We the deplorable

[buffalopundit]

The thing I find most interesting is Pundit is a product of the system he so strongly defends/protects.

I have no doubt he has been graced with all the tax subsidized goodies many immigrants and refugees hope to attain in his time here in America.

For that reason there is or never will be any way to budge his beliefs or propaganda.

He has been brain washed to believe Democrat = Democracy .

Wow. Stereotype much? What a despicable and cowardly little worm you are.

[buffalopundit]

(1) You expressed the need for "politeness" and "courtesy." I agreed with you. Regarding what I viewed as Obama's "offensive" language and your challenge to my view, I would be just as offended about a generalized characterization, by any political candidate, about any group, based on venue, culture, economics, race, ethnicity and the like. Then-Senator Obama's comments not only generalized about the people in small Pennsylvania and mid-western towns, but SUGGESTED that their value system, based on their right to own a fire arm and their right to practice their faith, ran contrary to what he apparently views as responsible behavior. To anyone with common sense, responsible behavior does not rise from the world of "bitterness---" his "insightful" characterization, not mine.

To conclude, there is nothing inaccurate about the quote you provide. It speaks for itself. I remain offended.

Then-Senator Obama's remarks couldn't describe the Trump electorate more accurately. There's nothing there about which to be offended.

(2) I have heard Trump apologize for some of the more bizarre things that he said. He apologized to Ms. Fiorina, he later called Ted Cruz a very able person, and the ******* comment about women, he apologized directly for that chestnut. If your asking me to defend the P***y remark, don't hold your breath. I'll take a page from Vice President Pence: "I can't defend those words."

He doesn't apologize. He just changes his mind when the person agrees with him. The best way to figure out who is trying to be in Trump's good graces is to see if they refer to him as "Mr. Trump" or literally anything else. He demands his vassals refer to him as "Mr. Trump", although that's about to change.

(3) I do not like racism, or racist remarks. If you are going to focus on Trump's remarks about Hispanics please, focus on those remarks within the meaning of what he was referring to: "I-L-L-E-G-A-L immigration, and I-L-L-E-G-A-L immigrants." If you are going to talk about the Muslim community, I do not find it objectionable to properly background the refugees. I'm sure you disagree, but convey that disagreement to the families of the victims of Orlando, San Bernadino, and the Boston Marathon.

He said "Mexico is not sending their best" or something. Mexico isn't sending anyone, and the comments were about Mexican immigrants in general. I think it's fine to "properly background" the refugees, and that is what the US has been doing since forever. To get to Germany, a Syrian refugee can basically walk. To get here, he has to fly. To fly, he has to have permission - a visa. To get a visa, there is a gauntlet through which he has to run, and if he can't properly be vetted he doesn't get the visa.

You seem to believe that I view racism subjectively and/or call it out selectively. Bear in mind, I write under my real name, and that type of reckless labeling is not only destructive to thoughtful political discourse, but tends to publicly frame my reputation in an entirely disgusting and FALSE way. However, your irresponsibility does serve to support my specific point:

Of course ALL racism should be called out. I never held to the contrary. What I said, (and please, no slick, theatrical courtroom "do you still beat your wife?" word games here counsel), is that the chronic, exploitative, unsupported, and seemingly automatic linkage of any criticism of President Obama's policies to bigotry and racism, diminishes the race issue. A legitimate policy dispute does not rise to the evils of segregation, lynching, and Jim Crow. It would be akin to someone frivolously labeling someone a "Nazi" for some bull**** transgression, and they made that remark in front of a Holocaust survivor or a disabled WWII vet. Get the picture?" The label of "Nazi" would seem inappropriate in that it diminishes the scale and scope of the suffering and evil of Dachau.

Here's what I think: I don't at all think that disagreement or opposition to President Obama's policies is racism, nor have I ever said that it is. What I do think is racist is when people treat President Obama differently for things that every other President has done.

