So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...

[GuitarStv]

This is something that kinda drives me nuts.  Inefficiency hurts everyone.  The guy driving a truck to commute that gets a third the gas mileage of a small car?  He's not helping the economy . . . the extra money he's paying is directly invested in enhanced air pollution and wasted gas.

And terrorism.  Let's not forget that his truck pays for terrorism.

To be more precise, the US spends hundreds of millions of dollars per year buying and shipping oil from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the primary source of funds for terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan according the US State Department.  Our relationship with the Saudis is a complicated one, but it's hard to argue that a gas-guzzling pickup is very patriotic, no matter how many flags you put on it, when you're supporting terrorist training camps every time you fill it up.

That's heresy Sol... nothing shows your patriotism more than a pickup.  Yesterday I walked past a giant F250 on mud tires with a lift kit.  The rear window had a bunch of stickers, including one in the shape of the lower-48 that said "F*ck Off We're Full", a second that just said "Trump that Bitch 2016" and a third for the US Marines. On the bumper were two US flag stickers.  What could possibly be more patriotic?

Maybe Jussie Smollett sporting a Bernie bumper sticker. That shouts Democrat, loud and proud lmao.

Can you point to a single democrat who advocates for what Jesssie Smollett did?  If not, I'd say that's not a great comparison . . . as there's plenty of Republican support for Trump, and zero Democratic support for Smollett.

Well actually, because Michelle Obama intervened, Jussie Smollett did not do anything wrong and has his entire records sealed and expunged of ANY wrong doing. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker and many others denounced his Lynching and cried for public support but after the entire thing "went away" and he still demands people address him as the victim. There were MANY Democrats that used his action to Rub Raw the Sores of Discontent, and when the recused DA in-recused herself to make it all go away, they changed topics and hoped no one would notice. Obama's Chicago forgave him, and erased all mention of it. .....but sure, tell me more about how unpatriotic that US Marines sticker is.....

A simple 'no' would suffice.  There are no democrats who advocate for what Smollett did.

Another group of zero people?  Those in this thread making the argument  that having a US Marines bumper sticker is unpatriotic.

[ematicic]

A simple 'no' would suffice.  There are no democrats who advocate for what Smollett did.

Another group of zero people?  Those in this thread making the argument  that having a US Marines bumper sticker is unpatriotic.

By definition a yes would suffice, after all, they came to his defense and his charges did not just get dropped, they were erased as if they never happened:

What does it mean to be someone's advocate?

noun. a person who speaks or writes in support or defense of a person, cause, etc. (usually followed by of): an advocate of peace. a person who pleads for or in behalf of another; intercessor. a person who pleads the cause of another in a court of law.

[JLee]

This is something that kinda drives me nuts.  Inefficiency hurts everyone.  The guy driving a truck to commute that gets a third the gas mileage of a small car?  He's not helping the economy . . . the extra money he's paying is directly invested in enhanced air pollution and wasted gas.

And terrorism.  Let's not forget that his truck pays for terrorism.

To be more precise, the US spends hundreds of millions of dollars per year buying and shipping oil from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the primary source of funds for terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan according the US State Department.  Our relationship with the Saudis is a complicated one, but it's hard to argue that a gas-guzzling pickup is very patriotic, no matter how many flags you put on it, when you're supporting terrorist training camps every time you fill it up.

That's heresy Sol... nothing shows your patriotism more than a pickup.  Yesterday I walked past a giant F250 on mud tires with a lift kit.  The rear window had a bunch of stickers, including one in the shape of the lower-48 that said "F*ck Off We're Full", a second that just said "Trump that Bitch 2016" and a third for the US Marines. On the bumper were two US flag stickers.  What could possibly be more patriotic?

Maybe Jussie Smollett sporting a Bernie bumper sticker. That shouts Democrat, loud and proud lmao.

Can you point to a single democrat who advocates for what Jesssie Smollett did?  If not, I'd say that's not a great comparison . . . as there's plenty of Republican support for Trump, and zero Democratic support for Smollett.

Well actually, because Michelle Obama intervened, Jussie Smollett did not do anything wrong and has his entire records sealed and expunged of ANY wrong doing. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker and many others denounced his Lynching and cried for public support but after the entire thing "went away" and he still demands people address him as the victim. There were MANY Democrats that used his action to Rub Raw the Sores of Discontent, and when the recused DA in-recused herself to make it all go away, they changed topics and hoped no one would notice. Obama's Chicago forgave him, and erased all mention of it. .....but sure, tell me more about how unpatriotic that US Marines sticker is.....

A simple 'no' would suffice.  There are no democrats who advocate for what Smollett did.

Another group of zero people?  Those in this thread making the argument  that having a US Marines bumper sticker is unpatriotic.

The unfortunate thing is people can create more straw men faster than we can knock 'em down. :(

[GuitarStv]

A simple 'no' would suffice.  There are no democrats who advocate for what Smollett did.

Another group of zero people?  Those in this thread making the argument  that having a US Marines bumper sticker is unpatriotic.

By definition a yes would suffice, after all, they came to his defense and his charges did not just get dropped, they were erased as if they never happened:

What does it mean to be someone's advocate?

noun. a person who speaks or writes in support or defense of a person, cause, etc. (usually followed by of): an advocate of peace. a person who pleads for or in behalf of another; intercessor. a person who pleads the cause of another in a court of law.

Then you will have no problem providing a single quote from a Democrat who advocates for what Smollett did.  Which you have so far been unable to do.

[Davnasty]

This is something that kinda drives me nuts.  Inefficiency hurts everyone.  The guy driving a truck to commute that gets a third the gas mileage of a small car?  He's not helping the economy . . . the extra money he's paying is directly invested in enhanced air pollution and wasted gas.

And terrorism.  Let's not forget that his truck pays for terrorism.

To be more precise, the US spends hundreds of millions of dollars per year buying and shipping oil from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the primary source of funds for terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan according the US State Department.  Our relationship with the Saudis is a complicated one, but it's hard to argue that a gas-guzzling pickup is very patriotic, no matter how many flags you put on it, when you're supporting terrorist training camps every time you fill it up.

That's heresy Sol... nothing shows your patriotism more than a pickup.  Yesterday I walked past a giant F250 on mud tires with a lift kit.  The rear window had a bunch of stickers, including one in the shape of the lower-48 that said "F*ck Off We're Full", a second that just said "Trump that Bitch 2016" and a third for the US Marines. On the bumper were two US flag stickers.  What could possibly be more patriotic?

Maybe Jussie Smollett sporting a Bernie bumper sticker. That shouts Democrat, loud and proud lmao.

Can you point to a single democrat who advocates for what Jesssie Smollett did?  If not, I'd say that's not a great comparison . . . as there's plenty of Republican support for Trump, and zero Democratic support for Smollett.

Well actually, because Michelle Obama intervened, Jussie Smollett did not do anything wrong and has his entire records sealed and expunged of ANY wrong doing. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker and many others denounced his Lynching and cried for public support but after the entire thing "went away" and he still demands people address him as the victim. There were MANY Democrats that used his action to Rub Raw the Sores of Discontent, and when the recused DA in-recused herself to make it all go away, they changed topics and hoped no one would notice. Obama's Chicago forgave him, and erased all mention of it. .....but sure, tell me more about how unpatriotic that US Marines sticker is.....

You missed the point here. The marines sticker isn't what's unpatriotic, that wouldn't make any sense. The point is that it's ironic how important being (or at least appearing) patriotic is to this person while they're driving a truck that funds terrorism by being an inefficient gas guzzler.

[ematicic]

A simple 'no' would suffice.  There are no democrats who advocate for what Smollett did.

Another group of zero people?  Those in this thread making the argument  that having a US Marines bumper sticker is unpatriotic.

By definition a yes would suffice, after all, they came to his defense and his charges did not just get dropped, they were erased as if they never happened:

What does it mean to be someone's advocate?

noun. a person who speaks or writes in support or defense of a person, cause, etc. (usually followed by of): an advocate of peace. a person who pleads for or in behalf of another; intercessor. a person who pleads the cause of another in a court of law.

