Raptors says a trip to the white house is a "hard no"

[QUOTE=ralph_i_el]Ever since Nixon the Republicans have made it their strategy to win the South by embracing any policy that hurts black folks and gets whites on their side. Here is Reagan's campaign consultant explaining the strategy. You can find the entire interview on YouTube.

[url]https://youtu.be/X_8E3ENrKrQ[/url]

I have a Master's degree in History. This is my shit.[/QUOTE]

So you make coffee at starbucks then?

The southern strategy and party switch is such a tired and misleading claim. The segregationists that Joe Biden said he had to work with were all democrats well past the civil rights acts.

[QUOTE=Hawker]Isn't all that stuff still alleged? Number 2 definitely looks bad I'll agree with you.

I applaud his father for trying to evade estate taxes. Those are immoral and unethical.

I'd still rather have someone like Trump than a lawyer, activist or political science major who wants to be in politics for life.

Also, many people, like myself, don't care as much about character and judge the actions of policy decisions. Bush was a despicable piece of shit but you have people here trying to claim he's a good dude that cares about people. It's hard to take people like that seriously when they try to make moral and ethical high grounds over Trump. These individuals are brainwashed to hate the guy - and normally can't name anything he's done policy wise and critique it.[/QUOTE]


2-3 are alleged. The Russian mob folks have been arrested in the past in Trump Tower.

Trump hasn't ever proven he's a billionaire, that's not an allegation either. It's just something he hasn't done. According to his lawyer, they falsified documents attesting to his worth when trying to get a loan to buy the Buffalo Bills.

I think inheritance is immoral and unethical to begin with. I understand passing down a plot of land that you live on, or family treasures. Passing down thousands of apartment units though? Isn't that just an aristocracy at a certain point?

Raptors are a Canadian team, the last Canadian team to win a major sports title didn't get an invite either.

[QUOTE=ralph_i_el]2-3 are alleged. The Russian mob folks have been arrested in the past in Trump Tower.

I think inheritance is immoral and unethical to begin with.[/QUOTE]

How is the government stealing from someone against their will supposedly more ethical than that individual, through their own voluntary choice, designating who gets their wealth? There's no case to be made for that at all.

I know the russian mob folks have been arrested but you're making the inference that there's a connection - of which there is no proof of. That part is alleged.

[QUOTE=Hawker]So you make coffee at starbucks then?

The southern strategy and party switch is such a tired and misleading claim. The segregationists that Joe Biden said he had to work with were all democrats well past the civil rights acts.[/QUOTE]

I used to work in investment banking, and now I'm in education. My first degree was finance (specializing in banking services). I basically managed people's retirement funds.


Democrats are mostly shit too. We basically have 4 parties right now, compressed into 2 by our election rules.

1. The Trump Wing. (I could go on and on about how people end up being huge Trump fans, but we all kind of get it by now).

2. Corporate Republicans (Mitch McConnell etc...). These guys used to own the party until Trump came along. They line up on the right of social issues (gay rights, guns, drugs....). They support subsidizing business and an interventionist foreign policy.

3. Corporate Democrats (The Nancy and Chuck wing). They line up on the left of social issues (gay rights, guns, drugs....). They support subsidizing business and an interventionist foreign policy.

Corporate R's and D's are really only different on social issues. These "wedge" social issues just serve to keep workers divided.

4. The Left. For a lot of America's history, the Left was openly repressed by the police. We have a bloody history of labor riots up until WW2. After WW2, the socialist left was purged from the government and major media sources. The Left has made a come back thanks to the Iraq War and 2008 Great Recession. Bernie Sanders is pretty much a centrist Dem from the 1930s on financial issues and taxes. Obviously he's far to the left of them on social issues.

[QUOTE=Hawker][B]How is the government stealing from someone against their will supposedly more ethical than that individual, through their own voluntary choice, designating who gets their wealth?[/B] There's no case to be made for that at all.

I know the russian mob folks have been arrested but you're making the inference that there's a connection - of which there is no proof of. That part is alleged.[/QUOTE]

Why do you own the land and resources? Where does this claim come from?

[QUOTE=Hawker]Isn't all that stuff still alleged? Number 2 definitely looks bad I'll agree with you.

I applaud his father for trying to evade estate taxes. Those are immoral and unethical.

