Philosophy Now Forum

65% of Republicans believe Muslims should be banned from USA. Republicans do not believe in freedom of thought (the bed rock of the constitution ). Our country was based on rational thought. Our founding fathers were deists. See Jefferson's Bible. Republicans think the scientific method is rubbish! They think the entire world's scientific community believes in rubbish (the scientific method )!!!
Republicans want us to call daesh (isis) Islamic. Daesh is not Islamic. Daesh wants us to call them Islamic. Why do Republicans want to aid the terrorists?

Read 'em and weep.

Hillary Clinton’s most repugnant lie

http://nypost.com/2015/12/09/hillary-cl ... gnant-lie/

raw_thought wrote:65% of Republicans believe Muslims should be banned from USA. Republicans do not believe in freedom of thought (the bed rock of the constitution ). Our country was based on rational thought. Our founding fathers were deists. See Jefferson's Bible. Republicans think the scientific method is rubbish! They think the entire world's scientific community believes in rubbish (the scientific method )!!!
Republicans want us to call daesh (isis) Islamic. Daesh is not Islamic. Daesh wants us to call them Islamic. Why do Republicans want to aid the terrorists?

What are American values, and why do you imply that they are the same as existed 240 years ago?
What kind of sexist crap is "Founding Fathers"? I thought American Values supported equality?
Where the fuck do you get your statistical information, about Republican attitude to Muslims and Science?

Daesh Is totally Islamic. Islam is a broad church. Republicans are "Americans".
Calling Daesh Islamic is not aiding terrorism, thought it can be used to blacken other Muslims.
You might as well claim that Republicanism is not Christian. But then you'd be contradicting yourself (again).

Walker wrote:Read 'em and weep.

Hillary Clinton’s most repugnant lie

http://nypost.com/2015/12/09/hillary-cl ... gnant-lie/

Are you confused too? The thread is about Republicans. Last time I looked Clinton was a Democrat.

FYI.
Thought you might like this.

Donald Trump claims 'I'm doing good for the Muslims' as petition to ban him from UK passes 380,000 signatures

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 67436.html


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4EAc0QFubs

Yes, thank you Hobbes.

Let record clearly state:

Clinton is a life-long Democrat. She has also been United States Secretary of State under the current administration and carries that official responsibility for the current Middle East geo-political situation.

And with payment as the basis, she must give fantastic speech.

Be proud, Democrats.

Donald Trump is a successful businessman aspiring to clean up the mess.

The O.P. is some raw fantasy dredged up from who knows where.

That’s the way it goes. The Democrats play around for awhile in fantasy-land until things get so bad that the adults have to come in and create a bit of order. That pattern may have changed, though.

Orchestration of a massive demographic shift via open borders and non-enforcement of immigration laws, pandering, gerrymandering, and misinformation, just may have sealed the deal on a one-party political system.

Interesting to witness. The obvious strategy is that Trump is going all-in with appeal to a disaffected base. Both party voices have their panties in a wad because he’s not PC about it, so that’s the Trump hubub in the media everyone is parroting.

He’s as anti-establishment as it gets. He is the non-status-quo, and the vested interests are in a panic. If he can stimulate that white, middle-class voting block, he has the numbers to forego pandering to those who won’t vote for him anyway, no matter what he says, for the voices of their leadership that they follow are too heavily-conditioned in status quo.

But with electronic voting, wouldn’t be all surprising if the race is fixed.

Walker wrote:Yes, thank you Hobbes.

Let record clearly state:

Clinton is a life-long Democrat. She has also been United States Secretary of State under the current administration and carries that official responsibility for the current Middle East geo-political situation.

And with payment as the basis, she must give fantastic speech.

Be proud, Democrats.

He’s as anti-establishment as it gets. He is the non-status-quo, and the vested interests are in a panic. If he can stimulate that white, middle-class voting block, he has the numbers to forego pandering to those who won’t vote for him anyway, no matter what he says, for the voices of their leadership that they follow are too heavily-conditioned in status quo.

But with electronic voting, wouldn’t be all surprising if the race is fixed.

