Donald Trump and Racism

[Anomaly]

I agree with Dairy in this.  

Trump pointing out that active hate and inflaming the situation is wrong and that both sides do this was strategically wrong when in this case, white supremacists joined with the other side and  one of the WS escalated it to terror and murder with a car.  It wasn't the time to say that and it was not helpful.  In fact, it played into the hands of those who want to sensationalize division whether to raise awareness, score points against the other side, sell ads, or bash Trump 

[Era Might]

On 8/18/2017 at 8:58 AM, dominicansoul said:

Republicans hate Trump cos he's not a politician and he's trying to drain the swamp of corruption in D.C.

This is part of Trump's propaganda. And it's not unique to him, it's what all populist demagogues and authoritarian autocrats do, they present themselves as being above the system and the establishment and they create the illusion that they have a direct link to "the people." You can see this all around the world. Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, Fidel Castro in Cuba, Putin in Russia, etc. Trump is playing politics in the tradition of the Latin American caudillo who rides in to save the people from the powerful by taking power in the name of the people. The only difference is Trump is a cartoon buffoon...he's only playing the part, he doesn't have the balls to actually do what Putin does, and he probably wouldn't get away with it anyway, American democracy, for all its problems, still has the strongest system of institutional separation of powers. Trump will be gone in 4 or 8 years, he can't change the constitution like other despots do. He ain't draining nothing except the wallets and brains of the American people. Why do you think he ran Miss Universe? Because he's a connossieuer of women parading in bikinis? No, because it gave him a cover to travel the world and hobnob with Russian oligarchs and other underworld scum, but they had the pretext of respectability, they were just businessmen. Trump draining the swamp? The only swamp he'll ever drain is the Everglades to sell more property to rich old white people. He doesn't need the American swamp, his connections are in the global swamp. He doesn't care about DC or American institutions. He hates the free press even more than he hates Congress, because he's like the Tsar of Russia, he wants people to see him as beyond institutions, answering only to "the people." But there's a reason we have institutions, because otherwise we have a political system like we have now, with one demagogue playing everyone for the sucker and laughing all the way to the bank.

Edited August 19, 2017 by Era Might

[Benedictus]

Trump needs to come off twitter.  Feeding into conflated and bitter media feuds is a waste of time. He can't win those kinds of narratives. All of his PR team must be having panic attacks and need medication to get through the day.

He needs to focus on policy and holding together the party on a moderate course, even if not the country as a whole. At least make things a bit better! The less he says off policy the better. You can't manage a country like a hostile business takeover.

 

 

[Ice_nine]

8 hours ago, Anomaly said:

I agree with Dairy in this.  

Trump pointing out that active hate and inflaming the situation is wrong and that both sides do this was strategically wrong when in this case, white supremacists joined with the other side and  one of the WS escalated it to terror and murder with a car.  It wasn't the time to say that and it was not helpful.  In fact, it played into the hands of those who want to sensationalize division whether to raise awareness, score points against the other side, sell ads, or bash Trump 

Pretty much everything Trump says plays into the hands of those who want to bash Trump. Although I've been accused of being a leftist, bleeding heart pinko-commie, I am not. I have a strong desire for moral values that are typically considered conservative, and I am all about less interference from the government. But anyway, pretty much every time the guy speaks, I just cannot understand how people are duped by him. He speaks at a fourth grade reading level, he's usually all over the place, and he always seems to find a way to eschew responsibility when he doesn't want it and take credit for things he does not deserve credit for. It's inanity. I still haven't figured out how people take him seriously. Like how could you think a corporate billionaire is "for the little people" when corporations are pretty much the enemies of little people, and they're the ones (remember corporations are people) who are really running the country. I mean I don't think most politician's are "for the little guy" but they sure do a better job playing the part.

Trump is a clown. I just can't have fruitful dialogue with people who take him seriously. Maybe that's my own limitation. It does not compute. Where are his redeeming qualities? I honestly don't see them.

[dominicansoul]

18 hours ago, Anomaly said:

I agree with Dairy in this.  

