U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old Today, 07:58 AM
 
23,892 posts, read 12,576,751 times
Reputation: 7635

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post
He's the greatest military commander our nation has ever produced. He just ended his career fighting for the losing side in our most awful war.

Back to topic - anyone who reads the entirety of Trump's comments on the Charlottesville thing can spot a leader trying to be neutral and asking if we can all just get along. If you want to find offense in his words, you can. If you want to find leadership, you can.

One of the worst versions of the straw man argument (which we see on this forum all the freaking time, sadly) is of the form: "so what you're really saying is..." or "so by that, what you really mean is..." and then that straw man gets repeated ad nauseum until nobody can even remember what was ACTUALLY SAID. That was always the case with the Charlottesville thing. Within seconds of his comments, someone on some mainstream media outlet said "what he really means is...." and that became what he said, and we've been screaming at that strawman ever since.

Kudos to someone I almost always disagree (travis t) with for the topic. Fine work.
See -- the spin is real.

The whole point --- that whole rally was organized by white supremacists, predominately attended by white supremacists WHO chose to use the statues as a premise for setting up the protest.

THey weren't going to get a permit to protest in support of white supremacy .

When it became a violent protest -- Trump refused to condemn with any significance the white supremacists who used the rally to promote white supremacy.

You yourself said it -- he was trying to remain neutral and you see nothing wrong with that.

No more to be said.

Many of us felt it wasn't time for a President who has never been known for diplomacy to become diplomatic and fearful of offending the very few who mistakenly thought the protest was for the love of statues.

 
Old Today, 08:11 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,740 posts, read 20,282,326 times
Reputation: 8511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clarallel View Post
Let's be more precise. Trump said that white supremacist group included "very fine people." He did not use the word "Nazi" and he did not apply it to all Alt-Right people. But he clearly claimed a false equivalency between the two sides, and clearly felt that it was possible to be a hate-mongering neo-Nazi and still be a "fine person."

So you just repeat the lie that the video proves to be a lie?
 
Old Today, 08:21 AM
 
7,171 posts, read 2,600,884 times
Reputation: 3909
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
See -- the spin is real.

The whole point --- that whole rally was organized by white supremacists, predominately attended by white supremacists WHO chose to use the statues as a premise for setting up the protest.

THey weren't going to get a permit to protest in support of white supremacy .

When it became a violent protest -- Trump refused to condemn with any significance the white supremacists who used the rally to promote white supremacy.

You yourself said it -- he was trying to remain neutral and you see nothing wrong with that.

No more to be said.

Many of us felt it wasn't time for a President who has never been known for diplomacy to become diplomatic and fearful of offending the very few who mistakenly thought the protest was for the love of statues.
A white supremacist has the same freedom of speech, association, and assembly that the person totally opposed to them does. That they even had to obtain a "permit" to assemble and speak is the tyranny of arbitrary power illustrated perfectly.

The protest became violent when those opposed to them chose to employ violent means to disagree with them, and being the people they are, they didn't shy away from the fight like the SJW bullies hoped. One cannot be a white supremacist and also unfamiliar with people wanting to kick your arse. One is a necessary condition of the other.

Hateful and offensive as their imagery and rhetoric may be, had no SJW counter-protesters show up with axe handles, crowbars, bats, etc to help "advance their counter narrative", no violence occurs that day and it is a long forgotten nothing event of a bunch of idiots playing nazi dress up and shouting sieg heil at a statue of a man who would have so vehemently disagreed with their position that he might have ordered his men to shoot them.

But the angry SJWs with their melee weapons DID SHOW UP, and the event did become violent AS A RESULT of them showing up, armed and ready for combat. What gets lost in this entire discussion is that free speech (white supremacists) got countered with initiations of force (SJW counter protesters) and because the people speaking freely wouldn't back down from the cultural narrative's demand that they shut up, violence ensued. Somehow, that has now been blamed on those who had force initiated against them simply because they were doing WrongSpeak.

The reality is that the cultural narrative is binary in an almost draconian way. You agree with it and virtue signal on its behalf, or you are a terrorist, nazi, criminal, hatemonger, whatever. No middle ground whatsoever. Way better and smarter thinkers than I have explained that the truest test of your belief in natural, individual rights is whether you'll defend them even when people use them in ways that are totally repugnant. Clearly, one of us actually believes in free speech and assembly and one of does not. Want to venture a guess as to who's who?

