Will Trump win again???

Started by Planktonmd
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Browse articles Compare schools My application plan Read Interview Feedback
Practice for interviews Ask an Advisor
Status
Not open for further replies.
BoolaHI said:
Indeed, over a billion Muslims in the world. On my own block, there are are two mosques....should we start the judeo-Christian persecution with Matty and his band of proud boys and pepe the frog leading the patriotic charge. Oh, I forgot, he has an adopted brother from Africa so he is all good and has standing with the homies...
Click to expand...

You crack me up Boo. You respond to a post about the Nobel peace prize with rants about GPA or some nonsense, then respond again with Ukrainian rants. Then you move to Pepe the frog and personal attacks. All in response to a non-controversial statement on the Nobel peace prize. Love it.

If you ever want to actually respond to my comment on the peace prize being unearned, you’re more than welcome to offer some thought out insight, but I imagine you’ll just say something else silly about Trump. That’s fine.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
vector2 said:
Was Obamacare repealed and replaced?
Have healthcare costs gone up or down since 2016?
How much wall has been built?
How much of it has Mexico paid for?
What percentage of their income did middle-class people get back in the tax cut vs large corps and capital gainers?
How much of the coal industry has been saved? Are there any government programs to help miners transition to new work in energy fields?
Have soybean and other farmers been positively or negatively affected by trade policy?
Did the ban against Muslims from "terror" countries hold up in court?
Did opioid deaths increase or decrease between 2016 and now?





The "I'm not pals with the president, I treat it as a business relationship and evaluate him based on performance alone"-line would maybe pack some punch if it weren't 100% fcking delusional and inaccurate.
Click to expand...
It depends on how you look at it.

Overall, things are going well for the average American. Unemployment is down, the economy is doing fairly well, we still get new iPhones and Samsung Galaxies every year.

Now we all know that the President has limited, at best, influence on any of these things, but that doesn't matter to most people. Country is doing well = President is doing a good job.
 
Matty44 said:
So it’s trump fault our vetting system wasn’t working well enough? He saw a problem and made a decision. You guy seriously need to chill out and not scream hatred and racism at everything if you ever want anyone other than extreme libs to take you seriously.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

One, it's a false premise because you're overwhelmingly more likely to get killed in the US by a white or black male citizen than by a foreign Muslim from the middle east or Africa. Two, even if I agreed with your premise, yes, its trump's responsibility to create a vetting system instead of blanket banning, assuming of course he believes in American principles. Three, he has no incentive to come up with a good vetting system because banning Muslims satiates all his mouth breathing supporters. Four, I'm sure it wouldnt be a surprise for you to learn that you not taking me seriously would be an absolute blessing.
 
vector2 said:
One, it's a false premise because you're overwhelmingly more likely to get killed in the US by a white or black male citizen than by a foreign Muslim. Two, even if I agreed with your premise, yes, its trump's responsibility to create a vetting system instead of blanket banning, assuming of course he believes in American principles. Three, he has no incentive to come up with a good vetting system because banning Muslims satiates all his mouth breathing supporters. Four, I'm sure it wouldnt be a surprise for you to learn that you not taking me seriously would be an absolute blessing.
Click to expand...

So you want me to take your comments as a joke?

Ok, status quo then.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
VA Hopeful Dr said:
It depends on how you look at it.
.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it does matter how you look at it. His supporters aren't claiming, "hey, trump passed an irresponsible tax cut which juiced the economy for a couple quarters while blowing up the deficit, and other than that he mostly just left well-enough alone the recovery that had been progressing since 2009."

What they're claiming is that hes made a ton of rational, deliberate choices and enacted much of his agenda, therefore his impeachable behavior doesnt matter. I'm just pointing out that he's mostly failed in regard to his campaign issues like repealing Obamacare, the wall, mexico paying for it, opioid deaths, coal, farmers, and benefitting the populist notion of the middle class working man.
 
vector2 said:
One, it's a false premise because you're overwhelmingly more likely to get killed in the US by a white or black male citizen than by a foreign Muslim from the middle east or Africa. Two, even if I agreed with your premise, yes, its trump's responsibility to create a vetting system instead of blanket banning, assuming of course he believes in American principles. Three, he has no incentive to come up with a good vetting system because banning Muslims satiates all his mouth breathing supporters.
Click to expand...

So not for you, since you’re just joking around, but for anyone else who likes to have civil discourse....

One - it’s not a false premise. No matter what the likelihood is to die at the hands of US citizens, why would you want to let additional threats in? That couldn’t be more irrelevant.