Trump pointing out that active hate and inflaming the situation is wrong and that both sides do this was strategically wrong when in this case, white supremacists joined with the other side and  one of the WS escalated it to terror and murder with a car.  It wasn't the time to say that and it was not helpful.  In fact, it played into the hands of those who want to sensationalize division whether to raise awareness, score points against the other side, sell ads, or bash Trump 

Honestly had trump said the correct thing no doubt the media would still crucify him.  Nothing he ever does is good enough for leftists.  Their job is to run trump out of the White House because their "more qualified" moron couldn't beat this stupid clown in the election.  They can't live that down...

 

 

[dairygirl4u2c]

if trump said 'white supremecists have some good points', half the people here would be going on about 'reverse discrimination' and other things that give the statements some credibility. then theyd go on a tangent bashing democrats etc etc. all but admit it was in poor taste and wrong to say it like that. to make it analogous trump here didn't say 'they have some good points, but' and go on to say those reasons why racists are bad, he just said they have some good points. that's what he did when he said 'both sides did wrong' and couldn't even manage a 'but'. 

or if 911 just happened and trump said without qualifying it that the terrorists have some good points. maybe they have a fair reason to not like us occupying their land or something. does that mean we should focus on that instead of the wrong timing and bad tone and lack of a right minded approach? sometimes when something bad happens it doesn't always have to become a split between liberals and conservatives we can just call a spade a spade. 

Edited August 20, 2017 by dairygirl4u2c

[Anomaly]

2 hours ago, dairygirl4u2c said:

if trump said 'white supremecists have some good points', half the people here would be going on about 'reverse discrimination' and other things that give the statements some credibility. then theyd go on a tangent bashing democrats etc etc. all but admit it was in poor taste and wrong to say it like that. to make it analogous trump here didn't say 'they have some good points, but' and go on to say those reasons why racists are bad, he just said they have some good points. that's what he did when he said 'both sides did wrong' and couldn't even manage a 'but'. 

or if 911 just happened and trump said without qualifying it that the terrorists have some good points. maybe they have a fair reason to not like us occupying their land or something. does that mean we should focus on that instead of the wrong timing and bad tone and lack of a right minded approach? sometimes when something bad happens it doesn't always have to become a split between liberals and conservatives we can just call a spade a spade. 

I think you are right, DG.  Many people would defend Trump if he said the WS had a point and were pushed into reacting with the terror murder with the automobile.

I also think if Trump said WS should always be shot because of this attack, people would defend that.   

I also believe if Trump said violence at protests from anyone is dispicable, people would criticize that as being wrong in some sense and point to both sides and justify the violence of one of the sides.   

Edited August 20, 2017 by Anomaly

[Anomaly]

14 hours ago, Ice_nine said:

 

Trump is a clown. I just can't have fruitful dialogue with people who take him seriously. Maybe that's my own limitation. It does not compute. Where are his redeeming qualities? I honestly don't see them.

Personally, I like to think I could find redeeming qualities and condemning qualities in John Wayne Gacy and Mother Teresa.   How much of which quality each had is apparent.  Neither one walked down the road 24/7 shooting people in the head or healing the sick.  Like the rest of us, they're a field of wheat and weeds, their actions a mixed flock of goats and sheep.  

I probably am less than a mediocre farmer/shepherd in practice, but by golly, I'm sure I am a stellar expert advisor to my neighbor.   

Clinton wasn't a 24/7 womanizing scoundrel, Bush wasn't a 24/7 drooling idiot, Obama wasn't a 24/7 Capitalism bashing socialist, and the majority of US voters aren't dim witted sheeple.   

[Ice_nine]

Maybe we're not speaking the same language. Redeeming qualities, as I understand it, "redeem" a person from their bad qualities. A child molester might be a surgeon who saves lives, but he's a child molester. Doesn't matter if he doesn't molest children 24/7. That's an important part of who he is. I don't care if he saves puppies and rescues people from burning buildings. I don't consider those things "redeeming qualities." So it means the child molester, through and through, isn't a wholly terrible monster. But he still sexualizes children, so yeah, I don't get your point.

I guess I'm too stupid. Because I can literally not understand how an educated, intelligent voter, could have voted for him. Maybe, not so much in the general election, as I can understand not wanting to vote for hillary, and party loyalty, and all that, but in the primaries? Before that? I don't know how enough people took him seriously enough for him to be where he is now. I don't know how someone could think a multi-billionaire born into inherited wealth could possibly be on the side of the common man. Someone explain that to me. Tell me how you amount such vast wealth without continuously crapping on the common man. I'm sure it's possible, I just don't think very likely now is it?

