Trump plays media

[rexbeccarox]

Holy fuck. Drich, you have to be one of the thickest, most willful people on the planet.

[Tiberius]

Back in March of 2007, Hillary Clinton’s chief strategist Mark Penn wrote a campaign memo that proposed painting Barack Obama as un-American or “other”:
“His roots to basic American values and culture are at best limited. I cannot imagine America electing a president during a time of war who is not at his center fundamentally American in his thinking and in his values ... Every speech should contain the line you were born in the middle of America to the middle class in the middle of the last century ... Let’s explicitly own ‘American’ in our programs, the speeches and the values. He doesn’t.“
In December of 2007, Billy Shaheen, the co-chair of Clinton’s New Hampshire campaign, raised the issue of Obama’s drug use as a young man, and the possibility that Obama could be attacked as a drug dealer. He said he was talking about how Republicans would attack Obama, but his statements had the effect of injecting racist stereotypes into the campaign: “It’ll be, ‘When was the last time? Did you ever give drugs to anyone? Did you sell them to anyone?’ There are so many openings for Republican dirty tricks.” It is a tried and true tactic: floating an idea to which you claim to not personally ascribe, with the effect of getting the idea to circulate.
The next day, Clinton privately apologized to Obama for Shaheen’s comments and claimed she had nothing to do with them. Obama didn’t accept the apology because he believed Clinton’s campaign was circulating emails claiming he was a Muslim. According to Reggie Love, Obama’s personal assistant at the time: “The candidate [Obama] very respectfully told her the apology was kind, but largely meaningless, given the emails it was rumored her camp had been sending out labeling him as a Muslim.”
In February 2008, the Drudge Report posted a picture of Obama in traditional Kenyan/Somali clothes (including a turban, which helped reinforce the “secret Muslim” smear). Drudge said the picture was circulated by the Clinton campaign....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-ruck...12004.html

Playing devil's advocate for Clinton here.

1) "un-American" is not the same as "non-American". You can be an American citizen and not hold certain "American" values. It's called being an individual.

2) not being "fundamentally American in his thinking and in his values" is not the same as "non-American" either. See above.

3) "Let’s explicitly own ‘American’ in our programs, the speeches and the values. He doesn’t." - Being more nationalistic than a person doesn't mean that person is non-American. It means they are less nationalistic. Being nationalistic is a state of mind/thinking. You can be an immigrant to the USA and be more nationalistic about the US than a person who was born here.

4) "the possibility that Obama could be attacked as a drug dealer." - Nothing to do with being American/non-American. Plenty of drug dealers are American.

5) "In February 2008, the Drudge Report posted a picture of Obama in traditional Kenyan/Somali clothes (including a turban, which helped reinforce the “secret Muslim” smear). Drudge said the picture was circulated by the Clinton campaign...." - Nothing to do with being American/non-American. There are lots of Americans who are Muslim.

[Drich]

Do you really think that communicating the 5 points you brought up were the intentions of the Clinton campaign in 08?

You are right they did select their language carefully, but even so do you think they made any provision so that the people to whom this argument would appeal to would make the 5 point of distinction you made?

To me (one who chooses his words carefully so that people will take the bait go in the direction I want them to go) that chose their words so they could infact deny any charge that they claimed Obama was a non American, even though those same words were indeed the start or catylist of the 'birther' movement.

[Tiberius]

Do you really think that communicating the 5 points you brought up were the intentions of the Clinton campaign in 08?

You are right they did select their language carefully, but even so do you think they made any provision so that the people to whom this argument would appeal to would make the 5 point of distinction you made?

To me (one who chooses his words carefully so that people will take the bait go in the direction I want them to go) that chose their words so they could infact deny any charge that they claimed Obama was a non American, even though those same words were indeed the start or catylist of the 'birther' movement.

I don't see how any one of those points, let alone all five of them together, even comes close to hinting at Obama being born in a different country.

The first three are literally about his values. The 4th is about drug dealing. The 5th was about his religion. Even if you reach and try to make the 5th one about him wearing traditional Kenya clothes, the fact is, his father was Kenyan, and he never hid that fact. If anything, it shows a man learning about his father's culture.

