J
Jeanne_S
Guest
Are you sure you want to go down that rabbit hole.?:woman_facepalming:t2:
- Status
D
dvdjs
Guest
I am glad that you agree. I commented because some other poster, to whom I responded, was claiming that this is not what she meant as deplorable.
She said afterwards that that estimate might be exaggerated. I am not so sure.
It really depends on how you define those isms and phobias. Some seem to think that anything short of slave-holding and lynching is not properly called racism,
Last edited:
A
Annie
Guest
BarbaraWalters admitted on a broadcast appearance with Piers Morgan that maybe Christmas wasn’t the time to say it, but it’s true – the media regarded President Obama as the “next messiah” because of his promises and policies.
From Chris Matthews: This is bigger than Kennedy. [Obama] comes along, and he seems to have the answers. This is the New Testament.
Overall, a lot of people did think Obama was Someone Extremely Special.
And whether he said anything like that about himself (does “We are 5 days away from fundamentally transforming America” count?) or not, has nothing to do with Trump’s riff.
A
Annie
Guest
On the other hand, some people think white people are intrinsically racist, men intrinsically misogynistic, etc.
Depends on who is doing the defining, you’re right about that.
A
angel12
Guest
Of course it does. The entire fuss is about Trump calling himself the “Chosen One.”
D
dvdjs
Guest
I suppose, though it would be very hard to find an example of that here.
A
Annie
Guest
I’m not saying it was a good joke, but as someone who has had a lot of jokes left uncomprehended, I sympathize with Trump.
It was a joke, a play on the attitude a lot of people had towards Obama.
That means Trump was n.o.t r.e.a.l.l.y calling himself the chosen one. No outrage necessary.
I would like to add that I have known a lot of New Yorkers of the generation just after Trump’s, and New Yorkers are or were like this. Lots of allusions, lots of word play, lots of jokes, --they can be a tough bunch.
Additionally, people of more recent generations seem to have less understanding of the rich figurative uses of our language, and much more likely to be super-literal in how they interpret what people say.
It was a joke, a play on the attitude a lot of people had towards Obama.
That means Trump was n.o.t r.e.a.l.l.y calling himself the chosen one. No outrage necessary.
I would like to add that I have known a lot of New Yorkers of the generation just after Trump’s, and New Yorkers are or were like this. Lots of allusions, lots of word play, lots of jokes, --they can be a tough bunch.
Additionally, people of more recent generations seem to have less understanding of the rich figurative uses of our language, and much more likely to be super-literal in how they interpret what people say.
Last edited:
E
EricF
Guest
Given Trump’s penchant for taking shots at others, that’s a valid interpretation. (That he was taking a dig at Obama). Also, given his unchecked narcissism, a literal interpretation is valid as well.
P
ProVobis
Guest
The Evangelicals will be very disappointed to hear this. They thought they finally hit the jackpot.
M
Minks
Guest
M
Minks
Guest
@Emeraldlady
@JharekCharnelian
LOL
@Emeraldlady asked: “How do you account for the vast numbers of Republicans (with traditional republican spirit) who publicly denounce Trump?”
Americans with good memories don’t hear “vast” and “Republicans” without triggering laughter… or other responses.
My exact quote was: “Lol! Let us guess! You mean a “vast Republican conspiracy?”
See? I added no interpretation; I merely asked a question.
Did you not notice that “vast Republican conspiracy” was in quotes? You might want to Google that.
You’ll see “vast right-wing conspiracy” pop up—several times.
Why? Well, Ol’ Hillary, many years before her Presidential run, used that phrase to describe Republicans. Her long-time gambit, now used by most of the Democrat elite, many news reporters, and, sadly, even CAF posters, is to divide and conquor by using denigrating nouns and descriptives in an effort to create new scapegoat minorities—essentially, big-time bullying on a massive scale.
Using derogatory terminology to orchestrate widespread disgust toward particular groups is a technique straight from the playbook of an unprincipled radical who, in his younger days, worked to overthrow the US government. Shockingly, though, he was seen fit to be a…confidante…during the last administration.
Many, many Americans would recognize that “vast Republican conspiracy” = “vast right-wing conspiracy,” especially since Hillary and her quotes were among the topics being discussed.
Too funny!
@JharekCharnelian
I
LOL @Emeraldlady asked: “How do you account for the vast numbers of Republicans (with traditional republican spirit) who publicly denounce Trump?”
Americans with good memories don’t hear “vast” and “Republicans” without triggering laughter… or other responses.
My exact quote was: “Lol! Let us guess! You mean a “vast Republican conspiracy?”
See? I added no interpretation; I merely asked a question.
Did you not notice that “vast Republican conspiracy” was in quotes? You might want to Google that.
You’ll see “vast right-wing conspiracy” pop up—several times.
Why? Well, Ol’ Hillary, many years before her Presidential run, used that phrase to describe Republicans. Her long-time gambit, now used by most of the Democrat elite, many news reporters, and, sadly, even CAF posters, is to divide and conquor by using denigrating nouns and descriptives in an effort to create new scapegoat minorities—essentially, big-time bullying on a massive scale.
Using derogatory terminology to orchestrate widespread disgust toward particular groups is a technique straight from the playbook of an unprincipled radical who, in his younger days, worked to overthrow the US government. Shockingly, though, he was seen fit to be a…confidante…during the last administration.
Many, many Americans would recognize that “vast Republican conspiracy” = “vast right-wing conspiracy,” especially since Hillary and her quotes were among the topics being discussed.
Too funny!
Last edited:
P
pnewton
Guest
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. No one has said Donald Trump is some sort of Hitler. Specific similarities between the two do exist, as they do between Donald Trump and St. Peter, yet Trump is no St. Peter either. What is telling is the reaction to any attempt to point at history for a cautionary tale. Rejection of any point out of a deliberate chosen ignorance, regardless of who are what the issue is, should also be seen as dangerous. Choosing blindness and rhetoric are historically disastrous.
So assuming that Trump had no intention of equating himself as a Messiah, it remains to be seen if his supporters can quit defending him as if he were.
So assuming that Trump had no intention of equating himself as a Messiah, it remains to be seen if his supporters can quit defending him as if he were.
P
pnewton
Guest
Pot meet kettle.
M
meltzerboy2
Guest
Not everything the Democrats do or do not do is related to the prolife agenda, though this seems to be the lens through which you interpret virtually all of the Democratic agenda.
OTOH, I agree with you that this was a joke on the part of Trump, not meant at all to be taken seriously. And it shows me, once again, that neither the Far Left (as in this case) nor the Far Right (as other examples reveal) have anything even approaching a sense of humor, but instead take themselves much too seriously through their self-righteous attitudes.
OTOH, I agree with you that this was a joke on the part of Trump, not meant at all to be taken seriously. And it shows me, once again, that neither the Far Left (as in this case) nor the Far Right (as other examples reveal) have anything even approaching a sense of humor, but instead take themselves much too seriously through their self-righteous attitudes.
Last edited:
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Not really. But I do consider that it would be foolish on my part to assume a political party that’s ok with killing innocent unborn children could possibly care anything about anyone else, including me.
M
meltzerboy2
Guest
Touche. Still, strange as it may seem, for some Democrats, abortion is not considered a main political issue, being a personal choice, while, for others, the self-determination of a woman and her body is framed as the key political issue rather than the haphazard killing of an unborn baby. People, in their complexity, can also compartmentalize such matters.
Last edited:
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
That’s worse still, though I suppose it might be a step on the road to moral recovery to admit to oneself that one supports the killing of children rather than rationalizing it away as a “political issue”.
- Status