Godstud wrote:Criticizing a STATE is not the same as criticizing a race or ethnicity. This is the tired old lame-duck argument that criticizing Israel is criticizing all Jewish people.
Ilhan Omar's comments included people who support the State of Israel--"all about the Benjamins." So she wasn't just criticizing a state.
noemon wrote:As I already said and you ignored:
I'm ignoring your quoted interpretation, because it's not what Trump said. It's what you say he said. Your interpretation is your interpretation. It came from you, not from Trump. I'm not interested in debating your interpretation of what Trump said, but rather what Trump ACTUALLY said. Why you cannot grasp this distinction is anyone's guess.
noemon wrote:Again you are refusing to offer the evidence that people request from you and explain your reasoning.
Your laziness about your uninformed state is your problem, not mine. AOC is trolling, just like Trump does. When she calls cauliflower a "colonial vegetable," I think it's funny because she comes off as deliberatively crazy and she will be taken seriously by people of her ilk and harming the Democrats in the process--part of my objective. AOC ran on racial grounds asserting that Joe Crowley was not in step with the Bronx, because he's white and the majority of the Bronx is not. I wrote a whole thread on it. She accuses Israel of committing massacres against Palestinians at Israel's effective border walls when Hamas--a terrorist organization--is trying to breach Israeli security. She routinely calls US ICE detention centers "concentration camps" to compare US border enforcement with the Holocaust. AOC was criticized by the US Holocaust Museum for this. AOC refused to apologize and rejected an invitation to visit actual concentration camps in Europe. Again, I support
her doing this, because it furthers my interest of creating disarray among the establishment.
Omar plays the PC game of apologizing and removing tweets to avoid censure, but then makes inflammatory statements weeks later. Ilhan Omar Doubles Down on Antisemitic Slur: No ‘Allegiance’ to Israel
. She says American Jews have allegiance to Israel. Again, she's focusing on a particular American ethnicity. It's similar to what you claim Donald Trump is doing. Unlike you, I have no problem with it, because it furthers my objective of destroying political correctness and the establishment that supports it. Humorously, Ilhan Omar's criticism of AIPAC gained her the support of David Duke. AOC 'squad' revolts: Ayanna Pressley says no more 'black faces that don’t want to be a black voice'
. Ayanna Pressley is perfectly within her rights to say such things, just as Donald Trump is within his rights to say what he ACTUALLY said. Trump is now campaigning on this stuff, and his crowds are enormously enthusiastic while the Democrats are fighting with each other. I'm sure if Donald Trump said, "We don't neeed anymore white faces that don't want to be a white voice," you'd be howling about it. I, of course, would be laughing hysterically.
noemon wrote:You made the argument that Trump cannot be racist because he has Black friends.
No I didn't. I said Trump is not a racist, because he doesn't actually do anything to harm people based on their racial backgrounds. It's not who he is as a person. I've explained at length that huge numbers of Americans have followed Trump as a public figure for ages. He's a known quantity. The media tries to shape a perception of him, but they cannot. This type of thing--Focus Group of Female Trump Voters Shocks CNN
--gets to the point where CNN personnel end up arguing with their guests, because none of them take issue with what Trump said. You can see it here: CNN making the same types of arguments @noemon makes, and Republican women not agreeing
noemon wrote:Now justify your outrage and whining for the alleged "anti-white racism" of a white person.
I don't care what he says. I support his right to say it, just as I support the right of everyone else to call for extermination of anyone they want too, provided it is done in a political context and not actually encouraging extra-judicial violence. I'm American. I believe in free speech. That doesn't mean I agree with every outrageous thing people say. Admin Edit: Rule 16 You have been warned both in private and in public not to talk about moderating decisions outside the Basement --Yellow Card--
nomeon wrote:Racist statements especially from the White House President are even more so racist acts as they carry state authority behind them.
This is you finding the source of a statement more important than the statement itself. This is because you don't believe in equal application of rules. I do. I just don't believe in egalitarianism, which is a different assertion. Uniform application of the law makes law scalable. Non-uniform application of the law makes the law unintelligible and less likely to be defended.
noemon wrote:The fact that even BoJo condemned Trump's tweets, means that it's not just Theresa May as you claimed.
Right now, only Teresa May or the Foreign Office can speak for the UK in an international context. BoJo is just an MP. His tune will change when he wants a trade deal and has to negotiate with Trump.
noemon wrote:Why is Trump using the ethnic origins of these women as a means to justify his attacks on them instead of their actual arguments?
Trump didn't mention anyone by name or mention an ethnic origin. He baited. He trolled. We have to infer he meant Ilhan Omar, but he used the plural, which was incorrect to apply to the rest of them. So why would he do it? He KNOWS that he will be attacked by the media. He will get a lot of attention, which was his goal. Then he gets to direct that attention. So what does he do then? He then starts talking about their actual arguments. Why does he need to do this? The media is in the tank for the Democratic party, so they will bury the stories that don't serve the Democratic party's cause. The reason the DrudgeReport became huge is because it broke the Clinton-Lewinsky story when NBC knew about it and sat on it. In today's politics, you have to manipulate the media to your ends if you are not a Democrat. If you are, you can simply coordinate with them.
When I debate liberals I do not know in person, my argument doesn't change. However, I find it is very easy to disarm the "I'm smarter than you, and you are an idiot" liberal type by simply mispronouncing words. For example, I would pronounce paradigm as "para-diggum" rather than "para-dime", because it makes the liberal feel superior and they become decidedly less hostile when they think they have "evidence" that I am an idiot. It works surprisingly well.
noemon wrote:Why are you and Kaiser attempting to justify this:
Why do you think everyone needs to get together and condemn it? Why do you feel so passionately about perceived racism?
