Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, May 16, 2018

Paul Waldman, Washington Post: In the endless search for the magic key that Democrats can use to unlock the hearts of white people who vote Republican, the hot new candidate is "respect." ... The assumption is that if Democrats simply choose to deploy this powerful tool of respect, then minds will be changed and votes will follow. This belief, widespread though it may be, is stunningly naive. It ignores decades of history and everything about our current political environment. There's almost nothing more foolish Democrats could do than follow that advice.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

So what are Democrats to do? The answer is simple: This is a game they cannot win, so they have to stop playing. Know at the outset that no matter what you say or do, Republicans will cry that you're disrespecting good heartland voters. There is no bit of PR razzle-dazzle that will stop them. Remember that white Republicans are not going to vote for you anyway, and their votes are no more valuable or virtuous than the votes of any other American. Don't try to come up with photo ops showing you genuflecting before the totems of the white working class, because that won't work. Advocate for what you believe in, and explain why it actually helps people.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

I would be happy with a party that learns to rise above the terrible disrespect that goes on now. Anything would be an improvement.

#1 | Posted by bornfree at 2018-05-16 01:37 PM | Reply

"The right has a gigantic media apparatus that is devoted to convincing people that liberals disrespect them, plus a political party whose leaders all understand that that idea is key to their political project and so join in the chorus at every opportunity."

Republican leaders are convinced that they can sell perception over reality... and they are disciples of that old cynic Mencken:

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
H. L. Mencken

"No one in this world, so far as I know -- and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me -- has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby."
H. L. Mencken

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2018-05-16 01:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

From the article:

"As a voter says in "The Great Revolt," a new book by conservative journalist Salena Zito and Republican operative Brad Todd, 'One of the things I really don't get about the Democratic Party or the news media is the lack of respect they give to people who work hard all of their lives to get themselves out of the hole.'"

It's because when you vote for the guy by saying he speaks the truth and tells it like it is, what about that gives you the feeling the person deserves respect or has invested any time into researching the person for whom they believe "tells it like it is" and is speaking the truth?

Looking at Republican party, what has Trump done, prior to being elected to give anyone the idea he is conservative or liberal. What has he done in his life to make a person believe, "he is looking out for me?" Just look at the latest information about the ZTE deal with China and that should tell you all you need to know but the Trump fans will find a way to deny what is going on.

#3 | Posted by TheRef65 at 2018-05-16 01:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

"'One of the things I really don't get about the Democratic Party or the news media is the lack of respect they give to people who work hard all of their lives to get themselves out of the hole.'"

I don't see that happening.

I think this is like the myth of spitting on soldiers.

Here's what I do see happening. It takes a lot of hard work to make it to the NFL, and plenty of the players had to get out of a hole to get there. But when they take a knee the GOP ----- all over them.

#4 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-16 02:06 PM | Reply

"In the world Republicans have constructed, a Democrat who wants to give you health care and a higher wage is disrespectful, while a Republican who opposes those things but engages in a vigorous round of campaign race-baiting is respectful.

The person who's holding you back isn't the politician who just voted to give a trillion-dollar tax break to the wealthy and corporations, it's an East Coast college professor who said something condescending on Twitter."

Excellent article... even a good conclusion:

"Finally -- and this is critical -- never stop telling voters how Republicans are screwing them over. The two successful Democratic presidents of recent years were both called liberal elitists, and they countered by relentlessly hammering the GOP over its advocacy for the wealthy. And it worked."

#5 | Posted by Corky at 2018-05-16 02:13 PM | Reply

"The right has a gigantic media apparatus that is devoted to convincing people that liberals disrespect them"

Which wouldn't work if it wasn't for the fact many liberals do disrespect them. How many posts have we seen just on sites like this one dismissing people in "flyover" states as nothing more than people who live in close proximity to cows? How many have completely written off former Obama voters who wouldn't hold their noses and vote for lousy candidate #2 last time, and instead of trying to win their votes back lay insults and blame on them every chance they get? Continuing to do this is just dumb, self-defeating behavior that works against Democrats getting back in power, not for it. There's a difference between bending over backwards to try to court people who think probably won't vote for you, and going out of your way to insult people who might.

#6 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-16 02:20 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 4

There's a difference between bending over backwards to try to court people who think probably won't vote for you, and not going out of your way to insult people who might.

#7 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-16 02:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

It's because when you vote for the guy by saying he speaks the truth and tells it like it is, what about that gives you the feeling the person deserves respect or has invested any time into researching the person for whom they believe "tells it like it is" and is speaking the truth?
Looking at Republican party, what has Trump done, prior to being elected to give anyone the idea he is conservative or liberal. What has he done in his life to make a person believe, "he is looking out for me?" Just look at the latest information about the ZTE deal with China and that should tell you all you need to know but the Trump fans will find a way to deny what is going on.

#3 | POSTED BY THEREF65 AT 2018-05-16 01:54 PM | FLAG: | NEWSWORTHY 1

There was no difference with Obama. He was all about change and basically draining the swamp, he was about a great health care system where everyone saved money and got better care. What did he do to bring our races together like he said he would do? What about bringing back jobs to America? Nope. Yet Trump didn't insult those that voted for him, he just said he was going to bring about real change this time. Same main theme that Obama ran and won on. Problem for the Dems and Hillary was they just alienated and insulted anyone who even thought about voting for that which even alienated them more. And HRC was so cocky in thinking she had this one in the bag they figured pissing these people off wouldn't even matter. Well it mattered big time but they kept on doing it going so far as insulting anyone who supported Bernie. HRC just figured that she would win despite that, she didn't need them anyway. So the bottem line is the left doesn't think they have a respect problem, they just continue to think that if someone doesn't respect them now they are hopeless and beneath them anyway. If they lose it's either they got cheated or the public is stupid.

#8 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-05-16 02:24 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Most rational people realize that respect is earned, not the result of Waldman's DRtarded "gigantic media apparatus that is devoted to convincing people that liberals disrespect them." It's almost as if Hillary was moving Waldman's fingers as he typed this.

Keep up the good work though in looking down at the very same swing voters that put Obama into the WH twice.

#9 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-05-16 02:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Which wouldn't work if it wasn't for the fact many liberals do disrespect them."

It's not like you little idiots don't get off on calling liberals ------- or beta cucks. We don't demand your respect.

Nor do I want it, since you've allowed alt right nazis to take over your party. This isn't about "respect" anyway, this is about white male conservatives freaking out because they are losing their special privileged status.

Good.

#10 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 02:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Advertisement

Advertisement

"The person who's holding you back isn't the politician who just voted to give a trillion-dollar tax break to the wealthy and corporations, it's an East Coast college professor who said something condescending on Twitter."

Annnndddd the last few posts prove the truth of that. Thanks!

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2018-05-16 02:28 PM | Reply

"Which wouldn't work if it wasn't for the fact many liberals do disrespect them."
It's not like you little idiots don't get off on calling liberals ------- or beta cucks. We don't demand your respect.
Nor do I want it, since you've allowed alt right nazis to take over your party. This isn't about "respect" anyway, this is about white male conservatives freaking out because they are losing their special privileged status.
Good.

#10 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE AT 2018-05-16 02:28 PM | FLAG:

Perfect example. Thanks Alex, keep up the good work.

#12 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-05-16 02:30 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

fishpaw- im not going to respect the alt right that has taken over the republican party. These are the people that have called me a race traitor for having biracial kids. These are the people that call my kids -------.

Get lucid.

#13 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 02:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

#13, nobody's asking you respect those people. Just don't lump everyone who voted for Trump or didn't vote for HRC into that category.

#14 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-16 02:41 PM | Reply

sentinel- our president is a racist.

If you voted for him you either agree with his racism or don't care about it.

#15 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 02:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Trump voters don't want respect. They want a candidate who HATES who they HATE.

If they wanted respect, his tax plan would have angered them. It didn't. As long as he still hates the right people, they'll still support him.

#16 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-05-16 02:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Nobody respects individuals who reside in an ivory tower trumpeting their intellectual superiority, while simultaneously shirking responsibility through blaming the Russians for their ineptitude.

#17 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2018-05-16 02:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Hillary lost by 80,000 votes in 3 states, so if 45,000 people in those 3 states had changed their votes, we'd be having a very different conversation. A change of 45,000 votes out of the millions cast, and Hillary would have won with over 3 million votes. But to hear so many tell it, Trump won by a landslide. Nope.

#18 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-16 02:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Nobody respect people who brag about winning an election in states where we all know voter suppression is the only reason why they won. That's not shirking responsibility, that's just stating a fact.

#19 | Posted by danni at 2018-05-16 02:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

PS When you add in the people who voted 3rd party, which I think was around 7 million voters, about 10 million more people didn't vote for Trump than did. Trump and the GOP act like the election gave them a mandate; it didn't.

#20 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-16 02:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

PS When you add in the people who voted 3rd party, which I think was around 7 million voters, about 10 million more people didn't vote for Trump than did.

That's almost akin to assigning those 3rd Party votes to Clinton.

Trump and the GOP act like the election gave them a mandate; it didn't.

#20 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

It gave them control of both chambers plus the WH. The '16 election absolutely gave the GOP a mandate.

#21 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 03:01 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"That's almost akin to assigning those 3rd Party votes to Clinton."

Not at all, but those 7 million didn't support Trump, so: 3 million more Clinton voter plus 7 million 3rd party voter does not a Trump mandate make.

#22 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-16 03:06 PM | Reply

"The '16 election absolutely gave the GOP a mandate."