Two - So if you think the vetting system isn’t working and you are currently letting in admitted terrorists who are bragging about infiltrating refugee groups, what would you do? Just let it continue even though you know you’re letting in the bad with the good?

Three - racist, bigot, homophobe blah blah blah. Don’t you get tired of accusing everyone on the other side of the aisle of hating every singe ethnic group and minority?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
vector2 said:
Lol, don't cheer on bigotry toward Muslims and I won't accuse you of such
Click to expand...

One and two were not for you.
Three you see was meant for thee.

And I’m sorry you are too blinded by your TDS to see that security Trumps empathy sometimes. It’s not bigotry just cause you say so.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Matty44 said:
One and two were not for you.
Three you see was meant for thee.

And I’m sorry you are too blinded by your TDS to see that security Trumps empathy sometimes. It’s not bigotry just cause you say so.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


We get it, you hate Muslims but are ashamed to say so, so you couch it in "security" language. It's the cowards way out, and none of us deserve this faux sense of "security" if blanket bans are the price we pay. I know you're too ignorant to know US history but your logic was the very same we used to discriminate against German and Japanese Americans in WWII.


Also, we haven't stopped noticing that you're unable to explain the 5 out of 6 things trump hasnt delivered on other than the bigoted Muslim ban
 
Last edited:
vector2 said:
We get it, you hate Muslims but are ashamed to say so, so you couch it in "security" language. It's the cowards way out, and none of us deserve this faux sense of "security" if blanket bans are the price we pay. I know you're too ignorant to know US history but your logic was the very same we used to discriminate against German and Japanese Americans in WWII.
Click to expand...

Can you phrase any argument with out demonizing the people on the other side? And no, it’s not the same as the history you attempt to use. ISIS was bragging about infiltrating the refugees. What you mention was actually race based, this was location based. You can’t deny that. Give it up man, it such a weak ass argument to continually call me a racist. That’s all you got. You can’t even give an answer to my simple statements. Just racist this, bigot that. [emoji848]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
vector2 said:
Also, we haven't stopped noticing that you're unable to explain the 5 out of 6 things trump hasnt delivered on other than the bigoted Muslim ban
Click to expand...

I came on here and posted about the Nobel peace prize. Then you posted a false fact about the travel ban, so I corrected it. I have no desire to get into a huge debate with you over facts cause all you do is sling insults. Just correcting the record on your false statement.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Matty44 said:
Can you phrase any argument with out demonizing the people on the other side? And no, it’s not the same as the history you attempt to use. ISIS was bragging about infiltrating the refugees. You can’t deny that. Give it up man, it such a weak ass argument to continually call me a racist. That’s all you got. You can’t even give an answer to my simple statements. Just racist this, bigot that. [emoji848]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

ISIS was attempting to infiltrate refugees? Well holy smokes batman, I guess that means that my Libyan neurology resident colleagues shouldn't be allowed back in the country if they try to go home on vacation!

Yes dumb dumb, its exactly the same as what we did to Germans and Japanese Americans. Spies tried to infiltrate those communities as well, and in response we demonized (and incarcerated) tens of thousands of those groups.
 
Last edited:
vector2 said:
We get it, you hate Muslims but are ashamed to say so, so you couch it in "security" language. It's the cowards way out, and none of us deserve this faux sense of "security" if blanket bans are the price we pay. I know you're too ignorant to know US history but your logic was the very same we used to discriminate against German and Japanese Americans in WWII.


Also, we haven't stopped noticing that you're unable to explain the 5 out of 6 things trump hasnt delivered on other than the bigoted Muslim ban
Click to expand...
Just remember Matty is always correct-always. He never insults anyone ever, or so he says, despite calling folks silly, ignorant, or even questioning if they are a real doctor, because that is never insulting or condescending. It’s easier for all to accept him as a grand wizard and oracle of race relations —which reminds me if Richard Spencer is some kind of kin to him-we should ask?

Finally, he loves everyone and practices the most intrinsic form of agape to all men, except those he doesn’t trust, doesn’t like or if they are located too close to him....but finally, he holds the profound and gigantic trump card (double pun intended) of having an adopted African brother, so he is basically Mandela in that respect.
 
