Ingraham: Innocent people are paying the price for multicultism

[Correll]

Your issues with the past actions of the American Nations, is noted and irrelevant.


Donald Trump isn't the one that divided this nation. Trump ran against HIllary and other politicians.


It was Hillary that made the campaign about pitting one half of the nation against the other half.

The nation was already divided, dummy. People like you hated that n*gger in the White House.

Oh? THe nation wasn't divided when Bill Clinton was in the white house?

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

Cutting taxes for the rich and foodstamps for the poor, is good governance?

Trade policy crafted to protect American interests instead of an ideological concept of Free Trade and enforcing immigration laws, and NOT fucking with Russia, is good governance.

 

[RightyTighty]

I Guess people like Obama drives experts crazy. But here is something even more enlightening.
The proportion of human genetic variation due to differences between populations is modest, and individuals from different populations can be genetically more similar than individuals from the same population.
Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations
Note that my link substitutes the word "populations" in place of "races." I agree because the differences between humans aren't great enough to classify those differences as races.


Impossible. All humans belong to the same race. Supremacists have tried hard to create a racial hierarchy with white people at the top and blacks at the bottom but scientific evidence isn't on their side. All living humans are Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

That Chinese gene can be passed on to any other human group on the planet via sex. No group of humans have genes that can't be
shared with other humans.and believe me...they will find a way.

Humans belong to the same species, not the same race. What you're trying to say is that a Doberman is the same as a Yorkshire Terrier. They are obviously different, but they can still interbreed.

You're spouting a bogus theory popular with leftwing academics, but's total bullshit.

Bullshit. When did the Human Race become the Human Races? Hint: it never did.
But lets look at your trite dog analogy. A dog is still a dog no matter what natural or artificial breed it is..you can call each variety a species i.e. collie..snoopy...beagle..whatever...they are all belong to the " race" of dogs. I used quotes around race because it doesn't really exist among dogs or humans. Race is NOT a biological concept...it's a social construct.
One created by a German wanting to establish a social heirarchy based on superficial differences in humankind.

My observations on this matter are not something I made up. For further reading and understanding I suggest those interested read the following book on the subject:View attachment 132077

If you can't tell a Nigerian, from a Swede, or Chinaman, god help us.

I think anti-Racism is a ideology for sub-Humans.

The anti-Racist seems to not be intelligent enough to pick up on differences, important differences.

Well, frankly a black person could be a Swede or a Chinaman...depending on where he was born or where he lives. The terms Swede and Chinaman denotes nationality not race. Blacks living here are Americans..those living in Britain are Brits.
I thought you knew that.

Black people will never be real Swedes, or Chinaman, or Brits for that matter.

So what are, Liberians? Will wetbacks ever be real Americans?

 

[RightyTighty]

The nation was already divided, dummy. People like you hated that n*gger in the White House.

Oh? THe nation wasn't divided when Bill Clinton was in the white house?

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

Cutting taxes for the rich and foodstamps for the poor, is good governance?

Trade policy crafted to protect American interests instead of an ideological concept of Free Trade and enforcing immigration laws, and NOT fucking with Russia, is good governance.

Free trade is capitalism (as is lax immigration policy). I'm sure sorry that doesn't work for you my little fascist.

 

[Correll]

Oh? THe nation wasn't divided when Bill Clinton was in the white house?

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

The billionaire - protector of the middle class. Love that one.

And I think it was ray who said Trump was, LOL, down to earth.

He crafted a platform to speak out for those who had been long ignored by the political class.


That he was not part of that class, is well known.


My point stands.




Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

His appeal was to people to stupid to know that someone like Trump doesn't drain the swamp - he is the fucking swamp. And just look at that, nothing but cronies in his administration.

Soooo, you've dropped the argument that he was "pitting races, religions and nationalities" against each other? Cause that was what we were talking about.

You admit that that is not true, and instead now want to move on to if he is/was sincere?

 

[Correll]

Oh? THe nation wasn't divided when Bill Clinton was in the white house?

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

Cutting taxes for the rich and foodstamps for the poor, is good governance?

Trade policy crafted to protect American interests instead of an ideological concept of Free Trade and enforcing immigration laws, and NOT fucking with Russia, is good governance.