Let's also not gloss over the fact that Trump's statement "Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy. I finished it" plays down his role considerably. Even if we assume that Clinton started the birther controversy, she never came out and said anything about it directly, or fueled it with anything concrete. Trump on the other hand, took it and ran with it, making it a multiple years long crusade of his, with speeches, monetary offers, interviews, etc. It's a reach to even say he "finished it". As if Trump's word is now final on the matter. People will continue to believe Obama was born in Kenya, despite what Trump says.

A more accurate statement would have been: "Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 purportedly started the birther controversy. I made it bigger than it ever should have gotten, and now I'm admitting that after all the hype and controversy I generated for my own self-interests, I was actually completely wrong about it."

[Thumpalumpacus]

Here you go, Drich ... http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-st...-movement/

Zowee!  Will you look at all that smoke!

That's what happens when someone who shall remain unnamed overworks his 27 synapses.

[Drich]

Drich, your orange colostomy bag of a vile demagogue

(in ancient Greece and Rome) a leader or orator who espoused the cause of the common people.
https://www.google.com/search?q=define+d...8&oe=utf-8

appeals to your gullibility and fear.

If this were true, Trump would be warning us of what could happen if a certain race creed or groups of religious people were left unchecked.

The fact is IT IS HAPPENING!!! His words and purposed works are meant to stop these acts from happening. There is a huge/Uge (if I may borrow a term) difference

We don't have to be scared into believing that criminal illegals are killing citizens. We don't have to be scared into believing that an open boarder means drugs flow into this country with impunity. We don't have to be scared into thinking that ISIS is Probably going to infiltrate the hoard of Syrians slated to come into this country. Why?? Because all we have to do is turn on the news, it is all happening with far too great regularity. Illegals have killed/killing citizens, Drugs do flow into this country with impunity And ISIS has made the statement that they have already infiltrated the refugee population, (which the director of the CIA, Home Land Security, and the FBI have all concurred on. BTW These are Obama's people Telling us not to let them in unless they can be better vetted, not trumps.)

What stupid people don't seem to understand is the fact that the act of appealing to gullibility and fear differs from reacting to our fears made real, via terrorist attacks on the civilian population in this country nearly on a monthly if not a weekly basis. a Current definition of a demagogue is a leader who preys of prejudice and creates fear rather than address.

The fact is a demagogue preys on fear where no vial acts are committed. He creates fear/people are just scared into thinking bad things will happen, but nothing really has happened. He preys on the idea of change will always be bad. How does that differ from what trump has said? How about We've had more terrorist attacks this one year than we did through out Bush's whole presidency. Why? Because our leadership wants to align themselves with a philosophy that 2/3's of the rest of the world is not willing to respect.

We can not live and protect our people and maintain a utopian philosophy. Why? because that philosophy completely depends on the honor system, in that we will honor you and your beliefs and you honor us. Again, 2/3's of the world do not wish to honor us despite how we treat them. that other 2/3's of the world is living on a mandate to place their societal beliefs and their systems of government ahead of everyone else, and about 1/2 of that 2/3s has a made date to kill anyone who does not completely yield to their way of life.

Yet our leaders foolishly pretend if 1/3 of the world will just simply live and let live, the rest of the planet will just follow suit.

We must act in a way that is consistent to match the violence levied against this nation. We must protect our people first, then look at our philosphies. It is beyond arrogant and stupid to throw down the lives of our citizens to protect "The emperor's cloths."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Empero...ew_Clothes

He's been condemned not just by democrats, but COLIN POWELL

Powell pooped on Clinton as well! He doesn't like anyone.

and 50 former REPUBLICAN law agents. Trump has called captured veterans losers,

Stop stereotyping and learn to look at circumstance you liberal nazi robot. Some are losers, or are you so foolish to paint men like william port or Don Cook http://www.nampows.org/POWMOH.html in the same light as the trader "Bowe" Bergdahl. Being a captured veteran does not automatically make you a hero. Just like putting on a uniform does not automatically make you a hero. The A$$ Hole who ambushed and killed those 5 cops was a marine, Not to mention places like Ft. Leavenworth is FULL Of "vetrans"/Men who put on the uniform and pledged to defend this country with their lives, who betrayed their oath, the honor of the armed forces, and this country to full fill their own personal agendas. The military or going through the military does not make you a hero, it is simply the path many hero's have taken. This path can also be taken by wicked men.
Here's the thing you don't seem to understand.. The difference (here in the military, and in the rest of the world) between a hero and monster is the narritive, and intent of the man, NOT HIS ACTIONS.

