So when Breitbart publishes odious articles, which you don’t seem to be disputing that there are multiples of, you just consider it an oopsie-daisy?
Are you familiar with the stories about Ron Paul’s newsletters? Here are some of the things that were written in them:
Homosexuals were better off when they were forced to be in the closet
The LA riots only ended when people had to go get welfare checks
“nearly all” black men in DC are “criminal or semi-criminal,” and they get away with it because they are very “fleet-footed”
“Hip-hop youths” play whites “like pianos” to steal their cars
New York City ought to be renamed “Zooville” or “Welfaria”
Al Sharpton would get more attention if he held speeches at crackhouses
And of course that the “race war is coming”
Are you able to render judgment on the bigotry of Paul’s newsletters? Or do you need some statistics of how many issues were produced to determine whether these statements were just “oopsies” and we shouldn’t draw any conclusions from them?
(Don’t bother trying to squirm out of it. You’ve committed yourself to the principle that cherry-picking is acceptable. This is the cherry that’s been selected for your sundae, bon appétit!)
Chao - Wife of Mitch McConnell. So forget about the Senate being any kind of check on Trump’s power. Cabinet offices are real jobs, they should not be used to curry political favor like this. I thought we were supposed to be draining the swamp?
Haley - Zero international experience. What qualifies her for her post?
Mattis - Possibly not that bad, but there is a reason there is a law requiring the nominee be out of active service for at least 7 years prior to serving as SecDef, but they are working on a special exemption to this because Republican I guess.
So I grant one or two nominees may not actually be horrifying but are definitely concerning.
What about the rest of the picks that you didn’t disagree with me on? All good with you?
Actually they aren’t “working on” Mattis’ waiver anymore. It passed the Senate 81-17 and the House 268-151. Kind of odd vote totals if the only reason was “because Republican” don’t you think?
Regardless of to whom she is married, Secretary Chao is well-qualified. She has been Secretary of Labor, Deputy Secretary of Transportation, and Director of the Peace Corps.
What international experience did President Obama have before taking office?
Because Republican, really? The Senate approved the exemption 81-17. The House also approved it, although more narrowly, by 268-151.
So you do concede that aside from these three nominees, the rest of Trump’s picks are horrifying?
I mean we can quibble about these three, and I know that’s what you want to do, but I’d rather discuss why you won’t acknowledge my questions about the rest.
I concede that “all” was not the correct word, and that those couple are merely concerning, not horrifying. As far as I’m concerned that aside is settled now.
All was definitely incorrect. If you look at the link in post #36, a great many nominations haven’t even been made yet. Are those future nominations equally “horrifying”?
You were wrong about Congress “working on” an exemption for General Mattis.
You are also wrong about Secretary Chao’s qualifications to serve.
What about them? In general, I believe that any President should have the privilege to choose his own Cabinet and advisors.
I didn’t question her qualifications, I said it was concerning that she’s the Senate Majority Leader’s wife, which is one of the institutions that is supposed to serve as a check against executive overreach.
That’s nice. I think they should choose responsibly. The new secretary of education knows nothing about education. Nothing aside from her experience in school. Horrifying.
“You should all be very respectful towards President Trump, the same as we all were towards that foreign born muslim false prophet who single handedly destroyed the country we all love”
It’s not a nitpick. Probably most people don’t follow the news very closely, which is OK. But it’s impossible to have a political conversation with someone who doesn’t even know what’s happening.
You were wrong. I gave you the vote totals, as did HurricaneDitka, and you doubled down, saying again that you weren’t wrong, even though you factually are.
What’s the point of discussing this with you, then?
Ignoring the substance of a post and focusing on an unimportant detail so you can find something to be “right” about while completely ignoring the actual point being made is the very definition of nit picking.
I agree with your first point here. I can’t imagine Trump to be “haunted” by anything beyond a critical comment by a movie actress, or the four Big Macs he wolfed down as a midnight snack.
As for the second: I’ve lived in the NYC area (New Haven, Conn) since 1978, and in the city itself since 1982. I’ve lived with this shitbird my entire adult life. I’ve read the tabloid headlines as I passed newsstands on the way to work. TRUMP JACKHAMMERS BONWIT TELLER BUILDING SCULPTURES INSTEAD OF DONATING TO METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART. MARLA ON TRUMP: BEST SEX I’VE EVER HAD! Etc.
Yeah, he’s a monster, all right. Wouldn’t piss on 'im if he was on fire.
I think this thread is a pretty good argument for what the protests can achieve: a lot of Trump supporters are what’s known as “low information voters” and we need to puncture their bubble to get them to view this president with a more critical eye. Without massive resistance, they would labor under the delusion that Trump is popular and supported by the people.
