patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,197,864 comments by 14,119 users - anniecoyote, Blue, desertguy, WookieMan, zzyzzx online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 29 - 68 of 68 Search these comments
FortWayne
2015 Jul 12, 4:49pm
We need to fix our borders, Trump is correct.
Millions of illegals significantly distorts the labor market. When there are millions of poor schmucks who will take any pay just to not go hungry that drops wages for the working class. It's no different then outsourcing on a larger scale. And the only way to fix it is Romney's self deportation, which means punishing employers with fines and heavy fees. And putting up a real border that fixes that issue.
Democrats don't want to fix that, they don't give a shit about working Americans getting fucked by this system. They like the idea of more illegals, because illegals have children and their children being poor predominantly vote for Democrats because Democrats always promote hand outs. That's how it is. And if this continues we as a nation will fall like every other socialist empire that simply has too few resources and too little pay. Not to mention there is a cultural impact, which I know liberals don't care about. Liberals don't love America, can't expect them to love it's culture.
marcus
2015 Jul 12, 5:23pm
We need to fix our borders, Trump is correct.
Okay. But then he must secretly be supporting democrats. Because if this becomes an issue, there is a risk that the voters will learn the facts, that is that border security is way up under Obama, as is sending criminal illegal immigrants back. Over all numbers of people coming in in recent years is way down, in part due to tighter borders, probably in part due to a worse economy.
By making this an issue, is Trump just trying to make Obama look good ?
FortWayne
2015 Jul 12, 5:26pm
Okay. But then he must secretly be supporting democrats. Because if this becomes an issue, there is a risk that the voters will learn the facts, that is that border security is way up under Obama, as is sending criminal illegal immigrants back. Over all numbers of people coming in in recent years is way down, in part due to tighter borders, probably in part due to a worse economy.
Better than what? After 10 various executive orders that basically stopped all deportations that's not really "better". Not to mention we are still getting killed, people are physically killed, at the border.
marcus
2015 Jul 12, 8:04pm
Better than what?
Better than previous administrations. Bringing the subject up only serves to highlight how well (from a from a right wing perspective) Obama has done with this issue.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/07/us/more-deportations-follow-minor-crimes-data-shows.html
Keep in mind the big increase in deportations under Obama coincide with a period in which incoming illegals were down a lot, because of the economy and because of tightened border security.
FortWayne
2015 Jul 12, 8:38pm
Marcus all of your sources are one sided, and biased, and tailored propaganda, they might as well be Democrat. While I clearly remember Obama executive orders making news when he prevented deportations.
marcus
2015 Jul 12, 11:00pm
FortWayne you're a moron that's incapable of grasping even the most simple facts. Pew research is nonpartisan and almost all of the links I gave you were giving very clear facts and data.
Republican friends say that democrats are hateful when they claim that republicans are just stupid. But it's from dealing with the likes of you. Only a dim witted moron can take simple clear facts and turn them into propaganda, just because they don't like them. IF you have other facts you wish to cite then go ahead, but this is just pathetic.
your sources are one sided, and biased, and tailored propaganda
You mean like this ?
or this ?
What's it like to realize that your beliefs have no connection to reality ?
I wonder how many of these people who pass judgement on Trump have more than a 3rd grade education? Of course, Trump also needs to take note of who is listening to him today as a candidate. Either case is a sad situation for Trump.
marcus
2015 Jul 13, 6:08am
I wonder how many of these people who pass judgement on Trump have more than a 3rd grade education?
Good luck finding a well educated person that doesn't think Trump is a total moron.
Captainshuddup and FortWayne like him. That's a negative correlation between education level and supporting Trump. I have evidence that that negative correlation holds up even among republicans.
lostand confused
2015 Jul 13, 6:23am
Nah. The illegal immigrants and the welfare epidemic are synonymous. Kick them out ad make the welfare freaks work those jobs-or is that racist/sexist/one percentish???? Trump needs to go farther and call out the feminazis and the unwillingness of the feminazis to take on the responsibility of being an equal. I think there are enough disaffected people in all spectrums of life in America who are willing to try something else out.
