Wow! Trump's Comments Actually Shock Me!

[Taem]

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/12/politics/t...index.html

I was going to catch up on the Net Neutrality thread, but while reading the news today (internet came back up finally at my house like 2 hr ago), I found myself disgusted and dismayed at Trump's comments a few days ago, confirmed by several Democrat senators:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics...-1.3753550

And then you have Trump completely denying his own words! I am literally aghast right now, in complete shock! This man is a legitimate bigoted racist! How can this be, someone so ignorant is holding the highest position in this country, and perhaps the world?

In case you missed it, Trump, while speaking on countries with TPS (temporary protected status) in regards to whom should be allowed to keep DACA status, Trump said immigrants from "shithole countries", referring specifically to Haiti, central America, and parts of Africa, should not be allowed to receive DACA. He also said that he, and his law making team, wanted to cut citizenship down by 50%, and weed out those from these "shithole countries" by deferring them to TPS countries instead, and not allowing them to receive citizenship through the current lottery setup. I have a lot of respect for what Trump has done for the economy, however what he has done to Net Neutrality sets me on fire, and this issue with immigration is very personal for me, as I have quite a few friends whom this affects, so for me, I think we're better of without this man in office. We don't need a racist like Trump sitting on the iron throne. A huge step backwards for the world. Thoughts?

Edit: And his tweets after the incident, saying its a Democrat conspiracy, even though the Republicans in the meeting wouldn't comment to rather said that or not. And his "LETS MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" tweet reeks of imperialism as a despot dictator. He is disgusting! Can't wait for his term to end.

[Lissa]

It wasn't just confirmed by the lone Democrat in the room, Richard Durbin, but indirectly cornfirmed by Lindsay Graham (Republican Senator from North or South Carolina, I don't remember which of the Carolina's he's from).

[Taem]

It wasn't just confirmed by the lone Democrat in the room, Richard Durbin, but indirectly cornfirmed by Lindsay Graham (Republican Senator from North or South Carolina, I don't remember which of the Carolina's he's from).

That's absolutely terrible that Trump would deny deny deny, and even go so far as to point fingers and Dems when the evidence is turning out to be irrefutable, even members of his own caucus saying he made these racist comments!

[FireIceTalon]

Can't say I'm shocked by these comments at all. They are pretty much par for the course for this administration since even before day one. The KKK openly supports him, he appointed one Steve Bannon, executive of Breitbart, one of the most blatantly racist and nationalist news outlets anywhere, as his Chief Strategist (the fact they had a falling out is irrelevant here). He ran his campaign on a platform of hate, bigotry, racism, sexism/pro-rape, homophobia, ageism, ableism, and xenophobia that is unprecedented in the garbage heap that is American politics. Nothing Trump says surprises me. This guys stupidity knows no bounds. He makes both Bushes look like Einstein. He's an orange man-child whose literacy is literally lower than that of a 5th grader.

That being said, there is *some* truth (or at least context) into calling those places "shitholes". However, they aren't shitholes because of the people who live in them, their character, or their culture, as he would have you believe; they are "shitholes" due to the capitalist system and Western Imperialism that plundered them and their resources, enslaved them and made them poor. In general, the citizens of Haiti, central America and Africa are fine people who have been historically oppressed and wronged in countless ways for centuries - all for the profit of a few wealthy countries that benefit from a rotten-to-the-core social-economic system that by all rights, does not deserve to exist.

As for not needing Trump on the iron throne, here is a more fundamental (and rhetorical) question: Why do we have an "throne" (what its made of matters not) at all, to begin with?

[LavCat]

Ulysses S. Grant caught flack because he wanted to make the Dominican Republic a state.

[Tal]

I have a lot of respect for what Trump has done for the economy,

I'm going to need to stop you there. Trump hasn't done anything for the economy thus far. The improved economy is directly as a result of Obama's budget.

[Jester]

I'm going to need to stop you there. Trump hasn't done anything for the economy thus far. The improved economy is directly as a result of Obama's budget.

The claim that Trump is not the cause is surely true - economies move slowly, and Trump simply hasn't done enough, fast enough, or big enough to have had any major impact. People overestimate what presidents can do. (Even shockingly incompetent ones.)

