Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
What are you claiming your incapable of doing a google search for the comment?It's pointing out Democrat hypocrisy which your trying to aviod addressing you called Trumps comment a racist lie that Republicans should condemn Schultz comment was a sexist lie which no Democrats conemned and you it seems have no problem with that. Don't insist others live up to a standard your not willing to live up to.It didn't cost me a flag so I don't know where you got that only if Trump is the Republican nominee which he won't be don't see it as taking a chance. But since your so keen on having others condemn someone else for remarks they made Did Hillary Clinton or any of the Democrats running for the nomination condemn Debbie Wasserman Schultz when she said Scott Walker has given women the back of his hand and that Republicans like Walker are grabbing us by the hair and pulling us back? That was several months ago and it was an outright lie but if your not condeming it then your are saying that you believe Walker and anyone who supports him is OK with abusing women.
What does that deflection have to do with Trump's racist remarks about Hispanics?
How about you provide the original quote in context so that I can make an informed decision. That way I won't have to rely upon your faux outrage.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz Gov. Scott Walker gives women back of his hand - Lucy McCalmont - POLITICO.com
When you make a claim the onus is on you to substantiate it.
Now where is the context link of what Walker said that provoked that response?
Can't tell if it is applicable or not without knowing what Walker said about women.
Trump said what they would all like to but a couple have said they don't agree. Just saw that but the only one I can remember is Rick oops Perry.
And of course, he was 100% wrong.
Thing is, even though we know there is now a net zero of illegals coming into the country, there are still people who believe the kind of nonsense we read here - that they're pouring over the southern border. One of our own RWs nutters recently wrote "millions every day".
You can tell what she was talking about your simply trying rationalize not holding Democrats to the same standard you want to hold Republicans to.What are you claiming your incapable of doing a google search for the comment?It's pointing out Democrat hypocrisy which your trying to aviod addressing you called Trumps comment a racist lie that Republicans should condemn Schultz comment was a sexist lie which no Democrats conemned and you it seems have no problem with that. Don't insist others live up to a standard your not willing to live up to.It didn't cost me a flag so I don't know where you got that only if Trump is the Republican nominee which he won't be don't see it as taking a chance. But since your so keen on having others condemn someone else for remarks they made Did Hillary Clinton or any of the Democrats running for the nomination condemn Debbie Wasserman Schultz when she said Scott Walker has given women the back of his hand and that Republicans like Walker are grabbing us by the hair and pulling us back? That was several months ago and it was an outright lie but if your not condeming it then your are saying that you believe Walker and anyone who supports him is OK with abusing women.
What does that deflection have to do with Trump's racist remarks about Hispanics?
How about you provide the original quote in context so that I can make an informed decision. That way I won't have to rely upon your faux outrage.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz Gov. Scott Walker gives women back of his hand - Lucy McCalmont - POLITICO.com
When you make a claim the onus is on you to substantiate it.
Now where is the context link of what Walker said that provoked that response?
Can't tell if it is applicable or not without knowing what Walker said about women.
You can tell what she was talking about your simply trying rationalize not holding Democrats to the same standard you want to hold Republicans to.What are you claiming your incapable of doing a google search for the comment?It's pointing out Democrat hypocrisy which your trying to aviod addressing you called Trumps comment a racist lie that Republicans should condemn Schultz comment was a sexist lie which no Democrats conemned and you it seems have no problem with that. Don't insist others live up to a standard your not willing to live up to.What does that deflection have to do with Trump's racist remarks about Hispanics?
How about you provide the original quote in context so that I can make an informed decision. That way I won't have to rely upon your faux outrage.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz Gov. Scott Walker gives women back of his hand - Lucy McCalmont - POLITICO.com
When you make a claim the onus is on you to substantiate it.
Now where is the context link of what Walker said that provoked that response?
Can't tell if it is applicable or not without knowing what Walker said about women.
You know full well what she was referring to when she made the comments it's in the article you simply don't want to acknowledge it your partisan hypocrisy has been though.You can tell what she was talking about your simply trying rationalize not holding Democrats to the same standard you want to hold Republicans to.What are you claiming your incapable of doing a google search for the comment?It's pointing out Democrat hypocrisy which your trying to aviod addressing you called Trumps comment a racist lie that Republicans should condemn Schultz comment was a sexist lie which no Democrats conemned and you it seems have no problem with that. Don't insist others live up to a standard your not willing to live up to.
How about you provide the original quote in context so that I can make an informed decision. That way I won't have to rely upon your faux outrage.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz Gov. Scott Walker gives women back of his hand - Lucy McCalmont - POLITICO.com
When you make a claim the onus is on you to substantiate it.
Now where is the context link of what Walker said that provoked that response?
Can't tell if it is applicable or not without knowing what Walker said about women.
What she said is quoted but it is out of context because we don't know what he said to provoke it.
Unlike you I don't rush to judgment without all the facts.
Either provide what Walker said or stop whining.
Your choice.
You know full well what she was referring to when she made the comments it's in the article you simply don't want to acknowledge it your partisan hypocrisy has been though.You can tell what she was talking about your simply trying rationalize not holding Democrats to the same standard you want to hold Republicans to.What are you claiming your incapable of doing a google search for the comment?How about you provide the original quote in context so that I can make an informed decision. That way I won't have to rely upon your faux outrage.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz Gov. Scott Walker gives women back of his hand - Lucy McCalmont - POLITICO.com
When you make a claim the onus is on you to substantiate it.
Now where is the context link of what Walker said that provoked that response?
Can't tell if it is applicable or not without knowing what Walker said about women.
What she said is quoted but it is out of context because we don't know what he said to provoke it.
Unlike you I don't rush to judgment without all the facts.
Either provide what Walker said or stop whining.
Your choice.
ObamaNobody denied Obama used the term. We are looking for a quote of Obama saying that MEXICANS are gang bangers. It is now clear that some right wingers in this board just made that up.How about we all read what Obama actually said in the context of his speech?
No Obama Isn t Just Deporting Gang Bangers Mother Jones
Here is what Obama said:
What I've also said is if we're going to go after folks who are here illegally, we should do it smartly and go after folks who are criminals, gang bangers, people who are hurting the community, not after students, not after folks who are here just because they're trying to figure out how to feed their families. And that's what we've done. And what I've also said is for young people who come here, brought here often times by their parents. Had gone to school here, pledged allegiance to the flag. Think of this as their country. Understand themselves as Americans in every way except having papers. And we should make sure that we give them a pathway to citizenship.
Thank you, Obama used the derogatory term "gang bangers" please call the NY Times and register your outrage fool.
Are you a retard or something? HELLO earth to retarded liberals its not rocket science, Obama is talking about illegals and said the "gang bangers" should be deported HELLO...HELLO is anyone home in your puny retarded brains? For fucks sake libs.
Obama said that illegals who are not gangbangers, criminals, etc. Should not be deported, and the ones who are those things should.Nobody denied Obama used the term. We are looking for a quote of Obama saying that MEXICANS are gang bangers. It is now clear that some right wingers in this board just made that up.How about we all read what Obama actually said in the context of his speech?
No Obama Isn t Just Deporting Gang Bangers Mother Jones
Here is what Obama said:
What I've also said is if we're going to go after folks who are here illegally, we should do it smartly and go after folks who are criminals, gang bangers, people who are hurting the community, not after students, not after folks who are here just because they're trying to figure out how to feed their families. And that's what we've done. And what I've also said is for young people who come here, brought here often times by their parents. Had gone to school here, pledged allegiance to the flag. Think of this as their country. Understand themselves as Americans in every way except having papers. And we should make sure that we give them a pathway to citizenship.
Thank you, Obama used the derogatory term "gang bangers" please call the NY Times and register your outrage fool.
Are you a retard or something? HELLO earth to retarded liberals its not rocket science, Obama is talking about illegals and said the "gang bangers" should be deported HELLO...HELLO is anyone home in your puny retarded brains? For fucks sake libs.
Yawn...Hispanic groups will pressure Republicans to say whether they agree with Trump, and whoever wins the GOP primary that candidate has no chance to beat Hillary without getting at least a significant number of Hispanic votes.
Will Republican candidates condemn Trump's statement?
How do we guarantee the payout of this bet?A republican candidate attacking Trump over his comments is double edged and require some daft handling.(Believe it or not, Jeb Bush and Mike Huckabee can do this, but I don't see it viable to their campaigns as of now!!).
However, letting Trump stir the masses and then stealing his support before Iowa(Trump is not going to make it to Iowa--suck on that, Democrats!!) is the best strategy, while shaping their responses to questions that Trump has created through his tactless responses and speeches.
In a way, Trump is acting like a snow plough for the other Republicans. All they have to do is follow a simple plan, then eliminate his candidacy in the 3 months to Iowa.
Do you want to bet $20 on whether Trump will withdraw at least a week before the Iowa caucus? I'm willing to bet that he'll still be in by then.
How do we guarantee the payout of this bet?A republican candidate attacking Trump over his comments is double edged and require some daft handling.(Believe it or not, Jeb Bush and Mike Huckabee can do this, but I don't see it viable to their campaigns as of now!!).
However, letting Trump stir the masses and then stealing his support before Iowa(Trump is not going to make it to Iowa--suck on that, Democrats!!) is the best strategy, while shaping their responses to questions that Trump has created through his tactless responses and speeches.
In a way, Trump is acting like a snow plough for the other Republicans. All they have to do is follow a simple plan, then eliminate his candidacy in the 3 months to Iowa.
Do you want to bet $20 on whether Trump will withdraw at least a week before the Iowa caucus? I'm willing to bet that he'll still be in by then.
Do we use a third party? Do we send it to our actual address? I mean, really, do you trust someone you don't know?
For now, it is probably best to hold this over my head if he makes it to Iowa(or over your head, which I see I won't have to do if he does not make it) and look for a trusted third party that will handle the payout without disclosing our identity.
Sure, I am interested in the Bet. However, there are some technical difficulties we ave to address.
What are you claiming your incapable of doing a google search for the comment?It's pointing out Democrat hypocrisy which your trying to aviod addressing you called Trumps comment a racist lie that Republicans should condemn Schultz comment was a sexist lie which no Democrats conemned and you it seems have no problem with that. Don't insist others live up to a standard your not willing to live up to.What does that deflection have to do with Trump's racist remarks about Hispanics?
How about you provide the original quote in context so that I can make an informed decision. That way I won't have to rely upon your faux outrage.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz Gov. Scott Walker gives women back of his hand - Lucy McCalmont - POLITICO.com
When you make a claim the onus is on you to substantiate it.
Now where is the context link of what Walker said that provoked that response?
Can't tell if it is applicable or not without knowing what Walker said about women.
You mean like how the far left will vote for Hilary who is part of the 1% while demonizing the 1%?
Or how that Clinton foundation takes money from those countries that do not care about women's rights, yet claim they are for women's rights?
Like I said you far left drones are not capable of making an informed decision. A letter in the alphabet means more to you than what a person says and does.
ObamaNobody denied Obama used the term. We are looking for a quote of Obama saying that MEXICANS are gang bangers. It is now clear that some right wingers in this board just made that up.How about we all read what Obama actually said in the context of his speech?
No Obama Isn t Just Deporting Gang Bangers Mother Jones
Here is what Obama said:
What I've also said is if we're going to go after folks who are here illegally, we should do it smartly and go after folks who are criminals, gang bangers, people who are hurting the community, not after students, not after folks who are here just because they're trying to figure out how to feed their families. And that's what we've done. And what I've also said is for young people who come here, brought here often times by their parents. Had gone to school here, pledged allegiance to the flag. Think of this as their country. Understand themselves as Americans in every way except having papers. And we should make sure that we give them a pathway to citizenship.
Thank you, Obama used the derogatory term "gang bangers" please call the NY Times and register your outrage fool.
Are you a retard or something? HELLO earth to retarded liberals its not rocket science, Obama is talking about illegals and said the "gang bangers" should be deported HELLO...HELLO is anyone home in your puny retarded brains? For fucks sake libs.
Obama said that illegals who are not gangbangers, criminals, etc. Should not be deported, and the ones who are those things should.Nobody denied Obama used the term. We are looking for a quote of Obama saying that MEXICANS are gang bangers. It is now clear that some right wingers in this board just made that up.How about we all read what Obama actually said in the context of his speech?
No Obama Isn t Just Deporting Gang Bangers Mother Jones
Here is what Obama said:
What I've also said is if we're going to go after folks who are here illegally, we should do it smartly and go after folks who are criminals, gang bangers, people who are hurting the community, not after students, not after folks who are here just because they're trying to figure out how to feed their families. And that's what we've done. And what I've also said is for young people who come here, brought here often times by their parents. Had gone to school here, pledged allegiance to the flag. Think of this as their country. Understand themselves as Americans in every way except having papers. And we should make sure that we give them a pathway to citizenship.
Thank you, Obama used the derogatory term "gang bangers" please call the NY Times and register your outrage fool.
Are you a retard or something? HELLO earth to retarded liberals its not rocket science, Obama is talking about illegals and said the "gang bangers" should be deported HELLO...HELLO is anyone home in your puny retarded brains? For fucks sake libs.
But you are pretending that Obama thinks most or all illegals are gangbangers. And that's false.
How do we guarantee the payout of this bet?A republican candidate attacking Trump over his comments is double edged and require some daft handling.(Believe it or not, Jeb Bush and Mike Huckabee can do this, but I don't see it viable to their campaigns as of now!!).
However, letting Trump stir the masses and then stealing his support before Iowa(Trump is not going to make it to Iowa--suck on that, Democrats!!) is the best strategy, while shaping their responses to questions that Trump has created through his tactless responses and speeches.
In a way, Trump is acting like a snow plough for the other Republicans. All they have to do is follow a simple plan, then eliminate his candidacy in the 3 months to Iowa.
Do you want to bet $20 on whether Trump will withdraw at least a week before the Iowa caucus? I'm willing to bet that he'll still be in by then.
Do we use a third party? Do we send it to our actual address? I mean, really, do you trust someone you don't know?
For now, it is probably best to hold this over my head if he makes it to Iowa(or over your head, which I see I won't have to do if he does not make it) and look for a trusted third party that will handle the payout without disclosing our identity.
Sure, I am interested in the Bet. However, there are some technical difficulties we ave to address.
There is a better way.
The loser donates the $20 to the winner's charity of choice and posts the receipt after blocking out their name and address.
How do we guarantee the payout of this bet?A republican candidate attacking Trump over his comments is double edged and require some daft handling.(Believe it or not, Jeb Bush and Mike Huckabee can do this, but I don't see it viable to their campaigns as of now!!).
However, letting Trump stir the masses and then stealing his support before Iowa(Trump is not going to make it to Iowa--suck on that, Democrats!!) is the best strategy, while shaping their responses to questions that Trump has created through his tactless responses and speeches.
In a way, Trump is acting like a snow plough for the other Republicans. All they have to do is follow a simple plan, then eliminate his candidacy in the 3 months to Iowa.
Do you want to bet $20 on whether Trump will withdraw at least a week before the Iowa caucus? I'm willing to bet that he'll still be in by then.
Do we use a third party? Do we send it to our actual address? I mean, really, do you trust someone you don't know?
For now, it is probably best to hold this over my head if he makes it to Iowa(or over your head, which I see I won't have to do if he does not make it) and look for a trusted third party that will handle the payout without disclosing our identity.
Sure, I am interested in the Bet. However, there are some technical difficulties we ave to address.
There is a better way.
The loser donates the $20 to the winner's charity of choice and posts the receipt after blocking out their name and address.
OK--I could go for that. How about you Josh?
PS--can we keep political campaigns out of the potential choices for donations.
The pressure isn't coming from Mexicans, it's coming from Moveon.orgHispanic groups will pressure Republicans to say whether they agree with Trump, and whoever wins the GOP primary that candidate has no chance to beat Hillary without getting at least a significant number of Hispanic votes.
Will Republican candidates condemn Trump's statement?
net zero coming in?....are you serious?.....you have been away from this area to long ludd...Trump said what they would all like to but a couple have said they don't agree. Just saw that but the only one I can remember is Rick oops Perry.
And of course, he was 100% wrong.
Thing is, even though we know there is now a net zero of illegals coming into the country, there are still people who believe the kind of nonsense we read here - that they're pouring over the southern border. One of our own RWs nutters recently wrote "millions every day".
its how he said it mike.....sure there is some truth to what he says,BUT he is saying that the majority are people with lots of problems,bringing drugs,bringing crime,bringing rapists....and then some are good people?.......i live in a 70% Mexican neighborhood....and we dont have as much crime like trump and others would like you to believe......trump lives in his ivory tower and is saying what he thinks you wanna hear......Do you even know what Trump really said? Did you read the entire comment, not just the cherry-picked excerpts? Here's what he said:
"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best; they're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."
Some of them are rapists. Some of them are robbers. Most of them have problems, which is why they're fleeing their own countries. And some are good people.
What's the problem? What is there to "apologize" for?
