Trump explained - because you all are blind

[Mechanicalsalvation]

This is one of the recent tweets by J.K.Rowling:

“This monster of narcissism values only himself and his pale reflections. The disabled, minorities, transgender people, the poor, women (unless related to him by ties of blood, and therefore his creations) are treated with contempt, because they do not resemble Trump."

Turns out she was completely wrong:
http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...p/news-story/8a31f6d18fd6f9eb4993dcf54e058825

Someone needs to explain to me the Trump haters...

 

[civver_764]

Yeah she's disgraceful. That reminds of this campaign: https://www.change.org/p/j-k-rowlin...e-in-muslim-refugees-in-her-18-spare-bedrooms

J.K. Rowling has often announced her solidarity with Middle-Eastern refugees on twitter. She is a well-known advocate of open borders and often stated, that Europe has the duty to give every single one of these refugees from all over the middle east, rarely warzones, asylum and welfare. Everyone who represented a different opinion was viciously attacked by her, and she is not alone. Many other multi-millionaires and billionaires seem to be fond of virtue-signaling about refugees. Since she is a sheltered member of the rich elite, we think that it is time for her to show some true solidarity. J.K. Rowling has 18 spare bedrooms in her mansions in Britain and could easily give 18 refugees a long-time housing, not to mention the space available on her giant property to erect refugee shelters.

The refugee crisis will require 250000 homes to be built every year in her homeland Britain. Helping refugees in Europe will cost 10 times as much as helping them in neighbouring countries would. Donations by the superrich, even in the millions, are a drop in the ocean, as the taxpayer will have to pay billions for the following decades. Elites, that echo the MSM narrative, defending open borders, are hypocrites that will never share the outlook of the working class, which has to encounter refugees every day. So let's bring one of the loudest virtue-signaling apologists of globalism back to reality and give her some new roommates.

We demand that J.K. Rowling grants no less than 18 refugees shelter in her mansions for at least 8 years. She rejects safe immigration, which is why we also demand, that there will be no additional vetting process for these refugees. Her virtue-signaling stems from ignorance, and the 100% effective cure of it will be this drastic change of perspective. To make this group of refugees representative of the situation Europe, we also demand that the group consists of 14 men and 4 women, since over 75% of the millions of refugees are male.

Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

 

[Zkribbler]

This is one of the recent tweets by J.K.Rowling:

Turns out she was completely wrong:
http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...p/news-story/8a31f6d18fd6f9eb4993dcf54e058825

Someone needs to explain to me the Trump haters...

Someone needs to explain to Trumpsters what a lie is. Here's some snippets from the linked-to article:

HARRY Potter author JK Rowling has been labelled a “disgraceful liar” after falsely accusing US president Donald Trump of snubbing a disabled boy.

In a series of furious tweets on the weekend, Ms Rowling called Mr Trump a “monster of narcissism” and claimed he had “pretended not to see” a boy in a wheelchair as he met with “victims of Obamacare” before a press conference on July 24.

“Trump imitated a disabled reporter. Now he pretends not to see a child in a wheelchair, as though frightened he might catch his condition,”
...
Ms Rowling seems to have based her tweetstorm on an edited clip that popped up on social media, appearing to show Mr Trump snubbing the boy, whose name is Monty. But that clip has since been deleted, and an unedited version released by the White House clearly shows the president greeting him.

Despite that fact, Ms Rowling has so far refused to correct the record, earning her the ire of her fellow Twitter users — foremost among them British morning TV host Piers Morgan.

For the record. a lie means: "to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly, as with intent to deceive."

Yet the article admits it was Rowling herself who was deceived, that she was reacting to an edited video clip. She had no intent to deceive; thus she did not lie. The article goes on to assert "Ms Rowling has so far refused to correct the record." However, the article contains no facts regarding any communication with Rowling, telling her of the true facts and asking for a correction. The definition of "refuse" is:

verb (used with object), refused, refusing.
1.to decline to accept (something offered):
to refuse an award.
2.to decline to give; deny (a request, demand, etc.):
to refuse permission.
3.to express a determination not to (do something):
to refuse to discuss the question.

In sum, Ms Rowlng did not lie; she did not refuse.

`

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Someone needs to explain to Trumpsters what a lie is. Here's some snippets from the linked-to article:

I think you are "slightly" deflecting the issue and completely missing the point...

 

[Zkribbler]

I think you are "slightly" deflecting the issue and completely missing the point...

I thought your point was Rowling "lied" about Trump. If that wasn't your point, maybe you can explain it to me.

Please use small words; I seem to be extraordinarily dense this morning,

 

[Zkribbler]

Mooch has resigned. Something about a clean slate, and blah, blah, blah.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

I thought your point was Rowling "lied" about Trump. If that wasn't your point, maybe you can explain it to me.

Please use small words; I seem to be extraordinarily dense this morning,

Not shaking kids hand makes you a psychotic monster? Of course she is just using form of manipulation to get what she wants. She is not looking for truth of things but puts some agenda above that. I could put it simplier but I hope this will do.

 

[Zkribbler]

Not shaking kids hand makes you a psychotic monster? Of course she is just using form of manipulation to get what she wants. She is not looking for truth of things but puts some agenda above that. I could put it simplier but I hope this will do.

Actually, she called him a "monster of narcissism," based upon her mistaken belief that he'd snubbed the boy, and she also referenced his mocking a disabled reporter. When you couple this with Trump's belief that Mexicans are murderers and rapists, that Muslims are terrorists, and that women are either pigs or should be sexually assaulted, this characterization is not far off the mark.

 

[civver_764]

Actually, she called him a "monster of narcissism," based upon her mistaken belief that he'd snubbed the boy, and she also referenced his mocking a disabled reporter. When you couple this with Trump's belief that Mexicans are murderers and rapists, that Muslims are terrorists, and that women are either pigs or should be sexually assaulted, this characterization is not far off the mark.

It's the fake news compilation!

 

[Traitorfish]

"He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is not a porn star."

 

[Borachio]

Luckily.

Can you imagine it?!

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Luckily.

Can you imagine it?!

Not really. Small hands and all that.

 

[Lexicus]

I'm surprised you don't subscribe to free market principles; are you instead in favor government forcing job creators to run their businesses a certain way?

Not when the white race is at stake.

 

[Sommerswerd]

"He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is not a porn star."

WRONG!

Donald Trump AKA the Supreme Leader... is ... in-fact... a porn star...

 

[Lexicus]

Man, the title of that youtube video was highly misleading

 

[El_Machinae]

There's an interesting dispute coming out of classical liberals and the current 'Right'. In general, classical liberals are incredibly anti-border - who are you to say who I may hire to tend my lawn, after all? And their normal bugaboo is the state welfare system, you cannot really have a generous welfare system AND open borders, obviously. These two things need to be threaded in a balance.

But the current Right has swung towards pro-borders. It's not so much the normal 'we need borders because of welfare', but it's just pro-borders. Welfare is a tacked on argument, rather than the more classical part of the seesaw we're trying to balance.

I'm sympathetic to the welfare concerns, but a lot of people have the wrong intuitions when it comes to the numbers and how they work. It takes taxpayers what? a few tens of thousands to turn a citizen's baby into a proper hardworking adult? If you can get a hardworking immigrant for a fraction of the cost, it's economically a good deal. After that, it's just the cultural concerns that are getting in the way.

 

[civver_764]

I'm sympathetic to the welfare concerns, but a lot of people have the wrong intuitions when it comes to the numbers and how they work. It takes taxpayers what? a few tens of thousands to turn a citizen's baby into a proper hardworking adult? If you can get a hardworking immigrant for a fraction of the cost, it's economically a good deal.

What are you basing this on?

Full report.

 

[El_Machinae]

The statistics I very clearly elucidated are not captured in the statistics you presented. What you're comparing is an average, which won't capture whether individuals transition out of welfare or not.

A person that comes over and gets welfare benefits, but then transitions out, is what I am talking about. It's akin to how a child is taken care of, and then eventually transitions out. That question wouldn't be captured in the averages you've presented.

 

[civver_764]

Eh? You said 'a fraction of the cost'. That does not look a fraction of the cost at all.

Or were you talking from the perspective of a business owner? Because I agree, it's a good deal for them, but taxpayers should not be expected to subsidize their employees.

 

[Perfection]

What are you basing this on?

Full report.

Most of that difference (as their own study acknowledges) is based on the fact that immigrant households tend to be bigger with more kids.

When they control for that the differences are much smaller

Children are our future!