I find any form of collective notion of supremacy to be anathema, but I will always, forever and ever, defend an individual's right to believe/speak/write freely, and to assemble/associate voluntarily accordingly. A neo-nazi jacktard standing in front of that Robert E. Lee statue saying "heil Hitler" does not harm you or anyone in any way whatsoever. A thousand or a million of that idiot's like minded buddies doing the same thing still doesn't harm you or anyone else in any way. It's just speech. It's just ideas. They cannot harm you. Really.

Now you can go back to your safe space and declare no hate speech can ever be allowed, or that offensive speech itself is an act of violence, or whatever makes you feel better about your desire to suppress all speech/expression that doesn't agree with you, but understand that such thinking makes you a worse person and threat to liberty than the worst fever dream image you have of Trump could ever hope to be.
 
Old Today, 08:35 AM
 
23,892 posts, read 12,576,751 times
Reputation: 7635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post
A white supremacist has the same freedom of speech, association, and assembly that the person totally opposed to them does. That they even had to obtain a "permit" to assemble and speak is the tyranny of arbitrary power illustrated perfectly.

The protest became violent when those opposed to them chose to employ violent means to disagree with them, and being the people they are, they didn't shy away from the fight like the SJW bullies hoped. One cannot be a white supremacist and also unfamiliar with people wanting to kick your arse. One is a necessary condition of the other.

Hateful and offensive as their imagery and rhetoric may be, had no SJW counter-protesters show up with axe handles, crowbars, bats, etc to help "advance their counter narrative", no violence occurs that day and it is a long forgotten nothing event of a bunch of idiots playing nazi dress up and shouting sieg heil at a statue of a man who would have so vehemently disagreed with their position that he might have ordered his men to shoot them.

But the angry SJWs with their melee weapons DID SHOW UP, and the event did become violent AS A RESULT of them showing up, armed and ready for combat. What gets lost in this entire discussion is that free speech (white supremacists) got countered with initiations of force (SJW counter protesters) and because the people speaking freely wouldn't back down from the cultural narrative's demand that they shut up, violence ensued. Somehow, that has now been blamed on those who had force initiated against them simply because they were doing WrongSpeak.

The reality is that the cultural narrative is binary in an almost draconian way. You agree with it and virtue signal on its behalf, or you are a terrorist, nazi, criminal, hatemonger, whatever. No middle ground whatsoever. Way better and smarter thinkers than I have explained that the truest test of your belief in natural, individual rights is whether you'll defend them even when people use them in ways that are totally repugnant. Clearly, one of us actually believes in free speech and assembly and one of does not. Want to venture a guess as to who's who?

I find any form of collective notion of supremacy to be anathema, but I will always, forever and ever, defend an individual's right to believe/speak/write freely, and to assemble/associate voluntarily accordingly. A neo-nazi jacktard standing in front of that Robert E. Lee statue saying "heil Hitler" does not harm you or anyone in any way whatsoever. A thousand or a million of that idiot's like minded buddies doing the same thing still doesn't harm you or anyone else in any way. It's just speech. It's just ideas. They cannot harm you. Really.

Now you can go back to your safe space and declare no hate speech can ever be allowed, or that offensive speech itself is an act of violence, or whatever makes you feel better about your desire to suppress all speech/expression that doesn't agree with you, but understand that such thinking makes you a worse person and threat to liberty than the worst fever dream image you have of Trump could ever hope to be.
Your whole rant is worthy of discussion but has little to do with the subject of this thread.We aren't debating the right to free speech...that's not at the core of what Trump was addressing nor this thread.

The issue is whether or not Trump condemns white supremacy significantly.

This isn't about defending their RIGHT to speak. It is about the PResident of the USA seemingly not able to condemn groups that choose to use violence and hate.

You can fight for their right to be hateful...and still condemn their hate.

But nice rant.
 
Old Today, 08:49 AM
 
7,171 posts, read 2,600,884 times
Reputation: 3909
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
Your whole rant is worthy of discussion but has little to do with the subject of this thread.We aren't debating the right to free speech...that's not at the core of what Trump was addressing nor this thread.

