Comrade Trump Jr. compares Syrian Refugees to Skittles

[easyt65]

The US has invaded Syria in order to allow Israel to retain the Golan Heights

The US has invaded and ILLEGALLY gone to war in Syria, as it did in Libya, because Barry is OBSESSED with rectifying the disastrous error he made by declaring his horrific 'Red Line' then backing down in front of the whole world when Assad called his bluff and being laughed at after he tried to blame the entire WORLD for his F* Up!

 

[rdean]

Taste the rainbow? I suppose that could be a crass slogan for welcoming refugees but why do that?

Trump has no respect for people not him. It's like Romney's wife with "you people" and Romney with the 47%.
As far as Clinton talking about Trump's half, we all know she meant the Alt Right, Aryan Nation, KKK half.

Besides, we knew what the real message was:

 

[rightwinger]

There is a chance that everything I eat may be poison. Does that mean I should stop eating?

Nice dodge...let's try it again....

You are given a bowl of skittle and told not that some MAY be poisonous but that some ARE poisonous....do you still grab a handful and eat them.

AGAIN, if you are honest you would say 'NO'!

I face the same choice in everything I eat. Every day I read some horror story about the dangers of the food I eat..... Salmonella, e coli , excess sugar and fat, artificial ingredients......

Yet, I still eat

So YES, I would let all the Skittles into the country while realizing some may be "bad skittles"

 

[Dr.Traveler]

There is a chance that everything I eat may be poison. Does that mean I should stop eating?

Nice dodge...let's try it again....

You are given a bowl of skittle and told not that some MAY be poisonous but that some ARE poisonous....do you still grab a handful and eat them.

AGAIN, if you are honest you would say 'NO'!

Analogies are useful, but have a limit. Rephrase the question:

You have a building on fire. One of the people who want out of the building is likely the person that set the fire. Do you keep everyone in the building for the safety of those outside, or you do you let them out of the building?

If your answer is anything other than let them out, then you are quite frankly a monster. We can debate where they go, we can debate screening, monitoring, etc, but debating whether you trap them in the burning building or not? That's monstrous.

I absolutely do not support the position we should stop taking in refugees. You want to screen them? Fine. You want to monitor them? Fine. But not let them in? No.

 

[easyt65]

[No...I said "Drunks and Hoodlums"

That was a popular characterization of the day and was used to discriminate against the Irish. Yet, we allowed millions into the country even though some may be "bad skittles"

Thanks for correcting me on your bigoted statement. Yes, we allowed the Irish in...partly because they DIDN'T want to overthrow the US and slaughter Americans.

 

[rightwinger]

[No...I said "Drunks and Hoodlums"

That was a popular characterization of the day and was used to discriminate against the Irish. Yet, we allowed millions into the country even though some may be "bad skittles"

Thanks for correcting me on your bigoted statement. Yes, we allowed the Irish in...partly because they DIDN'T want to overthrow the US and slaughter Americans.

But they did slaughter Americans (IRA were known terrorists). So did the Italian mobsters....at a much higher rate than we lose to terrorism

 

[jillian]

Skittles Issues Terse Response to Trump Jr. Refugee Tweet

Just another spoiled rich kid. I am sure dad is very proud of Comrade Junior for such a sick analogy,,,

apparently the company that makes skittles told him to stop comparing candy to human beings.

although that type of thing does harken back to white supremacist memes.

there's a shock.

 

[easyt65]

I face the same choice in everything I eat.

Bullshit...and bogus dodge. You are NOT told every day that some of what you are about to eat IS poisoned and some is not!

You just don't want to admit what Jr said was a great analogy. Like most rabidly partisan Libs, your ego and your partisanship won't ALLOW you to admit it.

'Nuff said...keep wallowing in your denial and distractions while making bigoted statements.

 

[easyt65]

[No...I said "Drunks and Hoodlums"

That was a popular characterization of the day and was used to discriminate against the Irish. Yet, we allowed millions into the country even though some may be "bad skittles"

Thanks for correcting me on your bigoted statement. Yes, we allowed the Irish in...partly because they DIDN'T want to overthrow the US and slaughter Americans.

But they did slaughter Americans. So did the Italian mobsters....at a much higher rate then we lose to terrorism

No sect of the Irish openly declared they wanted the destruction of the US government, wanted to murder as many Americans as they could like the terrorists we face today have.

just keep lying, denying, and Justifying.....that's what bigoted Liberals do best.

