Muslim immigrant family. And it turns out, as anybody with part of a brain stem could have guessed, that it isn’t difficult to find a Muslim immigrant family infinitely better and more patriotic than Donald Trump, who is currently one of the world’s most famous morally-vacuous, intellectually-limited scumbags. That this counts against him is entirely a product of his incredibly stupid public remarks, and therefore entirely his own fault.
3 Likes
Immigration lawyer focusing specifically on muslim immigration sees his golden goose about to get cooked by Trump.
He also works for a law firm with ties to Saudi Arabia.
Check out these snapshots of things he wrote (they were on his site which he took down).
In it he elucidated on the system of Sharia law expressing his reverence for “The Sunnah [the works of Muhammad] — authentic tradition of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him).” A snapshot of his essay can be seen here:
He literally tells muslims to subordinate to Shariah Law.