Only in their own minds. The difference between the inauguration turnout and the women's march turnout should have been their first clue.

#23 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-16 03:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"The '16 election absolutely gave the GOP a mandate."
Only in their own minds. The difference between the inauguration turnout and the women's march turnout should have been their first clue.

#23 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

After the '16 election the GOP controlled the WH and both chambers of congress. Like it or not, that is a mandate.

#24 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 03:34 PM | Reply

losing the popular vote by 3 million people is not a mandate.

#25 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 03:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Jeff, W called his 2000 electoral college victory a mandate too. It wasn't. Just because someone says it doesn't make it true.

#26 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-16 03:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"After the '16 election the GOP controlled the WH and both chambers of congress. Like it or not, that is a mandate."

It's a mandate unfunded by popular opinion.

Unfunded mandates are kind of your battle cry, after all.

#27 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-16 03:47 PM | Reply

OK. Then define a mandate and how does it translate to the pursuit of policy?

If one party controls both chambers plus the WH but POTUS didn't win the popular vote, how does that affect how the party that is clearly in power from pursuing its agenda?

Does party control at the state level factor into this equation?

#28 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 03:48 PM | Reply

After the '16 election the GOP controlled the WH and both chambers of congress. Like it or not, that is a mandate.

#24 | Posted by JeffJ
Definition of mandate

2 : an authorization to act given to a representative

accepted the mandate of the people

Trump didn't even win the majority of votes from the people. Hillary had more of a mandate than he did.

And congress's balance comes from republicans drawing their own congressional districts, not from public approval of their agenda.

#29 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-05-16 03:51 PM | Reply

2 : an authorization to act given to a representative

Right. It's called "winning an election".

#30 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 03:56 PM | Reply

Right. It's called "winning an election".

#30 | Posted by JeffJ

If you mean he has a mandate from a bunch of anonymous ELECTORS, then you're right.

If you're talking about a mandate from the VOTERS, that went to hillary.

#31 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-05-16 04:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

sentinel- our president is a racist.

He's a race baiter. He wants Democrats to call him racist because he knows they've overused that accusation so much that many independent voters have stopped taking them seriously.

If you voted for him you either agree with his racism or don't care about it.

I didn't vote for him, but it's just stupid make a blanket statement like that about every single voter who did. You're shooting yourself and your country in the foot.

#32 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-16 04:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

As far as I'm concerned, any American who voted for Two Scoops, or supports him now, ---- on their own credibility and deserves no respect.

#33 | Posted by contrecoup at 2018-05-16 04:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If you mean he has a mandate from a bunch of anonymous ELECTORS, then you're right.

I'm guessing the Pantsuit Brigade would rather have a hockey game be decided by shots on goal rather than actual goals...

#34 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-05-16 04:56 PM | Reply

Poor rwingers respect rich doofuses and proxy vote for them because they are rich... which means they MUST be right about everything. Not as rich lefties couldn't possibly know what they are talking about because they are not as rich.

This isn't sprocket science!

#35 | Posted by Corky at 2018-05-16 04:58 PM | Reply

#34

Perhaps they would prefer to have elections decided without the many GOP forms of voter suppression, the help of foreign countries, and their lies and racist fear mongering.

#36 | Posted by Corky at 2018-05-16 05:02 PM | Reply

"OK. Then define a mandate"

In this case, the mandate a politician receives from winning an election comes from the overwhelming majority of popular support that candidate received from voters.

That doesn't describe Trump. His mandate is not a popular one, it's only found among our several states' electors, a population that numbers in the hundreds. Unlike America, whose voting population numbers in the hundreds of millions.

#37 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-16 05:11 PM | Reply

Right. It's called "winning an election".

#30 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 03:56 PM

So, suddenly, Republicans care about election results?

Merrick Garland.

#38 | Posted by morris at 2018-05-16 05:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

sentinel- our president is a racist
#15 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE

He's a race baiter
#32 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

^
I'm buying a lottery ticket today, because you're both right!

#39 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-16 05:49 PM | Reply

"Yet Trump didn't insult those that voted for him,..."
-Fishspew

What world do you live in?

www.bostonglobe.com

www.washingtonpost.com

www.cnn.com

#40 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-05-16 05:57 PM | Reply

Nobody respects individuals who reside in an ivory tower trumpeting their intellectual superiority, while simultaneously shirking responsibility through blaming the Russians for their ineptitude.
#17 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake

How is it physically possible to respect people who voted for Trump KNOWING his stance on immigration, have their livelihoods decimated by Trump's actions on immigration and continue to support him? How is it possible to respect someone who destroys themselves because of.... reasons?

#41 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-05-16 06:00 PM | Reply

"I didn't vote for him, but it's just stupid make a blanket statement like that about every single voter who did. You're shooting yourself and your country in the foot.

#32 | POSTED BY SENTINEL AT 2018-05-16 04:39 PM | FLAG: "

Sorry, but it's true. EVERY person that voted for trump is either a racist or didn't care that he is, plus he's a mysognist. Trump called a venezulan "miss housekeeping" a person claiming native american heritage "Pocahontas" and he calls women fat pigs.

The guy is dirt, and so are his voters. Sue me.

#42 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 06:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

One time I was watching The Apprentice and when Donald was firing some guy, he explained to him that respect, real respect, isn't something you can just demand from subordinates. It has to be earned.

It's kind of funny how literally zero Trumpers and Never Trumpers alike saw that one. I mean, what are the odds!!??

#43 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-16 07:00 PM | Reply

"Like it or not, that is a mandate."

Why is it Republicans always seem to really be concerned about man dates.

#44 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-05-16 07:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Reagans victory was a mandate.
Obamas victory was a mandate.

Losing the popular vote should tell a president they need to reach across the aisle.

#45 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 08:06 PM | Reply

Republicans lost the last two Senate races in Missouri because their stupid candid failed to show respect for the disabled and women.

#46 | Posted by Tor at 2018-05-16 08:10 PM | Reply

Republicans lost the last two Senate races in Missouri because their stupid candid failed to show respect for the disabled and women.

#46 | Posted by Tor

And they won the presidency by running the most disrespectful candidate in history.

They are officially the party of cruel --------.

#47 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-05-16 08:26 PM | Reply

After the '16 election the GOP controlled the WH and both chambers of congress.

#24 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

And despite controlling everything, they still can't make a beer fart in a whirlwind.

#48 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2018-05-16 08:27 PM | Reply

majority of Voters voted against Trump.

#49 | Posted by Tor at 2018-05-16 08:34 PM | Reply

Majority of voters also voted against Hillary Clinton.

I agree though that any candidate who can't get at least 50% of the popular vote can't convincingly claim they have a mandate from the voters.

#50 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-16 09:15 PM | Reply

"Sorry, but it's true. EVERY person that voted for trump is either a racist or didn't care that he is, plus he's a mysognist."

Or they didn't believe that he is and saw his actions as just trying to wind up his political opponents into constantly being in reactive mode, which worked out well for him, and still does

"The guy is dirt, and so are his voters. Sue me."

I'll do better than that. I'll call you out as either
a) a foreign troll trying to sow discord
b) a pro-Trump operative reinforcing the narrative that liberals are insulting everyone who didn't support their failed candidate last time
c) a useful/useless idiot who's unwittingly doing the work of a and b for free

#51 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-16 09:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Or they didn't believe that he is and saw his actions as just trying to wind up his political opponents into constantly being in reactive mode, which worked out well for him, and still does

#51 | Posted by sentinel

That's a very astute evaluation of trump's actions.

Either he's a racist, or he's merely willing to inflame worldwide race relations for his own personal gain. Either way, he's totally evil.

#52 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-05-16 10:00 PM | Reply

hey, sentinel...

Today the president of the united states called immigrants "animals". Again.

Trump is racist. His voters are either racist or stupid. Period.

#53 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 10:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"saw his actions as just trying to wind up his political opponents into constantly being in reactive mode,"

So they excused him making fun of a disabled person because it pissed off the left?

Like i said: they're dirt.

#54 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 10:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Today the president of the united states called immigrants "animals". Again.

Yeah, I think that crossed the line. He should have just called them "deplorables", then it would have been all good.

Also, did he call immigrants that, or illegal immigrants that? Just trying to nail down the verbiage.

#55 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 10:13 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

So they excused him making fun of a disabled person because it pissed off the left?
Like i said: they're dirt.

#54 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE A

Didn't Biden call on some wheelchair bound disabled person to stand up and be recognized?

#56 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 10:15 PM | Reply

Biden has foot in mouth disease. He didn't pretend he couldn't walk. Your equivalences are terrible today.

Go watch the video if trump mocking a disabled person.

#57 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 10:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"He should have just called them "deplorables", then it would have been all good. "

Which isn't racist. Again, your whataboutism sucks today. Work on it.

#58 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 10:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Biden mocked him up and down. He even said, "Stand up, you lazy clown!" Then he commented about not being able to walk into a 7-11 and deal with an employee who doesn't have an Indian accent. Then he threatened to go Frank Cotton on Trump because Trump was ogling the young woman that Biden had just fondled.

And, just when you thought Biden's depravity couldn't get any worse, he did this:

www.youtube.com

#59 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 10:24 PM | Reply

Too bad Biden didn't run as president and win with 62 million votes, eh?

Cuz if he had then your equivalence wouldn't be apples and oranges.

#60 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 10:35 PM | Reply

Big picture, as far as politicians go, I like Biden, Alex.

#61 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 10:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I think you like Trump more, since you defend him witn bothsiderism all the time.

