George Will renounces GOP, declares ‘This is not my party'

[Good_Tidings]

OK, so you and GT agree that there is a good definition of racism. But in tracing back through the exchanges between you, GT, and estesbob, I see that eb’s claim was that racism as a term is meaningless (“whatever the Left wants it to be”). So apparently you and GT agree that eb was wrong about that. So the only question that remains is whether or not Trumps comments have been, as Joie claimed, racist. Sadly, I have not seen in this long exchange over definitions, any addressing of the substance of Joie’s claim. Now that you and GT agree on a definition of racism, why not try to use that common starting point as a basis to support your point or refute Joie’s?

I agree with Joie’s statement.

 

[stinkcat_14]

You assume too much. No agreement was implied. I think my definition covered more than a 3rd grade reading level.

I asked you if you had a problem with that definition. You had a chance to respond and you chose not to. If you have a problem with the definition, then why don’t you respond with a legitimate criticism rather than a flippant response.

 

[Good_Tidings]

I asked you if you had a problem with that definition. You had a chance to respond and you chose not to. If you have a problem with the definition, then why don’t you respond with a legitimate criticism rather than a flippant response.

Flippant is putting words in my mouth. Please refrain from doing it.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Flippant is putting words in my mouth. Please refrain from doing it.

Here is my issue. It is hard to ascertain from your behavior whether or not you are interested in having a serious discussion on racism. Are you interested in a serious discussion or not?

 

[Good_Tidings]

Here is my issue. It is hard to ascertain from your behavior whether or not you are interested in having a serious discussion on racism. Are you interested in a serious discussion or not?

I don’t wish to have any discussion with you.

 

[Peter_J]

Which is ironic, given how serious the difference is between conservatives like George Will and those who will support Trump.

As far as the motivations of people on the left, my own ideas on what drives them are much darker than just tryiing to convince people.
**
For people to be just okay with the death of a third of each successive generation, there is no rational line of thought that will be able to reach them**.

I definitely don’t argue with that. Although I do wish that better attempts would be made. I often wonder how many self-proclaimed prolifers on the Internet are actually pro abortion people secretly trying to make prolifers look bad.

 

[Inisfallen]

People who vote for democrats want a vague definition of racism. Because racism is a profitable strategy for them. What they count on is a docile public to not raise questions and expose the fact that the emperor has no clothes.

That’s a crock, and you know it.

 

[stinkcat_14]

That’s a crock, and you know it.

Racism is not a profitable strategy for the democrats? Source?

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

I wouldn’t pretend to have read or heard everything Trump has ever said relating to race, but I have yet to hear or read of him saying anything that’s directly racist in the sense of denigrating another race. He advocated non-importation of Muslims, but Muslims are not a race. He remarked that Judge Curiel is “Mexican”, but then added “which is fine”. I think he began to complain about bias against him by Judge Curiel because of Trump’s immigration policy, but never completed the thought.

And, too, he said Mexico is not sending us “their best”. Well, might be true or untrue, but that’s not “racist”.

Maybe somebody will point out to me, from a reliable source, when Trump directly said some race or other is inferior or some other derogatory, and truly racist, thing like that.

But Repubs like George Will are joining those who call Trump “racist”.

I think we have been so well trained over the years to think of the slightest reference to race or even things that can be construed that way as “racist” that we flee like starlings from a rubber owl on a rooftop.

One remembers that ad (wasn’t it Red Cross?) that was called out for a “racist” poster that failed to have the exact proportional racial mix in a cartoon of a bunch of kids in a swimming pool.

It has been commented that the cheapest way to shut down conversation is to assert that something is “racist” in it. I think that’s true. I’m not surprised that Dems throw the epithet around. That’s what they do. But for people like George Will to run and hide when he hears it?

I think we have lost our courage. We might have a constitutional right of free speech for now, but when we self-deprive ourselves of it for flimsy reasons, I think things have come to a poor pass.

He pretty much said that the judge, one who had to be relocated because Mexican cartels wanted to kill him, was incapable of being impartial because his family came from Mexico even though he was born in the US as Donald Trump accused Mexico of sending rapists and murderers to the US.

 

[estesbob]

He pretty much said that the judge, one who had to be relocated because Mexican cartels wanted to kill him, was incapable of being impartial because his family came from Mexico even though he was born in the US as Donald Trump accused Mexico of sending rapists and murderers to the US.

The judge belongs to an organization that called Trump a racist and called for boycotting his businesses Trump has valid reasons to be concerned about his impartiality-especially after he released confidential case documents

 

[Trader]

Maybe in 4 yrs he has hope of making his party great again.

