In three tweets, President Trump slammed four Congresswomen that keep criticizing “USA first” policies and the President. You guys are familiar with these four freshman congresswomen, and their comments regarding the United States and how this country should do things.
Well, President Trump fired back, even taking aim at the foreign-born among them:
@realDonaldTrump
So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly……
….and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how….
….it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!
This is basically a sentiment that most of us feel. However, the media wants to spin this as if he simply told them to “go back to where they came from”.
“Think about how other countries would see us”. This is one of the argument points that I get from the left when explaining President Trump’s policies in context.
I usually respond by saying something to the effect that until those other countries do [list of US accomplishments], I could care less about what those other people think.
There are reasons why there is a massive flood of people coming from certain countries to the US. However, there is no matching massive migration of people from the US to these same countries. There is something that we are doing right that those other countries aren’t.
This is the same media that insists that “context matters” when referencing the last president.
“Think about how other countries would see us”
As a free ride. Not an opportunity to succeed at hard work but a “FREE RIDE”.
I understand exactly what Trump was saying and it had nothing to do with racism, xenophobia or anything else other than calling out the “hate America (and Israel) crowd.
Love it, support it and defend it or get the fuck out.
“Free Ride” That is exactly what they are wanting. And even sadder is all of the people that were born here are wanting the same thing.
“Love it, support it, and defend it or get the f^ck out.” That goes, in my opinion, for immigrant or born here. We have an old saying down here in the Southland. If you don’t like it here, Delta is ready when you are.
I don’t agree with everything President does, and I surely don’t agree with the way he presents himself at times. I DO agree with him putting America and American Citizens FIRST. We don’t owe anybody anything and I, for one, am sick of seeing 40% + of my earnings being used to support deadbeats, ne’er do wells, and corrupt congress critters.
What does FA stands for?
Fabulous Ass?
I am getting slightly tired of the “I don’t agree with everything the President does, but…”
Name ONE single thing President Trump has done that you don’t agree with.
I am scratching my ass trying to think of one thing he has ever done that was anti-American or against the benefit of the American people in general, and I can’t think of any.
What? Trump is not Presidential? The last thing I want is a “Presidential” President that keep his mouth shut when the libs assault him with libel, like the Bushies and candidate Romney did.
I want a fighter that is not afraid of the libs. That’s what I wanted, what America needed, and we have it right effing now.
So stop wishing for unicorns and Bushies, and support the bullfighter we have.
A wise man once said “If two people agree one hundred percent of the time, one of them is not thinking for their self.”
The tweet above. Its wording is counterproductive and detracts from his intended message. And, unfortunately, he does stuff like that fairly often on Twitter.
He really does need someone to act as a sounding board/filter for his Twitter account.
Not necessarily. Trump lets folks know in an unpolished way what is what. I prefer that even if I don’t always like it or agree with the way he says it. It also keeps the libtards, dems, and establishment republicans guessing, as they cannot muzzle him, nor control him.
Unfortunately, being a career businessman vice a career politician the POTUS doesn’t necessarily always have a good “gut feel” regarding how the media will play something he says. And things you might say during private business negotiations sometimes aren’t suitable as public statements.
Speaking plainly in public is fine, so long as it’s done carefully. Speaking plainly and carelessly – say, by using language that can be easily misinterpreted – in public when the press is hostile is handing them a club and telling them to swing away.
Trump IMO could benefit from running his tweets by someone with media savvy and getting their “take” on them prior to hitting send. He’d still have the option to send them, but he also might be able to change a few words here and there before doing so and save himself a ton of pushback. This incident is a prime example.
Actually, he knows for a fact that the media will spin anything he says in the worst way possible. But right now, he has got San Fran Nan defending the same four women she is feuding with and personally, I think that’s great for a laugh.
More concentration camps. Gas kids. It’s all great gas when you launder for the Russian mob, sell yr country down the swanee and destroy democracy n the goons will love you. There ain’t no thick like a trump supporting thick.
And when the ducks cross other sides that ruskies gal wanna swim like fishys.
Tell me – is that Progressive Communion Kool-Aid grape, mixed berry, orange, or some other flavor?
I’ve never drunk it, but you obviously have.
There’s a glut of people trying to join the winning team at the same time the co-captains are undermining the successful playbook.
It’s almost like the freshman congresscritters want us to lose…
Now now… wait one.
Lars will be here on the double to ‘splain us all.
Normally I would ask one to NOT conjure the goblin, but this time I look forward to it, I could use a good laugh right now!
Major Snickerdick will be here soon with empirical evidence of how the Orange man is bad.
As the unofficial “thought police” of this blog and holder of my talisman of truth (my flaccid, soy infused micropenis) that ORANGE. MAN. BAD.
ORANGE. MAN. BAD.
Just be aware, there’s an official thought police who likes to delete comments. 😘
Only three comments deleted in the other thread consisting of 185 responses. Those that had something to do with the debate remained and those of the opposition were rebutted.
I also approved posts for public viewing today. Among those posts was a post that I disagreed with on this thread.
Wouldn’t that demonstrate an issue with control?
No. Not even remotely close to a control issue. This would be like saying that proofing and changing your draft, to include deleting sections, is a “control issue”.
None of the three posts that I deleted had anything to do with the argument. In fact, in over 15 years of participating on message boards/forums, I’ve seen moderators/admins delete posts for the same reasons I’ve stated for deleting them here.
I have access to the trash folder, I’ve lost count of how many posts were deleted from the other threads, by the others who could delete posts. I only deleted three. The others deleted far more than three.
It’s something that administrators and moderators do as a part of their duties.
I doubt if Donald gives half a flyingfuckingdamn what any of them think, so long as it he got’em stirred up.
Trump and Coulter can play the libs like puppets, for their own amusement, anytime they feel like it.
Ilhan reminds me of Kenny from South Park while the rest of her clique are mere transient derelicts and one-term-turds.
Trump is playing them like a fine instrument, and these are just the opening notes. Been watching this cat for two years now, and he never does anything without a reason.
The D-rats are scurrying around with their coloring books playing novice Checkers while President Trump is playing multi-level Chess like you see Spock playing in the original “Star Trek” series!
Agree. He’s deliberately using the wording, and spelling, that he does in his tweets knowing full well how people are going to react. As seen on this thread, people are going to go by what the media says, followed by what a collection of opinionated outrage is going to say.
Fortunately, there are many here who see what he’s doing.
It got to the point to where the media didn’t always imbed his tweets. These tweets allowed their readers a path to President Trump’s other tweets. Many publishers have opted to copy and paste instead, even take them out of context.
However, the president knows that on social media, those that hate him are going to respond to his tweets, attracting more flies… Or share his tweets, getting more eyes on them… And on his perspective against what the media is saying.
One example is the collusion conspiracy theory. While avoiding a “grueling interview” in the hands of Mueller, President Trump succeeded in getting his side of the argument into the Mueller report via his tweets. Mueller and his team otherwise would’ve had “writer’s license” to pick and choose which of Trump’s statements to include from the “interview”.
President Trump is applying this elsewhere with his tweets. He knows the audience and knows exactly what to say to get people to do or say certain things. Many in the opposition are so consumed by their distaste for him that they still haven’t figured this out.
Oddly enough the president doesn’t seem to know that three of them are native born Americans, so going back to where they came from is exactly where they are…the fourth is naturalized and according to our laws is as American as I am.
Since when do suggest that a disagreement over the course of the nation’s politics is grounds for being told to get the fuck out?
I know the Democrats seem eager to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory again, but sometimes it seems like Trump wants to spot them a few points.
Just once I’d like to hear a speech of this nature from this fucking president instead of the dumb shit he puts out day after day…
America represents something universal in the human spirit. I received a letter not long ago from a man who said, ‘You can go to Japan to live, but you cannot become Japanese. You can go to France to live and not become a Frenchman. You can go to live in Germany or Turkey, and you won’t become a German or a Turk.’ But then he added, ‘Anybody from any corner of the world can come to America to live and become an American’ …
This I believe is one of the most important sources of America’s greatness. We lead the world because unique among nations, we draw our people, our strength, from every country and every corner of the world … Thanks to each wave of new arrivals to this land of opportunity, we’re a nation forever young, forever bursting with energy and new ideas, and always on the cutting edge; always leading the world to the next frontier …
VoV, you nailed it.
Oh boy. Queue the blue font and prepare to be diagnosed as a narcissist with anger and control issues.
GDContractor: Oh boy. Queue the blue font and prepare to be diagnosed as a narcissist with anger and control issues.
Already happened, and in a previous debate that VOV and I had. Showed similar patterns that would get that description applied. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck…
VOV, I too wish that Trump was Reaganesque.
I voted for Trump, it appalls me when he puts out bullshit like this and I can’t unequivocally support this nonsense.
I’m in agreement with the wall, but suggesting that four American citizens elected to Congress should get out of the country because their voices in dissent piss you off is about as fucking Un-American as I can imagine.
It’s essentially the same thing he told the NFL players. There is no doubt in my mind that Reagan would have wished that the players stand. There is also no doubt in my mind that he would have expressed that wish without the use of the words “deportable offense”. Trump is no Reagan.
But, I question if “a Reagan” could get elected in these modern times.
What President Trump actually said:
“I don’t think people should be staying in the locker rooms, but still I think it’s good. You have to stand proudly for the national anthem. Or you shouldn’t be playing, you shouldn’t be there. Maybe you shouldn’t be in the country.
“You have to stand proudly for the national anthem and the NFL owners did the right thing if that’s what they’ve done.” – President Trump in an interview
Saying “Maybe they shouldn’t be here”, during an interview is not President Trump saying that this is a deportable offense. “Maybe you shouldn’t be in the country” is something conservatives say to people who demonstrate dislike for the United States. If you don’t like it somewhere, why even be there?
I do agree with you that Ronald Reagan would’ve wished for the players to stand. However, he wouldn’t have been in a position to say, “maybe they shouldn’t be here”, as kneeling during the national anthem, as a constant protest, was unfathomable back when Ronald Reagan was president. Especially with the Cold War still ongoing.