Because a Hero AND a Monster can both slay 100 men in the most brutal of ways, and one man be held up a hero and the other a monster depending on the reason and circumstance of his actions. Again it is not the action that makes a man a hero it is the intent and circumstance.

People who blur the line between individual acts/circumstance of heroism, and a uniform for political gain are without honor, have little integrity, and should feel shame for taking the acts of selfless men so they can propagate a point.

and done so running for the party that has obstructed and stopped several veterans bills in recent years.

Do you not understand how bills work? There is not ever any One single issue Bill being passed under one vote ever! A bill even if it has a header of "veterans bill" is actually tapestry of bills patch worked together under a single header. often times they have nothing to do with one another.

So why call it a veteran's bill if has funding for obama care is also attached to it?

So that politicians who have an over abundance of stupid people that follow them can say "i voted for veterans bill" and so and so did not.

It's a game dumb ass, pull the curtain back and google/search all the other crap attached to the 'veteran's bill.'

He has had fellow BILLIONAIRE Mark Cuban call his Jerry Springer tactics "Headline Porn". You can call us godless liberals commies all you want and stupidly believe that, but when you ignore his own party that makes you the worst fool and worse than those who are intent on harm for giving them cover.

But, here's the thing sport... What if.. I am not a big fan of the GOP? What if I like the other want an outsider in that office so we can stop another 4 years of business as usual? What IF I like the rest of the country don't like where the dems or the GOP are taking us, but also know a tea party candidate or a Greene party candidate is a wasted vote?

Then absolutely everything you just said that put distance between the core GOP and trump would infact be a plus not a minus!

Trump is not a politician. For now that is what I want. why? because the "game of politics" is the death of every great democracy. How about for the next 4 years we play as little of the game as possible and lets see what comes of that.

He is using the language of a fascist, a despot.

English? if that's the case then know so is hillary!
I almost feel sorry for you here.. The following shows without a shadow of a doubt you do not understand the difference between oppression for the sake of the preservation of a societal philosophy, and the isolation and the minimization of a clear and present danger. It is like what i said above about being a hero... Circumstance, and reason will define the action not the act alone.

He is using the same language used against blacks in the age of segregation.

Apart of Lincoln's freeing of the slaves was to ship them back to africa, or to use the ones who did not go to Africa to colonize the Caribbean and south America. Lincoln died before any of this was finished (as many were shipped back to Africa and many were sent out to start colonies.) The prevailing thought for segregation was indeed an example of demagoguery, in that people of that time did not want to make allowances for black people to be seen as equals. The prevailing thought was black people had a lot of 'growing up to do as a nation or race of people.' and they did not want that 'growing up' to change the predominate culture.

So in short segregation's goal was to minimize the disruption of mid 19th century's culture and current way of life. So threats were created, dangers rumored about, all for the sake of keeping cultural disruption and the reintegration of the south at a minimum.

The same demagoguery that was aimed at Chinese migrants whom helped build our railways in the 1800s.

Yes in the west the Chinese culture was a threat to 'white culture' because durning that time their was a massive famine that took china and millions died, so the only hope was migration. Unlike the in the east, there were no programs in place that kept one culture laying claim to large swaths of land. Got to remember here the continental land mass was still some what subdivided, It had not been a full generation since the spainish and the french both occupied North America with colonies. The fear was real that with enough residence China could establish a foot hold in North America and invade from the west. This was a real threat because the Chinese were comming by the thousands. So immigration reform had to come because the majority were not being assimilated into this culture. they were simply displacing their culture to this continent.. So what made them assimilate? Their numbers were cut, they were placed back in the minority, and All of that good olde' fashion oppression cowboys could muster. Noth'n makes an asia boy wish he were more like the natives than a but kicking every single day he acts too asian.
(think about who you are talking to before you say something self righteous)

So Yes even today many western Chinese have retained their culture, but at the same time do not directly take orders from the forbidden city, which would not had been the case 150 years ago. While many still identify as chinese/manderian or cantonese most identify as american first

So here is a mixture where a perceived demogogish threat, that worked out for the betterment of this country. As the alternative (china's drought) would have most likely lead to an invasion, as has been the case in China's history.

