digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 Make a point and we can discuss it. Trump isn't "not polished", he is incapable and disinterested in telling the truth, or hearing it. I'm sure Obama hid things for good and bad reasons like any other head of state. Trump will give a speech in which he says explicitly, objectively and provably wrong things a dozen times, then call anyone who points it out an enemy of the American people. You seem to want really badly to be contrarian. You could do that just by actually making points about the last administration that you've mostly been vaguely referring to without presenting much for several years. Comparing that to Trump, as if just saying factually inaccurate things is representative of their differences or caused by being "not polished" is not just unreasonable, you're being dishonest to tell us you actually think that is true or important. If he were more polished then he would be more capable of telling the truth...the truth being what he wants you to believe. Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 LOL Steve is right...they're not even hiding it anymore. If he were more polished then maybe he could get away with blowing up a couple of buildings and using that to justify, in the publics eye, an attack on another country and an increase in surveillance of his own citizens. is this a WTC reference? Link to post Share on other sites
Fenxis 99 Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 If Trump were a more polished politician with more restraint and self-control and surrounded himself with the same kind of people then his number would be much closer to Obama's. You'd have a point; if he wasn't trying his earnest to gut ACA and stuff people actually like. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 You'd have a point; if he wasn't trying his earnest to gut ACA and stuff people actually like. Some people didn't like some of the things Obama did either...but he sure was well-spoken when he did them. Link to post Share on other sites
Fenxis 99 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Some people didn't like some of the things Obama did either...but he sure was well-spoken when he did them. Trump campaigned on preserving Medicare, improving health care affordability for all, has been pro-universal health care in the past, etc. but AHCA is a betrayal of what he campaign on. If Republican nominee had been from the "Freedom Caucus", campaigned on those ideals and won then it would have sucked but you would have to respect that. Meanwhile Trump campaigned on a populist appeal but from the moment he's gotten in he's done pretty much sold out the US public. Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Some people didn't like some of the things Obama did either...but he sure was well-spoken when he did them. Some people don't like pineapple. But they do like ham, so Obama Probably could have sold them on Hawaiian pizza. Trump is systematically ordering people by race, gender, language and wealth, then limiting their basic access to basic human rights based on those categories. But sure, if he was a smooth-talker who didn't surround himself with white nationalists, family members and laughably unqualified sycophants, I'm sure we wouldn't even notice a difference. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Some people don't like pineapple. But they do like ham, so Obama Probably could have sold them on Hawaiian pizza. Trump is systematically ordering people by race, gender, language and wealth, then limiting their basic access to basic human rights based on those categories. But sure, if he was a smooth-talker who didn't surround himself with white nationalists, family members and laughably unqualified sycophants, I'm sure we wouldn't even notice a difference. You're just making things up now. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/draft-presidents-trump-vs-obama-first-4-month-comparison/#disqus_thread Truths, half-truths or lies? Idk Bob? Link to post Share on other sites
GOCUBSGO 77 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 LOL Steve is right...they're not even hiding it anymore. If he were more polished then maybe he could get away with blowing up a couple of buildings and using that to justify, in the publics eye, an attack on another country and an increase in surveillance of his own citizens. Please tell me you don't actually believe that. Maybe I'm missing the joke or reference to something. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 is this a WTC reference? The second part, yes. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Please tell me you don't actually believe that. Maybe I'm missing the joke or reference to something. Tell you I don't actually believe what? Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Trump campaigned on preserving Medicare, improving health care affordability for all, has been pro-universal health care in the past, etc. but AHCA is a betrayal of what he campaign on. If Republican nominee had been from the "Freedom Caucus", campaigned on those ideals and won then it would have sucked but you would have to respect that. Meanwhile Trump campaigned on a populist appeal but from the moment he's gotten in he's done pretty much sold out the US public. He's hardly the first to betray his campaign promises. Link to post Share on other sites