In terms of Reagan not winning the Presidency in the current climate, that’s a reality. But, it wouldn’t be due to the lack of support from conservatives. Prior to President Trump, many conservatives considered Ronald Reagan as the last real president.
Ah yes. The familiar sound of one hand clapping.
That’s not me trying to clap with one hand. I’m trying to signal to you that the toy monkey occupying your empty head is banging its cymbals. My other hand is holding your head back, in case you’re trying to figure out why your “swings” aren’t making contact.
This isn’t bullshit, but right on target. Was his implication that they were originally from another country in error? Yes. But based on his mode of operation, it worked the way he intended for it to work.
The cold hard reality is that Cortez et al, as radical as they are on the left, represent the heart and soul of the Democratic Party, of the left. Those who identify as “moderate” are “moderate in name only”. Many embrace radical leftism. However, one of the ways to keep this under wraps is to condemn and attack those who are overtly radical.
Then came those three tweets and BOOM! The so-called “moderates” close ranks with the radical leftists and defend these leftists against a man who’s doing the things that need to be done to get stronger economically.
President Trump continues to shine a light on the true ugliness, and intent, of the Democrats and of the left.
Actually, he stated that they should “go back” and fix things, then come back. That’s not the same thing as Commissar argues, where the actual racist comment leaves no other option with regards to not departing, and with regards to an option to return.
No, it’s not simply about their dissent. It’s about their agenda as well as statements that they’ve made against him, and by extension against what he sees needs to be done, against Israel, etc.
He has faced more dissent than I remember being faced by both Bush presidents, and by Ronald Reagan. They were “lacerated” and were shown dissent, but not to the extent that they’re doing to President Trump.
If it was simply an opposition to dissent, then he would’ve been telling people to get out of the country since 2017.
VoV, good on you for putting your principles above party loyalty, unlike certain other individuals here. I don’t always agree with your opinions or views, but I respect your writing and arguments more than anyone else’s here.
No, he’s not putting principles above party. He’s putting his own opinions above fact. My side of the argument accurately sees that the President isn’t being racist with that tweet… Instead, we see what he’s actually doing. The “certain other individuals” that you talk about are listening to fact, reason, and logic.
Likewise, this isn’t even about party, but a battle for the heart and soul of the country… A battle that those who want to destroy this country have been winning until President Trump came to the scene. Those congress critters that he called out are no friends of the United States.
Their actions highlight a bigger issue… Two of the main threats to our long-term survival as a country and as a civilization. Leftist policies, enforced for decades, have ruined many areas in the United States. Why that’s the case has been pointed out repeatedly on this website, and elsewhere.
Within these areas we have radical, and violent, groups that thrive.
Take Minnesota for example, specifically the Twin Cities area. The area that Omar represents has a high concentration of Somali immigrants. It so happens that this is the same area that is one of the highest US based contribution to terrorist manpower overseas.
Radical Islamists, as a community, thrive in areas that have been under Democrat policies for decades. As I mentioned before, they are to Democrat controlled areas what parasites are to their hosts. Dito with Antifa and other radical U.S. based violent groups.
Prior to President Trump, these issues weren’t emphasized, as the mainstream media was waging an all-out propaganda campaign. The mainstream media doesn’t intend to do the job most people think it does. They’re feeding their viewers just enough information for them to vote Democrat in mass… By extension, vote for people who would implement policies that would slowly weaken and eventually destroy the United States.
Those of us who support President Trump, including the use of these tweets, see him as taking action that’s preventing the U.S. from continuing its march towards the offramp of history. This has nothing to do with party, as we also criticize Republicans that continue to want to act as useful idiots.
Those tweets caused a chain reaction that’s showing the Democratic party for what it is… Consistent with the radicalism that drives their movers and shakers.
They may be native-born Americans, and one naturalized, but based on their statements, their loyalties do not appear to be consistent with that of the United States. They don’t always seem to be always consistent with that of the Democratic Party.
They are extreme leftists, and their philosophy is consistent with the of the movers and shakers of the Democratic Party. Nancy Pelosi may dismiss them as “the fringe” or some other group. But they are consistent with those who want to move the Democratic Party further to the left.
The victories of 2018 were not completely Democratic victories. Among these victories were those claimed by the new left. There is a struggle within the Democratic Party, Nancy Pelosi versus these four congresswomen is just the tip of the iceberg. The Democratic Party has been shifting further left for decades.
The changes that they recommend are not consistent with what needs to be done if the United States is to remain a strong country in the future. The leftists among them, as well as in the general Democratic Party, want the United States to be where many countries in Europe, and in South America, are currently at.
Many radical Muslims find that as communities, they can grow and thrive in areas within the United States that have “benefited” from decades of leftist/Democrat policies.
The solutions that these congresswomen have, as well as that of the Democrats in general, are to the US what laxatives are to someone with diarrhea.
The leftist policies they embrace, the statements they made regarding the United States, the president, and some of our allies, are simply additions. The long-term goal is not to bring the United States towards further wealth, and strength, but to destroy what exists in order to replace it with their utopia.
President Trump was challenging them to take their ideas elsewhere and see if it worked there. Then, they could talk. His choice of wording was deliberate. Unlike President Trump, they do not have experience succeeding in the free market to the extent that President Trump has. He understands the free market, and its inner workings, in a way that most people, including politicians, don’t understand.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: Since when do suggest that a disagreement over the course of the nation’s politics is grounds for being told to get the fuck out?
If the tweets were simply about telling people, that he disagreed with, to “get the fuck out”, he would have told a whole bunch of people, including the media, to do just that. He would’ve done that since 2017. However, this was not just about a simple disagreement over the course of the debate or politics.
President Trump’s tweets highlighted what many of us know about these four Congresswomen. Their economic policies would amount to economic suicide for the United States. Economic suicide would lead to national suicide. Yet, they and others parade their ideas as if they would do better than what the current president has done.
He was challenging them to do what he has actually done.
All four of their districts aren’t exactly what one would call “the shining example” of how we should fix things in the United States. Yes, stay put as they’re from here, and try to help get things done… on the federal level… To help their respective districts improve. To date, none of them have done anything substantive over a long period of time to move their districts, or the country, and head.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: I know the Democrats seem eager to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory again, but sometimes it seems like Trump wants to spot them a few points.
Until he published those tweets, there was a visible “head banging” contest going on between “the old guard” and the “new guard”. The old guard paraded itself as “more to the middle”. Until those tweets, they were showing a visible effort to fight against what the Republicans are as radical.
The “moderate” Democrats were trying to distance themselves from the radical elements of their party. And they were doing this diplomatically.
And then came the tweets.
Guess what happened right after the tweets? Both radical and “moderate” closed ranks. Now those who identified as “close to the middle” are enthusiastically defending the radical elements of the Democratic Party.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: Just once I’d like to hear a speech of this nature from this fucking president instead of the dumb shit he puts out day after day…
You’re comparing what President Trump does on social media to what Ronald Reagan did in a more formal setting. That’s equivalent to global warming scientists splicing instrumental measurements to proxy measurements in order to show a “spike” in temperature rise over the last century.
President Trump agrees:
“Throughout our history, we have proudly welcomed newcomers to our shores. Out of many people, from many places, we have forged one people and one nation under God, and we’re very proud of it. We share the same home, we share the same destiny, and we pledge allegiance to the same, great American flag.” — President Trump May 16, 2019
The president is for legal immigration. In fact, he wants to reform it to make it more consistent with the commonsense immigration policies that other countries already have. One that favors immigrants that have something to offer while making it harder for others who want to come over here and leach.
The president’s tweets were not anti-immigrant. Likewise, they are not racist. They do not address demographics or race. His tweets challenged them to fix “where they came from” in a rhetorical way.
Going to another country may be impractical. However, they do represent their respective congressional districts. They’re busy blowing their nonsense yet their districts aren’t examples of what other districts should strive to be like.
As was mentioned above, President Trump is very deliberate about how he chooses words. I agree. I follow his twitter feed and he does things like deliberately misspell words, or use the wrong words. He knows very well that people are going to zero in on his words, or his statements.
Results? His tweets get spread like wildfire. These three tweets are no exception. Not everybody would interpret them the way you guys did.
I received a letter just before I left office from a man. I don’t know why he chose to write it, but I’m glad he did. He wrote that you can go to live in France, but you can’t become a Frenchman. You can go to live in Germany or Italy, but you can’t become a German, an Italian. He went through Turkey, Greece, Japan and other countries. But he said anyone, from any corner of the world, can come to live in the United States and become an American.
Ronald Reagan
Intelligence alert
I think your never Trumper attitude is coloring your perception. Omar committed known immigration fraud to get here. If the gov would get off their asses and make it happen, she would be gone. She as well as the Palestinian terrorist are both criminals who if prosecuted would not be a problem. But no one does anything about the obvious crimes involved. Tlaib committed known election fraud, as she ain’t from the district she ran in, never lived there yet. And since Omar isn’t actually a citizen due to the aforementioned fraud, she cannot hold an office. Add to that the known tax offenses and campaign finance issues, and she would at least be in prision. Two down right there if someone would grow balls and take them down. And if you had actually listened to what he said, rather than doing the orange man bad bit, he did not specifically call them out and say get out. He was referring to ANYONE using those defective thought processes. And anything Trump says will never meet with your approval, even if he parroted your little speech there.
I think your pro-Trump attitude is coloring your perception. I think Trump could eat a live puppy in public and people like you would still make excuses for him. Is mental gymnastics an Olympic sport yet? If so, I have no doubt we will take home all the gold next year.
As for your conspiratorial nonsense, if those accusations had any merit, appropriate action would have been taken by now. If not, why don’t you call up the appropriate DA or at least report their crimes to the police or ICE? Nobody in this country is above the law. I’m sure any ambitious lawyer would just love the chance to boost their career and publicity by being the one to take down an elected official.
You sound like you attend UC Berzerkely. “Nobody in this country is above the law.” You mean like the Clintons?
Careful, strawmen easily catch fire in the summer heat. 😉
I neither attended Berkeley nor am I a fan of the Clintons (How one manages to be a fan of ANY politician is beyond me. They are here to serve US, not become pop stars). I have absolutely no problem with locking them or anyone else up, if they are guilty of any crime. But AFAIK, nothing has ever come of the numerous rumors, even though Trump said he’d have her locked up after being elected. Weird, it’s almost like you need evidence to do that.