Either that ir you're chuck todd.

#62 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 10:46 PM | Reply

Which is it Alex: a, b or c?

#63 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-16 10:47 PM | Reply

I think Biden is a better person, and it's not even close.

Trump's politics have taken me by surprise, at least so far. He has been far closer aligned, in terms of his policy pursuits, than I ever imagined he would be.

That doesn't make him any less of a lout though.

#64 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 10:49 PM | Reply

So trumps just pretending to be a racist for the stupids is your argument, sentinel?

Or do you even have an argument beyond " don't be mean to the racists?"

#65 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 10:51 PM | Reply

#65 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE

Trump plays identity politics.

So do Dems.

I LOATHE identity politics.

I think it is the single biggest toxin driving a cultural divide in this country.

#66 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 10:53 PM | Reply

Didn't Biden call on some wheelchair bound disabled person to stand up and be recognized?

#56 | Posted by JeffJ

That's your weakest WHATABOUT deflection yet. And that's saying a lot.

Making fun of a person you know is handicapped person vs not knowing a person is handicapped?

You're really getting pathetic.

#67 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-05-16 10:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#67 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Lighten up, Francis.

Watch the short video at the end of that post, and take it in the context of 'depravity'.

#68 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 10:55 PM | Reply

That's your weakest WHATABOUT deflection yet. And that's saying a lot.

It wasn't WHATABOUT, nor was it a deflection.

#69 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-16 10:56 PM | Reply

Like I said, many have stopped taking seriously anyone who throws around the R-word in cases where it clearly doesn't apply. Immigrants are not a race. Mexicans are not a race. Muslims are not a race. You come across sounding dumber and even more uneducated than many Trump voters when you make these claims.

#70 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-16 11:44 PM | Reply

Sentinel backdoor defends bigotry and trump by claiming the wrong nomenclature is being used.

Sophist. Fraud.

#71 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-16 11:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Immigrants are not a race. Mexicans are not a race. Muslims are not a race.

That's irrelevant. They're not white. America has a long history (literally from its inception) of white supremacy. It was the justification for chattel slavery and the genocide against the native population (Manifest Destiny). In the 19th century, even the European immigrants weren't considered "white". That includes Italians, Irish, Spanish, Greek, Portuguese, Jews, Catholics, etc. Only "Anglo-Saxon Protestants" were the real white people. And now, the only immigrants the right complains about are the non-white ones. I never hear complaints about the undocumented Russians and Irish and wherever-the-hell Melania (or Ivanna, for that matter) is from.

#72 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2018-05-17 12:15 AM | Reply

#71, sounding more and more like a.

#73 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 12:15 AM | Reply

You got me, Ive been hiding on this website for 14 years as a russian.

lol. -------.

#74 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-17 12:17 AM | Reply

Aha! So you admit it, comrade.

#75 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 12:36 AM | Reply

Or they didn't believe that he is and saw his actions as just trying to wind up his political opponents into constantly being in reactive mode, which worked out well for him, and still does

#51 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

Sounds a lot like this to me...

Trump voters don't want respect. They want a candidate who HATES who they HATE.

#16 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Conservatives have been indoctrinated into hating liberals and just want someone who pisses liberals off. It is all tribalism and identity politics. They believe in the zero sum game. That they can only win if someone else loses. That is why Donald Trump was able to win with racist rhetoric. Because minorities are gaining more power and affluence, so conservatives assume (because they believe in the zero sum game) that it must be at the expense of white people.

That is why they are so obsessed with limiting welfare, even though a large part of Trump voters are on it themselves. Because they believe that minorities get MORE out of the welfare, and they want to reduce the benefits of minorities even if it means taking a cut themselves. So they think that white people benefit if less money goes to minorities, and the Trump voters think some of that will eventually trickle down to poor white voters in -------- states.

It is basically a cold race war. That is why the alt right has become so prominent in the Republican party.

#76 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2018-05-17 10:27 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

So... "respect" is just a cover. They can't admit that they just have this deep seated hatred of liberals stemming from racial animus. No matter what liberals do, the conservative snowflakes are going to whine that they aren't respected. Just ignore them.

I would prefer that Democrats stay true to our ideals and lose than to try to pander and encourage to the racial insecurity of conservatives, and possibly have a better chance of winning (because conservatives will magically start feeling "respected").

#77 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2018-05-17 10:34 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Today the president of the united states called immigrants "animals". Again.

Trump is racist. His voters are either racist or stupid. Period.

#53 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE

Immigrants?

No, he called MS-13 gang members animals.

That was a gross mischaracterization of what was said.

Don't let TDS get the best of you.

#78 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-17 10:45 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 3

"I would prefer that Democrats stay true to our ideals and lose than to try to pander and encourage to the racial insecurity of conservatives, and possibly have a better chance of winning (because conservatives will magically start feeling "respected")."

I agree with you but I think that if we actually find candidates who will do that we will win. But you are correct, we, as a party, have to stand for the things we believe in, not water them down, not try to make them palatable for conservatives. It's a class war and Democrats have to decided which class we represent.

#79 | Posted by danni at 2018-05-17 10:46 AM | Reply

"Trump's response: "We have people coming into the country -- or trying to come in, we're stopping a lot of them -- but we're taking people out of the country, you wouldn't believe how bad these people are. These aren't people. These are animals," the president said."

www.npr.org

#80 | Posted by danni at 2018-05-17 10:48 AM | Reply

What you're saying is obviously true of SOME Trump voters. It still doesn't explain the people who voted for Obama twice and went the other way in the '16 because they felt Democrats were either ignoring or actively insulting them. And now you're calling the majority of states ---- hole states. How do you think that's gonna work out?

"Der, maybe if we keep saying we only need to win the popular vote in 20 states, someday it will come true!"

#81 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 10:49 AM | Reply

How about this: Just as we expect Muslims who aren't terrorists to condemn ISIS, we expect people who voted for Trump who aren't racist to condemn the racists among them who also voted for Trump. Democrats would have no problem respecting those people. None whatsoever.

#82 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 10:59 AM | Reply

#80

That is selectively edited.

It's not yours or Alex's fault that our MSM is dishonest as hell.

Those comments were in direct response to a question posed to him about MS-13 gang members - specifically by name.

Any transcript or video clip that doesn't also include the question he was responding to is horribly dishonest and ------.

#83 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-17 11:01 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"If you voted for him you either agree with his racism or don't care about it."

IOW, if you voted for Trump and you aren't a racist (and, yes, many who voted for him aren't), let's hear from you. Call out Trump for his race baiting and call out Trump voters who are racist. Let them know you won't tolerate that kind of talk and behavior. You will earn the respect and gratitude of many.

#84 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 11:06 AM | Reply

Gal,

I have no problem with Trump referring to MS-13 gang members as animals.

#85 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-17 11:17 AM | Reply

"that doesn't also include the question he was responding to is horribly dishonest and ------."

Karma is a bitch.

You built that

#86 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-05-17 11:20 AM | Reply

"I have no problem with Trump referring to MS-13 gang members as animals."

The language of dehumanization eventual creeps up the social hierarchy. It's a habit to be avoided among civilized people.

#87 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2018-05-17 11:26 AM | Reply

"I have no problem with Trump referring to MS-13 gang members as animals."

Why call them animals? Why not call them criminals, which is what they are and is what distinguishes them from other illegal immigrants who aren't gang members but who the Trump administration is often treating in similar ways.

#88 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 11:32 AM | Reply

BTW, I think I know why the nonracist Trump voters don't speak up. They are afraid; they know the racists will turn on them if they do.

#89 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 11:34 AM | Reply

"The language of dehumanization eventual creeps up the social hierarchy. It's a habit to be avoided among civilized people."

Like calling people super predators?

#90 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 01:15 PM | Reply

#89, Or Maybe They Don't Think Everything Is About Race?

#91 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 01:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Come on Sentinel, you have been here far too long to not realize that most of the DR Left loooooves them some good race baiting.

#92 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-05-17 01:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

No one said everything is about race. "Blood and soil." That was about race, and Trump didn't call them out. Neither did a lot of the nonracist Trump supporters.

#93 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 01:27 PM | Reply

Or Maybe They Don't Think Everything Is About Race?

#91 | Posted by sentinel

When the president got elected by inflaming racial divisions, and keeps his support by stoking racial fears, everything he does is about race. His presidency runs on racism like your car runs on gas.

#94 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-05-17 01:34 PM | Reply

HRC and many of her supporters didn't care about denouncing the bigots on the left, specifically the ones who were and are explicitly anti-white and anti-male, and equated white privilege with white supremacy. I'm sure most non-racist HRC supporters just ignored that as noise and didn't think it was worth commenting on. Why should a different standard be used to place an onus non-racist Trump voters before they're worthy of having the Democrats even trying to court their votes?

#95 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 01:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Like calling people super predators?"

So are you agreeing with me or disagreeing? It's hard to tell when one engages is whataboutism.

#96 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2018-05-17 01:39 PM | Reply

And why shouldn't Democrats try to court the votes of Never Trumpers who didn't vote for him, instead of lumping them in with Trump supporters?

#97 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 01:40 PM | Reply

"HRC and many of her supporters didn't care about denouncing the bigots on the left, specifically the ones who were and are explicitly anti-white and anti-male,"

But they were voting for a white woman. Your entire attempt to create an argument fails because it contradicts itself.

#98 | Posted by danni at 2018-05-17 01:42 PM | Reply

If someone thinks Neo Nazis marching through C-ville should be dismissed as noise and deemed unworthy of comment, I would wonder why they held those views.

