Trump tells Dem congresswomen: Go back where you came from!

originally posted by: mtnshredder
The taking down of our American flag to raise a Mexican flag this week should tell you all you need to know about these immigrants and their feelings toward this country. Yet people like you and some members of congress are defending them and welcoming them with open arms. These people are not assets to our country, they’re a burden on taxpayers and our welfare system among other programs and always will be.

Read this with interest.

All those 'Irish' bars..the folks in them need to go home? Certainly the same was said about them when Irish settlers first moved to the USA.

When America Despised the Irish

What about the Italians? Where do you think a large chunk of the organised crime started (hint, imported Mafia)
Illegal Immigration - Italian Americans

Scots?
Scottish Americans

And lets not forget Jewish Americans and African Americans.

Don't these people fly their flags? Are they not proud of their heritage? Are there not large communities of them who work together, lobby congress and seek to further their particular agendas?

Aren't they all (originally) immigrants and part of the "rich tapestry" of the USA?

Except these ones... oh no. These ones are 'anti american'. They have politics that the right don't agree with - ironically in a country that allegedly prides itself on freedom of speech - so they have to be demonised, deported even - back to the place they came from. They are evil, scum, the lowest of the low. Send them back to their #holes, right?

Well, if people had sent the factions above back to their #holes, there wouldn't be a USA.

Just a thought.

originally posted by: neformore

originally posted by: mtnshredder
The taking down of our American flag to raise a Mexican flag this week should tell you all you need to know about these immigrants and their feelings toward this country. Yet people like you and some members of congress are defending them and welcoming them with open arms. These people are not assets to our country, they’re a burden on taxpayers and our welfare system among other programs and always will be.

Read this with interest.

All those 'Irish' bars..the folks in them need to go home? Certainly the same was said about them when Irish settlers first moved to the USA.

When America Despised the Irish

What about the Italians? Where do you think a large chunk of the organised crime started (hint, imported Mafia)
Illegal Immigration - Italian Americans

Scots?
Scottish Americans

And lets not forget Jewish Americans and African Americans.

Don't these people fly their flags? Are they not proud of their heritage? Are there not large communities of them who work together, lobby congress and seek to further their particular agendas?

Aren't they all (originally) immigrants and part of the "rich tapestry" of the USA?

Except these ones... oh no. These ones are 'anti american'. They have politics that the right don't agree with - ironically in a country that allegedly prides itself on freedom of speech - so they have to be demonised, deported even - back to the place they came from. They are evil, scum, the lowest of the low. Send them back to their #holes, right?

Well, if people had sent the factions above back to their #holes, there wouldn't be a USA.

Just a thought.

Latin Americans are great people, people are opposed to illegal immigration for economic reasons, and wanting our laws upheld - only an extremely small amount want them kept out for racial reasons.

It is sickening to me that anyone actually believes half the country is full of racists. That is so out of touch with reality they truly need psychiatric help.

Now as far as the go home remark - First off everybody is conveniently leaving off the rest of the tweet, where Trump says they should come back after they have figured out how to fix the countries they come from.

This is a common tactic by the media - they are constantly taking Trump out of context such as Charlottsville where after he said there are good people on both sides his next sentence was he does not mean the white supremacists he condemns them completely - but the media NEVER shows that part. They want to brainwash their lemmings he is a racist - and to a large degree sadly it has worked.

Lastly - The US is the greatest country in the world, but if you truly believe we can soak up any significant portion of the 4 billion living in poverty and remain that way you are an idiot. #1 We can't support our current population with the taxes we are collecting, #2 Increasing taxes will destroy our economy. #3 People from 3rd world countries are mostly low skilled labor - which we do not need any more of when low skilled labor is in the process of being decimated by Automation and AI.

For me being against open borders is one hundred percent about not destroying the country economically - which is a certainty if any of the Democrats running for president gets their way.

a reply to: neformore

If you actually want to assimilate to America and are here legally, you're welcome to stay. If, however, you want America to change and assimilate to your visions and expectations, GTFO and go elsewhere. Why is that difficult to understand and why does it immediately receive the throw-away verbal flail of "*gasp& RACIST!" the instant it is said? I know the second answer: it doesn't fit a narrative and it doesn't placate the weaker masses... I don't know the answer to the first part, though.

a reply to: proximo

originally posted by: xuenchen

So, the above shows Trumps tweets.

No media bias there. Just his words.

So your president is telling people to leave because he doesn't like their policies and thought processes.

Out of the people he is referring to - congress women (plural, not woman as in singular) - 3 of the 4 are US citizens who he is suggesting originally came from foreign countries and should go back there.

So - what can we infer from the mans own words, without any media bias whatsoever?

Your president does not believe in freedom of speech, or the right to criticise his administration or US policies. (he's doubled down on that - they "hate america" apparently)
He believes that these women (plural) 'originally came from countries whose.....'

On the best day, you could count the above as spectacularly crass and not becoming of the office of the President of the United States - a man who represents hundreds of millions of people, a considerable amount of who have extended ethnicity and of whom roughly half don't share his politics

Or you could look at the sheer lack of knowledge about his opponents countries of origin and wonder how the POTUS can be so misinformed - and if he is misinformed on simple details to such a staggeringly crass extent, why is he POTUS?

And then there is how a huge amount of people see it - the man is spectacularly intolerant, ignorant, and tinged with bigotry, because he has suggested they "go back to the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came"

You can try and spin that, but they are his words.


The rest of your post is strawman trolling and not really worth a response, because I implied no such thing, but I will quote Doug Stanhope to you

"They probably don't speak the language, and they probably have minimal education. And if that guy can show up like that, as qualified for your job as you are, then you are a #ing loser of such dynamic proportions

a reply to: neformore

Can you show me the illegal mass immigration of 1 million ILLEGAL Irish every year?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

The problem is that obvious bigotry is obvious.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Try reading my post again, and maybe you'll get the point.

The Dems have utilized a technique made famous by the Nazis.

Contextomy refers to the selective excerpting of words from their original linguistic context in a way that distorts the source's intended meaning, a practice commonly referred to as "quoting out of context". The problem here is not the removal of a quote from its original context per se (as all quotes are), but to the quoter's decision to exclude from the excerpt certain nearby phrases or sentences (which become "context" by virtue of the exclusion) that serve to clarify the intentions behind the selected words. Comparing this practice to surgical excision, journalist Milton Mayer coined the term "contextomy" to describe its use by Julius Streicher, editor of the infamous Nazi broadsheet Der Stürmer in Weimar-era Germany. To arouse anti-semitic sentiments among the weekly's working class Christian readership, Streicher regularly published truncated quotations from Talmudic texts that, in their shortened form, appear to advocate greed, slavery, and ritualistic murder.[3] Although rarely employed to this malicious extreme, contextomy is a common method of misrepresentation in contemporary mass media, and studies have demonstrated that the effects of this misrepresentation can linger even after the audience is exposed to the original, in context, quote.[4][5]

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Even though Trump has clarified his intended meaning, and the context has proves it, the technique still works wonders on those susceptible to such propaganda.

Trump probably is a bit of a racist and the same goes for Ilhan Omar and I don't give a damn.

I care about if they are doing the job they were elected to do. Trump as idiotic and cras as he is, is doing his job. Ilhan Omar and the others are wasting the taxpayer's money on partisan bull# and personal agendas. They whine and cry about the border then do nothing about funding a solution. When former ICE Director Homan came to testify the left wasn't willing to listen and AOC was a complete idiot that was trying to play political games. The man stated what needed to be done to make things better and save lives but they didn't give a damn. He said a simple one-page bill that he had on hand would save lives and they didn't want to see it.

I still don't like Trump but the left has given me little choice but to support him and apparently that makes me a racist according to Ilhan Omar. Well, she and her comrades can simply f### off.

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: burdman30ott6

The problem is that obvious bigotry is obvious.

Except "America: Love it or leave it" has been a valid political and patriotic slogan since the Vietnam War era and this was little more than a rewording of that sentiment. Blue collar Americans used it widely against domestic terror group "The Weather Underground" (which Obama had major connections to years later, for what that's worth) and their largely college student supporters who were spending their time ridiculing the US and trying to threaten her into installing the changes they demanded to see.

This is a damned old song and yeah, it was a chart topper. What you're calling "obvious bigotry" is something I call Trump calling out "obvious bull#" from the 4 pawns involved. They don't represent America, they want to change America to be representative of them and their ideals. That is NOT what the political positions they've managed to find themselves in were intended for and, frankly, if they think America needs changed as fundamentally as they say it should on a daily basis, they should GTFO. Unlike the POTUS, I'm not going to suggest they go to a country seemingly more in-line with their expectations for America because I don't care where they go. They can return to Somalia, visit their homelands of Puerto Rico or wherever, or strap lead to their ankles and try to walk from Florida to the UK... I care not, but anyone who believes America needs radical changes to be inhabitable needs to go elsewhere.

We know that. Heck, anyone who isnt towing a hard political party line or just completely stupid knows it. Its been failed smear campaign after failed smear campaign against the President. I think people in general are just tired of this crap populating their TV, smartphone and PC media feed. Theyre over it. Its not trendy or popular anymore. Its been beat to death. The bright, shiny flickering lights and pretty colors say, "Get ready to storm Area 51!".

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
Except "America: Love it or leave it" has been a valid political and patriotic slogan since the Vietnam War era and this was little more than a rewording of that sentiment.

Blind obedience to state is required then. You want to simply silence an opposing viewpoint.

How very communist.

originally posted by: neformore

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
Except "America: Love it or leave it" has been a valid political and patriotic slogan since the Vietnam War era and this was little more than a rewording of that sentiment.

Blind obedience to state is required then. You want to simply silence an opposing viewpoint.

How very communist.