You sound like a devout Bernie-head to me.
“No amount of proof will ever convince an idiot.” – Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain)
WTF?!
The outrage on these tweets is not his sentiment toward other countries. The outrage is that he told congress members who were born and raised in the United States to “go back to the countries you came from and fix them”.
He assumed because of their ethnicity that they were not born in America. Only one of the congress members he targeted was naturalized. The rest were born and raised here. Americans by birth.
That is the equivalent of telling a black person to “go back to Africa”.
The “go back to where you came from” racist meme is such a blatant and ridiculous display of racism that it is literally used as an example of how absurd, ignorant, and outright stupid American racists can be.
And he did it and then doubled down.
It is not merely racist it is clownishly stupid racism.
The pathetic mental gymnastics I see some of you twist yourselves into to defend and justify Trump is an embarrassment to veterans.
Do you all stand for anything at this point? Are you just going to continue to accept and defend everything this guy does? He has already violated deeply held Republican values and positions and has never in his life lived up to any of the values republicans claim to represent.
The constant feckless acquiescence to idiocy and enthusiastic gullibility of the Republican Party proves that a con man does not have to be smart if the people he is conning are sufficiently stupid.
I’m in agreement on this one, it’s more than a bit beyond the pale. It’s simply disgusting and discouraging for me.
There are things I will defend Trump on, and things I won’t. This is one that I won’t. As much as I dislike all four of these women and question the legitimacy of Ilhan Omar’s citizenship, this went too far.
I don’t see the above tweets as “going too far”, and likewise I’m glad that I’m here defending those tweets. They didn’t go too far, and he was well within his left and right limits with that post.
Those who follow the President’s tweets, and his statements, know that the president is going to deliberately get things wrong, and word things, in a way that would get people to argue a certain way… To get them to assume and think a certain way.
A reading, of the above tweets, doesn’t come close to telling someone to “go back where you came from” in the same sense that it’s used as a result of racism/prejudice.
Those four congresswomen made statements that indicate that they’re no friends to the United States, or to its founding principles. They yap their mouths about how the U.S. should do things, but they’re short on the “practical application” of what they’re yapping about.
He essentially told them to walk the walk. This involved not only telling them to “go back”, but telling them to fix things there, then to come back and tell us how to do things.
He didn’t name names, or identify demographics. In posting the above tweets, he initially accomplished the following:
* Got the “moderate” factions of the democrats to close ranks with the radicals in the party.
Then he accomplished the following:
* House quickly moves to condemn him… While having a history of taking forever and a day to come up with legislation needed to fix immigration laws and to fund substantive changes to our border… Both policy and structural.
Result? It’s clear that the Democratic party is in the tank for radical leftists and for those that hate the U.S. President Trump is doing things to fix things that previous administrations kicked down the road. Yet, the House would much rather condemn him based on a phony argument than to pass the laws that would give border patrol/security the tools they need to reduce the flow of illegal immigration into the U.S.
Others say that “he went out of line” with his word usage. I’d tell the president, “Damn political correctness, engines ahead flank tweet.” However, it appears that he doesn’t need anybody to tell him that.
Great Lars, now do this one:
https://mobile.twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1150573502803533824?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1150573502803533824&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Falthouse.blogspot.com%2F2019%2F07%2Fthe-asserted-requirement-that-your.html
The argument she is making is fine.
The way she said it is fucked up.
It would be racist for a congress person to say “we don’t need any more white faces that don’t want to be a white voice” so it should be regarded as racist to say “ we don’t need any more brown faces that don’t want to be a brown voice.”
What she is trying to argue is that our country has deeply intrenched and intransigent institutional prejudice against brown people, black people, Muslims, and the queer community. Minorities, Muslims, and the queer community are also significantly underrepresented in all the institutions of political power in this country. So, therefore, If you are black, brown, Muslim, or queer you have an ethical responsibility to be a voice for your community. If you are unwilling to do that we, as democrats, don’t need you taking a seat in power from someone that would be a voice for underrepresented communities.
That is the argument she is making and has been making. That argument is fine.
The way she presented that argument is not OK. It is fair to call it “racist” for her to say what she said.
There is a intellectual argument being made in sociology and political science that minority groups can never be racist because racism is about power and they do not hold the power in this country.
I do not agree with that school of thought and have lost a friend over it. I believe racism, ethic prejudice, religious bigotry… any identity based prejudice is well understood and documented in-group/out-group behavior and power and thus racism can be localized and even individualized.
If you see someone as an “other” because of their race, then you are choosing to view the world through a racist perspective. Whether you have power over them or not.
Now if they forced you into being the “other” and you were forced to accept their label as an “other” due to their power over the institutions and rules in your community/society then your viewing the world through the racist perspective they imposed on you is not racism.
So it is possible for someone who is forced to live as an “other” by the dominant in-group to have racial animosity toward that “in-group” and not the be racist because it was not their own views on race that defined the in-group/out-group it was the racist perspectives of the dominant group that forced their group distinctions on the slave.
That was better than I expected Lars, though I notice that you were careful not to explicitly say “what she said was racist”. But I understand that your orthodox prog faith makes it difficult for you to criticize a “woman of color” in any way. Still, baby steps, so good for you. I do wonder though what “brown voice” those “brown faces” are supposed to speak with, and if that voice is the same for South Asians as it is for South Americans (substitute “brown face” group as you like).
So, pray tell: what is the essential difference between her p!ss-poor choice of words in making her argument and the POTUS doing the same here?
IMO the POTUS screwed the pooch in his choice of language in the tweets in question. But rather than being racist, I see his argument as being, “Go prove you can create Socialist Utopia elsewhere before you expect anyone in America to take your proposals seriously.” I’d love to hear your justification for excusing one while hammering the other.
C’mon Hondo, don’t you know that when she said it, it was (D)ifferent.
If you choose to view society through a racist lense; choose to see people as “others” based on their race then you are a racist.
If you forced to view the world through a racist lens; forced to see people as “others” because of the power they have to shape the institutions and rules of our society then you are not racist.
I do not think a sitting member of congress is powerless but she represents people who are because people are still subjected to institutional racism. She also had to overcome institutional racism throughout her life.
I think it is justified to say what she said is racist. But I also think that we need to look at how much she is choosing to view society through a racist lens and how much she feels forced to do so or ethically responsible to represent those that are still forced to do so.
“If you choose to view society through a racist lense; choose to see people as “others” based on their race then you are a racist”
You just described the Democrat party.
“…how much she is choosing…” and “….how much she feels forced…”. Is this like “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” amongst the prog faithful? And you accuse others here of mental gymnastics, tsk.
I said twice in the above posts that it is fair to say what she said is “racist”.
That is more ground some of these asshats have given on Trump’s blatantly racist comments.
Yes, and you also tried to contextualize what she said.
Now I’ll just tell you that I wish Trump had expressed himself differently, but I also understand how we got Trump. If you would like to explore how we have come to a less refined discourse (I mean, we don’t have Buckley vs Schlesinger in a formal debate on TV anymore), I think you honestly have to point to some of the “street theater” tactics that the left has employed for at least 50 years.
Now the truth is, that those tactics were effective, so he right went and found their own street fighter.
Hubris brings rise to Nemesis.
Racism of Trump’s statement was the assumption they were not natural born American because of their ethnicity.
It was not that they could “go somewhere else” it was that he assumed they were FROM somewhere else.
You are not a stupid man, Hondo. How stupid are you willing to pretend to be to justify your position?
I’m not the one viewing the world through race-tinted glasses, Poodle. That would be you.
Wearing those race-tinted glasses guarantees you’ll find racist statements, intent, and even (gasp) racists everywhere – including a ton places where they don’t exist. But hey: if that’s the way you want to view the world, have at it.
But while you’re seeing many things that are not there – then wondering why the world doesn’t take you seriously, or why you can’t seem to “fit in” – you just might want to reflect on what I said above. Because just maybe that’s why.
But hey: maybe I’m just pretending to be “stupid” here, too.
Now, regarding the question I asked that you tried to side-step: you actually gave us enough info to discern your position. Let me summarize what I’ve gotten from your previous comments here.
You find the minority Congresswoman’s statements blatantly racist. But you’re giving the minority Congresswoman a pass because although her statements were blatantly racist, she’s acting as a spokesperson for other minorities.
However, Trump is white, and is thus part of the “institutional elite” responsible for what the Left calls “institutional racism”. So Trump gets no pass for statements you assume (without proof) were motivated by what were possibly subconscious racist assumptions on his part.
Short version: you’re treating people grossly differently based solely on their skin color.
There’s a name for such behavior. I’ll let you figure out the name.
And the really sad part is you probably think you’re fully justified in doing that because, well, “Trump . . . baaaaaaaaaaaaad!”
Hondo – they way Lars looks at things, people of color CAN’T be racists… only whites can. People of color speak truth to power.
The only way that whites can not be racist is if they check their white privilege… and then, it’s “conditional”.
“therefore, If you are black, brown, Muslim, or queer you have an ethical responsibility to be a voice for your community. If you are unwilling to do that we, as democrats, don’t need you taking a seat in power”
Well now that’s pretty racist. You only seeing a candidate as a race, religion, or sexual preference. Like Dr. King, I prefer to view people by the content of their character. Unfortunately your view is the shared by most Democrats, seeing people only as their race, gender, religion, or sexual preference.
If you’re going to get upset at Trump saying something you think is racist, you then shouldn’t be a cheerleader for only electing black, muslim, or gay people only to boost their representation.
While I normally disagree with what you say, Commissar, this time I have to agree with you.
They’re as American as we are, whether we like it or not. What Trump wrote there is beyond the pale. I find it rather worrisome that there are people, on both sides of this fence, who will support anything their chosen people say, regardless of how wrong it is, just to support their person.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: While I normally disagree with what you say, Commissar, this time I have to agree with you.
Then that makes both of you wrong.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: They’re as American as we are, whether we like it or not.