I'd still rather have someone like Trump than a lawyer, activist or political science major who wants to be in politics for life.

Also, many people, like myself, don't care as much about character and judge the actions of policy decisions. Bush was a despicable piece of shit but you have people here trying to claim he's a good dude that cares about people. It's hard to take people like that seriously when they try to make moral and ethical high grounds over Trump. These individuals are brainwashed to hate the guy - and normally can't name anything he's done policy wise and critique it.[/QUOTE]

I can't find the clip now, but I recall several years ago on PTI, Michael Wilbon made some comments along the lines of how black people hear the way that Trump characterizes other "out group" members, like immigrants and foreigners, and that the presence of that sort of open chauvism/bigotry makes them viscerally nervous.

I don't know how much there is to it, but it sounded good to me. It seems crazy to me that it's so socially acceptable to discriminate against someone born in another state's territory, when doing so is arguably even less defensible than discriminating based on skin color.

[QUOTE=ralph_i_el]I used to work in investment banking, and now I'm in education. My first degree was finance (specializing in banking services). I basically managed people's retirement funds.


Democrats are mostly shit too. We basically have 4 parties right now, compressed into 2 by our election rules.

1. The Trump Wing. (I could go on and on about how people end up being huge Trump fans, but we all kind of get it by now).

2. Corporate Republicans (Mitch McConnell etc...). These guys used to own the party until Trump came along. They line up on the right of social issues (gay rights, guns, drugs....). They support subsidizing business and an interventionist foreign policy.

3. Corporate Democrats (The Nancy and Chuck wing). They line up on the left of social issues (gay rights, guns, drugs....). They support subsidizing business and an interventionist foreign policy.

Corporate R's and D's are really only different on social issues. These "wedge" social issues just serve to keep workers divided.

4. The Left. For a lot of America's history, the Left was openly repressed by the police. We have a bloody history of labor riots up until WW2. After WW2, the socialist left was purged from the government and major media sources. The Left has made a come back thanks to the Iraq War and 2008 Great Recession. Bernie Sanders is pretty much a centrist Dem from the 1930s on financial issues and taxes. Obviously he's far to the left of them on social issues.[/QUOTE]

Sounds like you really only have praise for the left. Bernie praised communist countries like Nicaragua, Cuba and Russia. How comes he's stopped doing so?I'd say he's far left on financial and tax issues as well. None of his so called democrat socialist paradises exist without heavily taxing the middle class. Good luck selling that to the US. It's just unfortunate that many people stopped learning history after WWII to see the dangers of socialism and communism failures from the 50s onward.

I agree with your overall view of the four sectors. Corporate dems and republicans do differ on regulations. Generally republicans don't pass nearly as many regulations while repealing very little while corporate democrats support passing very many regulations and never repealing any.

[QUOTE=ralph_i_el]Why do you own the land and resources? Where does this claim come from?[/QUOTE]

It comes from property rights that have existed since the foundation of the US - individuals should own the land and determine how they are used as opposed to the government (aristocratic governments like Europe which you seemed to detest earlier).

A philosophical, libertarian understanding essentially.

I could throw the same question to you really - why should the government own the land and resouces? Where does this claim come from? The main difference being is property rights and negotiation of how these properties would benefit individuals would be mainly voluntary whereas government would be by force.

We know what your kind of mindset leads to which is the Soviet Union - no thanks.

[QUOTE=MaxPlayer]I can't find the clip now, but I recall several years ago on PTI, Michael Wilbon made some comments along the lines of how black people hear the way that Trump characterizes other "out group" members, like immigrants and foreigners, and that the presence of that sort of open chauvism/bigotry makes them viscerally nervous.

I don't know how much there is to it, but it sounded good to me. It seems crazy to me that it's so socially acceptable to discriminate against someone born in another state's territory, when doing so is arguably even less defensible than discriminating based on skin color.[/QUOTE]

We are a world of nation-states - that's the reality. Every country discriminates based on their immigration system. Not many countries make you a citizen just for being born there. Not many countries have immigration systems just for being your aunt/uncle. To satisfy your desire, that would mean open border countries with no legal system to manage immigration. And if that were to happen, all state welfare/benefits would have to be ceased.

It's not crazy at all.

And I don't think Michael Wilbon from PTI should be anyone's foundation for political opinions - or sports media in general as they're extremely liberal biased.

