|
Post by elaine on Sept 28, 2019 23:24:43 GMT
Agreed. Overstatement on my part. And a lot of omission of the rest of what he said on your part, ignoring the other words and context that contradicts the condemnation. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/04/25/meet-trump-charlottesville-truthers/eta: do you want to talk about the dramatic increase in hate crimes in our country since Trump took office committed by white nationalists and alt-right extremists? Or the fact that Trump has repeatedly re-tweeted white nationalists and includes white nationalists among his closest advisors? I mean, come on. We can argue, "Oh, well, he went back and briefly covered his ass after making a provocative statement, so obviously he's not sympathizing with white nationalists," or we can look at the people he surrounds himself with and the statements he makes about people of color on a regular basis. Context is way more than what he said in that moment. Context is his history of words and actions that show his feelings quite clearly. Yes. It is a fascinating dynamic. The man who waxed sentimental about wanting to bring back the term “nationalism” at one of his rallies. The article I linked discusses this and Trump and his supporters’ attempts to rewrite history regarding his reaction and responses to Charlottesville. I hope that people who express interest in discussing Charlottesville take the time to read it.
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Sept 29, 2019 1:29:58 GMT
Trump’s response: “There were fine people on both sides.” No condemnation of the Neo-Nazis involved. With all due respect, the facts do not support your bolded statement. We can all talk and try to see the other side's reasoning and come to an understanding, but we have to agree on facts first. The fact is that Trump said "You also had some very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name." A few moments later, to make sure there was no misunderstanding, he says "I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis and white nationalists. They should be condemned totally."What kind of “very fine people” stand shoulder to shoulder with Neo-Nazis who are chanting “Jews will not replace us” while holding flags with swastikas and signs with other hateful white nationalist slogans? They may have shown up to protest the removal of the statue, but when they saw who else was there, if they did not agree with that point of view they would have left or formed their own group far away from the white nationalists and KKK members.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 26, 2024 4:06:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2019 1:32:01 GMT
Agreed. Overstatement on my part. Thank you for agreeing with the facts.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 26, 2024 4:06:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2019 1:37:25 GMT
Agreed. Overstatement on my part. And a lot of omission of the rest of what he said on your part, ignoring the other words and context that contradicts the condemnation. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/04/25/meet-trump-charlottesville-truthers/eta: do you want to talk about the dramatic increase in hate crimes in our country since Trump took office committed by white nationalists and alt-right extremists? Or the fact that Trump has repeatedly re-tweeted white nationalists and includes white nationalists among his closest advisors? I mean, come on. We can argue, "Oh, well, he went back and briefly covered his ass after making a provocative statement, so obviously he's not sympathizing with white nationalists," or we can look at the people he surrounds himself with and the statements he makes about people of color on a regular basis. Context is way more than what he said in that moment. Context is his history of words and actions that show his feelings quite clearly. And much of that context has been interpreted the same way this was. Falsely. Such as the time he called brutal murderers animals and there were those that tried to say he was talking about all immigrants. Or the often repeated claim that Trump called all immigrants rapists and murderers.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Sept 29, 2019 1:54:25 GMT
Or the fact that Trump has repeatedly re-tweeted white nationalists and includes white nationalists among his closest advisors? I mean, come on. We can argue, "Oh, well, he went back and briefly covered his ass after making a provocative statement, so obviously he's not sympathizing with white nationalists," or we can look at the people he surrounds himself with and the statements he makes about people of color on a regular basis. Context is way more than what he said in that moment. Context is his history of words and actions that show his feelings quite clearly. And much of that context has been interpreted the same way this was. Falsely. Such as the time he called brutal murderers animals and there were those that tried to say he was talking about all immigrants. Or the often repeated claim that Trump called all immigrants rapists and murderers. So what was the mitigating context for him having Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon in his administration? For retweeting acknowledged white supremacists not once but multiple times? For the “shithole countries” comment and the fact that his administration has a stated policy of separating brown children from their parents in order to “deter” asylum seekers, while doing no such thing to white families caught in visa overstays? For the fact that he said four brown-skinned lawmakers should go back where they “came from.” For all the times he’s used dehumanizing language specifically about Democratic lawmakers of color? I mean, how bad does it have to be before you quit covering for him? Isn’t it quite bad enough that he said made collective statements about Mexican immigrants being rapists and murderers (with that CYA “and some” statement afterward) without it having to be a blanket statement? Girl, I bet you are smarter than this. I know you are.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 26, 2024 4:06:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2019 2:23:11 GMT
And much of that context has been interpreted the same way this was. Falsely. Such as the time he called brutal murderers animals and there were those that tried to say he was talking about all immigrants. Or the often repeated claim that Trump called all immigrants rapists and murderers. So what was the mitigating context for him having Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon in his administration? For retweeting acknowledged white supremacists not once but multiple times? For the “shithole countries” comment and the fact that his administration has a stated policy of separating brown children from their parents in order to “deter” asylum seekers, while doing no such thing to white families caught in visa overstays? For the fact that he said four brown-skinned lawmakers should go back where they “came from.” For all the times he’s used dehumanizing language specifically about Democratic lawmakers of color? I mean, how bad does it have to be before you quit covering for him? Isn’t it quite bad enough that he said made collective statements about Mexican immigrants being rapists and murderers (with that CYA “and some” statement afterward) without it having to be a blanket statement? Girl, I bet you are smarter than this. I know you are. I can't possibly keep up with all of the claims, but I do know there are too many times when the claims aren't based in reality. Going back to the topic of the thread, it makes me think that when you base your condemnation of friends on your interpretation of what was said (or the media's opinions and false narratives) is nothing more than condemning them for your opinion. The friends didn't twist what he said to fit a narrative, they're taking into account his actual words, so they see it differently and aren't supporting racism. I say this in hopes some people will take a second look at their friends so called flawed values.