Matty44 said:
I came on here and posted about the Nobel peace prize. Then you posted a false fact about the travel ban, so I corrected it. I have no desire to get into a huge debate with you over facts cause all you do is sling insults. Just correcting the record on your false statement.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You have no desire because you're unable to explain that trump is a failure and a liar who is unable to deliver on campaign promises like the wall, mexico paying for it, bringing back coal jobs, us being the winner of the trade war, opioid deaths, and the middle class being the beneficiary of the tax cuts vs the rich and big corps.
 
vector2 said:
ISIS was attempting to infiltrate refugees? Well holy smokes batman, I guess that means that my Libyan neurology resident colleagues shouldn't be allowed back in the country if they try to go home on vacation!

Yes dumb dumb, its exactly the same ad what we did to Germans and Japanese Americans. Spies tried to infiltrate those communities as well, and in response we demonized (and incarcerated) tens of thousands of those groups.
Click to expand...

False.

“Still, students with visas who are re-entering the country to return to school should not encounter problems, said Kevin R. Johnson, dean of the School of Law at the University of California, Davis”





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Matty44 said:
False.

“Still, students with visas who are re-entering the country to return to school should not encounter problems, said Kevin R. Johnson, dean of the School of Law at the University of California, Davis”





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yes, after they toned down the bigotry during the court challenges of 2018. I was actually there when we weren't sure if people on my neuro CC service would be able to get back in the country when the executive order was first layed down
 
I'd like to point out that I discuss ISSUES and do NOT participate in hurling insults at my fellow posters. I may sling insults at the ruling class and media, but not my fellow posters. I don't have anger or hatred in my heart for those with different opinions (here or anywhere in my life). I don't accuse my fellow posters of vile things. I don't even like to engage in a back and forth that has the appearance of being a stalemate. I think that those reading my posts can see this and judge for themselves.

With that said, I will defend myself here:

The definition of a "boy" is "a young male typically under the age of 18 (or 21)."
Therefore, a young male HS student applying to college would be a "boy."
The definition of "poor" is "being of lower economic means."
Put those 2 words together and make the phrase: "poor boy" and it means a young male HS student of lower economic means. "Poor boy" was used in direct comparison to the phrase "upper middle class boy." It meant NOTHING racial. They were MY words and I think I know what I was talking about.

You falsely accused me of racism for using this phrase, and I apologized for any confusion or any insult taken by you or others from the phrase "poor boy." Then I made my point clearly and calmly. I never attacked you for your accusation. Like an adult, I made my point and moved on. It appears like you have not moved on.

I've seen you post many things in this thread that I do not agree with and, at times, I've seen you make (what appears to me as) false claims that others are behaving or speaking in a racist fashion. Up until now, I have not engaged with you. I haven't tried to bait you or argue with you, even when I disagreed with you. But I WILL NOT allow you to smear me again BY NAME for something that you have SO WRONGLY interpreted. I will not be bullied into silence by you or anyone. You don't agree with my opinions, fine. Speak to the issues. Attacking me or any other fellow poster is not winning over any hearts or minds. It's probably more of a detriment to your stance. But we ALL have freedom of speech here, and I intend to use it.
 
Leon'sMom said:
I'd like to point out that I discuss ISSUES and do NOT participate in hurling insults at my fellow posters. I may sling insults at the ruling class and media, but not my fellow posters. I don't have anger or hatred in my heart for those with different opinions (here or anywhere in my life). I don't accuse my fellow posters of vile things. I don't even like to engage in a back and forth that has the appearance of being a stalemate. I think that those reading my posts can see this and judge for themselves.

With that said, I will defend myself here:

The definition of a "boy" is "a young male typically under the age of 18 (or 21)."
Therefore, a young male HS student applying to college would be a "boy."
The definition of "poor" is "being of lower economic means."
Put those 2 words together and make the phrase: "poor boy" and it means a young male HS student of lower economic means. "Poor boy" was used in direct comparison to the phrase "upper middle class boy." It meant NOTHING racial. They were MY words and I think I know what I was talking about.

You falsely accused me of racism for using this phrase, and I apologized for any confusion or any insult taken by you or others from the phrase "poor boy." Then I made my point clearly and calmly. I never attacked you for your accusation. Like an adult, I made my point and moved on. It appears like you have not moved on.

I've seen you post many things in this thread that I do not agree with and, at times, I've seen you make (what appears to me as) false claims that others are behaving or speaking in a racist fashion. Up until now, I have not engaged with you. I haven't tried to bait you or argue with you, even when I disagreed with you. But I WILL NOT allow you to smear me again BY NAME for something that you have SO WRONGLY interpreted. I will not be bullied into silence by you or anyone. You don't agree with my opinions, fine. Speak to the issues. Attacking me or any other fellow poster is not winning over any hearts or minds. It's probably more of a detriment to your stance. But we ALL have freedom of speech here, and I intend to use it.
Click to expand...
Bring it then, and I will equally confront you on every contested topic and opportunity. And by the way, racism is always an interpretation of the receiving party.
 