[QUOTE=MaxPlayer]I can't find the clip now, but I recall several years ago on PTI, Michael Wilbon made some comments along the lines of how black people hear the way that Trump characterizes other "out group" members, like immigrants and foreigners, and that the presence of that sort of open chauvism/bigotry makes them viscerally nervous.

I don't know how much there is to it, but it sounded good to me. [B][COLOR="Red"] It seems crazy to me that it's so socially acceptable to discriminate against someone born in another state's territory,[/COLOR][/B] when doing so is arguably even less defensible than discriminating based on skin color.[/QUOTE]


what against democrat states?

both sides fling shit in that regard and have since forever thats politics 101.

[QUOTE=Hawker]It comes from property rights that have existed since the foundation of the US - individuals should own the land and determine how they are used as opposed to the government (aristocratic governments like Europe which you seemed to detest earlier).

A philosophical, libertarian understanding essentially.

I could throw the same question to you really - why should the government own the land and resouces? Where does this claim come from? The main difference being is property rights and negotiation of how these properties would benefit individuals would be mainly voluntary whereas government would be by force.

We know what your kind of mindset leads to which is the Soviet Union - no thanks.[/QUOTE]


Where did those property rights come from? The government. Your property rights are protected by the legal system which upholds contracts and deeds. Without the government, there is no right to property beyond what you can control by force.

Where does government come from? In older times, people said that their rulers were favored by God (or gods), and that was why they ruled legitimately. Theoretically the government in America is legitimate because it represent the people of the nation. Our representatives can basically do anything allowed by the Constitution, including taxes. [B]The same document that gave you property rights gives the government the ability to tax that property. [/B].

Our founding fathers knew that over-concentration of wealth was dangerous to the nation. Thomas Jefferson wrote about this, and said that it was necessary to control inheritance. Adam Smith actually wrote about this in "The Wealth of Nations" (considered the seminal work of capitalist theory). There are many obvious problems that can come from having a bunch of very rich people that didn't earn their money and don't have to work.



I wouldn't want to live in the USSR, but it's silly to criticize their quality of life if you don't have any context of what pre-revolutionary Tsarist Russia was like. For example, 25% of Russia was literate when the communists took over. Within 10 years, that had doubled. By the 1950's they were as literate as any country on Earth.

Famines were common in Russian history. The last famine in their history was under Stalin. By the 60's Soviets were consuming more calories a day than Americans (until the 1990's. Not as much meat though).

Pre-revolutionary Russia literally horrified visitors from other countries due to the level of violence and poverty. Nobles carried around whips as a symbol of nobility and would use them often. Executions were common for things as small as grazing a cow on a noble's pasture (this is barely over 100 years ago).

[QUOTE=Hawker]Sounds like you really only have praise for the left. Bernie praised communist countries like Nicaragua, Cuba and Russia. How comes he's stopped doing so?I'd say he's far left on financial and tax issues as well. None of his so called democrat socialist paradises exist without heavily taxing the middle class. Good luck selling that to the US. It's just unfortunate that many people stopped learning history after WWII to see the dangers of socialism and communism failures from the 50s onward.

I agree with your overall view of the four sectors. Corporate dems and republicans do differ on regulations. [B]Generally republicans don't pass nearly as many regulations while repealing very little while corporate democrats support passing very many regulations and never repealing any[/B].[/QUOTE]

Corporate Dems have deregulated banking many times.
Republicans don't regulate corporations....they regulate individuals. War on drugs. Opposition to gay marriage. Opposition to abortion. These are all instances of the government regulating morality of individuals.

Regulations on businesses are usually good. Ever read "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair? Basically the meat-packing industry was just throwing chemicals and rats and human body parts in processed meats, and only stopped when the government regulated them.

Without government regulation, banks could invest your savings in risky start-ups, and then just stiff you if they went out of business. As it stands, banks have to reserve 10% of deposits, and pay for federal deposit insurance to make sure YOU don't get ripped off if the banks fail.

Don't fall for corporate BS on regulations.

[QUOTE=Hawker]We are a world of nation-states - that's the reality. Every country discriminates based on their immigration system. Not many countries make you a citizen just for being born there. Not many countries have immigration systems just for being your aunt/uncle. To satisfy your desire, that would mean open border countries with no legal system to manage immigration. And if that were to happen, all state welfare/benefits would have to be ceased.