Then you will have no problem providing a single quote from a Democrat who advocates for what Smollett did.  Which you have so far been unable to do.

No Problem.... At work so I just pulled up some of my favorite zingers. Sure everyone got quiet when Chicago forgave him, but they certainly used the anger to fuel their causes. Let me know if you need more, there are plenty to be found on the internet. I hope this addresses your inquiry.

House Speaker Pelosi wrote: "The racist, homophobic attack on [Jussie Smollett] is an affront to our humanity. No one should be attacked for who they are or whom they love. I pray that Jussie has a speedy recovery & that justice is served. May we all commit to ending this hate once and for all."

On Jan. 29, Gillibrand’s Twitter account had this to say about Smollett’s obviously far-fetched tale: “This is a sickening and outrageous attack, and horribly, it's the latest of too many hate crimes against LGBTQ people and people of color. We are all responsible for condemning this behavior and every person who enables or normalizes it. Praying for Jussie and his family.”

Sen. Kamala Harris', D-Calif., social media team also tweeted this on Jan. 29 [emphasis added]: “[Jussie Smollett] is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate.”

Others, like New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, said last month, “There is no such thing as ‘racially charged.’ This attack was not ‘possibly’ homophobic. It was a racist and homophobic attack. If you don’t like what is happening to our country, then work to change it. It is no one’s job to water down or sugar-coat the rise of hate crimes.”

Lastly, there’s Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., who also tweeted on Jan. 29: “The vicious attack on actor Jussie Smollett was an attempted modern-day lynching. I'm glad he's safe. To those in Congress who don't feel the urgency to pass our Anti-Lynching bill designating lynching as a federal hate crime -- I urge you to pay attention.”

"He is also innocent and no longer subject to legal uncertainty with the criminal charges against him having been dropped," they added. "We are confident in his lawyer’s assurance that the case was dismissed because it would not have prevailed."
The actors argued that the current political climate has made both the court system and public opinion less just. 
"It’s clearer every day that the extreme political climate in our country has only made our system of justice and the court of public opinion more unjust," they wrote. "It is why now, more than ever, we must stand together as a family. A family is there for us in good times and bad."

[ematicic]

This is something that kinda drives me nuts.  Inefficiency hurts everyone.  The guy driving a truck to commute that gets a third the gas mileage of a small car?  He's not helping the economy . . . the extra money he's paying is directly invested in enhanced air pollution and wasted gas.

And terrorism.  Let's not forget that his truck pays for terrorism.

To be more precise, the US spends hundreds of millions of dollars per year buying and shipping oil from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the primary source of funds for terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan according the US State Department.  Our relationship with the Saudis is a complicated one, but it's hard to argue that a gas-guzzling pickup is very patriotic, no matter how many flags you put on it, when you're supporting terrorist training camps every time you fill it up.

That's heresy Sol... nothing shows your patriotism more than a pickup.  Yesterday I walked past a giant F250 on mud tires with a lift kit.  The rear window had a bunch of stickers, including one in the shape of the lower-48 that said "F*ck Off We're Full", a second that just said "Trump that Bitch 2016" and a third for the US Marines. On the bumper were two US flag stickers.  What could possibly be more patriotic?

Maybe Jussie Smollett sporting a Bernie bumper sticker. That shouts Democrat, loud and proud lmao.

Can you point to a single democrat who advocates for what Jesssie Smollett did?  If not, I'd say that's not a great comparison . . . as there's plenty of Republican support for Trump, and zero Democratic support for Smollett.

Well actually, because Michelle Obama intervened, Jussie Smollett did not do anything wrong and has his entire records sealed and expunged of ANY wrong doing. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker and many others denounced his Lynching and cried for public support but after the entire thing "went away" and he still demands people address him as the victim. There were MANY Democrats that used his action to Rub Raw the Sores of Discontent, and when the recused DA in-recused herself to make it all go away, they changed topics and hoped no one would notice. Obama's Chicago forgave him, and erased all mention of it. .....but sure, tell me more about how unpatriotic that US Marines sticker is.....

You missed the point here. The marines sticker isn't what's unpatriotic, that wouldn't make any sense. The point is that it's ironic how important being (or at least appearing) patriotic is to this person while they're driving a truck that funds terrorism by being an inefficient gas guzzler.

So at what MPG fuel rating is the terrorism label warranted? This sounds incredibly dumb to me personally.

[sol]

So at what MPG fuel rating is the terrorism label warranted? This sounds incredibly dumb to me personally.

I don't think it's about hitting a specific MPG rating, it's about deliberately choosing inefficient vehicles so that you can send extra US dollars to middle eastern countries that support acts of terrorism against America.

Even if you only mailed a single dollar bill to ISIS, I would not support your decision.  If you drive a F-250, you send a whole lot more than that.

[ematicic]

So at what MPG fuel rating is the terrorism label warranted? This sounds incredibly dumb to me personally.

I don't think it's about hitting a specific MPG rating, it's about deliberately choosing inefficient vehicles so that you can send extra US dollars to middle eastern countries that support acts of terrorism against America.

Even if you only mailed a single dollar bill to ISIS, I would not support your decision.  If you drive a F-250, you send a whole lot more than that.

My Jeep gets about 17 miles to the gallon. It is laughable that you would see it in my drive way and actually hold me to the same horrible level as you would a terrorist without knowing anything else about me. It is a 2007 with 60,000 miles on it because I got it mainly for towing and camping. I drive 5 miles every day to the train station and commute on public transportation. I get that my opinion differs from most here, and that you feel somehow vindicated by labeling with such hateful terms. Just know that your assumption is completely idiotic and I sleep well at night with the life I lead. Just because someone votes differently than you, your hatred is very misguided.

[JLee]

So at what MPG fuel rating is the terrorism label warranted? This sounds incredibly dumb to me personally.

I don't think it's about hitting a specific MPG rating, it's about deliberately choosing inefficient vehicles so that you can send extra US dollars to middle eastern countries that support acts of terrorism against America.

Even if you only mailed a single dollar bill to ISIS, I would not support your decision.  If you drive a F-250, you send a whole lot more than that.

My Jeep gets about 17 miles to the gallon. It is laughable that you would see it in my drive way and actually hold me to the same horrible level as you would a terrorist without knowing anything else about me. It is a 2007 with 60,000 miles on it because I got it mainly for towing and camping. I drive 5 miles every day to the train station and commute on public transportation. I get that my opinion differs from most here, and that you feel somehow vindicated by labeling with such hateful terms. Just know that your assumption is completely idiotic and I sleep well at night with the life I lead. Just because someone votes differently than you, your hatred is very misguided.

They didn't.

If you'd stop making straw men, that would be lovely.  Logical fallacies are against the forum rules, too.

[JLee]

A simple 'no' would suffice.  There are no democrats who advocate for what Smollett did.

Another group of zero people?  Those in this thread making the argument  that having a US Marines bumper sticker is unpatriotic.

By definition a yes would suffice, after all, they came to his defense and his charges did not just get dropped, they were erased as if they never happened:

What does it mean to be someone's advocate?

noun. a person who speaks or writes in support or defense of a person, cause, etc. (usually followed by of): an advocate of peace. a person who pleads for or in behalf of another; intercessor. a person who pleads the cause of another in a court of law.

Then you will have no problem providing a single quote from a Democrat who advocates for what Smollett did.  Which you have so far been unable to do.

No Problem.... At work so I just pulled up some of my favorite zingers. Sure everyone got quiet when Chicago forgave him, but they certainly used the anger to fuel their causes. Let me know if you need more, there are plenty to be found on the internet. I hope this addresses your inquiry.

House Speaker Pelosi wrote: "The racist, homophobic attack on [Jussie Smollett] is an affront to our humanity. No one should be attacked for who they are or whom they love. I pray that Jussie has a speedy recovery & that justice is served. May we all commit to ending this hate once and for all."