Yeah, I call people silly when they respond to every topic by bringing up unrelated topics, and I call people ignorant when they don’t discuss facts but I don’t sling insults and claim racism repeatedly, things you would NEVER do to someone’s face. You guys are so filled with hate and anger towards anyone who doesn’t share your view it’s kind of getting disgusting. Leons mom and I were merely talking about the Nobel peace prize and you guys come in start spinning everything out of control again, slinging insults and accusing everyone of hatred toward Muslims and racist this and that, it’s sad.

I’ll gladly defend myself and correct lies when posted, but Im done with any other interactions with you two. It’s getting too offensive and tiresome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Matty44 said:
Yeah, I call people silly when they respond to every topic by bringing up unrelated topics, and I call people ignorant when they don’t discuss facts but I don’t sling insults and claim racism repeatedly, things you would NEVER do to someone’s face. You guys are so filled with hate and anger towards anyone who doesn’t share your view it’s kind of getting disgusting. Leons mom and I were merely talking about the Nobel peace prize and you guys come in start spinning everything out of control again, slinging insults and accusing everyone of hatred toward Muslims and racist this and that, it’s sad.

I’ll gladly defend myself and correct lies when posted, but Im done with any other interactions with you two. It’s getting too offensive and tiresome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Fantastic, mission accomplished, awards banquet next.
 
vector2 said:
Blanket banning muslims from particular countries instead of evaluating INDIVIDUALS on a case-by-case basis? Absolutely bigoted, and I'll say as much if the shoe fits.
Click to expand...

Good thing that he never did that, then.
 
Matty44 said:
Yeah, congrats on being a jerk repeatedly I guess???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Takes one to know one, and at least I’m honest and don’t pretend to be some open-minded, fair-minded, objective person, when in reality you condescend and offer a litany of dismissive pejoratives under the guise that comments are not well received or smart or correct, all under your auspices and definitive command.

Oh, and btw, this is no less than the third time that you said you are done with me and will no longer acknowledge or communicate, and in every situation in no fewer than 10 minutes, you write back....impulse control or am I just that much under your skin...wink.
 
BoolaHI said:
Takes one to know one, and at least I’m honest and don’t pretend to be some open-minded, fair-minded, objective person, when in reality you condescend and offer a litany of dismissive pejoratives under the guise that comments are not well received or smart or correct, all under your auspices and definitive command.

Oh, and btw, this is no less than the third time that you said you are done with me and will no longer acknowledge or communicate, and in every situation in no fewer than 10 minutes, you write back....impulse control or am I just that much under your skin...wink.
Click to expand...

Once again, you have trouble interpreting what’s actually been said. But hey, we can both agree that you are neither open-minded, fair-minded or objective. Feels good to finally share some truth together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Matty44 said:
Once again, you have trouble interpreting what’s actually been said. But hey, we can both agree that you are neither open-minded, fair-minded or objective. Feels good to finally share some truth together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
And I see again, you could not resist having the last word, but more importantly, you not conceding that you are biased, boorish and pedantic with your vantage, and that it is not subject to ever being wrong, is more than telling....
 
BoolaHI said:
And I see again, you could not resist having the last word, but more importantly, you not conceding that you are biased, boorish and pedantic with your vantage, and that it is not subject to ever being wrong, is more than telling....
Click to expand...

I think anyone who has read your nonsense racist-accusing-filled effete posts can see what’s so telling of our interactions. The left is incapable of separating emotion from logic, and is incapable of having a conversation without attacking the person, incapable of attacking ideas without slandering the one with the ideas.

Your recent post sums it all up so nicely. You claim racism is in the eye of the beholder, not in the actual actions of the alleged racist. And you, as someone who so clearly inserts race into every single aspect of society, every law, every word uttered by someone who disagrees with you, can never be objective.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Matty44 said:
I think anyone who has read your nonsense racist-accusing-filled effete posts can see what’s so telling of our interactions. The left is incapable of separating emotion from logic, and is incapable of having a conversation without attacking the person, incapable of attacking ideas without slandering the one with the ideas.

