The resistance is on the wrong side, as usual

D

Darth Omar

Russian asset
Trump's travel ban that's a Muslim ban except when it's not lol, shows a 55% favorability amongst voters.

Yet The Resistance opposes it.

They claim to oppose it on principle, but that principle was notably absent when Obama enacted the same ban on the exact seven countries. In fact, hardly anyone even remembers it.

But this is Donald J. Trump; Trump is Hitler, and he must be opposed at all costs!

All very amusing lol. But are the democrats even aware they are in opposition to a majority of voters? Will they go as far as to label folks who support *the common sense* travel ban as religious bigots?

Did democrats learn nothing last November?
___________________

https://www.aol.com/article/news/20...rumps-most-popular-executive-orders/21710001/
 
Well what? Obama's gone and trump could have signed another EO cancelling his ban, but he didn't. It's a specious argument to say "Obama did it too."
 
Darth Omar said:
Trump's travel ban that's a Muslim ban except when it's not lol, shows a 55% favorability amongst voters.

Yet The Resistance opposes it.

They claim to oppose it on principle, but that principle was notably absent when Obama enacted the same ban on the exact seven countries. In fact, hardly anyone even remembers it.

But this is Donald J. Trump; Trump is Hitler, and he must be opposed at all costs!

All very amusing lol. But are the democrats even aware they are in opposition to a majority of voters? Will they go as far as to label folks who support *the common sense* travel ban as religious bigots?

Did democrats learn nothing last November?
___________________

https://www.aol.com/article/news/20...rumps-most-popular-executive-orders/21710001/
Click to expand...

If it is a travel ban on MUSLIMS, why doesn't it include all the countries where more than 90% of the people are MUSLIM? The left can't answer that.
 
christiefan915 said:
Well what? Obama's gone and trump could have signed another EO cancelling his ban, but he didn't. It's a specious argument to say "Obama did it too."
Click to expand...

Is it a specious argument for the lefties saying "we're going to do to you what you did to Obama"?
 
And to address the OP - Obama didn't announce it formally, and it wasn't reported widely. It was in response to a specific incident instead of "policy," and I would have opposed it if I knew about it.

Here's the deal: like some on the right, particularly on the security side, I happen to think that this measure achieves the opposite of what it intends. I think it alienates important allies and communities who we really need to fight terrorism & extremism, and makes us less safe - not more.
 
the media creates the memes, and the Dems reinforce,and the protestors haven't a clue..

"Muslim ban " is manifestly, stupidly wrong
 
Thing1 said:
By "media and Dems," do you mean Rudy Giuliani?
Click to expand...
him too. it's manifestly not a Muslim ban or any attempts at a Muslim ban -most of the Islamic world is not even effected.
Guliani's best characteristic is that Trump shut him out of government..
 
anatta said:
him too. it's manifestly not a Muslim ban or any attempts at a Muslim ban -most of the Islamic world is not even effected.
Guliani's best characteristic is that Trump shut him out of government..
Click to expand...

I don't think he's lying about what Trump said.

Because Trump said it in the campaign.
 
Thing1 said:
I don't think he's lying about what Trump said.
Because Trump said it in the campaign.
Click to expand...
Long, long ago, and he corrected that to "extreme vetting" - and that led to the "7 states" once he got to
Office and saw what Obama did. it was a process of refinement from the coarse initial idea

But if you always want to think the very worse,and ignore the many changes since then...so be it.
 
anatta said:
Long, long ago, and he corrected that to "extreme vetting" - and that led to the "7 states" once he got to
Office and saw what Obama did. it was a process of refinement from the coarse initial idea

But if you always want to think the very worse,and ignore the many changes since then...so be it.
Click to expand...

I'm just able to put 2 & 2 together. He 1st said "Muslim ban" because that's what he meant. Then, even conservatives were objecting because some of them care about the Constitution and not discriminating based on religion. So, Trump knew he had to re-frame it - which is the same thing he told Rudy.
 
anatta said:
him too. it's manifestly not a Muslim ban or any attempts at a Muslim ban -most of the Islamic world is not even effected.
Guliani's best characteristic is that Trump shut him out of government..
Click to expand...

When he admitted he would give preference to Christians in Muslim majority countries, that is a de facto Muslim ban.

"In an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network on Friday, Trump clarified what this means: Christians refugees will be given priority status. “They’ve been horribly treated,” the president said. “Do you know if you were a Christian in Syria it was impossible, at least very tough, to get into the United States? If you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible.” People overseas “were chopping off the heads of everybody, but more so the Christians,” he added, “so we are going to help them.”
 
Thing1 said:
I'm just able to put 2 & 2 together. He 1st said "Muslim ban" because that's what he meant. Then, even conservatives were objecting because some of them care about the Constitution and not discriminating based on religion. So, Trump knew he had to re-frame it - which is the same thing he told Rudy.
Click to expand...

So you admit it's not a Muslim ban. Good.

The U.S. Constitution does not apply to foreigners, despite how many times you say it does, moron..
 
Thing1 said:
I'm just able to put 2 & 2 together. He 1st said "Muslim ban" because that's what he meant. Then, even conservatives were objecting because some of them care about the Constitution and not discriminating based on religion. So, Trump knew he had to re-frame it - which is the same thing he told Rudy.
Click to expand...
what? why on earth would he want to"ban Muslims" and then not ban SA/Pakistan?
He wants to BAN TERRORISTS. That's why he picked the "7 countries" - they are incapable of verifying immigration status. I posted this somewhere before : here's the reasoning behind Obama's choices,and Trump's concurrance

*Libya has no government ( well it has 3)- we have a few CIA and the Brits have some SAS operating, but they are doing so with local militias
*Syria is not giving us intel
*Iraq's gov't barely cooperates with the US -and only over ISIS - being a proxie gov't of Iran
*Sudan is in a civil war -no cooperation with the US.
*Somalia the central gov't can't really get out of Mogadishu
*Yemen use to co-operate with the US -but that gov't lost the ability to deal with the US -rebels overran many of their bases
*Iran is hostile to the US in all dealings


forget Guiliani - the man has no credence whatever he was saying or not- Trump rightfully blew him off
 
Thing1 said:
And to address the OP - Obama didn't announce it formally, and it wasn't reported widely. It was in response to a specific incident instead of "policy," and I would have opposed it if I knew about it.

Here's the deal: like some on the right, particularly on the security side, I happen to think that this measure achieves the opposite of what it intends. I think it alienates important allies and communities who we really need to fight terrorism & extremism, and makes us less safe - not more.
Click to expand...

And you would have been wrong. We really don't need people traveling here from those seven countries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top