But by the same token, the claim that it's the fiscal policy of the Obama administration is shakier. Most of what's happening here is just the slow recovery from the 2008 depression picking up steam. The Obama administration managed an acceptable, if not spectacular, program for recovery back in 2008. But the stimulus of that spending ended years ago - this is just the economy bouncing back to full employment and consumer confidence, which well-managed economies tend to do eventually after a major crash. He gets credit for a steady hand on the tiller, but the budget is not the major driver here.

-Jester

[Archon_Wing]

Hah, it's funny how overt his racism can get but there will still be people to rationalize it out. Suddenly, not being a racist becomes PC.... this is the cancer brought to you by the Alt-Right.

Hopefully we will survive these 4 years.

[Lissa]

Hah, it's funny how overt his racism can get but there will still be people to rationalize it out. Suddenly, not being a racist becomes PC.... this is the cancer brought to you by the Alt-Right.

Hopefully we will survive these 4 years.

I think in the next 3 months we're going to see something come from the Mueller investigation. Mueller is about to postpone the sentencing on Papadopolus for three more months and they continue to gather more there. Then there's the comments by Bannon on Mueller wanting to interview him and the fact that Bannon has said he'll hold nothing back from Mueller.

The true sign of insanity is coming from Trump's council, Ty Cobb, who keeps saying only 4 to 6 more weeks from Mueller on his investigation, he's now said this about 5 times (since around September 17). Ty Cobb doesn't realize that <Vaas>the definition of insanity is saying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result</Vaas>.

[FireIceTalon]

Hah, it's funny how overt his racism can get but there will still be people to rationalize it out. Suddenly, not being a racist becomes PC.... this is the cancer brought to you by the Alt-Right.

Hopefully we will survive these 4 years.

Yea, although this has really been an ongoing thing even before Trump came into office. I've explained several times here in the past how the right likes to use "political correctness" as a shield to justify their disgusting views or deflect blame onto those who call them out for said disgusting views. The whole narrative of political correctness to justify their views certainly has gained momentum since he was sworn in, to be sure. But make no mistake about it, I don't call these people the Alt-Right, I call them for what they actually are: which is nothing short of white nationalist scum. These are the people, ironically enough, who actually deserve to be deported - preferably off the entire planet, and permanently so.

[eppie]

Hah, it's funny how overt his racism can get but there will still be people to rationalize it out. Suddenly, not being a racist becomes PC.... this is the cancer brought to you by the Alt-Right.

Hopefully we will survive these 4 years.

Yea, although this has really been an ongoing thing even before Trump came into office. I've explained several times here in the past how the right likes to use "political correctness" as a shield to justify their disgusting views or deflect blame onto those who call them out for said disgusting views. The whole narrative of political correctness to justify their views certainly has gained momentum since he was sworn in, to be sure. But make no mistake about it, I don't call these people the Alt-Right, I call them for what they actually are: which is nothing short of white nationalist scum. These are the people, ironically enough, who actually deserve to be deported - preferably off the entire planet, and permanently so.

When you are just talking about white nationalist scum you are accusing a whole group of people with very different levels of nationalism. Lots of blue collar workers who weren't represented by the democrats anymore.
These people will never change their mind when being accused.....this is the whole reason Trump supporters are still supporting him.
Far more dangerous (but of course largely overlapping) are the extremist christians. They embrace anyone who can help them ban abortion or the right of extremely ill people to end their live in peace or ...well anything that people should be able to decide by themselves but that christians would like to decide for them.

Trump is probably farthest away from what you could call a ''good christian''.....someone that would help the poor, be modest, not rude, doenst swear, stays with his first wife etc..... but just because he dangles the carrot in front of the christian extremists he gets their votes.

This is something that is not only happening in the US though. Everywhere leaders have understood that they can treat the religious extremists in this way.......you can tell them to pay 20% more tax as long as you tell them you hate the other religion or you will pass legislation that forces everyone to live like thise extremists and they vote for you.

His racial politics are by the way of least concern. What he does against science, the environment and his support of weapons and oil industry are by far worse than the fact that some people from some countries are not allowed to travel into the US anymore.

[FireIceTalon]

His racial politics are by the way of least concern. What he does against science, the environment and his support of weapons and oil industry are by far worse than the fact that some people from some countries are not allowed to travel into the US anymore.