I think Trump had a flashback to the Vietnam of his college days. He had to destroy the Republican Party in order to save it. He seems to have done the former. Phase two will be a lot more difficult.

 

[Darryl1958]

That’s a crock, and you know it.

If it was a crock, then people would be able to come up with a definite definition of what they are actually talking about.

Identity politics, which is differential treatment of racist, or racist as per the definition of racism already agreed to here, has indeed been a profitable strategy for Democrats, in that promises of differential treatment of races attracts many votes for them.

Votes are the capital of democracy.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

The judge belongs to an organization that called Trump a racist and called for boycotting his businesses Trump has valid reasons to be concerned about his impartiality-especially after he released confidential case documents

An organization he belongs to is affiliated with one that called for a boycott, this is like saying a Catholic judge who belongs to the Knights of Columbus couldn’t be impartial on a case involving Pepsi if an organization the KoC is connected with asked its members to boycott Pepsi for using aborted fetal stem cells in the process of taste testing.

 

[Darryl1958]

To be fair, it was leftist judges like Sonya Sotomayer he introduced us to the idea that an Hispanic judge would give us different decisions that would be the case with a bunch of white guys on the bench.

Of course Trumps comments on the partiality of a ‘Mexican’ judge are out of order. On the other hand, it is the climate created by Identity politics of the left that have made people like Trump to think the way he does.
Judges like Sotomayer making the comments that she did have more people than just Trump believing that decisions will now have a racial component embedded within them.
The antidote to Trump is e pluribus unom, and not making this all about a bunch of white guys on the bench who need to be displaced by the rainbow generation.

Of course color has no bearing on ability. That is not the message of Identity politics though.

 

[Darryl1958]

I guess my biggest criticism of conservatives like Jay Nordlinger, and George Will, and Mona Charen is not that they renounce Donald Trump. In the end, in the improbable event that he gets elected, supporting him would make Trump their responsibility. We are bound to who we support.

Let Democrats be responsible for electing a lout like Hillary Clinton. It is not like anyone takes the left to be principled anyway.
But the attraction of the GOP in the first place has been all about standards. Opting for Trump anyway is to opt for standards being of lesser importance than a GOP at all costs.

I cannot blame any conservative for not following the Dems and the left down that road. Just because principles are hogwash to the left, holding onto principles is all that separates conservatives from the left.

My biggest criticism of them is that they renounce the GOP, as if the GOP and Trump are synonymous. Of course, there is bound to be anger at a Republican primary electorate that is capable of nominating Trump in the first place, but to the extent that people with principle abandon the GOP to that part of the electorate, that is what the Republican party is going to be.

 

[pnewton]

does this mean he will not be a FOX news commentator anymore?

If FOX is completely a Republican Party tool, it will mean this. I guess we will see. An independent, or unaffiliated, commentator could always get a job with CNN perhaps, allowing CNN to position themselves now as the balanced news network.

 

[Peter_J]

To be fair, it was leftist judges like Sonya Sotomayer he introduced us to the idea that an Hispanic judge would give us different decisions that would be the case with a bunch of white guys on the bench.

Of course Trumps comments on the partiality of a ‘Mexican’ judge are out of order. On the other hand, it is the climate created by Identity politics of the left that have made people like Trump to think the way he does.
Judges like Sotomayer making the comments that she did have more people than just Trump believing that decisions will now have a racial component embedded within them.

I also find it interesting that Dems are often the first to blow their tops if anyone dares to suggest that Trump doesn’t represent Republicans in general.

 

[Peter_J]

I guess my biggest criticism of conservatives like Jay Nordlinger, and George Will, and Mona Charen is not that they renounce Donald Trump. In the end, in the improbable event that he gets elected, supporting him would make Trump their responsibility. We are bound to who we support.

Let Democrats be responsible for electing a lout like Hillary Clinton. It is not like anyone takes the left to be principled anyway.
But the attraction of the GOP in the first place has been all about standards. Opting for Trump anyway is to opt for standards being of lesser importance than a GOP at all costs.

But there are many different shades of grey. E.g. Many have completely refused to say anything positive about a Trump presidency, but then say they will vote for him if it comes down to a choice (God forbid) between Don and Hill.

 

[stinkcat_14]

I also find it interesting that Dems are often the first to blow their tops if anyone dares to suggest that Trump doesn’t represent Republicans in general.

Or the first to scream racism, but then get mad when you try and engage them on the issue.

 

[Peter_J]

Or the first to scream racism, but then get mad when you try and engage them on the issue.

What, didn’t you know that Identity Politics is only acceptable when it helps the Left?