The Niggers, Muds & Race-Traitors of the US 2020 Election

[Hidden to Guests]

Sometimes I feel like I'm living in some kind of alternate world. Throughout Nature and human history the alpha male was to be the leader/ruler of the tribe/civilization. Although by the looks of it in present day and only in the bizarro world I live in can an "openly out of the closet" faggot even be considered a leader. If this queer was to be elected, I'll be looking forward to U.S. and mudlim countries political relations. I can guarantee those crazy muds will be looking for more ways to bomb us.

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/04/16/politics/pete-buttigieg-gay-rachel-maddow/index.html

What America can learn from Pete Buttigieg's coming out experience

Analysis by Chris Cillizza, CNN Editor-at-large
Updated at 5:02 PM ET, Tue April 16, 2019

(CNN) — The rapid rise of South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg in the 2020 Democratic presidential race is one of the more remarkable stories in modern presidential politics. But one of the more difficult to quantify elements of Buttigieg's sudden viability is the way in which he is already reshaping societal views on homosexuality -- and the very personal decision of when to come out as gay.

In an interview with MSNBC's Rachel Maddow on Monday night, the two shared -- in emotional and moving terms -- how they struggled with their sexuality and when to publicly acknowledge that they were gay. Maddow, who came out in college, asked Buttigieg how he dealt with keeping his sexuality a secret for so long. (Buttigieg came out at 33, when he was already the mayor of South Bend.)

His answer was remarkable:

"I guess I really needed to not be [gay]. There's this war that breaks out inside a lot of people when they realize that they might be something they're afraid of. It took me a very long time to resolve that. "

That echoes a sentiment Buttigieg expressed about his sexuality at an LGBT fundraiser earlier this month:

"If you could have offered me a pill that could make me straight, I would have swallowed it before you could give me a swig of water," Buttigieg said. "It's a hard thing to think about now. If you had shown me exactly what it was that made me gay, I would have cut it out with a knife. ... Thank God there was no pill. Thank God there was no knife."

The humanity there jumps out at you. This is a hugely accomplished person -- Rhodes scholar, military veteran, elected mayor of his hometown at 29 years old -- who wished for years that he could be something other than what he knew he was. Someone who "needed to not be" gay. Someone who, at one point in his life, would have gladly taken a pill to make him not gay -- or even cut out his "gayness" if he could.

That's stunning stuff. And while Buttigieg's struggle may be familiar to many gay people, it likely will be the first time many straight people have heard someone's coming-out story presented in such raw and personal terms.

There's also a universality in the internal struggle Buttigieg is describing. You don't have to be gay to understand what it's like to deny parts of yourself, to wish you were something different than you are. To pray for an easy way to dissolve all of your internal turmoil. To be wiling to do almost anything to get it to go away. The terms in which Buttigieg is talking about grappling with his homosexuality also describe, for many of us, the human condition: A lifelong struggle to accept who we are, with all the positives and negatives that come with it.

If the first step -- or one of the first steps -- toward tolerance is understanding and empathy, Buttigieg's candidacy is already having an impact beyond just him.

Now, all of that is NOT to say that there won't be a chunk of voters who simply will not vote for a gay candidate. There will be. And it is likely higher than the number who tell pollsters they would be uncomfortable with a gay president. (Ask yourself whether you would tell a total stranger calling you on the phone that you wouldn't feel comfortable casting a ballot for a gay candidate. For lots of people, they wouldn't be -- and aren't.)

With that caveat, it is striking how much attitudes have changed in just the last decade and a half toward the idea of a gay president. In 2006, just 43% said they would be either "comfortable" or "enthusiastic" about the idea of a gay presidential candidate, according toNBC-Wall Street Journal polling. By 2019, that number had soared to 68%. Those numbers have risen across the age spectrum. In 2006, 47% of 18-to-34-year-olds said they would be comfortable or enthusiastic about a gay candidate. Now? It's 75%. And even among those 65 and older, 56% now say they would be comfortable or enthusiastic about the idea of a gay presidential candidate while just 31% said the same 13 years ago.

This is social change at warp speed. (Compare the movement of poll numbers on gay marriage to, say, legality of abortion. Night and day.) Buttigieg's candidacy -- and the way in which he has chosen to speak about his homosexuality and air his own internal struggles to grapple with what it meant (and means) to him -- is the next logical step in society's changing views of being gay. Even if he doesn't wind up as the Democratic nominee in 2020, Buttigieg's candidacy will be one for the history books.

[Hidden to Guests]

Could you imagine if he got in? The meetings “Butt-Grub” would have with the leaders of: North Korea,China and Russia? I wonder what they’d think of “The most powerful man in the world”?

This poofter would be in charge of the World’s greatest military!

