dyna mo

?I mean, look, we should not be encouraging illegal immigration,? Obama said. ?What we should be doing is setting up a smart, legal immigration system that doesn?t separate families, but does focus on making sure that people who are dangerous, people who are gang-bangers or criminals.

Read more: Obama Refers To Some Illegal Immigrants As 'Gang-Bangers' | The Daily Caller

brassmonkey

deport them all!! crime goes up in their areas.

__________________
TRUMP 2025 KEKAW!!! - Support The Laken Riley Act!!!
END DACA - SUPPORT AZ HCR 2060 52R - email: brassballz-at-techie.com

dyna mo

which clothing line will Macy's ban in reaction to this outrage? Which USA contest will be dropped?

TheSquealer

Black Jesus is never wrong.

__________________
.
Yes, fewer illegal immigrants working equates to more job opportunities for American citizens.

Rochard

dyna mo

and he can even call blacks hahahahahahas

epitome

I can't find the part where he said most are.

Some and most are not the same thing. Of course same are. So are some American citizens. There are bad people in all populations.

Trump said most are. That is 50.01% or more.

crockett

Man you guys are really reaching.. to blame Obama. Isn't it about time for another round of Benghazi or repelling Obama Care?

dyna mo

no, i get it, BO gets a free pass. you know, on account he just was referring to some gangbangers and well, Benghazi.

dyna mo

no I get it, Trump gets lambasted. you know, on account he only said some are good people and well, Benghazi.

crockett

No you don't get it...

He then followed it up with.. Something like "and some are ok people".

Meaning he is saying Mexico is purposely sending criminals to the U.S. on purpose. He was also implying most were not decent people whom were trying to better their lives, but rather that most were going to be rapist, murders ect..ect..


Meanwhile Obama said "some" are gangbangers...


Two completely different quotes from opposite ends of the spectrums, but of course you can't see the diffrence because Obama...


It would be like me saying most Christians are child molesters because a few priests are guilty but of course there are a few ok one....Vs saying some Christians are child molesters..

dyna mo

you got me crockett, i don't get you.

nevertheless, i fully get the BO gets a free pass from the media, and you, like a few others here, rely on the media to tell you what's important. if it's not important to the media, it's not going to ring a bell with you.

and i certainly do not get that. touche.

MK Ultra

I guess that's that Crockett Science I've been hearing so much about, I tried to find more info on it but could only find this video.

__________________

dyna mo

When Trump brings in his own people for his campaign he gets lambasted across the media. When Hillary does it, it's a below the fold story.


oops, wait, n/m, Benghazi.

dyna mo

bronco67

Holy shit!!!!You cracked the case. Brilliant job!!!

__________________

dyna mo

the case of the media bias? it's that complicated to you huh. bless your heart.

crockett

Of course you don't get it...

Obama! Obama! Obama!

dyna mo

here's what i do get: i think neither guy chose the right words. the simple fact is that i thought BO was inarticulate saying hahahahahaha in that radio interview. just like i believe Trump was. i got the point behind BO's saying hahahahahaha just like i got the point behind Trump's saying rapist. but that's because i hold both to the same standard, unlike crockett which has 2 standards.

I also get that you can't get that i'm pointing out in this thread that people like you don't get any of that.

crockett

It's clear you don't really care what anyone says, you have your lil preconceived idea that Obama gets free pass despite they both said very diffrent things and meant very diffrent things.

Your preconceived ideas keep you from viewing this from a reasonable view point. as such all you can do is complain about double standards, because you think it's unfair, rather than looking with your own eyes and brain to see what was said and what was meant..

So this just becomes yet another Obama! Obama Obama! Thread..

dyna mo

I just stated I understand the context of both messages.

You just wax right over that and claim I have preconceived idea. Jtfc.

Bladewire

I didn't see a mention of that regarding either of them in the media. All politicians do this though, it frames them well to the viewing audience, be stupid not to have your crew there supportibg you, paid or not.

dyna mo

I'm with you, I couldn't care less and had figured of course they all do this. However, when trump did it, the liberal blogosphere, and more than a few gfyers, raked him over the coals for it. There was a thread or two.

Bladewire

I'm pretty sure the average liberal is to happy with things to really care too much. Talking heads are paid to maintain friction, a lot of the extreme political bloggers are attention whores trying to be seen.

I'm an average person and I like spunky Trump, but I'm not on the rooftops letting the world kknow, same with gay marriage.

__________________

dyna mo

research suggests liberals are unhappy.

https://www.google.com/search?q=libe...erals++unhappy

JuicyBunny

Trump was laughing about his tie collection being pulled. "Not much money"
Have you seen his ties? Kinda nice actuall.y

crockett

If you understood the context of both posts, then why the need to start this topic? If you understood the diffrence you wouldn't of started a topic complaining that Obama didn't get lambasted by the media..

The simple fact is many Republicans do and say shit that is fucking crazy or stupid, by the average person's standards. The media then treats them like they are crazy or stupid. trump is no diffrent, he constantly comes off like an egomaniac asshole, so that's how the media presents him..

If he acted like a real businessman and was polite and respectful, then that's the way the media would present him..

TCLGirls

kane

Yep, what Obama said is the same thing as, "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."

dyna mo

i started this fucking topic because
1. i fucking wanted to and
b) because i can see the fucking parallels between the two.

and I didn't ask you to agree with me. i'm not here needing crockett to have the same fucking views as me. i'm not trying to convince you of my view. i am sharing my fucking view for the reasons i just listed.

the fucking question you should ask yourself is why the fuck are you so defensive and apologetic about BO that you felt the need to reply to a dyna mo news story thread about BO calling immigrants gang-bangers? as if calling a criminal a gang-banger better defines the criminal under the law. heads-up, it doesn't. there is no criminal category of gang-bangers.

and heads-up crockett, i'm not asking you that question, i'm telling you to ask yourself that fucking question.

dyna mo

my previous posts applies to all jackasses, including you knae.

crockett

You started this post, because there has been a lacking of Obama bashings lately, since Vendzilla had to give up his nonsense inorder to trick little old ladies into giving him their money..

You wanted some addaboys from your fellow conseribros so you started a topic to show us how Obama didn't get in trouble but Trump did.. Meanwhile it's two completely different contexts which you want to treat as the same to get your conseribro addaboys and high fives..

kane

If you didn't want or need people to agree with you and you really didn't care what other people thought you wouldn't have started the thread.

You either need attention and approval or you are seeking a disagreement so you can convince others of your view.

dyna mo

sure thing kane, communication amongst people and sharing personal viewpoints is a psychopathic urge.

fucking idiot.

kane

If you really didn't care what people thought or you weren't trying to change their minds why would you bother creating the thread? But lets assume you just wanted to create the thread to make your view known. Still, you fail and convincing anyone that you don't care what other people think because you have 15 replies in your own thread defending your position.

dyna mo

only at gfy can a fuckwad like kane make posting a newsstory a psychological profile

jesus titty fucking christ. and that's the guy that fucking writes 500 words diatribes at gfy on shit.

fucking right.

dyna mo

it's gfy you dumbfuck. you're the one taking it seriously, and btw, projecting that shit on me.

dyna mo

you think i come here for attaboys? keep proving you can't pay attention.

attaboys..

kane

Someone needs a hug.

dyna mo

the pussification of gfy. hugs because i point out how fucking ridiculous your across the interwebs gfy psych analysis is.

dyna mo

next time, simply state your view without the insecure need to sarcastically denigrate someone else's view in an attempt to advance your's. then you won't have to embarrass yourself with your feminine needs to psych profile others because you disagree, then cover that up by claiming someone needs attention because they start a fucking topic.

mineistaken

kane

I did... you then called me a jackass.

dyna mo

Kane, you and i go back a long time hanging out on boards, so i'm going to go back to respecting you, like I always have, for what........ 16 years now. I apologize for replying like i did to your reaction re: my view.

i'll add that your retort did catch me off guard for 2 reasons, 1) because you have no reason to be snarky towards me and b) you usually take political threads seriously, and if you take a look at how i structured the OP, you will realize this was a serious gfy thread.

so i was also surprised by your derisiveness.

kane

I guess I read the thread as being a "See, Obama says the exact same thing as Trump and gets a pass it's not fair" thread. I thought I would point out that, to me, they are two very different statements. Of course, I may have misinterpreted the whole point.

That seemed to piss you off, so I thought I would poke you with a stick

It's all good. It is GFY after all. I know we don't always agree politically, but that doesn't mean I don't respect you and respect the fact that you have a point of view and are willing to defend it.

Sly

You guys should hug. This is America day. Save your energy for bashing Russia!

__________________
Vacares - Web Hosting, Domains, O365, Security & More - Paxum and BTC Accepted

Windows VPS now available.

Wanted: CCBill pay sites for sale

dyna mo

often times at teh gfy adding in a fuck here and there and such stimulates the dialogue, not to be confused with pissed off. like you said, it's gfy after all.

so back to the op, sure they are 2 different statements. i get that. that's not my point. my point is it's all about choice of verbiage. as i mentioned previously, i feel that both men did not articulate their view properly. the word "gang-banger" doesn't help illustrate the issue BO was trying to advance, which was better border security. Just like Trump's exclaiming "rapists...and i assume some are good people" distracts from his wanting a wall.

different statements, similar poor choice of how to state the statement. I expect more from my President, the one i voted for and I expect more from a Presidential candidate.

dyna mo

got coors light and fireworks ready to go! the good shit too, not just snakes and sparklers.

SuckOnThis

Vendzilla

Why do Morons keep mentioning me when I have them on ignore, am I that important to their lives?

__________________
Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants
think about that