UK condemns Trump’s racist tweets in unprecedented attack against US congresswomen - Page 7 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15019140
Traveller wrote:It's like i'm telling you, as if to a 5 year old: "Reminding people they are free to leave the USA and return to the country of their origin is no more racist than telling people they are free to move out of their neighborhood to another neighborhood.


Yes, it is racist. I have no idea why you are denying this.

But this is irrelevant. You claimed that people “REFUSE to look at the merits of his point of view”.

What are these supposed merits that he was trying to communicate in this racist way?
#15019142
Traveller wrote:
It's like i'm telling you, as if to a 5 year old: "Reminding people they are free to leave the USA and return to the country of their origin is no more racist than telling people they are free to move out of their neighborhood to another neighborhood.


It is like talking to a five year old. Are YOU aware that three of the five people to which he was referring are born in the US citizens and the other is a naturalized US citizen? :roll:
#15019146
BigSteve wrote:I seem to recall you arguing that Trump telling them to "shut up" was racist,


You have repeated this nonsense 2 or 3 times. You can repeat it for 20 times it will still not make your ridiculous straw any more valid.

yet Admin Edit: Rule 2 Violation at showing us where he actually told them to shut up.

Or is that just what you wish he'd said?



You said:

Big Steve wrote:Trump is exercising HIS right of free speech (he still has that, you know). Why do you take such a hypocrtitical stance?

Telling someone they should shut the fuck up isn't an "attempt to remove the right of free speech". It's just telling them that they should shut the fuck up...


:lol: :lol: :lol:

And I told you:

noemon wrote:Telling someone to "shut the fuck up" is not racist just rude. Telling them to shut up because they are foreigners who should go back where they came from is the very definition of racism.


Now if you wish you had never said that Trump is effectively telling them to "shut up" or in the long version to stop exercising their right to speech by criticising his policies, then sure retract your statement say you were wrong and explain why that is and what is the alleged hidden meaning of Trump's statements. I'm all ears.
#15019158
noemon wrote:Now if you wish you had never said that Trump is effectively telling them to "shut up" or in the long version to stop exercising their right to speech by criticising his policies, then sure retract your statement say you were wrong and explain why that is and what is the alleged hidden meaning of Trump's statements. I'm all ears.


"Effectively" told them to shut up?

No, he didn't, and no amount of whining from the left will change that. He also never told them to stop exercising their right to free speech.

Seriously, do you just make this shit up as you go along?
#15019176
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--

Image

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.
#15019179
noemon wrote:You said so yourself and I have quoted you saying it. It doesn’t get any more ridiculous. If you want to interpret it differently then sure be my guest, as I said Im all ears.


Why can't you simply admit that he never said what you want to believe he said?
#15019180
blackjack21 wrote: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.


Image
#15019227
blackjack21 wrote:“it's all about the Benjamins”

I thought “it's all about the Benjamins” means “it's all about the money.” Nothing to do with Jews or am I missing something.


:?:
#15019234
blackjack21 wrote: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.


BigSteve wrote:Why can't you simply admit that he never said what you want to believe he said?


This is boring SJW, "ultra-lib" denial about what he supposedly did not say, despite the fact that Big Steve has explicitly said what he understood himself:

BigSteve wrote:Trump is exercising HIS right of free speech (he still has that, you know). Why do you take such a hypocrtitical stance?

Telling someone they should shut the fuck up isn't an "attempt to remove the right of free speech". It's just telling them that they should shut the fuck up...


It is actually hilarious that people like yourselves who pretend to be straight-talkers that do not care about political correctness are denying obvious reality. It along with all your other outrageous victimhood requests just goes to show how you are no different from SJW's and the outrage culture.

blackjack21 wrote: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.


Is there something here that I am supposed to say "that's racist", if yes you should point it out.

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....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.


The bold is a fake accusation you just made up. I looked in your links and nowhere did she say that. I have said before to you that Trump is the most pro-Israeli president ever to have been. He gave Jerusalem to Israel and withdrew from the Iran deal without even taking something back from Israel in return. It is quite safe to say that the Trump Presidency is more about being allegiant to Israel than anything else. Please go ahead and call me racist now so that you come full circle in your transformation as Israeli apologist. Looking forward to it. Careful though because you have made several statements about Jews and about the "influence of pro-Israel groups in the US corridors of power". As I said, looking forward to your acrobatics here.

Please explain which part of this is racist against Jews or where you disagree with it:



blackjack21 wrote: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,


Sounds like a Black person saying she no longer wants token Black people around, or like white people saying that they do want traitors in their midst. Is that something you consider white on white racism?

blackjack21 wrote: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.


I wouldn't mind at all, but what Trump effectively said is that "we don't want your annoying Black, Latino faces around so go back where you came from"

blackjack21 wrote: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......

