Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Protesting for what?


Baz Dane
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Frank Merton said:

This is entertaining.  It also speaks volumes about what sort of person you are.

Why else would they be protesting FOR the Globalist agenda and for maintaining the establishment. That, we the people have been trying to overcome for generations. You do realize that those in power think they should rule over everyone else. When they spew democracy they actually mean control over the masses, can you site any where in the world a full on democracy has been successful? The latest attempt was Venezuela. That country was robust now the people are starving and the rulers are wealthy.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cerberusxp said:

Why else would they be protesting FOR the Globalist agenda and for maintaining the establishment. That, we the people have been trying to overcome for generations. You do realize that those in power think they should rule over everyone else. When they spew democracy they actually mean control over the masses, can you site any where in the world a full on democracy has been successful? The latest attempt was Venezuela. That country was robust now the people are starving and the rulers are wealthy.

Yeah im pretty much anti anything that isnt good for America - at this stage that definitely includes Trump. Conversely you can't imagine the hell id be raising if Hillary had been elected.  We were screwed as a nation either way the election went, just from different angles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reply to Farmer77

The dismantling of the establishment is what we want Trump has begun what little he can do about it. It's a very daunting task.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cerberusxp said:

Reply to Farmer77

The dismantling of the establishment is what we want Trump has begun what little he can do about it. It's a very daunting task.

Trump has said thats what he's going to do. He's not off to a great start, repealing the dodd-frank act is a great example of that. He railed against Hillaries wall street connections and then does that? Comeon !!!! 

Another is in not including Saudi Arabia in his immigration ban, its the same old same old. Just in a new offensive orange package

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Trump has said thats what he's going to do. He's not off to a great start, repealing the dodd-frank act is a great example of that. He railed against Hillaries wall street connections and then does that? Comeon !!!! 

Another is in not including Saudi Arabia in his immigration ban, its the same old same old. Just in a new offensive orange package

You do know that Dodd Frank was actually written by the Federal reserve banks don't you? It regulates the small banks into not lending. It does not regulate the BIG banks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, cerberusxp said:

You do know that Dodd Frank was actually written by the Federal reserve banks don't you? It regulates the small banks into not lending. It does not regulate the BIG banks.

 I do know its not perfect although I gladly admit to not being a financial expert. Im more concerned about the other aspects like mandating that investors make the best decisions for their clients ,ending predatory lending practices and aiding whistle blowers. 

Edited by Farmer77
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the being against predatory lending. However the big banks can do as they please derivative are still happening only on a larger scale through the larger banks. Guess what we tax payers back all that still! These swaps can only be done in the bigger banks and do what ever they want. Thousands of small banks went out of business because of these regulations. I'm certain that there will be some revision to some of the regulations.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cerberusxp said:

All the anti Trump people you must understand they have been psychologically enslaved and psychologically oppressed. Their masters can spew any lies they wish against anyone and they treat it as gospel. The plan by the old KGB 50 years ago has worked on these people and the real sad part is they don't even know they have been brainwashed. The question and answer to this problem is how do we develop a deprogramming solution!

Nonsense. If people don't like Donald Trump....it's not because they are brainwashed... it's because they have the common sense and the rational to see through his BS where his narcissistic personality is concerned.

 

  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Astra. said:

Nonsense. If people don't like Donald Trump....it's not because they are brainwashed... it's because they have the common sense and the rational to see through his BS where his narcissistic personality is concerned.

 

  

possibly it might in fact be almost the opposite of that; they in fact might actually be easily influenced by media and powers at work behind the scenes orchestrating these "spontaneous scenes of protest at the Horrible Man". They only see the superficial triggers that provoke them to get out their little placards. It might be interesting to see how much knowledge they have of economic or foreign affairs matters, or whether their response to any question would just be "Dunno, but he hates women! And Mexicans! Nasty!"

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Well to be fair I think my description in another thread is the most accurate. He is at best offensive, at worst racist and sexist ....some examples:

I think the mexican judge was a decent example: The justice department sued his company twice for discriminatory renting practices.

He condoned violence against a BLM protester 

Here is a quote attributed to the Donald  from a 1991 book: (I know the author mustve been a time traveling Hillary supporter right?) “And isn’t it funny. I’ve got black accountants at Trump Castle and Trump Plaza. Black guys counting my money! I hate it,” O’Donnell recalled Trump saying. “The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day.”

 

Sorry but the grab em by the genitals comment is absolutely sexist and as disconcerting to me it was the kind of thing a bully would say and do (I hate bullies)

Here's another lovely quote from the man:

“I have days where, if I come home — and I don't want to sound too much like a chauvinist,” the Republican said, “but when I come home and dinner's not ready, I go through the roof.”

This one about breastfeeding is kind of a gem too:

Trump was in court testifying in a deposition over a failed Florida real estate project when lawyer Elizabeth Beck asked to take a break to breastfeed her three-month old daughter.

The property mogul and his team objected, so she pulled out her breast pump to prove it. In an incident that Trump "does not dispute", he walked out of the room, telling Beck she was "disgusting".