GOCUBSGO 77 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Tell you I don't actually believe what? 1. That it actually happened. 2. That if Trump was a more polished politician that he could get away with something like that. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 1. That it actually happened. 2. That if Trump was a more polished politician that he could get away with something like that. If you're asking me if I think Bush knew in advance that an attack was going to take place then my answer is **** yes. Idk how much he actually had to do with it, but he certainly had a plan to use it to his advantage. Any President can get away with it. It's just easier for some. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Some people don't like pineapple. But they do like ham, so Obama Probably could have sold them on Hawaiian pizza. Trump is systematically ordering people by race, gender, language and wealth, then limiting their basic access to basic human rights based on those categories. But sure, if he was a smooth-talker who didn't surround himself with white nationalists, family members and laughably unqualified sycophants, I'm sure we wouldn't even notice a difference. https://www.google.ca/amp/www.newsweek.com/illegal-immigration-undocumented-migrants-obama-trump-585726%3Famp%3D1 https://www.google.ca/amp/www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-trump-obama-immigration-ban-similar-perspec-0216-20170215-story,amp.html Link to post Share on other sites
GOCUBSGO 77 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 If you're asking me if I think Bush knew in advance that an attack was going to take place then my answer is **** yes. Idk how much he actually had to do with it, but he certainly had a plan to use it to his advantage. Any President can get away with it. It's just easier for some. Well that's not even close to how you phrased it. You said getting away with blowing up a couple of buildings. If your argument is simply that Bush knew an attack was possible or imminent and had a plan if it did occur, then sure I can get behind that. All the intel screamed we knew an attack was coming but that is hardly a conspiracy. If your argument is that Bush ordered the buildings bombed or knew that terrorists were going to fly planes into the WTC and simply let it happen so he could go to war and increase surveillance then I would argue that you need to loosen your tinfoil hat. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Well that's not even close to how you phrased it. You said getting away with blowing up a couple of buildings. If your argument is simply that Bush knew an attack was possible or imminent and had a plan if it did occur, then sure I can get behind that. All the intel screamed we knew an attack was coming but that is hardly a conspiracy. If your argument is that Bush ordered the buildings bombed or knew that terrorists were going to fly planes into the WTC and simply let it happen so he could go to war and increase surveillance then I would argue that you need to loosen your tinfoil hat. I don't think Bush was smart enough to order anything unless he was instructed to do so. There's a huge difference between possible and imminent. I think he was aware of the attack plan. I think he was aware of what role certain Americans had to play in order for the attack to happen. I think he had the plan to benefit from the attack prior to September 11th. A tinfoil hat reference...cute. Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Quite the rabbit hole we all jumped into here. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Quite the rabbit hole we all jumped into here. We're all mad down here... Link to post Share on other sites
GOCUBSGO 77 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 I don't think Bush was smart enough to order anything unless he was instructed to do so. There's a huge difference between possible and imminent. I think he was aware of the attack plan. I think he was aware of what role certain Americans had to play in order for the attack to happen. I think he had the plan to benefit from the attack prior to September 11th. A tinfoil hat reference...cute. Lol and what role did Americans play, Dale? And what evidence are you citing that Bush knew of the attack plan other than your own conspiracy theory desires? And you know what they say. If the shoe...errr hat fits..... Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 https://www.google.ca/amp/www.newsweek.com/illegal-immigration-undocumented-migrants-obama-trump-585726%3Famp%3D1 https://www.google.ca/amp/www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-trump-obama-immigration-ban-similar-perspec-0216-20170215-story,amp.html And I realize there are differences between Obama's policy and Trump's policy, but if you really want to simplify the differences, Obama's policy was reactive while Trump's is proactive. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Lol and what role did Americans play, Dale? And what evidence are you citing that Bush knew of the attack plan other than your own conspiracy theory desires? And you know what they say. If the shoe...errr hat fits..... Let's go back to your accepting they had plenty of intel indicating an attack was possible or imminent...what actions did they take to address it? Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Also, this has nothing to do with my desires. If you are suggesting that I prefer "conspiracy theories" based on some kind of Sherlockian/egotistical/perverted need then you are very wrong. It would be much easier and mentally healthier to believe the "truth" we are fed. I just can't do it. Many can. Link to post Share on other sites
GOCUBSGO 77 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Just because you know an attack is imminent doesn't mean you know the what, who, or where. Was there a failure to connect the dots that could have possibly prevented 9/11? Sure. Is that evidence that we knew of the attack plan ahead of time and let it happen? Hardly. Link to post Share on other sites
GOCUBSGO 77 Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 I'm more than happy to reject the "truth" being fed to us if I can find evidence to the contrary. Without evidence, its nothing more than an opinion or theory Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now