And yet somehow you don’t see candidates or campaigns that don’t espouse racist views posting this kind of stuff. Not a big deal by itself, just another reinforcing piece of evidence.
Missing the point, It is not only for those issues, and it was not just clip art, it was piece already made by an antisemite.
piffle, that is not needed at all, and you are using the fallacy of reducing it to the ridiculous, publicly denouncing the source and the antisemites who made it is what is needed. What is happening is that Trump did not do that, but made a change (with who’s permission?)* to the image and then to top the shit sundae put the cherry of #America First that the ADL had already told him to drop it.
- This is still important IMHO as it shows that Trump and buddies have no regard for the law, (copy right in this case) or more to the matter at hand, they do know who is the maker and got permission from him to change it. Of curse the follow up question is once again: why are you keeping that kind of company still?
First off, I vote for plenty of Republicans, so don’t lump me in with “the left”.
Second, you hit the nail on the head with “infer”. Yeah, reasonable people can “infer” that the anti-Semite who created the image was “implying” that – but after this was brought to Trump’s attention, nothing has to be inferred. Nothing has to be implied, either; so long as it’s being taken down, Trump could simply apologize while explicitly noting that, no, he of course did not intend to imply the offensive meaning.
Don’t just take it down with no comment – and don’t just comment that it should have stayed up. Simply mention why you’re taking it down when it’s taken down.
I don’t give a crap whether he offends in the first place; if he genuinely didn’t see the problem in advance, and simply apologizes once it’s been brought to his attention, then I figure he gets a pass. “Oh, you didn’t intend that meaning, and that’s why you took it down? Well, apology accepted; thanks for specifying; keep up the good work!”
Or he can (a) re-tweet he pleases; and, if reasonable folks take offense, he can (b) apologize at need: takes ten seconds, takes one sentence.
I’ve said many times that, if you don’t apologize for offending, then you communicate that you intended to offend. This goes doubly so for Trump, since he’s run his campaign on not caring if he offends.
So people are offended and attacking him for it. Funny how that works…
No handbook or scholars needed.
Simple rule: don’t trawl through the sewers of hate group message boards for your material. If you do not you will be unlikely to run across too much hate-shit.
Second simple rule: if you have, and you have put up a piece of hate-shit, do not try to defend the piece of hate-shit as not being hate-shit.
That which disgusts here is not that some are ignorant that of how classic a piece of Jew-hating that graphic was - ignorance alone is always forgivable. Sometimes hard to believe, but forgivable.
What disgusts is that it is part of an unapologetic pattern of trawling through the sewers looking for material, a pattern of clearly identifying those to whom those sorts of messages most appeal as target audience number one.
And the defense of the hate-shit after it was clear that such was what it was, by Trump and by some here, is beyond disgusting.
I see you also are a fan of the political practices of Governor George Wallace.
Next you are going to be talking about the movie Frozen as well. To borrow a quip "would you like to build a strawman? "
This whole post was excellent, of course, but this bears repeating, and repeating, and repeating. The most awful part of this whole thing, in some ways, is Trump’s complete and utter inability/unwillingness to say “I didn’t know. I’m sorry.”
Not really that awful. We get to see the real Trump*, not a phony hiding behind false apologies.
*Not that we haven’t seen plenty of that already.
Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz thinks Trump just might be anti-Semitic:
Believe me, Trump knows more about Jews than some foreign Arab sounding newspaper. He hears things on the Internet about Jews all the time. People tell him these things.
He’s got a very good brain.
(post shortened, underline added)
“YOU should have left it up.” What do you suppose that means? Does that suggest that Trump didn’t take it down? Does that suggest that Trump didn’t post the original tweet? Is Trump being blamed for the actions of someone else, just as Trump was recently blamed for that woman reporter being manhandled by a Trump campaign manager. The one where that woman reporter ignored a request to leave the area, she then approached Trump, grabbed Trump, and was then restrained by the man behind her. Ow! That Trump guy prevented me from grabbing Trump AGAIN. How dare he! My arm will be bruised in three days and it must be Trump’s fault. Get a rope! Grab the pitch forks! Light the torches!
Dog whistle? Dog whistle bit, indeed. Isn’t that one of those sounds that only the offended/Democrat party hears?
As far as the 6-pointed star issue is concerned, a tweet was posted, complaints were made, the problem was quickly corrected, and the whining continues. It’s politics - SNAFU.
Right. His campaign regularly just happens to retweet and repost images and content from white supremacist sources. No big deal, and nothing to see here.
Given David Duke’s reaction to it, it looks pretty clear that the dog whistle had its intended effect with its intended target.
I touched on that earlier. I wonder how the 6-pointed star issue was presented to the responders? Did the responders see the actual tweet OR did a reporter tell the responder that a SOD was used?
Star of David pics -
(post shortened, underline added)
I have NOT said that no reasonable person could take it that way. As this thread shows, there are people who have seen it both ways. Which ones were wrong? Neither, because it’s their opinion.
The bottom line is that after it became clear that SOME people were offended by the 6-pointed star, the 6-pointed star was removed. A problem was identified and corrected.
The misunderstanding that all 6-pointed stars must be a SOD seems to be quite common. Apparently our schools systems and media outlets have failed in their attempts to accurately educate the public.
You heard a dog whistle? Or did you and Duke hear a dog whistle?
Maybe you’re too poor to pay attention? 
Bernie is honest. Can anyone say that about Hillary?
Bernie is not a politics-as-usual politician. Can anyone say that about Hillary (and keep a straight face)?
This is the year of the anti-establishment voter. Out with the old and busted. In with the new hotness. 
Hillary is a lying sack of steaming horseshit. She should never be placed in a position of authority that comes with the ability/responsibility to use Executive Privilege to keep her actions hidden from the voters.
[/snip]
And just to avoid the issue. Again it is clear that the conservative from RedState points at the refusal of Trump to deal with the source of the image as one of the key reasons why we should not to give the benefit of the doubt to Trump.
IMHO The misguided efforts from the Republicans (Benghazi, email security) only showed that the Republicans would rather risk exposing secret information in order to score political points.