 

The above is not a comprehensive list. So you can choose to interpret the above as just being offensive and not actually racist or sexist if you like, hell I even kind of do. I think its much less a case of he actually dislikes any particular group and much more a case of he's a spoiled brat who has never had to get along in society like an average American. 

How about 
"we came, we saw, he died"

or, from one of her biggest supporters

"I think the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children was a price worth paying."

Which would you say was more objectionable?

 

 

 

.... "he's a nasty bully!" ...

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

How about 
"we came, we saw, he died"

or, from one of her biggest supporters

"I think the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children was a price worth paying."

Which would you say was more objectionable?

 

 

 

.... "he's a nasty bully!" ...

  Like I said yesterday, I would rather have Trump than Hillary but  that's tantamount to saying id rather have untreated syphilis than ALS

Clearly the 500k children comment is more reprehensible , its on par with wanting to make certain religious groups wear stars to identify themselves. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/5/2017 at 5:37 AM, Farmer77 said:

If thats the tactic then perhaps he should back off on insulting the checks and balances that this nation is built on.  

I didn't hear that rhetoric from you when President Obama was signing Executive Orders. 

Is it because the orders he was signing were stuff you supported? Do you only care about checks and balances when it the other guy is in office?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2017 at 3:05 AM, Yamato said:

Paper or plastic.

Actually the paper is recyclable, and biodegradable, and the plastic bags are neither. Plus the plastic bags kill tons of wildlife every year, while the paper ones don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/5/2017 at 0:51 PM, Farmer77 said:

Nahhhh he isnt doing what he said he'd do.He's doing just enough to keep the division up.  His 7 nation ban didnt even include the nation that sent us 9/11, its pure politics.

I thought the "Ban" didn't include Saudi Arabia, because the US has FULL access to the Saudi criminal and government databases, so we can vet people from that country. Which we can not do with the other 7 nations, as far as I can tell.

Those 7 nations were listed by President Obama's State Department as the leading points of entry for suspected terrorists. So thank Obama for the list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2017 at 3:34 AM, Farmer77 said:

Trump is developing a pattern of showing disdain for the way our nation functions. Specifically a disdain for the piece of our government which keeps would be dictators in check. That doesnt worry you in the slightest? 

Obama already broke that mold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2017 at 5:10 AM, Ellapennella said:

I believe that President Trump & others in congress will have this Liberal circuit court overturned by a higher court that actually will favor utilizing our laws to protect our nation that we already have but don't enforce because of the left liberals blocking them all of the time with lies while flooding our country with people that hate us. Not safe, not good. It will be overturned. President Trump will win back our justice for America's best interest.

From what I've read, Trump didn't do anything that Obama, Bush, Clinton, or Reagan did, but just on a slightly larger scale. Precedent is clearly on Trumps side in this discussion. It is only Identity Politics that allows this to be a big deal. Poor Muslims... Just because they don't prevent terrorism, then they can't come to America? Wait... Bull Shoot, almost every single person who's been held up by the "Ban" has gotten in with only a slight hassle. Some few needed wavers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

He railed against Hillaries wall street connections and then does that? Comeon !!!! 

I thought that was to point out her Hypocrisy, not because he didn't like Wall Street. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2017 at 9:39 AM, Ellapennella said:

Why's it always  about race with the left or sex or something to divide people?  White people have been done wrong too, black's are not the only ones that happens to.

Identity Politics gets the Dems fired up. It is emotional. It gets them feeling like Social Justice Warriors. Their reason leaves them when a discussion can be turned into a care of Bigotry.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Identity Politics gets the Dems fired up. It is emotional. It gets them feeling like Social Justice Warriors. Their reason leaves them when a discussion can be turned into a care of Bigotry.

 I see that.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I didn't hear that rhetoric from you when President Obama was signing Executive Orders. 

Is it because the orders he was signing were stuff you supported? Do you only care about checks and balances when it the other guy is in office?

I dont remember Obama belittling and eroding the confidence in the checks and balances. Thats really why the outrage from my part. 

I fully confess to not being as politically active or aware when Obama was in office. Several factors played into that. A whole lot of burnout  and a whole lot of cynicism being the major ones. The 2016 election really energized me. Not because im a partisan but because of the wholly horrific faux "choices" we had. 

I truly dont believe Trump is actually any different than Obama or Bush or Clinton etc etc all the way back to 1963. So its not about the other guy , its about the degradation of our nation. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I thought that was to point out her Hypocrisy, not because he didn't like Wall Street. 

Hillary will never reform Wall Street. She is owned by Wall Street!

 Was one of his tweets about Hillary and wall street. The obvious implication is that he would, the dude ran as a populist. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I dont remember Obama belittling and eroding the confidence in the checks and balances

No, he just disregarded them when it suited him (like when he gave himself powers to assassinate anyone at all anywhere at all if he decided that they were, in some vague way, a Threat to America) while pretending to worship the all-sacred Constitution. That's good old hypocrisy right there. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

No, he just disregarded them when it suited him (like when he gave himself powers to assassinate anyone at all anywhere at all if he decided that they were, in some vague way, a Threat to America) while pretending to worship the all-sacred Constitution. That's good old hypocrisy right there. 