#99 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 01:44 PM | Reply

"Blood and soil." That was about race, and Trump didn't call them out. - #93 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 01:27 PM

From the transcript of his interview:
TRUMP: As I said on -- remember this -- Saturday, we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence. It has no place in America.

TRUMP: Well, I think the driver of the car is a disgrace to himself, his family and his country. And that is -- you can call it terrorism. You can call it murder. You can call it whatever you want. I would just call it as the fastest one to come up with a good verdict. That's what I'd call it. Because there is a question. Is it murder? Is it terrorism? And then you get into legal semantics. The driver of the car is a murderer. And what he did was a horrible, horrible, inexcusable thing.

TRUMP: Those people -- all of those people -- excuse me. I've condemned neo-Nazis.

TRUMP: And you had people, and I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally.

Gal_Tuesday, were you really unaware that he absolutely did call out and condemn the actions of the neo-Nazis?

#100 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 01:45 PM | Reply

How the GOP treats the #NeverTrumpers is one of the reasons why folks who might think to challenge the racists in their ranks prefer to stay silent, IMO.

#101 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 01:46 PM | Reply

"And why shouldn't Democrats try to court the votes of Never Trumpers who didn't vote for him, instead of lumping them in with Trump supporters?"

After Trump won they stopped being Never Trumpers and just went back to being Republicans.

#102 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 01:49 PM | Reply

That was his attemapt to clean up his first statement:

A group of white supremacists -- screaming racial, ethnic and misogynistic epithets -- rallied in Charlottesville, Virginia, on Saturday. One person was killed and 19 others were injured when a car sped into a group of counter-protesters.

This is what the President of the United States said about it:

"We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence, on many sides. On many sides. It's been going on for a long time in our country. Not Donald Trump, not Barack Obama. This has been going on for a long, long time."

www.cnn.com

#103 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 01:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"HRC and many of her supporters didn't care about denouncing the bigots on the left, specifically the ones who were and are explicitly anti-white and anti-male,"

Like who?

"and equated white privilege with white supremacy."

What exactly is wrong with that?

#104 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 01:50 PM | Reply

A few brave Republicans did attempt to speak up (from the CNN link above):

"Mr. President - we must call evil by its name," tweeted Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colorado. "These were white supremacists and this was domestic terrorism." Tweeted Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, another fellow Republican: "Very important for the nation to hear @potus describe events in #Charlottesville for what they are, a terror attack by #whitesupremacists."

#105 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 01:52 PM | Reply

"The language of dehumanization eventual creeps up the social hierarchy. It's a habit to be avoided among civilized people."

"Like calling people super predators?"

Yes, like that.

That quote is a few decades old; there are more and more timely examples from the current President.

But I'm pretty sure you approve of the language of dehumanization. Since you've never called out any Republican for invoking it.

#106 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 01:53 PM | Reply

Speaker Paul D. Ryan called white supremacy "repulsive" and said "there can be no moral ambiguity." Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Republican of Florida, tweeted: "Blaming ‘both sides' for #Charlottesville?! No."

Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, said white nationalists in Charlottesville were "100% to blame" and wagged his finger at the president for suggesting otherwise.

"The #WhiteSupremacy groups will see being assigned only 50% of blame as a win," Mr. Rubio said on Twitter moments after Mr. Trump's remarks. "We can not allow this old evil to be resurrected."

Senator Todd Young of Indiana, a freshman Republican, wrote: "This is simple: we must condemn and marginalize white supremacist groups, not encourage and embolden them."

Even members of Mr. Trump's own military appeared to take quick offense to their commander's words. Hours after the president spoke, the Marine Corps commandant, General Robert B. Neller, wrote in a tweet that there is "no place for racial hatred or extremism in @USMC. Our core values of Honor, Courage, and Commitment frame the way Marines live and act."

www.nytimes.com

#107 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 01:55 PM | Reply

"Like calling people super predators?"

Clinton apologized for words those words she spoke 20 years ago. It's not likely Trump will apologize for any of his race-baiting comments.

#108 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 01:56 PM | Reply

#103 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 01:49 PM
Is that your way of saying that you did know that he condemned them?

#109 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 01:59 PM | Reply

"were you really unaware that he absolutely did call out and condemn the actions of the neo-Nazis?"

Were you really unaware that he made a muddled mess in his three statements after the protest, so much so that even a few in his party felt the need to correct him and distance themselves from him, if only for an instance?

#110 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 02:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"And why shouldn't Democrats try to court the votes of Never Trumpers who didn't vote for him"

Democrats should not court Never Trumpers who still disagree with them on virtually everything. We want a progressive agenda, those Never Trumpers don't. We should never compromise policies just to gain a few Never Trumpers because trying to please them would cost us millions of votes from people like me who want a real progressive agenda.

#111 | Posted by danni at 2018-05-17 02:11 PM | Reply

I am aware. Which is why I know he went back to clarify. Nobody thinks that Trump is an intelligent or eloquent speaker.
Which is why I don't make statements like "Blood and soil." That was about race, and Trump didn't call them out.
Maybe a more honest statement like 'Trump didn't call them out strongly enough quickly enough'?
Something honest.
Pretending that he didn't, when evidence says otherwise, makes you seem like you're intentionally lying about the man.

#112 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 02:13 PM | Reply

#108, I never agreed that Clinton was being racist or racially insensitive when she was talking about super predators. I knew she was talking specifically about incorrigible criminals, regardless of their race. When she apologized for it, she gave the impression she was acknowledging that she was. She could have stood by her intention not to be soft on actual criminals, while acknowledging the way it was implemented had unintended consequences.

#113 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 02:13 PM | Reply

As I guessed, Sentinel is okay with dehumanizing language. In fact he thinks it's appropriate.

What a surprise.

#114 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 02:16 PM | Reply

Democrats should not court Never Trumpers who still disagree with them on virtually everything. We want a progressive agenda, those Never Trumpers don't. We should never compromise policies just to gain a few Never Trumpers because trying to please them would cost us millions of votes from people like me who want a real progressive agenda.

POSTED BY DANNI AT 2018-05-17 02:11 PM | REPLY

youtu.be

#115 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-05-17 02:16 PM | Reply

"Pretending that he didn't"

He was pretty mealy-mouthed and full of obfuscating equivocation, when he finally did get around to saying he condemns it, which took a few days of prodding by his own party and advisors to even get him to say that much.

Let's not pretend that isn't the case.

#116 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 02:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

As we guessed, Snoofy is not only okay with child trafficking, but also with the actions gang members who gone past the point of no return.

Not a surprise.

#117 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 02:21 PM | Reply

"Pretending that he didn't, when evidence says otherwise, makes you seem like you're intentionally lying about the man."

I wasn't pretending, unless you think all those Republicans I quoted were pretending as well. His original statement did not contain the condemnation most people expected from a nonracist POTUS. It has nothing to do with him not being "an intelligent or eloquent speaker" as he had plenty of time to prepare those first remarks as he wasn't speaking off the cuff.

BTW, "the man" doesn't need me to lie about him. He does that quite well himself.

#118 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 02:23 PM | Reply

"He was pretty mealy-mouthed and full of obfuscating equivocation, when he finally did get around to saying he condemns it, which took a few days of prodding by his own party and advisors to even get him to say that much."

Not only that, but Trump's original comments were seen in the context of his having retweeted White Supremacists during the campaign and pretending he didn't know who David Duke was:

www.factcheck.org

#119 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 02:28 PM | Reply

Wow, you actually think not calling criminals animals means you're okay with their crimes.

You are burdened by a tremendous amount of anger and rage, which is your choice. Why do you like it so much??

#120 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 02:28 PM | Reply

I wasn't pretending, unless you think all those Republicans I quoted were pretending as well. - #118 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 02:23 PM
Those quotes were prior to his clarifying comments. Of course they didn't have knowledge of the future.
You wrote your post today.
If you weren't pretending, you were simply ignorant of his statements very clearly condemning white supremacists, neo-nazis and their actions?

#121 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 02:35 PM | Reply

#121 "If you weren't pretending, you were simply ignorant of his statements very clearly condemning white supremacists, neo-nazis and their actions?"

No, I basically think he was forced into making that condemnation, a condemnation that would have been his first response if it had been heartfelt:

Trump finally condemns Charlottesville racism, days after violence

After widespread criticism over initial response to white nationalists, Trump says: ‘Racism is evil and those who cause violence in its name are criminals'

www.theguardian.com

#122 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 02:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Wow, you actually think not calling criminals animals means you're okay with their crimes."

You really have no concept of nuance here, or that Clinton abandoned any claim to it when she apologized for her comments. They were trying to paint Trump as racist for doing the exact same thing she did, but it backfired on her. People who saw her statement as racist clearly didn't forgive her just because she gave an unconvincing apology 20 years later. Many who didn't think she was being racist saw it as disingenuous an act of political cowardness. Which it was.

#123 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 02:46 PM | Reply

Like Trump, Avig won't condemn racism unless forced.

#124 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 02:54 PM | Reply

"Many who didn't think she was being racist saw it as disingenuous an act of political cowardness. Which it was."

In your judgement... which means precisely nothing.

#125 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 02:56 PM | Reply

"You really have no concept of nuance here, or that Clinton abandoned any claim to it when she apologized for her comments"

Sure, I'll bite.
What did Clinton apologize for?