The same hate that was aimed at the New York city Irish of "Hell's Kitchen".

The same is true here. 'Persecution" forced assimilation. Add a few decades of persecution, now they are simply Americans.

Which leaves us to WWII

The same hate filled demagoguery that lead to innocent Japanese like George Takei who was a kid during WW2.

Ignorance of history is your sin..
In WWII The Japanese Residents had proven themselves a threat at several points during the early stages of the war. Even before hostilities began many residents at the behest of their 'god' began gathering and sending intel back to their home land. Some did this openly with intent and with purpose other did so unwittingly, as family members in japan would be prompted to ask about fleet movements or staging, air raid drills procedures and the like.
The 'last straw' was the help the Japanese Navy received at the battle of Pearl Harbor. Which intel was gather from Japanese citizens living there about fleet placement, troop movement/habbits, patrols, status of readiness and weather reports all critical for maximum effect/weapons load outs. If you don't know what happened in Pearl Harbor the entire pacific fleet (ALL The ships we had to fight a war in the pacific minus the carrier groups) were destroyed.) most were raised and recommissioned, some were beyond salvaging...

The point? The Japanese Americans intentionally or not, were a real threat to the safty of this nation during WWII. Were all? certainly no. but who could say who would talk to a family member that could touch off another disaster like pearl harbor? Remember we had no pacific fleet for a time and no way to defend the west coast. If Japan had followed up with an invasion of the west coast, nothing could have been done. (they invaded alaska and nothing for a great while was done.) The US was not a world power then and had less than 1/10 of the Japanese army. So historian have speculated that they would have made it to the Mississippi river before we could stop them.

So again not a perceived threat, or a threat to a life style as with segregation, but a close and present danger that had already cost thousands of lives 100's of millions of dollars in equipment, in the FIRST opening salvo of the war, and if the patten of behavior was allowed to continue/not acted upon would have cost hundreds of thousands of more lives if not millions. This prompted a reaction that lead to the discomfort/persecution of less than 1% of the total population, but ensured the safety of a nation from literally a hostile nation who actions (in taking American lives in one day) would go unchallenged for 60 years. So cry me a river Mr. Sulu it seems to me you made out pretty well, after America won the war.

Again, you do not seem to be able to distinguish action from reason. You assume all who wear a uniform are heros. You assume all who are treated differently are persecuted wrongly. When in fact not everyone who puts on a uniform is a hero, and not everyone who this country does not welcome is unrighfully persecuted. The primary question we must ask is their a proven real danger in a group (race religion whatever) of people to this country if left uncheck/unchallenged?

If yes then F-them. America/Americans First. I don't care who gets butt hurt if it saves the lives of our country men, if we hurt some feelings then so what, do it. If My family of even if I were told I needed to go to a 'Asian camp' to ensure that people like me would not turn this country over to it's enemy's then I'd go home and pack a friggen bag.

What you don't get is the needs of the many out weight the comfort of the one.

I am tired of our leaders pretending terrorist attacks are the new norm and no one is at fault, but when one of our own goes off hit nut it's gun control that is needed.

And just like the NRA has falsely sold for decades, and simply the same "Obama's coming for your guns" which never happened, he knows damned will that the Constitution has not ever allowed on individual politician to over turn ANY amendment. He fucking knows, and so does the NRA that it takes all 50 states as  a 2/3rds majority vote to overturn an amendment.

Moron, Has any of that stopped him from comming? Has he stopped preaching about assault rifle bans when ever someone get hurt? No. Look at the comment "Obama is coming for your guns" which means he is trying to ban them... It doesn't mean he will get them does it?