This is a strawman argument. Their demographics and nationality had no bearing on the message that President Trump was getting across. What he was slamming them for was their actions. He was also challenging them to “walk the walk” if they felt that they knew better.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: What Trump wrote there is beyond the pale.
No it isn’t. If you understand how President Trump does things, and you understand what he’s really saying in the above tweets, you’ll see how he is outmaneuvering his opposition. He knew what he was doing, he knew what the reactions would be, and he knew what he was going to post in the aftermath of the opposition’s reactions.
We, on the right, have argued that the left is increasingly embracing communism/socialism. Enter Cortez et al and “presto” we have people living up to the description that we give the left. We have the Democrats, parading themselves as “moderates” in a “back-and-forth” with these radical leftists.
This action allows the left to argue that they are not with the radical left. Enter the above three tweets, and “wham”, you have the “moderates” closing ranks with the “radicals”. A reading, of the above tweets in context, does not show racism. This wasn’t even a case of, “If you don’t like it here, leave”. This was a case of him essentially telling them to take a dump or get off the pot with regards to getting things done to move the country forward.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: I find it rather worrisome that there are people, on both sides of this fence, who will support anything their chosen people say, regardless of how wrong it is, just to support their person.
The above tweets don’t qualify for one of those situations. President Trump clearly had a plan, and he worded something in a way that others would interpret it the way they did… Then react accordingly. He was deliberate with that wording for a reason.
Thebesig: I’m punching this up on my phone, so I apologize for the lack of formatting compared to your response.
Should we really be demanding that people leave this country just because we don’t like their politics? The entire point of the First Amendment is that people have the right to speak their minds. I’d argue that removing them, or calling for them to leave, would be a form of censorship, just disguised as something else. If they’re not here, does their opinion influence our politics anymore?
It’s not a strawman, it’s a statement of fact. They are American citizens. They’re here legally (maybe not Omar, in which case she shouldn’t be here. If the case can be made for immigration fraud, she can and should be deported. Period. Dot. End discussion.)
I wholeheartedly understand what his playbook is. I’m just not a fan of it. I have a problem with American politics, as a whole. The American people have swallowed these divide and conquer tactics wholly, allowing themselves to be set against each other.
Framing his argument, in the light he did, is where I have a problem. He knew it would have racist undertones, and it does. While it benefits him to have the left focus on that, it actually defeats the intent of his message, which should be directed at the left. If he wants them to “walk the walk”, it would help to have them focus on that, instead of racist undertones. Both sides are taking pages from the same disgusting playbook, here.
We shouldn’t drag someone’s race into something, overtly or otherwise. That’s wrong, whether it’s the left or the right doing so. That’s something that we all should stand up against, regardless of political affiliation.
I’d encourage AOC et al to visit Vietnam or Venezuela, and witness firsthand the end results of their policies. I’ve had the honor of speaking to a man who escaped Vietnam on a raft. He could tell them a thing or three about why these ideas are bad.
We should encourage people to have their opinions, then challenge them with opinions of our own. However, we should always be wary of what the connotations of what we say are, and what the end result would be. I feel that telling them to leave is wrong, in that they have every right to be here, and to say what’s on their mind. Them leaving is simply a means to an end, in this case, that end being their removal from American political discourse.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: Thebesig: I’m punching this up on my phone, so I apologize for the lack of formatting compared to your response.
No need to apologize. I could read through and understand just the same. I do this on my lap top, using speech to text.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: Should we really be demanding that people leave this country just because we don’t like their politics? [STRAWMAN]
President Trump didn’t tell the four congress critters to leave the United States “because he didn’t like their politics”. He challenged them to fix a smaller country before telling them to come back and tell us how to fix ours. He was challenging them to walk the walk instead of spewing codswallop.
There was an element involving their returning to the U.S. in his statement. In the statements where he suggested that they leave, he did it in context of people leaving if they didn’t like it here. Nothing in that equation involved him wanting them to leave because he didn’t like their politics.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: The entire point of the First Amendment is that people have the right to speak their minds. [STRAWMAN]
President Trump has no problems with people speaking their minds. He has his ways of responding if their comments warrant a response from him. A reading of the above tweets, in context to the total words used, as well as in context to the rest of his tweets and to the rest of the speeches, does not indicate an issue with people speaking their minds.
What his tweets do is call them out as hypocrites. Listening to some of their speeches, one has a valid reason to question their loyalty to the United States. Their recommendations and arguments are inconsistent with what the United States needs to do. Ergo, do we really need to abolish elements of the military, and border patrol, when real world realities require their existence?
President Trump has walked the walk with regards to doing things that need to be done to “fix” the country. These congresswomen, as well as his detractors at large, have not done anything substantive to fix the issues like what President Trump has done.
That is what is tweets focus on. And, he does this using the strategy that I pointed out yesterday.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: I’d argue that removing them, or calling for them to leave, would be a form of censorship, just disguised as something else. If they’re not here, does their opinion influence our politics anymore? [STRAWMAN]
If you read the above three copy and pasted tweets, you’d find that nowhere, in any of the statements, is he calling for their removal. His tweets could be broken down into three main messages:
1. Congress women from fucked up areas, with corrupt and inept governments…
2. These same congresswomen tell us how our government should be ran…
3. Congresswomen should go back and fix the areas that they came from…
4. Once that is done, come back and tell us how to fix ours
That is not, exactly, telling people to just leave simply because their politics is disagreeable. He’s basically challenging them to get off their rear ends and to actually do something substantive.
That is not censorship. When they come back, in this scenario, we would presumably have access to their politics and opinions. But, even if they were to carry this out, they would still have twitter feeds and other social media presence despite being outside the United States.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: It’s not a strawman, it’s a statement of fact. They are American citizens. They’re here legally (maybe not Omar, in which case she shouldn’t be here. If the case can be made for immigration fraud, she can and should be deported. Period. Dot. End discussion.)
It’s a strawman, not a statement of fact.
President Trump is not calling for their removal from the United States. He is not telling them to “Go back to where you came from” in the same sense that certain people are told. Not even close.
It’s a strawman because President Trump is not calling for them to be removed from the United States. It is not calling for them to be censored. He is simply challenging them to actually be useful and to get something done before telling the U.S. what to do. In their cases, see if their ideas would actually work first before telling the U.S. government what to do.
This is no different from somebody lecturing us how to do our job, this same somebody not knowing how to do our job, and then us responding to them that they could feel free to do our job for us… Knowing full well that beyond criticizing how we do our job, they don’t have the knowledge or skill set to do so.
His series of tweets rhetorically told them to do something, and then to come back and show us how. the bolded statement clearly shows that the arguments that you guys are advancing, regarding “censoring and removing” American citizens is null and void. That is not what he is arguing.
Hence, you, and those on your side of the argument, are advancing a strawman argument.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: I wholeheartedly understand what his playbook is. I’m just not a fan of it.
I’ve been a news junkie since 1982. I’ve been a history junkie for four decades. The trend that the US has been going through until recently was not a good one. What was occurring in Europe, and in other places around the world, was a preview of where we were headed… What the Democrats and their leftist supporters want.
The mainstream media has increasingly abdicated their journalistic responsibilities to the point to where we have a large percentage of millennial’s being okay with socialism. We have a bunch of kids running around “fighting against fascism” while engaging in fascist tactics, because they don’t know what fascism is. We have people demanding more entitlements and “free stuff” without understanding the free market forces that make it possible for them to even get that free stuff.
This is just scratching the surface.
President Trump had to do, what he has currently done, to fight back against this juggernaut of an effort to radically transform the United States. The mainstream media, and their enablers, together with Hollywood, the education system, etc., have pumped out a population that is receptive to their propaganda.
Yuri Bezmenov warned about this phenomena back in the 1980s. He talked about three generations required to be subjected to propaganda before it was “game over” for the U.S. The first generation that he talked about is the baby boomer generation. The second generation that he talks about is Generation X. The third generation that he talked about is the Millennial generation.
He proved prophetic. Everything that President Trump is doing is intended to upend this trend… And to crush it…
A Terminal Lance Coolie: I have a problem with American politics, as a whole. The American people have swallowed these divide and conquer tactics wholly, allowing themselves to be set against each other.
A lot of this boils down to information. We have a mainstream media that is not interested in doing real journalism. By that I mean presenting the news as opposed to trying to get the people to think and believe a certain way. They’ve abdicated the former, advocated the later.
We have an education system that trends toward supporting one argument as opposed to another. When I was posting on the old Protest Warrior forums, last decade, the high school students and college students that posted there had a common complaint… That their teachers and professors were outright socialists and communists.
Add to that a media/Hollywood that panders to social justice warriors and their causes.
Results? A large segment of the population that is misguided and is ignorant of the real issues. We have Black Lives Matter venting their frustration at alleged police brutality against specific ethnicities… While ignoring statistics showing that most black deaths, caused by another, is caused by another black.
Then we have groups like Antifa. They think that they are fighting Hitler style fascism, while not realizing that they are engaging in the very tactics that fascists engaged in.
I saw a video of a group of demonstrators who were in favor, or leaned toward, the flying of the Mexican flag at an illegal immigrant detention center. She acted like the US government was completely in the wrong for holding people the way AOC said they were being held.
Then, when you have people present the facts to them, they get triggered.
However, when the facts are presented, and the opposition is willing to listen, then they “throw the shackles off”. A good example of this is the walkaway movement, and their founder’s story on what led him to walk away.
Access to the facts tends to unite people. It is access to these facts that the media, and others, want to hide. It is those who do not have access to these facts that are susceptible to being “divide and conquer”.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: Framing his argument, in the light he did, is where I have a problem.
I don’t have a problem with the way he framed the question. He knows how to say the right things to get people to react a certain way. He didn’t mention race, gender, or any other demographic. He mentioned actions and statements. That’s neither racist nor a poor chose of words, no matter how many people will try to spin it as such.
I don’t have a personal twitter account, but if I did, I would jump on there and like all three of those tweets… Putting my name behind them.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: He knew it would have racist undertones, and it does.
