Call to Action: Stop Bannon Appointment

[Anonymous]

When was Sharpton appointed to be the senior advisor to the president of the united states?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

INoble wrote:Where was the "Stop Sharpton" crowd when BO made him the race relations czar? How'd that work out?
I keep seeing and hearing from people that have known Bannon for decades, and all say he's nothing like what people keep accusing him of.

+1.

For all we've seen, Sharpton is a million time worse than Bannon. And I don't recall any Dem backlash against him, even when his financial irregularities and cheating came to light.

Bannon is once said he would be cool with only having "property owners" be able to vote even though that would mean denying votes to a huge chunk of black Americans, because it wouldn't be such a bad idea if African-Americans had less of a say in elections. The "news" site he led is, in his own words, "the platform for the alt-right" i.e. white supremacists. And Trump wants to make him his chief strategist.

Meanwhile your lie about Obama making Sharpton a"race relations czar" -- a position that does not exist -- is typical of of the disinformation campaign of the right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When was Sharpton appointed to be the senior advisor to the president of the united states?

When he went to the WH like 100 times under Obama.

When Sanders and HRC had to s*ck up to him in his apparent capacity ad czar of AA affairs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When was Sharpton appointed to be the senior advisor to the president of the united states?

When he went to the WH like 100 times under Obama.

When Sanders and HRC had to s*ck up to him in his apparent capacity ad czar of AA affairs.

So you are ok with the idea that the person closest to the president's ear believes one should be a property owner to vote.

Simple yes or no question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When was Sharpton appointed to be the senior advisor to the president of the united states?

When he went to the WH like 100 times under Obama.

When Sanders and HRC had to s*ck up to him in his apparent capacity ad czar of AA affairs.

No such post. No matter how much you lie and repeat the lie, there is no such czar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When was Sharpton appointed to be the senior advisor to the president of the united states?

When he went to the WH like 100 times under Obama.

When Sanders and HRC had to s*ck up to him in his apparent capacity ad czar of AA affairs.

So you are ok with the idea that the person closest to the president's ear believes one should be a property owner to vote.

Simple yes or no question.

Yes only landed gentry should be able to vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When was Sharpton appointed to be the senior advisor to the president of the united states?

When he went to the WH like 100 times under Obama.

When Sanders and HRC had to s*ck up to him in his apparent capacity ad czar of AA affairs.

So you are ok with the idea that the person closest to the president's ear believes one should be a property owner to vote.

Simple yes or no question.

Yes only landed gentry should be able to vote.

Limited to white males, of course. Hey, if you're going to be a Constitutional Originalist, be an Originalist!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When was Sharpton appointed to be the senior advisor to the president of the united states?

When he went to the WH like 100 times under Obama.

When Sanders and HRC had to s*ck up to him in his apparent capacity ad czar of AA affairs.

Source on Sharpton visiting the WH like 100 times?

And does that make him the formal White House Policy Advisor and Chief Strategist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When was Sharpton appointed to be the senior advisor to the president of the united states?

When he went to the WH like 100 times under Obama.

When Sanders and HRC had to s*ck up to him in his apparent capacity ad czar of AA affairs.

So you are ok with the idea that the person closest to the president's ear believes one should be a property owner to vote.

Simple yes or no question.

Yes only landed gentry should be able to vote.

Then maybe you should move back to England and become a member of Parliment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When was Sharpton appointed to be the senior advisor to the president of the united states?

When he went to the WH like 100 times under Obama.

When Sanders and HRC had to s*ck up to him in his apparent capacity ad czar of AA affairs.

The white house chef, janitor, security, secret service etc visited the white house over 2000 times. Does that make them czar of white house? Heck most of them would have been in the white house longer than Obama himself. UNLESS THERE IS A POST and responsibility assigned they are yet another visitor. I am not even asking proof of your idiotic claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When was Sharpton appointed to be the senior advisor to the president of the united states?

When he went to the WH like 100 times under Obama.

When Sanders and HRC had to s*ck up to him in his apparent capacity ad czar of AA affairs.

So you are ok with the idea that the person closest to the president's ear believes one should be a property owner to vote.

Simple yes or no question.

