X
Don't miss a thing
We’d like to send you notifications for things that might interest you.
We can let you know when...
- someone follows you
- or replies to your comment
- or sends you a message
- etc.
We'll also give you a heads up when a really cool, funny, or hotly debated post is trending.
*You can customize or cancel notifications in your “Settings” page.
X
Login with Facebook
Login with Google
The last time you logged in, you used your account. Using a different login will create a new account.

The centrist perspective

X
Delete This Choozlet?
Are you sure you want to delete this choozlet?



X
Who upvoted...
X
Choozlet Image
Share on social media, your blog, etc.
 
X
Are you sure you want to delete this choozlet?



Okay I am going to say it
If you b!tched about Obama's deal with Iran because Iran could not be trusted while praising Trump for his meeting with Kim. Then you are a hypocrite .

Flip side of the coin.

If you are b!tching about Trump's meeting with Kim while you supported Obama's deal with Iran because North Korea cannot be trusted then you are hypocrite.

Just sayin'
Created: June 12, 2018
By: Glis
Totals: 2 votes, 35 comments
Image | Widget | Id 
Choozlet Id: JE0ODPX0KXVxPxT
 
1
100%
2 votes
2
0%
0 votes

Comments

A week and 2 days ago
I wanted both.
reply to: I wanted both.
A week and 2 days ago
reply to:
A week and 2 days ago
A week and 2 days ago
Personally, I hold a little different opinion on this asserted equation.

Any bitching I do about either has nothing to do with not trusting Iran and NK.
It's a given from my POV that NEITHER should be trusted, regardless of any rhetoric of "trust" spoken by Trump and Obama.
The conclusion of my different POV in the Iran deal vs. the NK deal is the level of trust that I hold/held for each respective POTUS administration to put America's interests FIRST.

And from that conclusion, I have to admit I trust Trump more than Obama for the sake of the best interests of the USA.
reply to: Personally, I hold a little different opinion on this asserted equation. Any bitching I do about either has nothing to do with not trusting Iran and NK. It's a given from my POV that NEITHER should be trusted, regardless of
A week and 2 days ago
They are both the same exact thing in objective reality.
reply to: Personally, I hold a little different opinion on this asserted equation. Any bitching I do about either has nothing to do with not trusting Iran and NK. It's a given from my POV that NEITHER should be trusted, regardless of
A week and a day ago
You do know that the money that President Obama released to Iran was their own money, don't you?
0
reply to: You do know that the money that President Obama released to Iran was their own money, don't you?
A week and a day ago
The money transferred, given to, given back, etc. to Iran by the Obama admin is not why I trust Obama less...Never was.
0
Voted: 1
A week and 2 days ago
I want a presidential abortion.

I gotta say this...It seems like the erra of Obama was marked with medocricy. The Iran deal was overall success compare to the N.Korean deal and I will tell you why. First..the Iran deal with also supported by US allies and non allies bilaterally. The North Korean deal (as I have highlighted in my other post) is nothing mopre than the idiocy proposed by the Chinese and President (LOL) Xi back in November 2017. (Freeze for Freeze) That was dismissised as insulting and absurd by Trump's government. IT IS THE SAME DEAL. Now, in come bumble**** and he makes President Xi's same proposal. It's hard to be excited by that and I don't see how that compares to the Iran deal. I don't know about y'all,, but I am NOT comfortable with Trump behaving like an autocratic making unilateral deals with another autocratic despot.
reply to: I want a presidential abortion. I gotta say this...It seems like the erra of Obama was marked with medocricy. The Iran deal was overall success compare to the N.Korean deal and I will tell you why. First..the Iran deal with
A week and 2 days ago
I can't see one bit of difference on the two deals.
reply to: I can't see one bit of difference on the two deals.
Voted: 1
A week and 2 days ago
I can see several, but the biggest is that this was not Trump's deal. He is either appropriating Xi's proposal or taken marching orders.

