BruceVC

Well I am surprised 2133....pleasantly surprised. You somehow found a way to not attack and undermine the EU..even if its a small positive step forward And you right its not a authoritarian regime

If I may opine on this point. Barack Obama has called people very much like me bitter, small minded, he says I cling to guns and religion because I'm afraid of people who don't look like me. He has insulted my religion when he spoke at Georgetown last year. He has insulted an organization I belong to, the VFW. He said people like me were incapable of thinking for ourselves. He has openly insulted my patriotisim and believes I am a likely terrorist because of my military service. GD I also find many of these accusations against Obama hard to believe, can you produce any links? I just prefer to read these types of charges in my own time?

Guys I dont think you trying to understand my point, please try to not look at this from your own view which is biased as you guys are convinced free speech means in a civil society that anything should be allowed to be said ...as long as its just words its okay @ Meshugger Please clarify your post as I have never suggested anything like that Freedom is impossible with forced diversity? No I live in a free country where we dont force diversity ....we acknowledge our diversity but we all are part of rebuilding the new SA misery is propegated by an elite class :Not really, I dont have issues with people who are wealthy. As long as they are ostentatious and think they better than everyone else....so what elite class do you mean? keeps the groups by your own design from hating and killing each other through superior acts of violence: No thats not the SA reality...black people dont want to kill white people at all? In fact we have been treated very well considering the attrocities of Apartheid. The racism I am talking about is from a small, 7 %, of the white people ....and nothing actually happens to them except for most black people getting upset @ Ganrich Yes I understand the argument about creep and suddenly there is real censorship ....but that doesnt have to happen. We only attempt to ban racist comments....thats all Let me ask you something and be honest. Trump has ignited in some parts of the USA real anger and violence through his words ...in fact even if you not angry with him this has got to be the most unexpected and interesting but also divisive election the USA has ever seen Do you really think this was necessary? Do you really think the USA needed this type of negative political outcomes? And if you do please tell me what the benefit it from Trump and his words ?

I have started watching this season and its good but the creation of the Others seemed like an anti-climax? So it was the children who created them to defeat humans? But why did they go against the children and who is the leader of Others?

So because they are angry with Trump it's perfectly understandable that they should trash the property of and beat the hell out of people who are not Donald Trump? Way to go, become the monsters Trump accuses them of being. They are doing more to help him than hurt him. Funny enough I can provide an answer to this point, I have seen this through the years in SA ( not white getting beaten up ). You are right though, destroying property and beating up some Trump supporters is wrong But this type of violence is more of an emotional human reaction to people feeling marginalized by a system or laws, the people who feel they are being hard treated cannot necessarily change the system so they burn or destroy property as a form of protest You think you have unreasonable protesters, we deal with this every few months in SA but it is getting less https://crusaderjournal.com/2016/05/06/19-schools-burnt-to-the-ground-in-south-africa/ Freedom of expression for some, jails for others. Hear me out for a second on this one, why are racist comments considered free speech? So what I mean is why do we classify hurtful and offensive comments as acceptable, this should be changed as it abuses what free speech is suppose to be

Do you have any sources that countries have done such thing as official declaration, and not just some politician speaking poppy****. Like for example there are Russian politician that tell every year how Russia will reclaim Finland, but that is quite far from Russia itself threatening to reclaim Finland. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0W50PN The Gibraltar one seems to be a few speculatory statement by the Spanish foreign minister taken as fact by several publications Good link but its just rhetoric, why would the UK allow that? If they do leave the EU the UK in fact would be more forceful and committed to stopping illegal immigrants. The UK is a small country and it could manage entry points effectively It isn't rhetorical threat, but quite real thing that France can do if they want. It is what Russia did for Finland from December to February, they just let immigrant pass their border control and then these immigrant seek asylum from UK and because of what was agreed on 1951 Refugee Convention UK has to take them in and process their petition for asylum. Of course UK can denounce it but such action probably would cause them quite lot problems in UN. You right about how I used the word rhetoric, I should have said " its rhetorical in the sense it wont impact the UK like France is suggesting " Not that France would do this but lets say France carried through with that threat and disbanded all the refugee camps near the English Channel and stopped policing there side and said to all the immigrants " there is UK we wont stop you " all that will mean is the UK will be finally able to implement proper border control.....there will be less refugees in the UK as the UK allows a certain percentage of refugees into the UK only because they have to due to there EU responsibility Currently UK can't say no for refugees that cross their border and seek asylum. It is what UK has agreed on when they signed UN's articles about refugee rights. Meaning that if France don't stop people that seek to go in UK to get asylum then UK don't actually can do anything else than take them process if they actually fulfill requirements to be refugee and if not sent them back to their home country if some other country don't take them. This scenario of course assumes that UK don't break their international agreements. You make some good points, all I'm saying is just because France fails to maintain its borders that will not suddenly mean thousands of refugees will overwhelm the UK and expect to be integrated

Yes he does and he did in the beginning The rise of Trump is actually a fascinating window into the depths of populism and how you can achieve a real political movement in a place like the US by following a certain strategy Personally I could never do or be part of that approach to politics but it worked for Trump but at the expense of alienating or offending most demographics except for who it was aimed at... disenfranchised white males But the decisions and comments he made I found almost incomprehensible, for example In the beginning he refused to apologize or admit he was wrong about anything....so its like " admitting a person is wrong makes you weak " Suddenly " being PC " is a big no no. Now I understand on the Internet and forums like this some people dont like this concept of being PC all the time. But in RL being PC is normal and expected and achieves the best results when debating or making certain points. Its not hard to be PC and is just really a form of diplomacy. But for some of Trumps supporters they loved the way Trump " refused to be PC and spoke the truth " ....except there is no logical corollary between not being PC and the truth being spoken. So for example I can insult people and not be PC but its still hyperbole or I'm biased

Do you have any sources that countries have done such thing as official declaration, and not just some politician speaking poppy****. Like for example there are Russian politician that tell every year how Russia will reclaim Finland, but that is quite far from Russia itself threatening to reclaim Finland. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0W50PN The Gibraltar one seems to be a few speculatory statement by the Spanish foreign minister taken as fact by several publications Good link but its just rhetoric, why would the UK allow that? If they do leave the EU the UK in fact would be more forceful and committed to stopping illegal immigrants. The UK is a small country and it could manage entry points effectively It isn't rhetorical threat, but quite real thing that France can do if they want. It is what Russia did for Finland from December to February, they just let immigrant pass their border control and then these immigrant seek asylum from UK and because of what was agreed on 1951 Refugee Convention UK has to take them in and process their petition for asylum. Of course UK can denounce it but such action probably would cause them quite lot problems in UN. You right about how I used the word rhetoric, I should have said " its rhetorical in the sense it wont impact the UK like France is suggesting " Not that France would do this but lets say France carried through with that threat and disbanded all the refugee camps near the English Channel and stopped policing there side and said to all the immigrants " there is UK we wont stop you " all that will mean is the UK will be finally able to implement proper border control.....there will be less refugees in the UK as the UK allows a certain percentage of refugees into the UK only because they have to due to there EU responsibility

Muslims don't have the capacity for self criticism. Have you ever seen a Muslim country ever recognize their atrocities? Several white christian countries have apologized for slavery, despite being the ones to end it at great expense of lives and money, and having like 600 fewer years involved in it and with far better conditions than slaves in the muslim world. Yes I agree In fact one of my greatest points of vexation is the general lack of condemnation I hear from the South African Muslim community about any atrocities committed from the Islamic extremists Even tonight on one of the talk shows I listen to one of the regular Muslims callers phones in, his name is AB, and he always says the same thing " its not that I dont like the people in Europe ....its just the white people I dont like " and then he will always ignore things like ISIS or Al-Basser from Sudan and bring up " what Bush and Blair did "

