Donald Trump

Stop saying that because something is not constitutional then it can't be done. That's not an argument. There are plenty of unconstitutional things being done in the US and noone really gives a fuck, Obamacare, gun laws etc. Just aslong as you get some guys to vote yes and could you guess who chooses these guys? Yes, it's the government. You honestly have a really thick head.

 

Woah woah woah. Shhhh, shhh. This is a conversation about our feelings, not logic and facts.


Queue copy/paste rant

THE CHILDREN. OH MY GOSH WHAT ABOUT THE INNOCENT MUSLIMS I FEEL SO SORRY FOR THEM! MY FEELINGS! MY POOR BROKEN HEART! UR A RACIST! GENOCIDE! FEMINISM! UNCONSTITUTIONAL! UR LOGIC IS WRONG CUZ MAH FEELINGS! TRUMP IS EVIL! DOWN WITH THE CAPITALIST CIS SCUM COP PIGS! BLACK LIVES MATTER!

Sorry, I was just so triggered by your comment.

E: btw thank you whoever the mod was that confirmed that people were being reported. I assumed there would be considering that one fake female and Wins can't handle being wrong on their own religious founder.

 

THANK YOU. Great post.


Believing that, "Its in the constitution so people must actually be following it" is as ignorant as the whole gun free zone BS.


x2 on the reports.
Honestly, I'm not the least bit surprised it was happening. Nothing short of what I'd expect.

 

What? A major part of the argument republicans make for defending the right to bear arms is based on the 2nd amendment?

The idea that someone like Trump can go around shouting to protect the second amendment and then turn around and restrict religious liberties protected in the first amendment is beyond idiotic

I'm not going to get in an argument for or against this nonsense, but I just wanted to point out the inconsistency, especially @ the posts above saying that the constitution can be violated/doesn't matter

 

Are you really arguing about semantics here? Rent is extortion. You're being forced to pay rent otherwise you're kicked out of your home.

Source

Taking legal guns away from Americans is not constitutional. I've only ever heard of tighter restrictions on being able to get these weapons, never the former.

 

No. I am talking about entirely distinct things, which I continue to prove to you, and you continue to move the goal posts. First, you claimed taxes were fair because it's based on your income. Then you claimed it was fair because you vote for them. Then you claimed it was fair because, well, you don't vote for them, but you vote for people who tax you. Now you claim it's fair because renting property is a thing, and losing access to rented property that you don't pay for is somehow "extortion".

If you are renting a place, it isn't YOUR home, it is THEIR home, that they OWN you are RENTING. If you don't hold up your end of the deal, they are free to no longer offer the use of their property to you. The reason that the government is different than voluntary trade is because you have the money taken from you no matter which way you vote, no matter how much you make, no matter how many government services you use. You have swallowed the propaganda that taxes are somehow justified by these completely arbitrary and unrelated reasons. When I ask you to defend any of these reasons, you skip to the next one.

It's like you didn't even read everyone correcting you. Did you not happen to see the huge list of examples we provided of the government breaking the Constitution? By the way, the amendment doesn't read "taking legal guns away from Americans is unconstitutional". It says the right to keep and bear arms shall not been infringed. Under the Constitution, there is no such thing as an "illegal gun", because Congress is not allowed to pass laws that infringe keeping or bearing arms, no matter how fast it shoots or how many bullets it holds. Yet, the right for people to own automatic weapons, large capacity magazines & other arms is infringed by congress passing laws banning them.

When did he say he would do anything that violated the first amendment? The only ones I know he supports violating are the 4th and 13th

 

I heard donald trump wants a Muslim database?

 

Yeah, that rumor keeps circulating along with the rumor that he wants them to wear ID badges. He never said this though.

Even worse however, he is an advocate for NSA spying, which is a database for EVERYONE.

 

Once again you're going off topic.

Income taxes are assessed based on your level of income. This is fair to me, and saying it isn't fair is an opinion, as is my own. Trying to "objectively" counter this isn't possible. As all arguments are purely subjective.

We vote for those who manage our taxes. Meaning we choose our level of taxes.

I think you need to look up the definition of extortion.

Saying your home is suspended doesn't make it not extortion. You're still being threatened to pay regardless.

Definition of home:

the place where one lives permanently, especially as a member of a family or household.

If I'm living in a house I pay rent for, the level of the house in which I'm living in is my home. You don't have to own the property to claim it's your home.

If you don't pay rent, you will be kicked out of said home.

Definition of threat:

a declaration of an intention or determination to inflict punishment, injury, etc., in retaliation for, or conditionally upon, some action or course

When you sign a contract to live in someones home, you agree to the condition of paying rent, or else you will be kicked out.

Definition of extortion:

the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats.

As I've said before, within the contracts are conditions that need to be met which threaten your environment if you're unable to meet them. This is done by force.

I really don't understand why I'm explaining something so simple to you.

Here's another example:

I'm the state, and the land within the state is owned by me. If you want to live in the vicinity of my land, you will need to pay taxes that goes to services in exchange for you living on my property. You will receive those taxes back.

By choosing to live on my property, yes choosing, you agree to these terms.

If you break the law, saying "I didn't know it was against the law to do x", or "I didn't choose to live here" isn't an argument.

If you read my reply, you can challenge the government to a judicial review. If incompatible with a higher authority, such as the written constitution, decisions can be overturned.

I already explained why removing privatized ownership as a whole is impractical.

Here we go again.

Definition of infringe:

actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.).

I obtain a gun legally, them trying to take it away would INFRINGE on my rights to bear arms, which is not constitutional.

Restricting how you obtain the gun isn't against the constitution.

 

No it isn't. End of discussion. http://www.sythe.org/something-all/940416-prove-my-existence-within-state.html

You are making things up to justify your warped morality, where lowering taxes is "the epitome of shadiness" when we have already proven:

http://www.sythe.org/something-all/...sm-fails-why-our-society-being-destroyed.html

Taxes are covered here, I suggest you learn basic philosophy before ever attempting politics.

 

It's an example buddy. You know, hypothetical? I really had enough of this thread as it's purpose has been shot to the ground by those warping the conversation. I already explained my position on Donald Trump. I'm out.

 

Yo Ghast I rapped about you in Spam forum. Shout out nig.

 

I honestly couldn't repeat it back to you, because it has been buried under all this misinformation & propaganda about him that you have regurgitated.

Did you have a real reason for disliking Trump, or did you believe people when they told you he was a racist?

 

Wtf happened to this thread?

 

You know how the media has been running nonstop hate stories against Trump for like 5 months? Apparently, a few users here decided not to fact check anything they heard from reporters, and repeat it here.

 

So I go to a friend's tumblr page for cute anime pics, and I stumbled upon this.



44K+ notes on the post.

Apparently 44k+ people actually believe half the garbage they see on a social media site. I thought someone in this thread was joking when they said people likened Trump to Hitler, I guess I really shouldn't be doubting what I hear when considering certain groups on the internet (tumblr and imgur are two very good examples) have the collective IQ of a dead baby. The fact some people try to draw a parallel between German Jewish citizens to illegal immigrants screwing us is quite funny honestly. Then we have the last part of it, which leads me to believe 44K+ people don't know how to read an article, probably reading the headline without paying attention to context.

Ahhh, our glorious education system.

btw, I can't seem to remember. Was Hitler proposing mass deportation? I seem to remember the Nazi party slaughtering 6 million people rather than deporting 6 million. Hmm, maybe i'm just wrong on that part.

 

Nope he only said something about "creating a wall" sound familiar ?
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/donald-trump-i-would-force-mexico-build-border-wall

 

Thank you for providing this link. It outlines very clearly the intent to reduce crime due to illegal immigrants.

https://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/pages/txCriminalAlienStatistics.htm

This is Texas alone.

 

Boom goes the dynamite.

 

I never said its not now did i? I only said he wanted to build a wall.