Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'College Basketball Board' started by LetsGoDuke301, Apr 20, 2018.
This is a great clip where this woman spells out what it's like to be on welfare first hand. She explains why Dems push these policies because they know they can keep these people's votes while NOT helping them get out of poverty.
Sadly this is where internet political conversation has gone in modern world. People too lazy to make coherent arguments so link some video of some person on other side of country to be held up as proof of something that is probably being taken out of context. This is what happens when millennials don't take debate classes or learn the value of logical arguments.
More media trash and click-bait fake news headlines.
He banters on and on about it, someone is bound to misconnstrue what he’s actually saying. So he was referring to MS13? Who cares?
He was prettt clearly referring to MS-13. News outlets implying otherwise are being disingenuous.
Why are you so against calling media on its bullshit? Work in media?
On the NBC World News yesterday they said that Trump referred to immigrants as animals. Never played the audio, gave no context and ended the story with a quick disclaimer that Trump says he was referring to MS-13. Pretty ignorant.
Yup, even Dattier called that b/s what it is.
If it was so clear, why did others not immediately understand what he meant by it? Damn fake news. I’m not for or against calling media out for misinformation, you however seem hellbent on the fact that you hate any bit of media that isn’t slanted towards the right, and doesn’t suck the presidents dick.
Because some people don’t hear the full clip because news outlets are starting it after the MS-13 question. Disingenuous media.
What's wrong with linking someone else's argument on a matter when they make the statement better than I can, especially considering that the person making the statement has lived it?
I'm starting to feel that since I don't ever get a good argument back from @bkingUK and @Dattier that I'm doing a good job and they don't have anything to argue back.
Has the President not called Latinos “bad hombres or rapists” in the past? You keep harping on selective listening brought about by the “disingenuous media”, yet you don’t realize you’re plugging your ears to a lot of asinine things he says regularly.
The question asked is clear and the response is clear. Many media outlets start the clip after the questions is asked to disallow the listener from full context. It’s disingenous and deceitful.
Quite clearly so.
And yet you can’t admit it. Even dattier can admit it and you can’t. Think about that, man.
Idgaf what anyone else says, quit trying to lump me in with what others think, I know some of you like to stick together in regards to your rhetoric, but what does anything Dattier says have to do with me? Media can do whatever they please, I think it’s rather funny it rustled some people so hard. You didn’t answer my previous question though...would you admit that Trumpy doesn’t care for Latino’s?
My point is that even someone as bullheaded and far left as dattier recognizes that media outlets weren’t providing proper context with regards to his answer on MS-13.
You still think those reports are objective and provide full context.
Shame on you.
Will you admit that media outlets not reporting that he was responding to a question about MS-13 are being disingenuous?
Some Latinos are bad hombres and some are rapists. Has the president ever said, or insinuated that ALL Latinos are bad hombres or rapists?
Lots of Americans are rapists and “bad hombres or whateverthe**** that means, but sort of, yes, he seems to have a genuine disdain for the Latin American community.
Lots of reports are objective and report the news, shame on you for wearing a tin foil hat year round.
You can't make the point yourself or even summarize why a linked video was a good argument. Why should we engage you? And when we have, you've been dismissive. Why waste our time spelling it out for someone who still won't accept anything outside his narrative?
Would you at least agree that the title of the link I posted is disingenuous / doesn’t give proper context?
Sure, I agree Hail.
I would like to see where he has said or insinuated that ALL Latinos are bad hombres or rapists. So I can judge for myself.
He has made asinine comments many times before. But they come up well short of the comments that are not asinine that the media and the resisters make out to be asinine. Like you are doing here bringing up the bad hombres.. "there are some bad hombres coming into this country illegally." Is that a lie? Do you think that all of the people who come here illegally are good people who are only looking to find work? That's asinine.
Big mistake. He'll be manipulating that into claims that you agreed to something else just like he is on this very page w/ me. That's why it's always a risk to answer anything hail asks you.
His actions speak louder than his moronic words ever could. His position on DACA spoke volumes. His immigration policies seem to favor those of historically “white”population. The fact that he is wanting to build a frivolous wall should imply that he’s not really backing Mexicans. Though many “illegals” come to America every day undocumented from other countries that aren’t in Central Am, Mexico or parts of S America, and receive less hatred than those of the Latin American population. So yes, I do think he doesn’t care about their communities best interests. Or the fact he’s ripping families apart that have lived in the states for generation upon generation. Sad!
Your next move on the chess board better be a wise one. I agreed to the fact that you wanted me to agree with you.
Uh, actually, no, I didn't. Here's what I said:
I saw a single headline that didn't include any specificity about MS-13. I have no idea what the article itself may have clarified, and I don't expect headlines to cover everything or else they're fake news. I also specified "on that level," meaning there may be plenty -- actually, no, I meant that there absolutely are other valid reasons to object to what he said, but that I didn't feel like getting into any of them at that time. (I still don't.)
This is why I rarely answer your questions. You manipulate them to mean something else. You're a liar. There is no such thing as a sincere conversation with you. You can't be trusted.
You agree that the title misrepresented what he said (more specifically what he was answering). Thanks.
Are you looking for factual evidence of an insinuation?
You have no problem claiming President Obama told small business owners they didn't deserve any credit for their hard work, or that he hated the police, or that he stirred up racial unrest.
I retract any and all so-called "agreement."
I feel like we won't agree here. You seem more in favor of open borders than reasonable immigration policies. I am more for the wall than against it. But neutral enough to not vote yay or nay. But I don't think anyone should get a free pass for breaking the law. It is unfortunate that families are being separated, but it's not exclusive to immigrants. When a father is put in jail for robbing a gas station or trafficking heroin, that is separating families too, correct? I am not a supporter of removing people who have raised their families in this country without committing crimes, but I am also not a supporter of doing nothing to stop illegal immigrants from being in that situation in the first place.
Don't know what you are talking about with the Obama stuff. I think you have me confused with someone else.
But just give me an example of what you would consider an insinuation by Trump that supports the claim.
Why do I have to meet your bar of "ALL Latinos"?
I didn't ask you to step in for UL1986. He said that about Trump. I asked for him to give me an example, you chimed in, so I asked you to. Just one example, shouldn't be that hard.
I provided examples, now you’re deflecting with “all Latinos”, it shouldn’t matter.
I have addressed each point that you have brought up. I wish I got the same in return. I have not deflected a thing.
You literally just did, then responded to Dattier insinuating that I failed to bring an example to the table, when I clearly did.
I clearly missed your example. Because actually enforcing immigration laws is not an example him saying or insinuating that all Latinos are bad hombres or rapists.