#126 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 02:56 PM | Reply

@122 Gal_tuesday
You even acknowledge in 122 that he did condemn them.
No one can control your speech. If you want to continue to make objectively false statements about trump in an effort to discredit him, that is your prerogative. Just expect rational people to push back. Your actions give evidence to people who claim that lies are being told about trump to make him look worse than he is.

#127 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 03:01 PM | Reply

#127 Nah, no one can make Trump look worse than Trump himself, IMO.

#128 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 03:06 PM | Reply

#128 And the more he talks when talked, the better. Which is why he doesn't give wide-ranging press conferences anymore, go on TV except for Faux News, and will never, I predict, speak to Bob Mueller unless he is compelled to do so.

#129 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 03:09 PM | Reply

And now you're calling the majority of states ---- hole states. How do you think that's gonna work out?

#81 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

Hey... I'm just trying to speak in the language of the Trumpers. Why is it OK to describe regions with people of color this way, but not regions in the United States?

#130 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2018-05-17 03:16 PM | Reply

Like calling people super predators?

#90 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

That is dehumanization as well. It was also 20 years ago. And she has said that she should not have said it. It is not OK when Republicans do it. It is also not OK when Democrats do it.

Has Trump withdrawn his dehumanizing remarks, like Hillary did? Or is he now doubling down on them (and his racist base is supporting him in doing it)?

#131 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2018-05-17 03:20 PM | Reply

#128 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 03:06 PM
Again, this isn't about Trump being bad or worse. He only gets 1 vote in 2020.
This is about the rest of the populace. People who see false statements being made about Trump in an effort to discredit him.
That is a lot of voters.
If you want trump defeated in the next election, the last thing you want to do is to give people examples to point to about how unfairly maligned he is.
Trump is a terrible president. Use that reality to discuss him. There is no need to pass off fake information about the man when honest information is sufficient to the task.

#132 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 03:20 PM | Reply

#132 I stand by my posts.

#133 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 03:23 PM | Reply

"And now you're calling the majority of states ---- hole states. How do you think that's gonna work out?
#81 | POSTED BY SENTINEL"

It will help Trump win in 2020.

How do you think that's gonna work out for those states?

#134 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 03:24 PM | Reply

"Blood and soil." That was about race, and Trump didn't call them out. - #93 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 01:27 PM

Here ya go:

"Blood and soil." That was about race, and Trump didn't call them out until he was forced to.

#135 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 03:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Like Trump, Avig won't condemn racism unless forced. - #124 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 02:54 PM Flag: Defender of those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" and flying the swastika.
I'm an American. I can't be forced to say anything. When I make a statement, it is because I choose to do so.
For example, if I chose to defend people "protesting" under the nazi flag while calling for the eradication of the jews, as you have done, it would be a choice.
No one forced you to sympathize with nazis.
But to be clear, I certainly do choose to condemn your racism.

#136 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 03:25 PM | Reply

"Hey... I'm just trying to speak in the language of the Trumpers."

Again, how do you think that's gonna work out? Everybody who's tried to beat Trump at his own game, including in the Republican primaries, has failed. You'll never beat him by emulating his trollish behavior, which is exactly what he's been trolling you into doing.

#137 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 03:26 PM | Reply

People who see false statements being made about Trump in an effort to discredit him.
--Avigdore

Trump is a terrible president.
--Also Avigdore

I rate your second statement as "false." Unless you have some kind of convincing argument Trump is terrible. Can I hear that argument?

#138 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 03:27 PM | Reply

I guess for specificity, I should condemn DirkStruan's anti-Semitism, not racism.

#139 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 03:28 PM | Reply

I rate your second statement as "false." Unless you have some kind of convincing argument Trump is terrible. Can I hear that argument?
#138 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 03:27 PM Flag: Doesn't think Trump is a terrible president.

No

#140 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 03:30 PM | Reply

"And now you're calling the majority of states ---- hole states. How do you think that's gonna work out?
#81 | POSTED BY SENTINEL"

"It will help Trump win in 2020."
#134 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Why are you trying to help Trump win in 2020?

#141 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 03:30 PM | Reply

"Blood and soil." That was about race, and Trump didn't call them out until he was forced to.

Which, btw, was might white of him, IMO.

mighty white of you
Used to describe someone who thinks they've done a great deed, charitable action or sacrifice, but in reality they've done very little to help the human condition.
Earl: I gave that homeless man my half eaten apple.
Roger: Wow, thats mighty white of you.

www.urbandictionary.com

#142 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 03:30 PM | Reply

So... I think that the anyone who joins the military at this point is somewhat despicable. They are basically mercenaries to advance the agendas of large corporations throughout the world. They intimidate, disrupt, and kill people in other countries in the furtherance of corporate profits. This is much worse than MS-13.

Should I now be like a Republican and pretend that they aren't people? That they don't have wives, mothers, fathers, and children that care about them? That they aren't MORE than just their job? That they don't have dreams and aspirations, fear and regrets?

Should I call them animals so that I won't mind them being mistreated or killed or screwed over? (Who cares about having good healthcare in the VA when they are just treating animals? PTSD causing homelessness?... their suffering does not matter, they are just animals.)

It seems like JeffJ and Sentinel think that is a good mindset for me to take.

#143 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2018-05-17 03:35 PM | Reply

"I'm an American. I can't be forced to say anything. When I make a statement, it is because I choose to do so."

Like Trump, you only condemn racism when pressured. Because really you are fine with it.

#144 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 03:35 PM | Reply

The headline of this thread needs to be truncated to the first four words. Comments by the posters here consistently indicate Democrats at this time either don't want to win or haven't got the first clue how to.

#145 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 03:41 PM | Reply

"There is no need to pass off fake information about the man when honest information is sufficient to the task."

Believe it or not, I do try to tell the truth in terms of facts and to delineate what is fact from my opinion.

"I did my best, it wasn't much
I couldn't feel, so I tried to touch
I've told the truth, I didn't come to fool you
And even though it all went wrong
I'll stand before the lord of song
With nothing on my tongue but hallelujah"

Cohen

#146 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 03:41 PM | Reply

#143, go ahead an compare the military to gangs like MS-13, if you really want to. How do you think that's gonna work out?

#147 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 03:44 PM | Reply

@#144 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 03:35 PM Flag: Defender of those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" and flying the swastika
Shoo, Nazi

#148 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 03:45 PM | Reply

@#146 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 03:41 PM
I know that you do. Which is why I am trying to convey my point without calling names. I apologize if I failed in doing so.

#149 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 03:46 PM | Reply

"Flag: Defender of those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" and flying the swastika"

Flag: That's all protected First Amendment speech that you defended as such in Charlotsville.

#150 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 03:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#148

By all means, link to a thread in which you play apologist and propagandist for people who murdered civilian demonstrators: show everyone what you are really about.

#151 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 03:52 PM | Reply

Why are you trying to help Trump win in 2020?

#141 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

We get the president we deserve. The people who elected Trump did not get hoodwinked or tricked or were not even severely uninformed. They knew what they were getting into, and they CHOSE Trump.

Now... you may be right. Republicans are always feeling victimized by liberals, the media, minorities, and anyone else they can blame on their personal problems. Me telling the little snowflakes the truth might push them to be EVEN MORE emotional so that they vote for Trump AGAIN after he screws them over for 4 years. Sorry... but you can't help stupid. And coddling them won't do anyone any good.

At some point people have to take personal responsibility for their actions. To do that you might have to hit rock bottom to get to the point of stopping lying to yourself about where the problem actually originates (hint, it almost ALWAYS originates internally). And, like a beaten wife, they may get back together with Trump for another 4 years. If that is what it takes, then so be it. People sometimes have to make mistakes to really learn. We will survive.

And like usual (Bush->Clinton, Shrub->Obama), Democrats will be the adults waiting in the wings, ready to try to start piecing the economy back together after Republicans destroy it. It has happened in the past. It will happen in the future.

#152 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2018-05-17 03:52 PM | Reply

"Why are you trying to help Trump win in 2020?
#141 | POSTED BY SENTINEL"

Why are you?

#153 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 03:52 PM | Reply

The headline of this thread needs to be truncated to the first four words. Comments by the posters here consistently indicate Democrats at this time either don't want to win or haven't got the first clue how to.

#145 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

They've been doing a pretty damn good job for the last 12 months.

#154 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-05-17 03:59 PM | Reply

#153, I'm not the one doing things that you acknowledged will help him win in #134

#155 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 04:00 PM | Reply

"Which is why I am trying to convey my point without calling names. I apologize if I failed in doing so."

No, I don't think you did. I don't recall you doing so anyway.

#156 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 04:01 PM | Reply

#143, go ahead an compare the military to gangs like MS-13, if you really want to. How do you think that's gonna work out?

#147 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

I am hoping that some people may realize that all people make mistakes, but they are still people. Some people make very bad mistakes, and do very bad things, but that does not mean you cannot understand and empathize with them. They are still people.

Generally, dehumanization is done intentionally (though somewhat subconsciously) so you don't feel like a terrible human being. You know you are about to do something terrible and inhumane to these people (something that you would be aghast if it happened to someone you cared about) so you dehumanize them to cut out any potential empathy you may feel for their situation.

It is tribalism and identity politics at its worst. And it has been used as a tool throughout history to allow one group of people to do terrible things to another group (you think the Nazi's saw Jews as fellow humans, or do you think they dehumanized them as "animals"?).

But, as I have said before, I am pretty sure that people with limited ability to empathize with different points of view self-select as Republicans, so it is not surprising.

