Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Hillary Clinton accepts donations from countries with terrible human rights violations and doesn't say a peep
Random Politics & Religion #00
Random Politics & Religion #00
Which is still highly illegal, regardless on how you dress it up.
I think you may be reaching a little too far on this one Rav.
Not because it isn't pathetic, but because Modern Day politics as a whole, given Trump's recent involvement this time, has proven to be little more than a side show.
And as much as I despise the idea of Trump running America like he's done his businesses (into the ground or by suing his partners), he's not under any obligation to correct the moron shouting what he was shouting... I mean, he is still running for president, so he should be acting in a way that isn't intentionally limiting free speech as an individual, or it would have simply become a shouting match over "NO U!"
And probably because he would have lost a lot of supporters if he had.
Not because it isn't pathetic, but because Modern Day politics as a whole, given Trump's recent involvement this time, has proven to be little more than a side show.
And as much as I despise the idea of Trump running America like he's done his businesses (into the ground or by suing his partners), he's not under any obligation to correct the moron shouting what he was shouting... I mean, he is still running for president, so he should be acting in a way that isn't intentionally limiting free speech as an individual, or it would have simply become a shouting match over "NO U!"
And probably because he would have lost a lot of supporters if he had.
Being muslim isn't an insult anyway, whether the guy was wrong who cares?
Bloodrose said: »
he's not under any obligation to correct the moron shouting what he was shouting... I mean, he is still running for president, so he should be acting in a way that isn't intentionally limiting free speech as an individual, or it would have simply become a shouting match over "NO U!"
It's the liberals/democrats who are decrying "hateful speech" here, not Trump.
Valefor.Sehachan said: »
Being muslim isn't an insult anyway, whether the guy was wrong who cares?
So what if some idiots believe him to be a Muslim? Who cares? What really is the problem is that democrats/liberals have to make ***up, even though they are ignoring their own problems they have...
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Hillary Clinton accepts donations from countries with terrible human rights violations and doesn't say a peep
Are you talking about her campaign or a PAC or what?
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Bloodrose said: »
he's not under any obligation to correct the moron shouting what he was shouting... I mean, he is still running for president, so he should be acting in a way that isn't intentionally limiting free speech as an individual, or it would have simply become a shouting match over "NO U!"
It's the liberals/democrats who are decrying "hateful speech" here, not Trump.
And it's not just the liberals/democrats. It's anyone trying to discredit him (and there is lots of ammo there already) for the other dumbass remarks he's made just for publicity.
The wrong part of the speech was that "muslims are the problem of America", not whether Obama is one. I don't get it.
Jassik said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Hillary Clinton accepts donations from countries with terrible human rights violations and doesn't say a peep
Are you talking about her campaign or a PAC or what?
And IRS did not audit the foundation either year, as noted in the financial statements....I wonder why?
[+]
[+]
I was unaware American citizens that practiced Islam were a problem in this country. But I guess Trump is going to be "looking at ways" to deal with it.
Here's a denier now Rav.
[+]
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »
Muslim camps! Sorta like fat camp except for sweating the Muslim out of you.
Have you ever been to the Middle East? If anything, sweating seems to only make you more Muslim.
[+]
I'm kind of looking froward to being fired by president trump...
but idc as long as hillary doesn't win... ***I will vote for bernie sanders and the ghost of che guevara for VP if that's what it takes..
/checks pockets
now if only I had some souls to sell
but idc as long as hillary doesn't win... ***I will vote for bernie sanders and the ghost of che guevara for VP if that's what it takes..
/checks pockets
now if only I had some souls to sell
[+]
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
now if only I had some souls to sell
[+]
Most Middle Eastern people aren't terrorists! They aren't angry!
It's just HOT FACE!
Give them air conditioning and they are so happy!
It's just HOT FACE!
Give them air conditioning and they are so happy!
[+]
[+]
The more I think about it on a basic level, the more I think Rav is right.
Practically every religion that comes out of the Middle East is about restricting your freedoms and joy and making you suffer for some future gift after you die.
THEY'RE ALL A TRICK TO KEEP YOUR *** WORKING IN THE DESERT!