On Jan. 29, Gillibrand’s Twitter account had this to say about Smollett’s obviously far-fetched tale: “This is a sickening and outrageous attack, and horribly, it's the latest of too many hate crimes against LGBTQ people and people of color. We are all responsible for condemning this behavior and every person who enables or normalizes it. Praying for Jussie and his family.”

Sen. Kamala Harris', D-Calif., social media team also tweeted this on Jan. 29 [emphasis added]: “[Jussie Smollett] is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate.”

Others, like New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, said last month, “There is no such thing as ‘racially charged.’ This attack was not ‘possibly’ homophobic. It was a racist and homophobic attack. If you don’t like what is happening to our country, then work to change it. It is no one’s job to water down or sugar-coat the rise of hate crimes.”

Lastly, there’s Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., who also tweeted on Jan. 29: “The vicious attack on actor Jussie Smollett was an attempted modern-day lynching. I'm glad he's safe. To those in Congress who don't feel the urgency to pass our Anti-Lynching bill designating lynching as a federal hate crime -- I urge you to pay attention.”

"He is also innocent and no longer subject to legal uncertainty with the criminal charges against him having been dropped," they added. "We are confident in his lawyer’s assurance that the case was dismissed because it would not have prevailed."
The actors argued that the current political climate has made both the court system and public opinion less just. 
"It’s clearer every day that the extreme political climate in our country has only made our system of justice and the court of public opinion more unjust," they wrote. "It is why now, more than ever, we must stand together as a family. A family is there for us in good times and bad."

None of those support what he did.  They condemn the actions he reported to have happened.

Still waiting for you to quote people who supported his actions...

[ematicic]

So at what MPG fuel rating is the terrorism label warranted? This sounds incredibly dumb to me personally.

I don't think it's about hitting a specific MPG rating, it's about deliberately choosing inefficient vehicles so that you can send extra US dollars to middle eastern countries that support acts of terrorism against America.

Even if you only mailed a single dollar bill to ISIS, I would not support your decision.  If you drive a F-250, you send a whole lot more than that.

My Jeep gets about 17 miles to the gallon. It is laughable that you would see it in my drive way and actually hold me to the same horrible level as you would a terrorist without knowing anything else about me. It is a 2007 with 60,000 miles on it because I got it mainly for towing and camping. I drive 5 miles every day to the train station and commute on public transportation. I get that my opinion differs from most here, and that you feel somehow vindicated by labeling with such hateful terms. Just know that your assumption is completely idiotic and I sleep well at night with the life I lead. Just because someone votes differently than you, your hatred is very misguided.

They didn't.

If you'd stop making straw men, that would be lovely.  Logical fallacies are against the forum rules, too.

Vizzini: He didn’t fall?! Inconceivable!
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

He specifically said that driving a high fuel usage vehicle contributes to ISIS. ISIS is a terrorist group. I wish I could make it simpler. If you feel like a logical fallacy exists, please point it out but personally, it seems that you have a problem simply because I do not agree. Did you actually read what was written, to include what he wrote?

[JLee]

So at what MPG fuel rating is the terrorism label warranted? This sounds incredibly dumb to me personally.

I don't think it's about hitting a specific MPG rating, it's about deliberately choosing inefficient vehicles so that you can send extra US dollars to middle eastern countries that support acts of terrorism against America.

Even if you only mailed a single dollar bill to ISIS, I would not support your decision.  If you drive a F-250, you send a whole lot more than that.

My Jeep gets about 17 miles to the gallon. It is laughable that you would see it in my drive way and actually hold me to the same horrible level as you would a terrorist without knowing anything else about me. It is a 2007 with 60,000 miles on it because I got it mainly for towing and camping. I drive 5 miles every day to the train station and commute on public transportation. I get that my opinion differs from most here, and that you feel somehow vindicated by labeling with such hateful terms. Just know that your assumption is completely idiotic and I sleep well at night with the life I lead. Just because someone votes differently than you, your hatred is very misguided.

They didn't.

If you'd stop making straw men, that would be lovely.  Logical fallacies are against the forum rules, too.

Vizzini: He didn’t fall?! Inconceivable!
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

He specifically said that driving a high fuel usage vehicle contributes to ISIS. ISIS is a terrorist group. I wish I could make it simpler. If you feel like a logical fallacy exists, please point it out but personally, it seems that you have a problem simply because I do not agree. Did you actually read what was written, to include what he wrote?

"You do things that support terrorism"

"You are a terrorist"

Do you see the difference?

[ematicic]

A simple 'no' would suffice.  There are no democrats who advocate for what Smollett did.

Another group of zero people?  Those in this thread making the argument  that having a US Marines bumper sticker is unpatriotic.

By definition a yes would suffice, after all, they came to his defense and his charges did not just get dropped, they were erased as if they never happened:

What does it mean to be someone's advocate?

noun. a person who speaks or writes in support or defense of a person, cause, etc. (usually followed by of): an advocate of peace. a person who pleads for or in behalf of another; intercessor. a person who pleads the cause of another in a court of law.

Then you will have no problem providing a single quote from a Democrat who advocates for what Smollett did.  Which you have so far been unable to do.

No Problem.... At work so I just pulled up some of my favorite zingers. Sure everyone got quiet when Chicago forgave him, but they certainly used the anger to fuel their causes. Let me know if you need more, there are plenty to be found on the internet. I hope this addresses your inquiry.

House Speaker Pelosi wrote: "The racist, homophobic attack on [Jussie Smollett] is an affront to our humanity. No one should be attacked for who they are or whom they love. I pray that Jussie has a speedy recovery & that justice is served. May we all commit to ending this hate once and for all."

On Jan. 29, Gillibrand’s Twitter account had this to say about Smollett’s obviously far-fetched tale: “This is a sickening and outrageous attack, and horribly, it's the latest of too many hate crimes against LGBTQ people and people of color. We are all responsible for condemning this behavior and every person who enables or normalizes it. Praying for Jussie and his family.”

Sen. Kamala Harris', D-Calif., social media team also tweeted this on Jan. 29 [emphasis added]: “[Jussie Smollett] is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate.”

Others, like New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, said last month, “There is no such thing as ‘racially charged.’ This attack was not ‘possibly’ homophobic. It was a racist and homophobic attack. If you don’t like what is happening to our country, then work to change it. It is no one’s job to water down or sugar-coat the rise of hate crimes.”

Lastly, there’s Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., who also tweeted on Jan. 29: “The vicious attack on actor Jussie Smollett was an attempted modern-day lynching. I'm glad he's safe. To those in Congress who don't feel the urgency to pass our Anti-Lynching bill designating lynching as a federal hate crime -- I urge you to pay attention.”

"He is also innocent and no longer subject to legal uncertainty with the criminal charges against him having been dropped," they added. "We are confident in his lawyer’s assurance that the case was dismissed because it would not have prevailed."
The actors argued that the current political climate has made both the court system and public opinion less just. 
"It’s clearer every day that the extreme political climate in our country has only made our system of justice and the court of public opinion more unjust," they wrote. "It is why now, more than ever, we must stand together as a family. A family is there for us in good times and bad."

None of those support what he did.  They condemn the actions he reported to have happened.

Still waiting for you to quote people who supported his actions...

There were no actions, other than the original attack. Any "cover up" by police has been sealed and all charges have been dropped, and deleted from the record books. When the DA expunged all records, the only thing that remains is the original story, and the out pouring of support. There are no records of ANY wrong doing, so therefore, there are no quotes from something that has not happened.... Looking for quotes from something that has not happened seems to be a logical fallacy, and I am pretty sure those are not allowed on this forum..

[NorthernBlitz]

So at what MPG fuel rating is the terrorism label warranted? This sounds incredibly dumb to me personally.

I don't think it's about hitting a specific MPG rating, it's about deliberately choosing inefficient vehicles so that you can send extra US dollars to middle eastern countries that support acts of terrorism against America.

Even if you only mailed a single dollar bill to ISIS, I would not support your decision.  If you drive a F-250, you send a whole lot more than that.