Do you have any sources that countries have done such thing as official declaration, and not just some politician speaking poppy****. Like for example there are Russian politician that tell every year how Russia will reclaim Finland, but that is quite far from Russia itself threatening to reclaim Finland. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0W50PN The Gibraltar one seems to be a few speculatory statement by the Spanish foreign minister taken as fact by several publications Good link but its just rhetoric, why would the UK allow that? If they do leave the EU the UK in fact would be more forceful and committed to stopping illegal immigrants. The UK is a small country and it could manage entry points effectively

Happy to help: http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/02/politics/donald-trump-california-protesters/ Thanks for the link, I think burning a flag of a country that you live in especially a democracy like the USA is deplorable If I had control of laws that person would immediately face a tribunal where there intent would be questioned ....and if the response is something like " I burnt the US flag because of what Trump said " that person could be immediately deported because of there stupidity ( imagine having to explain Trump doesnt represent the USA but is merely a politician and burning of the flag is an attack on the entire country ) Its like my views on how to deal with some of the racist comments from a small group of white South Africans ....tribunals and then incarceration for a 2-3 years. Remove them from society, people will quickly learn what is responsible behavior http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/16/donald-trump-mexico-presidential-speech-latino-hispanic Yes he did There used to be a time when the use of generalizations was intended to speed up discussion because most people understand when you say "mexico is sending their rapists and drug dealers" you don't mean every mexican is a rapist and drug dealer. Because its quicker than saying "a great number of illegal mexican immigrants are at a higher rate than American citizens engaging in criminal activities such as drug dealing and rape". Mexico actually releases instruction booklets on how to better your chances of illegal immigration to the US. So while he may have just said mexico is sending them as rhetoric, but its actually true. So really when you have a crime ridden impoverished nation supporting their poor and criminal to leave the country for its rich neighbour illegally , how is a wall out of the question? I appreciate the fact you have made this post, now I understand your view Trump knew exactly what he was saying and why he was saying it Almost everything controversial he has ever said is calculated and is not really about the words but who they resonate with But in the USA there are millions of Latinos who are legal citizens and contribute meaningfully towards a better USA, yes we know about the Latino gangs but they must be the minority Why should hardworking citizens of the USA who happen to be Latino be subjected to that type of verbal abuse ? I would be equally annoyed with Trump....

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/16/donald-trump-mexico-presidential-speech-latino-hispanic Yes he did

Surly this highly irresponsible behavior wouldnt be a reason for people to suddenly vote Trump? I would imagine people who burn the US flag would be in the minority? It doesn't matter Bruce. People largely don't put a lot of effort into researching who to vote for. They just watch the news and see the people opposed to Trump burning American flags, waving Mexican ones, beating up Trump supporters, and hearing "Make America Great Again" "Deport illegals stealing jobs from Americans" "Make the people who benefit from our military either meet their obligations or pay for our protection" and think Trump is the sane one. I have read that link several times and I cant find where they burnt the US flag, they burned a " Trump Make America Great " which I can understand especially if I was Latino ? Where did they burn the US flag? But does this violence surprise you ? I'm use to this type of social unrest....Trump must play a huge part in this type of resistance to him as he started the diatribe with his highly offensive comments It must be hard living in society where people's mental capacity ranges from those of children to those simply lacking any understanding in civil discourse. I dont support the violence but you can understand why many people are angry with Trump Trump made a conscious decision to attack the Latino community because he knew it would appeal to some of his supporters and get him media attention but did he just think people would smile and happily accept being told " you guys are basically rapists and drug dealers "

Oby once again you are misunderstanding one of the core principles of what most Western countries stand for Germany is not betraying Turkey, Germany is being consistent as Turkey did commit genocide agaisnt the Armenians .....Turkey needs to accept responsibility for its past Its strange how Turkey refuses to accept this

No thats not accurate If the UK leaves it will definitely survive....no one is seriously suggesting this will actually cause the collapse of either the UK or EU But that's not the economic risk that has been raised but much of what I can list is hypothetical but it could happen

I told Triss I love her .....I do, she is cool But I told Yen the same and ended the Djinn curse and still said " I love you " ....but I dont know if I do love Yen, she is hot but more emotionally detached than Triss I also was faced with yet another one of those moral choices that always make me ponder the right choice For me I RP Geralt a certain way and that helps me decide certain things ...so I let the Witcher from the School of the Cat live even though he massaced the village because I felt he had been attacked first and Witchers are a very rare breed so I normally want them to survive ...I wont commit genocide against my own unless I have no choice

Surly this highly irresponsible behavior wouldnt be a reason for people to suddenly vote Trump? I would imagine people who burn the US flag would be in the minority? It doesn't matter Bruce. People largely don't put a lot of effort into researching who to vote for. They just watch the news and see the people opposed to Trump burning American flags, waving Mexican ones, beating up Trump supporters, and hearing "Make America Great Again" "Deport illegals stealing jobs from Americans" "Make the people who benefit from our military either meet their obligations or pay for our protection" and think Trump is the sane one. I have read that link several times and I cant find where they burnt the US flag, they burned a " Trump Make America Great " which I can understand especially if I was Latino ? Where did they burn the US flag? But does this violence surprise you ? I'm use to this type of social unrest....Trump must play a huge part in this type of resistance to him as he started the diatribe with his highly offensive comments

Please can we keep this type of thing in context I appreciate your input on matters but what Volo said is hyperbole and completely lacking in the actual facts The EU troika and EU leaders dont want the UK to leave because the EU is stronger with the UK being part of it ....this is obvious Merkal and other EU leaders have already made concessions to Cameron for logical and strategic reasons ...Cameron wouldn't have supported EU:In without them But there are other things the EU cant or wont comprise on and these reasons could still cause the UK to leave ... But the suggestion that the EU " wants to destroy the UK " is preposterous

I'm confused by this criticism? Dont both Trump and Clinton deserve to be respective nominees because they had the most delegates? Now lets say somehow Trump wins, at the end of his 4 years when it becomes apparent he wasn't able to deliver most of what he claimed he would do the Republican political machinery should go back to the old structures ....in other words looking at the establishment for guidance. I have always felt this would be a better way to manage the Republican party?

Shady what would you like to change in the US if you could wave a wand and it would happen....but you cant be unreasonable like saying " everyone becomes a millionaire "

Isn't this an infringement of the US free speech?

Only for the cycle to return the next election. At this point a strong(over 10% of the national vote) showing for a candidate would just lead to blaming said candidate for spoiling it for whichever Big 2 candidate lost. Johnson will be no different, Republicans will blame him for Trump losing and next election the Libertarian candidate won't break single digits in the hypothetical situation where he grabs more than %10 of the vote. It's enough show a pattern. We've had the Big2 parties dominate presidential and congressional politics for over a century. It's not going anywhere and the choice between one Goldman Sachs employee and another isn't much of a choice. This seems like such a pessimistic view of the future. We live in a different time. Most of these 3rd party candidates that challenged in the past didn't have the tools available to candidates today. Social media and the constant news cycle have changed a heck of a lot of things in the last decade, why can't they change the two party system? Just upping the voter turnout could cause a major shift in the political climate. Both Bernie and Trump are examples of this. They've defied polls and done unprecedented things all campaign long. Why can't something as surprising happen in the general election? I am generally surprised about the degree of pessimism that I sometimes see from people on forums like this and who generally live in first world countries. Its good to question things in life but surly populism isn't a reason to follow someone in politics? If you could change any 3 things in the USA, this could be legal laws or some political development what would they be? In other words what will make more Americans happier?

I am not familiar with the history of how most of the US presidents got elected before 1990 or so.....how did Nixon get elected?

This must be one of the most inaccurate posts you have ever made? You trolling I assume Lets keep it simple....is there one thing in this post that is true?

Surly this highly irresponsible behavior wouldnt be a reason for people to suddenly vote Trump? I would imagine people who burn the US flag would be in the minority?