Your recent post sums it all up so nicely. You claim racism is in the eye of the beholder, not in the actual actions of the alleged racist. And you, as someone who so clearly inserts race into every single aspect of society, every law, every word uttered by someone who disagrees with you, can never be objective.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
The left, so the entire left (not a single person) is definitively incapable of separating emotion, wow, talk about a sweep generalization and stereotype—could you be more cliche and disingenuous?

So, tell me little man, how come you can’t keep to your own word of not responding to me, pray tell, you have a man crush on me—cmon it’s a new world and ok to admit....
 
radsisrad said:
The TDS-addled anti-Trumpers are so low-information that it's legitimately frightening that they have the right to vote.
Click to expand...
Hilarious when we know that the least educated, poorest, and most federally aided states are those that have the highest percentage of Trump voters....not to mention least healthy, least diverse, whitest and oldest and least insured.
 
BoolaHI said:
Hilarious when we know that the least educated, poorest, and most federally aided states are those that have the highest percentage of Trump voters....not to mention least healthy, least diverse, whitest and oldest and least insured.
Click to expand...

We get it, BoolaHI, you don't like white people. Enough.

Sheesh.
 
radsisrad said:
Good thing that he never did that, then.
Click to expand...

Uhhh that's absolutely what he did with the initial EO.

"
On January 27, 2017, President Donald Trump signed his first Muslim ban, immediately impacting thousands of people around the world. This executive order banned entry into the United States for 90 days of nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries (Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syrian, Sudan, and Yemen), banned the entry of all refugees for 120 days, and indefinitely banned the entry of all Syrian refugees.

www.nilc.org

One Year After the SCOTUS Ruling: Understanding the Muslim Ban and How We’ll Keep Fighting It

www.nilc.org www.nilc.org
"

It was only after everyone challenged it in court and Republicans were like "holy crap guys, this is too bigoted, even for us" that the court handed down the watered down version after the appeals.
 
BoolaHI said:
So, tell me little man, how come you can’t keep to your own word of not responding to me, pray tell, you have a man crush on me—cmon it’s a new world and ok to admit....
Click to expand...

Matty44 said:
I’LL GLADLY DEFEND MYSELF and correct lies when posted, but Im done with any other interactions with you two. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Ya know, I can keep pointing out how you don’t seem to understand words if you like, but it’d be easier for everyone if you just read stuff and understood it.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
vector2 said:
Uhhh that's absolutely what he did with the initial EO.

"
On January 27, 2017, President Donald Trump signed his first Muslim ban, immediately impacting thousands of people around the world. This executive order banned entry into the United States for 90 days of nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries (Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syrian, Sudan, and Yemen), banned the entry of all refugees for 120 days, and indefinitely banned the entry of all Syrian refugees.

www.nilc.org

One Year After the SCOTUS Ruling: Understanding the Muslim Ban and How We’ll Keep Fighting It

www.nilc.org www.nilc.org
"

It was only after everyone challenged it in court and Republicans were like "holy crap guys, this is too bigoted, even for us" that the court handed down the watered down version after the appeals.
Click to expand...

If he said “No Muslims allowed in the US! Period.” You would have a point. He didn’t. So you don’t. It’s not that hard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Matty44 said:
If he said “No Muslims allowed in the US! Period.” You would have a point. He didn’t. So you don’t. It’s not that hard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Your finagling in the attempt to say "it's not bigoted unless they have a pointy hat on" is sad and laughable. Dont pretend you dont understand the concept of dogwhistling.
 
vector2 said:
Your finagling in the attempt to say "it's not bigoted unless they have a pointy hat on" is sad and laughable
Click to expand...

Do you literally think there was no security threat with allowing a bunch of unvetted or poorly vetted refugees in from countries known to produce terrorists who want “death to America” and loudly proclaimed that they are infiltrating said refugees?

Like, if you don’t think there was any threat at all, it’s pointless to discuss.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Matty44 said:
Do you literally think there was no security threat with allowing a bunch of unvetted or poorly vetted refugees in from countries known to produce terrorists who want “death to America” and loudly proclaimed that they are infiltrating said refugees?

Like, if you don’t think there was any threat at all, it’s pointless to discuss.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Let me get back to seven year old language so you can comprehend.

Yes, there is a threat from elements within certain countries. Terrorist elements make up a very, very small percentage of the population of these countries. Banning immigrants from an entire Muslim majority country is a bigoted, blunt response to a problem that requires surgical precision. Individuals deserve the right to be evaluated on their own merits when trying to immigrate or obtain a Visa.