It's not crazy at all.
[/QUOTE]

It just seems odd that in the "land of the free", I'm not allowed to trade with a Chinese person or hire a Mexican because some protectionist moron thinks I'd thereby be "taking his job."

That a self-described "libertarian" as yourself appears to view this as ethically normal seems illustrative of the problem. Hopefully someday more people will view this apartheid for what it is.

[QUOTE=Hawker]
And I don't think Michael Wilbon from PTI should be anyone's foundation for political opinions - or sports media in general as they're extremely liberal biased.[/QUOTE]

I don't believe that I cited him as a "foundation for political opinions," just as what I viewed as a refreshing and optimistic take on black people's alleged dislike of Trump.

Since a Canadian team won...

shouldnt they be going to 24 Sussex, not the white house?

:biggums:

[QUOTE=LukeWalton]Since a Canadian team won...

shouldnt they be going to 24 Sussex, not the white house?

:biggums:[/QUOTE]
Prime Minister already invited the Team. Nick Nurse already accepted the invitation. They will be in Ottawa, Ontario.

[QUOTE=ralph_i_el]Where did those property rights come from? The government.[/QUOTE]

***** wtf. the constitution was made to limit the power of the government can and cant do.
[QUOTE=ralph_i_el]Your property rights are protected by the legal system which upholds contracts and deeds. [/QUOTE]

yo i didnt sign shit lol inb4 you say theirs some imaginary contract i signed when i as born lol
[QUOTE=ralph_i_el]Without the government, there is no right to property beyond what you can control by force. [/QUOTE]

so you dont own your body and you cant defend yourself? ain't nothing immoral about force if its used to defend yourself from getting jumped after some homies dont like you dominating them on the court.

[QUOTE=Detroit]Now imagine a white player saying no if Obama was in office :oldlol:

They would've labelled him a racist bigot and threw the book at him.[/QUOTE]

Media would def have exploded

[QUOTE=DaHeezy]Then is it fair to say you're an irrational prick who's a lefty snowflake? Because, you know, free speech.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, and I could call you an asshole who should mind your own fukking business. Trump goes against my political viewpoints more often than not, I don't dislike him just because he's a douchebag who writes mean tweets. And I'm not that far left, I'm socially conservative, more left on economic issues...

I know you oppose Trudeau, it's my free speech to call you an irrational prick too, you reactionary snowflake :cheers:

[QUOTE=Cleverness]Media would def have exploded[/QUOTE]
Tom Brady didn't go when the Patriots were invited...no one batted an eye and he's a pretty big name athlete.

Fail

[QUOTE=DaHeezy]I find it the opposite. I find Trump haters loose their shit when they come across anyone neutral or in support. It'c clear the anti-Trump brigade are more irrational ITT. This is coming from an outside observer not from the US[/QUOTE]
Fukk off, you aren't unbiased, LMAO

You support Trump often in the OTC forum :oldlol: You are a far right loon, explains your Trump fan boi status.

You ain't fooling anyone buddy

Plenty of ISHers who aren't from the US goofing on the US because of the clown in the White House, lol

Why do you even care what American citizens think about in our internal affairs? You're Canadian, fukk off, I couldn't care less about your politics...mind your own fukking business.

[QUOTE=TheMan]Tom Brady didn't go when the Patriots were invited...no one batted an eye and he's a pretty big name athlete.

Fail[/QUOTE]

???

I remember Tom skipping a visit while Trump was in office, but I think the reason was to spend time with his family?

I don't remember Tom Brady skipping the WH visit [I]because [/I]of Obama.

I do remember several Warriors (pretty much the entire team) skipping the WH visit because of Trump.

[QUOTE=MaxPlayer]It just seems odd that in the "land of the free", I'm not allowed to trade with a Chinese person or hire a Mexican because some protectionist moron thinks I'd thereby be "taking his job."

That a self-described "libertarian" as yourself appears to view this as ethically normal seems illustrative of the problem. Hopefully someday more people will view this apartheid for what it is.



I don't believe that I cited him as a "foundation for political opinions," just as what I viewed as a refreshing and optimistic take on black people's alleged dislike of Trump.[/QUOTE]

Who is allowing you not to trade with a chinese person? I believe the main issue is with tariffs and not true free trade.