Yes only landed gentry should be able to vote.

Then you won't have a vote because you don't sound that wealthy and even if you are , you didn't earn it, because your IQ may not be much higher than that of a chimp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Andrew Breitbart was Jewish. Jared Kushner appeared to be fine with Bannon. The guy worked in Asia and in Hollywood. He was a Navy officer. He was a MD for goldman sachs, one of the biggest supporters for Hillary Clinton.

This whole fuss about Bannon is ridiculous.

No, even the National Review acknowledges he is unfit due to his gleeful association with the alt right.

National Review is in the anti trump camp. They are one of the losers in this election.

we are going to be hearing the squealing of the pigs for a long time as they get pushed aside.

+1

+2
Liberals do not seem to understand Trump won. He can pick whomever he chooses for whatever position he wants. He could put the racist, anti-white Al Sharpton as head of a new dept. called Buffoon Union Outreach and all people can do about it is cry and moan.

Trump can pick whomever he wants for whatever office he wants and the media and everyone else will have to stand aside and accept the inevitable.

Again: TRUMP WON. He chooses the people for positions, not the media, not Obama, Nobody but Trump and his cabinet, but it is mostly Pence who will be doing the picking as we have seen so far with the EPA pick --great pick by the way: Climate Change nonsense is going away and Senator Inhofe's great speech concerning that issue will be trumpeted throughout the nation.

AGW funding? GONE. No more wasting taxpayer dollars to gin up big boogey-man stories the sky is falling if we do not stop carbon output which is changing the climate, like we have the power to change the climate. So stupid, and Americans are tired of it.

There are more than 2 million who voted against TRUMP and they are not going away. These 4 years is going to be hell for the Pussy grabber in chief. He is gonna be scandal plagued, discredited and run out of the white house in 4 years. He barely 2on 4 states with about 1% of the votes. What are the odds his voters who expected manufacturing jobs will get those jobs and they will come back to vote for him? His hardline team will make a mess of the country because the man has no clue and it is free for all in the trump team. This is much worse than the clueless W controlled by Cheney.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Andrew Breitbart was Jewish. Jared Kushner appeared to be fine with Bannon. The guy worked in Asia and in Hollywood. He was a Navy officer. He was a MD for goldman sachs, one of the biggest supporters for Hillary Clinton.

This whole fuss about Bannon is ridiculous.

No, even the National Review acknowledges he is unfit due to his gleeful association with the alt right.

National Review is in the anti trump camp. They are one of the losers in this election.

we are going to be hearing the squealing of the pigs for a long time as they get pushed aside.

+1

+2
Liberals do not seem to understand Trump won. He can pick whomever he chooses for whatever position he wants. He could put the racist, anti-white Al Sharpton as head of a new dept. called Buffoon Union Outreach and all people can do about it is cry and moan.

Trump can pick whomever he wants for whatever office he wants and the media and everyone else will have to stand aside and accept the inevitable.

Again: TRUMP WON. He chooses the people for positions, not the media, not Obama, Nobody but Trump and his cabinet, but it is mostly Pence who will be doing the picking as we have seen so far with the EPA pick --great pick by the way: Climate Change nonsense is going away and Senator Inhofe's great speech concerning that issue will be trumpeted throughout the nation.

AGW funding? GONE. No more wasting taxpayer dollars to gin up big boogey-man stories the sky is falling if we do not stop carbon output which is changing the climate, like we have the power to change the climate. So stupid, and Americans are tired of it.

I understand he won. Just like Obama won in 2008- with bigger majorities in both house and Senate.
Still, Obama did not get to do a lot of what he wanted to do, and neither will Trump.
Also, people were allowed to, and in fact did, complain- a lot- about whatever it was they did not like about him. As they should have.
--> birth of the Tea Party.
It's all part of the process. Unless you are telling me that Trump wants to rule as a dictator.

[Anonymous]

PP here, I don't understand why you are getting mad at people expressing their dislike of Trump.

[Anonymous]

Climate Change nonsense is going away and Senator Inhofe's great speech concerning that issue will be trumpeted throughout the nation.

Regrettably, climate change is not going away.
Regrettably, the US will become irrelevant as research will be done elsewhere.