This morning...

[zahidf]

'Stop calling Trump voters racist'

 

[zahidf]

'Republicans dont hate gay people'

 

[Chawk]

29 minutes ago, zahidf said:

'Republicans dont hate gay people'

 

I'm not left/right/republican/democrat or whatever, but sensational headlines like that are a real problem. If you look at the bill it makes no reference to LGBT, or even sexuality. 

http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/85R/billtext/pdf/SB00242I.pdf#navpanes=0

OK, you could see orientation/gender potentially coming under 'records relating to the child ’s general physical, psychological, or emotional well-being;', but that's not what the headline you posted says. 

Misinformation like this just divides and boils up the hate even more, it's no better than what tabloids do.

Edited November 21, 2016 by Chawk

[SwedgeAntilles]

2 hours ago, Alex DeLarge said:

Help me out, I'm trying to find some evidence of this but can't.

Good shout.

[SwedgeAntilles]

15 minutes ago, Chawk said:

I'm not left/right/republican/democrat or whatever, but sensational headlines like that are a real problem. If you look at the bill it makes no reference to LGBT, or even sexuality. 

http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/85R/billtext/pdf/SB00242I.pdf#navpanes=0

OK, you could see orientation/gender potentially coming under 'records relating to the child ’s general physical, psychological, or emotional well-being;', but that's not what the headline you posted says. 

Misinformation like this just divides and boils up the hate even more, it's no better than what tabloids do.

I dont trust the source, that's the worst thing about these stories, we have to focus on something substantial 

[JacquelineS]

It is sad time when an essentially comedy and satire site has to point out a few what should be disconcerting things:

http://www.cracked.com/article_24445_8-huge-stories-nobody-paid-attention-to-in-2016.html?utm_content=inf_11_40_2&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=fijifrost&utm_campaign=WH&tse_id=INF_9a801280af8311e698611db1302aa2cb

[Alex DeLarge]

1 hour ago, SwedgeAntilles said:

Good shout.

Are you being sarcastic? Sorry if you're not I'm just really tired haha.

[DeanoL]

6 hours ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

It's quite funny to see how defensive people get when others make (what they think are) sweeping statements about the Left, yet for the previous 30 or so pages they're quite happy to brand everyone in the Right idiots, dumb, morons, racists, sexists, illogical, bigots and so on.

One of the reasons the Democrats lost is because they can't see that hypocrisy. 

 

Ironically, what you've done there is seen some people on the left do one thing, some other people on the left do another thing, and not realised that they're different people. 

[eFestivals]

8 hours ago, Alex DeLarge said:

Help me out, I'm trying to find some evidence of this but can't.

I refer you to just about all of zahidf's posts.

Or is my suggestion of you actually taking the trouble to engage your brain when you read these pages too fascist of me?

[waterfalls212434]

23 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Likewise,. all Muslim's in Britain need to line up and make clear in their own words to the British public that they're against 'Islamic terrorism'.

No?

Why does it apply to Trumpers, but not Muslims? Both have chosen to associate themselves with something 'bad'.

When your double standards are screaming so loudly at the Trumpers that you're an utter hypocrite, why might those Trumpers think you have the answers?

Why might those Trumpers decide that the better side is the one with the hypocrite as cheerleader?

Why might those Trumpers desert Trump to stand side by side with hypocrites?

I missed this earlier,.......ummm Muslims `choose` to be associated with Islamic terrorism now do they? wow have I entered the twilight zone where Efests have turned into a Britain first forum? cant decide if that`s insulting or just incredibly ignorant!



 

[eFestivals]

13 minutes ago, waterfalls212434 said:

I missed this earlier,.......ummm Muslims `choose` to be associated with Islamic terrorism now do they? wow have I entered the twilight zone where Efests have turned into a Britain first forum? cant decide if that`s insulting or just incredibly ignorant!
 

Writing off all muslims as terrorists is wrong.

Writing off all Trump voters - tens of millions of people, 25% of Americans - as only racists is no less wrong.

What aren't you grasping?

And if Trump voters are damned forever as racists for voting in support of Trump, then it applies no less to the non-voters who didn't vote to stop fascism and therefore must accept it, which makes about 75% of Americans racists.

