FWIS3

https://www.facebook.com/shaunking/vide ... 9130/?t=38

Tells us everything we need to know, I think.

And his base and supporters, don't hear a word of it. Time and time again.

Nah, I think a lot of them hear every word, and find those words to their liking. You've probably seen footage of the rallies, etc.

The US has always had a strong undercurrent of authoritarianism, and racism is a huge chunk of our culture and history.

I find it rather ironic that he makes that statement just four days after the NY Times ran an op-ed piece decrying the moral superiority of the liberals. Titled "Liberals, You're Not As Smart As You Think" the author appears to be suggesting that liberals push people into the camp of the deplorable coalitions by being judgmental.

It's rather hard not to judge people who support this type of behavior. Le sigh.

please just someone tell me we will survive this in some way, shape or form. I pray to god the midterms work out well for the blue wave

Most of us will survive this, I think, but it's going to be very ugly.

Thumper wrote:And his base and supporters, don't hear a word of it. Time and time again.

No. His base and supporters and even some of the rest of us care about things like context. He was referring to violent gang members like MS13 not all undocumented immigrants.

Even CNN and NPR are pointing this out.

SciFiFisher wrote:I find it rather ironic that he makes that statement just four days after the NY Times ran an op-ed piece decrying the moral superiority of the liberals. Titled "Liberals, You're Not As Smart As You Think" the author appears to be suggesting that liberals push people into the camp of the deplorable coalitions by being judgmental.

It's rather hard not to judge people who support this type of behavior. Le sigh.

This is absolutely judgmental. Assuming there's only one way to see an event and dismissing even the idea that there might be another valid pov is the very definition of judgemental.

A President of the United States of America does not say, "These aren't people, these are animals."
Period.

If you don't mind the greasy furriner from the shithole country. I think that the point is this:

Arguing on whether Trump is a racist or not is basically Byzantine. I think that it's much more important to understand that racists are an important part of his base and he is convinced that he NEEDS their support. What leads me to think that? When this David Duke character spoke about endorsing him. Trump waffled over and over about it and took a lot of prodding to get him to disavow Duke (in his usual kind of, sort of, way). In the Charlottesville incident. Mr. "Tell it like it is" came out like a pipsqueak with his "many many sides" comment. And again, took plenty of prodding to get him to disavow the Nazi sympathizers from that rally. I don't know how many of his supporters are actual (or even closet) racists. But the proportion has to be high because he seems to need a lot of prodding to disavow them.

So, the point is that Racists work pretty hard to be indistinguishable from Trump Supporters, Trump considers that he needs their support. And, while everyone argues on whether that Trump is a racist or not, his supporters find cover from facing the fact that either:

A) They are supporting a Leader that tolerates racists

or

B) They hate the other side so much that they're willing to tolerate racists within their ranks.

Wow that's depressing.

SciFi Chick wrote:

SciFiFisher wrote:I find it rather ironic that he makes that statement just four days after the NY Times ran an op-ed piece decrying the moral superiority of the liberals. Titled "Liberals, You're Not As Smart As You Think" the author appears to be suggesting that liberals push people into the camp of the deplorable coalitions by being judgmental.

It's rather hard not to judge people who support this type of behavior. Le sigh.

This is absolutely judgmental. Assuming there's only one way to see an event and dismissing even the idea that there might be another valid pov is the very definition of judgemental.

Assuming I really buy the story that he was "only" talking about MS13 members it still doesn't excuse the comment. There is no excuse for labeling human beings as animals. And thank you for my shiny new label. I am proud to be called judgmental in this context. I am judging. I am judging the behavior and the context that this group of people engage in. I am judging who they are and what they value. I am judging what they defend. And I am judging what they don't defend.

I haven't watched the full nearly hour long video of the conference during which Trump made these comments, but I have watched the section that includes the woman who spoke to Trump just prior, which elicited his 'animals' comment.

She mentioned MS-13 but it is not at all clear that Trump's response was limited to only MS-13 members. He did not use language that suggests he was only referring to MS-13 but seemed to generalize far beyond that group. That said, Trump is infamous for bungling, semi-coherent responses, so it's not out of the question to think that he was in fact referring to MS-13. The AP has deleted the tweet that reported the animals comment, saying that they failed to indicate it was in response to a question mentioning MS-13. The New York Times has acknowledged that they also did not mention that aspect of the response. However, neither of these news organizations seems to buy that Trump framed his response in terms of MS-13 only. The Washington Post isn't buying it either.