What about having pipelines from Canada so we don't need to worry about the claim that oil "funds terrorism"

[JLee]

A simple 'no' would suffice.  There are no democrats who advocate for what Smollett did.

Another group of zero people?  Those in this thread making the argument  that having a US Marines bumper sticker is unpatriotic.

By definition a yes would suffice, after all, they came to his defense and his charges did not just get dropped, they were erased as if they never happened:

What does it mean to be someone's advocate?

noun. a person who speaks or writes in support or defense of a person, cause, etc. (usually followed by of): an advocate of peace. a person who pleads for or in behalf of another; intercessor. a person who pleads the cause of another in a court of law.

Then you will have no problem providing a single quote from a Democrat who advocates for what Smollett did.  Which you have so far been unable to do.

No Problem.... At work so I just pulled up some of my favorite zingers. Sure everyone got quiet when Chicago forgave him, but they certainly used the anger to fuel their causes. Let me know if you need more, there are plenty to be found on the internet. I hope this addresses your inquiry.

House Speaker Pelosi wrote: "The racist, homophobic attack on [Jussie Smollett] is an affront to our humanity. No one should be attacked for who they are or whom they love. I pray that Jussie has a speedy recovery & that justice is served. May we all commit to ending this hate once and for all."

On Jan. 29, Gillibrand’s Twitter account had this to say about Smollett’s obviously far-fetched tale: “This is a sickening and outrageous attack, and horribly, it's the latest of too many hate crimes against LGBTQ people and people of color. We are all responsible for condemning this behavior and every person who enables or normalizes it. Praying for Jussie and his family.”

Sen. Kamala Harris', D-Calif., social media team also tweeted this on Jan. 29 [emphasis added]: “[Jussie Smollett] is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate.”

Others, like New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, said last month, “There is no such thing as ‘racially charged.’ This attack was not ‘possibly’ homophobic. It was a racist and homophobic attack. If you don’t like what is happening to our country, then work to change it. It is no one’s job to water down or sugar-coat the rise of hate crimes.”

Lastly, there’s Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., who also tweeted on Jan. 29: “The vicious attack on actor Jussie Smollett was an attempted modern-day lynching. I'm glad he's safe. To those in Congress who don't feel the urgency to pass our Anti-Lynching bill designating lynching as a federal hate crime -- I urge you to pay attention.”

"He is also innocent and no longer subject to legal uncertainty with the criminal charges against him having been dropped," they added. "We are confident in his lawyer’s assurance that the case was dismissed because it would not have prevailed."
The actors argued that the current political climate has made both the court system and public opinion less just. 
"It’s clearer every day that the extreme political climate in our country has only made our system of justice and the court of public opinion more unjust," they wrote. "It is why now, more than ever, we must stand together as a family. A family is there for us in good times and bad."

None of those support what he did.  They condemn the actions he reported to have happened.

Still waiting for you to quote people who supported his actions...

There were no actions, other than the original attack. Any "cover up" by police has been sealed and all charges have been dropped, and deleted from the record books. When the DA expunged all records, the only thing that remains is the original story, and the out pouring of support. There are no records of ANY wrong doing, so therefore, there are no quotes from something that has not happened.... Looking for quotes from something that has not happened seems to be a logical fallacy, and I am pretty sure those are not allowed on this forum..

The quotes you are referring to are from before people knew that the police report was false. 

[sol]

My Jeep gets about 17 miles to the gallon. It is laughable that you would see it in my drive way and actually hold me to the same horrible level as you would a terrorist without knowing anything else about me. It is a 2007 with 60,000 miles on it because I got it mainly for towing and camping. I drive 5 miles every day to the train station and commute on public transportation. I get that my opinion differs from most here, and that you feel somehow vindicated by labeling with such hateful terms. Just know that your assumption is completely idiotic and I sleep well at night with the life I lead. Just because someone votes differently than you, your hatred is very misguided.

Lol dude, relax.  No one said anything about who you vote for, I have no hatred for you, and you needn't be so aggressive about this whole conversation. 

I was merely agreeing with another poster who suggested that fuel inefficient vehicles undermine America's success, and I added another reason to his list.  This little side discussion is about automobiles, not politicians.  Not everything you read on the internet is a personal attack against you.  Feel persecuted much?  Were you triggered?  Because you're kind of lashing out for no reason here.

[Davnasty]

ematicic just dropped into a thread about people who could not retire on time to let everyone know they feel sorry for aborted babies who never get the chance to retire.

Sometimes we should just accept there will be trolls :)

[ematicic]

A simple 'no' would suffice.  There are no democrats who advocate for what Smollett did.

Another group of zero people?  Those in this thread making the argument  that having a US Marines bumper sticker is unpatriotic.

By definition a yes would suffice, after all, they came to his defense and his charges did not just get dropped, they were erased as if they never happened:

What does it mean to be someone's advocate?

noun. a person who speaks or writes in support or defense of a person, cause, etc. (usually followed by of): an advocate of peace. a person who pleads for or in behalf of another; intercessor. a person who pleads the cause of another in a court of law.

Then you will have no problem providing a single quote from a Democrat who advocates for what Smollett did.  Which you have so far been unable to do.

No Problem.... At work so I just pulled up some of my favorite zingers. Sure everyone got quiet when Chicago forgave him, but they certainly used the anger to fuel their causes. Let me know if you need more, there are plenty to be found on the internet. I hope this addresses your inquiry.

House Speaker Pelosi wrote: "The racist, homophobic attack on [Jussie Smollett] is an affront to our humanity. No one should be attacked for who they are or whom they love. I pray that Jussie has a speedy recovery & that justice is served. May we all commit to ending this hate once and for all."

On Jan. 29, Gillibrand’s Twitter account had this to say about Smollett’s obviously far-fetched tale: “This is a sickening and outrageous attack, and horribly, it's the latest of too many hate crimes against LGBTQ people and people of color. We are all responsible for condemning this behavior and every person who enables or normalizes it. Praying for Jussie and his family.”

Sen. Kamala Harris', D-Calif., social media team also tweeted this on Jan. 29 [emphasis added]: “[Jussie Smollett] is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate.”

Others, like New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, said last month, “There is no such thing as ‘racially charged.’ This attack was not ‘possibly’ homophobic. It was a racist and homophobic attack. If you don’t like what is happening to our country, then work to change it. It is no one’s job to water down or sugar-coat the rise of hate crimes.”

Lastly, there’s Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., who also tweeted on Jan. 29: “The vicious attack on actor Jussie Smollett was an attempted modern-day lynching. I'm glad he's safe. To those in Congress who don't feel the urgency to pass our Anti-Lynching bill designating lynching as a federal hate crime -- I urge you to pay attention.”

"He is also innocent and no longer subject to legal uncertainty with the criminal charges against him having been dropped," they added. "We are confident in his lawyer’s assurance that the case was dismissed because it would not have prevailed."
The actors argued that the current political climate has made both the court system and public opinion less just. 
"It’s clearer every day that the extreme political climate in our country has only made our system of justice and the court of public opinion more unjust," they wrote. "It is why now, more than ever, we must stand together as a family. A family is there for us in good times and bad."

None of those support what he did.  They condemn the actions he reported to have happened.

Still waiting for you to quote people who supported his actions...

There were no actions, other than the original attack. Any "cover up" by police has been sealed and all charges have been dropped, and deleted from the record books. When the DA expunged all records, the only thing that remains is the original story, and the out pouring of support. There are no records of ANY wrong doing, so therefore, there are no quotes from something that has not happened.... Looking for quotes from something that has not happened seems to be a logical fallacy, and I am pretty sure those are not allowed on this forum..

The quotes you are referring to are from before people knew that the police report was false.

Smolletts's report was debated but there are no charges, nor any history of fake charges. AGAIN, all that remains on the history books is the original Smollett claim, and the quotes of support. The Prosecutor dropped all pending charges, expunged Smollett's record, and sealed all records. He is completely innocent, and stands as a victim of the hate crime he reported. There is NO fake, or proof of wrongdoing on Smollett's behalf. The City of Chicago saved his career. I know what I think happened but Smollett's supporters have reached the outcome they wanted. How much more support do you need to see?