Trump is NOT anti establishment. You have he dead wrong buddy.
He's about as antiestablishment as Adolf fucking Hitler, and there are some very close similarities between the two of them.
Take a look at the remarks from the Mayor of London. "Out of his mind..." "not fit for the office of President.."
But make no mistake if Trump gets to lead the US he's for his own establishment; a right-wing dictatorship.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Walker wrote:Yes, thank you Hobbes.

Let record clearly state:

Clinton is a life-long Democrat. She has also been United States Secretary of State under the current administration and carries that official responsibility for the current Middle East geo-political situation.

And with payment as the basis, she must give fantastic speech.

Be proud, Democrats.

He’s as anti-establishment as it gets. He is the non-status-quo, and the vested interests are in a panic. If he can stimulate that white, middle-class voting block, he has the numbers to forego pandering to those who won’t vote for him anyway, no matter what he says, for the voices of their leadership that they follow are too heavily-conditioned in status quo.

But with electronic voting, wouldn’t be all surprising if the race is fixed.

Trump is NOT anti establishment. You have he dead wrong buddy.
He's about as antiestablishment as Adolf fucking Hitler, and there are some very close similarities between the two of them.
Take a look at the remarks from the Mayor of London. "Out of his mind..." "not fit for the office of President.."
But make no mistake if Trump gets to lead the US he's for his own establishment; a right-wing dictatorship.

You’re illogical, pal.

Words have meaning. Trump is anti-establishment.

Doesn’t matter what notions of “establishment” are rattling around in your head.

Status quo means the existing state of affairs.

Donald Trump is an American-born private citizen.

The status quo of both political parties want Donald Trump out of the presidential race.

Therefore, Trump is the anti-status-quo.

Simple.

Incompetence is the status quo.

Incompetence is the establishment.

Trump is a successful, competent businessman.

A private citizen.

In today's climate, competence and success is anti-establishment.

He's anti-establishment.

Bank on it.

That's why he's feared.

It's the Dems these days seeking to limit free expression. Any theory such as the one expressed in the title of this thread needs to account for that. In just the past week both Dem presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton and Google chairman Eric Schmidt (a big Dem supporter) have called for censoring free speech on the Internet.

wtf wrote:It's the Dems these days seeking to limit free expression. Any theory such as the one expressed in the title of this thread needs to account for that. In just the past week both Dem presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton and Google chairman Eric Schmidt (a big Dem supporter) have called for censoring free speech on the Internet.

That's Dem hatefulness of American values.

And that pretty much tells the story.

The establishment will thus have the power to legally censor anti-establishment types such as Trump.

The past seven years has provided the Democratic establishment a greater working knowledge for The Totalitarian Mentality to legislate even greater dictatorial powers under the guise of public welfare, by limiting free expression.

why do you think the second was written?

1861

-Imp

Walker wrote: You’re illogical, pal.

Words have meaning. Trump is anti-establishment.


Yes words have meaning. And your are bullshit. Trump is about as antiestablishment as Mao Tse Tung. Get a fucking life.

Doesn’t matter what notions of “establishment” are rattling around in your head.

Trump intends to establish a white capitalist, anti-histpanic, anti-islam regime. That means he has to have establishment aspirations.

Status quo means the existing state of affairs.

He wants to establish his own fucking status quo so that the US is moulded in his own image.

Donald Trump is an American-born private citizen.

Duh, fucking duh.

The status quo of both political parties want Donald Trump out of the presidential race.

Therefore, Trump is the anti-status-quo.

Half the fruit cakes in the US want Obama out of office - that does not make Obama anti-establishment, nor the morons that think he is a Muslim.

Simple.

Yes you have a pretty simple view. But Trump is just one more President wanna be. And you'd better hope and prey that he doesn't make it.

Walker wrote:Incompetence is the status quo.

Incompetence is the establishment.

Trump is a successful, competent businessman.

A private citizen.

In today's climate, competence and success is anti-establishment.

He's anti-establishment.

Bank on it.

That's why he's feared.

~He's feared because he is a fucking brain dead moron that is good at rabble rousing, like a long line of dictators like Mussolini, Hitler and Caesar.
He is not smart, he is dangerous.

Impenitent wrote:why do you think the second was written?

1861

-Imp

What are you talking about?