|
|
snyder
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,061
Location: Colorado
Apr 26, 2017 6:14:47 GMT
|
Post by snyder on Sept 29, 2019 2:25:53 GMT
So you are saying that anyone that voted for Trump is not worthy of being a friend to anyone, but another person that voted like wise. The people posting here are not looking at both sides. The other side is not 100% spot on either. No, that is not what I am saying. I have tried, repeatedly, using a wealth of thought-out sentences, and you pretend to understand almost none of it. I am done spending time, effort and words to try to discuss it with you anymore since apparently you don’t have any interest in looking at both sides - you have made that crystal clear in your dogged refusal to display a modicum of understanding of what people are saying to you. Quite ironic given that seems to be your main complaint about me and others on this thread. And i feel the sae way, you have not even given a 2nd thought to both sides, it is your side or not side. Trump is a creep, I agree, but to loose friends over it because they voted for him is ludicrous.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 26, 2024 4:06:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2019 2:32:19 GMT
Once we are done with brother’s estate, we won’t have much to do with the other brothers. The final straw is their stupid devotion to the great orange blob, because you know he is a CHRISTIAN and he is being held back for doing what he needs to do the make America great.
OMGthese are 2 Vietnam vet, union guys and Democrats.
I just can’t even....
|
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png)
Posts: 7,456
Jun 26, 2014 23:58:32 GMT
|
Post by sassyangel on Sept 29, 2019 3:05:09 GMT
I am a trump supporter so I guess I wouldn’t be anyone’s friend. Lol. I actually hate all politicians at this point. They all lie and have zero integrity. Funny how everything was Obama’s fault and now it is Trump. I meN the sky is cloudy today. Obama’s fault. It rained today. Trumps fault. Lol This makes absolutely zero sense to me. You’re a Trump supporter. But you hate all politicians because they lie and have zero integrity? Trump has lied openly and unapologetically every single day of his presidency. The man would not know integrity if it was covered in neon, and he fell over it. How can you support that?
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Sept 29, 2019 3:27:19 GMT
Or the fact that Trump has repeatedly re-tweeted white nationalists and includes white nationalists among his closest advisors? I mean, come on. We can argue, "Oh, well, he went back and briefly covered his ass after making a provocative statement, so obviously he's not sympathizing with white nationalists," or we can look at the people he surrounds himself with and the statements he makes about people of color on a regular basis. Context is way more than what he said in that moment. Context is his history of words and actions that show his feelings quite clearly. And much of that context has been interpreted the same way this was. Falsely. Such as the time he called brutal murderers animals and there were those that tried to say he was talking about all immigrants. Or the often repeated claim that Trump called all immigrants rapists and murderers. You know darn good and well what he was suggesting with these and his other statements. How many times should someone, especially in his position, have to go back and clarify what he meant? Quit being purposefully obtuse.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Sept 29, 2019 3:33:14 GMT
So what was the mitigating context for him having Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon in his administration? For retweeting acknowledged white supremacists not once but multiple times? For the “shithole countries” comment and the fact that his administration has a stated policy of separating brown children from their parents in order to “deter” asylum seekers, while doing no such thing to white families caught in visa overstays? For the fact that he said four brown-skinned lawmakers should go back where they “came from.” For all the times he’s used dehumanizing language specifically about Democratic lawmakers of color? I mean, how bad does it have to be before you quit covering for him? Isn’t it quite bad enough that he said made collective statements about Mexican immigrants being rapists and murderers (with that CYA “and some” statement afterward) without it having to be a blanket statement? Girl, I bet you are smarter than this. I know you are. I can't possibly keep up with all of the claims, but I do know there are too many times when the claims aren't based in reality. Going back to the topic of the thread, it makes me think that when you base your condemnation of friends on your interpretation of what was said (or the media's opinions and false narratives) is nothing more than condemning them for your opinion. The friends didn't twist what he said to fit a narrative, they're taking into account his actual words, so they see it differently and aren't supporting racism. I say this in hopes some people will take a second look at their friends so called flawed values. Since I have been able to keep up with all the “claims,” I think I’ll trust my own judgement over yours in whose values are flawed. If you are a Trump supporter, I don’t have space for you in my life, period. I keep very well abreast of what he says and does, and no one who supports that is worth my time.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Sept 29, 2019 3:33:23 GMT
