Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon

[peteblue]

Pete, thanks but I am not lying on a couch in front of you no matter how nice you ask x

As much as I've just enjoyed that description, it does raise important points. The woman, who is incredibly good looking (sexist I know), portrays an almost solemn image of decent behaviour, devoid of violence, defeating the instruments of power. I will now use it shamelessly to emphasise the thread I've been pushing all along, violence achieves nothing, decency achieves all.......

 

[BlueTX]

And they're all raising the 'wrong' arm.

Cretins.

Of course certain posters will use that fact as 'proof' that they're not men who hold Nazi views.

It's a Ku Klux Klan salute, not a Nazi one. Still completely mental.

 

[peteblue]

Quite a contrast

The image shows Ieshia Evans, a young woman in a dress standing calmly in front of two police officers wearing layers of armour, and appearing to approach her in a hurry. Reuters reported that she was later detained.

Actually, I cannot now stop looking at this image. It is incredibly powerful, and should shame all those who try to excuse violence.......

 

[Clint Planet]

Quite a contrast

The image shows Ieshia Evans, a young woman in a dress standing calmly in front of two police officers wearing layers of armour, and appearing to approach her in a hurry. Reuters reported that she was later detained.

That photo was my desktop wallpaper for a while.

 

[BlueTX]

For me it is history vs honouring

One set of them are set at contemporaneous places of an event (like a battlefield or a home) and are placed in a context where there is discussion about alternate points of view and statues to those with differing opinions. Whereas the statues in the middle of a town not related to that person are placed there specifically to honour that person because of their actions which in this case many find repulsive. So the very same statue could deliver a different message if it was in a museum vs in front of a town courthouse.

I also think you are underplaying the significance of when these statues were erected, including this one - they didn't just appear in a post racial environment as a nod to historu but at times where tensions were high and they stand as representative of those as much as the civil war.

To you they represent events and attitudes that are in the distant past - to a Charlottsville resident that has been stopped for the third time for the sole crime of driving whilst black and whose parent suffered under Jim Crow it probably feels significantly different. So why not let the residents of those towns make their own decisions?
I sure hope you are right about Trump though!

We have a winner right here.

Defenders of the statues by and large have no idea what they are talking about. The statues were not erected in honor of the "virtues" of the Confederacy or to give proper homage to "heroes" they were flat out symbols of white power over minorities during the Jim Crow and, later, desegregation periods in the American South.

They are antithetical to an open, inclusive, modern society that adheres to the notion all men and women are created equal.

 

[peteblue]

That photo was my desktop wallpaper for a while.

It's the equivalent to that lad standing in front of the tanks in Tianamen Square

 

[peteblue]

It means Presidents are not Kings.

They require legislation to be passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate. The House of Representatives disproportionately represents rural areas. Rural areas tend to not care too much about Civil Rights of minorities (and when they do, they tend to be opposed).

I can tell you successive Presidents have not apologized for Nazism in the streets of America, which is not something that requires legislation.

So the system is screwed then......

 

[BlueTX]

It means Presidents are not Kings.

They require legislation to be passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate. The House of Representatives disproportionately represents rural areas. Rural areas tend to not care too much about Civil Rights of minorities (and when they do, they tend to be opposed).

I can tell you successive Presidents have not apologized for Nazism in the streets of America, which is not something that requires legislation.

Theoretically, it takes just 17% of the population to have a majority of the votes in the US Senate. That's the lowest number (percentage) it has been in the history of the country.

 

[RaleighBlue]

So the system is screwed then......

Yes. Absolutely.

Which is the point being made by BLM - the system is screwed to the point where politics is a higher ideal than human rights for entire swaths of our society. It's very much not equivalent to what happened in Charlottesville.

 

[LinekersLegs]

Actually, I cannot now stop looking at this image. It is incredibly powerful, and should shame all those who try to excuse violence.......

Have a read of her story of that day and what brought her to do it - you'll like the bits where she complains about Obama!
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...stand-in-baton-rouge-because-enough-is-enough

 

[RAFUH]

We have a winner right here.

Defenders of the statues by and large have no idea what they are talking about. The statues were not erected in honor of the "virtues" of the Confederacy or to give proper homage to "heroes" they were flat out symbols of white power over minorities during the Jim Crow and, later, desegregation periods in the American South.

They are antithetical to an open, inclusive, modern society that adheres to the notion all men and women are created equal.

Symbols placed at county and state court house frequently

I can't imagine a POC when going before the court would find that a reassuring sight with regard to how they would be treated.

 

[BlueTX]

Symbols placed at county and state court house frequently

I can't imagine a POC when going before the court would find that a reassuring sight with regard to how they would be treated.

As a white man married to a POC I can confirm it is not reassuring.

 

[verreauxi]

Ok. Can someone give a list of all these Civil Liberties that have been demanded by POC.

Now can someone please tell us why successive Democrat Presidents including the Demi- God Obama didn't put them in place before Trump arrived.

You've had 150 years since the Civil war, who's statues you now tear down, so what have you done in that time that Trump has not done in the last 10 months........