Trump is a very sick and dangerous man and this is no longer about party or economics. Trump is beyond a mere mudslinger, he is pandering to fear and that is toxic in politics. When you go from mere blasphemy to demagoguery you cease to be a mere blunt critic. and you become the very thing that leads to fascist states like North Korea and oppressive theocracies like Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Again. it's not pandering when the things he's mentioning is actually taking place!! Or are you not aware their is a war going on against our police officers right now? that this weekend alone there where 3 terrorist attacks!!! When has this ever happened in this country? (I mean before obama/clinton)

Again separate empty threat/demagoguery from a reaction to what is happening. Trump is reacting to the killing of Americans on our streets by people who's 'god' told them to do it.

You have been programmed to think there is no difference, but there is. Again what caused segregation where threats against "what might happen" to society if a people were left unchecked.

What is happening here is a clear and present danger perpetrated against the American people. This threat has cost thousands of civilian lives and nearly cause the collapse of the western economy. This isn't a what if or what might happen. This has happened and Trump say we need to change how we address people who wish us harm

Again like with the Japanese are all Muslims enemy combatants? No, but again like the Japanese who among us can say who is and is not willing to kill innocent people? The desire to kill as example by the Christmas party shooters has nothing to do with gender (as both husband and wife) waged jihad. It is an ideology that can perminates their entire social structure without any outward sign or appearence, so then legislation/precautions must be enacted to encompass everyone who may qualify as a threat from regions where it is the national policy to kill people from this nation.

Again, not persecution or demagoguery as this is not a perceived/envisioned threat. This has been an active problem for the past 15 years. Terrorism is an actionable course that members of radical Islam have used to strike at the citizens of the United States on US soil, and it is getting worse. Primarily because our leaders have failed to acknowledge the difference between
an action taken to preserve soceitial change, and actions that protect the lives of it's citizens. As if our lives do not matter when compared to preserving their 'philosophy.'

You as well as your preferred 'leaders' speak in 'moral' absolutes. as in it is always wrong to do "x" people who wear "x" are always "Y" people who say "Z" are always good but people who say "z" are always bad...

How about take a step back from all of this and do a little thinking for yourself.

That is the problem with liberals. most of you are mindless morons who can't for a moment stand on his own thoughts. For example look at all the crap you spewed out at me. in one form or fashion nothing you have said here I haven't already hear from clinton or some face book propaganda supporting her side...

Verse what i wrote...
Has any what I've said about segregation, Chinese, Japanese or even the entomology of demagoguery been used to combat any of the same old same old you have been soap boxing?

I have taken History, political facts, religious ideologies what was said, and what was done in the past and more importantly why, along with the long term result to come to my final conclusion. You are toeing the line because bono said so.... why? do you not want to think for yourself, do you just vote emotion only? Look at history, look at the evidence, USE YOUR COMMON SENSE. See the differences between what was done and why. DON'T Paint All Who Had To Take Certain Actions In the Same Light. There is Legitimate Reason, And Justifiable Circumstance Why? Because It Saves Lives!!!

[ReptilianPeon]

How about a clinton appology to obama for starting this whole movement???

I don't know about that. But he has lots of reasons not to like her. I think he's just pretending to like her because he's a Democrat and what choice does he have except to endorse her?

1. She circulated photographs of Barrack in Kenyan attire (Guardian: Clinton aides claim Obama photo wasn't intended as a smear).

From article:

Barack Obama's campaign team today accused Hillary Clinton's beleaguered staff of mounting a desperate dirty tricks operation by circulating a picture of him in African dress, feeding into false claims on US websites that he is a Muslim.

2. Then you had the ridiculous 3AM advert which had a racist sub-message.

3. New York Times: THE 1992 CAMPAIGN: Democrats; Clinton Says Golfing at All-White Club Was Mistake

4. The "super-predators" thing.

5. Bill Clinton golfing with Donald Trump

6. Clintons at Donald Trump's wedding.

7. Leaked Colin Powell e-mails suggest the Clintons still refer to Barrack Obama as "that man" and Hilary is still bitter about her 2008 loss. (New York Post: Hacked Powell email reveals Hillary ‘hates’ Obama for 2008)
From the leaked e-mails:

Corporate financier Jeffrey Leeds depicted Clinton as a sore loser set on revenge in the ­emails, which were obtained by The Intercept, and claimed Clinton is terrified she might lose again.

“I think Hillary can’t believe she might not make it,” Leeds wrote to Powell in March 2015.

