Donald Trump
Comments
-
And if daca involved 90% white people, we woudn't be having this discussion. The issue would've been resolved already.tempo_n_groove said:
Am I the only one that finds it ridiculous that everyone points to Mexicans as the only ones that lose on this?Tiki said:
Last I checked DACA was for ALL illegals so our neighbors south of the border aren't the only ones that will suffer, no?0 -
84% Hispanic. Crazy.Go Beavers said:
And if daca involved 90% white people, we woudn't be having this discussion. The issue would've been resolved already.tempo_n_groove said:
Am I the only one that finds it ridiculous that everyone points to Mexicans as the only ones that lose on this?Tiki said:
Last I checked DACA was for ALL illegals so our neighbors south of the border aren't the only ones that will suffer, no?
0 -
Definitely not surprising.tempo_n_groove said:
84% Hispanic. Crazy.Go Beavers said:
And if daca involved 90% white people, we woudn't be having this discussion. The issue would've been resolved already.tempo_n_groove said:
Am I the only one that finds it ridiculous that everyone points to Mexicans as the only ones that lose on this?Tiki said:
Last I checked DACA was for ALL illegals so our neighbors south of the border aren't the only ones that will suffer, no?It's a hopeless situation...0 -
It is surprising considering all the travel that I have done here in the US and all the people I've worked with from other countries that have legal documents, work visas and citizenship.tbergs said:
Definitely not surprising.tempo_n_groove said:
84% Hispanic. Crazy.Go Beavers said:
And if daca involved 90% white people, we woudn't be having this discussion. The issue would've been resolved already.tempo_n_groove said:
Am I the only one that finds it ridiculous that everyone points to Mexicans as the only ones that lose on this?Tiki said:
Last I checked DACA was for ALL illegals so our neighbors south of the border aren't the only ones that will suffer, no?0 -
tempo_n_groove said:
84% Hispanic. Crazy.Go Beavers said:
And if daca involved 90% white people, we woudn't be having this discussion. The issue would've been resolved already.tempo_n_groove said:
Am I the only one that finds it ridiculous that everyone points to Mexicans as the only ones that lose on this?Tiki said:
Last I checked DACA was for ALL illegals so our neighbors south of the border aren't the only ones that will suffer, no?
I may be misunderstanding your point, but it's not surprising to me. After all, geographically speaking, it's the people from Mexico, Central and South America who realistically have a chance of illegally traveling across the border by land or sea, which, though still risky, is significantly easier than illegally entering by air. Probably not too many Canadians motivated to try this.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf0 -
Not everything is about putting down "others". So if I say illegals, it is an offensive term because illegal immigrants is what I should say, so by not including that word I am lessening their importance? Give me a break. It's all about context. We are so fucking focused on everything that can be interpreted as divisive and divided lately it's out of control.oftenreading said:
As for your bolded statement above - yes, it absolutely is done to demean and lessen their importance. Making people "the other" is absolutely part of the discussion, and such actions get taken.tbergs said:
Disgusted that I used a term besides children to simplify the explanation for conversation purposes? I could have typed it all out, but was trying to save the excessive use of words that weren't necessary. Just like when someone shortens illegal immigrants to illegals. It isn't being done to demean or lessen them as human beings.what dreams said:
I'm not offended. I'm disgusted. I've always thought it was bad enough to call people "illegal." People cannot be illegal. They can perform illegal actions, but it is never a crime to be a human being. Now we have children being called "by-products" from someone agreeing with Trump's decision to rescind the order (definition of a defense? Idk what that word means if not that).tbergs said:
That was me and I'm not a Trump defender. Sorry if my description offended you.what dreams sjaid:I can't wait to see which Congressperson votes against innocent children -- otherwise known as "by-products," according to a Trump defender a few pages back.
Today marks a low, low point for humanity.
I guess it's just my personal involvement with multiple dozens of students over multiple decades of teaching that tears my heart up over this. How do I, in serving my country, look a group of teenagers in the eye and tell them that "In America, you can be whatever you dream to be. Do your work, get a good education . . . Oh, wait. Not you, or you, or you. You're going back to El Salvador to be gang raped."
How lucky we native-borns are to have experienced the accident of our birth.
Again, I am not defending Trump's decision. Labels and groupings are ok when it fits your narrative, but not when it goes against your narrative of the world. If you find it easier to put me in a box and label me a Trump defender, that's your choice, but much like DACA, it's not so black and white. It's easy to blame Trump because he's a blundering jackass with no moral compass; however, many non-Trump supporters also don't think DACA as an EO was a legitimate and legal solution. I see the positive intent it was created for, but skirting around a true legal answer was never going to hold up.
I've worked in higher ed at a handful of different institutions for almost 20 years at various levels, the current one being an urban Tech and Community college with a diversity rate at around 60%. They may not be the traditional "kids" you are referring to, but they are mostly young and eager early twenty-somethings or late forty-somethings looking for a start to their new life in this country or a 2nd chance and a do over from the hardships of this country and elsewhere. How do you look them in the eyes? The same way you always have. You have a serious conversation about what is happening. You explain to them where the rule of law and moral decision have met a crossroad that doesn't have a simple solution. Tell them that they should get out and make their voices heard and do what they can to make sure our lawmakers do their due diligence in resolving the disconnect between what is morally right and legally allowed. The more people who speak up, the better. It does not mean that any of this will change in the next 6 months, but it definitely won't without the voice and actions of the masses. It is our duty to influence changes in laws and policies. Living in a democratic society doesn't mean we always get what we want or that we get it right as a whole, but we sure as hell need to keep trying.It's a hopeless situation...0 -
oftenreading said:tempo_n_groove said:
84% Hispanic. Crazy.Go Beavers said:
And if daca involved 90% white people, we woudn't be having this discussion. The issue would've been resolved already.tempo_n_groove said:
Am I the only one that finds it ridiculous that everyone points to Mexicans as the only ones that lose on this?Tiki said:
Last I checked DACA was for ALL illegals so our neighbors south of the border aren't the only ones that will suffer, no?
I may be misunderstanding your point, but it's not surprising to me. After all, geographically speaking, it's the people from Mexico, Central and South America who realistically have a chance of illegally traveling across the border by land or sea, which, though still risky, is significantly easier than illegally entering by air. Probably not too many Canadians motivated to try this.
I never thought of the logistics of it though that they are the closest neighbor. In my travels I've met lots of different people from other countries.
Take a cab in NYC and they aren't from Central or South America. There is a huge influx of West Indian, Indian and African out here in NY.
Just my observation.0 -
If you take a cab in DC or NY, you're likely to get a driver from Kenya or Ethiopia. Tons of them on the road.tempo_n_groove said:oftenreading said:tempo_n_groove said:
84% Hispanic. Crazy.Go Beavers said:
And if daca involved 90% white people, we woudn't be having this discussion. The issue would've been resolved already.tempo_n_groove said:
Am I the only one that finds it ridiculous that everyone points to Mexicans as the only ones that lose on this?Tiki said:
Last I checked DACA was for ALL illegals so our neighbors south of the border aren't the only ones that will suffer, no?
I may be misunderstanding your point, but it's not surprising to me. After all, geographically speaking, it's the people from Mexico, Central and South America who realistically have a chance of illegally traveling across the border by land or sea, which, though still risky, is significantly easier than illegally entering by air. Probably not too many Canadians motivated to try this.
I never thought of the logistics of it though that they are the closest neighbor. In my travels I've met lots of different people from other countries.
Take a cab in NYC and they aren't from Central or South America. There is a huge influx of West Indian, Indian and African out here in NY.
Just my observation.0 -
-
-
Made in Chiiiii-Na?Tiki said:09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
That isn't really the point I don't think. Does anyone think he would be impeached for getting hookers to pee on each other as a fuck you to the dems? No. I think everyone just wants to witness the proof for fun and spite and so there is further evidence of how disgusting he is.ledvedderman said:I read that earlier. Pee tape changes nothing. We all know that Trump is a sleazy guy. Hell, a solid chunk of the people who voted for him don't believe he's a good person. Russian hookers peeing on one another changes nothing.
Instead, give me video of the President personally asking for Russian help. Would that even do it though? Putin polls much higher than even President Obama amongst Trump voters. They'd probably give even that a pass.
We can't impeach the guy over a sexual act...no matter what Newt and Ken Starr think.
Of course, that dossier overall is likely another matter.
Post edited by PJ_Soul onWith all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
Personally, I would have liked to have known prior to the election that he was susceptible to blackmail from Russia. It's not like he admitted to the behavior and released the tape. Poor judgement on a future presidential candidate's part, the likes of which we're seeing and experiencing now after it's too late. Remember, Obama didn't release it but his intelligence team briefed Trump on it. PTAPE, where are you? The humiliation alone is worth it.PJ_Soul said:
That isn't really the point I don't think. Doesn't anyone think he would be impeached for getting hookers to pee on each other as a fuck you to the dems? No. I think everyone just want to witness the proof for fun and spite and so there is further evidence of how disgusting he is.ledvedderman said:I read that earlier. Pee tape changes nothing. We all know that Trump is a sleazy guy. Hell, a solid chunk of the people who voted for him don't believe he's a good person. Russian hookers peeing on one another changes nothing.
Instead, give me video of the President personally asking for Russian help. Would that even do it though? Putin polls much higher than even President Obama amongst Trump voters. They'd probably give even that a pass.
We can't impeach the guy over a sexual act...no matter what Newt and Ken Starr think. Of course, that dossier overall is likely another matter. 09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
#PTAPEBristow 05132010 to Amsterdam 2 061320180
-
This statement is hilarious in any context.ledvedderman said:I read that earlier. Pee tape changes nothing. We all know that Trump is a sleazy guy. Hell, a solid chunk of the people who voted for him don't believe he's a good person. Russian hookers peeing on one another changes nothing.
