It's a bad day for human beings

User Forum Topic
Submitted by zk on November 9, 2016 - 7:53am

President Donald Trump.

Jesus.

You idiots have gone and done it.

Dear trump voter,

You've been bamboozled. Tricked.

You're a chump. A fool.

You think he's going to build a wall and get Mexico to pay for it? You're a credulous buffoon.

You think he's going to "fix" Washington? "Drain the swamp?" You've been hoodwinked.

You think he's going to be able to deal effectively with foreign leaders? Especially ones that criticize him? You're a fool.

You think he's going to bring jobs back to America? You're deluded.

You think he's going to lead with any kind of common sense, even after all the things he's said and done? You're blind.

You think his threats to not pay our debts will have no effect? Think again.

You think his desire to throttle free speech when it insults him is a good thing? You'd probably "vote" for Mussolini.

You think his isolationist ideas will be good for America? Even if that did turn out to be true (highly doubtful), you're a selfish bastard.

You think his rhetoric on women and minorities and foreigners won't continue to have a corrosive effect on our society? You're deplorable.

You think he'll take any responsibility for his actions and mistakes when he hasn't done anything of the sort ever? You’re a credulous bumpkin.

You don't care that he didn't know Russia invaded Ukraine and didn't know what the nuclear triad is? You're ignorant.

He’s shown you virtually no detailed policy proposals, yet you think whatever he comes up with will be good for you? Jesus, that’s pathetic.

You think he's a good businessman? You're easily tricked. He started with millions of dollars and then cheated, lied, stole, declared bankruptcy, and still didn't make more than an index fund would've.

You don't care that he didn't release his tax returns? You are, pathetically, a pigeon in the thrall of a Barnum.

You don't care that he didn't pay hard-working people he had promised to pay? And you still think he's for the "little guy?" You're a patsy.

You're glad to have a president who thinks climate change is a Chinese hoax? Your children and your grandchildren and your great-grandchildren will pay for that.

You don’t care about all the misogynistic, xenophobic comments that he made? You’ve chosen a disastrous role model for your children and grandchildren and the results of that are your fault.

You think it's a good thing that he wants the military to follow orders from him even if they're illegal? You live in a fantasy world.

You think it’s ok to threaten to not honor our NATO obligations? You have made the world a more dangerous place.

You put in office a “man” who wants more countries to have nuclear weapons? You’ve added even more danger.

You gave the nuclear codes to a man who responds to every insult with an attack? My god, what the fuck is wrong with you?

You put in office a man who wants to kill the families of terrorists? You're a sorry excuse for a human being.

You think he cares about you or about this country or about anything but his fucked-up, orange self? You're a joke.

You're glad that idiots like you have been given a voice? You're about to find out just how much of an idiot you are and that you should have just shut the fuck up.

Submitted by flu on August 10, 2017 - 1:05pm.

Hobie wrote:
All this talk is just posturing. By both sides. What will Kim do next if he indeed bombs US interests? Invade?

He will be opening a large can of whoop azz on himself not only by the US, but China and SKorea possibly even be invaded by Russia.

Didn't you see the remake of Red Dawn? Lol.

The easiest way to get China to step in and actually do something ? Suggest arming Taiwan and Japan more.

Submitted by harvey on August 10, 2017 - 1:40pm.

flu wrote:
The easiest way to get China to step in and actually do something?

What would they want to do something?

There's no outcome that benefits China. Status quo is their best alternative.

Submitted by flu on August 10, 2017 - 1:49pm.

harvey wrote:
flu wrote:
The easiest way to get China to step in and actually do something?

What would they want to do something?

There's no outcome that benefits China. Status quo is their best alternative.

Putting a bunch of missiles off the coast of China would not make China very happy. It would be the equivalent of Russia putting missiles in Cuba. We know how that turned out.

This is a big game of chess. Nothing is going to happen. Plenty of moves each player can play.

It's just people aren't using to playing this game...for a long time...

