Quote:
Originally Posted by theS5
You can't be serious here. I'm speechless. Take you head out of the sand.
|
How about you start learning to respect reasonable people who disagree with you, instead, and stop posting childish comments like "You are blabbering," and "Take you head out of the sand." I think your perspective is immoral, or irrational, or whatever, and I express such thoughts in a mature and respectful manner. I don't spew derogatory throwaway lines at you.
Incidentally, without prejudice: If you want replies in context of what you write, you need to learn to use quoting better. I'm not going to reconstruct the thread, so regrettably your failure to use quoting properly will force you and all readers to have to swap back and forth between your comments and this response to them.
Point #1: I am talking about the promises Trump made that prompted his supporter, especially those in PA, MI, and WI, to vote for him. They didn't elect a trainee. They elected someone who would fix their hurt. You said the solution was to roll back eight years. I replied that eight years ago was the Great Recession. You deflected from addressing the fact that your comment was an embarrassment. Now go back and answer the original question without trying to use the throwaway line "roll back eight years" now that I've shown how wrong-headed that response was. What, precisely, are you expecting to see with regard to Trump living up to that promise he made.
Point #2: No: When you're replying to a comment that say "a few months", "tomorrow" is not a figure of speech. Go back to what I wrote in context. It is reasonable for these people who supported Trump to expect that they will be back to work making enough to pay their own way and secure their own future in a few months. They have children to feed and bills to pay. They're not expecting Trump to turn around and say that they're going to have to continue in desperation for years. That was my point, which you seem to have worked very hard to deflect yourself away from responding to.
Point #3: Our standing in the world has not been adversely affected by President Obama's tenure. That's a deception that Trump and his supporters peddled to dupe weak-minded sycophants into voting for Trump. Foreign policy experts know that the reputation of the United States has been affected mostly by the fact that President Bush sent armed forces to kill Muslims in Iraq. The reputation of the United States reached the point where it is when the World Trade Center fell. There was no way to damage the reputation of the United States any further than it was damaged already. Efforts to remedy that situation by working with Muslims to help them reclaim their lands from totalitarian regimes that have oppressed them have failed, leaving the reputation of the United States where it has been for 15 years. You're welcome to delude yourself further, but let's hope President Trump isn't as stupid as that and doesn't try to improve the reputation of the United States by attempting to conquer Muslims that he doesn't like.
Regardless, that wasn't what I asked you. I asked you, "What makes you think that any nation would actually care to be a subject state of another?" Stop trying to dodge the question by deflecting to some other matter. Answer the question. Why do you think the United States dominating other nations is something other nations actually would welcome? What rationalization do you have for your saying that the effort to re-establish some domination role for the United States in the world is a good thing?
Answer the questions.
Point #4: If you refuse to be specific I can only assume that had no legitimate reply to what I wrote and you're just trying to dodge the issue. List five events from history that you were implicitly touting with your comment. Give dates and places and name the event. The point of forcing you to take responsibility for the words you posted is so that I can specifically dig into the specific events and show you that there was as much if not more reason to be ashamed of what you're referring to. You're trying to reclaim something that was never noble, never admirable, never respectable. And in the context of your earlier comments about the reputation of the United States, your scurrilous rhetoric is even worse: As soon as you have the intellectual integrity to list the five specific historical events of which you are proud, I'll be able to point out how some of them actually were the root cause of the loss of reputation by the United States which you yourself expressed concern earlier in your comments.
This is the real problem with Trumpism: Abject myopia. I read some other Trump supporter say that he was looking forward to rolling things back to when there was less racial divisiveness. Digging into when that actually was leads back to before the Voting Rights Act increased the number of people of color who were able to safely vote their conscience... back to a time when two members of my denomination were murdered by white supremacists.
Point #5: You wrote, "I'm not sure his plan is to make Muslims love him. His first priority is making our citizens safe." There are roughly 3.3 million Muslim-Americans.
Point #6: You tried to dodge this issue entirely so I will repost what I posted earlier and challenge you to have the intellectual integrity to respond to it on the merits.
Hillary Clinton is a good Methodist and has honored her Methodist values all her life. Meanwhile, Donald Trump admits to committing adultery and then dumping his wife for the younger woman with whom he committed adultery - twice! Beyond that, and more importantly, Trump has promised to violate every precept of the Higher Ground Moral Declaration. So he either breaks his promises (which is immoral) or he keeps his promises (which is also immoral).
First: Don't dare challenge someone's adherence to their chosen religious precepts unless you have standing to know their religious precepts and evidence of their directly contravening those precepts. Second: If you don't like what I said about Trump, then prove what I wrote was wrong. Prove he didn't admit to committing adultery, or prove that adultery isn't a bad thing. Third: Prove that something we mutually recognize as a higher power supports your implied condescension toward the Higher Ground Moral Declaration. Or admit that you have no legitimate response to the fact that Trump's stated intentions are directly contrary to these moral precepts.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