[GuitarStv]

A simple 'no' would suffice.  There are no democrats who advocate for what Smollett did.

Another group of zero people?  Those in this thread making the argument  that having a US Marines bumper sticker is unpatriotic.

By definition a yes would suffice, after all, they came to his defense and his charges did not just get dropped, they were erased as if they never happened:

What does it mean to be someone's advocate?

noun. a person who speaks or writes in support or defense of a person, cause, etc. (usually followed by of): an advocate of peace. a person who pleads for or in behalf of another; intercessor. a person who pleads the cause of another in a court of law.

Then you will have no problem providing a single quote from a Democrat who advocates for what Smollett did.  Which you have so far been unable to do.

No Problem.... At work so I just pulled up some of my favorite zingers. Sure everyone got quiet when Chicago forgave him, but they certainly used the anger to fuel their causes. Let me know if you need more, there are plenty to be found on the internet. I hope this addresses your inquiry.

House Speaker Pelosi wrote: "The racist, homophobic attack on [Jussie Smollett] is an affront to our humanity. No one should be attacked for who they are or whom they love. I pray that Jussie has a speedy recovery & that justice is served. May we all commit to ending this hate once and for all."

On Jan. 29, Gillibrand’s Twitter account had this to say about Smollett’s obviously far-fetched tale: “This is a sickening and outrageous attack, and horribly, it's the latest of too many hate crimes against LGBTQ people and people of color. We are all responsible for condemning this behavior and every person who enables or normalizes it. Praying for Jussie and his family.”

Sen. Kamala Harris', D-Calif., social media team also tweeted this on Jan. 29 [emphasis added]: “[Jussie Smollett] is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate.”

Others, like New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, said last month, “There is no such thing as ‘racially charged.’ This attack was not ‘possibly’ homophobic. It was a racist and homophobic attack. If you don’t like what is happening to our country, then work to change it. It is no one’s job to water down or sugar-coat the rise of hate crimes.”

Lastly, there’s Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., who also tweeted on Jan. 29: “The vicious attack on actor Jussie Smollett was an attempted modern-day lynching. I'm glad he's safe. To those in Congress who don't feel the urgency to pass our Anti-Lynching bill designating lynching as a federal hate crime -- I urge you to pay attention.”

"He is also innocent and no longer subject to legal uncertainty with the criminal charges against him having been dropped," they added. "We are confident in his lawyer’s assurance that the case was dismissed because it would not have prevailed."
The actors argued that the current political climate has made both the court system and public opinion less just. 
"It’s clearer every day that the extreme political climate in our country has only made our system of justice and the court of public opinion more unjust," they wrote. "It is why now, more than ever, we must stand together as a family. A family is there for us in good times and bad."

None of those support what he did.  They condemn the actions he reported to have happened.

Still waiting for you to quote people who supported his actions...

There were no actions, other than the original attack. Any "cover up" by police has been sealed and all charges have been dropped, and deleted from the record books. When the DA expunged all records, the only thing that remains is the original story, and the out pouring of support. There are no records of ANY wrong doing, so therefore, there are no quotes from something that has not happened.... Looking for quotes from something that has not happened seems to be a logical fallacy, and I am pretty sure those are not allowed on this forum..

The quotes you are referring to are from before people knew that the police report was false.

Smolletts's report was debated but there are no charges, nor any history of fake charges. AGAIN, all that remains on the history books is the original Smollett claim, and the quotes of support. The Prosecutor dropped all pending charges, expunged Smollett's record, and sealed all records. He is completely innocent, and stands as a victim of the hate crime he reported. There is NO fake, or proof of wrongdoing on Smollett's behalf. The City of Chicago saved his career. I know what I think happened but Smollett's supporters have reached the outcome they wanted. How much more support do you need to see?

To be fair, I agree with your outrage that charges against Smollett have been dropped.  That's bullshit and a miscarriage of justice, and I suspect that when the ongoing FBI investigation into the matter concludes, heads will roll for it.

But that's got nothing to do with what I was asking.  As near as I can figure the actions that Jessie Smollett took are not viewed favourably by Democrats, Republicans, or anyone else.  Contrary to your earlier argument, Democrats don't really like Jessie Smollett.

[JLee]

Smolletts's report was debated but there are no charges, nor any history of fake charges. AGAIN, all that remains on the history books is the original Smollett claim, and the quotes of support. The Prosecutor dropped all pending charges, expunged Smollett's record, and sealed all records. He is completely innocent, and stands as a victim of the hate crime he reported. There is NO fake, or proof of wrongdoing on Smollett's behalf. The City of Chicago saved his career. I know what I think happened but Smollett's supporters have reached the outcome they wanted. How much more support do you need to see?

https://thegrapevine.theroot.com/1-petition-to-investigate-jussie-smollett-case-dropped-1834411697

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/02/20/jussie-smollett-goes-from-victim-to-suspect-in-alleged-hate-crime-attack-on-himself/amp/

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/02/20/jussie-smollett-hires-mark-geragos-defense-attorney/

https://www.theepochtimes.com/empire-actor-jussie-smollett-arrested-on-charges-of-filing-false-police-report_2809873.html

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jussie-smollett-is-under-arrest-in-custody-of-chicago-police.amp

https://abcnews.go.com/US/jussie-smollett-custody-chicago-police-allegedly-lying-attack/story?id=61208295

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/videos/entertainment/2019/02/21/jussie-smollett-leaves-courthouse-bond-hearing-tsr-vpx.cnn

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-jussie-smollett-charges-20190221-story,amp.html

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/21/entertainment/jussie-smollett-thursday/index.html

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/2936589002

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/03/08/jussie-smollett-grand-jury-indictment/?fbclid=IwAR32t9wvl8TlYBJ2MHZxUn3YQ0L0hy61jHXdKVN2DwJM4eYlxdTA41GwF7Y

https://abc7news.com/jussie-smollett-indicted-on-16-felony-counts-by-grand-jury/5177586/

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-jussie-smollett-indicted-20190308-story,amp.html

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/identities/2019/3/9/18257397/jussie-smollett-empire-indictment-16-charges

[Davnasty]

Smolletts's report was debated but there are no charges, nor any history of fake charges. AGAIN, all that remains on the history books is the original Smollett claim, and the quotes of support. The Prosecutor dropped all pending charges, expunged Smollett's record, and sealed all records. He is completely innocent, and stands as a victim of the hate crime he reported. There is NO fake, or proof of wrongdoing on Smollett's behalf. The City of Chicago saved his career. I know what I think happened but Smollett's supporters have reached the outcome they wanted. How much more support do you need to see?

To be fair, I agree with your outrage that charges against Smollett have been dropped.  That's bullshit and a miscarriage of justice, and I suspect that when the ongoing FBI investigation into the matter concludes, heads will roll for it.

But that's got nothing to do with what I was asking.  As near as I can figure the actions that Jessie Smollett took are not viewed favourably by Democrats, Republicans, or anyone else.  Contrary to your earlier argument, Democrats don't really like Jessie Smollett.

Yep. In fact some of his biggest haters are black and gay people who know they're already fighting an uphill battle when it comes to being believed about harassment and hate crimes. Smollett just gave the world a high profile reason to keep questioning the victim.

[JLee]

Smolletts's report was debated but there are no charges, nor any history of fake charges. AGAIN, all that remains on the history books is the original Smollett claim, and the quotes of support. The Prosecutor dropped all pending charges, expunged Smollett's record, and sealed all records. He is completely innocent, and stands as a victim of the hate crime he reported. There is NO fake, or proof of wrongdoing on Smollett's behalf. The City of Chicago saved his career. I know what I think happened but Smollett's supporters have reached the outcome they wanted. How much more support do you need to see?

To be fair, I agree with your outrage that charges against Smollett have been dropped.  That's bullshit and a miscarriage of justice, and I suspect that when the ongoing FBI investigation into the matter concludes, heads will roll for it.