You really think its just about some people from some countries not being able to travel here anymore? If so, you are very wrong. That is but merely one way his racist ideology has manifested into policy. You completely forgot about all the non-white people who already live here in the US (legally or not). Tell them that his actions against science, the environment and support of weapons and the oil industry are worse than his racist politics, and see what they say. I predict the words "fuck" and "off" to be in there, somewhere - especially since it would be coming from a western, white male. Now, living as a racial minority in America is akin to living under fascism everyday regardless of which party holds office, but I certainly would not want to be a Muslim or Mexican immigrant (legal or not) under the current Administration. It isn't just about his policies either, its also the fact his rhetoric and election have ignited all the racists in this country to come out of the woodwork. In numerous locations, this makes everyday life for non-whites to be extremely difficult at best, entirely miserable at worst.

I'm not going to get into a debate on who is worse between white nationalists and the moralistic christian right, cause frankly, both of them suck, and to be quite honest, many of aspects of their ideology already overlap anyways as you stated. It's like debating which smells worse: dog shit or cat shit.

As for blue collar workers not being represented by the Democrats, at what point in time was this ever the case (rhetorical question)? Democrats certainly have paid plenty of lip service to working class people but in the end they will always serve the ruling class, just like the Republicans do - because that is what they were elected by said ruling class to do. The Democrats are NOT (AND NEVER WERE) a workers party; they are a bourgeois capitalist party that is centrist at best even by bourgeois political standards (with Republicans being a far right party). The sooner working people realize that neither party has their interests in mind, and that neither party is the one in charge (the ruling class that they represent are the people in charge), the better off they will be.

All that being said, the fact Democrats do not represent the economic interests of working class people in no way justifies the racism, hate, and xenophobia that many white working class people have towards minorities and immigrants. Racist workers are no better than liberal capitalists.

[Taem]

This man is a work of art, seriously. I wonder where these funds were going? Something tells me embezzlement to Russia, but you know politics... someone else who works for Kushner will take the fall for this, when it's got Trump's fingerprints all over it. I used to write off the stories of Trump's Russia ties as propaganda from his enemies, or conspiracy nuts (such as the Obama birth certificate), but I've been becoming increasingly unsure as more and more evidence piles up. Without knowing what the reports state, it's mere speculation at this point, and perhaps competely overhyped, however it's still an interesting read, as I personally had no idea Trump owed the Deutsche Bank millions, and has recently eased their penalties for allowing Russia to embezzle money... Very shady practices.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/deu...63006fc877

[kandrathe]

When you are just talking about white nationalist scum you are accusing a whole group of people with very different levels of nationalism. Lots of blue collar workers who weren't represented by the democrats anymore.

Yes, but... what the leftists bundle in the alt-right for demagogic expediency is more complicated. I'm going to add my two cents... ok, realistically, I’ve held back a few months, so you get the full $20 version.

From my perspective as someone relegated by the expansion of the US political extremist universe to a place of relative centrism. I’m tending to think there is no “one Ring” of ideology to “rule them all”.



Here is a diagram I drew for a friend from Africa recently as we discussed the various “lenses” representing US political thought. Most people are mainly “for” a position, and “against” what they see as it’s malevolent opposite. While everyone sees themselves correct, and at the top side of this chart, people tend to also see their opponents advocacy for a different “positive” position reflecting to the bottom of the chart.

I believe the bulk of Trump votes were more against Hillary, and a large enough group felt abandoned during the Obama slow recovery. I also feel the Clintons are perceived to leave a trail of corruption behind them like a Honeywagon. Trump was the devil they didn’t know, so people who tend towards the optimistic, held their noses and picked one of the skunks.

At the almost extremist wing nut fringe, you have the outright racists like Duke, or Spencer who advocate for "ethnic nationalism", or what amounts to voluntary ethnic separation, or some form of territorial apartheid. It's beyond ludicrous, and immoral to just outright crazy. There are some beyond this level of crazy, bordering on violent extremism, but not many. When found, they make the press though, as representatives of the fearful deplorables they want us to cower from.

So, forget the small minority of outright racists...like Duke, or Spencer. They are a remnant of mostly the old South holdouts being castigated and abandoned by the Democrats, like Kennedy, and "publicly" by LBJ. In the 1960's, those against civil rights for black people, opted for the other party, in a two-party system.

Unfortunately, in that Nixonian era, the Republicans flying in the face of their own history of emancipation, saw the opportunity to rise from an obscure minority to annex the votes of the disenfranchised Dixiecrats. Yet, had they not, the erstwhile Whig party would still be a minor 20% of the vote, and we'd have had the last 40 years dominated by one party. My adherence to a moral high ground is the main reason I could never be a modern Republican, or vote for a reprobate like Trump.