Free trade is capitalism (as is lax immigration policy). I'm sure sorry that doesn't work for you my little fascist.

Free Trade is not capitalism. They are separate concepts that only dishonest ideologues like to conflate.


Neither is lax immigration policy.


Your godwin in noted. YOu lose.



You seem to be devoting a lot of energy to being dishonest and/or personal. Almost like you know at some level that discussion the issue seriously and honestly will not work in your favor....

 

[sealybobo]

Ingraham: Innocent People Are Paying the Price for Multiculturalism

Yep. She is 100% correct. This entire DIEversity and Multicultism and White self hatred will go down as the darkest decades in history.

She's right. Innocent people are also being hurt by our 2nd amendment. Should we ban guns Laura?

 

[IM2]

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

The billionaire - protector of the middle class. Love that one.

And I think it was ray who said Trump was, LOL, down to earth.

He crafted a platform to speak out for those who had been long ignored by the political class.


That he was not part of that class, is well known.


My point stands.




Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

His appeal was to people to stupid to know that someone like Trump doesn't drain the swamp - he is the fucking swamp. And just look at that, nothing but cronies in his administration.

Soooo, you've dropped the argument that he was "pitting races, religions and nationalities" against each other? Cause that was what we were talking about.

You admit that that is not true, and instead now want to move on to if he is/was sincere?

Trump ran on racism. People voted for him based on racism.

New election analysis: Yes, it really was blatant racism that gave us President Donald Trump

Fear of Diversity Made People More Likely to Vote Trump

 

[danielpalos]

The nation was already divided, dummy. People like you hated that n*gger in the White House.

Oh? THe nation wasn't divided when Bill Clinton was in the white house?

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

Cutting taxes for the rich and foodstamps for the poor, is good governance?

Trade policy crafted to protect American interests instead of an ideological concept of Free Trade and enforcing immigration laws, and NOT fucking with Russia, is good governance.

We have the largest economy in the world and a Commerce Clause in our supreme law of the land. How is cutting taxes for the rich and foodstamps for the poor, good governance; or, is it an, "acceptable casualty and loss" for the right wing?

 

[danielpalos]

I Guess people like Obama drives experts crazy. But here is something even more enlightening.
The proportion of human genetic variation due to differences between populations is modest, and individuals from different populations can be genetically more similar than individuals from the same population.
Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations
Note that my link substitutes the word "populations" in place of "races." I agree because the differences between humans aren't great enough to classify those differences as races.


Impossible. All humans belong to the same race. Supremacists have tried hard to create a racial hierarchy with white people at the top and blacks at the bottom but scientific evidence isn't on their side. All living humans are Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

That Chinese gene can be passed on to any other human group on the planet via sex. No group of humans have genes that can't be
shared with other humans.and believe me...they will find a way.

Humans belong to the same species, not the same race. What you're trying to say is that a Doberman is the same as a Yorkshire Terrier. They are obviously different, but they can still interbreed.

You're spouting a bogus theory popular with leftwing academics, but's total bullshit.

Bullshit. When did the Human Race become the Human Races? Hint: it never did.
But lets look at your trite dog analogy. A dog is still a dog no matter what natural or artificial breed it is..you can call each variety a species i.e. collie..snoopy...beagle..whatever...they are all belong to the " race" of dogs. I used quotes around race because it doesn't really exist among dogs or humans. Race is NOT a biological concept...it's a social construct.
One created by a German wanting to establish a social heirarchy based on superficial differences in humankind.

My observations on this matter are not something I made up. For further reading and understanding I suggest those interested read the following book on the subject:View attachment 132077

If you can't tell a Nigerian, from a Swede, or Chinaman, god help us.

I think anti-Racism is a ideology for sub-Humans.

The anti-Racist seems to not be intelligent enough to pick up on differences, important differences.

Well, frankly a black person could be a Swede or a Chinaman...depending on where he was born or where he lives. The terms Swede and Chinaman denotes nationality not race. Blacks living here are Americans..those living in Britain are Brits.
I thought you knew that.

Black people will never be real Swedes, or Chinaman, or Brits for that matter.

Not being, Roman enough, is our Republican problem.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Your issues with the past actions of the American Nations, is noted and irrelevant.


Donald Trump isn't the one that divided this nation. Trump ran against HIllary and other politicians.


It was Hillary that made the campaign about pitting one half of the nation against the other half.

The nation was already divided, dummy. People like you hated that n*gger in the White House.

Oh? THe nation wasn't divided when Bill Clinton was in the white house?

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

The billionaire - protector of the middle class. Love that one.

And I think it was ray who said Trump was, LOL, down to earth.

Maybe he meant soiled, like he rolled in dirt?

 

[sealybobo]

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

The billionaire - protector of the middle class. Love that one.

And I think it was ray who said Trump was, LOL, down to earth.

He crafted a platform to speak out for those who had been long ignored by the political class.


That he was not part of that class, is well known.


My point stands.




Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

His appeal was to people to stupid to know that someone like Trump doesn't drain the swamp - he is the fucking swamp. And just look at that, nothing but cronies in his administration.

Soooo, you've dropped the argument that he was "pitting races, religions and nationalities" against each other? Cause that was what we were talking about.

You admit that that is not true, and instead now want to move on to if he is/was sincere?

Trump ran on racism. People voted for him based on racism.

New election analysis: Yes, it really was blatant racism that gave us President Donald Trump

Fear of Diversity Made People More Likely to Vote Trump

I guess the racists cared more than we did. I hate the people who didn't show up or naively voted Trump Johnson or Stein.

So what's Jill Stein or Gary Johnson doing now? No one knows.

 

[RealDave]

The nation was already divided, dummy. People like you hated that n*gger in the White House.

Oh? THe nation wasn't divided when Bill Clinton was in the white house?

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

Cutting taxes for the rich and foodstamps for the poor, is good governance?

Trade policy crafted to protect American interests instead of an ideological concept of Free Trade and enforcing immigration laws, and NOT fucking with Russia, is good governance.

So, you think the US can use trade policy to bock imports & no other country will reciprocate? You & Trump are dumber than shit as you try to lock in a 320 million customer base while pissing away a 7 billion person global market.

 

[Correll]

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

The billionaire - protector of the middle class. Love that one.

And I think it was ray who said Trump was, LOL, down to earth.

He crafted a platform to speak out for those who had been long ignored by the political class.


That he was not part of that class, is well known.


My point stands.




Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

His appeal was to people to stupid to know that someone like Trump doesn't drain the swamp - he is the fucking swamp. And just look at that, nothing but cronies in his administration.

Soooo, you've dropped the argument that he was "pitting races, religions and nationalities" against each other? Cause that was what we were talking about.

You admit that that is not true, and instead now want to move on to if he is/was sincere?

Trump ran on racism. People voted for him based on racism.

New election analysis: Yes, it really was blatant racism that gave us President Donald Trump

Fear of Diversity Made People More Likely to Vote Trump

"It’s worth remembering, particularly when the Hillary Clinton recrimination news cycle is in full swing, that Donald Trump is president today because of a margin of fewer than 80,000 votes spread across three states.



“The most important states, though, were Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin,” Philip Bump in The Washington Post wrote in December. “Trump won those states by 0.2, 0.7 and 0.8 percentage points, respectively — and by 10,704, 46,765 and 22,177 votes.”

Those three states, however, had been comfortably won by Democrat Barack Obama in both 2008 and 2012. Much of the recent shift, however tiny, was due to slightly more white working-class voters voting Republican than before. This, in turn, has prompted an ugly and ongoing fight between two progressive factions: those who believe those voters were primarily motivated by a sense of economic insecurity and people who think the shift occurred because racist appeals are prompting more white people to vote for Republicans."



So, voters who voted for Obama, voted for Trump, because racism.

 

[danielpalos]

The nation was already divided, dummy. People like you hated that n*gger in the White House.

Oh? THe nation wasn't divided when Bill Clinton was in the white house?

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

The billionaire - protector of the middle class. Love that one.

And I think it was ray who said Trump was, LOL, down to earth.

He crafted a platform to speak out for those who had been long ignored by the political class.


That he was not part of that class, is well known.


My point stands.




Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

dude, "your guy" had nothing but pander. simply, telling you what you want to hear, is good salesmanship, not necessarily good politics.

 

[Correll]

Oh? THe nation wasn't divided when Bill Clinton was in the white house?

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

Cutting taxes for the rich and foodstamps for the poor, is good governance?

Trade policy crafted to protect American interests instead of an ideological concept of Free Trade and enforcing immigration laws, and NOT fucking with Russia, is good governance.

We have the largest economy in the world and a Commerce Clause in our supreme law of the land. How is cutting taxes for the rich and foodstamps for the poor, good governance; or, is it an, "acceptable casualty and loss" for the right wing?

Macroeconomic growth, doesn't mean that the growth is not imbalanced.

 

[danielpalos]

Oh? THe nation wasn't divided when Bill Clinton was in the white house?

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

The billionaire - protector of the middle class. Love that one.

And I think it was ray who said Trump was, LOL, down to earth.

He crafted a platform to speak out for those who had been long ignored by the political class.


That he was not part of that class, is well known.


My point stands.




Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

His appeal was to people to stupid to know that someone like Trump doesn't drain the swamp - he is the fucking swamp. And just look at that, nothing but cronies in his administration.

Why does a one percenter in the largest economy in the world, need to cut taxes that benefit those with the most capital the most and cut foodstamps for the poor.

A work requirement should be found unlawful, in Any at-will employment State.

 

[Correll]

Oh? THe nation wasn't divided when Bill Clinton was in the white house?

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

Cutting taxes for the rich and foodstamps for the poor, is good governance?

Trade policy crafted to protect American interests instead of an ideological concept of Free Trade and enforcing immigration laws, and NOT fucking with Russia, is good governance.

So, you think the US can use trade policy to bock imports & no other country will reciprocate? You & Trump are dumber than shit as you try to lock in a 320 million customer base while pissing away a 7 billion person global market.

Why don't your rephrase that as a question, instead of asshole diatribe?

 

[danielpalos]

Oh? THe nation wasn't divided when Bill Clinton was in the white house?

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

Cutting taxes for the rich and foodstamps for the poor, is good governance?

Trade policy crafted to protect American interests instead of an ideological concept of Free Trade and enforcing immigration laws, and NOT fucking with Russia, is good governance.

Free trade is capitalism (as is lax immigration policy). I'm sure sorry that doesn't work for you my little fascist.

Laissez-faire sometimes interferes with their socialism on a national basis.

 

[danielpalos]

Trump was the one pitting races, religions and nationalities. And this nation has never been united. Stop pretending that it has.

Past policies denied blacks jobs, educations, housing and incomes. Things for blacks just did not end with slavery.

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

The billionaire - protector of the middle class. Love that one.

And I think it was ray who said Trump was, LOL, down to earth.

He crafted a platform to speak out for those who had been long ignored by the political class.


That he was not part of that class, is well known.


My point stands.




Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

His appeal was to people to stupid to know that someone like Trump doesn't drain the swamp - he is the fucking swamp. And just look at that, nothing but cronies in his administration.

Soooo, you've dropped the argument that he was "pitting races, religions and nationalities" against each other? Cause that was what we were talking about.

You admit that that is not true, and instead now want to move on to if he is/was sincere?

Mr. Trump could not win in blue States, only low population red States.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

The billionaire - protector of the middle class. Love that one.

And I think it was ray who said Trump was, LOL, down to earth.

He crafted a platform to speak out for those who had been long ignored by the political class.


That he was not part of that class, is well known.


My point stands.




Trump had a platform that appealed to Middle America's interests.

It was his enemies that decided that supporting a policy that might benefit Middle America vs the interests of say, Mexicans, was racist, instead of simply good governance.

His appeal was to people to stupid to know that someone like Trump doesn't drain the swamp - he is the fucking swamp. And just look at that, nothing but cronies in his administration.

Soooo, you've dropped the argument that he was "pitting races, religions and nationalities" against each other? Cause that was what we were talking about.

You admit that that is not true, and instead now want to move on to if he is/was sincere?

Trump ran on racism. People voted for him based on racism.

New election analysis: Yes, it really was blatant racism that gave us President Donald Trump

Fear of Diversity Made People More Likely to Vote Trump

]

Not necessarily, I think Trump's strong performance in the Rustbelt, comes down to him talking tough on outsourced jobs.

But, of course running as a Republican, he's been assimilated to their Capitalist greed mumbo jumbo.