Furthermore, most of the 9/11 hijackers were of Saudi nationality. You are too stupid to realize that there is no Saudi ban because of the US's and Trump's personal financial interests. This alone is evidence enough that the ban is came from bigoted motivations.
 
vector2 said:
Blanket banning muslims from particular countries instead of evaluating INDIVIDUALS on a case-by-case basis? Absolutely bigoted, and I'll say as much if the shoe fits.
Click to expand...

vector2 said:
Uhhh that's absolutely what he did with the initial EO.

"
On January 27, 2017, President Donald Trump signed his first Muslim ban, immediately impacting thousands of people around the world. This executive order banned entry into the United States for 90 days of nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries (Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syrian, Sudan, and Yemen), banned the entry of all refugees for 120 days, and indefinitely banned the entry of all Syrian refugees.

www.nilc.org

One Year After the SCOTUS Ruling: Understanding the Muslim Ban and How We’ll Keep Fighting It

www.nilc.org www.nilc.org
"

It was only after everyone challenged it in court and Republicans were like "holy crap guys, this is too bigoted, even for us" that the court handed down the watered down version after the appeals.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that you wormed your way into anesthesiology residency, because that specialty demands a profound understanding of physiology. I'd have thought that basic reading comprehension would be a prerequisite to that. Oh well... maybe you had a connection in the residency department.

The ban didn't declare, "No Muslims allowed." It enacted policy that entry was banned to nationals from seven particular countries that had been identified as sponsors of /affiliated with so-called "terrorist" groups. Any Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Jew, atheist,or Odinist from those countries would have been banned, as well.

In review (to compensate for your egregious lack of reading comprehension): the ban didn't exclude Muslims. It excluded nationals of seven countries, regardless of their religion.

www.whitehouse.gov

Executive Order Protecting The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States | The White House

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act
www.whitehouse.gov www.whitehouse.gov
 
BoolaHI said:
How could that be when both my great grandmother and great great grandmother were raped by white men....
Click to expand...

If that indeed happened, we all sympathize, of course. Rape is a terrible act.

Now we know why you are racist toward white people. Thank you for opening up to us.
 
radsisrad said:
I'm surprised that you wormed your way into anesthesiology residency, because that specialty demands a profound understanding of physiology. I'd have thought that basic reading comprehension would be a prerequisite to that. Oh well... maybe you had a connection in the residency department.

The ban didn't declare, "No Muslims allowed." It enacted policy that entry was banned to nationals from seven particular countries that had been identified as sponsors of /affiliated with so-called "terrorist" groups. Any Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Jew, atheist,or Odinist from those countries would have been banned, as well.

www.whitehouse.gov

Executive Order Protecting The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States | The White House

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act
www.whitehouse.gov www.whitehouse.gov
Click to expand...

Are you really that stupid that you think "well shucks, the language didnt explicitly say NO MUSLIMS ALLOWED" therefore it's not bigoted"? Are you another one who pretends dogwhistling doesn't exist?

To make it perfectly clear in an analogy which even you might understand, during Jim Crow after blacks won the right to vote, many counties imposed a poll tax. There was no law that said "BLACKS CAN'T VOTE." It was just understood that the vast, vast majority of people who would be affected by the law happened to be black. Just like the vast, vast majority of people affected by the Muslim ban are Muslim.

Get it now, genius?
 
Last edited:
vector2 said:
Banning immigrants from an entire Muslim majority country is a bigoted, blunt response to a problem that requires surgical precision. Individuals deserve the right to be evaluated on their own merits when trying to immigrate or obtain a Visa.
Click to expand...

It’s funny, you seems so close to understanding, but for some reason are still so far.

Yes, it does require precision, and people DO deserve the right to be evaluated individually. Now here’s the tricky part, when you realize that you can’t do that, you shut it down til you can figure it out. If it means some people have to wait to avoid letting bad actors slip through the cracks, sorry. It’s not that complicated. And if you only took of you “Trump hates everyone who’s not white” glasses, maybe you would understand.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Matty44 said:
It’s funny, you seems so close to understanding, but for some reason are still so far.

Yes, it does require precision, and people DO deserve the right to be evaluated individually. Now here’s the tricky part, when you realize that you can’t do that, you shut it down til you can figure it out. If it means some people have to wait to avoid letting bad actors slip through the cracks, sorry. It’s not that complicated. And if you only took of you “Trump hates everyone who’s not white” glasses, maybe you would understand.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
It’s because you hold all keys to wisdom and are the final gatekeeper to all things erudite...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.