“It’s the one prize she wants. She has everything else.”

Leeds went on to say that the 2008 Democratic primary left Clinton and Obama bitter rivals.

“And she HATES that the President (‘that man,’ as the Clintons call him) kicked her ass in 2008,” he wrote. “She can’t believe it or accept it.”

So, naturally, she had to have the DNC rig the primaries to make sure that she didn't lose again.

And that e-mail exchange was in 2015. Clinton was still bitter years after losing to Obama. She si so arrogant, and that is why she's struggling against Donald Trump, who should be the easiest candidate to be, well, ever!

The Clintons are as much of a joke as the Trumps. Why is Hilary running for president? What's her reason? Why is it she can only speak in platitudes and clichés? Why is everyone besides Hilary being blamed for her low poll numbers? It sounds like she's running purely because of her huge ego. For all his ills, at least Donald Trump has a pretty clear message.

She has the support of most of the hack establishment journalists who pretend to be on the left but aren't. The sorts of people who assert it's sexist not to vote for Hilary (even if you're going to vote for Jill Stein) . And she has loads more money than Trump. Yet she's still barely beating him and Trump is up in some of the key swing states.

The DNC underestimated how disliked Hilary Clinton is. They cheated for this piece of poop! They were too cocky and arrogant for their own good. They would rather risk Donald Trump becoming president than have a fair primary. So now the establishment media has to resort to chastising voters if they dare not support the coronation of Queen Hilary.

[Faith No More]

We don't have to be scared into believing that criminal illegals are killing citizens

Here you go, Drippy, this one's for you.  It's from the Cato institute, so you can't whine about liberal bias...

Only three people have been killed on U.S. soil in terrorist attacks caused by refugees – which is a one in 3.64 billion chance a year of dying in an attack by a refugee.

The chance of being murdered by a non-terrorist is one in 14,275 a year compared to one in 3,609,709 a year for all foreign-born terrorist attacks.

The chance of being murdered on U.S. soil by any terrorist, native or foreigner, was one in 3.2 million a year.

The chance of being murdered in a terrorist attack on U.S. soil, committed by a foreigner after 9/11 was one in 177.1 million a year.

For every successful foreign-born terrorist who actually killed somebody on U.S. soil in an attack, over 28 million foreigners entered the United States.

http://www.cato.org/blog/immigration-terrorism

So, tell us again how you're not being played...

[Drich]

We don't have to be scared into believing that criminal illegals are killing citizens

Here you go, Drippy, this one's for you.  It's from the Cato institute, so you can't whine about liberal bias...

Only three people have been killed on U.S. soil in terrorist attacks caused by refugees – which is a one in 3.64 billion chance a year of dying in an attack by a refugee.

The chance of being murdered by a non-terrorist is one in 14,275 a year compared to one in 3,609,709 a year for all foreign-born terrorist attacks.

The chance of being murdered on U.S. soil by any terrorist, native or foreigner, was one in 3.2 million a year.

The chance of being murdered in a terrorist attack on U.S. soil, committed by a foreigner after 9/11 was one in 177.1 million a year.

For every successful foreign-born terrorist who actually killed somebody on U.S. soil in an attack, over 28 million foreigners entered the United States.

http://www.cato.org/blog/immigration-terrorism

So, tell us again how you're not being played...

I'm being played because you feel like you can refute 1 singular subpoint out of that whole wall of information i provided?

That is like being on a cruise ship for a whole week and refusing to eat or drink anything they serve breakfast, lunch and dinner, because you don't like the brand of grape jelly they serve with toast.

Not that it is not grape jelly, you just don't like the branding/how it is packaged.

[Whateverist]

Donald Trump played the Mainstream Media like a Charlie Daniels fiddle today -- and it was music to my ears.

He was holding court ..

And he kept them waiting and waiting and waiting.

How can you not respect a man like this?

All the other politicians cower .. This man turns their ill intended conference into..

I am absolutely loving this! .. got to respect the man for playing people..

Wow. You really got a bro-crush on Trump. But the Walter Mitty-ish identification with the man is what it all comes down to, doesn't it?

If I were trump,

But cheer up. Even if you can't be the man you can still go on being his sycophant and dream of being his fluffer.