....This is you finding the source of a statement more important than the statement itself....

...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....

...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...

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.

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.

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.


The President of the US is leading a crowd that is shouting at a Black congresswoman: "Send her back"



The President of the US is blatantly instigating harm against a fellow American Black Congresswoman.

blackjack21 referring to Special Olympian wrote: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.


Who are you kidding? You do not support SpecialOlympian's right to satirise white supremacist logic and turn it on its head. You are crying and whining privately and publicly for it to be removed and censored. :lol:

blackjack21 wrote: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.


Glad we agree that for Trump racism is simply a justification to use the media to get re-elected.

blackjack21 wrote: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.


Not sure why you 're telling me this as I have not accused you of mispronouncing something, but I know what you mean. I have my own similar version that I do as well. That's cool actually.

blackjack21 wrote: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.


I'm not pleading with anyone, just asking why would they legitimise Trump rallying hatred against Black and Latino American congresswomen by refusing to call it what it is. Unlike you, they are not bots who will deny everything just because they are loyal fans so more is expected from them. But do not worry, that is not expected from you so you can carry on with your bot replies until it has been exhausted at its shallowest point.

blackjack21 wrote: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.


Your overreaction against those who simply call it racist(which is what it is) is worse than AOC's "concentration camp" comment. You actually believe that calling it what it is is the actual problem and not what he said or the harassment he caused to a Black American congresswoman. Hilarious hypocrisy and SJW level of outrage.

blackjack21 wrote:He didn't attack them for being black.


He attacked them for being of different ethno-national origins, Black or Latino origins.

#15019242
noemon wrote:It is actually hilarious that people like yourselves who pretend to be straight-talkers that do not care about political correctness are denying obvious reality.


The only reality bneing denied here is the fact that Trump never said what you wish he'd said, and you're just afraid to admit that...

I wouldn't mind at all, but what Trump actually said is that "we don't want your annoying Black, Latino faces around so go back where you came from"


Where, exactly, did he say that?

Or is this just yet another example of you saying he said something that you wish he'd said?

The President of the US is leading a crowd that is shouting at a Black congresswoman: "Send her back"



The President isn't "leading" anyone. He was giving a speech. Never once did Trump join the chant...

The President of the US is blatantly instigating harm against a fellow American Black Congresswoman.


If speaking the truth about someone qualifies as "blatantly instigating harm" against someone, perhaps the person who's the target of the comments should change their ways. I've not found a single instance wherein Omar has uttered a single positive thing about the country she calls home. Trump was spot on, and if someone were to visit violence upon Omar it wold be due to her reprehensible conduct and not Trump "instigating" anything...


Your overreaction against those who simply call it racist(which is what it is) is worse than AOC's "concentration camp" comment. You actually believe that calling it what it is is the actual problem...


Exactly.

Just like when Trump accurately and truthfully portrays Omar and her disgusting conduct. SHE is the actual problem...

He attacked them for being of different ethno-national origins, Black or Latino origins.


How did he attack them?

I will give you this: You sure do have a flair for drama...
#15019249
BigSteve wrote:The only reality bneing denied here is the fact that Trump never said what you wish he'd said, and you're just afraid to admit that...


The only reality here is that you have already said that Trump said it and now you 're just afraid to admit that, but reality is independent of your ostrich syndrome:

BigSteve wrote:Trump is exercising HIS right of free speech (he still has that, you know). Why do you take such a hypocrtitical stance?
Telling someone they should shut the fuck up isn't an "attempt to remove the right of free speech". It's just telling them that they should shut the fuck up...


It is very entertaining watching you deny your own self.

BigSteve wrote:The President isn't "leading" anyone. He was giving a speech. Never once did Trump join the chant...
If speaking the truth about someone qualifies as "blatantly instigating harm" against someone, perhaps the person who's the target of the comments should change their ways. I've not found a single instance wherein Omar has uttered a single positive thing about the country she calls home. Trump was spot on, and if someone were to visit violence upon Omar it wold be due to her reprehensible conduct and not Trump "instigating" anything... How did he attack them?...SHE is the actual problem...


"How did he attack them? They deserved it, they also deserve violence to be visited upon them." :lol:

Apparently Black Congresswomen of the opposition party can only agree with Trump's policies and any disagreement means that they deserve to have violence visited upon them according to you BigSteve. :knife:
#15019256
noemon wrote:It is very entertaining watching you deny your own self.


"Telling someone they should shut the fuck up isn't an "attempt to remove the right of free speech""

I do not deny that. Telling someone to shut the fuck up is not denying anyone any rights whatsoever.

Trump never told anyone to shut up, despite the fact that you seem to believe he did...