As far as hiring a mexican, sure, do it but again, we are a nation-state and not an open border country. You'd have to eliminate the minimum wage. Eliminate state and federal welfare. Privatize all land as well to accomplish the libertarian dream that you want. That's not the reality we live in so I'll continue with the belief that as americans, we are the ones paying taxes so we get to choose the flow of immigration - which doesn't mean we don't trade with China and don't hire a mexican. Those are values of self-determination and sovereignty which fit in line with libertarian values.

I'm a right-libertarian, not a left-libertarian.

[QUOTE=Cleverness]???

I remember Tom skipping a visit while Trump was in office, but I think the reason was to spend time with his family?

I don't remember Tom Brady skipping the WH visit [I]because [/I]of Obama.

I do remember several Warriors (pretty much the entire team) skipping the WH visit because of Trump.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. He didnt skip it because of politics. He skipped it because he had other things going on.

It's not a legitimate comparison but TheMan knows this (as well as the rest of the low-IQ lefties) and is just being obtuse anyway.

[QUOTE=TheMan]Fukk off, you aren't unbiased, LMAO

You support Trump often in the OTC forum :oldlol: You are a far right loon, explains your Trump fan boi status.

You ain't fooling anyone buddy

Plenty of ISHers who aren't from the US goofing on the US because of the clown in the White House, lol

Why do you even care what American citizens think about in our internal affairs? You're Canadian, fukk off, I couldn't care less about your politics...mind your own fukking business.[/QUOTE]

This is fine - as long as you apply the same standard to whose views you identify with. The narrative that "omg the world hates Trump" is so juvenile and untrue and plebs on here believe it.

For example - mexicans can **** off. Who cares what they think about americans?

[QUOTE=Cleverness]???

I remember Tom skipping a visit while Trump was in office, but I think the reason was to spend time with his family?

I don't remember Tom Brady skipping the WH visit [I]because [/I]of Obama.

I do remember several Warriors (pretty much the entire team) skipping the WH visit because of Trump.[/QUOTE]
Black athletes aren't declining Trump just because he's white :facepalm

How is this hard to understand? Black athletes never had a problem visiting Reagan, HW Bush, Clinton, W Bush...those guys weren't accused of being overtly racist like Trump has.

Trump has a history of racism, from not renting black people apartments (Google it), his comments on the Grand Central 5, his quoting White Nationalists on tweeter, his anti Obama northern movement, his anti Kaepernick comments, his basically saying "there are nice guys in the Klan too" Charlottesville shitfest etc etc...there are many instances of him being a racist prick, it's not a figment of the imagination.

[QUOTE=Hawker]This is fine - as long as you apply the same standard to whose views you identify with. The narrative that "omg the world hates Trump" is so juvenile and untrue and plebs on here believe it.

For example - mexicans can **** off. Who cares what they think about americans?[/QUOTE]
I agree.

Mexicans also don't gaf what Americans think about them, I have a lot of friends here in MX and they find them to be over all ignorant (their opinion)

[QUOTE=Hawker]Who is allowing you not to trade with a chinese person? I believe the main issue is with tariffs and not true free trade.

As far as hiring a mexican, sure, do it but again, we are a nation-state and not an open border country. You'd have to eliminate the minimum wage. Eliminate state and federal welfare. Privatize all land as well to accomplish the libertarian dream that you want. That's not the reality we live in so I'll continue with the belief that as americans, we are the ones paying taxes so we get to choose the flow of immigration - which doesn't mean we don't trade with China and don't hire a mexican. Those are values of self-determination and sovereignty which fit in line with libertarian values.

I'm a right-libertarian, not a left-libertarian.[/QUOTE]

Isn

[QUOTE=TheMan]Black athletes aren't declining Trump just because he's white :facepalm

How is this hard to understand? Black athletes never had a problem visiting Reagan, HW Bush, Clinton, W Bush...those guys weren't [B]accused [/B]of being overtly racist like Trump has.