No, that is not what I am saying. I have tried, repeatedly, using a wealth of thought-out sentences, and you pretend to understand almost none of it. I am done spending time, effort and words to try to discuss it with you anymore since apparently you don’t have any interest in looking at both sides - you have made that crystal clear in your dogged refusal to display a modicum of understanding of what people are saying to you. Quite ironic given that seems to be your main complaint about me and others on this thread. And i feel the sae way, you have not even given a 2nd thought to both sides, it is your side or not side. Trump is a creep, I agree, but to loose friends over it because they voted for him is ludicrous. No, it’s really not ludicrous. Go back and really think about Elaine’s post as well as mine. Why on earth would we want to keep people as friends who were intent on hurting our families? To do that would be ludicrous.
|
|
|
Post by SockMonkey on Sept 29, 2019 3:46:34 GMT
I can be friends with people with views more conservative than mine.
However, people who support Trump at this point? No. Our values are so vastly different at that point that I can't think of wanting to spend any time with them at all.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 26, 2024 4:06:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2019 4:50:20 GMT
And much of that context has been interpreted the same way this was. Falsely. Such as the time he called brutal murderers animals and there were those that tried to say he was talking about all immigrants. Or the often repeated claim that Trump called all immigrants rapists and murderers. You know darn good and well what he was suggesting with these and his other statements. How many times should someone, especially in his position, have to go back and clarify what he meant? Quit being purposefully obtuse. "You also had some very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name." A few moments later, to make sure there was no misunderstanding, he says "I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis and white nationalists. They should be condemned totally." To me and so many others, that means he condemns Neo-Nazis and white nationalists and racism. You think it means something else. That's fine, but you must know that people come to different opinions and just because it's yours doesn't make it a fact.
|
|
|
Post by gar on Sept 29, 2019 8:19:31 GMT
"I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis and white nationalists. They should be condemned totally." His daily actions and countless words to the contrary do not support that sentiment.
|
|
|
Post by Peace Sign on Sept 29, 2019 12:19:52 GMT
I feel that anyone who supports him is a direct threat to the safety of my family. Nope-if you support him then we really have nothing in common. I had a couple peripheral friends who like him, but none of my close friends do.
i would never say the same of any other politician.
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Sept 29, 2019 13:51:16 GMT
So what was the mitigating context for him having Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon in his administration? For retweeting acknowledged white supremacists not once but multiple times? For the “shithole countries” comment and the fact that his administration has a stated policy of separating brown children from their parents in order to “deter” asylum seekers, while doing no such thing to white families caught in visa overstays? For the fact that he said four brown-skinned lawmakers should go back where they “came from.” For all the times he’s used dehumanizing language specifically about Democratic lawmakers of color? I mean, how bad does it have to be before you quit covering for him? Isn’t it quite bad enough that he said made collective statements about Mexican immigrants being rapists and murderers (with that CYA “and some” statement afterward) without it having to be a blanket statement? Girl, I bet you are smarter than this. I know you are. I can't possibly keep up with all of the claims, but I do know there are too many times when the claims aren't based in reality. Going back to the topic of the thread, it makes me think that when you base your condemnation of friends on your interpretation of what was said (or the media's opinions and false narratives) is nothing more than condemning them for your opinion. The friends didn't twist what he said to fit a narrative, they're taking into account his actual words, so they see it differently and aren't supporting racism. I say this in hopes some people will take a second look at their friends so called flawed values. There are people that won't say that someone is racist unless there is actual lynching happening. Maybe they would even justify that. A whole lot of people are in denial right now. Or they are ok with it. Neither is ok.