Once again, im really not in the business of defending that guy. The rest of the post you quoted really is the meat of it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

And that's the funny part of all this "P*tin is the Great Dictator because he Annexed Crimea". Crimea has always historically been part of Russia; it was when the Brits got out of their depth there in the mid 19th c. It only ended up as part of Ukraine when the USSR broke up because of some administrative adjustments that had happened in the 1950s. The people are overwhelmingly Russian, they'd often requested that the Crimea go back to Russia, and then when a hardline rightwing regime was put in power in Kiev (with no help whatsoever from the CIA and State Dept of course, because they'd never dream of interfering in other countries' internal affairs :innocent:), they overwhelmingly voted to break away from Ukraine, and this was ratified by the people who ratify these things, and since then support for Russia's Tyrant has been consistently over 90%. It really is very funny how supporters of democracy and self-determination don't seem to think it should apply to anyone who might want to join the current chosen enemy,. 

Don't confuse neoconservatives and hawkish "doves" with facts. It destroys their "Putin = Hitler" meme. At least, you didn't mention Biden's son's sweetheart deal after the coup, er, regime change, er, color revolution, er, something took place. Don't do as we do, do as we say.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 7:42 AM, Yamato said:

We're not going to get meaningful change with our country's TREASON (your word not mine) with Saudi Arabia and what surely must be other treasonous relationships with other foreign powers if you can ignore what we're doing over there to then come tell me "it makes no difference".   It makes no difference, if we drop what we were doing and retract our statements like "TREASON" the moment Trump goes to Arabia.

 

Yes my word was "Treason".

I said...

- "As far as my opinion on the Bush-Saudi relationship... Watching the romance between Dubya and the Saudis was sickening to say the least. But Gay romance aside, my opinion on their relationship can be summed up in one word... Treason"

Based on not just Dubya's completely ignoring of the Saudi's involvement in 9,11, but aiding and assisting them with escaping, and the entire cover-up of their involvement in 9/11. Not to mention the relationship with the Bush family and both, the House Of Saud and the Bin Laden family. I don't think Trump is quite on the same playing field in this regard in reference to my meaning.

I've repeatedly stated, quite clearly, my opinions on the Saudi-U.S. relationship, and how I think it should currently be approached(short of a war). You disagree and want to argue in immediate absolutes, in which I disagree. Period.

If things with ISIS, Saudi Arabia, Syria etc...foreign policy... continues going down the same path over the next couple of years, as it has over the last few decades, THEN I will be the first in line to call Trump out as a Traitor.

Not sure how many different ways do you need to be told that I am willing to wait and see what happens, BEFORE casting judgment? Your attempts to change and sway my opinion won't work.

2 weeks in and your calling Trump out for Treason based on twisting why I used the word Treason to begin with.

Just looking to argue for the sake of arguing.

Quote

It makes no difference who's in the White House, so long as half the time half our people don't care what their boy does and the other half the time the other half doesn't care what theirs does.   That's why I'm telling you, don't drop the ball on Saudi Arabia now.

Well first, Trump's not my "boy" in the White House, so that's wrong... and "drop the ball on Saudi Arabia"??? :lol: Yea, I'm going to suddenly do an about face and give them a pass or something :lol:

Quote

You apparently have zero interest in discussing Iran, I can't even invite you to comment to get one.

No, I apparently have something of a life to lead and do not have the time to respond in every thread here at UM.

What is it about Iran now that you would like to argue about?

You wrote in that thread...

- "Did you watch the OP video Lemieux?   I noticed you didn't participate in the other thread either.   Anything to discuss about Iran?"

I didn't realize I was required to post in every thread.

Actually, I have posted quite a bit about Iran here at UM, and I guess you weren't paying attention again. You asked me to show you where I've posted about Saudi Arabia, which I did... so what now... now I have to run around doing research for you too about Iran to give you something to argue about?

The reason I posted what I did in that thread because as I said, Claire had already started that exact topic previously, and the Mods obviously missed it.

Claire and I don't exactly see eye to eye on all things, but I don't think her posting should be buried, ignored and forgotten about, so in the interests of fairness I alerted the Mods about the double-topic. I didn't realize that obligated me to post my opinions on the subject matter of the topic.

You don't like Trump... I get that... I like Trump better than Clinton, or Bush or Obama. :yes:

I'm willing to give Trump some time before I decide just exactly what he is.

I did the same with Obama too... I didn't know much about him in 07/08, and even though I didn't like who he picked, and/or kept on, in assembling his first Administration, I still waited a few years to see exactly what he would become... Which unfortunately turned out to be an extension of the same Clinton/Bush group that ruins Middle Eastern countries and skyrockets the National Debt, etc etc.

I didn't support Obama at all, but nor did I instantly attack him... I DID afford him the time to see if he would be any good or not... Eventually proven NOT, and his true colors came out in the end.

People can keep jumping up and down all they like, but I will still wait and see how things unfold first instead of running around in a frenzied panic, smashing windows, setting fires, assaulting people and so on.


I'll eventually address your Iran question when I get the time considering I now know how important that is to you for some reason... I have no doubts there will be at least something you will want to argue about which should make you happy and keep you busy :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.