trump

[Mark 1911]

I thought I'd just leave this here
[video=youtube;ACSAd2w_Mis]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACSAd2w_Mis[/video]

 

[jbombelli]

To be fair, I can find an angle and timing of a model and make it look as ugly as any of these.

No. You can't, all things considered. Every one of them knew they were going to be on camera and still came out looking like the shrieking harpies we all know them to be. You'll never find a picture of a model who expected to be on camera that's as bad as any of those.

 

[Tombs]

What the **** does any of that prove? Hot or ugly doesn't make one side's politial arguments more sound than another. There are hot liberals and ugly conservatives, and visa versa.

Did you not read what I was responding to?

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Thanks for proving my point.

Megyn Kelly is a bimbo - i.e. foolish, stupid, inept; an attractive but unintelligent woman - in the realm of political journalism.

Or, perhaps other realms, too. She actually believes that Jesus was a white man.

[video=youtube;DBn2wIQWoB8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBn2wIQWoB8[/video]

I'm assuming you can't tell a joke without purple?
Bimbo 1)used as a generalized term of disapproval especially for an attractive but vacuous person
2)Tramp
I don't believe Kelly would meet the definition for 1, you usually don't earn a J.D. and practice for what 10 years or so being vacuous. I have no idea about 2, but I haven't anything towards that.

There is a very good chance Jesus was Caucasian. Of which white is an acceptable term for it isn't it? Same as Black is an acceptable term for Negroid?

And why did you leave this part out of my post that you quoted?

Otherwise why not just stop at the eyes comment, why add on the where ever part?

Why do you think? If he meant it how you say, why wouldn't he?

You're telling me you can make Ivanka Trump look as ugly as Feinstein?

How many years difference in age? When their the same age barring any plastic surgery, do a comparison.

 

[CountryBoy1981]

I thought in 2008, man Democrats must be really dumb to elect that guy, that bad of a candidate would never get Repub support. Fast forward to 2016 and he is in the lead for the nomination. I guess stupidity is in both paties,

 

[jamil]

Steganography - its embedded in the liberal women poster posted above. If you focus on Sotomayor, then squint your eyes, and defocus until its blurry, keep looking for about 5 minutes, you can see it clear as day.

You're welcome.

I don't see it. All I can see is Jackie Gleason. Or is that it?

 

[Kutnupe14]

There is a very good chance Jesus was Caucasian. Of which white is an acceptable term for it isn't it? Same as Black is an acceptable term for Negroid? .

Lol, "white," has always been a subjective and ever evolving word (in America).Heck there was a time when the Irish and Italians weren't considered "white." By your understanding, Mexicans, generally, are considered white. But let's not be coy. We have a pretty good inclination that Kelly meant "white" in the classic sense. In my own church, there is mural that depicts Jesus as blonde haired, and blue eyed. That's a pretty solid testament to how widespread the idea of a "white" Jesus is.
I personally, now, don't care. I have no need to claim the Messiah as one of my own. He exists for everybody, regardless of color.

 

[BugI02]

Exactly. I have been in churches in the far east where Jesus is depicted with a vaguely oriental appearance. In more innocent times we all saw our savior as one of us without too big of a point being made about it

How we imagine him is, however, somewhat indicative of unconscious bias

 

[DragonGunner]

Lol, "white," has always been a subjective and ever evolving word (in America).Heck there was a time when the Irish and Italians weren't considered "white." By your understanding, Mexicans, generally, are considered white. But let's not be coy. We have a pretty good inclination that Kelly meant "white" in the classic sense. In my own church, there is mural that depicts Jesus as blonde haired, and blue eyed. That's a pretty solid testament to how widespread the idea of a "white" Jesus is.
I personally, now, don't care. I have no need to claim the Messiah as one of my own. He exists for everybody, regardless of color.

I like your comment, He exists for everybody, regardless of color.

And I bet most pictures of Jesus are a handsome long haired man also. Jesus was indeed born a Jew, grew tall and wise…what skin shade not sure I could say…..long hair….funny because back then Apostle Paul who had seen Jesus also commented that if a man have long hair it is a shame to him. Long hair for the Jewish costum was hair past the shoulder by my studies anyway. Now for handsome Jesus….just some trivia for any interested and thought you might be……what did Jesus really look like…when God himself came to earth and manifested himself in the flesh for the world to see…..
Isaiah 53:2King James Version (KJV)

2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Lol, "white," has always been a subjective and ever evolving word (in America).Heck there was a time when the Irish and Italians weren't considered "white." By your understanding, Mexicans, generally, are considered white. But let's not be coy. We have a pretty good inclination that Kelly meant "white" in the classic sense. In my own church, there is mural that depicts Jesus as blonde haired, and blue eyed. That's a pretty solid testament to how widespread the idea of a "white" Jesus is.
I personally, now, don't care. I have no need to claim the Messiah as one of my own. He exists for everybody, regardless of color.

White is subjective and not. And yes by my understanding Mexicans generally would be considered white, along with people from the Middle East. If you are talking genetic race, if your talking skin color varies. There are 3 or 4 categories that are generally considered races, but I'm sure you know that. 3 of them have alternative names. Caucasoid/white Negroid/Black Mongoloid/Asian and some also have a 4th category Australoid which to the best of my knowledge doesn't have a alternative.

But I agree with you and personally don't care. He does exist for everyone. Picture him how you wish. I have no problem with people having a Black Jesus. Or one with more middle eastern looks.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I like your comment, He exists for everybody, regardless of color.

