The four women who are the topic of this conversation who were told to go back to their countries are all legal. Three aren’t even immigrants. Seems like you are mistaken.
True, we were much more aware of his misogyny (both general and specific) and his mocking of the disabled than of his racism, although that was hardly a secret (the Mexico-paid wall and the Muslim ban were campaign promises, remember?).
Does that excuse anything?
They got the 9/11 first responders bill passed, way faster than McConnell could.
Donald Trump: I don’t have a racist bone in my body.
Milo Yiannopoulos: Would you like one?
Really. If anything, Trump is inadvertently helping to close the divide among Democrats that opened up last week when Pelosi admonished the newbies. If he was really playing strategically, I think he would be better off either giving Pelosi some backhanded praise for slamming the commies or praising the newbies for standing up to the old lady.
What? WHAT???! He launched his modern political career by serving as the poster child for “birtherism,” as blatantly racist as it’s possible to be!!!
This week has simply been coming full circle to his white nationalist core.
Here, let me fix the spelling for you:
*"If he was really playing with a full deck..."*
Meanwhile, over in the House, debate on a resolution condemning Trump for his “racist remarks” has been put on hold for something like two hours while they discuss whether or not Pelosi violated the rules of the House when, when speaking in favor of the resolution, she called the remarks “racist.” Note that she didn’t call Trump a racist (nor does the resolution) - just the remarks.
Yep. In 1973 he was found guilty of discrimination against black people trying to rent his apartments. He’s old school OR (Original Racist).
Out of curiosity, what House rule might this refer to?
(Sounds rather like the SDMB — “attack the post, not the poster”?)
With the Central Park Five debacle in between.
If you need any evidence that institutional racism still exists in this country, the fact that racists are not allowed to be called “racist” in Congress should provide that for you.
See post 180. 
It was easy to have conservatives not really paying attention and think “he couldn’t possibly be all that bad”.
Like I said elsewhere:
I’ve noticed some news outlets finally giving up the euphemisms and calling Trump’s remarks “racist”. NPR did so in a tweet and in the most recent hourly news roundup I heard, and the St. Louis Post Dispatch did today as well. I’m glad some news operations are done with “racially charged” and other similar nonsense. I hope more follow suit soon.
Cool to say racist shit, uncool to call it racist. :dubious:
That’s fucked up. That’s really fucked up.
Rule XVII.1(b) says, “Remarks in debate (which may include references to the Senate or its Members) shall be confined to the question under debate, avoiding personality.” Apparently, the acting Speaker cited a similar situation against Speaker Tip O’Neill in 1984 in sanctioning the comment.
Note that the House then voted to keep Pelosi’s comment in the record.
If you ask me, the comment should stand - she didn’t call Trump racist; she just said that he made “racist remarks.” Yes, there’s a difference.
You’ll notice that the people who said that Trump’s remarks were not racist were all white and a lot of them were from the South. When asked, any person of color or recent immigrant emphatically states the remark was racist. Hell, even the Mooch said that the remark was racist and completely reprehensible.
AP is also calling the tweets racist.
Now if they can all just start calling the President racist, we’ll be getting somewhere.
Oh, and Republican. Can’t forget that part. Even those Repubs who didn’t like it (Mitt) just couldn’t bring themselves to speak the truth.