Taking your responses one piece at a time.
For one thing — Mr. Nice Guy crap?
I’m fed up with guys who insinuate that Trump supporters are brown shirts. Do you expect to improve the level of discource with that kind of insinuation?
So that’s Point A.
Secondly, this ‘hiring illegal immigrnats’ claim. FACT — they were defectors from the Soviet Bloc. FACT — they were not gang bangers. FACT — immigration policy failed to accomodate. FACT — Democrats prefer muslims to Christian Poles. FACT — Democrats favor gang banger immigrants to those who want to work.
That’s Point B.
As for asbestos and the rest, Trump bashers have a funny way of burying their valid points with deception and petty spin. First I read of it. Not my point in any case. My point is that Trump bashers dig back 30 years, take things out of context, and look for any excuse to call him Hitler.
So yeah, I should cut out the ‘nice guy’ crap. You aren’t worth it! Go play with Glenn Beck, your slanderous buddy.
Here we have a well reasoned article, one that I might have written. Look at the responses. There isn't a single Trup post on the first page that addresses content. They are all ANTI-Sasse and the poster. That is the essence of Trump support: Negativity.
Re your case in support of his hiring the Poles: FACT - They were illegal. FACT - He didn't hire Americans. FACT - He paid bottom dollar. FACT - He didn't pay legally required overtime. FACT - He supplied unsafe working conditions. FACT - He stiffed them on the contract. FACT - FACT - He expected the public to deal with the cost if the job made them sick. FACT - He defrauded the public with the contract.
The point of my post is that he is an ICON of the "cheap labor express," and therefore does not intend to deliver on what most people who support him expect of his program to deport all illegals. He is a fraud. So, your reply does not even begin to address the point of the citation. It is loud misdirection insinuating that my point is somehow biased against legitimate immigration, typical of a Trump supporter.
First I read of it. Not my point in any case. My point is that Trump bashers dig back 30 years, take things out of context, and look for any excuse to call him Hitler.
And there you attack me again instead of dealing with the content. You have supplied me with a fine example of exactly the hypocrisy of which you now stand accused.
I have alluded to Hitler with Trump, but not with regard to him as much as the mass psychology in response to the circumstances of 1933 that elected him. I think it's a legitimate parallel: a great nation brought to its knees, angry, desperate, and looking for a deliverer. What they found was a hyperbolic demegogue making vague and inflated promises, without regard for the constitutional limits on a prime minister. One otherwise has to ask how a sophisticated industrial culture could fall to such depravity. Well, in Trump and his followers, I'm seeing it now and am terribly concerned about where it goes. I have told you so. You know my scholarship, but gave that no heed.