I’ll echo what Dan says here. We may view them as such, and accurately at that, but to the public at large? To them the only terrorists are people with brown skin. Ask your average punter if they think Dylan Roof was a terrorist. Read the headlines about him. See the difference. Asshole terrorists like Roof are portrayed as ‘a nice neighbor we had no idea was capable of such things’, or ‘a good kid who made a mistake’, and someone whose killing is not portrayed as some ideological action, but simply the byproduct of an individual with issues.

While with the San Bernadino people were tripping over themselves to trot out terrorist. And, hey, they’re not wrong to do so! The killers were absolutely terrorists under any reasonable definition. The problem is the absence of the application of the terrorism to anyone who isn’t Muslim.

EDIT: The link from Telefrog, about Huckabee, is the only national conservative I’ve seen calling the PP killer a terrorist. While radical Christian terrorist may be better, domestic terrorist is at least something. Granted it further legitimizes the view that Muslims are not ‘true Americans’ by framing it as such. So that’s not good.

You realize that a president can’t just do whatever he wants. If Obama had the power to take office and just undo everything he didn’t like in the past, the next guy could do the same thing. It’s never that simple. Obama has had to work with a Republican controlled congress for how long now. And Laws like the Card Act, ACA, and incentives to hire new employees would probably not have passed a Bush 2.0.

He does. His clothing line is made in Mexico.

Just saw a self-identified gay man who supports Trump on Politico saying how he doesn’t want Muslims here because they kill all gays, that all Muslim countries punish infidelity with execution, all Muslim countries ban alcohol, drugs, homosexuals, etc. So I googled and threw a link showing that a few Muslim countries and almost half of American states still treat/list infidelity as a criminal offense. Obviously these existing laws, state-side, aren’t applied outside of divorce proceedings, but they act as a moral code that the politicians fear to speak against to have repealed.

Elsewhere; a petition in the UK to ban Trump from entering has 373,000 signatures. The National Post, Canada’s conservative / right-wing newspaper, asks the federal government not to return calls if there are any, or acknowledge Trump’s existence now, when he becomes the candidate, or when he becomes President.

I don’t get this. Doesn’t this fool realise that the right wing agenda also targets gays?

Has Trump targeted gays? I don’t recall it but i probably missed it. Trump is no bible thumper. I’d be far more worried about Carson if i was gay.

Not that I know of, but this guy was jumping on the Trump bandwagon because of his own bigotry toward Muslims (as if Sharia law is taking over).

Trump has come out against gay marriage. We’ll see where he lands on putting them on a register too.

Indeed. Although it appears it won’t result in a ban of entry to the uk:

‘Donald Trump will not be barred from Britain despite Muslims outburst’:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/09/petition-calling-for-donald-trump-to-be-banned-from-uk-signed-by-85000

But he has reconsidered his planned trip to Israel, until after his election to President (he might require ‘Presidential protection’ to go anywhere in the Middle East now?):

Cartoon artist are having a lot of fun with Trump. Is a easy target where doing a Goldwin feel justificated.

images

Well, at least it can be truthfully said that Trump can unify both Democrats and Republicans, and in the case of Israel, both Arabs and Jews.

Lol. I still have this sort of sad hope that it’s all a charade. If only.

Maybe Trump is just the president the world needs, some one to unify it. All we have to do is abandon any morals we ever held dear. .

I’m not willing to have America become the new Soviet empire, just so that the rest of the world has a new bad guy to rally together against.

Has Trump been photographed shirtless on a horse yet?

If Trump became president I’d probably look for a way to move to Canada. Not in the ‘haha’ joking around manner either, the actually apply for jobs and move my family kind.

Canada is the first place getting invaded if Trump becomes president.

I actually took a glance at the amicus brief, but couldn’t easily find good data to support that statement. I probably missed it, but of someone else takes a stab at it. … I know that it was apparently written by a ucla professor and that both UC and the CSU’s have a lot of students of all colors/creeds who need remedial courses to be at the appropriate levels for college and wanted to see if there was a specific racial/class breakdown to actually support the argument that scalia referenced.

I seriously think Trump getting elected would lead to World War 3. Problem is, the US would be the bad guys in that war.

WW3 would probably be preceeded with some kind of civil unrest in the US, or even a civil war here. I mean the guy will give executive orders in blatant violation of the Constitution. The majority of the Red State public will back him, the courts will rightly overturn his orders, and they’ll be carried out anyway because the idiot masses love Emperor Trump.

Suddenly all those nuts with self sufficient doomsday bunkers in remote regions of Montana won’t look so stupid.