But that's got nothing to do with what I was asking.  As near as I can figure the actions that Jessie Smollett took are not viewed favourably by Democrats, Republicans, or anyone else.  Contrary to your earlier argument, Democrats don't really like Jessie Smollett.

Yep. In fact some of his biggest haters are black and gay people who know they're already fighting an uphill battle when it comes to being believed about harassment and hate crimes. Smollett just gave the world a high profile reason to keep questioning the victim.

Indeed.  I have yet to hear a single person support his falsification of a police report.

[LennStar]

I especially like the patriots who say that if we let in 1-2% of our population in foreigners  that this will destroy our culture. (Here: Germany ans Syrian refugees a few years ago).

A patriot supports his culture. How do you support it by saying it is so weak that it vanishes when you add 2% of a different culture?

[sol]

A patriot supports his culture. How do you support it by saying it is so weak that it vanishes when you add 2% of a different culture?

But they're infectious!  With their super hot women and their delicious food, pretty soon even red-blooded white Americans are supporting the invasion.

And while I'm on the topic of infectious...  One of my relatives recently forwarded a facebook meme about how we had to build a border wall because invading migrant caravans are infected with smallpox.  Smallpox!  That was legitimately her concern, that America was under siege by a disease that was eradicated in the 80s.  And that a wall would somehow stop an airborne virus. 

I decided not to point out any of these errors, or to suggest that she spend 15 seconds fact-checking on google before posting memes she finds on the internet.

[MasterStache]

So at what MPG fuel rating is the terrorism label warranted? This sounds incredibly dumb to me personally.

I don't think it's about hitting a specific MPG rating, it's about deliberately choosing inefficient vehicles so that you can send extra US dollars to middle eastern countries that support acts of terrorism against America.

Even if you only mailed a single dollar bill to ISIS, I would not support your decision.  If you drive a F-250, you send a whole lot more than that.

What about having pipelines from Canada so we don't need to worry about the claim that oil "funds terrorism"

Ummm yeah well we actually already have one of those called the "Keystone Pipeline" and it provides plenty of some of the nastiest, shittiest oil on the planet, to the eastern US.

Seems like the best course of action is to reduce your dependency on petro as it sends less money to terrorist countries and cuts back on crap like tar sands oil.

[GuitarStv]

A patriot supports his culture. How do you support it by saying it is so weak that it vanishes when you add 2% of a different culture?

But they're infectious!  With their super hot women and their delicious food, pretty soon even red-blooded white Americans are supporting the invasion.

And while I'm on the topic of infectious...  One of my relatives recently forwarded a facebook meme about how we had to build a border wall because invading migrant caravans are infected with smallpox.  Smallpox!  That was legitimately her concern, that America was under siege by a disease that was eradicated in the 80s.  And that a wall would somehow stop an airborne virus. 

I decided not to point out any of these errors, or to suggest that she spend 15 seconds fact-checking on google before posting memes she finds on the internet.

The irony is that if smallpox was actually a concern, it would likely be spread by the idiots already living in the borders who refuse to get vaccinated for stuff because Jenny McCarthy is autistic.  Or something along those lines.

[NorthernBlitz]

So at what MPG fuel rating is the terrorism label warranted? This sounds incredibly dumb to me personally.

I don't think it's about hitting a specific MPG rating, it's about deliberately choosing inefficient vehicles so that you can send extra US dollars to middle eastern countries that support acts of terrorism against America.

Even if you only mailed a single dollar bill to ISIS, I would not support your decision.  If you drive a F-250, you send a whole lot more than that.

What about having pipelines from Canada so we don't need to worry about the claim that oil "funds terrorism"

Ummm yeah well we actually already have one of those called the "Keystone Pipeline" and it provides plenty of some of the nastiest, shittiest oil on the planet, to the eastern US.

Seems like the best course of action is to reduce your dependency on petro as it sends less money to terrorist countries and cuts back on crap like tar sands oil.

I agree that oil sands oil is dirtier to produce than oil from other places on Earth and that it's not a good solution in the long run.

But, the argument was that using gas powered cars is equivalent to mailing money to ISIS. Apparently, even Prius driving MMM types are guilty of literally mailing money to ISIS.

If that was actually his biggest concern, oil from Canada might look attractive despite the environmental impact.

[Davnasty]

So at what MPG fuel rating is the terrorism label warranted? This sounds incredibly dumb to me personally.

I don't think it's about hitting a specific MPG rating, it's about deliberately choosing inefficient vehicles so that you can send extra US dollars to middle eastern countries that support acts of terrorism against America.

Even if you only mailed a single dollar bill to ISIS, I would not support your decision.  If you drive a F-250, you send a whole lot more than that.

What about having pipelines from Canada so we don't need to worry about the claim that oil "funds terrorism"

Ummm yeah well we actually already have one of those called the "Keystone Pipeline" and it provides plenty of some of the nastiest, shittiest oil on the planet, to the eastern US.

Seems like the best course of action is to reduce your dependency on petro as it sends less money to terrorist countries and cuts back on crap like tar sands oil.

I agree that oil sands oil is dirtier to produce than oil from other places on Earth and that it's not a good solution in the long run.

But, the argument was that using gas powered cars is equivalent to mailing money to ISIS. Apparently, even Prius driving MMM types are guilty of literally mailing money to ISIS.

If that was actually his biggest concern, oil from Canada might look attractive despite the environmental impact.

Not equivalent in every sense, only in the sense that it does fund terrorism.

That's not what "literally" means. "Indirectly" would be more fitting.

And sol never suggested that it was his biggest concern, only that it's happening.

[NorthernBlitz]

So at what MPG fuel rating is the terrorism label warranted? This sounds incredibly dumb to me personally.

I don't think it's about hitting a specific MPG rating, it's about deliberately choosing inefficient vehicles so that you can send extra US dollars to middle eastern countries that support acts of terrorism against America.

Even if you only mailed a single dollar bill to ISIS, I would not support your decision.  If you drive a F-250, you send a whole lot more than that.

What about having pipelines from Canada so we don't need to worry about the claim that oil "funds terrorism"

Ummm yeah well we actually already have one of those called the "Keystone Pipeline" and it provides plenty of some of the nastiest, shittiest oil on the planet, to the eastern US.

Seems like the best course of action is to reduce your dependency on petro as it sends less money to terrorist countries and cuts back on crap like tar sands oil.

I agree that oil sands oil is dirtier to produce than oil from other places on Earth and that it's not a good solution in the long run.

But, the argument was that using gas powered cars is equivalent to mailing money to ISIS. Apparently, even Prius driving MMM types are guilty of literally mailing money to ISIS.

If that was actually his biggest concern, oil from Canada might look attractive despite the environmental impact.

Not equivalent in every sense, only in the sense that it does fund terrorism.

That's not what "literally" means. "Indirectly" would be more fitting.

And sol never suggested that it was his biggest concern, only that it's happening.

I agree that indirectly is more appropriate in reality, but that's not what his post says.

But his comment talks about driving gas powered cars and equates that to mailing money directly to ISIS.

My comment was pointing out that there's an alternative if we don't want to do that. But most decisions have tradeoffs.

We currently tend to pick lower price oil that happens to have lower emissions and higher likelihood of funding terrorism.

[sol]

But his comment talks about driving gas powered cars and equates that to mailing money directly to ISIS.

Not just driving gas powered cars, but deliberately choosing to drive inefficient gas powered cars and then pretending it's patriotic to do so.  It's the opposite of that.

In particular I'm reminded of the rolling coal crowd, and how they think that Americans who are supporting American energy independence are part of some subversive anti-American plot.  When in fact it is their dirty diesel trucks that are destroying our country's air, making a totally unnecessary disturbing-the-peace racket, and oh btw also sending a little extra part of their paychecks to ISIS with every fill-up.

[MasterStache]

So at what MPG fuel rating is the terrorism label warranted? This sounds incredibly dumb to me personally.