I'm not saying all rich people are bad. But you look at Trump's actions and words as a business man . . . they all reek of narcissism. I don't know where the math comes in. Billions of dollars + apparent narcissim = make America great again. I think he duped people. I think most politicians dupe people. Obama was really cool, eloquent, the first Black man in the White House, whose father came from Africa. I get how they sold the rags-to-riches, down-with-the-cause narrative, even if it isn't entirely true, but I don't understand how anyone could seriously think Trump gives a beaver dam about anyone but himself and his corporate interests.

I'm welcome to someone trying to explain it to me.

[Ice_nine]

3 hours ago, Anomaly said:

I think you are right, DG.  Many people would defend Trump if he said the WS had a point and were pushed into reacting with the terror murder with the automobile.

I also think if Trump said WS should always be shot because of this attack, people would defend that.   

I also believe if Trump said violence at protests from anyone is dispicable, people would criticize that as being wrong in some sense and point to both sides and justify the violence of one of the sides.   

Do you not believe that violence is justifiable in any case. Violence is not always bad. If someone is about to slit an innocent man's throat, and you run up behind the wannabe executioner and crack his head open, you are being violent, but your violence IS justifiable.

If you were at a protest and you defended someone with violence, that would be noble, not despicable. And seeing as white supremacy is an inherently violent ideology I kinda have more reason to consider the them as the more likely aggressors  than people who oppose WS, at least in most cases. The KKK doesn't seem like a group of peaceful people.

[dominicansoul]

I think we need to clarify what Trump actually said.  When he said, "there are good on both sides."  I understood he wasn't speaking of the two domestic terrorists groups present in Charlottesville.  I thought he was speaking of the general population, those who are AGAINST the confederate monuments and those FOR the confederate monuments.  Was I wrong in presuming that's what he was speaking about???  

And when he blamed "both sides" I understood he meant he blamed both the White Supremacist AND Antifa for escalating the protest into violence.  And for this I agree wholeheartedly with Trump.  You can't just object to one violent group and not the other, that would give credibility and legitimacy to the one.  

 

With that said, I have to admit...I live in South Texas and I've never been disturbed by the Confederate reminders.  I've seen the Confederate flag waving for all my life.   There are groups that honor the Confederate soldier.  We have schools and counties all named after Confederate heroes.  Why all of a sudden, has this become anathema?  Will all our founding Fathers need to be erased from our history now?  Washington monument taken down since he owned slaves???  Pictures of Jefferson taken off our dollar bills?   The KKK are dangerous, I agree.  But I see the same danger festering in liberal groups like antifa, who are not really anti-fascist.  They are just as fascist as the groups they are attacking, and can be just as dangerous.  They label and they accuse and they attack.  They are attacking Catholic statues now.  I guess to them, Catholicism is equated with bigotry and hatred.  There was a statue of Lincoln burned.  (Proves that liberals don't know their history very well, seeing he freed the slaves.  Don't know what they thought HE symbolized.)  I see nothing positive in these actions. Destroying monuments is one thing, but beating people up for wearing Trump hats and Trump tee shirts, IS NOT stopping hatred and racism and bigotry... there isn't any justification about that!!!  Same hate as the KKK if you ask me...Put a "racist" tag on something and suddenly it's okay to hate and beat and hurt them.  That's beyond ridiculous.  And that's why I'm defending Trump in this case.  Because liberal media is spinning his words to mean something more sinister than what they truly were.  As Catholics, we can't perpetuate that kind of calumny.  Sure Trump says some really stupid things, let's call him out for when he does.  But in this case, Liberals are using the tragedy of Charlottesville to further their own agenda and their own poison.  We can't help them do that.   

Edited August 21, 2017 by dominicansoul

[little2add]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsLW_C32Eyg

Charles Barkley 'not gonna waste my time thinking about any statue'

 

[little2add]

 

 

[Amppax]

What a fascinating, and totally unsurprising, Phatmass thread. 

[Era Might]

21 hours ago, little2add said:

 

 

Statue of Liberty: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

 

Trump: Build a wall, deport, imprison, bomb.

Edited August 22, 2017 by Era Might