He’d be able to give commands to launch nuclear missiles.

[Hidden to Guests]

Another mud running for President that wants the U.S. to look more like him and less like us. With decriminalization of illegal border crossings, he mine as well open the borders. It sounds like the same thing to me.

https://www.npr.org/2019/05/24/726080593/juli-n-castro-wants-to-redefine-which-immigrants-have-merit

Julián Castro Wants To Redefine Which Immigrants Have 'Merit'

Democratic presidential candidate Julián Castro, pictured at a forum in Las Vegas on April 27, says he wants to decriminalize illegal border crossings.

Democratic presidential candidate Julián Castro has a plan to change immigration policy in the U.S. The former Housing and Urban Development secretary wants to address immigrant detention, family reunification and the immigration court system.

In stark contrast to current policy, he also wants to decriminalize crossing the border illegally, a plan he outlined in a Medium post in April.

"For a long time in this country we actually did not treat crossing the border as a criminal act. We treated it as a civil violation," Castro told NPR. "A lot of the problems that we see in the system today flared up after we started treating it as a criminal offense."

[Hidden to Guests]

"For a long time in this country we actually did not treat crossing the border as a criminal act. We treated it as a civil violation," Castro told NPR. "A lot of the problems that we see in the system today flared up after we started treating it as a criminal offense."

So this guy who wants to lead thinks illegally entering a nation shouldn’t be a crime?

From what I understand some American businesses are the nations own worst enemy! They’ll travel to the boarder in a bus and transport the illegals to their factory and give them jobs! The laws about aiding and abetting illegals aren't strict enough.

[Hidden to Guests]

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/2020-democrats-all-have-the-same-immigration-position-open-borders

2020 Democrats all have the same immigration position: Open borders

by Eddie Scarry
May 23, 2019 01:59 PM

Other than offering some vague nods to “border security,” Democrats never put forth any policy that would prevent the hundreds of thousands of unknown people streaming into the U.S. Yet if you point out that the party doesn't care about securing the border, a confounded news anchor will insist, “Silly fool! Why, everyone supports border security!”

It’s a cover-up for what Democrats truly believe in: An open border that discriminates against no one from anywhere.

Look at any one of the Democrats running for the party’s presidential nomination, and you will not find a single policy proposal that would stop a single illegal entrant. Or even just the top five of them in the RealClearPolitics national average.

Former Vice President Joe Biden’s plan on his website: “We have got to address the root causes of migration that push people to leave behind their homes and everything they know to undertake a dangerous journey for the chance at a better life." It says nothing about halting the obscene numbers of migrants showing up at the border with bogus claims for asylum or the illegal border crossers with histories of child sex abuse and violent gang affiliations caught daily. Ah, but it does check the empty “secure our border and enforce our laws” banality.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders calls for expanding protections for illegal immigrants already in the U.S., “developing a humane policy for those seeking asylum," and virtually eliminating the deportation and detention of illegal aliens altogether. Sanders’ website doesn’t even bother nodding to the “border security” cliché.

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren doesn’t mention immigration at all on her website. But in interviews, she says the same nothing that every Democrat says. “We need an immigration system that is effective, that focuses on where problems are,” she said Wednesday on CNN, though Democrats never seem to find “where the problems are” when talking about the topic. They deny that even one illegal immigrant might be a rapist or drug dealer, even though there are scores of them. They deny that there’s a “crisis” at the border, where five children have died in recent weeks. They deny that illegal immigrants soak up welfare benefits (even though they do). So where exactly are the “problems”? Warren said in the interview that “we need immigration laws that focus on people who pose a real threat,” but how exactly do Democrats define “real threat”? They apparently see no threat, otherwise they wouldn’t oppose the construction of a border wall with the fury of a volcano god.

California Sen. Kamala Harris has compared Immigration and Customs Enforcement to the Ku Klux Klan, called on Senate Democrats to resist funding any measure or resource on the border that functions to apprehend and detain illegal border crossers, and made protections for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients among her top issues. I think we know where she stands on “border security.”

South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg finally got some policy positions on his website and he proposes “immigration laws to reflect today’s humanitarian and economic needs” as well as “reasonable security measures at the border.” Well, I feel better now, how about you? Last month, Buttigieg said he would be happy to welcome an infinite number of immigrants, legal or not, to his city, where he thought they would contribute to the snowplowing and need for more firefighters. Aw, shucks! Is that what the tiny Guatemalan woman who arrived at the Texas border with seven children wanted to do all along? Why didn’t they say so? Hand them each a helmet and hose!

The 2020 Democrats, with the media’s help, will either avoid the immigration issue as long as possible, or keep repeating “border security, border security, border security” in hopes that no one notices what they’re really after: Open borders and unabated immigration.