Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Sun Nov 18 01:35:34 PST 2018

Utopia Talk / Politics / The Donald made them do it
Rugian
Member
Mon Nov 05 04:15:13
The Donald Made Them Do It
By Carl M. Cannon
November 04, 2018

If Abraham Lincoln were alive today, as Yogi Berra might put it, he’d be spinning in his grave. Lincoln was more than America’s greatest rhetorician; before Donald J. Trump came along, he was the last president whose legitimacy was rejected by half the country as soon as his election was complete.

Although the 1860s version of “the resistance” didn’t turn out well, it never soured Lincoln on Americans’ capacity for good. “With malice toward none, with charity for all,” he proclaimed at the height of the Civil War. It’s the most evocative tautology in the American rhetorical canon. But its spirit is in short supply these days.


“You are not welcome here!” a Pittsburgh Presbyterian pastor screamed at Trump, her face contorted in hate. “We welcome everybody here!” That’s some kind of reverse tautology. Not expressing an idea in two different ways, but rather making two opposite sentiments as though they are compatible. It’s akin to the ancient Greek philosophers’ “liar’s paradox.” (“I always tell lies,” a man says. Is he lying or telling the truth?)

Yet there was nothing philosophical about CNN anchorman Don Lemon’s Trump-blaming after the murder of 11 American Jews in their Pittsburgh synagogue. “We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right,” Lemon said – thereby demonizing, oh, I don’t know, 100 million of his fellow Americans. Even more efficient than the vitriolic Pittsburgh Presbyterian, Lemon refuted himself in mid-sentence.

This encapsulates the state of the anti-Trump resistance. In the name of tolerance, a raging intolerance. I’m not a partisan person, so it’s difficult for me to reconcile how activists and Trump-bashing journalists are behaving these days. It takes a special cast of mind – and I don’t mean that as a compliment – to treat a hate crime or other atrocity as a political opportunity. Yet that’s what has been happening since Trump’s arrival on the political scene.

In early 2017, a rash of Jewish cemeteries were vandalized in several U.S. cities, most notably in St. Louis. At the same time, more than 100 bomb threats were phoned in to Jewish community centers all over the country. You don’t have to ask who got blamed, do you? Trump and his supporters, of course. In St. Louis, a Jewish woman surveying the cemetery desecration said Trump bore sole responsibility, which NPR dutifully reported. Vox News castigated Trump for not denouncing the damage even though he’d done just that during a visit to the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History & Culture.

“The anti-Semitic threats targeting our Jewish community at community centers are horrible and are painful and a very sad reminder of the work that still must be done to root out hate and prejudice and evil,” he said. Meanwhile, Vice President Mike Pence toured the St. Louis cemetery personally.

Eventually, two African-Americans were arrested and convicted of these crimes. Alzado Harris told police he was drunk and on drugs when he went on a rampage at the St. Louis cemetery. It apparently had nothing to do with Trump or politics -- or even Jews. As for the man who called in scores of bomb threats, well, he was a left-wing journalist who’d been fired for fabricating stories on racially charged subjects. He said he was trying to get back at a girlfriend. To recap: Not Trump’s fault. Not his supporters’ doing.

Nobody in the media felt the need to apologize, let alone atone. There’s no cost to condemning Trump, regardless of the facts. When asked about their own excesses, these critics point to Trump’s pugnacity, his imprecision, his exaggerations, his insensitivity and – when it comes to immigrant policy – his demagoguery. His critics are not wrong, but does it excuse their own immoderation? Their own demagoguery?

This tactic of alibi-by-proxy was taken to new heights recently by lawyers for one of three white racists convicted of plotting to bomb Somali immigrants in their homes and places of worship in Kansas. They asked a sentencing judge for leniency on account of Trump’s 2016 campaign rhetoric. “The court cannot ignore ... one of the most rhetorically mold-breaking, violent, awful, hateful and contentious presidential elections in modern history,” the attorneys wrote.

This sounds like a desperate gambit, but it’s worked in legal settings before. Attorneys for U.S. Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl played the Trump card – and basically got their client released from custody. In San Francisco, a Mexican citizen previously deported from the U.S. five times was acquitted by a jury of killing 32-year-old Kate Steinle. The defendant had found a stolen handgun and fired a stray shot that killed her as she walked on a pier with her father. Trump had made an issue of the case on the campaign trail, which apparently helped the defendant beat the most serious charges against him.