The way he phrased it is not racist. However, he knew that those on the left would have had problems with the way he worded those tweets. He did not mention race, he did not mention color, he did not mention gender, etc. He simply mentioned attitudes and actions.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: While it benefits him to have the left focus on that, it actually defeats the intent of his message,
It didn’t defeat the intent of his message. In fact, I’m reading the “impact indicators”, the effects, that those tweets had. They accomplished what they were intended to accomplished. Not only did he get the message across, he did so in a way that forced the Democratic Party to close ranks with low polling, toxic, radical leftists.
It shows that the Democratic Party is willing to overlook hatred and divisive statements by these congresswomen in favor of wanting to pass a resolution condemning the tweets. By doing this, the Democrats are showing their true colors.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: which should be directed at the left. If he wants them to “walk the walk”, it would help to have them focus on that, instead of racist undertones.
The way he did it is perfect. There were no racial undertones. Those who are opposed to President Trump, no matter what, who are looking for anything to torpedo him with, are going to see racial undertones. Those who are either racist, or don’t really understand what racism is, would see that statement as “racist”.
President Trump is using a direct approach, as you suggested, especially when it comes to passing laws to fix our immigration and to close loopholes.
These four congresswomen, whose actions and statements indicate that their loyalties should be questioned, deserved the kind of tweets the President Trump generated.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: Both sides are taking pages from the same disgusting playbook, here.
There is no equivalence to what President Trump did, and to what the Democrats are doing.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: We shouldn’t drag someone’s race into something, overtly or otherwise. That’s wrong, whether it’s the left or the right doing so. That’s something that we all should stand up against, regardless of political affiliation. [STRAWMAN]
And, a reading of the above tweets don’t indicate race being involved. It doesn’t indicate that either overtly, or subversively. President Trump called them out for their actions and statements. He focused on that. Telling them to go overseas to their presumed origin, to fix things, and then to come back, is not racism.
As I indicated in my first batch of posts, I’ve had racial terms and phrases thrown at me in the past. There is a clear difference between what President Trump said and intended above and those tweets, and my experiences.
What is wrong is assuming that he was racist, and insisting that it was racist, when the statement clearly does not indicate any form of racism.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: I’d encourage AOC et al to visit Vietnam or Venezuela, and witness firsthand the end results of their policies. I’ve had the honor of speaking to a man who escaped Vietnam on a raft. He could tell them a thing or three about why these ideas are bad.
She would do that, and then come back and talk about how great Vietnam is. She will point to the progress and argue that her policies would indeed work here. In the case of Venezuela, she would either claim that things are being hyped, or that they are not doing things properly.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: We should encourage people to have their opinions, then challenge them with opinions of our own.
Nobody is doing otherwise. President Trump did not say that they could not have an opinion. He is simply challenging them to walk the walk, and to actually do something substantive to show that they know what to do to build things up.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: However, we should always be wary of what the connotations of what we say are, and what the end result would be.
What President Trump did in his tweets, is similar to what I do in my arguments here and elsewhere. He is strategically using specific words, and phrases, to get a specific reaction. He knows how the intended audience would react. He knows that he can say something and that somebody would take it a certain way.
The way he worded those tweets is not racist. It’s not racist overtly, is not racist subvertly. He addressed their statements and actions, and not their races. Those who argue that his tweets were indeed “racist” are doing so to obscure the actual argument.
Telling somebody, a minority, to walk the walk does not make one “racist”. Had all four congresswomen been Caucasian, and one of them was from a European country that isn’t doing too well, yet they said the same BS that the four actual congresswomen said, President Trump would have said the same thing.
It is about action and statement, not biological characteristics.
A Terminal Lance Coolie: I feel that telling them to leave is wrong, in that they have every right to be here, and to say what’s on their mind. Them leaving is simply a means to an end, in this case, that end being their removal from American political discourse. [STRAWMAN]
False. President Trump is not demanding that they leave permanently. He is not demanding that they leave and to take their politics with them. If you read the above tweets, he’s basically calling them out for trying to tell the US government how to do things.
Even if you want to focus on the fact that they’re American citizens, none of their districts are what you would consider a “prime example” to strive for. So, if they are American citizens and are where they should be at, per the tweet, the message of the tweet is still valid.
Help fix your districts, and come back to Washington DC and tell us how to fix the country.
What is more important, in the above tweets, is the message that these four congresswomen needed to pull their heads out of their asses and to walk the walk. He deliberately made an erroneous message in order to get his tweets to be spread like wildfire.
It’s like the ant bait that you leave across the path of acts. The ants carry a piece of this bate back to their colony. The ants there eat this bate, then they die. Then, all of a sudden, enough of those ants die from the bait that their colony collapses.
President Trump is doing something similar with his tweets, whether those are the ones that I talked about above, or his other tweets. He is knocking the wind out of their arguments and is exposing them for what they are.
It’s like shining a laser light on the ground, and watching a cat chase after it… Or making a dog chase its own tail.
Not so. There is a distinct difference between living in America and being an American. Three meet the technical requirements for citizenship, the fourth does not, but no one will bust her for her fraud. That by itself does not make them Americans. There is a lot more to actually being an American than that. TLaib for one is constantly talking up her Palestinian terrorist heritage. They are racists and anti-Americans of the worst stripe. Being an American is both a spiritual as well as a demographic or geographic thing, and not one of them has any of that in them.
You -epic- hypocrite.
Trump is playing Politics by the rules used by Democrats, including saying outrageous things.
Day in and day out, you folks falsely call people “racist” or “fascist” or some other bullshit, then whine like bitches when someone on your side gets a dose of their own medicine.
You yourself got your ass banned for saying outrageously false bullshit, to the point where an -infantry platoon sergeant- thought your name calling was excessive. Wow.
Due to your hypocritical antics, -you- haven’t the moral authority to call anyone on anything.
-zero-
Trump is mouthy? Punched back? Said nasty bullshit about folks slandering folks constantly? How -dare- he play by your rules! How dare he hit back in kind!
How dare he give others the idea they can also win by playing by your rules.
Why if that catches on, if that reality sinks in, the Left might have to, you know, stop. Or, not stopping, suffer the consequences of flaming hypocrisy.
Face it. He is playing you fools, by exposing your hypocrisy, and forcing your moderates to embrace your radioactive lunatics. Ugly? Sure. Go look in a mirror. Look hard.
-you- threw away any moral authority when you went off the deep end with extra-broad-brush name calling here, especially demonstrable falsehoods that got you banned.
-zero-
even if you manage a stopped-clock moment.
-zero-
Not too late to mend your ways. But your ego and anger won’t let you take that long hard inward gaze.
But, you -could-
Mental gymnastics.
Except you didn’t even bother to defend what he said. You just claimed racism is ok as long as both parties do it.
Eat shit and bark at the moon DIPSHIT, Ilhan Omar CHEATED on her immigration by coming here married to her BROTHER.
Lied at least two years on her income taxes and lied in sworn court documents to secure her divorce from her legal husband/brother.
Anyone that hitches their wagon to that racist, anti-Semitic, America-hating piece of trash deserves to go down with her. So maybe we’ll lose AOC and Tlaib with her.
So mote it be.
So, you ignored the “stopped clock moment” line? That was hung out there where you couldn’t miss it?
That is also why you have zero moral authority.
What, you expected Poodle to read your entire comment before making up his mind?
You should know better. He doesn’t have time for that – or for doing due diligence or for getting his facts straight, for that matter – when it comes to dealing with others here at TAH.
Exactly what about his “stopped clock” moment was of reasonable merit to respond to, Hondo?
Or are you just mindlessly virtue signaling that you agree with this blog’s in-group of regulars?
Nope. Just pointing out the fact that you’d missed that, almost certainly because you failed to notice it the first time around. I say that because you have a demonstrated track record of missing the obvious in other people’s comments.
Thanks for playing – and for being played.
You really like to use the words “racism” and “racist” when commenting about, well, anything. You throw them around like they’re words du jour. Seeing as not one person has stated or implied their superiority or others inferiority over another based on ethnicity, your usage of these words is unfounded. If somehow these words have been bastardized to meet your needs then that’s on you. I’m guessing you’re not as ‘woke” as you think you are.
No. I don’t. The vast majority of my comments do not mention and have nothing to do with racism.
I use the term when I am calling out racism. What Trump said was racist.
And you don’t have a clue what racism is. It is usually but not always about superiority. For example: some people hold the view that all races/ethnicities are completely equal but ALSO are against “race mixing”. They are still racist.
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
…
The Commissar, like most Democrats, believes it’s only racist when a Republican says something racist. When he or his party say something racist, then he’s got a long explanation for why it’s not racist.
Then he complains about our mental gymnastics.
Der Commissar is a bigot… he’s proved it time and time again here at TAH with his pontifications and postulations.
ORANGE. MAN. BAD.
Apparently I have a far superior knowledge of what racism is than you. And the example you provided has nothing to do with what is being discussed here. “Race mixing” – Seriously?
What Trump said wasn’t the best choice of words, but had nothing to do with race. The fact that you’re bringing race into it is, once again, on you and everyone else playing that hand.
I suggest that you go brush up on the definitions of race and racism again. Just because those with today’s “progressive” values like to call everything they don’t agree with racist doesn’t make it so.
The fact that you try to claim that being prejudice against ethnicity is not racism shows that you do not understand what racism is.
Racism is about race AND ethnicity.
Which is why you have never in your life heard the term “ethnicityism”.
What Trump said was blatant racism. Period.
It is absurd you are trying to claim you have a “superior” understanding of racism because you don’t think was he said is racist.
I see that reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit either. I used the terms ethnicity and race synonymously in this case. You absolute tard. I can see why you’re such a hit here. You seem to confuse nationality with ethnicity/race. It’s entertaining.
As I see it, Commissar has Trump Acceptance Resistance Disorder (TARD) to the point where he lets it run his life thus making him a Trump Acceptance resistance Disorder Operative, a TARDO.
IMHO Commissar is a 24K TARDO!
This coming from a guy who once wrote on a post here:
“I date Asian women…” as your proof that you didn’t have a racist bone in your body.
Do you also “have a black friend”?
I never said that, asshole.
I said my recent girlfriends (at the time) were Chinese and Syrian.
And I did not mention it to show I was not racist. It had nothing to do with that.
