• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

The Trump Presidency 15

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can imagine a well-meaning defender of Trump saying that Trump's statement wasn't racist, it was politically motivated. It wasn't because of the ethnic backgrounds of the Squad and he would've said it to any vociferous progressives. I think that such a person could sincerely believe it.

I'd also think they'd be mighty wrong, but I wouldn't call them racist.

I'd call one who knows damned well that Trump was being racist and defends him anyway (Lindsey Graham, say) unprincipled and deceitful. I'd call one who knows that Trump tweeted what he did because of the ethnicity of the Squad and agrees with Trump a racist. I'd allow that some folk are just ignorant and cannot see the racism in Trump's tweet. They oughta know better but they don't.

For me, the rest of the Republicans who are silent are the dogs that didn’t bark. Ordinarily, if they thought the language was fine they would defend Trump. If they thought it was borderline they would say that they agreed with the language but disagree with how it was expressed. This time, they cannot possibly defend the tweets in any way. They are not paid to do so so they have decided to say nothing at all. To hide under a few coats and hope everything turns out okay in the end. Sniveling cowards with no moral courage.
 
Trump Retweets

Vice President Mike Pence‏
Verified account
@VP
50 years ago, Apollo 11 launched holding astronauts that would soon make history and walk on the moon. Today, under the leadership of President @realDonaldTrump, the US has rededicated itself to deep space exploration to the Moon, Mars, and beyond! #Apollo50th
 
For me, the rest of the Republicans who are silent are the dogs that didn’t bark. Ordinarily, if they thought the language was fine they would defend Trump. If they thought it was borderline they would say that they agreed with the language but disagree with how it was expressed. This time, they cannot possibly defend the tweets in any way. They are not paid to do so so they have decided to say nothing at all. To hide under a few coats and hope everything turns out okay in the end. Sniveling cowards with no moral courage.

Agreed.

The GOP "leadership" is pathetic.
 
I'd call one who knows damned well that Trump was being racist and defends him anyway (Lindsey Graham, say) unprincipled and deceitful. I'd call one who knows that Trump tweeted what he did because of the ethnicity of the Squad and agrees with Trump a racist. I'd allow that some folk are just ignorant and cannot see the racism in Trump's tweet. They oughta know better but they don't.
I suspect there's a certain sense of relief for Republicans. No more strained euphemisms like "Real Americans" (was there ever a "Real American" who wasn't white?). This is their "there, I've said it" moment.


The Republican Party has lived with the spectre of inexorable demographic decline unto death since the 60's : they've held it at bay with the Southern Strategy, voter suppression and gerrymandering, the cheapening of public discourse by Murdoch (a true evil genius) and his creatures, and abandonment of good faith governance, but now it's come to the crunch. And they're going to bring the Temple down on everybody's heads sa they go.


So much for the New American Century.
 
Seriously, for anyone trying to pretend Kellyanne isn't a ******* racist...


https://www.thedailybeast.com/kelly...nt-a-dark-underbelly-in-this-country?ref=home

Defending President Trump’s repeated racist attacks against a group of Democratic congresswomen of color, White House counselor Kellyanne Conway claimed on Tuesday that the so-called “Squad” represents a “dark underbelly in this country” and that some of the lawmakers are “palling around with terrorists.”
Don't make fools out of yourselves.
 
Under House rules, you explicitly can't say the President said something racist:

The House voted along party lines to allow Speaker Nancy Pelosi to refer to President Donald Trump's tweets about minority Democratic lawmakers as "racist," overriding House rules and GOP objections.

The nearly two-hour long delay threw the House into chaos and pushed back a final vote on a resolution condemning Trump's rhetoric. That vote is now expected late Tuesday night.

...

Republicans felt that Pelosi clearly violated House rules and objected to the California Democrat's remarks on Trump.

"Every single member of this institution, Democratic and Republican, should join us in condemning the president's racist tweets," Pelosi said. "To do anything less would be a shocking rejection of our values and a shameful abdication of our oath of office to protect the American people."