I don’t blame defense lawyers trying to help a client, even if they use the president of the United States as a foil. But when the media whips up hatred against him because some anti-Semitic, immigrant-hating murderer stalks a synagogue, that’s something else altogether. Trump’s daughter and son-in-law would have been a target of the Pittsburgh killer. Trump’s grandchildren, too.

Yet, the mainstream media amplified the publicity stunt of a group called Bend the Arc, which demanded that the president not set foot in Pittsburgh. Bend the Arc was identified in the New York Times, Washington Post, and elsewhere as an organization of Jewish leaders in Pittsburgh. If Trump was that misleading, as he often is, the Post fact-checkers would give the comment four Pinocchios.

Bend the Arc is based in New York, not Pittsburgh. Although it mobilizes “Jewish voices,” it’s not a religious organization; it’s a political action committee formed in 2015 by the son of Democratic donor George Soros with the express intention of helping elect left-wing Democrats. As the 2016 presidential cycle took shape, it’s raison d’etre morphed into opposing Donald Trump. Nothing wrong with that, but “Anti-Trump Organization Bashes Trump After Synagogue Shooting” is not as enticing a headline as “Pittsburgh Jewish Leaders Tell Trump to Stay Out After Synagogue Shooting.”

The ploy worked, and the city’s Democratic mayor went along with it. The “resistance” used a tragedy to essentially abrogate unto itself the authority to tell a U.S. president what cities he can visit. And it doesn’t stop there.

“Any strategy for enhancing the security of American Jewry should involve shunning Trump’s Jewish enablers,” proclaimed Franklin Foer in the Atlantic. “Their money should be refused, their presence in synagogues not welcome. They have placed their community in danger.”

Read those three sentences again. They seem to say that Jews who support the democratically elected president of the United States should be banned from their own places of worship. This is not a sustainable position, but I know Frank Foer, and he is not an intemperate man. The anti-Semitic death threats he and other Jewish critics of Trump receive are not imagined -- and the Pittsburgh shooting was an alarming wake-up call. Nonetheless, liberalism carries with it difficult obligations. The “resistance” must find ways to resist the temptation of becoming the very thing they oppose.

http://www...ld_made_them_do_it_138550.html
American Democrat
Member
Mon Nov 05 04:51:18
Fascinating another article attempting to curb that Trump's rhetoric does not have any influence on a base of people that would contribute to their behavior or actions.
Rugian
Member
Mon Nov 05 05:11:39
Nice ESL post, stupid.
American Democrat
Member
Mon Nov 05 05:16:56
Oh, I am sorry. Was there something that was particularly hard for you to understand. Or was it the critique itself about how the opinion piece is attempting to distance the concept between Trump's rhetoric and his influence.

I understand that you feel that he has no influence whatsoever on some peoples' actions as this article attempted to do. And this fits your nice comfy spot because it shares that sentiment. However, the cult of personality that exists and is attributed to Trump clearly shows there is an influence by Trump himself. Trump knows this and wields it, and when something extreme happens he then attempts to blame the media for it. Do not mistake this, because I am not dismissing media's influence. But more to the point you are wanting to dismiss Trump's influences.

"Stupid."
Rugian
Member
Mon Nov 05 05:24:02
"Was there something that was particularly hard for you to understand."

Yes, your idea of sentence structure and wording.

"I understand that you feel that he has no influence whatsoever on some peoples' actions as this article attempted to do."

This is an easy one. Would a reasonable person be incited to commit anti-Semitic violence due to the words and/or actions of Trump? Absolutely not. Next.
American Democrat
Member
Mon Nov 05 05:43:39
"Yes, your idea of sentence structure and wording."

Yes, a period or comma could have been used but in this day of texting at times. I feel that my point would clearly would have been made as I didn't feel it was necessary. But apparently for you who did not have a strong argument to begin with decide another approach. Good for you. It does not dismiss my point because you feel it interferes with your sensitive state of mind.

