From the Beeb: Republican Party representatives kept quiet amid a wave of criticism.
There is no doubt left: Trump is a raging racist and the GOP is complicit in that. Not a single Republican has spoken out against Trump's racism. American nazis are chortling with glee, for Trump is indeed their guy.
Trump could don a full Klan uniform and burn a cross on the South Lawn of the White House and there would not be a single peep of criticism would be heard from any Republican.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
I like how you folks twist the statement.
I am truly saddened by your comment, B. I knew you to be a conservative, but standing up for a racist? I sincerely would have thought that was beneath you.
"Go back where you came from" is racist. There is no way to put a fancy gloss on that. I really am surprised that you're trying to.
To paraphrase George Orwell, Not to see what is front of one’s nose demands a constant struggle.
How is it that the Left twists the statement? At face value, it is racist. The statement claims they came from other countries (only one did, the others were born here in The US.). Once again, Trump has made up (lied) some kind of shit to up his racist base. “Go back to your own country” was a phrase I heard often in the sixties. It was directed at blacks inferring that they return to Africa.
You cannot deny you haven’t heard that also. You can’t deny that statement is racist. You cannot deny that Trump put the statement in a tweet. Look back over the man’s past remarks. Charlottesville, shithole countries, Obama’s birth certificate, Mexican immigrants are rapists and murderers, Pocahontas, Nigerians after seeing America would never go back to their huts, etc. the fucking guy is a racist. It is seen in his actions. It is heard in his own words. It is read in his tweets. For someone to continue to defend, deflect, and excuse Trump’s behavior is abhorrent and is being seen as agreeing with his viewpoint. That person is also a racist.
Dale
comment from WaPo
“Trump told the four progressives they should “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”
That would be…..the United States?
Just can’t make this stuff up.
Maybe he was hoping they'd fix some problems in the places in America where they live, because he sure isn't going to.
-Doug in Oakland
"For someone to continue to defend, deflect, and excuse Trump’s behavior is abhorrent and is being seen as agreeing with his viewpoint. That person is also a racist."
I believe that is a precisely correct articulation of leftist philosophy and practice. And if I knew nothing else of it, that alone would be enough to condemn it. You lot are the Bernard Gui to B's William of Baskerville, extending an accusation to anyone who expresses skepticism of it. How frustrating it must be for you that Trump is not burnt ash.
I used to visit this blog to get an opposing opinion to check my own views. Now I just pop in to see what the Leftist Inquisition is up to. We're beginning to expect you.
I did notice that his latest Twitter malfunction has knocked the Jeffry Epstein stuff off of the front page.
-Doug in Oakland
No, B.P., it's the truth. Your response exemplifies the Right on this: Defend Trump, not by dealing with his racism, corruption and all of the rest, but by attacking his critics.
Your post is an object lesson in defending the indefensible. Trump flies his racist flag on a tall flagpole and the response of the Right is to attack everyone who says "look at that flag."
You are standing up for a racist, an authoritarian white supremacist and, yes, a neo-nazi. You could at least have the fortitude to acknowledge that plain fact.
C.M., you open your post by telling me that the Right has a habit of attacking critics, then you end it by telling me to have the fortitude to agree with your position. Think about it.
I didn't defend Trump or attack people for criticizing Trump. I defended the ability of people to defend Trump, specifically B, and attacked the idea of imputing the specific alleged misconduct or character flaws of someone to anyone who isn't on board with condemning them. To paraphrase Dale: "For someone to continue to defend, deflect, and excuse [Salvatore]’s behavior is abhorrent and is being seen as agreeing with his viewpoint. That person is also a [heretic]."
B disagrees with you, and expresses it, so he gets called a racist. That simple. No recognized possibility that he might subscribe to a reasonable alternative interpretation. Or even an unreasonable but facially plausible one. Or a stubborn refusal to reconsider a position in light of new evidence, or a zealously loyal member of a political party. Not in politics, not today. Certainly no need to ask what he might be thinking, or try to work on correcting a flaw in his reasoning. Just jump to it being a moral failing. And not just any moral failing. Somehow, it is immediately known that he's not just taking a mercenary position. It can't even be that he's a misogynist who had to vote against the woman and is happy to see a man chew out women. He must be, specifically and affirmatively, a racist, because that is was Trump was being accused of at the time. It is "seen as agreeing with" Trump's alleged viewpoint, and that is enough to state "that person is also a racist." The optics say it will work out, so make the allegation. That's a Bernardo Gui move.
That deserves to be called out regardless of Trump's motives. It is broader than Trump. It is discourteous, reckless, and arrogant to presume that any and all dissent your position is met with is the result of personal wickedness on the part of the dissenter, and nothing less than absurd to think that it must, additionally, be wickedness of the specific type that you were then accusing Trump of. It is fundamental attribution error staged for an epidemic.
"It is discourteous, reckless, and arrogant to presume..."
No presumption needs to be made about someone you have known for years. I see that as the main hole in your argument. Want an actual answer to your hypothetical questions? Read the hundreds of comments B has made on this very blog, or maybe click on over to his blog and ask him about it.
-Doug in Oakland
Notice how Trump's racist screeds have pushed the Jeffery Epstein case 'off the front page'?
BP, I used the transitive property. If a=b and b=c, then a=c. If racists (a) say (b)”Go back home to .....” Then trump (c) tweets out those same words, then Trump is a racist.
If Trump is a racist (a), and others (b) support his position (c), then they themselves are racist.
It is amazing that support or denouncement for racist tweets and racism in general is falling along party lines. One would think that basic human decency would preclude this behavior.
Dale
Post a Comment