Instead, give me video of the President personally asking for Russian help. Would that even do it though? Putin polls much higher than even President Obama amongst Trump voters. They'd probably give even that a pass.
We can't impeach the guy over a sexual act...no matter what Newt and Ken Starr think.1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley0 -
I'm trying to predict what the Obama equivalent will be when the pee tape comes out.0
-
Well, if he doesn't leave office before this term is over, he's likely to run again... of course, by then, the PTAPE will pale in comparison to all the shit he did in office. I agree that the humiliation is worth it, lol. Not just for the sake of Trump, but also for his die-hard supporters.Halifax2TheMax said:
Personally, I would have liked to have known prior to the election that he was susceptible to blackmail from Russia. It's not like he admitted to the behavior and released the tape. Poor judgement on a future presidential candidate's part, the likes of which we're seeing and experiencing now after it's too late. Remember, Obama didn't release it but his intelligence team briefed Trump on it. PTAPE, where are you? The humiliation alone is worth it.PJ_Soul said:
That isn't really the point I don't think. Doesn't anyone think he would be impeached for getting hookers to pee on each other as a fuck you to the dems? No. I think everyone just want to witness the proof for fun and spite and so there is further evidence of how disgusting he is.ledvedderman said:I read that earlier. Pee tape changes nothing. We all know that Trump is a sleazy guy. Hell, a solid chunk of the people who voted for him don't believe he's a good person. Russian hookers peeing on one another changes nothing.
Instead, give me video of the President personally asking for Russian help. Would that even do it though? Putin polls much higher than even President Obama amongst Trump voters. They'd probably give even that a pass.
We can't impeach the guy over a sexual act...no matter what Newt and Ken Starr think. Of course, that dossier overall is likely another matter.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
His approval rating might go up to 38%.PJ_Soul said:
Well, if he doesn't leave office before this term is over, he's likely to run again... of course, by then, the PTAPE will pale in comparison to all the shit he did in office. I agree that the humiliation is worth it, lol. Not just for the sake of Trump, but also for his die-hard supporters.Halifax2TheMax said:
Personally, I would have liked to have known prior to the election that he was susceptible to blackmail from Russia. It's not like he admitted to the behavior and released the tape. Poor judgement on a future presidential candidate's part, the likes of which we're seeing and experiencing now after it's too late. Remember, Obama didn't release it but his intelligence team briefed Trump on it. PTAPE, where are you? The humiliation alone is worth it.PJ_Soul said:
That isn't really the point I don't think. Doesn't anyone think he would be impeached for getting hookers to pee on each other as a fuck you to the dems? No. I think everyone just want to witness the proof for fun and spite and so there is further evidence of how disgusting he is.ledvedderman said:I read that earlier. Pee tape changes nothing. We all know that Trump is a sleazy guy. Hell, a solid chunk of the people who voted for him don't believe he's a good person. Russian hookers peeing on one another changes nothing.
Instead, give me video of the President personally asking for Russian help. Would that even do it though? Putin polls much higher than even President Obama amongst Trump voters. They'd probably give even that a pass.
We can't impeach the guy over a sexual act...no matter what Newt and Ken Starr think. Of course, that dossier overall is likely another matter. 09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
What a great humanitarian he's turned out to be ha man this is 2017 and it feels like 1952 between bafoon & kkk grand wizard Sessions we might as well be !jesus greets me looks just like me ....0
-
if it ever gets released, and if he makes it through his whole first time, he won't be nominated in 2020. that would be just way too humiliating for the republican party.PJ_Soul said:
Well, if he doesn't leave office before this term is over, he's likely to run again... of course, by then, the PTAPE will pale in comparison to all the shit he did in office. I agree that the humiliation is worth it, lol. Not just for the sake of Trump, but also for his die-hard supporters.Halifax2TheMax said:
Personally, I would have liked to have known prior to the election that he was susceptible to blackmail from Russia. It's not like he admitted to the behavior and released the tape. Poor judgement on a future presidential candidate's part, the likes of which we're seeing and experiencing now after it's too late. Remember, Obama didn't release it but his intelligence team briefed Trump on it. PTAPE, where are you? The humiliation alone is worth it.PJ_Soul said:
That isn't really the point I don't think. Doesn't anyone think he would be impeached for getting hookers to pee on each other as a fuck you to the dems? No. I think everyone just want to witness the proof for fun and spite and so there is further evidence of how disgusting he is.ledvedderman said:I read that earlier. Pee tape changes nothing. We all know that Trump is a sleazy guy. Hell, a solid chunk of the people who voted for him don't believe he's a good person. Russian hookers peeing on one another changes nothing.
Instead, give me video of the President personally asking for Russian help. Would that even do it though? Putin polls much higher than even President Obama amongst Trump voters. They'd probably give even that a pass.
We can't impeach the guy over a sexual act...no matter what Newt and Ken Starr think. Of course, that dossier overall is likely another matter. By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help