"This is an easy one. Would a reasonable person be incited to commit anti-Semitic violence due to the words and/or actions of Trump? Absolutely not. Next. "

Yet the article you posted attempted to use Lincoln as the thesis to compare Trump's rhetoric. While you also ignore many leaders in the course of history where their words, rhetoric and the like would compel a person to conduct themselves in a particular way. Would a 'reasonable person...' this isn't about reasonableness. It is about the acknowledgement of what is said, and what is not particularly denounced. Or when the pseudo-denunciation is made he repeats the rhetoric again using various triggers or "dog-whistling" terms that feeds to the fervor of some that they must take some sort of action to appease their frustration to make a statement.

What the article lines itself, including you and some other posters, is that there is a history of anti-Semitism that existed and there have been actions before. So what makes these particular instances so different than the ones before in the course of history? Is it a the Trump factor? To answer that is that Trump is being an enabler.

Look at the history of Germany; The unification of Germany and its particulars. There was a sentiment of anti-Semitism for decades before Hitler was born. However, he used them as a scapegoat and was able to rally those to believe his cause to rise to the position he got and then of course you know the history from that. Try not to look that Hitler ordered to exterminate the jews, but more to the influence he had over some people to cause them to conduce themselves.

There are similarities to what Trump is doing with his persona, with his words, with this sentiment. Primarily he took a class of people, immigrants, took a particular inconsequential, and anecdotal instance(s) and has them as a scapegoat, as it is a strong issue for some that are in his base. And for those who have the strong opinions of immigrants. Now the term "invaders" is being used and that connects to some and some felt compelled to take actions.

Some felt to take action because they painted Obama, Clinton, Soros, and anyone who is left-leaning, and now they felt compelled to act. This isn't so much about reasonableness, because now that is touching with the concept of about mental health. But I am willing to wager there isn't so much of any clinical diagnosis that can be made of those individuals, if so then you will have to say that anyone who commits a crime must be clinically diagnosis with an issue.

Nonetheless, it is clear that you still want to be dismissive of Trump's words, rhetoric, or behaviors conveying he doesn't have an influence on some people and does not want to acknowledge it, instead continue the scapegoating of immigrants and/or media.
jergul
large member
Mon Nov 05 05:47:40
Ruggy
Lincolm was in fact demonstratably far worse than Trump so far. His work as a unifier began a civil war.
Delude
Member
Mon Nov 05 05:53:08
"This is an easy one. Would a reasonable person be incited to commit anti-Semitic violence due to the words and/or actions of Trump? Absolutely not. Next."

Would a reasonable person or president in this case be invited to say that throwing rocks would be the equivalent of being a rifle? Absolutely not. Next.
Delude
Member
Mon Nov 05 05:53:32
Be *incited
The Sentinel
Member
Mon Nov 05 06:28:09
The article and Rugian is right. It was Lincoln's fault.
Paramount
Member
Mon Nov 05 07:11:14
"Why would people think that far-rightists would vandalize Jewish graves? Far-rightists are the good guys and have never attacked Jews before. It is the African man and the Leftists who are evil, as this article is trying to explain. Trump is innocent." – Rugian

Rugian
Member
Mon Nov 05 08:04:43
Jergul,

I didn't say the article was perfect. Any attempts to cast Lincoln in a favorable light are of course doomed to fail.

Paramount,

If there was ever someone who was in no position to complain about anti-Semitism...

"American" (doubtful due to the English skills displayed here) Democrat,

You needed way more than a comma to fix that jumbled mess.

Anyway, you were just presented with an opportunity to demonstrate how Trump was fueling anti-Semitism, and the best you could do is come up with comparisons to Hitler and cite his anti-illegal rhetoric. The first can of course be immediately discarded since it would require Trump to actively be encouraging hatred of the Jews, which he is not.

As for the other part, if you want to make the argument that anti-illegal talk encourages all forms of bigotry in general then knock yourself out, but that's a bad road for you to go down. Between the American left and right, only one side regularly engages in explicitly racist speech and policy proposals, and it isn't the right. Heck, just look at the people who are most likely to be virulently anti-Israel; they certainly don't exactly appear to be typical Trump voters.

If you want to condemn the entire political left and the institutions they control for encouraging bigotry, then I'll do the same for Trump. That's fair.