Practically every religion that comes out of the Middle East is about restricting your freedoms and joy and making you suffer for some future gift after you die.
THEY'RE ALL A TRICK TO KEEP YOUR *** WORKING IN THE DESERT!
[+]
Ramyrez said: »
The more I think about it on a basic level, the more I think Rav is right.
Practically every religion that comes out of the Middle East is about restricting your freedoms and joy and making you suffer for some future gift after you die.
THEY'RE ALL A TRICK TO KEEP YOUR *** WORKING IN THE DESERT!
Practically every religion that comes out of the Middle East is about restricting your freedoms and joy and making you suffer for some future gift after you die.
THEY'RE ALL A TRICK TO KEEP YOUR *** WORKING IN THE DESERT!
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
It's got a pretty poor spending record, for sure, but "slush fund" is a pretty specific term. Either way, if they aren't direct campaign contributions it's not illegal.
I'm not defending Clinton. Want to make that clear first off.
But at this point why do we even bother having campaign financing rules?
It's not like anyone actually follows them. They either just ignore them or find clever ways to circumvent them, or get the Supremes to say "*** it, do it."
But at this point why do we even bother having campaign financing rules?
It's not like anyone actually follows them. They either just ignore them or find clever ways to circumvent them, or get the Supremes to say "*** it, do it."
Welp, Jassik blocked me, at least that proves it.
*Provides evidence of possible slush fund activity, is ignored*
*Responder states no evidence of possible slush fund activity is presented*
Actually, it's very easy to investigate said rules. It gets ignored half the time, depending on the political party in the executive branch and is very thoroughly investigated against the other side...
Case in point: IRS examinations and denial of Tea Party 501(c)4s.
*Provides evidence of possible slush fund activity, is ignored*
*Responder states no evidence of possible slush fund activity is presented*
Ramyrez said: »
But at this point why do we even bother having campaign financing rules?
It's not like anyone actually follows them. They either just ignore them or find clever ways to circumvent them, or get the Supremes to say "*** it, do it."
It's not like anyone actually follows them. They either just ignore them or find clever ways to circumvent them, or get the Supremes to say "*** it, do it."
Case in point: IRS examinations and denial of Tea Party 501(c)4s.
[+]
Ramyrez said: »
I'm not defending Clinton. Want to make that clear first off.
But at this point why do we even bother having campaign financing rules?
It's not like anyone actually follows them. They either just ignore them or find clever ways to circumvent them, or get the Supremes to say "*** it, do it."
But at this point why do we even bother having campaign financing rules?
It's not like anyone actually follows them. They either just ignore them or find clever ways to circumvent them, or get the Supremes to say "*** it, do it."
Campaign reform seems to be a pipe dream, though. Everyone benefits from PAC's, heck, presidential candidates haven't even claimed nearly 100 million dollars in public funding in the last 3 elections. It represents such a small portion of what they get from private donors it's not worth the paperwork.
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Welp, Jassik blocked me, at least that proves it.
*Provides evidence of possible slush fund activity, is ignored*
*Responder states no evidence of possible slush fund activity is presented*
*Provides evidence of possible slush fund activity, is ignored*
*Responder states no evidence of possible slush fund activity is presented*
Nope, I have nobody blocked. The audit you linked doesn't have any evidence that the foundation is a slush fund. It's a really inefficient NGO and they've failed to report a lot of income over the years correctly. It's also not a campaign organization, which makes the contributions from foreign governments legal beyond any doubt.
For reference:
slush fund said:
1
: a fund raised from the sale of refuse to obtain small luxuries or pleasures for a warship's crew
2
: a fund for bribing public officials or carrying on corruptive propaganda
3
: an unregulated fund often used for illicit purposes
: a fund raised from the sale of refuse to obtain small luxuries or pleasures for a warship's crew
2
: a fund for bribing public officials or carrying on corruptive propaganda
3
: an unregulated fund often used for illicit purposes
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Actually, it's very easy to investigate said rules. It gets ignored half the time, depending on the political party in the executive branch and is very thoroughly investigated against the other side...
You're getting partisan again.
Everyone does this ***.
PACs PERIOD are a problem.
Let alone anything else going on.
[+]
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.