Sivad wrote:He's expressing ahistorical nationalist chauvinism, which is a type of bigotry and arguably more dangerous and destructive than racism but it's different from racism.
In actual fact, he didn't do that either. He's noting that someone like Ilhan Omar comes from Somalia--an utterly fucked country that was run by a Marxist war lord--and yet, she still embraces a lot of Marxist precepts and criticizes how the United States is run mostly through a Marxist lens when the United States is run one hell of a lot better than Somalia even with all its problems. No pro-Democratic Party media outlet would ever cover that juxtaposition voluntarily. Trump just triggered them so that they would do it according to their neurotic compulsions--just as @noemon is pleading with you and Kaiserschmarrn to condemn Trump in some sort of unified front as though that would make some sort of meaningful difference.
Sivad wrote:He's also engaging in massive fraud and hypocrisy by referencing Omar's comments regarding 9/11 given that he does business with the Saudi state oligarchs who orchestrated and quarterbacked those attacks.
Hypocrisy is a better argument; however, Saudi politics are murky at best.
noemon wrote:He is using their ethnic-origins by referring to their countries of origin as a means to shut their political opinions off.
He's not trying to shut their political opinions off. Quite the contrary. He's trying to shine a bright light on their political opinions and associate them with the Democratic party at large, and he succeeded.
noemon wrote:How is this not racial discrimination according to the the UNHR definition that the US is party to?
He hasn't deprived anyone of any rights. That's why. The US is only a party to UN stuff in so far as it is consistent with the US constitution. For example, your country may not make letters of marque and reprisal by some form of treaty. The US agrees not to, but cannot sign a treaty to that effect because it's inconsistent with the US constitution.
noemon wrote:Trump is rallying crowds chanting "Send her back".
He's not chanting it himself, and not the entire crowd is chanting that. Some people don't want people to emigrate to America and then rip on our society. They would prefer the emigre to stay where they are or go somewhere where they might actually like the country the emigrate to.
noemon wrote:attempt to justify this kind of blatant terrorism against American citizens
There isn't even a criminal act here. It's certainly not terrorism by any legally-defined standard. Your overreaction is like AOC calling ICE detention centers "concentration camps" and asserting the US is perpetrating some sort of Holocaust.
noemon wrote:Instead of addressing the political arguments of his opponents he is rallying hate against them by targeting their ethnic-origins.
He's triggering the media so that he can associate the squad's political arguments with the Democratic Party at large. You obviously missed the bait-and-switch.
noemon wrote:You are the one crying foul against those simply abiding by the globally accepted definition, as if your cries of foul serve any purpose other than to legitimise the harassment people of different ethnic origins have to endure merely for doing their jobs in Congress.
Trump just highlighted the fact that the squad is routinely harassing Israelis and American Jews...different ethnic origins. That's not the squad's job in Congress. It's what they do, and the media covers it up. Now the entire nation knows what they do, because Trump made the media focus on it and they took the bait.
noemon wrote:Lastly you have ignored Trump’s latest double down leading a crowd cheering: “send her back”.
Trump did not start chanting "send her back." He is highlighting their attacks on American Jews and Israel, and some of the crowd chants. Most know what Trump is doing. To use your party trick of putting words in people's mouths, Trump paraphrased Ayanna Pressley, "What if I had said, 'we only want white faces who are going to be a voice for white people'?", highlighting the racist appeals of Ayanna Pressley. The crowds love it.
noemon wrote:She is a Black woman as are others that he attacked.
He didn't attack them for being black. He attacked them for their constant attacks on Israel and American Jews and their constant appeal to racialist identity politics. You are helping Trump's cause, because you do not condemn people like Pressley for obviously racial language.
Drlee wrote:What they (the Democrats) should be hammering on is that he has taken on women in government. WOMEN, WOMEN, WOMEN.
Sometimes you get it right. Trump specifically singled out "progressive" women.
Drlee wrote:And unless the democrats make this about WOMEN, WOMEN, WOMEN they will lose and maybe lose badly.
There's a problem with that. The squad is interested in upending people like Nancy Pelosi. That's why they are inferring Pelosi is racist. Trump's strategy is to sow division, and he has succeeded. The squad is the Democrat's Tea Party. They aren't going to go along with the establishment, and the establishment wants to primary them because they are Democrat districts with no chance of going Republican. By getting the establishment to defend the squad, he gets to associate the Democrats with their extreme positions.
Drlee wrote:Where is Trump vulnerable? He sucks with WOMEN.
He won working class white women. Look at how Republican women reacted to his statements: CNN making the same types of arguments @noemon makes, and Republican women not agreeing
Trump is just appearing to be shooting from the hip. He's planned this stuff out.
Drlee wrote:Every time he hammers on a woman legislator the democrats ought to scream "misogyny". They should shout, "He HATES strong women". "He can't stand WOMEN in power."
That would have been the better response, but he successfully trolled them.
Drlee wrote:Pelosi ought to know better. She is arguably the most experienced politician in government about now.
She has lost a few steps due to age and due to her own Tea Party upstarts challenging her authority ongoingly. Keep in mind, in the increasingly fractious House, even a young guy with a long career ahead of him like Paul Ryan stepped down and went home after a short stint where John Boehner did the same. It's no picnic being Speaker of the House anymore.
BigSteve wrote:Or is that just what you wish he'd said?
This is why they are going to lose to Trump again. In 2016, he never said "All Mexicans are murderers and rapists." Everyone knew the media was lying. Everyone knows they are lying now.
"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."
"Folks, I can tell you I've known eight presidents, three of them intimately."
-- Joe Biden