Re: Trump Our New President
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Wrong, as usual. https://www.bloomberg.com/view/article ... sination-of-michael-flynn
Posted on: 2017/2/17 5:40
|
|||
|
Re: Trump Our New President
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I love how the liberal political hacks hadn't said one bad word about Russia, until they thought Russia was hurting Her. Then, overnight, Russia morphed into the Bogeyman for them.
Posted on: 2017/2/16 15:54
|
|||
|
Re: Hit & Run Injures 3 - Man Arrested - Sip/Tonnelle
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
What you may recall is the simple fact that neither drivers, pedestrians, nor cyclists follow the rules of the road at all times. All three can be particularly egregious in their transgressions. But I agree that this driver should be locked up for a LONG time. Maybe the passenger too, for not reporting the crime.
Posted on: 2017/2/15 18:36
|
|||
|
Re: Woman dies falling off escalator inside famed World Trade Center Oculus while reaching to grab hat
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
These stories come from people who say they watched the videotape. Wouldn't be surprised at all if the person who set up this page was just saying that because they didn't want to discourage donations. Also, since this happened right next to the twin sister, who went to the hospital purely for her mental trauma, I wouldn't be surprised if the sister is in denial of what happened, because accepting the truth could literally kill her. I trust the videotape and can't think of any reason why these people would be lying. It's certainly not to discourage a lawsuit, because then the tape would come out anyway. However, even assuming that the person who set up this funding page is lying, it is still a very sad story.
Posted on: 2017/2/14 4:30
|
|||
|
Re: Jersey City taps Downtown woman to be city planner
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Hopefully there will be more thought into ensuring JC's infrastructure can keep pace with the exploding development.
Posted on: 2017/2/14 1:01
|
|||
|
Re: Fulop: despite Trump, Jersey City remains 'welcoming' to immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Sure. Well, if you take an introduction to civics class, you'll learn that these types of policies are enacted through legislatures and the courts, not through the ballot. However, a local decision such as whether Jersey City should be a lawless sanctuary city could certainly be put on the ballot. And, if Jersey City is actually at a real risk of losing federal funding due to their grandstanding, I would argue they have a moral right to put the question on the ballot before we all get punished.
Posted on: 2017/2/9 4:34
|
|||
|
Re: Fulop: despite Trump, Jersey City remains 'welcoming' to immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
You're a single issue guy. As I stated, the Muslim ban was already put on the ballot during the last election, and the scoreboard speaks for itself. However, while we will not be redeciding what has already been decided, it is worth noting that nationwide, the Muslim ban is one of Trump's most popular executive orders, along with the subject of this thread, defunding lawless sanctuary cities. POLL: Travel ban is one of Trump's most popular executive orders http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-travel-ban-polls-2017-2
Posted on: 2017/2/9 2:53
|
|||
|
Re: Fulop: despite Trump, Jersey City remains 'welcoming' to immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
They matter depending on the rules of the game. They are meaningless in a national election, where the outcome is controlled by the electoral college. Pointing to the popular vote is like saying the Atlanta Falcons dominated the time of possession, therefore they should have won the Super Bowl. However, in a municipal ballot, the scoreboard is determined by the majority. I have a feeling that like most "progressive" causes, the majority of people even in a very liberal area like Jersey City do not support them. It just may appear that way due to an extremely biased media. Only one way to put this to the test.
Posted on: 2017/2/8 22:52
|
|||
|
Re: Fulop: despite Trump, Jersey City remains 'welcoming' to immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
This is a good point. If anything, the question of whether Jersey City should be a lawless sanctuary city should be put on the ballot. Why should these "progressive" grandstanding politicians force everyone's taxes to rise just to score political points with their brainwashed constituents? If a majority of voters decide this that's one thing, but I don't think the majority of people actually support this...
Posted on: 2017/2/8 21:30
|
|||
|
Re: Fulop: despite Trump, Jersey City remains 'welcoming' to immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I've been very clear about what I mean if you've been paying attention. The very policies that are the subject of this thread were on the ballot, and the side that wanted to implement them won. That means they get implemented, barring action by the courts. I think this is very good policy and the American voters agree. There's really no point in discussing further. Neither side will convince the other and for good reason: this stuff was the subject of an 18+ month campaign and has been analyzed in detail for the American voters, who already made their decision.