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Sept 29, 2019 14:28:30 GMT
You know darn good and well what he was suggesting with these and his other statements. How many times should someone, especially in his position, have to go back and clarify what he meant? Quit being purposefully obtuse. "You also had some very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name." A few moments later, to make sure there was no misunderstanding, he says "I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis and white nationalists. They should be condemned totally." To me and so many others, that means he condemns Neo-Nazis and white nationalists and racism. You think it means something else. That's fine, but you must know that people come to different opinions and just because it's yours doesn't make it a fact. I’ll just quote myself from above. So, if he’s not talking about the neo-nazis and white supremacists, and again, anyone who doesn’t really believe as they do would have gotten the hell out of dodge, who was he talking about on the other side? I know that’s what it makes you think, because it makes you feel better to think you aren’t supporting a racist jerk. But you are. It’s called being deliberately obtuse. If this was the only instance of his that made us question his racist beliefs, I might have been able to say that he misspoke and didn’t think about what he said. But his words and actions consistently betray what many of you are trying so desperately to ignore. When someone shows you who they are, believe them.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Sept 29, 2019 15:17:59 GMT
You know darn good and well what he was suggesting with these and his other statements. How many times should someone, especially in his position, have to go back and clarify what he meant? Quit being purposefully obtuse. "You also had some very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name." A few moments later, to make sure there was no misunderstanding, he says "I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis and white nationalists. They should be condemned totally." To me and so many others, that means he condemns Neo-Nazis and white nationalists and racism. You think it means something else. That's fine, but you must know that people come to different opinions and just because it's yours doesn't make it a fact. It seems like you keep pressing it to “be fact”. YOUR opinion is not fact either.
|
|
|
Post by SockMonkey on Sept 29, 2019 16:11:32 GMT
Perhaps if one is so upset that people would stop being friends with them because of their Trump support, instead of trying to defend or argue about that, some introspection may be in order.
Is it worth it to you? Is HE worth it to YOU? Because I'm seeing a trend here.
|
|
QueenoftheSloths
Drama Llama
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png)
Member Since January 2004, 2,698 forum posts PeaNut Number: 122614 PeaBoard Title: StuckOnPeas
Posts: 5,955
Jun 26, 2014 0:29:24 GMT
|
Post by QueenoftheSloths on Sept 29, 2019 16:20:57 GMT
I don't think so, given the number of peas who have left the board citing political reasons. I worry for the board as the election approaches.
|
|
|
Post by crazy4scraps on Sept 29, 2019 16:38:40 GMT
I am a trump supporter so I guess I wouldn’t be anyone’s friend. Lol. I actually hate all politicians at this point. They all lie and have zero integrity. Funny how everything was Obama’s fault and now it is Trump. I meN the sky is cloudy today. Obama’s fault. It rained today. Trumps fault. Lol This makes absolutely zero sense to me. You’re a Trump supporter. But you hate all politicians because they lie and have zero integrity? Trump has lied openly and unapologetically every single day of his presidency. The man would not know integrity if it was covered in neon, and he fell over it. How can you support that? This is how I feel too. I know people who say that all politicians lie, so what’s the big deal? Seriously? If it was their kids, their spouse, their friends or virtually anybody else in their real life spouting all the endless lies that Trump & Co. spew, these same people would NOT tolerate it for one hot second. The disconnect is astonishing to me.
|
|
|
Post by femalebusiness on Sept 29, 2019 20:38:06 GMT
You know darn good and well what he was suggesting with these and his other statements. How many times should someone, especially in his position, have to go back and clarify what he meant? Quit being purposefully obtuse. "You also had some very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name." A few moments later, to make sure there was no misunderstanding, he says "I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis and white nationalists. They should be condemned totally." To me and so many others, that means he condemns Neo-Nazis and white nationalists and racism. You think it means something else. That's fine, but you must know that people come to different opinions and just because it's yours doesn't make it a fact. He is a fucking con! His mumbo jumbo words are a CON. He will say all kinds of things. He is a CON. The very fact that trumpers don't get that tells me all I need to know about their thought processes.
|
|
pyccku
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,817
Jun 27, 2014 23:12:07 GMT
|
Post by pyccku on Sept 29, 2019 21:21:40 GMT
Perhaps if one is so upset that people would stop being friends with them because of their Trump support, instead of trying to defend or argue about that, some introspection may be in order. Is it worth it to you? Is HE worth it to YOU? Because I'm seeing a trend here. This is one of the craziest things about Trump. He's objectively a horrible person with many flaws. And yet, there are so many people who are willing to follow him over a cliff and give up whatever values they supposedly have, all in service of their new master.
I remember when the Left Behind books came out and how the antichrist was so smooth and appealing, the fans of those books were so sure that they would NEVER be taken in by such an evil person, no matter how sophisticated and alluring.