And if 75% of Americans are racists, that means there's no hope at all of anything better, so you might as well pack up and go home with your leftism. You're a lifetime loser.

Don't want to accept that? Then you have to accept some of the 'racists' into your side. Will you do that by pretending to yourself that they're not racists, or by facing the truth that they're not?

The same mindless meme has all tory voters as hateful of all disabled and unemployed. Is that 100% true?
The same mindless meme has all tory voters as hateful to minorities, because they're less taken with minority rights than other parties. Is that 100% true?
The same mindless meme has all tory voters as 100% in favour of nuclear weapons. Is that 100% true?
Etc, etc, etc.

There were two platforms. People had to vote for the one they felt was the better thing overall.

And for the mindless meme to work, that means it's better to bomb Muslims to fuck whereever they might live than it is for the USA to have a Muslim register.

A smart mind might wake up to the fact that a person's view towards Trump's racism is nuanced by the other things he said, just as it's nuanced by what Clinton represents. The dumb minds say they're just racists, there cannot be any other factors to it.

Edited November 21, 2016 by eFestivals

[The Nal]

12 hours ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

It's quite funny to see how defensive people get when others make (what they think are) sweeping statements about the Left, yet for the previous 30 or so pages they're quite happy to brand everyone in the Right idiots, dumb, morons, racists, sexists, illogical, bigots and so on.

One of the reasons the Democrats lost is because they can't see that hypocrisy. 

 

Can you imagine if Joe Biden went to the theater and the actors stopped the play and lectured him about his stance on gun control or healthcare. Would be so much "ooh typical strong arm right wing tactics" etc. 

Morons. 

[Untz]

My favourite hypocrisy of the left was when the killing of Jo Cox was used to portray all Brexit voters as extreme right wing terrorists mere days after the Orlando shooting where they were out in force defending Islam/Muslims.

What a time to be reading the Guardian's comment pages.

[Cornelius_Fudge]

10 hours ago, Alex DeLarge said:

Help me out, I'm trying to find some evidence of this but can't.

Oh come on, you can quite easily go through the previous pages and see a lot of this. zahdif, barmer are just two off the top of my head.

Lots of mudslinging and name calling and lumping everyone in as the same. Idiots, racists, sexists, blah blah blah.

Then someone says it about the Left and suddenly you're all morally high and mighty "Oh yeah if you think this is just what the Left is like on here".

Surely, you can see the hypocrisy?

It's very funny for those than can anyway

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, Untz said:

My favourite hypocrisy of the left...

I'm currently thinking about the merits of "hope not hate" and wondering whether 'the left' really means it.

It's not only Trump voters that can bring on depression.

[Cornelius_Fudge]

6 hours ago, DeanoL said:

Ironically, what you've done there is seen some people on the left do one thing, some other people on the left do another thing, and not realised that they're different people. 

Well you understand my point I'm making then.

Why can't these people shouting racist, sexist etc use your logic in your post to see that there's a difference between a man voting for Trump because of his work situation and not because he hates his neighbours skin colour.

[grumpyhack]

Many years ago when my daughters were about three and four we used to go down to the local playground and they would have a go on the seesaw.  The problem was that they were too short for their legs to reach the ground to push up and make it move.

So I stood on the seesaw in the middle and just shifted my weight a tiny bit from one side to the other to get it rocking.

The whole seesaw shifted and, at the ends, it moved from the extreme bottom to the extreme top.

That illustrated for me that in a two-party system a lot of people were probably around the middle and maybe moved just a degree or two to one side or the other.  The result was a huge swing.

You may be a centrist with just slight leanings to left or right but you then get lumped in with the final result which might appear to be a much bigger swing than actually represents your views.

So don't assume if someone agrees with a few points to the left or right that they are necessarily extremists.

[DeanoL]

1 hour ago, The Nal said:

Can you imagine if Joe Biden went to the theater and the actors stopped the play and lectured him about his stance on gun control or healthcare. Would be so much "ooh typical strong arm right wing tactics" etc. 

Morons. 