Posted on: 2017/2/7 20:17
|
|||
|
Re: Fulop: despite Trump, Jersey City remains 'welcoming' to immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Luckily for America, the important people already know this. We've won, and President Trump will continue enacting measures to make us safer. Let these bitter, nasty "progressives" on this site spew as many lies as they want. Doesn't matter, they lost.
Posted on: 2017/2/7 17:32
|
|||
|
Re: Grand Opening date for Krispy Kreme February 7th 2017
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I'm not Fulop's biggest fan, but I think that poster is right that this is a point for Fulop.
Posted on: 2017/2/4 20:57
|
|||
|
Re: Trump Our New President
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Hey, I wouldn't be happy being a member of the party of violence either. Also, you're spreading fake news. He reprioritized a program that was designed to counter all violent ideologies so that it solely focuses on Muslim terrorism. This makes sense, unless you've overdosed on "progressive" propaganda, because white supremacist groups haven't exactly been committing very much violence. I'm not aware of any, but if there's a smattering, it's certainly not worth devoting resources that could be used to counter Muslim terrorism. However, in light of recent events, I think President Trump should consider putting these violent liberal groups on the list, because they clearly are a threat.
Posted on: 2017/2/4 0:23
|
|||
|
Re: Trump Our New President
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I didn't paint you with the brush, I painted your party. There is a big difference and I agree it is a slimy tactic to attribute bad qualities of your side's extremists to you. You do not condone the violence and of course I believe you. It is the Democrat party that is the party of violence, just as how the Republican party would be the party of violence in my KKK example.
Posted on: 2017/2/3 21:26
|
|||
|
Re: Trump Our New President
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I will make it easier for you to understand. Imagine things were reversed in this country and the KKK was even 1/10th of the threat that the Left pretends they are. Let's say that it was culturally acceptable for the KKK to start angry riots, like it is for liberals. So let's say that a black liberal speaker was scheduled to speak at a university, but the KKK was outraged that a black liberal could dare be allowed to speak like this. In this alternative world, there are a lot of KKK members like there are violent liberals. And the mayor decides to tell his police to back off and do nothing. Let the KKK run wild. This results in many videos of them brutally beating the shit out of innocent black people and other minorities, along with starting fires and looting stores. Instead of reacting with outrage, the mass conservative media says, hey, they're the KKK, we don't control them. What do you expect us to do? Maybe that black guy shouldn't have spoken. And Republican politicians say nothing, not even to the mayor for welcoming this to happen. And celebrities also don't care. If you then wanted to paint the Republican Party as the party of violence, this would be completely fair, even though there were plenty of Republicans that were not KKK members. That's the present situation but for liberals, who belong to the party of violence.
Posted on: 2017/2/3 20:31
|
|||
|
Re: Trump Our New President
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Did you read my initial response to you? I already gave you two specific examples. The mayor of Berkeley and the mayor of San Jose both ordered their police to stand down and not try and stop violent liberals from beating up Trump supporters. The liberal media didn't care about what these mayors did, and neither did liberal party leaders or celebrities. So the blame is not just on the violent children, it's on the liberal adults. And the other liberal leaders close ranks to sweep this welcoming of violence under the rug. This is why it is fair to paint with a broad brush to describe liberals as belonging to the party of violence. Not all liberals want the violence, but the party welcomes it.
Posted on: 2017/2/3 19:43
|
|||
|
Re: Trump Our New President
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
You didn't understand my point. Please read my post again. I understand your point perfectly, but when liberal mayors order their police to stand back and do nothing while violent liberals beat up Trump supporters, and liberal celebrities and the media say absolutely nothing about this, it is fair to paint the Left with the broad brush as being the party of violence.