The other major type of alt right call themselves “Civic Nationalists” in the model of Ernest Renan and John Stuart Mill, but it tends to blur patriotism into jingoism at times. They tend to unquestioningly adhere to the symbols of patriotic nationalism, with dedication, and without much question or critical analysis. Thus, the never ending “War on Terror” resolution, used to put the US in conflict mode for 16 years now. This is used to justify the worst abuses, unchecked police state surveillance, to torture, to extrajudicial drone strike killing in any nation, to extraordinary rendition to black site prisons in nations with the most questionable HR records. In 2001, I tended to be more here, yet felt most of it was over the top. But, it was all justified to “Prevent another 911”.

These people will never change their mind when being accused.....this is the whole reason Trump supporters are still supporting him.

Them? Who are they? While I did not vote for him, and I personally don't like him, or most of his policies, he is what we have. By the rules we set up for fair elections, this was the one selected, so we live with it. All the Democrats, half the Republicans (old guards e.g. Ryan, McCain), and most of the entrenched bureaucracy outright despise him, and I feel fear his penchant for “loose cannon” abrupt change.

Unless there really is something to the year old Mueller investigation, besides the old tried and true perjury or obstruction of justice traps, neither of which have anything to do with any actual evidence of Russian meddling. If they can impeach him, they will. If not, they either live with it, or go the JFK route. I’m pretty convinced now that there are more layers to our political onion, than we are allowed to, or are willing to see.

Far more dangerous (but of course largely overlapping) are the extremist Christians. They embrace anyone who can help them ban abortion or the right of extremely ill people to end their live in peace or ...well anything that people should be able to decide by themselves but that Christians would like to decide for them.

Well… you and I disagree on the danger posed by 99.9999% of Christians, as I live as one, and among them daily my whole life. I do think it is a fundamental role of government to protect its vulnerable citizens from being murdered by either the government, or each other. Also, being among the diaspora of refugee Islamic Somalian in Minnesota, I would say the same about the vast majority of 99.9999% of them as well. There is always room for some impressionable people being led astray by either being crazy, or crazy ideological thinking. Again, I see it as fear mongering to point at any group as a monolith of unified thought.

Trump is probably farthest away from what you could call a ''good christian''.....someone that would help the poor, be modest, not rude, doesn’t swear, stays with his first wife etc..... but just because he dangles the carrot in front of the Christian extremists he gets their votes.

I agree he exhibits an un-Christian life, which in the political realm is all that matters to Christians. Like I said earlier, I couldn’t vote for any person I felt lacked the moral character I expect as a representative of the leader of the US. In Christian thought, everyone is a sinner and in process of seeking redemption. Sort of like Buddhists seeking serenity, and inner tranquility. So, perhaps Trump's journey to redemption will ultimately be a failure, but what would be important to either of the aforementioned philosophies is to stay on the path. There is good reason for the verse, "Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven." Referring to the plethora of temptations afforded a wealthy, powerful person.

This is something that is not only happening in the US though. Everywhere leaders have understood that they can treat the religious extremists in this way.......you can tell them to pay 20% more tax as long as you tell them you hate the other religion or you will pass legislation that forces everyone to live like these extremists and they vote for you.

Now you had to go and get all bigoted again. All those monolithic religious extremists who gobble up whatever lying gobs of Pablum you spoon feed them. People will tend to choose, vote for those things that are in their self-interest. We depend on it, in fact, as the cornerstone of democracy. I would add the caveat that we are in an era of unparalleled ease in the dissemination of propaganda. Where Macedonian clickbait miners can make a fortune pitting US political adversaries against each other on Facebook, because a generation of people are too used to uncritically believing whatever looks like an official news story.

His racial politics are by the way of least concern. What he does against science, the environment and his support of weapons and oil industry are by far worse than the fact that some people from some countries are not allowed to travel into the US anymore.

Close, but I think you have veered from the mark. My take is that he is trying to run the nation as CEO of America, Inc. I think he pretty much views the people as his workers, or at least the wealthiest (potential donors) as shareholders. His measure of his own, and the US success will be likely more economic, as in GDP. His "mission", in my perception, is he wants to recraft the US as a great place to do business. Corporations ( and unions), at their worst, are mainly amoral (although can be immoral), subservient to the bottom line, without much regard to obstacles, like environment, worker safety, or fairness to the “competition”. But, "corpus" means body, or in this context a like minded collection of individuals acting as one body. Generally though, the morality of any group is shaped by its leadership and only limited by enforced external regulation.