I don't think it's about hitting a specific MPG rating, it's about deliberately choosing inefficient vehicles so that you can send extra US dollars to middle eastern countries that support acts of terrorism against America.

Even if you only mailed a single dollar bill to ISIS, I would not support your decision.  If you drive a F-250, you send a whole lot more than that.

What about having pipelines from Canada so we don't need to worry about the claim that oil "funds terrorism"

Ummm yeah well we actually already have one of those called the "Keystone Pipeline" and it provides plenty of some of the nastiest, shittiest oil on the planet, to the eastern US.

Seems like the best course of action is to reduce your dependency on petro as it sends less money to terrorist countries and cuts back on crap like tar sands oil.

I agree that oil sands oil is dirtier to produce than oil from other places on Earth and that it's not a good solution in the long run.

But, the argument was that using gas powered cars is equivalent to mailing money to ISIS. Apparently, even Prius driving MMM types are guilty of literally mailing money to ISIS.

If that was actually his biggest concern, oil from Canada might look attractive despite the environmental impact.

Not equivalent in every sense, only in the sense that it does fund terrorism.

That's not what "literally" means. "Indirectly" would be more fitting.

And sol never suggested that it was his biggest concern, only that it's happening.

I agree that indirectly is more appropriate in reality, but that's not what his post says.

But his comment talks about driving gas powered cars and equates that to mailing money directly to ISIS.

My comment was pointing out that there's an alternative if we don't want to do that. But most decisions have tradeoffs.

We currently tend to pick lower price oil that happens to have lower emissions and higher likelihood of funding terrorism.

I don’t really care where the oil comes from. Destroying the planet offending terrorism both are shitty. Thus why it is important to make choices the limit your contribution to both.

[GuitarStv]

Long term and big picture . . . destroying the planet will end terrorism.  Forever.  I'm not sure the other side effects are worth this small benefit though.

[former player]

Long term and big picture . . . destroying the planet will end terrorism.  Forever.  I'm not sure the other side effects are worth this small benefit though.

It will make it worse in the meantime too - it's no co-incidence that the countries with the least stable and/or democratic governments/the most terrorism tend to be in the most environmentally fragile parts of the world and those most immediately threatened by the effects of global warming.

[Roadrunner53]

Anyone think William Bar might resign? Today he is going to be on the HOT seat!

[MasterStache]

Long term and big picture . . . destroying the planet will end terrorism.  Forever.  I'm not sure the other side effects are worth this small benefit though.

It will make it worse in the meantime too - it's no co-incidence that the countries with the least stable and/or democratic governments/the most terrorism tend to be in the most environmentally fragile parts of the world and those most immediately threatened by the effects of global warming.

That sounds entirely too logical (-;

[GuitarStv]

Anyone think William Bar might resign? Today he is going to be on the HOT seat!

Barr publicly said that he would do exactly what Trump wanted, was hired to do exactly what Trump wanted, and did exactly what Trump wanted.  Sure, he is a total disgrace as an attorney general, but he delivered for his boss.  He should be bucking for a raise.

[talltexan]

Not protesting against this summary of Barr's work over the past two months.

But, by giving the Trump base the "Mueller report says no collusion or obstruction" talking point--and it's basically Barr/Rosenstein who did this--could they have possibly saved the country by shifting us from inevitable impeachment to Democrats campaigning on Health Care and infrastructure and defeating Trump at the ballot box in 2020?

Suppose just for a second you thought Trump has a 40% chance of winning the 2020 election. You couldn't possibly have thought there was a 60% chance of Senate voting to remove via impeachment. Trump's chances of surviving impeachment have always looked higher than his chances of surviving another election.

[ematicic]

Not protesting against this summary of Barr's work over the past two months.

But, by giving the Trump base the "Mueller report says no collusion or obstruction" talking point--and it's basically Barr/Rosenstein who did this--could they have possibly saved the country by shifting us from inevitable impeachment to Democrats campaigning on Health Care and infrastructure and defeating Trump at the ballot box in 2020?

Suppose just for a second you thought Trump has a 40% chance of winning the 2020 election. You couldn't possibly have thought there was a 60% chance of Senate voting to remove via impeachment. Trump's chances of surviving impeachment have always looked higher than his chances of surviving another election.

I think in many ways O-Cortez did the Democrats a massive disservice by placing the price tag on the Democratic platform. I admire her for finally forming a path forward and feel that many politicians fail to do so. Many say they "want" this and that, and that they will fight for these topics but the GND is a path forward and it comes with a price that many did not expect. With the current economic climate, many Dems are left without a sound platform. They need the negative publicity from the Russian Collusion, even if it wasn't there to the degree they promised. They need people to hate the President and believe that he worked with Russia, regardless of what the 2 year investigation found.

[GuitarStv]

They need the negative publicity from the Russian Collusion, even if it wasn't there to the degree they promised.

Can you provide the sources you're referencing?  Which democrats promised "Russian Collusion" that wasn't supported or corroborated by the Muller report?

[ematicic]

They need the negative publicity from the Russian Collusion, even if it wasn't there to the degree they promised.

Can you provide the sources you're referencing?  Which democrats promised "Russian Collusion" that wasn't supported or corroborated by the Muller report?

Happy to help!

Sen. Richard Blumenthal: “The evidence is pretty clear that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.” (MSNBC’S “All In,” 10/17/18)
Rep. Adam Schiff: “Well, look, there’s clear evidence of an attempt to collude.” (CNN’s “The Situation Room” 12/14/17)
Sen. Ron Wyden: “I think there was clearly an intent to collude.” (CNN’s “Wolf,” 12/15/17)
Rep. Adam Schiff: “I think there’s plenty of evidence of collusion.” (“CBS This Morning” 08/05/18)
DNC Chair Tom Perez: “Over the course of the last year, we have seen, I think a mountain of evidence of collusion between the campaign and the Russians.” (Fox’s “The Five,” 04/23/18)
Rep. Eric Swalwell: “We saw strong evidence of collusion … I think that’s clear collusion.” (CNN’s “Wolf,” 03/16/18)
Rep. Jerry Nadler, chair of House Judiciary: “…we know there was collusion with people in the campaign with Russians.” (MSNBC’s “All In,” 10/27/17)
Rep. Maxine Waters: “And I am so depending on our special counsel Robert Mueller to connect the dots so that he can prove the collusion.” (MSNBC’s “All In,” 08/04/18)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal: “There are indictments in this president’s future,” (MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” March 21, 2019)
Sen. Richard Blumental: “Even more so now than ever before, according to the intelligence we’re receiving, we need to understand what Vladimir Putin and the Trump campaign may have done together, but also the obstruction of justice that was done by the president of the United States in real time.” (MSNBC’S “Morning Joe” March 21, 2019)

[GuitarStv]

They need the negative publicity from the Russian Collusion, even if it wasn't there to the degree they promised.

Can you provide the sources you're referencing?  Which democrats promised "Russian Collusion" that wasn't supported or corroborated by the Muller report?

Happy to help!

Sen. Richard Blumenthal: “The evidence is pretty clear that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.” (MSNBC’S “All In,” 10/17/18)
Rep. Adam Schiff: “Well, look, there’s clear evidence of an attempt to collude.” (CNN’s “The Situation Room” 12/14/17)
Sen. Ron Wyden: “I think there was clearly an intent to collude.” (CNN’s “Wolf,” 12/15/17)
Rep. Adam Schiff: “I think there’s plenty of evidence of collusion.” (“CBS This Morning” 08/05/18)
DNC Chair Tom Perez: “Over the course of the last year, we have seen, I think a mountain of evidence of collusion between the campaign and the Russians.” (Fox’s “The Five,” 04/23/18)
Rep. Eric Swalwell: “We saw strong evidence of collusion … I think that’s clear collusion.” (CNN’s “Wolf,” 03/16/18)
Rep. Jerry Nadler, chair of House Judiciary: “…we know there was collusion with people in the campaign with Russians.” (MSNBC’s “All In,” 10/27/17)
Rep. Maxine Waters: “And I am so depending on our special counsel Robert Mueller to connect the dots so that he can prove the collusion.” (MSNBC’s “All In,” 08/04/18)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal: “There are indictments in this president’s future,” (MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” March 21, 2019)
Sen. Richard Blumental: “Even more so now than ever before, according to the intelligence we’re receiving, we need to understand what Vladimir Putin and the Trump campaign may have done together, but also the obstruction of justice that was done by the president of the United States in real time.” (MSNBC’S “Morning Joe” March 21, 2019)

Those are indeed quotes taken out of context about collusion.  Which ones are you claiming were not supported by Mueller's report?