Under House rules and parliamentary precedent, lawmakers may not refer to the president having made "a bigoted or racist statement." Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) asked Pelosi to "rephrase" her statement.

Pelosi refused, saying she had "cleared them with the parliamentarian" before she made them. The parliamentarian oversees issues of precedent and procedure on the floor.

Linky.
 
Trump Retweets

Vice President Mike Pence‏
Verified account
@VP
50 years ago, Apollo 11 launched holding astronauts that would soon make history and walk on the moon. Today, under the leadership of President @realDonaldTrump, the US has rededicated itself to deep space exploration to the Moon, Mars, and beyond! #Apollo50th
It seems Pence has given up on the Rapture, which is understandable.
 
I think Babbylonian is suggesting that your "then they came for me" moment is still a little way off.

Maybe that's his point, though that's still bumfuzzling. I'm happy to condemn racism where I see it. We differ on one exchange involving Conway.
 
Sorry, "dark underbelly" is the smoking gun?

Anyway, I've not pretended she isn't a racist. I said a particular exchange wasn't evidence of racism.

What difference does it make? If the charge that the quote is racist finds a receptive audience, who cares if she meant it as a racist comment or not? If it gets out voters, if it gets money flowing into Democrat campaign coffers why resist an interpretation of the comment that makes it racist? If she weren't a racist would she still be doing that job?
 
I suspect that her point during the interview was supposed to be that everyone has somewhere other then the US that they're "from" if you go back in their family tree, so anyone can go "back where they came from" regardless of race.
It was still stupid.
 
I suspect that her point during the interview was supposed to be that everyone has somewhere other then the US that they're "from" if you go back in their family tree, so anyone can go "back where they came from" regardless of race.
It was still stupid.
Yeah, too bad the racist's racist boss hadn't picked some white Democrats to personally insult. It's just pure coincidence that he said those things about women of color.
 
The GOP is a festering dung-heap, and has been for years. The mask had been ripped off, and behind it is its true face - and it's the face of Mitch McConnell. An uglier one is difficult to imagine.

Agreed. McConnell and Trump are both disgusting.

What's also disgusting is that only 4 Republicans and 1 Independent voted in the House to condemn Trump's racist remarks. The rest of them are sniveling cowards afraid of Trump. How any Republican is not hanging their head in shame says all we need to know about the true GOP.
 
FEINBERG: My own ethnicity is not relevant to the question I'm asking.
CONWAY: No no, it is, because you're asking, he said originally, he said originally from.
How does Conway's statement make the slightest bit of sense? It just doesn't, does it? It's a string of words, signifying nothing.


I think Conway expected Feinberg to say he was Jewish and would then have launched into the theme that criticism of Israel - which in her mind is his country - being the real racism. Exactly the sort of thinking behind Trump's reference to Netenyahu as "your Prime Minister" when speaking to US American Jews. Of course, identifying Jews with Israel is racist, but that won't occur to people like Trump and Conway.
 
I suspect that her point during the interview was supposed to be that everyone has somewhere other then the US that they're "from" if you go back in their family tree, so anyone can go "back where they came from" regardless of race.
It was still stupid.


Sure, but in order to be "regardless of race" you would have to go back so far that we'd all be going back to the same place. Otherwise it is specifically about those later aspects of ethnicity often referred to as "race" (exemplified by her own assertion of her Irish and Italian heritage).

Just lame on top of lame and still ignoring the primary issue, as comedically alluded to by SuburbanTurkey, Tump’s sworn duty to uphold the constitution and thus the right of every citizen to petition government for redress of grievances.

One has to wonder why Trump hates the United States and the constitution so much to violate that oath by attacking people (whether you consider the assertions racist or not) for seeking such redress.

I must have missed the “lump it or leave it” amendment in civics class.
 
Breaking: House passes resolution condemning President Trump's comments. Republicans Will Hurd, Brian Fitzpatrick, Fred Upton and Susan Brooks and independent Justin Amash joined Democrats in voting for the resolution, which passed 240-187.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom