Democratic Party Convention General Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
queenofheartscv said:
How does unconventional speech compare with verified bad behavior? When it comes to speech, there can be as many styles as people. If politicians should oniy say what we expect them to say, you know what they say will be fake most of the time. Rough and gruff language is not anywhere nearly as bad as untrustworthy conniving self serving behavior, especially when the said language style is often used as a tool for rhetorical effect.
Click to expand...
I think those who just flippinantly dismiss “unconventional speech” as being no big deal disturb me.

To speak is a verb, it is an action word. Words have meaning and effect.

On my wedding day my words married me to my husband…“I do”
Words have the power to incite people to violence, or bring about peace and understanding.
It can also bring about comfort and solace to the grieving…like a family who have buried their son who was killed in combat.

So why do I think of Trumps speech in this situation as being disgusting verified bad behavior?
1)he could have used his speech to comfort and solace a grieving mother…instead he insulted her religion.
2) He could have offered comfort and solace to a grieving father…instead he insulted him by telling him his speech regarding his son was not authentic
3) When asked what has he sacrifice…he dwelled on on his business success, which is self-serving. As if that is anyway comparable to a family having a son killed in combat.
 
Donald Trump responded to the moving speeches of the father of an American hero at the Democratic National Convention by questioning why his wife stood at his side but did not speak.
The remarks were clearly intended to question whether the couple’s Islamic faith precluded her from speaking so publicly.
Khizr Khan, whose son, Army Capt. Humayun S.M. Khan was killed in Iraq in 2004, gave one of the most stirring speeches of the convention when he questioned what sacrifices Trump had made for his country. Khan’s wife, Ghazala, appeared beside him at the lectern but did not speak.
Trump suggested in two separate interviews that Ghazala Khan had been blocked from speaking.
“I’d like to hear his wife say something,” Trump told The New York Times in an interview published Friday.
“If you look at his wife, she was standing there. She had nothing to say. She probably, maybe she wasn’t allowed to have anything to say. You tell me,” he said in an interview with ABC on Saturday.

huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-ghazala-khan_us_579d0bb5e4b08a8e8b5e57d1
 
Millie123 said:
I think those who just flippinantly dismiss “unconventional speech” as being no big deal disturb me.

To speak is a verb, it is an action word. Words have meaning and effect.

On my wedding day my words married me to my husband…“I do”
Words have the power to incite people to violence, or bring about peace and understanding.
It can also bring about comfort and solace to the grieving…like a family who have buried their son who was killed in combat.

So why do I think of Trumps speech in this situation as being disgusting verified bad behavior?
1)he could have used his speech to comfort and solace a grieving mother…instead he insulted her religion.
2) He could have offered comfort and solace to a grieving father…instead he insulted him by telling him his speech regarding his son was not authentic
3) When asked what has he sacrifice…he dwelled on on his business success, which is self-serving. As if that is anyway comparable to a family having a son killed in combat.
Click to expand...
You make some fair points but in the short clip released by ABC, Donald Trump said the man in question was, “very emotional” a “nice guy” and that he “wished him the best of luck” - twitter.com/thisweekabc/status/759433280668049409

By the way, business sacrifices can be impactful and they can be personal. It’s not the same as the sacrifice made by going into the military, but Khazir Khan said Donald Trump didn’t make any sacrifices, and that just was not a fair statement to make.
 
Millie123 said:
I think those who just flippinantly dismiss “unconventional speech” as being no big deal disturb me.

To speak is a verb, it is an action word. Words have meaning and effect.

On my wedding day my words married me to my husband…“I do”
Words have the power to incite people to violence, or bring about peace and understanding.
It can also bring about comfort and solace to the grieving…like a family who have buried their son who was killed in combat.

So why do I think of Trumps speech in this situation as being disgusting verified bad behavior?
1)he could have used his speech to comfort and solace a grieving mother…instead he insulted her religion.
2) He could have offered comfort and solace to a grieving father…instead he insulted him by telling him his speech regarding his son was not authentic
3) When asked what has he sacrifice…he dwelled on on his business success, which is self-serving. As if that is anyway comparable to a family having a son killed in combat.
Click to expand...
To be honest I think it’s a personality and life experience thing when we approach these situations differently. I’ve had so many tragical experiences in my life that words simply don’t bother me that much. I don’t get disturbed by words that much. Actions mean a lot more to me.
 
_Abyssinia said:
You make some fair points but in the short clip released by ABC, Donald Trump said the man in question, “seemed emotional” a “nice guy” and that he “wished him the best of luck” - twitter.com/thisweekabc/status/759433280668049409

By the way, business sacrifices can be impactful and they can be personal. It’s not the same as the sacrifice made by going into the military, but Khazir Khan said Donald Trump didn’t make any sacrifices, and that just was not a fair statement to make.
Click to expand...
Perhaps Khazir Khan was referring only to military sacrifices even though he used the language “any sacrifices.” After all, Trump did not himself go to war and neither did any of his sons AFAIK. I think it is somewhat hypocritical not to give credit to or, even worse, be critical of those who did pay the ultimate sacrifice if one did not suffer in the same way. Remember too that Trump was critical of John McCain who was a POW for the silly reason that he was captured. I think one has to ask what kind of mind does a person who would say such things have? In particular, is it a rational mind?

As an aside, I recall during the 2012 election that Lawrence O’Donnell of “The Last Word” criticized Mitt Romney for having the hypocrisy of protesting against those who opposed the Vietnam War back in the day while not himself going to war, as well as the fact none of his sons joined the military either.
 
7_Sorrows said:
Michael Mayo;14078775:
it was only made public when a reporter from local Fox affiliate was tipped off in Phoenix as to what was about to go down and the reporter was able to get there in time to get a picture or two.
otherwise no one would have known about it. it makes me wonder how many other private meetings have taken place we will never hear about.
Click to expand...
If it was on the tarmac it wasn’t secret.
Click to expand...
 
meltzerboy said:
Perhaps Khazir Khan was referring only to military sacrifices even though he used the language “any sacrifices.” After all, Trump did not himself go to war and neither did any of his sons AFAIK. I think it is somewhat hypocritical not to give credit to or, even worse, be critical of those who did pay the ultimate sacrifice if one did not suffer in the same way. Remember too that Trump was critical of John McCain who was a POW for the silly reason that he was captured. I think one has to ask what kind of mind does a person who would say such things have? In particular, is it a rational mind?

As an aside, I recall during the 2012 election that Lawrence O’Donnell of “The Last Word” criticized Mitt Romney for having the hypocrisy of protesting against those who opposed the Vietnam War back in the day while not himself going to war, as well as the fact none of his sons joined the military either.
Click to expand...
No Donald Trump nor his sons have been to war, but as I saw somebody on Twitter make the point, neither has Hillary Clinton.

Neither has Chelsea Clinton been to war either.

I recognise the sacrifice that Khazir Khan’s son made, but sacrifices aren’t just made by going to war. Sacrifices can be small or large, for the country you live in, for business, for personal…
 
_Abyssinia said:
No Donald Trump nor his sons have been to war, but as I saw somebody on Twitter make the point, neither has Hillary Clinton.

Neither has Chelsea Clinton been to war either.

I recognise the sacrifice that Khazir Khan’s son made, but sacrifices aren’t just made by going to war. Sacrifices can be small or large, for the country you live in, for business, for personal…
Click to expand...
But there is an important difference. For all her other faults, Hillary Clinton has never demeaned Muslims, has never proposed a ban on Muslim immigrants, has never spoken negatively about the religion of Islam. Donald Trump, on the other hand, has a, to put it charitably, less-than-perfect relationship with the (American) Muslim community at the moment. This is undoubtedly why the Khan family is opposed to Trump rather than Hillary. They had good words to say, however, about Ryan and other Republican leaders of Congress.
 
7_Sorrows said:
it was only made public when a reporter from local Fox affiliate was tipped off in Phoenix as to what was about to go down and the reporter was able to get there in time to get a picture or two.
otherwise no one would have known about it. it makes me wonder how many other private meetings have taken place we will never hear about.
Click to expand...
In 2014 Trump said he had a meeting with Putin in Russia. Now he says that he never met Putin. What is the story behind that? Secret meetings with the enemy?
 
meltzerboy said:
But there is an important difference. For all her other faults, Hillary Clinton has never demeaned Muslims, has never proposed a ban on Muslim immigrants, has never spoken negatively about the religion of Islam. Donald Trump, on the other hand, has a, to put it charitably, less-than-perfect relationship with the (American) Muslim community at the moment. This is undoubtedly why the Khan family is opposed to Trump rather than Hillary. They had good words to say, however, about Ryan and other Republican leaders of Congress.
Click to expand...
How has Trump ever demeaned Muslims? Aside from whether it’s a good idea or not, and I am not saying it’s a good idea, but based on what I’ve read, a religious test in regards to immigration is unlikely to be unconstitutional and when polled, banning Muslim immigration does have significant support: thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/283789-poll-americans-split-on-trumps-muslim-ban-proposal
 
_Abyssinia said:
How has Trump ever demeaned Muslims? I’m not saying his idea on banning Muslim immigration (or immigration from certain parts of the world associated with terrorism) for a period of time is good, but based on what I’ve read, a religious test is unlikely to be unconstitutional and when polled, it does have significant support.
Click to expand...
You don’t think an unconstitutional religious test banning people based on their faith serves to demean Muslim Americans, especially those like the Khan family whose son served in the military and sacrificed his life to defend the U.S.? Of course it is demeaning.
 
meltzerboy said:
You don’t think an unconstitutional religious test banning people based on their faith serves to demean Muslim Americans, especially those like the Khan family whose son served in the military and sacrificed his life to defend the U.S.? Of course it is demeaning.
Click to expand...
The ban is temporary so that we can make sure security clearance is maximum for any type of immigration. Muslims will benefit from a safe society as well. They will benefit from a security tight immigration system where immigrants and native horns can live in peace with one another. They are hurt by constant news of terrorist acts. If they are smart they should want immigration policy to be as tight as possible no terrorists can come in. They need to fight this battle with us.
 
queenofheartscv said:
The ban is temporary so that we can make sure security clearance is maximum for any type of immigration. Muslims will benefit from a safe society as well. They will benefit from a security tight immigration system where immigrants and native horns can live in peace with one another. They are hurt by constant news of terrorist acts. If they are smart they should want immigration policy to be as tight as possible no terrorists can come in. They need to fight this battle with us.
Click to expand...
By his words and proposals, Trump is doing everything he can so that Muslims, both at home and abroad, have much less incentive to “fight this battle with us.”
 
meltzerboy said:
You don’t think an unconstitutional religious test banning people based on their faith serves to demean Muslim Americans, especially those like the Khan family whose son served in the military and sacrificed his life to defend the U.S.? Of course it is demeaning.
Click to expand...
It is not entirely clear that Khazir Khan’s son having been born in, the UAE wouldn’t have been able to move to the US as he did.

"Mr. Trump’s policy director, Stephen Miller, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal on Monday, “The best way to prevent continued radicalization from developing inside America is to suspend temporarily immigration from regions that have been a major source for terrorists and their supporters coming to the U.S.”

wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-back-pedals-on-banning-muslims-from-u-s-1467058774

Would the UAE be one of those countries under that suspension? I don’t know.

You are saying it is unconstitutional, but there are differing views. I’m not sure there has ever been a test case that has went through the US court system to say for definite, but it is not clear that it is unconstitutional.

I’m not saying the idea of a religious test is a good idea, but the point can be made that Trump’s Muslim ban can be seen as a response to terrroism and if the Obama administration and other governments had managed to deal with the threat of terrorism in a better way, would we be even discussing such a proposed ban?
 
_Abyssinia said:
No Donald Trump nor his sons have been to war, but as I saw somebody on Twitter make the point, neither has Hillary Clinton.

Neither has Chelsea Clinton been to war either.
Click to expand...
If you read about Hilliary’s early career you will see that she turned down lucrative legal work and sacrificed her personal career development in order to do public service on the Children’s Defense Fund. Hillary does know sacrifice.
 
YADA said:
I served my country and have taken the oath to protect and serve three times in my life - and I meant it every time .

Flint Michigan is run by the democratic party - the water issue there will take down many politicians of both parties but the local Democrats were in control and have been for years - and failing poorly because liberal policies are about pandering for votes and failing the people.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your service.

Republican governor Rick Snyder appointed managers to trump locally elected officials on key policy decisions.

To a significant degree, the buck does stop with Snyder, the state’s top elected official. And Snyder did set the tone of curbing municipal overspending.

Snyder appointed the emergency managers who signed off on the switch away from Detroit’s water system and the decision to use Flint River water as an interim solution.

Snyder does bear a significant share of the responsibility. His fiscal approach helped set the stage for the water switch that led to the poisoning, and it was his hand-picked emergency managers who implemented the changes. Snyder also oversaw the state environmental and health departments that have come in for sharp criticism for their failures to act quickly and forcefully when the first indications of a problem cropped up.

politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/feb/15/whos-blame-flint-water-crisis/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top