#157 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2018-05-17 04:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"#153, I'm not the one doing things that you acknowledged will help him win in #134"

Me either.

That beimg said, dehumanizing the enemy, whether its Democrats, lazy Democrats too stupid to get an ID, illegals, refugees, lazy blacks on the plantation, or gang mebers will probably help Trump win too.

And you, like Trump, sure do revel in dehumanizing the enemy.

As to calling states s---holes, I've been to every state. Is it wrong to call out the ones that suck? Why?? Was it likewise wrong for Trump to call some countries s---holes? Lol.

#158 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 04:15 PM | Reply

#157, that's all fine and good, if you actually mean it, but HRC and her supporters failed to convince many voters in key states that she was being sincere, especially after she stepped in it with her "basket of deplorables" statement, which also came across as dehumanizing. It also backfired because it was trying to equate making "dehumanizing" statements with being racist if it had an adverse effect on so-called people of color. The super predators comment was in the same category as Trump's statements, and the people who had a problem with either one were not going to be forgiving regardless of whether an apology was made.

#159 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 04:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"especially after she stepped in it with her "basket of deplorables" statement, which also came across as dehumanizing"

Her super predators statement came across as dehumanizing too.

And your problem with that statement was that she retracted it.

Now you're mad about one she didn't retract.

Do you not realize what you're doing?

#160 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 04:26 PM | Reply

#159

Nice of you to separate true racism from fake racism for us. Mighty white of you.

#161 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 04:26 PM | Reply

"Democrats should not court Never Trumpers who still disagree with them on virtually everything. We want a progressive agenda, those Never Trumpers don't. We should never compromise policies just to gain a few Never Trumpers because trying to please them would cost us millions of votes from people like me who want a real progressive agenda."

I disagree. If #NeverTrumpers are willing to put party before country, I think Dems should court them in 2018 and in 2020 should Trump run for re-election. If they are willing to vote for Democrats, despite policy, in order to reign in Trump and hold him accountable for emoluments violations and possible collusion, I, for one, will welcome their votes. I don't mean that Democrats should change their policy platform but that they should emphasize things like ethics and securing our elections.

#162 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 04:33 PM | Reply

"especially after she stepped in it with her "basket of deplorables" statement, which also came across as dehumanizing."

It wasn't dehumanizing, but it was insulting because only the alt-right Trump supporters are truly deplorable.

#163 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 04:36 PM | Reply

Oops, have this exactly backwards:

put party before country = country over party!

#164 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 04:38 PM | Reply

#160, I'm being consistent. I have no problem with people using "dehumanizing" language to describe those who have committed heinous criminal acts, as long as it's clearly targeted and isn't lumping others. People can disgree with that. Fine. I'm just pointing out that you can't claim the moral high ground if you're not consistent on this too. And again, you'll never beat Trump at his crazy, inconsistent behavior.

#165 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 04:39 PM | Reply

"160, I'm being consistent. I have no problem with people using "dehumanizing" language to describe those who have committed heinous criminal acts"

So was Hitler. So, per usual, you are in terrible company.

#166 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 04:45 PM | Reply

Everyone realizes that Sentinel is just concern-trolling, right?

#167 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 04:49 PM | Reply

Deplorable isn't even dehumanizing though.

Now if she had called them deplorable animals, that would be dehumanizing.

#168 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 04:50 PM | Reply

#167 I think Sentinel chose that name because his response to AYAK is AKIA.

#169 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 04:55 PM | Reply

Flag: That's all protected First Amendment speech that you defended as such in Charlotsville. -#150 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 03:51 PM
Dirkstruan has every right to continue to be a nazi sympathizer. He is completely protected by the 1st Ammendment. Just as we all have the right to acknowledge his defense of those seeking death to the jews.

#170 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 05:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Avigdore has every right to continue to be a nazi sympathizer. He is completely protected by the 1st Ammendment. Just as we all have the right to acknowledge his defense of those seeking death to the jews.

#171 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 05:26 PM | Reply

"Dirkstruan has every right to continue to be a nazi sympathizer."

With "Nazi sympathizer" here having the meaning of "person who thinks protestors shouldn't be machine gunned by the army." Funny how alleged champion of freedom Avig is not at all concerned about the rights of the people in Palestine...

#172 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 06:23 PM | Reply

Yup, this thread has gone full ------.

#173 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 06:28 PM | Reply

Yup, this thread has gone full ------.

#174 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-05-17 06:32 PM | Reply

#171 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 05:26 PM
The difference being that I have never started, so can't continue, but I have evidence linked above of Dirkstruan doing precisely that.

#175 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 06:35 PM | Reply

Your "evidence" is D. doesn't think someone throwing rocks at a tank deserves to be taken out by a sniper, regardless of whatever flag they might be waving.

That's why your claim is --------.

#176 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 06:37 PM | Reply

With "Nazi sympathizer" here having the meaning of "person who thinks protestors shouldn't be machine gunned by the army." person who defends those who "protest" under the nazi flag while calling for the deaths of jews.

#172 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 06:23 PM Flag: Defender of those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" and flying the swastika

#177 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 06:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

That's why your claim is --------.

#176 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 06:37 PM
Does D defends the people protesting in Gaza? "Shame on them for protesting, right?" & "This was a bunch of civilian protesters."
Were his civilian protesters throwing bombs, rocks, and grenades? Reports say so:
www.cnn.com
Were those protesters protesting under the swastika and calling for the deaths of jews? NPR says so: youtu.be
Were the majority of the dead members of a terrorist organization? The terrorist organizations says so: www.timesofisrael.com

Go ahead and point out the specific part that you disagree with in this sentence:
Dirkstruan defends those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" under the swastika.

#178 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 06:47 PM | Reply

How is that sympathetic?
That's just an acknowlehdement of a right.
If I say Trump has a right to plead the Fifth, does that make me sympathetic to Trump?

#179 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 06:48 PM | Reply

"Dirkstruan defends"

Not really.

I can't speak for Israel, but here in America, the cops defend those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" under the swastika.

Actually, I guess I kinda can speak for Israel: In Israel, the military police shoot those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" under the swastika.

You seem to be in favor of both responses to those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" under the swastika. Depending on who's calling for the death of jews while "protesting" under the swastika.

#180 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 06:56 PM | Reply

"Were the majority of the dead members of a terrorist organization? The terrorist organizations says so"

If your angle is that membership in HAMAS means Israel gets to kill you, why bring the flags and rocks into it?

You do think it's the right thing to do, for IDF to kill any and all HAMAS members, correct?

Then just say so. Stop bringing in unrelated facts.

#181 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 07:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Amazing how people react when you bottle them up, bulldoze their homes, and shoot them down in the street. - #16 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-16 11:40 AM
^^^ is justifying their actions. Finding a justifications for their actions is defending them.

#182 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 07:09 PM | Reply

Both sides are wrong.

#183 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-17 07:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Would any of you be defending the Israelis if they were the ones throwing the rocks?

Somehow, I think not..

#184 | Posted by boaz at 2018-05-17 07:15 PM | Reply

"^^^ is justifying their actions"

Justify: show or prove to be right or reasonable; be a good reason for.

So you don't think it's right or reasonable how Palestinian people react when you bottle them up, bulldoze their homes, and shoot them down in the street?

You thought it was a reasonable reaction from Neo-Nazis and white power groups when Charlotsville planned to remove their beloved statue.

"Finding a justifications for their actions is defending them."

Seems to me like it's just understanding their actions.

For example, what did you think was going to happen when that girl wore a miniskirt to the fraternity party and got blackout drunk? Did you justify sexual assault, or just predict what was likely to happen under the circumstances?

#185 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 07:30 PM | Reply

If Democrats want respect, they'd go to both the House and Senate floor's, everyday, and call Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan accessories to murder who would rather see children murdered from gun violence, than stand up against the NRA and help common sense gun control.

That's how you win respect from the voters, especially in middle America.

#186 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2018-05-17 07:38 PM | Reply

You thought it was a reasonable reaction from Neo-Nazis and white power groups when Charlotsville planned to remove their beloved statue. - #185 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 07:30 PM
What is 'it' that you're talking about?
I was unaware that they were throwing bombs, rocks and grenades.

Your analogy is flawed. Dirk wasn't predicting what might happen, he was justifying what was happening. Let me repeat it so you might stop dodging:

Dirkstruan defends those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" under the swastika.
If you want to hang it all on the word defend, we can switch it to 'finds justified the actions of' if you really think that's better.
Or less damning.

#187 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 07:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Dirkstruan defends those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" under the swastika."

So, he didn't defend the rock throwing then?
Why don't you support that, especially after you supported it in Chalotsville?

#188 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 07:48 PM | Reply

Snoof- if you're looking for a consistency from avidbore beyond "what do the rush limbaugh talking points tell me to think" you're gonna be disappointed.

#189 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-17 07:56 PM | Reply

"if you're looking for a consistency from avidbore"

I was at least hoping he would confirm his belief that IDF has the right to kill HAMAS at any time, any place.

You know, seeing as they're a terrorist organization committed to destroying Israel.

Why is Avigdore supporting HAMAS?

#190 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 08:01 PM | Reply

"Dirkstruan defends those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" under the swastika."

I certainly defended not mowing down the individuals you claim were doing those things. The real question is, why are you pro massacre?

#191 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 08:07 PM | Reply

Why don't you support that, especially after you supported it in Chalotsville? - #188 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 07:48 PM
Why do you keep lying about my supporting what happened in Charlottesville?

Go ahead and cite my doing so.
Or my supporting Hamas..
Or are you back to your big 3: Lies, stupid questions, and whataboutism?

#192 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 08:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

if you're looking for a consistency from avidbore beyond "what do the rush limbaugh talking points tell me to think" you're gonna be disappointed. - #189 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-17 07:56 PM
I don't actually listen to Rush. I'm more an NPR guy. Which is why I cite them all the time.
Would you care to give an example of something I've been inconsistent about?

#193 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 08:09 PM | Reply

#193

Lie some more Rushbot.

#194 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 08:11 PM | Reply

charlottesville nazis ok
palenstinians with nazi flags not ok

#195 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-17 08:15 PM | Reply

We would all do well to remember the actual course of the discussion. The thread was about the ODF opening fire on demonstrators, killing many of them. Avig jumped in right away with excuses, saying all sorts of nasty things about the protestors and basically cloning they had it coming. When I objected to this, he, of course, tried to tie me to the nasty things he was claiming about the protestors. Classic misdirection in the face of what was, from start to finish, an apologia for the brutal and illegal actions of the IDF.

#196 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 08:16 PM | Reply

"Why do you keep lying about my supporting what happened in Charlottesville?"

We all remember your support for the Nazis there. You still engage in it, defending Trump's "very fine people" Freudian slip.

#197 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 08:20 PM | Reply

charlottesville nazis ok
palenstinians with nazi flags not ok

#195 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-17 08:15 PM
Considering that I've never said, hinted at, implied, or thought that charlottesville nazis were ok, I'd say that makes for a pretty tough thing to be inconsistent on.
Or would you like to provide some evidence of this thing I've never done?

#198 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 08:20 PM | Reply

Fine, avigdore... im going to go look for you defending the alt right and attacking antifa, like hans would.

If my memory is wrong i will apologize.

If it's not you can apologize for wasting my time.

#199 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-05-17 08:22 PM | Reply

"Considering that I've never said, hinted at, implied, or thought that charlottesville nazis were ok,"

You are constantly running interference for Trump on the subject.

#200 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 08:24 PM | Reply

Here's the link you're lying about right here, Dirkstruan the nazi sympathizer.
www.drudge.com
I called them rioters instead of demonstrators.
The rest is in your head.
Or you are free to go ahead and quote me saying all sorts of nasty things about the protestors and basically claiming they had it coming.

#201 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 08:24 PM | Reply

#201

You call them Nazis and terrorists in this very thread. In the prior one you talk about them "storming the gates" like an enemy army. Classic dehumanization.

Of course, if you are saying that by engaging in that behavior you were not at all justifying how they were treated by the IDF (hard to believe), then I suppose I can accept your concession that Israel was wrong to massacre the persons in question.

#202 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 08:35 PM | Reply

I called you a Nazi sympathizer, because that is the title of someone who defends (or justifies the actions of) people who call for the death of Jews under the swastika.
I didn't call then terrorists, I said that Hamas said that a majority of the dead were Hamas/ terrorists.
I didn't accuse these people of storming the gates. Those words were yours, actually. Here is what I said:
"Trump did not attack the gates of Israel. He didn't attack and threaten to kill the people of Israel.
When a crowd stormed your castle, you didn't wait for them to breach the walls and begin killing your people to defend yourself."
You might want to stop trusting your memory. It is failing you

#203 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 09:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I called you a Nazi sympathizer, because that is the title of someone who defends (or justifies the actions of) people who call for the death of Jews under the swastika."

The police defend the First Amendment rights of Nazis.
The police are Nazi sympathizers.

#204 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 09:20 PM | Reply

"I didn't call then terrorists, I said that Hamas said that a majority of the dead were Hamas/ terrorists."

Which you reported as fact, hence calling them terrorists.

"I didn't accuse these people of storming the gates."

Sure you did. You even quote yourself doing so:

"Trump did not attack the gates of Israel. He didn't attack and threaten to kill the people of Israel.
When a crowd stormed your castle, you didn't wait for them to breach the walls and begin killing your people to defend yourself."

You will recall, in context it was a response to "Trump caused this" and you responded with the quoted passage, obviously meaning that Trump didn't do the things you listed... but the demonstrators did. Hence they are responsible for the situation (and the massacre).

#205 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 09:21 PM | Reply

I note again, Lying Avig: you went to great lengths to dehumanize the demonstrators. Why would you do that if you weren't trying to excuse the Israelis for mowing them down with military weapons?

#206 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 09:23 PM | Reply

"Why would you do that if you weren't trying to excuse the Israelis for mowing them down with military weapons?"

Why does he even feel IDF needs excuses to kill HAMAS members?
Because I'm sure he thinks IDF is justified killing HAMAS under any circumstances.
Whole thing is scatterbrained.

#207 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 09:30 PM | Reply

Bernie Sanders condemned the IDF's attacks on protestors. Is he a Nazi apologist?

How about the governments of Turkey, France, and Canada? The UN? Various human rights watchdog groups? All Nazi supporters I suppose.

www.google.com

Puzzlingly, in Avig's perverse world, the only people who aren't Nazis in this scenario are the Israel guards of the world said largest concentration camp, their masters, and their sycophantic apologists (himself very much included).

#208 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 09:31 PM | Reply

"I didn't call then terrorists, I said that Hamas said that a majority of the dead were Hamas/ terrorists."

You called them terrorists in post #178

#209 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 09:32 PM | Reply

"How about the governments of Turkey, France, and Canada? The UN? Various human rights watchdog groups? All Nazi supporters I suppose."

From Avigdore's perspective, I don't see how there's any wiggle room on that one.
But I'm sure he can find some.
Or maybe not. Maybe Canada is secretly run by HAMAS.

#210 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 09:33 PM | Reply

Maybe Canada is secretly run by HAMAS.

#210 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2018-05-17 09:33 PM | FLAG:

If so, they better watch themselves: Avig seems to think they can be murdered with impunity.

#211 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 09:35 PM | Reply

You called them terrorists in post #178 - #209 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2018-05-17 09:32 PM

Were the majority of the dead members of a terrorist organization? The terrorist organizations says so: www.timesofisrael.com

Go ahead and point out where I called them terrorists.

#212 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 09:41 PM | Reply

Oh, so you're saying they weren't members of a terrorist organization, and the terrorist organization was lying about that.

You sure have a weird way of expressing yourself.

#213 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 09:47 PM | Reply

Which you reported as fact, hence calling them terrorists.
"I didn't accuse these people of storming the gates."
Sure you did. You even quote yourself doing so:
"Trump did not attack the gates of Israel. He didn't attack and threaten to kill the people of Israel.
When a crowd stormed your castle, you didn't wait for them to breach the walls and begin killing your people to defend yourself."
You will recall, in context it was a response to "Trump caused this" and you responded with the quoted passage, obviously meaning that Trump didn't do the things you listed... but the demonstrators did. Hence they are responsible for the situation (and the massacre).

#205 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN AT 2018-05-17 09:21 PM
Go ahead and quote where I reported as fact that they were terrorists.

The problem with your 'Hence they are' is that I didn't say or indicate that. It's in your head.
As I said earlier. I don't need to hear how you interpreted something that I stated. Why should I defend how a nazi-sympathizer interprets anything.
Don't try to spin what I've said. Quote what I've said.
Nobody needs to be subjected to the monstrous thoughts in your head.

#214 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 09:48 PM | Reply

"Don't try to spin what I've said. Quote what I've said."

Maybe you'd like to explain why you said it, if it doesn't mean anything.
Or if it does mean something, maybe you'd like to tell us what it means.

#215 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 09:49 PM | Reply

Oh, so you're saying they weren't members of a terrorist organization, and the terrorist organization was lying about that.
You sure have a weird way of expressing yourself.

#213 | POSTED BY SNOOFYM AT 2018-05-17 09:47 PM
I said plainly that Hamas claimed that they were members of Hamas.
Which is why I said 'Were the majority of the dead members of a terrorist organization? The terrorist organization says so'
Just because you can't comprehend something plainly on the screen before you is not a failing from the rest of us.

#216 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 09:51 PM | Reply

Maybe you'd like to explain why you said it, if it doesn't mean anything.
Or if it does mean something, maybe you'd like to tell us what it means.
#215 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2018-05-17 09:49 PM

Not sure why there was an M in my 216.
Perhaps you'd like to define what 'it' is that you're referring to?

#217 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 09:52 PM | Reply

"Which is why I said 'Were the majority of the dead members of a terrorist organization? The terrorist organization says so'"

Why'd you say that?
Is it because you think those dead are in fact terrorists, or some other reason?
If some other reason, what's the reason?

#218 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 09:58 PM | Reply

because Dirk was calling people civilian protesters who themselves were claiming to be terrorists.

#219 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 10:04 PM | Reply

"who themselves were claiming to be terrorists."

Show me where the dead bodies said that. LOL!

#220 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 10:04 PM | Reply

HAMAS got funding from Israel. Does that make Israel a state sponsor of terrorism? Be honest now.

#221 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 10:08 PM | Reply

Show me there I said the dead bodies said that. I very clearly stated above that the terrorist organization says so.

#222 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 10:09 PM | Reply

"who themselves were claiming to be terrorists."

Themselves doesn't mean the dead bodies?
How does "themselves" refer to someone other than themselves?

#223 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 10:10 PM | Reply

Democrats Will Never Win the 'Respect' Argument

Neither will Republicans if they follow in the President's son's footsteps:

Eric Trump on Democrats: 'They're not even people'

www.usatoday.com

#224 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-05-17 10:11 PM | Reply

"Go ahead and quote where I reported as fact that they were terrorists."