There's a huge difference between stopping the play to do it, and doing it at the end, after the curtain call.

[eFestivals]

31 minutes ago, grumpyhack said:

You may be a centrist with just slight leanings to left or right but you then get lumped in with the final result which might appear to be a much bigger swing than actually represents your views.

So don't assume if someone agrees with a few points to the left or right that they are necessarily extremists.

 

Nice analogy, grumpy.

I'm quite happy for those who voted Trump to be held responsible via their vote for any bad things Trump causes, but that's a different thing to damning each and every one of them as being just-and-only all of the bad things that anyone might wish to label Trumpism as.

If Trumpism is going to be as bad as some want to suggest, then it's without doubt that not every Trump voter will support that - unless the USA has always had tens of millions of hardcore racists? 

If that version of 'bad' Trumpism is what happens, the good people who voted Trump need to have another place to move to - which they don't have if each one is forever damned a racist.  Damning them all as only racists ensures the very thing which those 'damners' say they're against.

[eFestivals]

16 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

There's a huge difference between stopping the play to do it, and doing it at the end, after the curtain call.

I don't particularly disagree, tho I think Nal's point still stands - that if it was 'the right' heckling 'left' politicians who had gone on a private night out to the theatre 'the left' would not be saying how righteous it was for that to happen. They'd be condemning it as totally out of order.

Personally I don't have much of an issue about the heckling, but neither do I have an issue with Trump defending his man about it either. If heckling is wrong then Trump has to the right to defend his man, and if heckling is right Trump has the right to defend his man.

If free speech is the righteous thing, then free speech applies to those you disagree with just as much as it applies to yourself. that means you have to accept the right of others to act in defence of their beliefs just as you might act to defend your own.

If free speech is not the righteous thing, then anyone taking that line is more like how they think Trump is than Trump really is. 

[waterfalls212434]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Writing off all muslims as terrorists is wrong.

Writing off all Trump voters - tens of millions of people, 25% of Americans - as only racists is no less wrong.

 

I haven't called them `only racists`  so there goes your argument....they are a mix of racists and people who maybe arent bigoted themselves but totally ignorant to the damage they are doing in supporting those who are......now don`t dodge the point of my question, please explain how Muslims `choose` to be associated with Islamic terrorists?  those were your words.

Edited November 21, 2016 by waterfalls212434

[Alex DeLarge]

3 hours ago, eFestivals said:

I refer you to just about all of zahidf's posts.

Or is my suggestion of you actually taking the trouble to engage your brain when you read these pages too fascist of me?

Thanks for the personal insults again, really helps your point of view.

But yeah, it was pretty funny that zahdif's post came immediately after mine.

[eFestivals]

8 minutes ago, waterfalls212434 said:

I haven't called them `only racists`  so there goes your argument....they are a mix of racists and people who maybe arent bigoted themselves but totally ignorant to the damage they are doing in supporting those who are......

You might not have, others in this thread certainly have.

And you're not slow to write them off yourself, deeming them "totally ignorant to the damage they are doing", and via your words also making clear that there cannot be any other issue of more importance in that US election. 

It's as shallow as it's possible to be.

 

Quote

now don`t dodge the point of my question, please explain how Muslims `choose` to be associated with Islamic terrorists?  those were your words.

By having chosen their religion with it's many abhorent tenets ... or do humans only have free will over how they vote?

Why can religionists be absolved of the abhorent they choose to associate with, but Trumpers cannot?

Why are Muslim's nuanced, but Trumpers can never be?

 

Edited November 21, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, Alex DeLarge said:

Thanks for the personal insults again, really helps your point of view.

But yeah, it was pretty funny that zahdif's post came immediately after mine.

You asked to be presented with something you claimed not to have seen - and yet those posts are peppered thru-out this thread.

It's all here for you to read, so the smart thing to do is to read it. If you've not been reading it then I'm entitled to call out your failing in reading. FFS. :lol:

[Alex DeLarge]

I think there's a difference between 'disagreeing with someone's political views and lecturing about them' and 'asking the President elect of the country to stand up for all Americans after he'd said he'll electrocute gay children'.