Can I say it was fun seeing two people from almost the same color range together in the same room without sounding racist?
reply to: I can see several, but the biggest is that this was not Trump's deal. He is either appropriating Xi's proposal or taken marching orders. Can I say it was fun seeing two people from almost the same color range together in th
A week and 2 days ago
No it's not. Xi's was a freeze for freeze, yes, but the agreement signed is NK's commitment to work toward "complete denuclearization of the peninsula". The *only* thing the US committed to *in* the agreement was to work to build a "lasting and stable peace" in the Korean Peninsula "in accordance with the desire of the peoples of the two countries". The decision to end war games was in conjunction with the formal agreement, but not a part of it. And frankly, I believe it was the right decision. Ending the war games doesn't end our presence or control of South Korean forces in the event of conflict, or our ability to reinstate them if Kim reneges. It was a good faith gesture, as was halting the implementation of 300 new sanctions. This agreement was simply a first step, not a final treaty.
reply to: I can see several, but the biggest is that this was not Trump's deal. He is either appropriating Xi's proposal or taken marching orders. Can I say it was fun seeing two people from almost the same color range together in th
A week and 2 days ago
Both are a nuclear deal with a completely untrustworthy nation.

With all do respect I am waiting for someone to actually show something that makes them all that different and how bashing either one and not the other is a trying but hypocrisy.
0
reply to: Both are a nuclear deal with a completely untrustworthy nation. With all do respect I am waiting for someone to actually show something that makes them all that different and how bashing either one and not the other is a try
A week and 2 days ago
I already stated as to why I think they are different, but I realize that doesn't insist, nor even want to suggest a desire that I get any agreement on my reasoning.
In a nutshell,

I trust Trump negotiating with enemies I don't trust more than I trusted Obama negotiating with enemies that I don't trust when I consider which administration of the two had/has America's best collective interests at heart,

And my opinion of America's best interests parallel with Trump's much more than Obama's, which IMO is not a hypocritical reason for supporting one over the other.
0
reply to: I already stated as to why I think they are different, but I realize that doesn't insist, nor even want to suggest a desire that I get any agreement on my reasoning. In a nutshell, I trust Trump negotiating with enemies I
A week and 2 days ago
Hypocrite.
reply to: Hypocrite.
A week and 2 days ago
Nope...I'm hypocritical in some ways as are we all, but not in this case.
I will readily agree that I'm not a centrist, nor will I ever be..
Newsflash: it's not hypocritical to trust one POTUS more or less than another relative to what they consider to be best for the USA.
0
reply to: I can see several, but the biggest is that this was not Trump's deal. He is either appropriating Xi's proposal or taken marching orders. Can I say it was fun seeing two people from almost the same color range together in th
A week and 2 days ago
So this wasnt a good deal because it wasnt Trump's idea originally?
0
reply to: Hypocrite.
A week and 2 days ago
Thats not at all hypocritical. For Holwer (and he can certainly speak for himself but I am chiming in because I agree) there is a degree of trust with Trump that there wasnt with Obama. No hypocrisy.

Here's an analogy. There is a knock on your door. You look out your front window and see a guy with a gun on his belt--its part of his uniform because h is a cop. Do you feel nervous? Probably not.

The next day, there is another knock on the door. You look out your front window and see another guy with a gun. This guy has MS13 tattooed across his face and is screaming "Im going to kill you" as he pounds on your front door and tries to kick it in. Do you feel nervous? Are you a hypocrit?

And before you dismiss that analogy, I am stating, unequivocally, that it is the greatest analogy ever.
reply to: No it's not. Xi's was a freeze for freeze, yes, but the agreement signed is NK's commitment to work toward "complete denuclearization of the peninsula". The *only* thing the US committed to *in* the agreement was to work to b
Voted: 1
A week and a day ago
I disagree. This is Xi's idea. I believe that 100%
And...Trump should have notified his allies first. Why is he going this alone?