Posted on: 2017/2/3 19:21
|
|||
|
Re: Trump Our New President
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
[quote]
135jc wrote: Agreed! Its the left that needs to denounce this behavior. If so many libs opposed the riots as Azul suggests. Then where is the outcry from the Hollywood elitists? Why isn't De Niro Streep Damon Baldwin all denouncing those actions. The rioters seem to be the ones city the voice right now. Maybe we should see how Rev AL feels about this?[/quote] Well these are two separate points. I agree with this one, obviously, in that the Left doesn't really denounce this behavior. More of a wink and nod. But the point I'm making is that liberals in an actual position of power, like the mayors of the two cities I linked, actually ordered the cops to stand back and let the violent liberals beat up Trump supporters. Far worse, in my opinion, and the picture I linked speaks a thousand words. http://m.imgur.com/l2kdhhz?r So liberals belong to the party of violence. Individuals like Azul may well be opposed to the violence, but his party welcomes it.
Posted on: 2017/2/3 18:48
|
|||
|
Re: Trump Our New President
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
There is a major distinction between the KKK and the violent little children of the left. While the right condemns the KKK in the strongest possible terms, the left condones their violent actors. That's why the Berkeley mayor ordered the police to do nothing, as the Left rioted, violently beat Trump supporters, and looted stores. Video of one of many violent beatings: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/ ... conscious-berkeley-riots/ Picture of what the police were doing at the time, following their liberal mayor's orders: http://m.imgur.com/l2kdhhz?r This is also not the first time a liberal mayor ordered his police to do nothing so violent liberals could beat up Trump supporters: https://mobile.twitter.com/i/moments/738560687853690880?m=1 So no, the extremists on both sides are not equivalent. I haven't heard any Democrat politician viciously denounce the Berkeley mayor for what he did. Own the fact that you are of the party of violence, or, at the very least, denounce your media which obviously condones such tactics by covering for the Berkeley mayor and other examples I posted, which you probably never even heard about.
Posted on: 2017/2/3 18:02
|
|||
|
Re: Trump Our New President
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Considering they violently rioted in Berkeley to stamp out speech they didn't like, and pepper sprayed a conservative speaker at NYU in the face last night, "progressives" are more interested in trying to violently stamp out the truth than anything else. Keep on supporting the party of violence, but Trump has a country he's working on making great again.
Posted on: 2017/2/3 17:41
|
|||
|
Re: Jersey City rally in support of immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Wrong on all counts. Not surprising coming from the guy who boasted that "literally all the intellectuals" were on his side, omitting his side's historical rejection by the American voters. And I'm sure you saw the violent liberal riots in California last night. Face it, you guys are on the wrong side of history. The Supreme Court picks will ensure this.
Posted on: 2017/2/2 14:10
|
|||
|
Re: Trump Our New President
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
You are a victim of fake news, which is rampant in our mass media. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2 ... ce=RSS_Feedutm_medium=RSS
Posted on: 2017/2/2 3:29
|
|||
|
Re: Jersey City rally in support of immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
They have a big mouth, like our city currently does. But just wait until they are pressed and they'll crumble.
Posted on: 2017/2/2 2:12
|
|||
|
Re: Jersey City rally in support of immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I have a feeling you are not a psychologist, but are quite skilled in your chosen profession. You really shouldn't quit your day job.
Posted on: 2017/2/2 1:18
|
|||
|
Re: Trump Our New President
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
You imply I'm not ok with reasonable opposition. The main objection, shared by all Trump voters, is the unending hysteria and tantrums that "progressives" are engaging in. And like I said, they do this for just about absolutely everything he does.
Posted on: 2017/2/1 22:48
|
|||
|
Re: Jersey City rally in support of immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Here's a good article on the subject I read the other day. Many of these "progressives" aren't worried that Trump is a Hitler type figure. They subconsciously want that to avoid admitting they were as wrong as can be. http://blog.dilbert.com/post/15654031 ... h-for-especially-if-it-is
Posted on: 2017/2/1 22:45
|
|||
|
Re: Jersey City rally in support of immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Oh, I'm well aware of your proclivity to misuse the term "projection." Fact is, it's very difficult for a conservative not to be exposed to the liberal viewpoint nowadays. It's crammed down everybody's throat via most mass media outlets. "Progressives" are far more likely to be victim to echo chambers because they simply aren't exposed to dissenting viewpoints. This is confirmed by numerous studies that demonstrate conservatives understand liberals FAR better than the reverse.
Posted on: 2017/2/1 21:00
|
|||
|
Re: Jersey City rally in support of immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
JSleeze, you didn't limit your false accusation to a "specific threat," you claimed "or similar rationale" along with the lie that the only rationale behind the order was an "I don't like the looks of those guys."
This was clearly wrong, as I proved, and you obviously didn't read the order. Not surprising. Your attempt to backtrack now would only be applicable if you didn't say any of the things I bolded, and only limited it to "a specific threat," in which case I would not have made my comment. So nice try. And the echo chamber stuff is obvious. You and many "progressives" receive all of your information from like minded sources, which largely ban the conservative point of view, which leaves you disconnected from reality. This effect was most obvious during the elections, as your echo chamber convinced "progressives" about the fabled "Blue Wall." Your posts indicate you continue to be very much immersed in your echo chamber because you say ridiculous things like "the snap back from this failed experiment with authoritatian know-nothingism is going to make Bernie Sanders look positively centrist." Yeah, if you spend all your time on HuffPo, I can see why you'd think that, but everyone else knows how ridiculous that is. Theres a civil war going on in the Democratic Party between the Hillary wing and the Sanders wing. You are clearly in the latter group. My money is on the Hillary wing winning.
Posted on: 2017/2/1 20:18
|
|||
|
Re: Jersey City rally in support of immigrants
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The ignorant and incorrect claim was that no threat or similar rationale was advanced in order to support the executive order, apart from an "I don't like the looks of those guys" type of thing. You quoted some, but not everything in the executive order that directly contradicts that. Here is the rationale advanced in order to support the executive order: The visa-issuance process plays a crucial role in detecting individuals with terrorist ties and stopping them from entering the United States. Perhaps in no instance was that more apparent than the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, when State Department policy prevented consular officers from properly scrutinizing the visa applications of several of the 19 foreign nationals who went on to murder nearly 3,000 Americans. And while the visa-issuance process was reviewed and amended after the September 11 attacks to better detect would-be terrorists from receiving visas, these measures did not stop attacks by foreign nationals who were admitted to the United States. Numerous foreign-born individuals have been convicted or implicated in terrorism-related crimes since September 11, 2001, including foreign nationals who entered the United States after receiving visitor, student, or employment visas, or who entered through the United States refugee resettlement program. Deteriorating conditions in certain countries due to war, strife, disaster, and civil unrest increase the likelihood that terrorists will use any means possible to enter the United States. The United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those approved for admission do not intend to harm Americans and that they have no ties to terrorism. In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles. The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law. In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including "honor" killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation. . . . Sec. 4. Implementing Uniform Screening Standards for All Immigration Programs. (a) The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall implement a program, as part of the adjudication process for immigration benefits, to identify individuals seeking to enter the United States on a fraudulent basis with the intent to cause harm, or who are at risk of causing harm subsequent to their admission. This program will include the development of a uniform screening standard and procedure, such as in-person interviews; a database of identity documents proffered by applicants to ensure that duplicate documents are not used by multiple applicants; amended application forms that include questions aimed at identifying fraudulent answers and malicious intent; a mechanism to ensure that the applicant is who the applicant claims to be; a process to evaluate the applicant's likelihood of becoming a positively contributing member of society and the applicant's ability to make contributions to the national interest; and a mechanism to assess whether or not the applicant has the intent to commit criminal or terrorist acts after entering the United States. http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politic ... n-ban-refugees/index.html Also, are you aware that 6 of the 7 countries targeted by the order are all listed in the top 9 countries in the Global Terrorism Index? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Terrorism_Index Iran is the only one that is not listed in the top 9. So, I don't expect you to support Trump's executive order, but there was plenty of justification behind it apart from "he didn't like the way they looked." It is evident JSleeze didn't spend 2 seconds to actually read the executive order, though I'm sure he'll never admit it. Just an ignoramus.
Posted on: 2017/2/1 2:09
|
|||
|