In any case, Trump does sometimes go over the top with his anti-illegal messaging (sending troops to the border f. ex.), but the larger problem here is that something that should be a policy issue has gradually been corrupted into a limitus test on whether you're racist or not. When it comes to giving amnesty to 12 million illegals, it shouldn't be controversial to voice opposition to such an idea. That plus a failure by both major parties to enforce our border for decades has naturally caused a build-up in resentment. This is not the same as anti-Semitism in 1930s Germany, which was rooted solely in bigotry. The problem with Trump is not that he gives a much-needed outlet to such sentiments, it's that he does so in an inarticulate manner and says some dumb things as a result. But that's a weak basis for claiming that Trump is causing Jews to get shot.

Bottom line, it is not reasonable to blame Trump for Jew hatred.
American Democrat
Member
Mon Nov 05 08:07:44
"Anyway, you were just presented with an opportunity to demonstrate how Trump was fueling anti-Semitism, and the best you could do is come up with comparisons to Hitler and cite his anti-illegal rhetoric. The first can of course be immediately discarded since it would require Trump to actively be encouraging hatred of the Jews, which he is not."

Rugian -The Fails at Comprehension
Rugian
Member
Mon Nov 05 08:14:32
I read just fine, Eurofag. There was not one empirical observation in that essay of yours that demonstrated Trump's supposed "enabling" of anti-Semitism.
jergul
large member
Mon Nov 05 08:14:46
Ruggy
IF any attempt to cast lincoln in a positive light is doomed to fail AND the article is using lincoln to cast Tromp in a positive light, THEN

What positive light outcome do you predict for Trump?
American Democrat
Member
Mon Nov 05 08:25:24
Presses enter inadvertently.

"Anyway, you were just presented with an opportunity to demonstrate how Trump was fueling anti-Semitism, and the best you could do is come up with comparisons to Hitler and cite his anti-illegal rhetoric. The first can of course be immediately discarded since it would require Trump to actively be encouraging hatred of the Jews, which he is not. "

Rugian - The fails at comprehension is undoubtedly noted. That wasn't the point I was making. This is me attempting to give you credit of deductive reasoning. But obviously that attempted is at a loss.

The point wasn't wasn't Trump is actively saying target Jews. But he is using the sentiment of emotions and anger that some of his base and extremists have and it favors them. Which gives them motivation to act out. To discard or dismiss that he had any influence whatsoever clearly shows how you are unable to acknowledge such existence because it does not favor your perception.

You use the the excuse of "Well he didn't directly say target jews..." is a definite cop out neglecting the bigger picture and ignoring what he has says is reflective.

"As for the other part, if you want to make the argument that anti-illegal talk encourages all forms of bigotry in general then knock yourself out, but that's a bad road for you to go down. Between the American left and right, only one side regularly engages in explicitly racist speech and policy proposals, and it isn't the right. Heck, just look at the people who are most likely to be virulently anti-Israel; they certainly don't exactly appear to be typical Trump voters."

Vote of convenience to obtain a goal would be the motive. It can be said that your typical Trump voter isnt a fair minded individual that leeches off of a campaign that furthers their agenda. Anti-israel doesn't not mean anti-jewish. So we can dismiss that.

"But that's a weak basis for claiming that Trump is causing Jews to get shot."

See that is the problem. You equate this specifically only the Jews are targeted. Where my point is that it is him and his rhetoric that seemingly compels some to act out of what they perceive as an injutice.

"Bottom line, it is not reasonable to blame Trump for Jew hatred"

That wasn't the point. But you are free to keep pushing that narrative.

American Democrat
Member
Mon Nov 05 08:30:51
"I read just fine, Eurofag. There was not one empirical observation in that essay of yours that demonstrated Trump's supposed "enabling" of anti-Semitism."

You read, but comprehension is another thing. I still find it amusing you think I am from Europe. But, I guess when you leave off a few commas or a period. It must mean they must be from another country. Or it could mean texting on a phone and grammar and punctuations is not a priority. But I see it is your attempt to direct the criticism towards that because you know yourself you have... a weak ass argument to begin with. Mr. "I know the article isn't perfect but I'll use it as my basis to show that Trump is being unfairly judged."
werewolf dictator
Member
Mon Nov 05 08:35:22
adl wouldn't be my first choice for determining right wing extremism killings.. but let's see how adl says those went when trump was constantly on cable news 2016 and president 2017..