Well, they have their own new leader - and the sad thing is that they were taken in by an evil person who doesn't know how to speak well, lies constantly, isn't physically attractive and has been a failure at almost everything he's done. But he's the hill they're willing to die on.
|
|
caro
Drama Llama
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png)
Refupea 1130
Posts: 5,222
Jun 26, 2014 14:10:36 GMT
|
Post by caro on Sept 29, 2019 21:38:57 GMT
Perhaps if one is so upset that people would stop being friends with them because of their Trump support, instead of trying to defend or argue about that, some introspection may be in order. Is it worth it to you? Is HE worth it to YOU? Because I'm seeing a trend here. I’ve been away since Friday so imagine my surprise at seeing a 6 page thread. My friend is worth it to me in many ways and I don’t want to throw away our friendship but HE is not worth it. I think I’m going to take a few days to think about all that have written here. There is also a religious aspect here that I didn’t want to mention because I didn’t want the thread to turn that way but we also have differing views on abortion, women’s rights and LGBTQ. You all are probably wondering how in the world we could be friends to start with given our major differences but we have a couple of things in common that are huge. We both had special needs children that passed away. We have kids and grandkids the same age and we go back 32 years. It’s a lot to throw away but it’s also about being a decent and kind person to ALL people. I told her recently that Jesus commanded believers to love their neighbor and that did not mean straight, white christians. It meant ALL. Red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in his sight.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 26, 2024 4:06:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2019 22:28:56 GMT
"You also had some very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name." A few moments later, to make sure there was no misunderstanding, he says "I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis and white nationalists. They should be condemned totally." To me and so many others, that means he condemns Neo-Nazis and white nationalists and racism. You think it means something else. That's fine, but you must know that people come to different opinions and just because it's yours doesn't make it a fact. I’ll just quote myself from above. So, if he’s not talking about the neo-nazis and white supremacists, and again, anyone who doesn’t really believe as they do would have gotten the hell out of dodge, who was he talking about on the other side? I know that’s what it makes you think, because it makes you feel better to think you aren’t supporting a racist jerk. But you are. It’s called being deliberately obtuse. If this was the only instance of his that made us question his racist beliefs, I might have been able to say that he misspoke and didn’t think about what he said. But his words and actions consistently betray what many of you are trying so desperately to ignore. When someone shows you who they are, believe them. He's talking about the normal people who came to protest the removal of statues and renaming of a park. They were there and that's who he was talking about, but we don't know when they had enough of the racists and left. I'm not ignoring. I've seen so many instances that, in reality, weren't as portrayed by the media. He says something and the media jumps on it in a different way, he clarifies and they dismiss what he actually said in favor of a narrative of "what he really meant" that makes him look bad. If you can't agree on facts (general you) and you can't accept that people come to different conclusions than you, then we can't really converse honestly. If all you can do is try to prove your conclusion is the only right one then you aren't discussing, you're lecturing. My point was that he did in fact condemn racism. The media and politicians all continue with the lie that he said neo-nazis and white supremacists are very fine people and people keep eating it up. He did no such thing. We have the very recent example of the New York Times with the headline saying "TRUMP URGES UNITY VS. RACISM” to “ASSAILING HATE BUT NOT GUNS” because it made him look good and people complained. I'm willing to look at other instances with Trump. I read a lot here and get a different perspective, it has changed the way I read articles and hear news. Are you willing to look at other instances when they come up, that factually deflate your narrative? There are a lot.
|
|
|
Post by ntsf on Sept 29, 2019 22:35:43 GMT
anyone who would employ steven miller cannot claim to not be a racist. he looks for ways to be evil
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 26, 2024 4:06:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2019 22:56:16 GMT
anyone who would employ steven miller cannot claim to not be a racist. he looks for ways to be evil Can we take a look at one of Hillary Clinton's mentors? Saul Alinsky, a very evil man.
|
|
|
Post by busy on Sept 29, 2019 23:03:06 GMT
anyone who would employ steven miller cannot claim to not be a racist. he looks for ways to be evil Can we take a look at one of Hillary Clinton's mentors? Saul Alinsky, a very evil man. *throws self off bridge. cannot take one more “but Hillary”*
|
|
|
Post by mustlovecats on Sept 29, 2019 23:08:36 GMT
anyone who would employ steven miller cannot claim to not be a racist. he looks for ways to be evil Can we take a look at one of Hillary Clinton's mentors? Saul Alinsky, a very evil man. Can you tell me what in particular about Alinsky causes you to consider him to be a very evil man?
|
|