Navin
MALDREAD
But a "real leader" would allow members of government to to keep sputtering that nonsense, right?
-
Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.
However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.
We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure. -
Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
U.S. Politics: The Biggest Trade in WNBA History
- Thread starter BigLutz
- Start date
But a "real leader" would allow members of government to to keep sputtering that nonsense, right?
That's where you're wrong. I never said to leave them be and do nothing. Despite what you might think, the driving force behind what people are saying and doing is fear. A real leader would see that, empathize with them, and then respectfully disagree, pointing out their differences. But that's not Obama's style. Instead, he gets onto his pulpit, looks down on those who disagree with him, and then chastises and ridicules them. Of course, the natural human reaction is to become defensive and double down on their beliefs. Thus, no progress is made, but Obama does get some nice soundbites for his fanboys to feast off of.
And this is why gridlock occurs and will continue to. Tell me, do you honestly think this is the best way?
You're saying that the "natural human reaction" is to continue to use a method that doesn't work?
First of all, Hobbes would argue that point.
Second, what was Albert Einstein's definition of insanity again? I believe it was "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting results."
First of all, Hobbes would argue that point.
Second, what was Albert Einstein's definition of insanity again? I believe it was "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting results."
The same thing over and over. What are you talking about? When it comes to the Syrian crisis, there has yet to be an repetition in policy so I don't know what you mean.
And when it comes to the reaction to the Syrian Crisis, as of right now, the American people are siding with Republicans. In the latest poll, 53% say Obama's refugee plan should be suspended. Not only that, only 46% of Democrats support bringing in refugees and 9% of them favor only letting Christian refugees in. So no, it's not a dumb Republican issue, there are a lot of people who are legitimately scared right now, ridiculing them and laying charges of Islamophobia won't help. Even the House Bill to block letting in more refugees was passed with bipartisan support. Do you think Obama is going to demean the people of his own party like he did the Repubs? Of course not. It's just going to be business as usual in Washington.
That's why a gentle hand filled with empathy is needed, not cheap insults for a soundbite. Not sure why any of you would prefer anything but.
Silver Soul
Well-Known Member
You know that's the kind of attitude that got us the Patriot Act and the war in Iraq, correct? People in Paris rather decided to accept and love the refugees instead of hate. If the people keep hating, then that is what Daesh truly wants. This is why people in France are handling this better than America because they are accepting more refugees than ever. To fight inhumanity is with humanity which it is no surprise that bigots are reacting fast this way.
Ben Carson just referred to Syrian refugees as rabid dogs. He is just saying things a white Republican can't get away with and that makes it even worse.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/19/politics/ben-carson-rabid-dogs-refugees/index.html
Ben Carson just referred to Syrian refugees as rabid dogs. He is just saying things a white Republican can't get away with and that makes it even worse.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/19/politics/ben-carson-rabid-dogs-refugees/index.html
Which go to show you that the people of France are more mature then Americans are in term of dealing with a tragedy.
Last edited:
If History is going to repeat you need more than a gentle hand. This is about people's safely and lives, and if these people can't think about anyone else but themselves then they're just horrible people.
Silver Soul
Well-Known Member
Speaking of Hitler... Trump proposed a special ID for Muslim citizens.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...d-certainly-implement-muslim-database-n466716
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...d-certainly-implement-muslim-database-n466716
Navin
MALDREAD
What the hell is there to explain that he hasn't mentioned? Obviously only allowing Christian refugees is flat-out wrong. As for refugees in general, yeah, the U.S. shouldn't back down in fear of ISIS and turn away people who are running away from those extremists; not to mention the state carries responsibility to accept them. Rejecting them only gives ISIS more propaganda fuel. It's also an admission that U.S. internal security cannot weed out potential terrorists entering the country and stopping extremist cells. I guarantee you if Obama said the opposite of closing the border, the Repubs would jump on the opposite bandwagon and accuse him of being "weak."
I really, really don't understand this recent beef you've developed with Obama on literally everything he says or does.
Chalkus, there was a time when folks who thought that way were called "selfish", and it was not a good thing.
I was afraid to bring this up for a long time, to avoid invoking a Godwin, but I have long seen other similarities that Trump's supporters clearly don't. Trump is an energetic, charismatic speaker who is using a whole ethnic group as a scapegoat. It sounds awfully familiar if you ask me.
The worst part is, the Tea Party screamed their head off how much the President was "destroying the Constitution" when it was suggested a new gun control law would result in a "national gun registry", they claim the government can spy on us through the internet and is creating an Orwellian dystopia (unplug the computer is you're that paranoid, guys, or better yet, look up 1984 and actually read it), and yet, Trump wants this.