No, adherence to the Constitution is required. Something the 4 Tenors we're talking about need to learn. When we see them delving into calling for Unconstitutional actions such as open borders, elimination of border security (one of the few things the Constitution actually mandates the federal government be authoritarian in regards to), call for excessive taxation while knowing the one paying those taxes will be the least represented, unequal protections under the law, placing foreign interests and foreign parties above American interests and American citizens, attacks against the First and Second Amendment enumerated Rights of Americans, and I could go on with the list, when we see them doing that, that's not an "opposing viewpoint" it's a bitch who is an enemy of the people and an enemy of the Constitution. Technically and legally speaking, DEATH is a valid option here and, if I was POTUS it would be my go to all while remaining perfectly, 100% legal under the Constitutional definition of treason and under the Constitutionally acceptable consequences of treason by an elected representative. I'm not POTUS and the man who is more compassionate than I am, so he suggested they either learn to appreciate this country or don't let the door hit them in the ass on their way out... that was a non-binding suggestion by him (unfortunately) so all of this waxing poetically about obedience to the state, dictatorships, and bigotry is nonsensical. If I wanted smoke blown up my ass, I'd go get a pack of Marlboros and a short length of garden hose... I come here for something a bit higher brow than that so maybe we can stop jumping straight into the radical Chicken Little pool now?

a reply to: neformore

No, not the state, the principles upon which it was formed.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Strikes me you come here to be a Trump sychophant and to peddle your own warped view of the world and how you perceive your country should be run.

Still, you're entitled to your opinion - it's a pity you can't afford that thought process to others.

a reply to: neformore

So you do not think the Constitution should be followed?

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Strikes me you come here to be a Trump sychophant and to peddle your own warped view of the world and how you perceive your country should be run.

Still, you're entitled to your opinion - it's a pity you can't afford that thought process to others.

It strikes me that I'm just peddling a model of how this country should be run that was the norm and mirrors how the country actually was run for my entire life shy the years 2008 to 2016. Amazingly, during that period, the majority who tried to conserve the American model and the nations Constitutional values were ridiculed as "obstructionists" for pushing against an agenda that was saying how the country "should be" run. Newsflash, Trump today, 2019 IS HOW THE COUNTRY IS run, not how it should be run. As I said above, everyone is entitled to their opinion, they're not entitled to their own personal assault on the country's Constitution, however. In fact, they all swore an oath to defend the Constitution, thus traitors walk among us in the hallowed halls of Congress wearing little scarlet 'Ds' next to their names.

We have history together, Nef. You should remember the discussions pre-Trump quite well. I told you this was coming then, and I was saying exactly what Trump has said long before the man ever stepped foot into the presidential race. A "sycophant" I wish I was limber enough to kiss my own ass, but I am not... yet that is essentially what you'd be saying by claiming I am a Trump sycophant. I can't help the fact that the man seems to square up on most political positions I've stood on for my entire adult life, nor can I help the fact that he stands for the same principles and has the same vision of an American future as grace filled and dignified as America's past has been as I have. That's just how the cards were dealt, my man... but here I sit holding a royal flush watching everyone around me try to bluff with a pair of 3s, knowing I've got an untouchable hand.

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: proximo

originally posted by: xuenchen

So, the above shows Trumps tweets.

No media bias there. Just his words.

So your president is telling people to leave because he doesn't like their policies and thought processes.

Telling them to isn't the same thing as sending police to make them. (Or actually I don't think he even told them to. He just suggested that they should.)

He has just as much a right to want them to get out of office as they do to suggest that they want him to get out of office Both sides want the other to get out of Washington.

But he shouldn't tell them to go to their "home" countries if he's talking to people for whom America is their legitimate home. - That's where he went too far.

Out of the people he is referring to - congress women (plural, not woman as in singular) - 3 of the 4 are US citizens who he is suggesting originally came from foreign countries and should go back there.

And this is the part he won't be able to come back from.

His campaign has always been about opposing illegal immigration, but still encouraging legal immigration (Heck. His own wife is a legal immigrant). But the people he said this to are legal immigrants (and in some cases natural born citizens.)

He can appeal to moderates as long as he's only telling illegal immigrants to go home. It's another matter entirely to tell legal immigrants (or natural born citizens) to go home.

I don't know what his game plan is, or was.

So - what can we infer from the mans own words, without any media bias whatsoever?

Your president does not believe in freedom of speech, or the right to criticise his administration or US policies. (he's doubled down on that - they "hate america" apparently)
He believes that these women (plural) 'originally came from countries whose.....'

Of course he believes in the right to do so. However, he also believes in his OWN right to do so.

He just criticizes back.

He.... has the right to do that.

That's how freedom works. It's not just one side that is free. It's both sides that are free. Freedom for only one side of a debate to speak its mind is not freedom at all.

And then there is how a huge amount of people see it - the man is spectacularly intolerant, ignorant, and tinged with bigotry, because he has suggested they "go back to the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came"

You can try and spin that, but they are his words.

Yep. And if were saying them to illegal immigrants, he'd have full support behind him.

But he said them to legal immigrants. (And I think a natural born citizen too.)

He's really dug himself into a hole here.

So uh ttump had a rally this evening...
" love it or leave it"

He doubled down
No F's given.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
So uh ttump had a rally this evening...
" love it or leave it"

He doubled down
No F's given.

Would that they were chanting "Love it or leave it"! But they're not. They're chanting "Send her back!"

How do you feel about that? How do you feel about a mob calling for the deportation of an American citizen, a duly elected Congresswoman, who has committed no crime?