For those who defend Trump

[Amppax]

3 minutes ago, Nihil Obstat said:

Backing up a bit, to what extent should we say that being associated with potentially racist people does actively legitimize racism? Morally speaking it strikes me as falling somewhere in the middle between formal support and formal resistance. What I do not want to say is that being associated with X Y Z is *just as bad* as actually being X Y Z.

I don't think it's just as bad. I think it's a different kind of bad, and, depending on the prominence of the figure could be more or less wrong. For example, supporting or defending the remarks of a racist family member at a family gathering as opposed to, hypothetically of course, being closely affiliated with racists as chief adviser to the president-elect. 

I guess my point is this: racism is evil, and should be condemned. Not only did Bannon not condemn racism, he provided it with a very public platform at Breitbart. This, I think, should be disqualifying. 

[Socrates]

17 hours ago, Ice_nine said:

These are the kind of people that also support him http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/richard-spencer-speech-npi/508379/

Thoughts?

 These sorts of guilt-by-association "XYZ horrible persons support Candidate X; therefore Candidate X is evil and we should support Candidate Y instead" "arguments" are generally garbage.

For what it's worth, Hillary Clinton was endorsed by the American Communist Party, NARAL and pretty much every baby-killing organization out there, groups with ties to radical Islamic groups, radical homosexual groups, and (interestingly enough) the Grand Dragon of the California KKK.

As the election is over, I'm really not sure what the point of your post/thread is.  I didn't support Trump in the GOP primary, and am not an across-the-board defender of everything he does, but I still have yet to see anything to make me regret that he rather than Hillary got the nomination, nor do I regret for a second voting for him to keep Hillary out of the White House.

Hillary lost.  Get over it.

8 hours ago, CatherineM said:

Lot of neo-nazis voted for Romney and Bush. They're citizens and allowed to vote like the rest of us. 

Oh, didn't you know that all Republicans are Nazis and racists.  So it's very, very urgent that everybody vote Dem before the GOP resurrects Adolf Hitler, throws all the Jews in death camps, and re-institutes slavery!

[Luigi]

Now wait - if it's permissible for a strongly liberal president to appoint strongly liberal cabinet members (what I might call the alt-left even though they don't), then it must be permissible for a strongly conservative president to appoint strongly conservative cabinet members (the alt-left, whoever coined that name).

I had no use whatsoever for any one of Obama's cabinet members (with the possible exception of John Kerry, who may not be all that effective, but I'm not sure anyone in that position could be, and he works very hard at his job) for the last eight years, but I didn't get on social media - or a Catholic discussion board - to lambast Obama or his appointees.

Let's just all take a breath here.

[Peace]

20 minutes ago, Socrates said:

 Hillary lost.  Get over it.

Come on now. You know plenty well that if Hillary won you would be moaning and complaining to everyone and their uncle for the next 4 years, just like you have been griping about president Obama for the past 8.

The fact that most of the racist groups in the USA seem to flock to Trump is a legitimate topic for discussion.

[dominicansoul]

https://stream.org/steve-bannon-vatican-defending-persecuted-christians-free-markets-little-guy/

 

He sounds like anybody else out there...not sure what all the fuss is about...

Edited November 22, 2016 by dominicansoul

[little2add]

32 minutes ago, Peace said:

The fact that most of the racist groups in the USA seem to flock to Trump is a legitimate topic for discussion.

Isn't a free election a b*tch

the people have spoken

[Nihil Obstat]

Whether we like it or not, the western liberal democratic system is set up specifically so that even the most virulent, extreme racist gets an equal say in the formation of his government. That is a feature, not a bug.

[little2add]

You could say the "trump card" was well played

[Nihil Obstat]

Worth reading: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2016/11/mark-shea-lies-bannonbreitbart-the-novelty-of-facts.html

[Nihil Obstat]

5 hours ago, Amppax said:

I don't think it's just as bad. I think it's a different kind of bad, and, depending on the prominence of the figure could be more or less wrong. For example, supporting or defending the remarks of a racist family member at a family gathering as opposed to, hypothetically of course, being closely affiliated with racists as chief adviser to the president-elect. 

I guess my point is this: racism is evil, and should be condemned. Not only did Bannon not condemn racism, he provided it with a very public platform at Breitbart. This, I think, should be disqualifying. 

I still have not had the chance to read the link you sent me, but I will ask anyway: what racist content has Breitbart hosted?

[Ice_nine]

Lol that escalated quickly.

I didn't imply that anyone here was racist. I was interested in what the Trump supporters here thought about it. I was hopeful that the response would be something along the lines of "well this is concerning, but . . ."

Instead y'all seemed mighty defensive. 

I asked a one word question. If you interpret that as loaded or accusatory, maybe your the one making unwarranted assumptions

[Nihil Obstat]

I am not and never was a Trump supporter. But I have always thought that he is a far less evil option than Clinton was.

[Quasar]

I think talking about the "kinds of people" who support Trump reminds people of the condescending and judgemental way Hillary spoke about anyone who disagreed with her.  I don't mind, because it cost her the election (ha) but you have to wonder who told her that was a good campaign strategy. 

[Guest]

 

[Jack4]

On 11/22/2016 at 10:27 AM, Ice_nine said:

These are the kind of people that also support him http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/richard-spencer-speech-npi/508379/

Thoughts?

 

Ah. The olde, olde association fallacy. 

 

13 hours ago, Socrates said:

 These sorts of guilt-by-association "XYZ horrible persons support Candidate X; therefore Candidate X is evil and we should support Candidate Y instead" "arguments" are generally garbage.

For what it's worth, Hillary Clinton was endorsed by the American Communist Party, NARAL and pretty much every baby-killing organization out there, groups with ties to radical Islamic groups, radical homosexual groups, and (interestingly enough) the Grand Dragon of the California KKK.

As the election is over, I'm really not sure what the point of your post/thread is.  I didn't support Trump in the GOP primary, and am not an across-the-board defender of everything he does, but I still have yet to see anything to make me regret that he rather than Hillary got the nomination, nor do I regret for a second voting for him to keep Hillary out of the White House.

Hillary lost.  Get over it.

Oh, didn't you know that all Republicans are Nazis and racists.  So it's very, very urgent that everybody vote Dem before the GOP resurrects Adolf Hitler, throws all the Jews in death camps, and re-institutes slavery!