Last edited:
7 tyranitars
Well-Known Member
The thing that bothers me about this attitude is that the amound refugees America *has* to take in is nothing compared that we Europeans are *forced* to take in. Europeans have gotten a lot of heat for even thinking of not taking in such a huge amound of people while most the countries simply can't handle it anymore logisticly speaking. Typicly american, everyone has to help out those poor syrians but when they have to take in a small margin they bail.
That being said, some of those *rich* arab neighbours should do a lot more for those refugees other than offering to build Mosques in Germany..
Well I can finally say that the republican party just crossed the line to fascism. But then again they crossed that line awhile ago.
Bananarama
The light is coming
They crossed it when Bush was elected and destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
As for Donald Chimp trying to ID Muslims, I'm afraid it's possible. He's in the lead again and has an entire party of support.
I never said to give in, rather, be compassionate in explaining the contrary position.
And Ben Carson, Ted Cruz and the Dumpster are all shameless fear mongers. Don't like any one of them.
If History is going to repeat you need more than a gentle hand. This is about people's safely and lives, and if these people can't think about anyone else but themselves then they're just horrible people.
But right now, a majority of the country is against it. Do you really think Obama insulting people will solve anything? Convincing is the only way to go.
Again, convincingpeople otherwise is the way to go, demeaning for the sake of satisfying his fans is not. And as for ISIS propaganda, please. What exactly are they going to say. That America is bad for rejecting the refugees that are fleeing from them because they are killing them? All they need are their invaders and great Satan narratives to drive recruitment.
As for Obama, I don't think he is as bad of a president as the Repubs do, but I think he has a lot of flaws. In fact, I don't know why you as a Democrat are not taking issue with his broken promises and betrayals over the years.
Geographically, of course Europe has to take in more. That only makes sense. And what do you mean 'forced.' I thought Europe was willing to do it because they are more 'mature' as has been previously stated.
Cool, lets see how you would convince them. Give a detailed way that isn't full of generic "he should do X" messages, because I'd love to see how he does that. These are people who see people fleeing for their lives and can only think about an action that makes their lives even worse. So you tell me how it should be done without throwing stones, or you stop posting.
7 tyranitars
Well-Known Member
Forced as in the media hellfire that has been unleashed upon countries that simply can't take anymore. You country is essentialy being scrutinised if you do not take more refugees than you can cope with. And willing? So far I know thanks to Merkel welcoming the hordes of refugees there are too many to handle. Funny thing that she is considered right wing though, most of the right wingers even in europe aren't so fond of immigrants, just look at Poland and Hungary. Europeans feel Americans should do more, as they are part to blame. Since they left Iraq it created a power vacuum which helped to strengthen IS. The USA is only taking in 10000 refugees. That is noting compared to many other countries. That they make a big deal about that is laughable at best. We have already had to take in 5000. My country is about the size of New jersey. My problem isn't even that they are Muslim, simply that it is way to much to handle. That being said, some of the neighbouring countries could do more. Libanon and Turkey are taking in a lot. But Suadi Arabia hasn't taken any in.
Btw, where did I say europe is more mature? I honestly can't remember posting that.
Well, he could do like he just did recently and visit a shelter for refugee kids, in which he said that the faces of those kids aren't much different than American kids. That would be a whole lot more helpful than name calling. And you have to wonder why he chose to do this now when just a couple days ago he took a very different approach. Perhaps he saw the polls showed that a majority of Americans, including Democrats, are against his plan to bring in refugees. You all applauded his tough talk against Repubs, so he should do the same now, right? Why doesn't he tell the 54% of Americans who oppose him that they are un-American, why doesn't he call out the 54% of Dems who do not approve of his refugee plans, why doesn't he chastise the Dems who voted with the Repubs in a bi-partisan effort to block his refugee plan. How often do we even see bi-partisan efforts in Congress anymore? He's not doing it, he won't do it, and I can bet that none of you mind. But the Repubs, it's okay to tear into them even though their beliefs aren't much different than many Dems right now. How does that make any sense? How is such a position defensible?
And I can remember seeing someone claim that the Repubs want all gays dead, and want to make minorities slaves, but I don't remember you demanding that they provide proof or stop posting. Perhaps I must have missed that.
Chalkus, how do you explain Cruz, Jindal, and Huckabee showing up at the National Religious Liberties conference? I mean, look at this:
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-...tor-event-hosts-3-gop-candidates-563178051820
Last edited: