Wrath of Dagon

Yes, this is exactly the kind of false equivalence that has put a guy like Trump the White House. All Presidents, like all humans, have some negative characteristics. That doesn't mean that some negative characteristics aren't far far more "poisonous" than others to an individual's prospects for being an effective public servant. You're right, being a corporate tool and surrendering your own country beats everything. "That Obama guy reads his speeches too much. Let's elect a guy who doesn't like reading anything longer than the kid's menu at Denny's! No way that can go wrong, right?" I'd rather find out what the President really thinks even if it produces some trumpisms than listen to a bunch of lies that a speechwriter thought people would prefer to hear. People just need to stop freaking out. Edit: Speaking of past Presidents: http://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/02/20/the-real-division-in-american-life-isnt-about-trump/

Trump is always right in the end. That is why he's the god-emperor.

More relevant are the statistics on who's committing the crimes. Unfortunately Sweden hasn't updated those since 2001.

Those policemen are probably afraid of getting fired for breaking the omerta. Is Springare also a madman? http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/20/trump-may-have-been-unclear-but-sweden-experiencing-migrant-crime-wave.html

Yes, Gary Johnson is a towering example of an orator and a genius.

Carter was a fool, Reagan was often confused, George H.W. Bush had a tin ear, Clinton was one of the most skilled liars in history, George W. Bush couldn't put two words together, Obama read deliberate lies off a teleprompter, and Trump talks out his ass. Pick your poison.

I just meant it was the most recent one, and particularly blatant. Btw, Trump was talking about crime and terrorism in Europe, and was referring to a report about crime in Sweden he saw on Fox the night before. He never said anything about terrorist attack in Sweden, it was just assumed by the press. True that he tends to ramble a bit and confuses people.

Trump 4, Politilie 1 : http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/02/trump-4-politifact-1.php?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=sw&utm_campaign=sw Also heard an obvious, blatant lie on NPR today. Trump mostly misstates things out of ignorance, the press blatantly lies on purpose.

Law enforcement doesn't keep statistics on immigrant crime, Pew BS are guesses and biased guesses at that. Where there are spotty statistics they indicate illegals account for large percentage of crimes committed.

The part about illegal immigrants committing less crime is a lie. It's also interesting to note the left's hypocrisy here. They constantly claim illegal immigrants are honest and hard working. Yet they simultaneously claim under Trump's new policy to deport a broader range of criminals as many as 8 million of the supposedly 11 million illegals are eligible for deportation, which is a pretty huge percentage. So which is it then?

East End of London hated Bobby Peel's original police force. Most of the negative names for the police in english originate from there. Yes, I think there were some troubles with the Roman Empire too.

Trump has been in office for a month, Obama for 8 years. So we know exactly what Obama's policies have led to.

Northern Ireland is quite famous from having neighborhoods that aren't that police friendly. Here in Finland we have our Romani neighbors and our motorcycle gangs don't like police that much, especially in mid 90s when they were in war with each other and were able to access weapons like M72 LAWs their neighborhoods weren't places were police went gladly. EDIT: If we go little more back in Finland's history. In there was in 1800s group called Puukkojunkarit (knife-fighters) that terrorize big part of Western Finland. Not really equivalent, Northern Ireland obviously an insurgency problem, motorcycle gangs aren't a neighborhood, doubt romani are a whole neighborhood but again an example of an ethnic-cultural enclave, although a minor one. By telling lies and exploiting such incidents as Zimmerman and Ferguson, and supporting BLM. I don't ever remember such anti-police riots here before (there were in the sixties, but that was a different situation). "”Man riskerar att bli skjuten om man går dit, eller rånad, av kriminella element. Det är områden dit polisen knappt själva vågar gå och folk som är där är annorlunda.”" "You risk getting shot if you go there, or robbed, by criminals. It's areas where the police themselves hardly dare venture, and people there are different." What the middle and upper class said about some areas in Stockholm and Gothenburg in the 30's. Filled with "jews, gypsies, russians and such suspicious filth" I suppose if you go back far enough, again talking about an immigrant enclave. I don't know if they were factual, or motivated by racism.

Examples?

Don't think they're exactly no-go, but they're hostile to the police, and have become a lot more hostile thanks to Obama's demagoguery and lies. Europe didn't have them though until mass migration. So the causes are different but the result is the same, ethnic-cultural enclaves hostile to the society at large.

Is 'gorilla effect' a commonly used phrase? It doesn't even make sense, unless he was actually trying to show that he's a racist and should get fired. 'Guerrilla tactic' would have been better, as in rushing the net to set an ambush, as I said before. But he was probably just trying to be clever and stepped into it as a result. Nothing really wrong about saying 'sorry' in a situation like this either, you bump into someone you say 'sorry' even though it may be their fault, it's just polite.

Pruitt confirmed to head EPA, environmentalists throw themselves into windmills.

https://twitter.com/CuffyMeh/status/832243621646761984

He referred to her as a guerilla. He did apologize for using an unfortunate word, but it's not his fault the two words sound the same. If he had time to think it over, you could argue he did something wrong, but in live commentary he didn't have time. The point is it's ridiculous to destroy a man's career and reputation over one word.

Why would he be apologetic if he did nothing wrong? I'm not aware of anyone who called his reaction into question, just the use of that word in the first place. I don't think it has anything to do with his reaction, it has everything to do with cowards at ESPN projecting their own racism onto others.

Don't forget your smelling salts while you're pearl-clutching.

I don't consider Congress taking back their constitutional power a dumb solution. Apparently you believe in rule by an unelected elite (I'm sure they never get lobbied). Sure the agencies will try to game any system, but it may not be as easy as you imagine, and there are counter measures which can be taken. In any case it's better than doing nothing.

Actually no one has to give him the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise everyone can do anything they want so long as they say it wasn't intentional afterwards. No, most actions are clearly intentional, others could be intentional or negligence. There's no evidence so far of either here. Lol, if someone is offended, someone surely must pay. Don't know what the legal requirements are, but to have evidence of wrongdoing before imposing punishment is a basic precept of justice.

If he has no proof it was intentional, he has to give the accused the benefit of the doubt. You're exactly acting out the sentence I put in quotes earlier.

No, but a human being should care.