No Bushies and Clintons again.
it is a free country and one can say whatever they want-there is a reason it is called the first amendment. It is funny how the lefties are now the most opposed to free speech. They do not argue back, but just demand that anyone with a different opinion not voice his opinion. Just like their idol Obama who has used the Espionage acts more than all other presidents combined-some of whom were in much bigger wars. Kim Jong Un is the leftie hero-parrot only the official line and anything against that will be met with swift retribution. Free speech is for suckers!
HydroCabron
2015 Jul 13, 6:54am
The illegal immigrants and the welfare epidemic are synonymous. Kick them out ad make the welfare freaks work those jobs-or is that racist/sexist/one percentish????
Most people on welfare have jobs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
lostand confused
2015 Jul 13, 7:48am
Most people on welfare have jobs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Stats?
if true, then perhaps one should look at their standard of living. Do they need cell phones, cars etc etc. If they decide to have kids despite their financial status, do we need to support them in the lifestyle they desire. Bare minimum is fine, but nothing more than that. if an illegal can survive without welfare, then so can an American. That will be their incentive to move up and if they are not getting welfare and have some hunger in their belly, then they won't stand for free trade and other such gibberish.
komputodo
2015 Jul 13, 8:14am
Pew research is nonpartisan and almost all of the links I gave you were giving very clear facts and data.
Recently, though, Pew decided to turn the spotlight on the reliability of its own research. What it found was alarming: Fewer than one in 10 Americans contacted for a typical Pew survey bothers to respond. That’s down from a response rate of 36 percent just 15 years ago.
Their poll results are based on the 10% of americans that willingly waste their time answering phone surveys. The lonely and bored I imagine.
HydroCabron
2015 Jul 13, 8:47am
Stats?
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-06/byu-moa062515.php
Do they need cell phones, cars etc etc
You can't make a living as a fry cook without a cell phone these days. 90 years ago, indoor plumbing was a luxury: should we yank that out of all poor people's housing?
A car is certainly optional, depending on where you live.
if they decide to have kids despite their financial status, do we need to support them in the lifestyle they desire.
This is chewed over ad nauseam: to blow them off just because they have kids is to punish the children for the sins of the parents, but people who have kids they can't support are incredibly irresponsible. If there were an easy answer to that question, a lot of questions surrounding poverty would have been solved thousands of years ago.
in the lifestyle they desire.
You make it sound as if they take the Learjet to their Caribbean vacation.
I have some extended family who are consistently in poverty: 3 generations, with the 3rd generation doing better. They are not generally stupid, but 3 factors are consistent:
- Mental illness (roughly 30% of the family)
- Poor choices ("Oooh! That raving alcoholic is so exciting! I'll marry him!")
- Amazing ability to take the wrong fork in the road - not huge obvious choices (other than marrying addicts), but choices you would think don't matter much come back to bite them.
And, yes, they drive me fucking nuts.
Good luck finding a well educated person that doesn't think Trump is a total moron.
Captainshuddup and FortWayne like him. That's a negative correlation between education level and supporting Trump. I have evidence that that negative correlation holds up even among republicans.
I bet Trump - who graduated from one of the top universities in the US - would beat most PatNetters handily in any IQ test. The leftist Hubris never fails to deliver. There's no question who the real morons are. You don't have to like somebody to acknowledge their intelligence, but it is a clear sign of stupidity and hubris to think that people you don't like must be dumb.
Tenpoundbass
2015 Jul 13, 9:17am
By making this an issue, is Trump just trying to make Obama look good ?
Only to the twitterverse
HydroCabron
2015 Jul 13, 9:35am
You don't do well in early primaries by appealing to the smart half of the GOP.
MisdemeanorRebel
2015 Jul 13, 9:44am
The Sinhaloa Drug Lord who 'miraculously' escaped jail for the 2nd time sure has choice words for Trump:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3159344/There-s-no-jail-big-midget-Mexico-s-billion-dollar-drugs-lord-gloats-Twitter-escaping-prison-shower-block-tunnel.html
As for glorious US ally and "democracy" Mexico:
He then hinted that the authorities had been complicit in the jailbreak by posting: 'The dog (slang for the Mexican government) dances for money, and I've bought it.'
Also, check out pic of Mexican National Security Guy. Blue Eyes, Whiter than a Bedsheet, probably 100% Spanish, Italian, or German. His 1%er children probably fill out "Hispanic" when applying for Harvard.
tatupu70
2015 Jul 13, 9:45am
I bet Trump - who graduated from one of the top universities in the US - would beat most PatNetters handily in any IQ test.
I'll take that bet. Rich kids going to top Universities doesn't mean much. W went to Yale, remember?
I'll take that bet. Rich kids going to top Universities doesn't mean much. W went to Yale, remember?
Don't forget Princess Chelsea.
"Lord Butler of Brockwell, the Master of University College, said: "Her record at Stanford shows that she is a very well-qualified and able student. The college is also pleased to extend its link with the Clinton family."
"In November 2011, NBC announced that they hired Clinton as a special correspondent. One of her roles was reporting feature stories about "Making a Difference" for NBC Nightly News and Rock Center with Brian Williams. It was a three-month contract and allowed her to concurrently continue working for the Clinton Foundation and pursue her education. Clinton's first appearance was on the December 12, 2011, episode of Rock Center. Although she received some critical reviews for her work, Clinton's contract with NBC was renewed in February 2012. Rock Center ended in May 2013, and Clinton left the network in August 2014.Clinton reportedly earned an annual salary of $600,000 for her work at NBC. Clinton memorably interviewed the Geico Gecko in April 2013."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Clinton
It's the level playing field of Hillary's dreams!
marcus
2015 Jul 13, 3:07pm
Their poll results are based on the 10% of americans that willingly waste their time answering phone surveys.
It's worth noting that the Pew research articles I posted had nothing to do with polls.
You don't do well in early primaries by appealing to the smart half of the GOP.
exactly, and when you're talking about the dumber half of the GOP, you're talking about a set of people that intersect substantially with the lowest overall quartile of the country.
marcus
2015 Jul 13, 3:24pm
It is funny how the lefties are now the most opposed to free speech. They do not argue back, but just demand that anyone with a different opinion not voice his opinion.
For one thing you won't find a "lefty" that denies your right to say whatever.
IF in this case, the "lefties" did not even dignify Trumps asinine remarks with an argument, maybe it's because they thought about what that might look like.
I suppose you think the "lefties" should have parsed everything TRump said, and found metrics describing as close as possible what percentage of undocumented immigrants commit each type of crime and so on to refute him ?
Fuck that. It just puts more focus on a question that's bullshit. Although actually some have looked at that and found him to be wrong on all levels. http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/anecdotes-evidence-setting-record-straight-immigrants-and-crime-0
It's a mistake to even put focus on the question.
If I accused you of being a child molester, I think it's correct for you simply to say fuck off. Engaging in dozens of threads discussing whether you are or are not a child molester, would only serve my purpose of getting people thinking that we must be having this discussion for some reason. Where there's smoke there's fire. Maybe LostandCOnfused really is a child molester, otherwise why would be be talking about it so much ?
Get it ?
If you tell me to fuck off when I say you're a child molester, it doesn't mean you are opposed to free speech. It simply means you are rightfully opposed to a big discussion about (hopefully) absurd claims.
In this case some have gone there, but thankfully the focus has been on how moronic Trump is.
Btw I think Murdoch reads Patrick.net and thought about how well Obama has done with immigration (see graphs above)
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/12/politics/rupert-murdoch-trump-tweets/index.html
lostand confused
2015 Jul 13, 3:33pm
If you tell me to fuck off when I say you're a child molester, it doesn't mean you are oppose free speech. It simply means you are rightfully opposed to a big discussion aabout (hopefully) absurd claims.
That ain't what the lefties are doing. What they are saying is he should not say those remarks as they do with anything bad about gays, gender, race etc etc. There are taboo discussions around which free speech has no merit-for the lefties.