"By ADL’s preliminary tally, at least, white supremacists were responsible for only seven of the 69 extremist-related murders committed in the United States in 2016. This represents an uncharacteristically low number for white supremacists, who are typically responsible for more such killings than any other extremist movement. These low figures also occurred during
a year in which non-violent white supremacist activity was particularly high, in large part due to agitation and propaganda by the so-called alt-right and other white supremacists in connection with the 2016 presidential election."
"This past year, however, anti-government extremists were responsible for only either 17% or 22% of extremist-related deaths, depending on how one classes Gavin Eugene Long, while white supremacists were responsible for only 10%. Other right-wing extremist movements committed no murders in 2016."
"MURDER AND EXTREMISM IN THE UNITED STATES IN 2016"

"Thus 20 of the 34 extremist-related murders in the United States in 2017, or 59%, were related to right-wing extremism. This can be compared to 2016, in which only 20% of extremist murders were related to right-wing extremism—though, again, 2016 was an aberration. Over the past 10 years (2008-17), domestic extremists have been responsible for at least 387 murders; of these, 274 (71%) were committed by right-wing extremists of one type or another."
"Murder and Extremism in the United States in 2017"



using these numbers for right-wing extremist murders.. i get

2016.. 7 + (12 to 15) killed
2017.. 20 killed

2008-2017 total = 274 killed

2008-2015 total = 274 - (39 to 42) = (235 to 232) / 8 years = (29 to 29.375) average killed per year by right wing extremists

so maybe out of don lemon's 100 million right-wing extremists.. they murdered 58% as many people as killed by lightning strikes 2008-2015.. and 40% as many 2016 to 2017 with trump centerstage.. at this rate they may kill as many people as hitler in a little under one million years.. or similar to bush/hillary iraq war [or obama/gulf timber sycamore] in around ten thousand years [give or take a little..]


[true that 11 jews was killed in 2018 shooting.. but of all the people that trump badmouths.. jews seem kind of at end of that list.. with pittsburgh shooter not even liking trump..]
werewolf dictator
Member
Mon Nov 05 08:43:30
only about one century for 100 million right wing extremists to murder as many americans as 9/11..
Delude
Member
Mon Nov 05 08:43:36
"only one side regularly engages in explicitly racist speech and policy proposals, and it isn't the right. "

Rugian ignores gerrymandering, current politicians who are Republicans with their racist rhetoric in speeches. Republicans who claim that if expanded Medicare means those people are not closer with God and should be dismissed. Ignores the white supremacists and racists who are opened about it running for office and some winning. Ignoring the that Republican political committee sharing inaccurate statistics and propaganda to push forward a narrative. Ignores that some Republicans are distancing themselves from it acknowledging that such things are taking place as they realized the populist movement and momentum that is taking place.

Seriously Rugian. Way to attempt to present yourself as a "centrist" while at the same time completely do the opposite. Skills, yo.
Paramount
Member
Mon Nov 05 08:56:45
"Bottom line, it is not reasonable to blame Trump for Jew hatred." - Rugian


When u see his people doing the nazi salute at his meetings I'm not sure if it is not reasonable.

http://gfx...f-4c67-8fea-d1d894fdee89?w=640

They are like a sect. People are singing, doing the nazi salute, taking selfies ... etc. They are so into it that they don't even know what they are doing. The only one who is wondering what the hell is going on is that old asian lady. She can see it that it all is madness, so she's just standing there and not taking part in any of it.

That old asian woman is like this man: http://goo.gl/images/Akgxys
Dukhat
Member
Mon Nov 05 12:48:50
The right never takes responsibility for their actions. It's unified by narcissism and tribalism and nothing else.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Nov 05 13:02:58
"
Angus King is a Fake Independent who votes with Schumer 88% of the time. Angus wants to repopulate Maine with Syrian and Somalian refugees. Support @SenatorBrakey who fights for secure borders and Better Jobs for Maine. #me #maine
"
~Don Trump Jr

88% is false (is 83... yet 88 is the # for 'heil hitler')

so get out there, white people, before you are repopulated!

i also learned that fine people chant of 'jews will not replace us' isn't a reference to jews replacing those fine white people, it's the plot of jews to replace white people w/ brown people... those crafty jews!

Trump has been great for educating us on white nationalism
Delude
Member
Mon Nov 05 13:12:27
Good people on both sides.
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share