Submitted by FlyerInHi on August 10, 2017 - 1:53pm.

flu wrote:

The easiest way to get China to step in and actually do something ? Suggest arming Taiwan and Japan more.

The US is increasing military support for South Korea and Japan, which is totally against what Trump promised his base.

The Japanese are the ones worried and pushing for action.... prior to July 4, the US did nothing. The Japanese publicized the ICMB test and the pentagon confirmed. The info didn't come directly from the Trump White House. Of course, things escalated since then.

China may be angling for a grand bargain to "solve the problem" once it's clear the US cannot. That would be good... but if China holds the cards then countries in the regions will be asking "what is the US good for? Might as well ally directly with China." Not good for us.

Unfortunately for Trump, statecraft is complicated, much more than just being badass.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-...
A grand bargain with China could remove North Korea's nuclear threat — but it would destroy America's global influence

Submitted by spdrun on August 10, 2017 - 3:34pm.

Problem is that Japan and South Korea are both de-facto nuclear states. Without a US promise, they might take matters into their own hands.

Both have uranium and plute enrichment plants and the precision casting tech needed to build a working nuke. Delivery? Toss it out of a 737, fire a torpedo from a sub, or launch a cruise missile dropped from the same aircraft.

Submitted by Hobie on August 10, 2017 - 4:29pm.

Kim knows the radiation from a nuke strike gains him nothing. He is just pounding his moobs to gain entrance into the nuke club.

Iran however, because of its religious ideology is a big concern for a nuke launch.

ICBM's are so 1950's. Suitcase nukes are another matter. Stick one in an airliner and we are vulnerable. Wait, Clancy wrote about this already. ..

Submitted by FlyerInHi on August 10, 2017 - 5:21pm.

I guess Japan and South Korea are getting more free protection while their corporations make money from us.

Submitted by flu on August 11, 2017 - 7:36am.

Russia is probably thinking about things right now... "maybe it wasn't such a good idea we interfered with the elections and helped Trump win... We didn't expect him to be this crazy"....

And if it gets any worse, maybe Russian hackers actually leak information that shows there was collusion....lol....

The plot thickens. Loli don't know. But I think our checks and balances in government is doing pretty well.our forefathers were mich smarter than people realize

Submitted by harvey on August 11, 2017 - 8:38am.

flu wrote:
But I think our checks and balances in government is doing pretty well.our forefathers were mich smarter than people realize

Agree.

But maybe we should do something about this one:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...

“Right now one person can launch thousands of nuclear weapons, and that's the president. No one can stop him."

It made sense when Eisenhower was president.

Yup, we once had Eisenhower, now we have Trump.

We really need to make America great again.

Submitted by spdrun on August 11, 2017 - 8:56am.

I'm not sure if "no one can stop him" is accurate -- there's a chain of command and a staff that might not pass the orders if they think POTUS has gone barking mad.

Submitted by harvey on August 11, 2017 - 9:47am.

Military officers are obligated to refuse unlawful orders.

The point is that it would be a lawful order.

It's not something we would want to see tested.

He's already given orders without consulting with the military.

This US first-strike nuke scenario was never even plausible until now.

BTW, this is all Obama's fault:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_North...

Submitted by spdrun on August 11, 2017 - 9:58am.

Would an order to commit genocide be lawful per international law? Also, is the person giving the order fully mentally healthy? A case could be made either way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Hering

Better a court-martial a year in the future than killing a few million people.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on August 11, 2017 - 10:16am.

It's not clear what the US wants from North Korea. Stop threatening, stop testing, stop developing, get rid of weapons, what? And what in exchange?

trump doesnt have any clear policy.

Submitted by harvey on August 11, 2017 - 10:25am.

spdrun wrote:
Better a court-martial a year in the future than killing a few million people.

I'm confident that most officers would agree with that.

I wonder if the Founders ever considered the situation where the military was protecting us from the civilian Commander in Chief?

Submitted by FlyerInHi on August 11, 2017 - 11:05am.

flu wrote:
Russia is probably thinking about things right now... "maybe it wasn't such a good idea we interfered with the elections and helped Trump win... We didn't expect him to be this crazy"....

And if it gets any worse, maybe Russian hackers actually leak information that shows there was collusion....lol....

The plot thickens. Loli don't know. But I think our checks and balances in government is doing pretty well.our forefathers were mich smarter than people realize

It serves Russia to have Trump because Trump undermines America's moral authority/softpower and any love and admiration foreigners may have for us.

Nothing to do with smart forefathers. We have long running institutions but if they're destroyed, they'll be gone for good, no matter what the constitution says. The constitution is just a piece of paper, it's up to successive governments to uphold it.

Submitted by zk on August 16, 2017 - 8:48am.

This is the disgusting, pathetic fool that you morons voted for:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powe...

If this behavior comes as a surprise to any of you who voted for him, you're just fucking stupid.

If this doesn't come as a surprise to any of you who voted for him, you're a despicable human being for knowing who he is and still voting for him.

Submitted by SK in CV on August 16, 2017 - 9:24am.

zk wrote:
This is the disgusting, pathetic fool that you morons voted for:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powe...

If this behavior comes as a surprise to any of you who voted for him, you're just fucking stupid.

If this doesn't come as a surprise to any of you who voted for him, you're a despicable human being for knowing who he is and still voting for him.

And they whined about being called deplorable.

Submitted by harvey on August 16, 2017 - 10:03am.

zk wrote:
If this doesn't come as a surprise to any of you who voted for him, you're a despicable human being for knowing who he is and still voting for him.

The other side also does it, so that makes it ok.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on August 17, 2017 - 9:28am.

Zk, Trump has 79% support among Republicans.

Submitted by zk on August 17, 2017 - 12:05pm.

FlyerInHi wrote:
Zk, Trump has 79% support among Republicans.

You're winning me over, Brian. At this point, I'm tired of saying they're brainwashed. I gave them the benefit of the doubt for a long time, but I don't see how they can support him at this point. Even fox propaganda can't hide what he's doing now. They're either fucking stupid or they're despicable human beings. Or both.

Submitted by harvey on August 17, 2017 - 2:14pm.

I occasionally check the headlines on Fox just to see how they are spinning current events.

In the past week or so they've given up trying to defend Trump.

There's still the usual stuff: emphasis on brown-skinned criminal gangs, histrionics over the threat level in North Korea, and the obsession with Hillary Clinton nearly a year after the election.

But Trump has lost Fox News. The spiral will accelerate.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/...

Submitted by svelte on August 17, 2017 - 9:19pm.

harvey wrote:
I occasionally check the headlines on Fox just to see how they are spinning current events.

In the past week or so they've given up trying to defend Trump.

I do the same thing and noticed the same thing!

It's almost every man for himself now on the Republican side. Fox it appears is looking towards the post Trump era. They want to have a fig leaf of respect left - better to bail now than later.

Fox has always had Krauthammer (interesting name) that gave a more even handed analysis of things happening, but now even the rest of Fox isn't trying to justify everything Trump does. Never thought I'd see the day.

Submitted by svelte on August 17, 2017 - 9:23pm.

zk wrote:

At this point, I'm tired of saying they're brainwashed. I gave them the benefit of the doubt for a long time, but I don't see how they can support him at this point.

I'm with you here ZK. I've got many Republican friends who on a day to day basis are reasonably intelligent people. But there are quite a few of them who defend and side with Trump - to this day! I can't reconcile those two facts.

It boggles my mind. I'm leaning towards the theory that (a) they close their mind to any information that doesn't match their preconceived view, and/or (b) their ability to reason is severely compromised. Both thoughts are truly scary.

I'm neither a Dem or Rep. I tend to side with the Dems more, but even they get me angry. As my son told me the other day, I've got to quit classifying Trump as a Rep because at the end of the day, he really isn't one.

Submitted by harvey on August 17, 2017 - 9:48pm.

There was a recent article in National Review that tried to explain that "the left" was responsible for Confederate monuments because most of the confederacy was former Democrats.

It was a horribly tortured argument but all too typical of we are hearing from the remainder of the Trump camp.

Submitted by zk on August 17, 2017 - 10:47pm.

svelte wrote:
zk wrote:

At this point, I'm tired of saying they're brainwashed. I gave them the benefit of the doubt for a long time, but I don't see how they can support him at this point.

I'm with you here ZK. I've got many Republican friends who on a day to day basis are reasonably intelligent people. But there are quite a few of them who defend and side with Trump - to this day! I can't reconcile those two facts.

It boggles my mind. I'm leaning towards the theory that (a) they close their mind to any information that doesn't match their preconceived view, and/or (b) their ability to reason is severely compromised. Both thoughts are truly scary.

I'm neither a Dem or Rep. I tend to side with the Dems more, but even they get me angry. As my son told me the other day, I've got to quit classifying Trump as a Rep because at the end of the day, he really isn't one.

I agree with all of that except the last phrase.

I know where you're coming from, and maybe you're right. But to me the problem with that is that when you say, "he isn't [a republican]" you appear to be using an outdated definition of "republican." I don't think "republican" can mean what it used to anymore. Virtually the entire party has sold their souls and boarded the trump train. They're on that pathetically mangled train now, and when they jump off, it'll be too late because they're already in trumpville. They can try to get on another train back to the old republicanland. But that's a long journey, and they could get lost (or voted out of office) before they reach their destination.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on August 18, 2017 - 9:10am.

harvey wrote:
There was a recent article in National Review that tried to explain that "the left" was responsible for Confederate monuments because most of the confederacy was former Democrats.

It was a horribly tortured argument but all too typical of we are hearing from the remainder of the Trump camp.

haha... Plus I don't understand the fixation on the old statues.

The statues were erected by localities. Let local town councils decide what they want to do. Wait, OMG.. my position is so quaintly classical "conservative".

Submitted by svelte on August 18, 2017 - 5:08pm.

FlyerInHi wrote:

The statues were erected by localities. Let local town councils decide what they want to do. Wait, OMG.. my position is so quaintly classical "conservative".

I'm with you here Brian.

I can see both sides of the coin. On the one hand, celebrating folks who went to war to keep other humans under slavery is very offensive. On the other hand, some of the south did it for southern pride not necessarily for a love of slavery. I had this discussion with my folks about 20 years ago. They didn't understand the uproar over the Confederate Flag. They saw it as a symbol of southern pride, not a symbol of oppression. They were sincere in their confusion, and that helped me understand that point of view.

Plus sculptures are things of beauty. It would be neat to see those localities who don't want them any more to donate them to some museum where they could be appreciated simply for their artistic beauty and historical perspective, not in a sign of honor.

I liked the photo I saw the other day. Some lady is going around decorating confederate statues with "Second Place" awards. Pretty funny!

Submitted by harvey on August 18, 2017 - 8:38pm.

Quote:
They saw it as a symbol of southern pride, not a symbol of oppression.

Well with that logic the Nazi flag is just a symbol of German pride.

Before anyone calls me out on Goodwin's law, this topic is exempt:

http://gizmodo.com/godwin-of-godwins-law...

By all means, compare these shitheads to the Nazis. Again and again. I'm with you.

- Mike Goodwin

Submitted by svelte on August 19, 2017 - 8:01am.

ha ha I'd never heard of Godwin's Law before, that's fabulous.

Yeah I know the stability of the argument that the Confederate Flag represents pride and not racism is dubious, but there are people who see it that way.

I mean, my folks certainly aren't racists. They don't fly or even own a Confederate Flag either, but then I can't recall them ever flying any flag. Just not their thing.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on August 19, 2017 - 9:49am.

About the confederate statues, some town will keep them, some would elect to remove them.

The truth is times have changed and Confederate statues are retrograde by our standards. If towns keep statues, they will lose business opportunities. But up to them.

In the future, some towns may erect Latino heritage or perhaps Muslim heritage monuments. Up to them. We have to be intellectually consistent in defining freedom.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.