Random Politics & Religion #18

Liberals as a group certainly seem to have an intense collective Dunning-Kruger effect.

Which would be fine.

If you were okay with foreign aide and deposing tyrannical world leaders.

But sovereignty is apparently paramount and if they want to be despots oppressing entire portions of their population, who are we to intervene?

Looks like nausi has been Whooshed.

Looks like nausi has been Whooshed.

Did you know on Sunday, just with his phone trump was able to pull the saudis on board with taking some of these refugees?

This is just Nausi's patented I know you are, but what am I?™ defense.

...did you know that you just managed to reference the #1 country that we should be looking at as a producer of terrorists and violator of human rights, and instead of recognizing it as such, lauded them as an ally and good place to send more suffering people? ^^;

Did you know on Sunday, just with his phone trump was able to pull the saudis on board with taking some of these refugees?

The man did more to help these people on one afternoon than obama did in 8 years.

It's hardly patented.

Nice pivot. But let's get back to the issue.

He only was targeted by the left when he ran against them. Surely you can see the cause-effect relationship here?

...did you know that you just managed to reference the #1 country that we should be looking at as a producer of terrorists and violator of human rights, and instead of recognizing it as such, lauded them as an ally and good place to send more suffering people? ^^;

That actually didn't happen, Saudi Arabia didn't agree to take in any refugees on Sunday. Nausi is just making things up again.

He is constantly whinging (decades!) about how everyone hates him and how it is not "fair"

Did you know on Sunday, just with his phone trump was able to pull the saudis on board with taking some of these refugees?

The man did more to help these people on one afternoon than obama did in 8 years.

"The president requested, and the King agreed, to support safe zones in Syria and Yemen, as well as supporting other ideas to help the many refugees who are displaced by the ongoing conflicts," the statement said.

The Saudi Press Agency, in an initial readout of the call, made no specific mention of safe zones, but said the two leaders had affirmed the "depth and durability of the strategic relationship" between the two countries.

The agency later said "the custodian of the Two Holy Mosques had confirmed his support and backing for setting up safe zones in Syria", but did not mention Yemen, where a Saudi alliance is fighting against the Iran-aligned Houthi group.

A senior Saudi source told Reuters the two leaders spoke for more than an hour by telephone and agreed to step up counter-terrorism and military cooperation and enhance economic cooperation.

In other words, the Saudis continue their policy of indifference to all things positive or negative. Nothing changes.

That said, I don't see how moving people from a war zone to an area relatively near the war zone but 'safer' is better than all the immigrants accepted into the united states under the Obama administration.

Liberals as a group certainly seem to have an intense collective Dunning-Kruger effect.

Maybe it's because I don't have some nonsense idea that every refugee we accept is slowly building up a full ISIS army within our borders.

If he'd actually managed it, I'd have been somewhat impressed.

That said, I don't see how moving people from a war zone to an area relatively near the war zone but 'safer' is better than all the immigrants accepted into the united states under the Obama administration.

So...case in point. You don't actually care about helping these people. All you care about is they go anywhere but here.

Which, fine. I think that's disgusting, but fine.

At least we're being honest.

Because as long as they're not our problem, who cares?

The real problem is, both candidates were equally guilty of this.

One has inherent conflict-of-interest issues due to his investments, the other one actually has solid evidence of conflicts-of-interest during her tenure as Secretary of State and her husband's use of the family's charitable foundation.

No matter who won, there would have been conflicts-of-interest by being President. Luckily, we have a person who (mostly) set aside his investments and given up all power over them to his family members.