[ematicic]

They need the negative publicity from the Russian Collusion, even if it wasn't there to the degree they promised.

Can you provide the sources you're referencing?  Which democrats promised "Russian Collusion" that wasn't supported or corroborated by the Muller report?

Happy to help!

Sen. Richard Blumenthal: “The evidence is pretty clear that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.” (MSNBC’S “All In,” 10/17/18)
Rep. Adam Schiff: “Well, look, there’s clear evidence of an attempt to collude.” (CNN’s “The Situation Room” 12/14/17)
Sen. Ron Wyden: “I think there was clearly an intent to collude.” (CNN’s “Wolf,” 12/15/17)
Rep. Adam Schiff: “I think there’s plenty of evidence of collusion.” (“CBS This Morning” 08/05/18)
DNC Chair Tom Perez: “Over the course of the last year, we have seen, I think a mountain of evidence of collusion between the campaign and the Russians.” (Fox’s “The Five,” 04/23/18)
Rep. Eric Swalwell: “We saw strong evidence of collusion … I think that’s clear collusion.” (CNN’s “Wolf,” 03/16/18)
Rep. Jerry Nadler, chair of House Judiciary: “…we know there was collusion with people in the campaign with Russians.” (MSNBC’s “All In,” 10/27/17)
Rep. Maxine Waters: “And I am so depending on our special counsel Robert Mueller to connect the dots so that he can prove the collusion.” (MSNBC’s “All In,” 08/04/18)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal: “There are indictments in this president’s future,” (MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” March 21, 2019)
Sen. Richard Blumental: “Even more so now than ever before, according to the intelligence we’re receiving, we need to understand what Vladimir Putin and the Trump campaign may have done together, but also the obstruction of justice that was done by the president of the United States in real time.” (MSNBC’S “Morning Joe” March 21, 2019)

Those are indeed quotes taken out of context about collusion.  Which ones are you claiming were not supported by Mueller's report?

Well since all of those quotes are not in the context of collusion, I apologize for associating them as such. Since they are out of context pertaining to collusion then Mueller's report is not applicable to any of these quotes. I interpreted all of those quotes as if they were in context of the Russian collusion investigation. I just know that Mueller recommended no charges on collusion and was a bit vague on obstruction. I haven't read the entire report and as of now, Barr is in the hot seat.

My original point, the Dems can continue the impeachment, collusion, obstruction talk all the way to 2020, or they can instead campaign on platform topics. President Trump may have wanted the investigation to end prematurely, but it was allowed to run it's course and the next few months will be all about the report, the summary and how the investigation came to a close. I want people to shift focus on what they can do for the country as leaders. They make themselves look weak when most of their focus is to have him removed forcefully, if he is as bad of a leader as they say, then they should be able to rally the voters in a different direction, not demand that he gets removed so they can advance.

[Cool Friend]

My original point, the Dems can continue the impeachment, collusion, obstruction talk all the way to 2020, or they can instead campaign on platform topics. President Trump may have wanted the investigation to end prematurely, but it was allowed to run it's course and the next few months will be all about the report, the summary and how the investigation came to a close. I want people to shift focus on what they can do for the country as leaders. They make themselves look weak when most of their focus is to have him removed forcefully, if he is as bad of a leader as they say, then they should be able to rally the voters in a different direction, not demand that he gets removed so they can advance.

Why not both?

[LennStar]

I just know that Mueller recommended no charges on collusion and was a bit vague on obstruction.

That is interesting, because I read (when the report came out) he had at least 5 clear cases of obstruction of justice and is basically begging for congress to use this.

Also Mueller is extremely dissatisified with Barr's summary, according to this:
https://boingboing.net/2019/04/30/barr-coverup-mueller-told-a-g.html

[Enigma]

Speculation...  A full Trump Presidency has the ability to reshape the European socialist countries into becoming more capitalist.  I would expect to see a major change with EU member states and EEA/EU candidate states.

Brexit, EURO currency, PIIGS (struggling European countries), Spain (Barcelona trying to break away), and mass muslim migrations.  4 more years of a Trump presidency and a prospering US economy could be seen as the grass being greener on the other side.  More overseas unrest...

[JLee]

Speculation...  A full Trump Presidency has the ability to reshape the European socialist countries into becoming more capitalist.  I would expect to see a major change with EU member states and EEA/EU candidate states.

Brexit, EURO currency, PIIGS (struggling European countries), Spain (Barcelona trying to break away), and mass muslim migrations.  4 more years of a Trump presidency and a prospering US economy could be seen as the grass being greener on the other side.  More overseas unrest...

A prospering economy in a country that gives a big "fuck you" to immigrants doesn't sound all that enticing, really.

[ematicic]

Speculation...  A full Trump Presidency has the ability to reshape the European socialist countries into becoming more capitalist.  I would expect to see a major change with EU member states and EEA/EU candidate states.

Brexit, EURO currency, PIIGS (struggling European countries), Spain (Barcelona trying to break away), and mass muslim migrations.  4 more years of a Trump presidency and a prospering US economy could be seen as the grass being greener on the other side.  More overseas unrest...

A prospering economy in a country that gives a big "fuck you" to immigrants doesn't sound all that enticing, really.

He only wants to give that big "FY" to those entering illegally, and I am ok with that. Especially seeing the next few massive waves coming. I disagree that that anyone that can walk here should be allowed in. No US President has ever allowed that and I find it ridiculous that President Trump should be expected to...

[sherr]

Speculation...  A full Trump Presidency has the ability to reshape the European socialist countries into becoming more capitalist.  I would expect to see a major change with EU member states and EEA/EU candidate states.

Brexit, EURO currency, PIIGS (struggling European countries), Spain (Barcelona trying to break away), and mass muslim migrations.  4 more years of a Trump presidency and a prospering US economy could be seen as the grass being greener on the other side.  More overseas unrest...

A prospering economy in a country that gives a big "fuck you" to immigrants doesn't sound all that enticing, really.

Especially not when the "prospering economy" is only propped up by Trump throwing gasoline on an already-raging fire (deficit-funded tax cuts, mostly for the ultra-rich of course) and appointing know-nothing stooges to the (supposedly apolitical) Federal Reserve to keep interest rates near 0%.

Seriously, I can't imagine how insulated in their own little bubble someone would have to be to think that basically anyone overseas thinks well of the US in the age of Trump or wants to be like us. Enigma must not know literally anyone in Europe if that's his prediction.

[talltexan]

Speculation...  A full Trump Presidency has the ability to reshape the European socialist countries into becoming more capitalist.  I would expect to see a major change with EU member states and EEA/EU candidate states.

Brexit, EURO currency, PIIGS (struggling European countries), Spain (Barcelona trying to break away), and mass muslim migrations.  4 more years of a Trump presidency and a prospering US economy could be seen as the grass being greener on the other side.  More overseas unrest...

A prospering economy in a country that gives a big "fuck you" to immigrants doesn't sound all that enticing, really.

He only wants to give that big "FY" to those entering illegally, and I am ok with that. Especially seeing the next few massive waves coming. I disagree that that anyone that can walk here should be allowed in. No US President has ever allowed that and I find it ridiculous that President Trump should be expected to...

Reminder: seeking asylum is legal. You may not like that it's legal. It would require Congress to make it illegal. Why didn't the unified GOP Congress do so when Trump would have signed it from 2017-2019? I do not know.