TBH, I think Kim Jung Un is a better president and more honest than Trump in his intent.
reply to: Thats not at all hypocritical. For Holwer (and he can certainly speak for himself but I am chiming in because I agree) there is a degree of trust with Trump that there wasnt with Obama. No hypocrisy. Here's an analogy. There
A week and a day ago
Thanks for the comment.
I do find it to be notable that at the time of my reply to you at this moment, the only explicit response of "Hypocrite" from the post creator to any participant on the post is me...lol
Yet, there are numerous critical posts that at the very least imply a negative opinion of the Trump-NK deal over the Obama-Iran deal.
Of course, what anyone chooses to call me at anytime is there prerogative.
However, when I see only one instance of a blatant "Hypocrite" response to the numerous comments that imply a side-taking stance with Obama vs. Trump, I must at least consider the possibility that some level of hypocrisy is ingrained within the created post itself...lol
0
reply to: I disagree. This is Xi's idea. I believe that 100% And...Trump should have notified his allies first. Why is he going this alone? TBH, I think Kim Jung Un is a better president and more honest than Trump in his intent.
A week and a day ago
Sorry, Jak, the facts say otherwise. Xi's proposal was for NK to *freeze* their nuclear program, not *total denuclearization*.

Should have, but was under no obligation to, and it's possible he did not make the final decision until after meeting with Kim. Why? Why has America gone it alone in South Korea for some 65 years? We fund it, ultimately it is our decision.

Lol...

New av, eh?
reply to: Thats not at all hypocritical. For Holwer (and he can certainly speak for himself but I am chiming in because I agree) there is a degree of trust with Trump that there wasnt with Obama. No hypocrisy. Here's an analogy. There
A week ago
Yes. I am nervous when a cop knocks on my door. Poor analogy.
reply to: Yes. I am nervous when a cop knocks on my door. Poor analogy.
A week ago
You shouldnt be. At least not overly. I would feel a certain amount of concern... just because they are cops and their presence indicates *some* kind of issue for concern or even bad news. But not quite what I would feel if I saw a "hoodlum" with a gun on my doorstep. And to be honest, I find it hard to believe that you would feel equally on edge between the two people presented in the example.
0
reply to: I can't see one bit of difference on the two deals.
A week and a day ago
Iran was complying with their deal. They allowed inspectors in. They never actually had nuclear weapons. They surrendered the material they had to develop one.NK Has multiple launch sites. They have multiple nuclear devices. They have successfully tested their devices. They have promised the same exact thing that they promised Trump multiple times and lied. Trump gave in to their number one demand. NK has not agreed to inspections.
0
reply to: Iran was complying with their deal. They allowed inspectors in. They never actually had nuclear weapons. They surrendered the material they had to develop one.NK Has multiple launch sites. They have multiple nuclear devices.
A week and a day ago
"They (N. Korea) have promised the same exact thing that they promised Trump multiple times and lied."

To which previous POTUS administrations did NK lie repetitively?
0
A week and 2 days ago
Don't trust Trump. Don't trust Kim. It's a PR move on both their parts. Two dictators full of lofty talk smiling and shaking hands for the camera.

**** both of them
reply to: Don't trust Trump. Don't trust Kim. It's a PR move on both their parts. Two dictators full of lofty talk smiling and shaking hands for the camera. Fuck both of them
A week and a day ago
I don't either, but when I take it objectively it's the same as the Iran deal.in that regard.
0
Voted: 1
A week and 2 days ago
My big bitch with both has to do with another issue altogether.
reply to: My big bitch with both has to do with another issue altogether.
A week and a day ago
What up May? What we thinking?
A week and a day ago
Iran allowed inspectors in. They complied with all of their conditions. The money that President Obama released to them was their money that the US seized years ago. It belonged to them. Korea committed to nothing. They stated the same thing they have stated multiple times and not done. Trump gave into their number one demand. He stopped the military exercises.
0
reply to: Iran allowed inspectors in. They complied with all of their conditions. The money that President Obama released to them was their money that the US seized years ago. It belonged to them. Korea committed to nothing. They state
A week ago
Which ending them really changes nothing for us other than saving money.

