Trumps not for freedom of speech

[Violet]

Once again pointing out Hillaries faults doesn't excuse trumps

No, but when it's a choice between candidate A and candidate B, and candidate A is caught doing something shady: it sure makes a person more likely to vote for candidate B.

[Faith No More]

It's amazing how Trump, in that article, says the same thing people on these forums have been saying for years. America is guilty of killing lots of people. America has no right to criticize other countries human rights records, when it has such a terrible one. I mean, those are things I believe myself. We kill just as many people as the Russians, easy.

The major difference being that we're actually criticizing the killing, not minimizing it while talking about how much we admire America.

[The Grand Nudger]

Meh, I think otherwise...I think we -could have been- much bigger pricks than we were...and I don;t exactly think that any of the other major players would have handled such power with whatever modicum of decency that we did...for whatever reason...mostly since history tells us that they didn't...........

We have -every-right to criticize other states...and any "well, you did/do bad shit too" only re-enforces our criticism as a base appeal to hypocrisy. The moment that anyone tries that shit about anything is the moment that they've explicitly admitted to doing bad shit. End of.

[Violet]

As for freedom of Speech and Trump, I don't think he's cares at all about Freedom of Speech or the press. Although that particular article doesn't say anything, I'm very wary about Trump and free speech. I consider myself a free speech absolutist and would riot if it were under serious threat.

Our first amendment has been under assault for a very long time... and it's been violated many times (hate speech, for instance).

Rioting isn't what should be done about it, though... what should be done is to run for office or to vote someone into office who believes as you do regarding the first amendment, and to use your second amendment to defend the first amendment only at the time when change is no longer possible within the system or you are forced by an aggressive government to act to defend yourself and your fellow Americans.

If you're gonna riot... at least do it properly. Don't smash up some car dealership: smash up government stuff.

---

Which are far far far far far far FAR worse.

Mind proving this, sir?

[Amarok]

Once again pointing out Hillaries faults doesn't excuse trumps

No, but when it's a choice between candidate A and candidate B, and candidate A is caught doing something shady: it sure makes a person more likely to vote for candidate B.

Then those people are fools there is no lesser evil. And if you choose a supposed one your still picking evil

[Violet]

Oh, you mean like removing qualified people from the National Security Council and appointing a man whose only experience is running a race-baiting online bullshit generator?

You're... talking about Bannon?

Is there any possibility that those 'qualified' people on the NSC happened to be corrupt and/or unwilling to work with the president?

There were probably better choices. I don't think it's the end of the world, though: we've survived Obama's terribly corrupt cabinet, I imagine we'll survive this as well.

Or how about banning but not banning a group of people from entering the country on account of how dangerous they are when they have not been responsible for one single death on American soil in the last 40 years?

Tell that to Europe... You do know that radical Islamic terrorism is a thing, yes? Something something 9/11, and a bunch of suicide bombers?

Or how about stating that he plans to gut the separation of church and state?

I'm not into that personally. Do I consider him the devil to do so? No. Religious freedoms should be respected just as gays should be legally allowed to engage in the farce that is called marriage (which should have zero legal ramifications in and of itself due to the religious origin of it).

He isn't the first president to have suggested such things... and yet? I didn't see anyone rioting about Bush.

Or how about nominating a creationist that thinks grizzly bears are good reason to have guns in schools as the Secretary of Education?

Grizzly bears ARE a good reason to have guns in schools. They'll fuck a kid, an adult, and their gramma up. Also, as you may have noticed, many of the mass shootings that have taken place took place in Gun-Free locations.

Still, in what way does their creationism interfere with their heading of that department?

Or how about saying he admires a man that kills people that speak out against him?

Putin? Guy is terrifying in his own ways, but I happen to also respect the man. He's absolutely impressive.

Or how about advocating we torture people despite all evidence pointing to the fact that it serves absolutely no purpose and actually harms us?

One of those position changes he did. Flipped that one round, to hear Alex Jones tell it Alex Jones is behind that one. Catch up.

Or how about re-opening the CIA black sites that were shut down because we were found to have routinely violated innocent people's civil rights there?

Don't you trust your intelligence agencies?

Our rights have been violated in innumerable ways, and we have done innumerable terrible things. But sometimes terrible things must be done in the defense of our country.

I personally hate secret police, but hell: it's not like Trump invented them.

But, hey, fuck that mainstream media, right?  Always quoting what he says and shit...

Often misquoting, ommiting, interjecting... sensationalizing. Yeah, fuck that. I'd love to find a news site that just reports on the news, as I believe I need diverse opinions myself... but I haven't found any news site that fits the bill.

---

Then those people are fools there is no lesser evil. And if you choose a supposed one your still picking evil

There's always not voting. I didn't, but I would have in the end had I not arrogantly decided that all of the shit was largely baseless and was already on the table at the time when I had the opportunity to register (or get the papers, not sure which the case would be, I've lived a very transitory life but I digress).

I don't think Trump is evil.

---

Meh, I think otherwise...I think we -could have been- much bigger pricks than we were...and I don;t exactly think that any of the other major players would have handled such power with whatever modicum of decency that we did...for whatever reason...mostly since history tells us that they didn't...........

We have -every-right to criticize other states...and any "well, you did/do bad shit too" only re-enforces our criticism as a base appeal to hypocrisy.  The moment that anyone tries that shit about anything is the moment that they've explicitly admitted to doing bad shit.  End of.

Let us take a moment to thank Jesus Christ that it wasn't The Soviet Union, it wasn't Nazi Germany, and it wasn't Imperial Japan that ended up being the world's sole superpower: it was the United States of America.

Things really could have gone much worse.

[The Grand Nudger]

The jury's out on that, of late, and that's the problem. We segued from justifiable...if rocky and sometimes questionable shenanigans.........to -being- the soviet union, nazi germany and imperial japan., because, I guess, some people thought to themselves "Well fuck, how bad could they have been anyway?"......godamnit!

We're running a clinic in how -not- to end an end run at greatness.........

Coulda been the end, coulda been america ascendant forever..but no./...nooo......gotta fuck it up, can't possibly be happy with fucking victory, could we be? Let;s repeat the most embarassing mistakes of -everyone's- past like we fucking mean it! What could possibly go wrong? It's not as if the entire world will turn against us and equate our nomenclature with monsters for half a century...or anything like that, right....right? Fucking idiots...forgot the system. If you're gonna do dirt, you don;t do it openly.

Admit nothing, deny everything, make counter-accusations. Properly basic people, properly basic.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

---

People here tried to humanize the guy i was even asked about Castro myself like how do i feel the honest answer here is from me. That guy killed people sure he may have done good but end the end he became a tyrant and his people suffered because of him.

---

That isn't to say that tyrants are always the worst thing... Assad, for instance, yes he did terrible things... but the things he did also stopped fanatical religious groups from springing up, and he is absolutely necessary to see peace in Syria (like when he ruled already) inside this decade. Or the incredibly well respected Gadafi, seeking to unite Africa and bring peace/wealth in with it...

Castro didn't have so much going for him.

---

---

Who are you? I heard Alice? Bees and Buff make me think late 60's and 70's.

[hide]They make me think of my fiance and flying 

I'm like Alice, if Alice was full of life, and had her head in the clouds, and was happy  

---

Syria was peaceful and prosperous until the US and its terrorist thugs attacked it.

Before & after pictures.https://images.search.yahoo.com/yhs/sear...p=yhs-SF01

[Autumnlicious]

Is there any possibility that those 'qualified' people on the NSC happened to be corrupt and/or unwilling to work with the president?

Irrelevant. You can leave their position vacant. The above conjecture doesn't require Bannon in particular to be appointed. Furthermore, Bannon is of questionable character. Is there seriously no better character for the job in the entire United States?

There were probably better choices. I don't think it's the end of the world, though: we've survived Obama's terribly corrupt cabinet, I imagine we'll survive this as well.

Comparison like that requires Trump and Obama to be comparable. Little overlap found between the two in history or accomplishments. Furthermore, challenges to judicial authority have not been so blatant. Finally, inept and lacking in leadership Obama has left the DNC, there is little concrete towards corruption. In stark contrast, Trump has documented instances of fraud and outright falsehoods.

Not comparable.

Tell that to Europe... You do know that radical Islamic terrorism is a thing, yes? Something something 9/11, and a bunch of suicide bombers?

Who funded 9/11, Sae? Saudis. Which nation wasn't on the blacklist despite being the country that Bin Laden was deeply connected with members of the royal family ? Saudia Arabia.

Secondly - when did Europe become part of America? Funny, cause it seems that you indicate that the existence of terror in one region should blindly influence policy in another that is far away. Simply assuming that Europe has terror attacks doesn't justify the ban as implemented. At best its ineffective - ony worse than no policy.

I'm not into that personally. Do I consider him the devil to do so? No. Religious freedoms should be respected just as gays should be legally allowed to engage in the farce that is called marriage (which should have zero legal ramifications in and of itself due to the religious origin of it).

He isn't the first president to have suggested such things... and yet? I didn't see anyone rioting about Bush.

Donald Trump said he'd do a muslim ban. He executive ordered a de facto muslim ban as he said would (using a prior list of Obama's in hopes it would pass - it hasn't). Thing is, the President must have good enough reasons to deprive citizens of their rights with his executive orders. He is not a dictator.

Donald Trump talked about getting rid of ACA. He executive ordered a look into that.

Already his most negative policies are coming into ugly being and this is the honeymoon period of Presidents! I wouldn't take his threats against the Church-State separation lightly.

Grizzly bears ARE a good reason to have guns in schools. They'll fuck a kid, an adult, and their gramma up. Also, as you may have noticed, many of the mass shootings that have taken place took place in Gun-Free locations.

This is so asinine I am not entertaining this. Try again - that block above is not rational.

Still, in what way does their creationism interfere with their heading of that department?

Davos advocates for vouchers, often an obvious trojan horse for private religious schooling. She has no experience in managing the public educational infrastructure - which is quite different from any private school infrastructure and is magnitudes larger. So you're left with a person who has clearly vested interest in one area and little expertise in another in an environment of scale.

Putin? Guy is terrifying in his own ways, but I happen to also respect the man. He's absolutely impressive.

So because you find him impressive means that our world leader, out of all the other ones, should publicly praise him? As opposed to an American? And someone who sponsored the Buk weapons system that took down an airliner with United States citizens on it over the Ukraine?

One of those position changes he did. Flipped that one round, to hear Alex Jones tell it Alex Jones is behind that one. Catch up.

Demonstrate this is a credible change of opinion.

Don't you trust your intelligence agencies?

Our rights have been violated in innumerable ways, and we have done innumerable terrible things. But sometimes terrible things must be done in the defense of our country.

I personally hate secret police, but hell: it's not like Trump invented them.

I didn't invent murder - so may I murder you? C'mon sometimes terrible things must be done for reasons.

Tell you what - you be the victim.

Often misquoting, ommiting, interjecting... sensationalizing. Yeah, fuck that. I'd love to find a news site that just reports on the news, as I believe I need diverse opinions myself... but I haven't found any news site that fits the bill.

We have video footage of his speeches and successive footage of him denying what he said.

Argue this one Nostradamus.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

It seems that all of the lovers of free speech are attacking Trump for speaking. Shouldn't the President be allowed to speak?