Trump has a history of racism, from not renting black people apartments (Google it), his comments on the Grand Central 5, his quoting White Nationalists on tweeter, his anti Obama northern movement, his anti Kaepernick comments, his basically saying "there are nice guys in the Klan too" Charlottesville shitfest etc etc...there are many instances of him being a racist prick, it's not a figment of the imagination.[/QUOTE]

-Accused... would they have visited if Hillary was president? I'm sure her and Bill have been [I]accused [/I]quite a bit for being racist, despite identifying as Democrats.


-What is a White Nationalist? If someone is a nationalist, and their mother is white, is this person considered a White Nationalist?

-His message regarding Kaepernick resonated with many sports fans; they're not interested in watching athletes demonstrating politics when they turn on a sports game. I'm sure there would be similar attitudes if a player gave an anti-abortion speech in every after-the-game interview.

-Direct quotes from Trump:

“Anyone who acted criminally in this weekend's racist violence, you will be held fully accountable"

“We condemn in the strongest possible terms the egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence. It has no place in America.”

“Racism is evil and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to all that we hold dear as Americans.”

Which of those 3 quotes do you agree with? Which do you disagree with?


-Here's the quote that got the Democrats/media all giddy: “the egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides." (I believe this was during a press conference about infrastructure? Honestly can't remember)

...And Trump was correct on that one too. Groups like Antifa had been getting a pass for a long time, while beating up people in the streets, smashing cars and windows, etc. [B]And you should look into San Jose, CA. San Jose police intentionally lead people who were attending a Trump speech right into violent Left-wing protesters who attacked them.[/B]

The San Jose politicians blamed Trump for the attacks by Left-wing protesters (WTH?). Where is the outrage regarding those politicians saying insane things like that?

[url]https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/07/27/trump-supporters-score-legal-victory-suit-san-jose-police/[/url]

So yeah, I'd say even that controversial quote was correct. There has been violence on many sides.

[QUOTE=MaxPlayer]Isn’t this the exact same logic that was used to sell Obamacare? “We already have socialism in the healthcare industry, therefore it’s a public cost, therefore we CAN’T permit individual freedom of choice.”[/QUOTE]

You're actually right on that one but the logic is different. I remember Reagan commenting on this back when medicare and medicaid were introduced.

People value culture dude - if America was replaced 50% with people from the middle east, would american culture be the same? No it wouldn't. So it's perfectly acceptable to make decisions based on that. Australia and New Zealand have done quite well in this respect.

[QUOTE=TheMan]Black athletes aren't declining Trump just because he's white :facepalm

How is this hard to understand? Black athletes never had a problem visiting Reagan, HW Bush, Clinton, W Bush...those guys weren't accused of being overtly racist like Trump has.

Trump has a history of racism, from not renting black people apartments (Google it), his comments on the Grand Central 5, his quoting White Nationalists on tweeter, his anti Obama northern movement, his anti Kaepernick comments, his basically saying "there are nice guys in the Klan too" Charlottesville shitfest etc etc...there are many instances of him being a racist prick, it's not a figment of the imagination.[/QUOTE]

^This is all nonsense. Especially the Kaep thing. That's just straight up playing the race card. Being black doesn't excuse you from criticism. These same people have an issue with Megan Rapinoe not saying the anthem at the USWNT. She's white as ****. (inb4trumpisasexist)

Left/liberals are just too damn soft these days and love calling everything racist when people disagree with them.

[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoXThCb8EZA&t=1s"]Check this - Katy Tur saying Trump never disavowed David Duke but has done it OVER AND OVER again. Even the late 90s[/URL]

[QUOTE=TheMan]Fukk off, you aren't unbiased, LMAO

You support Trump often in the OTC forum :oldlol: You are a far right loon, explains your Trump fan boi status.

You ain't fooling anyone buddy

Plenty of ISHers who aren't from the US goofing on the US because of the clown in the White House, lol

Why do you even care what American citizens think about in our internal affairs? You're Canadian, fukk off, I couldn't care less about your politics...mind your own fukking business.[/QUOTE]

It's this triggered type reaction that makes us ****ing laugh at your joke of political affiliation. Why would I care about your President when I have an even bigger of a joker running out country who is ACTUALLY affecting what's going on in my life. So yeah, I really DGAF about Trump. So it's easy to dissect you whiners making ignorant assumptions.

[QUOTE=TheMan]Yeah, and I could call you an asshole who should mind your own fukking business. Trump goes against my political viewpoints more often than not, I don't dislike him just because he's a douchebag who writes mean tweets. And I'm not that far left, I'm socially conservative, more left on economic issues...