 

[Meathead]

But they did slaughter Americans. So did the Italian mobsters....at a much higher rate than we lose to terrorism

As Capone said, "We only kill each other".

With Muslims that would not be much of a problem.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

[No...I said "Drunks and Hoodlums"

That was a popular characterization of the day and was used to discriminate against the Irish. Yet, we allowed millions into the country even though some may be "bad skittles"

Thanks for correcting me on your bigoted statement. Yes, we allowed the Irish in...partly because they DIDN'T want to overthrow the US and slaughter Americans.

You really think we are that easy to overthrow?

As for slaughter, from 1995 to 2014, 3503 Americans died from terrorism world wide. In 2014 alone 32,614 people died in a vehicle accident. Let's put this in perspective here. If you're that scared of terrorism, I question if you're going to be able to go outside when you look and see what people really die from.

These moments of fear are when we find out what we as a people are made of. Stopping refugees from entering means you are literally no better than anyone else. Not exceptional, not great, and really good. Just average. Looking after your own survival first is what the average do. The exceptional always look to the survival of others. Are we exceptional? Are we great? Or are we just average?

 

[easyt65]

There is a chance that everything I eat may be poison. Does that mean I should stop eating?

Nice dodge...let's try it again....

You are given a bowl of skittle and told not that some MAY be poisonous but that some ARE poisonous....do you still grab a handful and eat them.

AGAIN, if you are honest you would say 'NO'!

Analogies are useful, but have a limit. Rephrase the question:

You have a building on fire. One of the people who want out of the building is likely the person that set the fire. Do you keep everyone in the building for the safety of those outside, or you do you let them out of the building?

If your answer is anything other than let them out, then you are quite frankly a monster. We can debate where they go, we can debate screening, monitoring, etc, but debating whether you trap them in the burning building or not? That's monstrous.

I absolutely do not support the position we should stop taking in refugees. You want to screen them? Fine. You want to monitor them? Fine. But not let them in? No.

The UN has proven that it costs 12 times LESS to house and care for these refugees near their own country than it costs to bring them here.

If you have the option to house and care for these people somewhere else ... and without potentially jeopardizing our national security or ANY American lives...for 12 times LESS American tax payer dollars, WHY WOULDN'T YOU?

Considering this, what is Obama & Hillary's REAL reason for wanting to bring so many UN-VETTED Syrians HERE?

Is he STUPID or does he have some plan?

Which is it?

 

[rightwinger]

I face the same choice in everything I eat.

Bullshit...and bogus dodge. You are NOT told every day that some of what you are about to eat IS poisoned and some is not!

You just don't want to admit what Jr said was a great analogy. Like most rabidly partisan Libs, your ego and your partisanship won't ALLOW you to admit it.

'Nuff said...keep wallowing in your denial and distractions while making bigoted statements.

There is danger in everything we do..

Eating, driving a car, crossing the street, going out after dark....yet we still do it
We ignore the potential "bad skittles" and go on with our lives

 

[easyt65]

There is danger in everything we do..

AGAIN, dodging the specific question asked....Just drop it, you're embarrassing yourself.

 

[easyt65]

State admits: ISIS terrorists trying to pose as refugees

 

[rightwinger]

But they did slaughter Americans. So did the Italian mobsters....at a much higher rate than we lose to terrorism

As Capone said, "We only kill each other".

With Muslims that would not be much of a problem.

I grew up in the 60s and 70s

When someone talked "terrorism" you thought of the IRA randomly bombing
You heard daily reports of Mafia killings and gang wars

These were our "terrorists". Yet we did not talk about banning Irish or Italian immigration. There was no talk about turning down an entire bowl of skittles because one or two may be bad

 

[rightwinger]

There is danger in everything we do..

AGAIN, dodging the specific question asked....Just drop it, you're embarrassing yourself.

You just don't get it

Life itself involves risk. I am 300 times more likely to be killed in an auto accident than by a terrorist.Yet, I still drive
I am 100 times more likely to be killed by an American with a gun than a Muslim terrorist. Yet, I still go about my life

Life is indeed a bowl of skittles. One or two may kill you...but you still go on

 

[easyt65]

You just don't get it.

NO, you are AVOIDING 'it'.

No one tells you when you wake up in the morning, 'Here are 3 pairs of socks to wear today - 1 of them will kill you. Now pick'.

THAT is the analogy Jr offered, and that is the question I am asking you. It's a pretty simple damn 'Yes' or 'No' question....that you REFUSE to answer because you KNOW - we ALL do - your answer is 'NO'!

One last time, man up - 'You are given a bowl of skittles and told there are several in the bowl that WILL kill you. Do you grab a handful at this point and eat them?'

At this point, my guess is you will either refuse to answer the question again or lie and say 'yes' yo save face.

If I were you, I would just drop it, as I said, because you are just embarrassing yourself.

 

[rightwinger]

You just don't get it.

NO, you are AVOIDING 'it'.

No one tells you when you wake up in the morning, 'Here are 3 pairs of socks to wear today - 1 of them will kill you. Now pick'.

THAT is the analogy Jr offered, and that is the question I am asking you. It's a pretty simple damn 'Yes' or 'No' question....that you REFUSE to answer because you KNOW - we ALL do - your answer is 'NO'!

One last time, man up - 'You are given a bowl of skittles and told there are several in the bowl that WILL kill you. Do you grab a handful at this point and eat them?'

At this point, my guess is you will either refuse to answer the question again or lie and say 'yes' yo save face.

If I were you, I would just drop it, as I said, because you are just embarrassing yourself.

I have answered....you just didn't get the answer you wanted. I answered YES and told you why

The analogy Trump offered is that we should ignore humanitarian efforts because there is a slight chance that danger may be involved

We are afraid that Mexicans may be murderers, rapists and drug dealers.......that is why we must build a wall
We are afraid Muslims may be terrorists...that is why we must ban Muslims from immigrating

Living life in fear...That is what Trump gives us

 

[Dr.Traveler]

You just don't get it.

NO, you are AVOIDING 'it'.

No one tells you when you wake up in the morning, 'Here are 3 pairs of socks to wear today - 1 of them will kill you. Now pick'.

THAT is the analogy Jr offered, and that is the question I am asking you. It's a pretty simple damn 'Yes' or 'No' question....that you REFUSE to answer because you KNOW - we ALL do - your answer is 'NO'!

One last time, man up - 'You are given a bowl of skittles and told there are several in the bowl that WILL kill you. Do you grab a handful at this point and eat them?'

At this point, my guess is you will either refuse to answer the question again or lie and say 'yes' yo save face.

If I were you, I would just drop it, as I said, because you are just embarrassing yourself.

No one is answering your challenge because it's a crappy analogy. People aren't Skittles. If I refuse to eat the Skittles in the bowl the good ones aren't going to be killed by their government. Analogies are useful, but they have limits. You can only push an analogy so far and this analogy breaks down as soon as you compare people to candy.

The better analogy is this:

A building is burning down. One of the people still in the building is an arsonist who likely will set another fire. Do you keep all of the people locked up in the burning building, or do you let them out?

What's your answer?

 

[Dr.Traveler]

There is a chance that everything I eat may be poison. Does that mean I should stop eating?

Nice dodge...let's try it again....

You are given a bowl of skittle and told not that some MAY be poisonous but that some ARE poisonous....do you still grab a handful and eat them.

AGAIN, if you are honest you would say 'NO'!

Analogies are useful, but have a limit. Rephrase the question:

You have a building on fire. One of the people who want out of the building is likely the person that set the fire. Do you keep everyone in the building for the safety of those outside, or you do you let them out of the building?

If your answer is anything other than let them out, then you are quite frankly a monster. We can debate where they go, we can debate screening, monitoring, etc, but debating whether you trap them in the burning building or not? That's monstrous.

I absolutely do not support the position we should stop taking in refugees. You want to screen them? Fine. You want to monitor them? Fine. But not let them in? No.

The UN has proven that it costs 12 times LESS to house and care for these refugees near their own country than it costs to bring them here.

If you have the option to house and care for these people somewhere else ... and without potentially jeopardizing our national security or ANY American lives...for 12 times LESS American tax payer dollars, WHY WOULDN'T YOU?

Considering this, what is Obama & Hillary's REAL reason for wanting to bring so many UN-VETTED Syrians HERE?

Is he STUPID or does he have some plan?

Which is it?

This is easy. Go visit a UN Refugee camp. They suck in all measures of the word. They often aren't that much safer than where they were as bad actors have no problem bombing such camps. Bringing them into Europe or the USA means a better quality of life and safer conditions for the people involved. When a person is in need, you help. You worry about costs later. That's the guiding principle laid out in the Good Samaritan parable in the Bible. It is how we have always handled disaster recovery in the US. It is literally how every good and decent person in the world handles the matter of helping those in need.