Nobody is asking to be calm, collected and get a Ph D in their response. but in this and many unacceptable topics, one is not supposed to even utter anything-which is unacceptable. he can say whatever he want s and so can his opponents. Now that we have Mexican nationals allegedly threatening his life-well he wasn't that far off.
lostand confused
2015 Jul 13, 3:40pm
marcus
2015 Jul 13, 6:05pm
That ain't what the lefties are doing. What they are saying is he should not say those remarks as they do with anything bad about gays, gender, race etc etc. There are taboo discussions around which free speech has no merit-for the lefties.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Can you prove this in some way. Find one quote from a "lefty" where they say that's not allowed ?
Glad to see how well (NOT) you understood my response.
Look, just because Sean Hannity or whomever it is that you get this nonsense from says this proves liberals are against free speech, doesn't mean that it makes the slightest bit of sense to people other than Foxbots.
Please get me one single quote saying trhe closest thing possible to "he's not allowed to say that."
The fact that he's in a little trouble with the intelligent and or educated folk, is a far cry from anyone saying he isn't allowed to say something.
Also, keep in mind that he is running for PResident, and in some far right wing red state circles, not only is he allowed to say what he did, apparently he is being rewarded for it.
Thats what freedom of speech means. You're free to say things that some find stupid or offense, while others ( guess what constituency) say that's great !!
When one group says it's stupid or offensive, you say they are saying he's not allowed to say that ? What are you talking about ?
FortWayne
2015 Jul 13, 9:00pm
FortWayne you're a moron that's incapable of grasping even the most simple facts. Pew research is nonpartisan and almost all of the links I gave you were giving very clear facts and data.
Whose data, whose research? I have never seen a single piece of research that is not biased and tailored. I can draw you fancy graphs too that will show exact opposite or whatever else cherry picked. I've seen Obama executive orders that stopped deportations. He is a Democrat, he wants the votes, so he is willing to sacrifice the country in order to gain power for the party.
W went to Yale, remember?
W wasn't stupid either. He was somewhat technologically challenged but probably knows how to use a fax machine (unlike Hillary) and a poor speaker, but he wasn't stupid. DT is not a politician, had no help from the political rank and file dynasty, and he is very good impromptu speaker. He will obliterate most presidential candidates.
FortWayne
2015 Jul 13, 10:23pm
THe source was right on the graphs.
So what Marcus? Data gets cherry picked for statistics, I don't trust anything this government tells me anymore. Remember Obama scandal with IRS... and how important information simply disappeared? Well, if they did it there. Why wouldn't they cherry pick it here, if a boss says it must show something, they'll do it.
Charts and bar graphs don't tell me a damn thing here, because we still got ourselves a problem. Show me a chart after the problem is fixed, than it'll have a meaning.
marcus
2015 Jul 14, 1:08am
So the best data we have means nothing. It's how you feel that really informs you.
Idiot.
By the way, this is not an example of cherry picking data. Cherry picking data is when you show just the part of the data that supports your view. MY point was only what the data says. Nothing more. If I had found later years I would include those. The data says the number of border guards increased under Obama. It says that the number of deportations increased under Obama. Both of these are (or were) up by a lot. You think maybe these numbers were just made up ?
Even people like Mell, CIC, and Captaindimbulb aren't that thick.
Don't get me wrong, they appreciate and respect your ability and willingness to lie to yourself and others. But they don't think that data is make believe.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Can you prove this in some way. Find one quote from a "lefty" where they say that's not allowed ?
Marcus, what everyone is saying is that unless you are from a "protected class of citizens", the system requires you to discriminate based on race, sex, religion, national origin, etc with affirmative actions. FYI, that's the law, as stupid and double-standard as it's written.
Vote oligarchy Yes You Can ! lots of choices- Clinton, Bush, Trump. Rich people will save you. Honest.
tatupu70
2015 Jul 14, 5:02am
W wasn't stupid either. He was somewhat technologically challenged but probably knows how to use a fax machine (unlike Hillary) and a poor speaker, but he wasn't stupid. DT is not a politician, had no help from the political rank and file dynasty, and he is very good impromptu speaker. He will obliterate most presidential candidates.