So, where does that leave us? How about in the same position as before, with many, many decent, law-abiding long-time (but illegal) residents being deported, fracturing families and communities. It's these people we need to fight for. Dreamers, people who came here 30 years ago. This 'animals' flap is distracting us from the real tragedy.

As far as being judgmental, I'm with Fisher. I judge all the time. Everyone judges, and with the President of the United States (not just the current president), we all NEED to judge all the time. Democracy demands it. The term judgmental seems to have taken on a negative connotation, much like discrimination. If you think someone is not judging correctly - and by incorrectly I mean by not evaluating all the evidence before them - I recommend the term 'unfairly judgmental'.

I was responding in the context of that article. I also think the context of the words I wrote make it perfectly clear that I think Fisher is unfairly judgmental.

As for the immigration "tragedy" going on, President Clinton had the same immigration policy being pushed for now, and President Obama split up tons of families, but I guess it's okay when a Democrat does it.

BTW, I agree with deporting illegal aliens, but I'd also like to see the corporations that hire them taken to task. We simply don't have the resources to adopt every person that wants to come here.

[Deleted.]

Arguing about Trump isn't worth it.

amen Geo - its better to use our time to contact representatives on various issues than fight among ourselves about what the moron-n-chief "meant" ...

SciFi Chick wrote:... but I guess it's okay when a Democrat does it.

It's comments like these that really don't help the discussion rather distract from the original discussion.

Thumper wrote:

SciFi Chick wrote:... but I guess it's okay when a Democrat does it.

It's comments like these that really don't help the discussion rather distract from the original discussion.

I disagree. Too many people support policies if it's their favorite party but will call something evil if someone they don't like has the same policy.

I am looking at policy not personality. How does that hinder the discussion?

This thread was about a person making hideous, racist, bigoted, un-presidential statements. Bringing in some policies from 8, 12, 18 years ago and trying to say, "look they did it too" is not only misleading, it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Immigration policy is a legislative matter, involving the votes of hundreds of lawmakers. Saying, "Clinton did it too," means basically nothing if we're talking about immigration, and less than nothing if we're talking about appalling statements recently made by the current president.

I'm just gonna leave this here.

Summary: the ACLU published a report on CPB treatment of child detainees, alleging extreme abuses. Confinement, starvation, threats, and yes, rape.

This stuff dates back to the Obama administration, too. Welcome to the USA.

https://splinternews.com/aclu-alleges-h ... er_twitter

Edit: the Splinter article includes a link to the report PDF, if you want to be thorough.

Thumper wrote:This thread was about a person making hideous, racist, bigoted, un-presidential statements.

I have only one word for you: covfefe

Bringing in some policies from 8, 12, 18 years ago and trying to say, "look they did it too" is not only misleading, it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Immigration policy is a legislative matter, involving the votes of hundreds of lawmakers. Saying, "Clinton did it too," means basically nothing if we're talking about immigration, and less than nothing if we're talking about appalling statements recently made by the current president.

Thumper wrote:This thread was about a person making hideous, racist, bigoted, un-presidential statements. Bringing in some policies from 8, 12, 18 years ago and trying to say, "look they did it too" is not only misleading, it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Immigration policy is a legislative matter, involving the votes of hundreds of lawmakers. Saying, "Clinton did it too," means basically nothing if we're talking about immigration, and less than nothing if we're talking about appalling statements recently made by the current president.

One - this is FWIS where threads evolve.
Two - if you want to bitch about the President without argument, go to BMR.
Three - It has not been proven that he made "hideous, racist, bigoted" comments. If you want to get your knickers in a twist because he called a violent gang that tortures, rapes and murders people including children animals, go for it, but do not expect me to defend a violent gang made up of illegal immigrants just because everyone here thinks Trump is the next Hitler.

I'm not buying into the fear or the hypocrisy.

Four: You go have yourself some fun.

Don't want to be more of an ass than usual. But, based on what I've seen, I think I can consider my point proven

Sigma_Orionis wrote:Don't want to be more of an ass than usual. But, based on what I've seen I think I can consider my point proven

If you are implying that I'm a Trump supporter or that I have no problem with racism, you are most definitely being more of an ass than usual.