No, not substantiated. If English isn’t your primary language, I’d imagine that metaphors exist in whatever language you speak as a primary tongue. So you should understand this.
You said this in response to my saying:
*** quote start*** No we will say that Sanders encourages us to hate rich people and CEOs when he claims that they are sending rapists, murderers and terrorists to harm us. quote end
You want me to think that saying the rich steal is no less mild than what Trump says about Mexicans and Muslims?
Give me a break. Stealing is as you put it, not exactly mild language? Put it in the context of Trump^s accusation. If a bunch of Mexicans or Muslims rape people, murder people, or for that matter attack our nation through terrorist means, don’t you think that if they only got nailed for stealing they would have gotten off pretty mildly? Imputing that someone advocates theft is mild language when the discussion is about rape, murder and terrorist acts. We can debate whether Sanders advocates stealing (I think it is obvious he does not) but what we were discussing is the way you think that accusations of rape, murder and terrorism are somehow in the same ballpark as your idea that Sanders advocates theft (WTFuck?). Even if people grant your idea that Sanders advocates that the elite .1% are thieves, that is not even close to claiming that large groups of people have come to the US to rape, murder and terrorize us. Give up the special pleading, it is better to have a grown up reality based discussion.
Do not call other posters liars or accuse them of lying in the Elections forum.
(Rule inherited from the Great Debates forum.)
ETA: I now see that you had already received a Warning for that behavior, so my Note is being upgraded to a Warning.
Do not call other posters “liar.” Continued abuse of that (or any) rule will result in a loss of posting privileges.
[ /Moderating ]
You seem to be unclear on the concept of “metaphor”. Here is a standard (Wiki) definition:
So, nobody is saying that Mr. Trump is an actual real-life ambulatory chunk of fecal matter. They are using a common figure of speech (metaphor) to highlight the complete shityiness of Mr. Trumps pronouncements and policy statements.
So the next time a friend says “wow, that goalie in the hockey game was a rock!” You should not call him a liar, because the goalie was not, in fact, composed entirely of granite and/or obsidian, and was really a living human being.
I hope this helps you in your future postings. Life is a journey. (no, not a literal journey. Work with me here)
Of course, you absolutely can. Is that what you think Trump was doing when he said “They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists, and some I assume are good people”?
Alle fleshe is grasse, alle fleshe is shite.
No, he meant, "They’re bringing drugs and crime therapists." Which impresses me – not many people know that more than half of the undocumented Mexican immigrants in the U.S. are LCSWs. And boy, do we need 'em!
I, for one, am pleased beyond words that my phrases “acceptable political hyperbole” and “ambulatory chunk of fecal matter” are now part of the fabric of this thread.
The same applies to me “a YouTube comment thread made flesh” description.
And the intelligent people in this thread have had a lot of fun talking to you.
As I’ve pointed out, you lied about Sanders in the OP. You misquoted him in your complaint about how terrible it is to misquote people.
Note to the OP: Irony is not the opposite of wrinkly.
For heavens sake. Is this the ‘break the liar rule’ thread?
Warning issued. Please don’t do it again.
You know, with three warnings…and the potential for more given everyone’s behavior I’m moving this to the Pit. You can be mean to each other to your heart’s content…subject to Miller’s patience.
Everyone in this thread is lying about each others lying about each others lies. You’re all a bunch of filthy liars.
WTF, this is the pit. What makes you think we want some stinkin’ Trump shit here?
Drunky Smurf is telling the truth.
Great! This is despite your OP, not because of it.
Your bafflement at Trump’s racist policies has me, in turn, baffled.
Let’s game this out: Trump has proposed policies that are generally viewed as bigoted. Instituting a religious test for coming to this country is, in my book, a blatantly bigoted position, and I would even go further and call his position racist.
Now, one could argue that even if he holds a bigoted position on an issue, it could be possible that he personally does not feel hatred for another creed. Personally, I don’t think it is true in this case, but I guess it is theoretically possible.
But in my book, to summarize “advocating bigoted policies” as meaning “telling us to hate people” is within the margin of error. Not strictly true, certainly not a total fabrication, but an exaggeration that ought to be understood as such.
And in my book, adaher, I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to say that Bernie Sanders hates the people on Wall Street. I’d say that is roughly similar to how normal people would summarize Trump’s bigoted policies – the difference of course is that one can simply leave Wall Street and stop playing carnival games with the American economy and be redeemed in Sanders’ eye; but if you’re one of the people that Trump does not want in this country, you have a much harder time becoming a white Christian in order to reform yourself in his eyes.
So you’re saying that the penis really is mightier?