"How did he attack them? They deserved it, they also deserve violence to be visited upon them." :lol:


You've failed to demonstrate how he attacked them...
#15019262
BigSteve wrote:"Telling someone they should shut the fuck up isn't an "attempt to remove the right of free speech""
I do not deny that. Telling someone to shut the fuck up is not denying anyone any rights whatsoever.
Trump never told anyone to shut up, despite the fact that you seem to believe he did...


Your ostrich denial syndrome is very entertaining.

BigSteve wrote:Trump is exercising HIS right of free speech (he still has that, you know). Why do you take such a hypocrtitical stance?
Telling someone they should shut the fuck up isn't an "attempt to remove the right of free speech". It's just telling them that they should shut the fuck up...


BigSteve wrote:You've failed to demonstrate how he attacked them...


You have failed to demonstrate how he did not. I have made my argument. Yours however is nowhere to be seen.
#15019263
noemon wrote:You have failed to demonstrate how he did not.


Perhaps you're just not up to this.

See, that's not how intelligent debate works. You said he attacked them. Therefore, it is incumbent upon you to offer something more than your biased opinion to demonstrate that an attack took place.

Saying I need to prove that he didn't attack them is stupid. You're asking for me to prove a negative. Prove to me that you've never stolen anything from someone. Prove to me that you've never smacked a child in the mouth.

You can't do either of those, but using your special little brand of convoluted logic each accusation would be true.

You said he attacked them. Prove it, or I'll just dismiss your rantings from here on out. Fair?
#15019268
BigSteve wrote:Perhaps you're just not up to this.See, that's not how intelligent debate works. You said he attacked them. Therefore, it is incumbent upon you to offer something more than your biased opinion to demonstrate that an attack took place.

Saying I need to prove that he didn't attack them is stupid. You're asking for me to prove a negative. Prove to me that you've never stolen anything from someone. Prove to me that you've never smacked a child in the mouth.

You can't do either of those, but using your special little brand of convoluted logic each accusation would be true.

You said he attacked them. Prove it, or I'll just dismiss your rantings from here on out. Fair?


I have already made my argument. It is you that has failed to explain why you think the argument is wrong. You say that my reading of Trump's tweet is wrong, but you do not explain why that is or what is the supposedly correct reading. I am saying that you need to demonstrate your assertion that my argument is wrong and not merely assert it. Your entire paragraph applies to your own self because clearly you are not up to this.

Anyhow, since you want this be read to you out loud once more time:

Trump wrote:Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries...telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back


Congresswomen from other origins telling the United States how government should be run, when that is in fact the job description of the Congressman/woman to tell the US how they believe government is to be run. Trump however does not want these congresswomen telling/speaking/expressing any political opinion, because they have other origins. And that is the very definition of racism, using someone's ethnic/racial/national background as an argument to prevent them from exercising their political or human rights.
#15019336
BigSteve wrote:"Telling someone they should shut the fuck up isn't an "attempt to remove the right of free speech""

I do not deny that. Telling someone to shut the fuck up is not denying anyone any rights whatsoever.

Trump never told anyone to shut up, despite the fact that you seem to believe he did...

You've failed to demonstrate how he attacked them...

I would not bother arguing with noemon. He knows that President Trump did not tell any of them to shut up and has been unable to present proof that he did. Anyway, blackjack21 and I have already refuted his arguments.

I am sure you must know Ben Carson. He also said President Trump was not a racist. This guy noemon is left-wing and will believe anything they say, even if it is clearly wrong. I don't intend to continue to debate him and I advise you to ignore him too. He is definitely not worth our time and effort. Just be satisfied that many of us agree with you, including me, a near genius. :lol:

[KS mod edit: Rule 2]
#15019355
Hindsite wrote:I would not bother arguing with noemon because he would not tell the truth on this if his life depended on it. He knows that President Trump did not tell any of them to shut up and has been unable to present proof that he did. Anyway, blackjack21 and I have already refuted his arguments.

I am sure you must know Ben Carson. He also said President Trump was not a racist. This guy noemon is left-wing and will believe anything they say, even if it is clearly wrong. I don't intend to continue to debate him and I advise you to ignore him too. He is definitely not worth our time and effort. Just be satisfied that many of us agree with you, including me, a near genius. :lol:


Absolutely!

noemon wrote: It is you that has failed to explain why you think the argument is wrong.


I have, ad nauseum.

It's clear to me that you don't want to comprehend it, so you don't.

That doesn't make me wrong, though. It just means that you're not comprehending what I've said, despite the fact that I've put it into frighteningly simply verbage...
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 25

We all know that no matter what criminal conduct […]

I didn't talk about that case, and I am not going[…]

The Irishman...

The only difference between you and I is that I h[…]

December 14, Saturday Two weeks after his inter[…]