The stupid that emanates from you is not unexpected because you purposely ask nonsensical questions. No one is demanding new exclusive civil rights, they are demanding that the existing ones are upheld (and Trump is eroding them, as I pointed out to you on my post on page 666), and they are also demanding that racism/discrimination end. And the track record of Civil Rights advances of this country--despite considerable violence and resistance from racists, sexists, homophobes, etc.--is actually quite impressive since the Civil war. That Obama was America's first black president is, in part, a testament to this track-record. And more specifically, to quote The Nation:

Among the promises made on civil rights, Obama pledged to fight employment discrimination, expand hate-crime laws, end racial profiling, support ex-offenders’ reentry into society, eliminate sentencing disparities, expand drug courts as an alternative to incarceration, support rights for LGBTQ individuals, and repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the Clinton-era policy that barred openly gay people from serving in the military. The administration achieved many if not all of these goals.

But you already know that. You only persist in acting like the genuinely curious interlocutor ("gee, I'm just trying to learn a few things here...can someone point me in the right direction?") to hide the fact you're nothing but a defender of a racist, sexist, xenophobic president who makes fun of disabled people. What does that make you?

You may as well put a picture of Obama as your avatar, it's about as hypocritical.

 

[abelard]

The stupid that emanates from you is not unexpected because you purposely ask nonsensical questions. No one is demanding new exclusive civil rights, they are demanding that the existing ones are upheld (and Trump is eroding them, as I pointed out to you on my post on page 666), and they are also demanding that racism/discrimination end. And the track record of Civil Rights advances of this country--despite considerable violence and resistance from racists, sexists, homophobes, etc.--is actually quite impressive since the Civil war. That Obama was America's first black president is, in part, a testament to this track-record. And more specifically, to quote The Nation:

Among the promises made on civil rights, Obama pledged to fight employment discrimination, expand hate-crime laws, end racial profiling, support ex-offenders’ reentry into society, eliminate sentencing disparities, expand drug courts as an alternative to incarceration, support rights for LGBTQ individuals, and repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the Clinton-era policy that barred openly gay people from serving in the military. The administration achieved many if not all of these goals.

But you already know that. You only persist in acting like the genuinely curious interlocutor ("gee, I'm just trying to learn a few things here...can someone point me in the right direction?") to hide the fact you're nothing but a defender of a racist, sexist, xenophobic president who makes fun of disabled people. What does that make you?

You may as well put a picture of Obama as your avatar, it's about as hypocritical.

he's just a lonesome drunken WUM, and not worth your time or eloquence. if we must, let us give him at most a sentence or two

 

[abelard]

From the great Harvey Mansfield:

...it was left to Donald Trump alone to attack political correctness and come to the defense of vulgar manliness. He does this not with argument but with outrageous behavior meant to be offensive. As a demagogue, he seeks direct contact with the people. He wants to bypass the media, the parties, and the Constitution that try to control and limit his contact and claim the right, whether formal or informal, to stand between him and the people. As methods of direct contact, Trump used old-fashioned rallies in his campaign rather than informal meetings; he sends tweets to all indiscriminately rather than addressing people through the media; and he features shocking talk and behavior rather than conventional politeness and respect. His desire is to transgress normal boundaries, especially those of political correctness, and thus to capture attention.

His boastfulness seems stupid, and it is, but it makes people think that because he is bold, he is more honest and more truthful than those who hesitate and formulate. His offhand lies are not meant to be accurate but rather to display the lack of restraint that seems to be more truthful than the uptight rectitude of the fact-checker. His vulgar insults betray the absence of wit and the rejection of humor and irony in his flat soul; he is always serious and yet always exaggerates.

In sum, Donald Trump reflects and connects to the vulgar manliness in the American (or any) people. He is demotic rather than democratic, intuitive himself in finding what is instinctive in us. The American Founders made a Constitution for a popular republic that would resist the ills of all previous republics, which had exposed government to the vagaries and impulses of the vulgar. Instead, our republic would “refine and enlarge” the popular will through representative institutions that contain and employ the ambition of the few, and that supply the whole with the “cool and deliberate sense of the community.”

The Founders made a constitutional democracy with, among other things, an electoral college, of which Trump took full advantage, that was meant to keep people like him from ever winning office. Well, every human institution for good can be abused for ill. And not only Trump supporters but all of us must hope that even a demagogue can bring good. Perhaps what is demotic can refresh, rather than degrade, what is democratic. It is one good thing at least to be reminded of the difference between the vulgar and the refined.

Or have I not just said that this difference too is very much in question?

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/vulgar-manliness-donald-trump/

well, he's a better writer than Pyjamas Fernandez, at least.

so essentially, they are deplorables after all, but that's okay, because political correctness is the number one most serious problem in America today.

hence, Trump's complete legislative ineptness, embrace of the same tired elite Republican fiscal agenda, indulgence of resurgent white supremacy, and fascist overtones are exactly what's required because elite liberals (the only kind) are even worse - they just won't stop permitting penises in the wrong place or making unconstructive criticism of Milo online.

political correctness is what actually turned them into wannabe Nazis.

what did I miss? ; )