The inspections were also very flimsy.
Fundamentally they are very similar in that it is an agreement with a shady and untrustworthy nation
reply to: Which ending them really changes nothing for us other than saving money. The inspections were also very flimsy. Fundamentally they are very similar in that it is an agreement with a shady and untrustworthy nation
6 days ago
They might be similar in that they're both with Shady untrustworthy people. But everything surrounding the deals could not be more different. I would not trust Obama to broker a deal with anyone. Friend or Foe. How could I? He's never done anything like it. How could you possibly be any good at it? That's not a dig, it's pretty much just the fact if you don't do something a lot it's tough to be very good at it. With the North Korea deal it was a one-on-one Trump and Kim. That's right up trumps alley. So whatever method he chooses going forward, praising the guy, tweeting whatever he tweets, inviting the guy to the White House, whatever. I have to give him the benefit of the doubt and wait to see what happens.
0
A week and a day ago
I'm going to risk sounding like a trump puppet here, but that's okay. I would like to ask all of you rabid Trump haters to try and step back and be objective. Just try. This is the first of potentially more meetings. Is the first step. Now I know you despise Trump and I know you think he is a moron. But just try and be reasonable, the guy has been negotiating high-stakes deals for longer than Obama has been alive. Do you really think that he got taken to the cleaners by Kim, that he's such a fool that he got bamboozled, but you sitting here on your laptop has it all figured out? Now this isn't to mean that whatever Trump does I have to agree with it and support it 100% and because he did it must be wonderful. But seriously, you don't think that there's more to this strategy?
reply to: I'm going to risk sounding like a trump puppet here, but that's okay. I would like to ask all of you rabid Trump haters to try and step back and be objective. Just try. This is the first of potentially more meetings. Is the f
Voted: 1
A week and a day ago
Oh...I feel so much better.
NO. I DO NOT TRUST DONALD TRUMP. I do not trust him with my country, with my money, with my safety, with my families safety or my friends safety.
I mean this sincerely...I trust Mike Pence more than I trust Trump
reply to: Oh...I feel so much better. NO. I DO NOT TRUST DONALD TRUMP. I do not trust him with my country, with my money, with my safety, with my families safety or my fri
A week and a day ago
Again, try to step back and be objective. As far as the North Korean situation goes you have a guy in Trump that:

1) Has spent more time negotiating high-stake deals than any president we have ever had. Probably more than every President before him COMBINED--before they were POTUSs (and maybe even including there time as POTUS) So. lets be honest, you can hate him all you want, but he has forgotten more about negotiating than all of the presidents before him. It is literally impossible to do something for that long and not become great at it. I dont care who you are or what skill you are talking about. So, if you can be objective, the fact that Trump is a world class negotiator must be taken as fact.

2) Has been on record for DECADES railing against the politicians that allow the US to get suckered on trade deals and negotiations with other countries. Whether it is trade with China, or oil with OPEC, or negotiations with Iran, Trump has always been outspoken about how much he hates that America is getting our hat handed to us. And he has always taken the position that it needs to change so that it is tilted more toward being favorable to us.

So, what is not to trust? His skill--sorry but anyone that says he is not skilled enough to handle this doesnt know what they are talking about. His intent? Sorry, anyone that says that his intent is not in our best interest hasnt been paying attention the past few decades. So, what's left? The answer... nothing.

The biggest truth in this is that you are so blinded by your hatred of Trump that it blocks you from seeing reality.
A week ago
USA needs to stop invading other countries and telling them what to do. its not USA's job to control the world, in fact no country has the right to do that, we waged war against Germany to stop them from doing it. now we are allowing it to happen?

USA could not care less about Gadaffi until he went against american currency, only then did he become a "threat" and a "terrorist"

the sole purpose of why USA is in other countries is for control and the all mighty dollar, not humanitarian or terrorism. those are just BS stories to keep us supporting the invasion efforts. does anyone now ho wmany suicide bombers where in Iraq pre 2003? 0 a big fat ZERO! after USA invaded, suicide bombers became as popular as Mcdonalds in the USA. USA says those who defend their own homes are terrorists? if you looked at the news before 1945 you would see that radical islam terrorism was not an issue, why 1945 you might ask? well thats when USA figured out the middle east had OIL, thats when USA decided to invade, so before the 1990's bombing, or 2001 twin towers, remember usa instigated those attacks, if you believe the stupid official report,


if WWIII is near, we can thank USA for it. although you can trust your slimy politicians to make it seem like someone else started it