I know you oppose Trudeau, it's my free speech to call you an irrational prick too, you reactionary snowflake :cheers:[/QUOTE]

I oppose Trudeau because he's created a bunch of taxes that is basically putting low income families in bad financial situations. IDGAF about his social viewpoints and all the other nonsense people cry about. The equivelant of me hating Trudeau compared to how you hate Trump is complaining about his praising of the LGQTB and his general white knight POVs. That doesn't bother me. So yeah, our views aren't similar at all. You're more caught up in the media drama. If anything your statement can't be further from the truth as I voted for the party on the furthest left on the political scale and have been for years in the NDP. VERY opposite from your Republican party

But yeah, you have a right to say whatever you want. But when I say it it's true

[QUOTE=Vino24]if you are unbiased then the default is Trump supporter :oldlol: I can't wait till he wins a 2nd term the melt will be 2016 proportional[/QUOTE]

This is what I don't get with the political left in the US. You can't observe and criticize them, they go to the default, "you're a Trump supporter!"

If someone from the US questioned why I don't support my Prime Minister I would shout, "Trudeau Dick Sucker!" like all these American leftist do. Shows the mentality of the US political left is so out of whack.

[QUOTE=krazymofo]***** wtf. the constitution was made to limit the power of the government can and cant do.


yo i didnt sign shit lol inb4 you say theirs some imaginary contract i signed when i as born lol


so you dont own your body and you cant defend yourself? ain't nothing immoral about force if its used to defend yourself from getting jumped after some homies dont like you dominating them on the court.[/QUOTE]

That is one part of the Constitution. Having a government means that we can have a legal system to enforce [B]contracts[/B] and [B]deeds[/B] so that property ownership is possible.


I love force. What I'm saying is the government makes it possible to own more than you can personally defend. I'm armed to the teeth, I can easily defend my house (I'd rather not obviously). Walmart, on the other hand, would be defending facilities all over the planet...which is much easier to do when you can take people to court for stealing your property or breaking contracts, and the government can enforce those rights, possibly through violence.

When I'm talking about ownership, I'm talking about ownership of the land and capital resources that we need to produce goods and services.

[QUOTE=Hawker]You're actually right on that one but the logic is different. I remember Reagan commenting on this back when medicare and medicaid were introduced.

People value culture dude - if America was replaced 50% with people from the middle east, would american culture be the same? No it wouldn't. So it's perfectly acceptable to make decisions based on that. Australia and New Zealand have done quite well in this respect.[/QUOTE]

I mean, I'm sure many people valued the "culture" of Jim Crow. But nowadays you can't even have so much as a lunch counter that's racially segregated. And yet no one bats an eye when it comes to segregating the 95% of humanity that happens to be foreign-born from an entire 3.8 million square mile region.

[QUOTE=Cleverness]-Accused... would they have visited if Hillary was president? I'm sure her and Bill have been [I]accused [/I]quite a bit for being racist, despite identifying as Democrats.


-What is a White Nationalist? If someone is a nationalist, and their mother is white, is this person considered a White Nationalist?

-His message regarding Kaepernick resonated with many sports fans; they're not interested in watching athletes demonstrating politics when they turn on a sports game. I'm sure there would be similar attitudes if a player gave an anti-abortion speech in every after-the-game interview.

-Direct quotes from Trump:

Often times athletes/people only skip these things because they're afraid of the backlash from their fans/community. It's a left wing guilt trip mechanism. I bet a lot of guys would love to visit the White House but since they fear the backlash of their left wing controlling fans they have to decline.

Pretty sad, to be honest.

And the left say they are more tolerant and open minded :lol

Next

[QUOTE=TheCorporation]Often times athletes/people only skip these things because they're afraid of the backlash from their fans/community. It's a left wing guilt trip mechanism. I bet a lot of guys would love to visit the White House but since they fear the backlash of their left wing controlling fans they have to decline.

Pretty sad, to be honest.

And the left say they are more tolerant and open minded :lol

Next[/QUOTE]

Maybe the more educated players. I'd assume most of these cats are of the same ilk where they just hate Trump.

I find it hysterical that posters in here are talking about being "open minded".

More like the tops of their heads had been opened. GTFO -