But I thought words mattered?
Is it possible Trumps words “had nothing to do with that”?
Asshole.
Not mental gymnastics, but explaining reality to you. Nowhere, in any of his argument in that post, did he claim that racism is okay as long as both sides do it. One of the things that he argued was the Democrats have been playing dirty, and now someone is playing dirty back and doing it better than those who “wrote the dirty playbook tricks”.
Others here have defended the President’s actions. 11B-Mailclerk is addressing the other issue that hadn’t been emphasized as the defense of the President’s tweets. Still relevant to the debate.
Commissar: WTF?!
That’s the description of your response here and in the other thread.
Commissar: The outrage on these tweets is not his sentiment toward other countries. The outrage is that he told Congress members who were born and raised in the United States to “go back to the countries you came from and fix them”.
An outrage expressed by people who deliberately ignored the message in those tweets in favor of pulling the race card against the President. If you read those tweets, in context to the entirety of those tweets, as well as in context to his greater argument and speeches, he was challenging them to match his accomplishments.
As I mentioned above, the four congresswomen implied in his tweets are all hot air about how to get the U.S. to move ahead. Additionally, they’ve made remarks that make a large number of us question their true loyalty.
I’m sorry, but the mention “Someone did something” wasn’t an accident. Many are not coming here, from other countries… Specifically from radical Islamic backgrounds… in order to “integrate”. Keep in mind that many in that region actually cheered those events.
The fact of the matter is that the Democratic Party has been moving further to the left. The movers and shakers of the democratic party are further to the left than those in the “mainstream”… The latter also moving to the left.
Their leftist policies would amount to national suicide if implemented. Something that radical Islamists are fine with. They could already prosper, as a community, in areas that have been under Democrat control for decades. They’re using the left the way a parasite uses a host.
Unlike them, President Trump has actually done something to get a nation going. You do that through the free market. President Trump knows exactly how to leverage the free market to propel the US ahead economically.
The president will deliberately say things a certain way, and use the wrong words, knowing full well that the left would blow up. In the process of blowing up, they would spread his tweets far and wide. People do read these tweets and don’t always come away with the same interpretation as those that spread the tweet in an attempt to damage him.
Commissar: He assumed because of their ethnicity that they were not born in America. Only one of the Congress members he targeted was naturalized. The rest were born and raised here. Americans by birth.
No assumptions made; this was deliberate. President Trump studies his adversaries, as well as the “landscape” that he has to operate in. He knows exactly what to say, in his tweet, to make certain people blow up a certain way. He has constantly done this, using a similar pattern and mode of operation.
A common reply to that tweet would naturally be to argue that they are US citizens who happened to be in elected office.
If that’s the case, how, exactly, are their districts doing? I’m from Minnesota. I know that one of their districts is not exactly the kind of district that will serve as a model for the rest of the country to emulate. Ditto with the other districts that these congresswomen represent.
For that matter, the districts represented by other Democrats in Congress.
Herein lies the true intent of this tweet.
They, not having any real free market economy experience, are trying to voice their opinion about how to “move the country forward”. Yet, through their actions, don’t do anything substantive that would move the country, and by extension their districts, forward.
Commissar: That is the equivalent of telling a black person to “go back to Africa”.
False. When that phrase is used, it’s used as an “end state”, with the action being that they go there and they don’t return. He clearly indicated, in his tweet, for them to fix something then to come back. When someone tells a black to do what you state, it’s with the intent for them to stay there. You’re making this into a racist meme when it clearly isn’t racist.
Commissar: The “go back to where you came from” racist meme is such a blatant and ridiculous display of racism that it is literally used as an example of how absurd, ignorant, and outright stupid American racists can be.
If it were such a meme, but it isn’t. Telling someone to “go back where they came from” is usually said with the intent for that person is for them to never come back… To remain out of view and out of the way. That wasn’t the case with his tweet, as there was a “come back” element.
The president was taking a stab at their antics, and comments, as well as their criticism of practical policies that are actually working. He was essentially saying, “Oh yeah, if you think you know better, then why don’t you do X, Y, and Z, then come back and tell us how to do things.”
Your argument is nothing but a strawman that doesn’t address the President’s actual argument.
Commissar: And he did it and then doubled down.
Because the message of those tweets was spot on with regards to the message he was getting across. He was doubling down on something that he is right in.
Commissar: It is not merely racist it is clownishly stupid racism.
Wrong. What he said wasn’t racism. I am a part of a minority via my mother’s side of the family. I’ve been subjected to racist comments before by people who ignored the Caucasian part of me. I could say, with confidence, that those tweets weren’t racism.
He was making a point criticizing their nonconstructive attitudes and statements.
Commissar: The pathetic mental gymnastics I see some of you twist yourselves into to defend and justify Trump is an embarrassment to veterans.
False. The only mental gymnastics that I’m seeing is what’s coming from you, and from those that are arguing on your side of the argument here. So far, the opposition has advanced a strawman argument, and have gotten wrapped around the axel over words the president deliberately used… Just as he intended. That’s what is an embarrassment to the veteran community. My side of the argument isn’t embarrassing the veteran community.
Commissar: Do you all stand for anything at this point?
The arguments that I stand for have been consistent. I stand by the arguments that I made here, as well as elsewhere. Your question assumes that your argument is “right”, it isn’t, and that we “have no basis” for our stance. That’s a false assumption.
Commissar: Are you just going to continue to accept and defend everything this guy does?
I’ve watched his mode of operation, and know that he deliberately says, and does, the things that he says and does. He’s not just playing chess. He’s doing the equivalent of being a 3-D chess grandmaster with your side of the argument not knowing that he’s playing that game. President Trump’s opposition/detractors are just randomly moving pieces around on a two-dimensional board, not knowing what they’re doing… In the face of a 3-D Chess grandmaster executing a plan.
Commissar: He has already violated deeply held Republican values and positions
False. What you misidentified as “deeply held Republican values and positions” was that of the RINOs and deep state Republicans. President Trump is doing well, percentage-wise, with the Republican base because President Trump is exercising real conservative leadership… And doing things that conservatives argue he should be doing.
Commissar: and has never in his life lived up to any of the values republicans claim to represent.
False. There are numerous examples of President Trump doing things that helped other people out. Your interpretation of what real conservatism is, and on what conservatives do, is erroneous. But again, if you were conservative, then you’d know that your statement is false.
Commissar: The constant feckless acquiescence to idiocy and enthusiastic gullibility of the Republican Party proves that a con man does not have to be smart if the people he is conning are sufficiently stupid.
I’m sorry, but you have the wrong man. Your description is a perfect description of the left, and of the Democratic Party. President Trump is doing exactly what needs to be done to reverse the decline that accelerated under the last president.
He, having experienced financial and economic success in the free market, understands what policies need to be in place in order to lift everybody else up. So far, so good, to include very low unemployment and healthy work engagement among all demographics.
If you want gullibility, understand that there are people that believe that people are “causing” the planet to “warm up”. Oh yeah, gullible people voted for an empty suit in 2008, and 2012, who proved to be the empty suit that we knew him to be.
I read your entire response looking for something of merit to respond to on this issue.
I didn’t find anything.
I stand by most post and your response pretty much proves my point about the mental gymnastics.
Using my name just makes you an asshole to boot.
I thought your name was Snickerdick…
I gave him the name “Poodledick”!
Ah, that’s what I was going for…
Lars, that is because you are fucking stupid. Simple as that. Bla bla bla orange man bad, communism good. Does your CO know you are a socialist and communist sympathizer? I believe that would fall under Article 134 at a minimum.
Being a socialist is constitutionally protected you fmoron.
It is not a violation of Article 134.
Remember the first amendment?
The kind of world some you “patriots” want to live in is horrific. You think the government should be able to decide which economic theories Americans are allowed to support.
That is not a free country you faux-patriot.
What about Article 88, SCHMUCK?
I have to have been subject to the UCMJ at the time of the comments.
I seem to remember you indicating that you’re retired from the USAR vice separated.
If you’re retired, you are. The SCOTUS has recently ruled that military retirees are in fact still subject to the UCMJ and can be court-martialed for crimes committed after retirement.
https://www.military.com/military-report/court-retirees-can-be-court-martialed-crimes-committed-after-service.html
Commissar violates Article 88 just about every single time he posts here.
Good thing I was not subject to the UCMJ.
See above. If you’re retired, you are.
How come you were not whining about Article 88 during the eight years the members of this blog ripped Obama apart on a daily basis? Were you concerned about disparaging comments about PRESIDENT Obama?
Article 88 only applies to commissioned officers. The majority of the people here were/are NCOs. Of the officers we do have, you’re the only one I can recall saying/admitting they’re still in. The rest are separated or retired.
That would be correct, most of us left the service, including the reserve components long ago. Plus, I suspect he is no longer serving in a reserve unit, otherwise he might be a little more circumspect in his support of those who wish to overthrow the government.
He’s prolly still serving behind the dumpsters @ The Flying J.
What you’re dismissing as “mental gymnastics” is a fact-based, reasoned, logical post. A post that, based on what you said here, you’re unable to argue against. You’re implying that your post is based on facts, it isn’t, and that anybody that advances an argument that counters your post has to be “doing mental gymnastics.”
As I mentioned in another thread, I won’t argue a point unless I have the facts based on experience/study, and the opposition clearly doesn’t know what they’re talking about. This is the case here.
What you’re really saying is that you read my entire post, and found yourself unable to argue against my argument.
Also, your claims of “not finding anything” with regards to “something of merit to respond to” is pure baloney, as I’ve advanced some of the arguments advanced by those that you responded to.
Fuck it, Trump said what needed to be said, he fired up his fan base that are sick and tired of those 4 asswipes. Maybe some of you are offended, I could care less.
Only the Orangeman Bad gang are faux-outraged, brought to you here by the letters “V” and “C”. The solution is don’t read their blithering, bloviating blather. It means naught.
Nah, as usual you got it wrong…he’s put out a clearly racist bullshit tweet and the right who support him have no answer.
Suggesting that four duly elected representatives should get out of the country is wrong, period. The fact he’s your guy so you don’t want to criticize him over it doesn’t make it right it just reveals your own personal lack of integrity.
I criticized Obama for eight years and was called a racist for it, being called a faux outrage member of the OMB by the right today is fine with me.
I’m not interested in “sides” right or left.
If you make a racist comment I’ll call you out on it, regardless of whether or not I voted for you.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: Nah, as usual you got it wrong…
No, he wasn’t wrong. You were.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: he’s put out a clearly racist bullshit tweet and the right who support him have no answer.
False. That clearly wasn’t racist. Again, I’m a minority through my mother’s side of the family. I’ve been called racist terms in the past, and have had racist phrases thrown in my direction by people who ignored the white side of me.
Those tweets, above, are not racist. They clearly addressed the leftist’s attitudes, and actions, and challenged them to do fix another country… Their presumed point of origin… then come back. This wasn’t a slam on them for being a minority. This was a slam on their actions and words.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: Suggesting that four duly elected representatives should get out of the country is wrong, period.
He wasn’t telling them to leave the country and to stay out. He was essentially telling them that if they thought that they knew better how to fix things in this country, that they should go to “their place of origin” and fix things there first… Then come back and tell us how to fix things here.
No, not wrong. That’s telling them to walk the walk instead of talking the talk. It’s also calling them out for being nothing but propaganda mouthpieces rather than acting like elected representatives.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: The fact he’s your guy so you don’t want to criticize him over it doesn’t make it right it just reveals your own personal lack of integrity.
False. The fact that we’re not criticizing him for making those tweets have everything to do with us understanding his intent. It has nothing to do with “blindly following him”. We’re not doing that. However, some of us see how he “ticks” and understand his mode of operation, especially with these tweets.
If you’ve gone through the Mueller Report, you’d see just how clever he is by saying the right things in a tweet. With the above tweets, he successfully got the “moderates” among the Democrats to close ranks with the radical leftists… People who are near blatant about their communist socialist leaning.
This is before we start exploring the “Some people did something” comment.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: I criticized Obama for eight years and was called a racist for it,
This has no bearing on the fact that you’re expressing outrage based on not understanding the context of the tweets, as well as their intent.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: being called a faux outrage member of the OMB by the right today is fine with me.
I would call it a misguided outrage based on your accepting a strawman argument about what President Trump tweeted, vice an actual understanding of what he was saying and getting at. I’d also say that based on the apparent lack of understanding, on your part, of how President Trump “thinks”.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: I’m not interested in “sides” right or left.
But you’ve jumped on the wrong side of the argument at times.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: If you make a racist comment I’ll call you out on it, regardless of whether or not I voted for you.
Correction, if someone makes what you think is a racist comment, you’d get on that person’s case regardless of whether you understand what’s being said or not, or whether that statement was racist or not.
I love your replies, so serious…it makes me wonder whether you know you’re being trolled or if you’re just trolling me right back…
Either way it’s most enjoyable.
I didn’t post my first reply here until after you guys did. You responded to others on here. You are following the same mode of operation that I have seen you, and others, follow on the other threads. I jumped on here, last night, doing the same thing that you and others did. 😀
In terms of enjoyment, that is where you and I share a commonality. I read the replies today, then went about my next activity laughing about what I read, laughing at how others responded to me, and to others. I enjoy watching how people react to my rebuttals.
Of course you didn’t reply until after I did, that’s how trolling works…I cast a wide net and see who responds. This being your post I figured I’d get a rise.
If you recall, or even if you don’t, I wrote a post specifically DEFENDING Trump from charges of personal racism on this very site, back in February or March…that’s how you know you were trolled my friend.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: Of course you didn’t reply until after I did, that’s how trolling works…I cast a wide net and see who responds.
By your definition, everything that anybody posts here, and elsewhere on the internet, is “trolling”, regardless of whether they intended for it to be a debate or not. Heck, every post on this thread, on this website, by anybody, would count as “trolling”.
Ergo, those you responded to successfully trolled you. See how I’m applying your argument? You tried to make this sound that you were going about saying things to “see who bite”.
However, that’s not what the patterns of your actions indicate. You, like anybody here, saw something that you disagreed with, and you stated your disagreement. In this case, you saw posts that you disagreed with, and you disagreed with them. I, on the other hand, saw your posts, and that of others, that I disagreed with. I turned around and rebutted you guys.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: This being your post I figured I’d get a rise.
This latest response indicates that you didn’t get a rise from what I said. You saw me take your arguments on as enthusiastically as you took others on. You decided, by your actions, that your “trolling” would stop.
Veritas Omnia Vincit: If you recall, or even if you don’t, I wrote a post specifically DEFENDING Trump from charges of personal racism on this very site, back in February or March…that’s how you know you were trolled my friend.
False. You didn’t troll anybody. Back then, he didn’t make the above three tweets that he made. The way that they were worded seemingly turned some, who previously backed him, against him.
It doesn’t matter that you defended him from being called a racist before. Other conservatives and independents did the same thing. Then, President Trump advanced those three tweets. Result? Not only were Democrats accusing him of being racist, so were some Republicans and Independents.
What’s really happening is that like some of the Republicans that turned against the President for these tweets, you did the same thing here regarding those tweets. Saying that you were “trolling” people here would be like saying that those Republicans are just “trolling”.
Bull.
I’ve seen you post on the other threads and even debate there. Your mode of operation on this thread, originally, was not that different from what I saw you do on the other threads. It wasn’t until I finally jumped in and gave you the kind of pushback that you weren’t expecting that you all of a sudden shuffled through your cards and pulled the, “Oh, I just trolled you” card.
If I didn’t jump into the comments section of this thread, you would’ve done the same thing here that I’ve seen you do on the other threads. Something was going on all right, but it wasn’t you trolling.
Based on what I’ve done in other threads, I’ve constantly debated against the opposition. So, my rebutting your replies, as well as that of others, would not have been something that you’d be able to credit yourself with as far as “trolling” is concerned.
God I do so love this, thank you again.
No you don’t. 😀 I should be thanking you and others for the enjoyment though.
Remember that Trump is not a politician and doesn’t really care about dissing peeps that he doesn’t like. Why he shouldn’t have the dissed the 4 demorat squad peeps is that the fire burning between pelousy and the squad 4 demorats are now K/D (knocked down) over the twitttts and they are all now united with each other instead of fighting with each other. One of the younger residents living with his mother was born in Israel and came to the States when he was a baby and he used to tell me about why we shouldn’t own fire arms and I told him that I was sick and tired about peeps coming here from other countries and trying to change our Constitution. Told him this a couple of times then he stopped talking to me for a year and a half or so until our clubhouse burnt down last Dec 14. After that, he was back to talking to me. Strange that an anti 2A is against the open borders and immigration problem.
May I remind those of you renting your garments and gnashing your teeth over Trump’s questioning the origins and loyalties of these four, thoroughly dreadful Democrats, that for the past two-plus years, these same four have been the loudest in their party with denunciations of Trump as a totally vile, treasonous agent of the Russian state worthy only of prolonged imprisonment if not summary execution? Seems to me you’ve lost sight of that reality while obviously our president has not.
You remind me of the folks who write the Rules of Engagement for our troops.
Agreed.
I’m not defending the 4 women in question, I despise them. And I understand and agree with Trump’s sentiment, I just don’t like the way he expressed it. YMMV. You’re all welcome to your own views.
Poetrooper is an sniper with words.
Every time he shoots, he hits the target, center mass.
With you 100% Poetrooper, seems like it’s a double standard depending what party that one is in. And like I said in my above comment, Trump isn’t a politician and talks the street way. I wonder how Gen. Patton would have handled this back in his time???
“I wonder how Gen. Patton would have handled this back in his time???”
Probably much like how President Trump is doing so right now.
Well, as a naturalized citizen of a religious and ethnic minority, I didn’t see anything racist in what the President said.
As a matter of fact, I wholeheartedly agree with his comments.
Naturalized citizens and their children should know better than anyone else how great America is and how much more freedom and liberty we have here than anywhere else.
Like a good friend of mine likes to say, you don’t see Americans building rafts to escape America.
When you’re right, you’re right. As one of those “oppressed” brown people, I will happily tell the “Socialist Spice Girls” to fuck off.
Soy más cabron que mi padre!
“I didn’t see anything racist in what the President said”
EXACTLY!
Still waiting for some one to point out the actual words of racism. They are not there.
Read what he actually said, not what the media is saying he said.
Then read it again.
If you want to know how Trump thinks, read his books.
He didn’t write them. He didn’t read them.
He played no role in writing the book. It was credited to him to use the Trump brand to make a buck back in the 80s. Just like a builder buying the right to slap Trump’s name on a building.
He was, and has always been, more brand than substance. He is a successful con-artist, he is NOT a successful business man.
Do you have proof of this claim?
I’m pretty sure you already know the answer.
And don’t hold your breath waiting for proof, either. It isn’t worth Poodle’s time to prove his
baselessunsupported assertions to those who doubt his omniscience and infallibility.Your passive aggressive response took more words than a google search would have.
Your reply took far longer to compose than copying and pasting a URL would have.
Just google it. Both the author and the publisher are on record saying Trump has nothing to do with writing the book.
So an unproven claim by the co-author who is very anti Trump is your “proof”?
I wear socks smarter than you.
SO you’re also gonna say that President Trump gets NO credit whatsoever for the personal fortune he made himself as well?
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
…
If he does, does he also get credit for going bankrupt four times?
He had a few of the 500+ businesses he owns go bankrupt thus giving him a 95+% success rate!
The President also spelled Al Qaeda as ‘Alcaida’ in his notes – which I’m sure thebesig will now tell me was part of a ten-moves-ahead plan whereby he let the press photograph supposedly private notes, thereby triggering a crisis of faith among the jihadists, leading them to replace their suicide bombs with red, white and blue fireworks.
Alternatively, maybe the President is just a moron sometimes?
Or, perhaps misspelling Al Qaeda simply means the POTUS is a “terribul spellar”. As I recall, SF author and former tech columnist Jeffery Pournelle was once told the same in writing by none other than Robert A. Heinlein after sending Heinlein private correspondence containing spelling errors.
Regarding the tweet in question: yeah, the wording was IMO hugely ill-advised. It’s yet another case where I wish the POTUS would use someone else as a sounding board or filter prior ro using Twitter.
Alcaida is the pronunciation in Spanish of Al Qaeda.
So yes, the President knows exactly what he is doing.
That’s right. Those of us who “habla” are happy to see a cross on top of the church in Toledo, España. Fuck them “Musalmanes”, que vivan los Reyes Cristianos.
Yeah! It’s that 4D chess! The same chess that Gen. Mattis was too stoopid to play! More BRAWNDO, please!
it’s got electrolytes!
It’s got what plants want!!!
The presidency is a different ball of wax than either the military or the office of the secretary of defense. Retired General Mattis was brought in to do a job, and he was brought in to serve as long as the President needed him to serve. He served his function, and then he moved on.
He didn’t have to face the media and the political onslaught that President Trump had to face. The different positions within the administration change hands in every administration.
You’re comparing apples to oranges.
LC curls his lip, “Alternatively, maybe the President is just a moron sometimes?”
When Harvard granted an LL.D. to Andrew Jackson in 1833, John Quincy Adams boycotted the graduation ceremonies, calling Jackson ”a barbarian who could not write a sentence of grammar.” To which Jackson replied: ”It is a damn poor mind indeed which can’t think of at least two ways to spell any word.”
The fact that you don’t see the obvious, behind what the President is doing, is proof that he will continue to run circles around the Democrats and leftists.
That was deliberate. Here, I’m going to give you a clue. Plug “Alcaida” into a search engine and then click one of the links that show up. They show a photo of the notes that has that word written at the top.
President Trump knows that this word would cause the media outlets to go nuts and spread that photo around. The mainstream media was glad to spread that photo around.
But, guess what?
In the process of spreading the photo around to their subscribers, they also successfully pushed President Trump’s arguments out to their subscribers… You’ll find these arguments on the notes. They’re deliberately held at a slight angle to each other so as not to make it obvious what he is doing.
Normally, the mainstream media would take what President Trump says out of context. However, when showing the photo of the complete notes with “Alcaida” written at the top, they also show President Trump’s talking points on those notes.
President Trump defeated the medial firewall with this one antic. He does this constantly. President Trump found a way to get his message out to the people courtesy of the very people who would distort or hide his message.
They and you were all wrapped up in “Alcaida” that you guys did not see what he actually pulled over your eyes. You guys still don’t realize that you got punked, This means that you guys did not learn the lessons from 2016.
It’s refreshing to see a POTUS call out these morons
I personally don’t like him but you have to give him credit
For standing his ground
Unlike the RINOs who bow to these lunatics
It seems like yesterday pelosi was talking non stop about impeachment of bush
The crazy thing is nothing he said was “Racist” but again the true face of the media
Has been exposed. Last week crazy pelosi was accused of being racist
This week trump where does it stop
https://youtu.be/pKx9SohErPI
When Charlottesville happened some of the regulars on this blog defended BOTH Donald Trump for saying “good people on both sides” and they also defended James Alex Fields Jr. by claiming it was self defense.
This was a Nazi/White Nationalist protest literally organized by groups that are openly and explicitly white nationalist and white nationalist leaders that were openly white nationalists leaders.
There was absolutely zero doubt that it was a white nationalist protest. It was advertised and organized as one by prominent white nationalist groups.
The protest they organized STARTED with them filing off buses, buses that were chartered by the white nationalist organizers, then lighting torches and marching to the statue while chanting “Jews will not replace us”.
The next day one of their members drove into a crowd with the INTENTION of murdering counter-protesters.
And some of the regulars on this board choose to ally with and defend their actions.
And Trump called them “good people”.
That was the first impulse of Trump and some of the regulars in the wake of a white nationalist intentionally driving a crowd into people and killing Heather Heyer.
I am not surprised some of you are still defending Trump and his racism.
You still see yourselves as allies with the white nationalist movement.
Not everyone there was a Nazi.
Not everyone there was AntiFa.
There were good, non-violent people on both sides.
And at the time, with the knowledge available, the driver might have been telling the truth. We now know differently.
Context is your friend.
When has context ever been Lars’ friend? It’s all about what conforms to the far left’s narrative to him.
Read the thread. It was the first instinct of many of the members to defend the white nationalist and make excuses.
Yeah, I am sure some “good people” saw the white nationalist call for protest then showed up and when they saw the Nazi flags and heard the “Jew will not replace us” chants they decided that because they shared the same view on the statue there was enough common ground to stick around and join the protest.
Those “good people” are what Trump was talking about.
He was talking about normal people who were there demonstrating against removing statues not the white nationalists. He has disavowed white nationalists several time. If you were actually honest you would admit that, but hey orange man bad.
It’s to the point that you guys see white nationalists behind every bush to the extent that it would make even McCarthy blush. I’m not denying that there were a whole lot of them at Charlottesville, but they have become the boogey man to the left to the point that they call anyone who disagrees with them white nationalists.
Yeah, the “normal” people who joined the mass of protestors waving Nazi flags and chanting “Jews will not replace us.”
Wow, you are a fact bender. What’s worse is that you actually feel you’re correct.
The usual, huh?
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
“ORANGE MAN BAD” – *CLICK*
…
Trump specifically, and repeatedly, has condemned white supremacists, the Klan, and Neo-Nazis. Repeatedly!
You are taking a statement out of context, as your favorite fake news media sources have done. Get your head out of your ass you pitiful boob.
After pressure from his advisors and the GOP donor community and it is like pulling teeth for him to do that and usually after a day or two of negative optics. Then within 48 hours he tweets something to appease the white nationalists or retweets something from one of their members/groups to virtue signal that he is still an ally.
He denounced them in the “good people” message itself you useless, regressive fuckwit.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-charlottesville-transcript-20170815-story.html
He specifically condemns the neo-Nazis. He also condemns the violence of the alt-left and Antifa, which he points to as being the ones who instigated the violence there.
All he was saying is that not everybody there was a person with evil intent. Some were proud Southerners who wanted to protest taking down their history. Some were people who don’t like Nazis and wanted to shout at the bigots.
You are correct.
I was wrong.
He condemned the Nazis. At the time.
He was calling he pro-confederacy southerners who were walking and standing amongst the bro-Nazis, Nazi flags, and Jews will not replace us chants at “very fine people”.
Not the Nazis. Trump did not say the Nazis were “very fine people”. Just the pro-confederacy “heritage” defenders who allied themselves with the Nazis that day.
They were the ones Trump called very fine people.
I stand corrected.
I am against the removal of confederate statues, in fact I am against the removal of any monument of significant historical value.
I am not a white supremacist, nor a Nazi, nor even a southerner. Just a guy that believes that the history of our nation is preserved, both the good and bad parts.
But by your logic, I would have been standing shoulder to shoulder with the skinheads and klansmen.
You are a sad little man.
Nice try.
That protest was organized by white nationalist and Nazi groups. When you showed up you would have seen Nazi flags and white nationalist signs and shirts throughout the groups of protestors.
Would you have sticks around and joined the protest alongside these asshats?
And he would have seen Tiki Torches! OMG THE TIKI TORCHES! Only a Nazi would have a Tiki torch! It’s the symbol of racism!
I see that you still go to The Fountain of Stupid and guzzle to your heart’s content, Commissar!
So in your mind anyone who shares any singular opinion on any topic with Neo-Nazis is themselves a Nazi?
So if you showed up there to protest against the Neo-Nazis and saw the domestic terrorists Antifa there to protest them as well, you’d surely leave. Because by your reasoning, you are also an anti-White, America-hating domestic terrorist for sharing a single idea with Antifa.
Logical consistency has never been Commissar’s long suit.
Yeah, up above he says that Socialists are protected under the Constitution “fmoron”. Newsflash, so are Nazis.
…unless National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43 has been overturned….
Delusional doesn’t even begin to describe what you are. Then again, what can one expect from someone who continues to ascribe wishful thinking upon not only individuals but entire groups of people?
Recent polls showed members of the “Squad” to be dropping dramatically in popularity among less radical Democrats who realize the threat these women represent to Democrat election successes in 2020.
With a couple of quick Tweets, DJT has these same less radical Democrats solidly realigning themselves with and loudly, publicly defending the four unpopular radicals who are likely to cost the Democrats election victories in 2020.
Every time the Democrat mutts begin to reconsider the effects their rabid craziness is having on the voters and try to get things under control, Trump tosses another half-dead cat over the fence and, in the name of party solidarity, they ALL go froth-mouthed, bat-shit crazy once again, on camera for the voters to see.
What’s not to like?
I wonder if the D-rats will A) thrust them upon the same ash heap they did Cindyndt Sheehag and B. Manning or B) Jettison tham just long enough to fleece enough voters this election and dive right back into loony far left politics?
Lars dates Asian women. That was his self claimed proof that he is not a racist.
I am pretty equal opportunity when it comes to dating women. Not just Asian women.
Chelsea Manning maybe? Just asking.
I bet you haven’t gotten laid in so long that your virginity has been certified as restored!
Here are some folks who share my thinking:
“Were Trump’s Controversial Tweets a Trap That Democrats Walked Right Into?”
https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/trumps-controversial-tweets-trap-democrats-walked-right/
I kept thinking of that scene in Star Wars where the fish-headed general, screams: “Go back, it’s a trap!”
This thread is EPIC…!!!111
It needs more memes, photos and perhaps some Sousa music.
Maybe a steam calliope:
https://youtu.be/ubVw_4w0ppM
Have to agree. If nothing else, Commissar/Cthulu/LT vs. thebesig always generates walls of text. 🙂
https://i.redd.it/s79tl8m9gna31.png
“Love it or leave it” bumper stickers.
They will sell like Betsy Ross flag T-shirts.
You mean Trump coined that phrase, too? Well, gollee, Sgt. Carter! Quick call the MSM, cuz I never heard that phrase before the Trump (Muh Russia) Fascist dictatorship. Where’s that tweet on Twatter?
Trump said no names, yet the 4 jihadis jumped up. Hmmmm. Vov no names were named. Ever. Oh and Lars, suck an Antifa dick, you said they are your friends. Vov shame on you.