And I bet most pictures of Jesus are a handsome long haired man also. Jesus was indeed born a Jew, grew tall and wise…what skin shade not sure I could say…..long hair….funny because back then Apostle Paul who had seen Jesus also commented that if a man have long hair it is a shame to him. Long hair for the Jewish costum was hair past the shoulder by my studies anyway. Now for handsome Jesus….just some trivia for any interested and thought you might be……what did Jesus really look like…when God himself came to earth and manifested himself in the flesh for the world to see…..
Isaiah 53:2King James Version (KJV)

2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

Are you saying Jesus wasn't the Adonis we see in all his depictions? lol

 

[Route 45]

All this talk about what color Jesus is. Ridiculous. We all know what color he is, and where he is from.

 

[jamil]

There are too many Trump threads from which to chose to post this. I guess this thread is good as any for this.

I was thinking this morning about how vitriolic usual INGO allies have become towards each other. Hell, we have two members with creepily similar avatars, acting as the quintessential representation of this sort of war. People have take sides and on the furthest extremes of the sides, both indiscriminately support or condemn Trump.

This morning I accidentally tapped a video link mistaking it for one that I haven't seen before. But watching it again after thinking about the folly of the ridiculous conversations we've all had. I realized that this video says most everything I was thinking this morning.

Even if you've seen it, watch a gain and consider a few things.

[video=youtube;aBG6Xds7ifA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBG6Xds7ifA[/video]




Disclaimer: I do not endorse his statements about Glen Beck and other some other media ideologues on the right.

 

[Kutnupe14]

There are too many Trump threads from which to chose to post this. I guess this thread is good as any for this.

I was thinking this morning about how vitriolic usual INGO allies have become towards each other. Hell, we have two members with creepily similar avatars, acting as the quintessential representation of this sort of war. People have take sides and on the furthest extremes of the sides, both indiscriminately support or condemn Trump.

This morning I accidentally tapped a video link mistaking it for one that I haven't seen before. But watching it again after thinking about the folly of the ridiculous conversations we've all had. I realized that this video says most everything I was thinking this morning.

Even if you've seen it, watch a gain and consider a few things.

[video=youtube;aBG6Xds7ifA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBG6Xds7ifA[/video]




Disclaimer: I do not endorse his statements about Glen Beck and other some other media ideologues on the right.

View attachment 46241

Kut (has noticed)

 

[BugI02]

Umm...yeah. Is there a part II or something. Kept waiting for the part where he deals with whats wrong with Cruz. From the lead in he sort of gave the expectation of evenhandedness. A kinder, gentler Trump hit piece. Meh

 

[chipbennett]

Umm...yeah. Is there a part II or something. Kept waiting for the part where he deals with whats wrong with Cruz. From the lead in he sort of gave the expectation of evenhandedness. A kinder, gentler Trump hit piece. Meh

I'm a huge fan of Bill Whittle.

The point of this piece wasn't to compare candidates, or to discuss pros and cons of the candidates; rather, it was to admonish conservatives to recognize that reasonable people can disagree about a specific candidate, and not to make that disagreement personal, to the detriment of all.

He doesn't get into the relative differences in scope and amplitude of the vitriol of Trump supporters versus Trump opponents. I've seen and gotten it (not just here at INGO) from both sides, being someone who has decided to Vote for Trump given the current slate of candidates, yet not being an ardent Trump supporter. While it is true that the vitriol of Trump opponents is far worse, Trump supporters aren't completely innocent on the matter.

His ultimate point is that Hilary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are the real enemy here, and we should keep that in mind.

Honestly, I think the debate at INGO has remained FAR more civil than I've seen most other places. Even though I have made a different decision than, say GPIA7R and GFGT regarding how I will cast my vote in this primary, we've not made it a personal matter. We don't treat it as a intelligence or moral shortcoming that each has made a different decision. I can't say the same for other places. (RedState should just rename themselves FascistState. They have completed their LittleGreenFootballs-esque transformation.)

 

[jamil]

Umm...yeah. Is there a part II or something. Kept waiting for the part where he deals with whats wrong with Cruz. From the lead in he sort of gave the expectation of evenhandedness. A kinder, gentler Trump hit piece. Meh

It's about the war between the Trump supporters and the Trump critics. Most people supporting Cruz at this moment only support him because their candidate is gone and they prefer him over Trump. I'm in that predicament now. As bad as I think cruz is, I reason that he'd be better than Trump. If you, weighing the pros and cons of Trump vs Cruz leads you to reason that Trump is the better choice, fine. That's a reasoned conclusion. I'm not going to complain about that. But I haven't seen much from Trump supporters that shows you're willing to admit Trump has any cons. It's okay to admit yer guy has faults. It's okay to supoort a candidate that has faults. Cruz certainly has his.

On the the other hand I admit that some anti-trump critics can't admit Trump has any pros. He does. Neither one of those positions are helping. It's only making the opposition to hillary and bernie weaker. That's what he's saying. That you see it as a hit peace suggests that you can't accept any criticism of your guy.

 

[semperfi211]

I'm not sure if this has been posted yet. Not sure if I believe it either.Get ready for President Trump, says election whiz who?s scary accurate | New York Post

 

[Route 45]

[video=youtube;XvyRIgPImOY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvyRIgPImOY&sns=em[/video]

 

[femurphy77]

What the **** does any of that prove? Hot or ugly doesn't make one side's politial arguments more sound than another. There are hot liberals and ugly conservatives, and visa versa.

This is true but the conversation has definitely become even more entertaining! N'es Pas?