Regarding "Lock Her Up," do you remember Watergate? "Jail To The Chief!" Do you remember election 2000? "Your Fraudulence!" My petty political comment aside, a constant drum beat of mobs threatening to kill law enforcement is very, very, unsettling. I do not know who you depend on for your family's safety, I depend on law enforcement. Sorry, no apologies here.

I agree. I also remember the Brooks Brothers riots in 2000 that Roger Stone set up, and in 2016 we had an actual watergate burglary take place and splash all over the media. No one expressed much outrage about private citizens' email correspondence being published without redaction, but I think someone needs to go to jail for it.

[mark blazejewski]

Then-Senator Obama's remarks couldn't describe the Trump electorate more accurately. There's nothing there about which to be offended.



He doesn't apologize. He just changes his mind when the person agrees with him. The best way to figure out who is trying to be in Trump's good graces is to see if they refer to him as "Mr. Trump" or literally anything else. He demands his vassals refer to him as "Mr. Trump", although that's about to change.



He said "Mexico is not sending their best" or something. Mexico isn't sending anyone, and the comments were about Mexican immigrants in general. I think it's fine to "properly background" the refugees, and that is what the US has been doing since forever. To get to Germany, a Syrian refugee can basically walk. To get here, he has to fly. To fly, he has to have permission - a visa. To get a visa, there is a gauntlet through which he has to run, and if he can't properly be vetted he doesn't get the visa.



Here's what I think: I don't at all think that disagreement or opposition to President Obama's policies is racism, nor have I ever said that it is. What I do think is racist is when people treat President Obama differently for things that every other President has done.



I agree. I also remember the Brooks Brothers riots in 2000 that Roger Stone set up, and in 2016 we had an actual watergate burglary take place and splash all over the media. No one expressed much outrage about private citizens' email correspondence being published without redaction, but I think someone needs to go to jail for it.

Thank you for the response. In order:

(1) I can only restate the obvious.To generalize about 62,000,000 people, or any other group whose views run contrary to one's own personal beliefs, values, and/or suspicions, seems a little dangerous. I grew up in the aftermath of such thinking. Please, I can do without a 21st century version of beer hall rantings. If you are going to reply about the "ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT" issue again, please focus on the word "ILLEGAL." If you are going to spew on about the Muslims, please focus on the words "properly background."

(2) Regarding your position on the sincerity and motivation of President-elect Trump's apologies, your sage insights lack a professional psychological foundation. I believe the less sophisticated, such as myself, refer to that sort of opinion-based thinking as "HORSE... T"

(3) I believe I asked you to consider Trump's Mexican comments within the general topic "ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION." As far as the vetting process, "since forever," al-Qaeda and ISIS did not exist forever, so thank you for tracing the steps of an outdated and flawed process.

Mr. B., I understand that you are a very good lawyer and my appropriate compliments. But what I find entirely disingenuous is that while you seemingly advocate for the rights of illegal immigrants, you have worked to preserve the legal rights of landlords, and have guided them on problem tenant eviction procedures. You seem to have no problem crushing the dreams of those tenants. SO, think of the United States as one big rental property.

(4) I never said that YOU labeled those criticizing Obama's policies as "racists." I referred to those political animals that have. Ever hear of Van Jones?

(5) Not quite Watergate, The Pentagon Papers may be a more appropriate analogy. Much of the mainstream media, and past and current government leaders, have strongly criticized Assange. I do not remember that kind of outrage with Dr. Ellsberg. Another double standard?

(6) I agree about 2000. Both sides played big-time politics. Roger Stone did the "Brooks Brothers" thing because he owed Jim Baker a favor,and he admits it.

But, why didn't Gore ask for a statewide recount in Florida instead of cherry-picking select Democrat counties? And what was with the networks projecting a Gore win when the Panhandle was still voting?

Oh yea, the Butterfly Ballot must have carried a Dyslexia virus, turning the word "Gore" into "Buchanan," and a small mark on a chad screamed "Gore-Liberman." Give me a break.

Both sides were as crocked as the day is long.

[buffalopundit]

(1) I can only restate the obvious.To generalize about 62,000,000 people, or any other group whose views run contrary to one's own personal beliefs, values, and/or suspicions, seems a little dangerous. I grew up in the aftermath of such thinking. Please, I can do without a 21st century version of beer hall rantings. If you are going to reply about the "ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT" issue again, please focus on the word "ILLEGAL." If you are going to spew on about the Muslims, please focus on the words "properly background."

On subset (a), "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." Mexico doesn't "send" its people. As to subset (b) I explained to you that Syrian refugees undergo very strict background checks before they're issued visas to board a plane to come here. I don't know what you object to.

(2) Regarding your position on the sincerity and motivation of President-elect Trump's apologies, your sage insights lack a professional psychological foundation. I believe the less sophisticated, such as myself, refer to that sort of opinion-based thinking as "HORSE... T"

Donald Trump is an authoritarian whose personality cult makes Obama's look miniscule by comparison. "Only I can fix it" he says. LOL.

(3) I believe I asked you to consider Trump's Mexican comments within the general topic "ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION." As far as the vetting process, "since forever," al-Qaeda and ISIS did not exist forever, so thank you for tracing the steps of an outdated and flawed process.

ISIS attacks here have been from people who were radicalized while living here as citizens or with green cards. Haven't been a lot of AQ attacks lately.

Mr. B., I understand that you are a very good lawyer and my appropriate compliments. But what I find entirely disingenuous is that while you seemingly advocate for the rights of illegal immigrants, you have worked to preserve the legal rights of landlords, and have guided them on problem tenant eviction procedures. You seem to have no problem crushing the dreams of those tenants. SO, think of the United States as one big rental property.

I evict people who don't pay rent. It's as simple as that. No analogue here.

(4) I never said that YOU labeled those criticizing Obama's policies as "racists." I referred to those political animals that have. Ever hear of Van Jones?

Yes. He's brilliant.

[mark blazejewski]

On subset (a), "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." Mexico doesn't "send" its people. As to subset (b) I explained to you that Syrian refugees undergo very strict background checks before they're issued visas to board a plane to come here. I don't know what you object to.



Donald Trump is an authoritarian whose personality cult makes Obama's look miniscule by comparison. "Only I can fix it" he says. LOL.



ISIS attacks here have been from people who were radicalized while living here as citizens or with green cards. Haven't been a lot of AQ attacks lately.



I evict people who don't pay rent. It's as simple as that. No analogue here.



Yes. He's brilliant.

I am one of those Italians whose grandmother's maiden name began with a "Z" so please excuse my convoluted thoughts. Unlike me, she was particularly fond of applying a instructional spiked heal to the head of those engaging in Italian bigotry. In turn:

(1) For the last time, in general context, Trump was talking about ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

(2) I do not have the credential to label either Trump or Obama "authoritarian," so I'm am not going to get into that pissing contest. Both were duly elected. Although I disagreed with his approach, ie, the much talked about Executive Orders, which I feel did not serve him or the nation well, Obey apparently functioned within the boundaries of the Constitution, and as such, I can not label him "authoritarian."

Trump is not President yet, so I cannot see how he can be branded "authoritarian" in ANTICIPATION of his Presidency.

(3) If the "vetting" system had been updated on an on-going basis, perhaps those individuals on Green Cards would not have been admitted. Who know? But, , how many of these people, while citizens, or on Green Cards, were permitted to travel back and forth to "hot spots"as a component exercise in their so-called radicalization program? That apparent flaw appears deserving of remediation.

BTW, ISIS grew directly out of al Qaeda in Iraq. Therefore, they are not mutually exclusive.

(4) Not paying rent violates the law. Coming to the US illegally violates the law. You endorse enforcing the law against one set of law breakers, yet exempt another set of law breakers from enforcement. I find that disingenuous.

[mark blazejewski]

Oh yes,forgot your last point on the brilliant Van Jones. His name was raised within the context of those who branded entire population segments as "racist" for being critical of Obama's policy. Your reply was "Yes, brilliant." My reply: "To brand such a large group blindly, so too was Goebbels."

Thank you for the exchange sir.

[WNYresident]

It's time to close this thread.