The issue is whether or not Trump condemns white supremacy significantly.
Trump doesn't need to do any such thing. Both groups at Charlottesville, like it or not, were AMERICANS. Two sets of ideas that are diametrically opposed, but Americans on either side. The President of the United States is not just the President for Americans wit proper ideas that comport with the cultural narrative. He is the President of the United States for every single American.

It isn't his job to condemn one set of cultural ideas or another. In fact, him not taking a side and saying both sides had fine people was about as properly presidential as the situation allowed for. And he did denounce the concept of nazism and violence, just not vehemently enough for you apparently, which proves my point about the draconian nature of the cultural narrative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
This isn't about defending their RIGHT to speak. It is about the President of the USA seemingly not able to condemn groups that choose to use violence and hate.

You can fight for their right to be hateful...and still condemn their hate.
He did condemn hate. He did condemn violence. He did condemn the notion of nazism.

You're pissed off because you don't think he did it vehemently enough. And you're also pissed off because he said that both sides in the protest contained fine people which is the President remaining neutral on a difference of opinion between two groups of Americans, and respecting free speech and expression.

You hate Trump. Got it. Believe me, I am no particular fan either. That said, the truth of Charlottesville is wildly different than the narrative, and your repeated objections that so zealously defend the accepted narrative over the actual reality illustrate that difference perfectly.
 
Old Today, 08:53 AM
 
Location: Florida
21,790 posts, read 11,251,621 times
Reputation: 7960
The left loves their fake news .. they twist it to fit their hate for Trump.. this is how deranged they are.. and then they try to pawn it on the air ways.. this is all those losers have.. FAKE NEWS.
 
Old Today, 10:30 AM
 
38,944 posts, read 15,283,229 times
Reputation: 25284
BS.

Charlottesville did not become violent when people opposing the march became violent.

Watch the videos of that night march, the one without the permit. Those standing around the statue were attacked by those with the torches.

Watch the videos of the attacks the next day. Several have gone to jail, one for murder.

Guess which group of fine folks they represented?
 
Old Today, 11:07 AM
 
13,126 posts, read 4,032,749 times
Reputation: 3934
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
It is one thing to try and spin what the President said about Charlottesville and the fact he didn't seem to be totally condemning the white supremacist groups there -- that can be subjective, perception, spin.....

BUT to debate the motive of the groups and the rally itself is just plain naive and ignorance....and very disturbing.

The chants, the groups who proudly displayed their emblems, etc......and proudly spoke about how this rally was about furthering THEIR Cause......white supremacy.

I get it -- tough when the guy you voted for mishandles the situation. I'm not one of those that believe Trump is purposely racist. He's old, he's lived in a very small bubble all his life -- rich white guy in NYC. He has no clue what is going on at the grass roots level. He's not a guy who is into reading, researching, etc.

He gets fed talking points from Fox News..

Trump was not strong enough in his comments regarding the white supremacists who used the removal of statues as an excuse for their violence, and racist rants.

He just didn't.

He didn't want to be perceived as too liberal....so he kind of said -- bad guys on both sides.

President Trump has never suggested that these white supremacist groups that have been charged numerous times for invoking violence, etc. should be domestic terrorists...but the anti-fa should be.

Do I believe he supports the white supremacist. No I don't think he has that strong of a value system to commit to that kind of hate and bigotry. But his ignorance of the seriousness of these groups and their intentions, his inability to initially just condemn them for their hate......instead tempering his criticism of suggesting some of them were fine people.....or implying that.....just wasn't appropriate.
So why must this historical white majority country be purposely changed into a white minority, majority minority country? Why must anyone, let alone a white American have to accept and support this policy?

Why is it the official policy and the only accepted policy is to replace the white majority? How is this not an anti-white racist policy?

First, this policy of majority replacement and displacement should be condemned and then we can worry about condemning anyone for erroneously blaming the wrong group for that policy.
 
Old Today, 11:37 AM
 
1,209 posts, read 213,200 times
Reputation: 714
If it takes this much explaining, You lost the fight.
 
Old Today, 12:07 PM
 
Location: So Cal
40,766 posts, read 40,342,205 times
Reputation: 42196
TDS has caused many people to be disingenuous when it comes to Trump. I don't care for Trump but I place a lot of importance on intellectual honesty. I have to spend more time defending Trump than I care to. He was totally taken out of context and to say otherwise is nonsense. People because of their seething hate for him caused them to blow their wad looking for a gotcha on him.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top