Yes, of course, you're right. It was his strategery to be a folksy man's man and appeal to "real" America.
Behind the scenes, I'm sure he was busy doing game theory on foreign policy decisions and statistical analyses of crime and education data to see how his policies were working.
tatupu70
2015 Jul 14, 5:04am
So what Marcus? Data gets cherry picked for statistics, I don't trust anything this government tells me anymore. Remember Obama scandal with IRS... and how important information simply disappeared? Well, if they did it there. Why wouldn't they cherry pick it here, if a boss says it must show something, they'll do it.
Charts and bar graphs don't tell me a damn thing here, because we still got ourselves a problem. Show me a chart after the problem is fixed, than it'll have a meaning.
So you're basically saying that don't let the truth and facts get in the way of your preconceived notion.
lostand confused
2015 Jul 14, 5:10am
W wasn't stupid either. He was somewhat technologically challenged but probably knows how to use a fax machine (unlike Hillary) and a poor speaker, but he wasn't stupid
Nah. Dubya was a special kind of stupid and makes bgamall4 look like a genius. The only reason he was even able to make it so far was daddy. otherwise he would be a toilet cleaner at the Mcdees. After 9/11 the whole world stood with us and in a few short years Dubya managed to make us the villain. That really takes special talent. Then after being responsible for killing/maiming more young Americans through the war , Bin Laden was still releasing tapes and the shrub did not do anything and left Iraq a mess and more or less handed it to Iran. There has to be a new term in the dictionary to describe that kind of stupid-there is simply no word in the vocabulary.
Now I don't like Obozo the clown-but that is because he is a snake oil salesman who does everything against what he stood for-he is the biggest liar known to mankind. He even winks at slavery in other countries so he can get his trade agenda passed-what a pig. But he did get Bin laden-to me that a man can attack us so brazenly and still be releasing tapes taunting us is just dumb. And Dubya was that kind of dumb-unless he just wanted a prolonged war with no results so he could skim the war profits-that is what his family is known for.
Y
2015 Jul 14, 5:43am
Nobody drives a car like this without laying down some rubber.
so i'd say....well.......Yeah!
Is Trump a racist?
Y
2015 Jul 14, 5:49am
wrong again. now watch and learn...
Cherry picking data is when you show just the part of the data that supports your view.
W wasn't stupid either. He was somewhat technologically challenged but probably knows how to use a fax machine (unlike Hillary) and a poor speaker, but he wasn't stupid. DT is not a politician, had no help from the political rank and file dynasty, and he is very good impromptu speaker. He will obliterate most presidential candidates.
Yes, of course, you're right. It was his strategery to be a folksy man's man and appeal to "real" America.
Behind the scenes, I'm sure he was busy doing game theory on foreign policy decisions and statistical analyses of crime and education data to see how his policies were working.
Smarter than you? Possibly.
You get a piece from the left, the right and the middle to ponder:
http://keithhennessey.com/2013/04/24/smarter/
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/04/george-bush-was-no-dummy-how-about-if-we-leave-it
Bad president? Sure. Stupid enough to have a lengthy email convo about how to use a fax machine? Certainly not.
The only reason he was even able to make it so far was daddy. otherwise he would be a toilet cleaner at the Mcdees. After 9/11 the whole world stood with us and in a few short years Dubya managed to make us the villain. That really takes special talent.
He's a war criminal like many presidents, but that was calculated. Not saying he was a genius, but I think he'd beat the PatNetters ;) Also, one place where he improved relations was with Putin and Russia, which is very different from the constant saber-rattling you hear today. And that saber-rattling is a special kind of stupid.
tatupu70
2015 Jul 14, 7:41am
Smarter than you? Possibly.
You get a piece from the left, the right and the middle to ponder:
It's really just one piece from a former staffer that is likely biased. The mother jones basically refutes the Hennessey article while the Washington Post says it may be true as another write commented that Bush is smarter in private than he appears in public. Which really isn't saying much as his public persona resembles Jim Carrey in Dumb and Dumber.
« First « Previous Comments 29 - 68 of 68 Search these comments
Were his remarks about Mexicans racist?