Ok. That’s is my $20 contribution for now. Someday, maybe I’ll get you to lighten up on your evil enemy too.

P.S.
@Team : I tend to think along the lines of Quinta Jurecic here contributing to WAPO -- Robert Mueller can’t save us - The Washington Post

[Jester]

I agree he exhibits an un-Christian life, which in the political realm is all that matters to Christians.

*spits coffee*

White evangelicals voted for Trump with a gigantic supermajority. They still support him more than almost any other group. Whatever one thinks of Trump's politics, anyone who hasn't been living under a rock for the last three decades knows that Donald Trump has led a decidedly ... unchristian... life.

Curiously, black evangelicals are almost the mirror image, opposing Trump more consistently than almost any other group. (Other Christian denominations sit other places on the spectrum.)

I would draw almost the opposite conclusion: Christians have politics like everyone has politics, and it has (almost) blessed nothing to do with whether the candidate lives a Christian life or not.

-Jester

[kandrathe]

I agree he exhibits an un-Christian life, which in the political realm is all that matters to Christians.

*spits coffee*

White evangelicals voted for Trump with a gigantic supermajority. They still support him more than almost any other group. Whatever one thinks of Trump's politics, anyone who hasn't been living under a rock for the last three decades knows that Donald Trump has led a decidedly ... unchristian... life.

Curiously, black evangelicals are almost the mirror image, opposing Trump more consistently than almost any other group. (Other Christian denominations sit other places on the spectrum.)

I would draw almost the opposite conclusion: Christians have politics like everyone has politics, and it has (almost) blessed nothing to do with whether the candidate lives a Christian life or not.

-Jester

I should probably unpack that better. Christianity is very sectarian, so almost "no one" is doing it correctly, according to anyone's beliefs, unless they are the exact same. When it comes to politicians trying to "qualify" as worthy of your in-group preference, hardly no one has it.

So... like Mitt Romney, who seems pretty squeaky clean, I'd guess for a Mormon. But, the folks down at Oral Roberts need to evaluate him through the generic "Evangelical" lens. Or, "does he walk the talk"? He's in their outgroup.

Most politicians fall well short, as even the aspiration of power is characteristically un-christian. The deeper meaning of 1st century principles, like "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's", was not only to where possible follow the Roman laws, but conversely don't get involved in Roman affairs.

Back to Trump. I believe evangelical Christians, especially white evangelical Christians, were/are a major source of support for Trump with over 80% of them voting for him, and they continue to be a key part of his base.

"I was against those who said, as you know, we should just move on. I didn't move on. I said, his moral behavior - moral behavior is connected to governance. And a few of us said that and got critiqued from the left for saying so back then. But I think there's got to be consistency in this. And Donald Trump's moral behavior is really - is really disgusting. It's the antithesis of Christian values.

This is the worship of money and sex and power. Everyone struggles with - public figures struggle. They should struggle. There's not even a struggle with this man. And I agree with Pastor York speaking the truth to power, but this man's destroying truth. This is an administration of perpetual, continual lying. So much is at stake for our faith and the soul of the nation. And how we respond as Christians has got to be more than the ends justify the means."

My take is that this is how most Christians feel, but tend to be faced with bad choices, so end up choosing the one who will maybe stand for some issues in their interest. More clearly what I should have said is... that if given a moral candidate who also backs their issues, they would choose that one, but given two immoral choices, it will be the one who backs their issues.

But, again, like Jim Wallis, I believe people need to vote more on the persons character, and refuse to pick the lesser of two evils. Even when that means your side loses (which is why I think Roy Moore lost).

[Occhidiangela]

A tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

eppie, American evangelical Christians are a diverse bunch. I work around and with a lot of them. You are talking out of your backside.

That said, kandrathe is correct on one point: Mitt Romney was stabbed hard in the back by the hard evangelical wing of the GOP. Him being a Mormon drove them nuts.
(My Catholic friends were so upset with his Mormonism that, they would rather vote for "abortionist Obama" as he'd been called by them a year prior than vote for Romney).

They did Obama's work for him.

American politics is a bit more complex that eppie knows. Trump took advantage of that to promote himself. Successfully. PT Barnum was right.