You reported it and didn't indicate disbelief. So there you are.

"The problem with your 'Hence they are' is that I didn't say or indicate that."

Well, you admit to dehumanization of the demonstrators. And you engaged in that tactic in a discussion about said demonstrators being massacred. What exactly is one supposed to conclude?

#225 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 10:16 PM | Reply

"because Dirk was calling people civilian protesters who themselves were claiming to be terrorists."

They weren't claiming to be terrorists. You made that up.

#226 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 10:17 PM | Reply

I think he's using some kind of time warp transitive property.

IDF killed them.
HAMAS later said they were members of HAMAS.
HAMAS is a terrorist organization.
Therefore, they were being terrorists while IDF was killing them.

He did all that without saying they were terrorists, imagine that!

#227 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 10:19 PM | Reply

They weren't claiming to be terrorists. You made that up. - #226 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN AT 2018-05-17 10:17 PM Flag: Defender of those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" and flying the swastika
They claimed to be Hamas. Which is why I stated Hamas: It is regarded, either in whole or in part, as a terrorist organization by several countries and international organizations, most notably by Israel, the United States and the European Union.

Well, you admit to dehumanization of the demonstrators. #225 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN AT 2018-05-17 10:16 PM Defender of those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" and flying the swastika
Another in your list of lies.

I suppose I really shouldn't expect anything less from someone as despicable as you.

#228 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-17 11:26 PM | Reply

"Defender of those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" and flying the swastika"

The Constitution does that.
The Constitution was written by HAMAS.

#229 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-17 11:39 PM | Reply

"They claimed to be Hamas. Which is why I stated Hamas"

You said terrorists in post 219 and elsewhere. Stop lying.

"Another in your list of lies."

On this thread alone you've called them terroisrsnandnnazis. On the other thread you talked about them storming the gates. Dehumanization to a "T." You can't even dispute it.

#230 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 11:48 PM | Reply

It is almost funny watching Avig try to weasel out of his own statements. Until you remember that those statements were made in support of a massacre.

#231 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 11:50 PM | Reply

You said terrorists in post 219 and elsewhere. Stop lying.

"Another in your list of lies."

On this thread alone you've called them terroisrsnandnnazis. On the other thread you talked about them storming the gates. Dehumanization to a "T." You can't even dispute it.

#230 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-17 11:48 PM Flag: Defender of those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" and flying the swastika
"Another in your list of lies."
Yes, you ignorant buffoon, I said the word terrorist...as in, they called themselves terrorists.
Go ahead and quote where I called them terrorists.
Go ahead and quote where I called them Nazis.
Go ahead and keep lying to try to defend your despicable behavior.
You are free to continue lying. I'm going to keep calling you a liar until you provide some proof for your lies.

#232 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-18 07:09 AM | Reply

"Yes, you ignorant buffoon, I said the word terrorist...as in, they called themselves terrorists."

So you disagree with them? Why report the matter at all? Not that you have been able to point to where they called themselves terrorists anyway.

"Go ahead and quote where I called them Nazis."

Post 203, for a start.

#233 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-18 10:05 AM | Reply

So you disagree with them? Why report the matter at all? Not that you have been able to point to where they called themselves terrorists anyway.

"Go ahead and quote where I called them Nazis."

Post 203, for a start.

#233 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-18 10:05 AMFlag: Defender of those calling for the death of jews while "protesting" and flying the swastika

No, I disagree with you calling them 'civilian protesters' when the terrorist organizations calls them terrorists.
Hamas leader, Salah Bardawil, says of the "62 people martyred, 50 were Hamas." You lied again.
I didn't call them anything.
I called you a Nazi sympathizer, as I will call anyone who Defends those who protest under the swastika while calling for the deaths of jews.

#234 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-05-18 11:53 AM | Reply

"No, I disagree with you calling them 'civilian protesters' when the terrorist organizations calls them terrorists."

No one is calling them terrorists but you.

"I didn't call them anything."

Except Nazis and terrorists.

And why? To justify a massacre. You are an apologist for atrocities.

#235 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-18 12:00 PM | Reply

From what I've read warning shots were fired, tear gas was used and rubber bullets were used. None of that deterred them.

#236 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-18 12:41 PM | Reply

From what I've read warning shots were fired, tear gas was used and rubber bullets were used. None of that deterred them.

#236 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-05-18 12:41 PM | FLAG:

So mowing them down was the next logical step. Perfectly reasonable. /snark

#237 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-18 12:45 PM | Reply

Also, who did you hear that from? An international investigation was blocked.

#238 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-18 12:46 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"I called you a Nazi sympathizer, as I will call anyone who Defends those who protest under the swastika while calling for the deaths of jews."

JeffJ he just called you a Nazi sympathizer. You brute!

#239 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-18 12:49 PM | Reply

Look how well ABigWhore has trolled this thread.

He's reduced it to bickering with Dirk about whether one of them is a Nazi.

#240 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-05-18 12:51 PM | Reply

240

true but Boydstraun has had plenty of arguments where he accuses folks of being a Nazi sympathizer.

IOW, they are both trolls.

#241 | Posted by eberly at 2018-05-18 12:56 PM | Reply

#241

The difference being in those threads someone is sympathizing with Nazis ("very fine people.").

#242 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-18 12:58 PM | Reply

#237 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN

I get the feeling that the only acceptable outcome would have been for Israel to say,

"OK. You win. Come on in and do whatever you want to us. We'll go into a turtle position and let you do whatever you want. Rape, torture, execution, whatever. Have at it."

#243 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-18 02:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I get the feeling that the only acceptable outcome would have been for Israel to say,

"OK. You win. Come on in and do whatever you want to us. We'll go into a turtle position and let you do whatever you want. Rape, torture, execution, whatever. Have at it."

#243 | Posted by JeffJ

Or maybe "Ok here's your land back. We'll stop killing you now."

#244 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-05-18 02:28 PM | Reply

umm
Palestinians are being held captive in a toxic environment and are denied the basic human right of dignity.
I would like to see how jeffyj would react to

a) Someone else claiming ownership of an orchard your great, great, great grandfather planted
b) Being held captive against your will
c) Watching your kids suffer at the hands of an oppressor

I suspect jeffy wouldn't hold up too well to even one of these things, considering just having a black president caused him so much anguish and grief

#245 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-05-18 02:40 PM | Reply

"OK. You win. Come on in and do whatever you want to us. We'll go into a turtle position and let you do whatever you want. Rape, torture, execution, whatever. Have at it."

POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-05-18 02:22 PM | REPLY | F

Yawwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnnn GZLives would be oh so proud.

#246 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-05-18 02:43 PM | Reply

#243

You need to get your "feelings" sorted out, Jeff. My suggestion: start with your conscience.

#247 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-18 03:03 PM | Reply

I'm just conveying how you come across, Dirk.

If I've misconstrued your position you are free to clarify.

#248 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-18 08:30 PM | Reply

There's no way you actually think Dirk wishes the Nazis had killed more Jews.

You're just being a little bitch, is all.

#249 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-18 08:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#249

Piss off. Dirk ascribes the absolute worst intentions and motivations imaginable and usually baselessly.

I simply told him how he comes across and offered an opportunity to clarify, which is a courtesy that he (and you) rarely, if ever afford.

So spare me your faux outrage, D- bag.

#250 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-18 08:48 PM | Reply

"I'm just conveying how you come across....."

...to people with your bizarre worldview, perhaps. I suppose it is an education... of a sort.

#251 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-18 08:54 PM | Reply

"I simply told him how he comes across"

No, you made up him wanting all Jews dead.

(JEFFJ BEING A LITTLE BITCH INTENSIFIES)

#252 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-18 09:23 PM | Reply

Re-read the post in question, bitch.

And yes, I DID alleged he wanted all Jews dead - it was in response to equally nasty allegations going the other way.

Again, spare me your faux outrage.

Any more of this crap and you'll receive the Ashton Stamp.

Your stupid games are tiresome and repetitive.

#253 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-18 09:32 PM | Reply

...to people with your bizarre worldview, perhaps. I suppose it is an education... of a sort.

#251 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN

Is my perception of your position accurate?

If not, please clarify.

#254 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-18 09:33 PM | Reply

"it was in response to equally nasty allegations going the other way."

Allegations which, unlike those made against me, are supported by what was said in this thread.

Let's review:

Thread is posted about the IDF mowing down demonstrators. A series of outraged responses to this action by the IDF are posted. Several posters answer these responses by saying nasty things about the protestors: they are terrorists, Nazis, a ravening horde storming Israel, etc.

So, how should someone view these comments about the protestors, if not as attempts to justify the IDF response by saying that the protestors deserved what they got?

#255 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-18 09:45 PM | Reply

"Any more of this crap and you'll receive the Ashton Stamp."

Next you will threaten to stomp your feet and scream. Or perhaps stick your fingers in your ears and say "la la la la la."

#256 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-18 09:47 PM | Reply

So, how should someone view these comments about the protestors, if not as attempts to justify the IDF response by saying that the protestors deserved what they got?

#255 | POSTED BY DIRKSTRUAN

What you never, EVER do, is articulate a point at which Israel is justified in self-defense. NEVER. Please draw a line, even if it's hypothetical. Your tack is they should F***O** and die.

#257 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-05-18 11:25 PM | Reply

"What you never, EVER do, is articulate a point at which Israel is justified in self-defense."

Nice attempt to shift the burden.

#258 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-05-19 02:48 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort