patrick.net

Was it "racist" speech? Not by my measure.
Careless, beyond tact, and offensive to many? Yes.

I love that the GOP has embraced a myth of "folksy and plain spoken" means "honest" as well as the continued attack on intellectualism and science as being "elitist". Paths like that continue to lead them to self destruction. I just hope they can be consumed in the craziness here that they have bread, and be re-born to help the nation with real problems again.

Pretty sad.

Remember the definition of insanity? Trump is the shake-up that this country needs...not another Bush or Clinton.

Rew says

Pretty sad.

Yes, I share your view. But is it elitist to dismiss other views to which many apparently adhere? If this is happening in both camps, then how can communication occur, and common ground be found? Knee-jerk and ignorant liberal Americans do seem to believe Trumps remarks were racist, but have no depth of analysis behind that, and in my experience, become extremely defensive when challenged. You will find the same behavior on the part of conservatives. I believe ignorance is the problem. But also vested interests, to be sure, on both sides.

There's nothing wrong with going frontal on Trump or any other candidate and debating them hard politically, but that's not what's happening. These days you debate somebody by calling them racist and/or stupid on Twitter, Facebook or Tumblr (or Patnet) and then claiming the moral and intellectual high ground. Well done.

DieBankOfAmericaPhukkingDie says

ndians are useful if you can get control of the backend operations of their casinos and loot them.

Look into that.

Blurtman says

Knee-jerk and ignorant liberal Americans do seem to believe Trumps remarks were racist

I don't believe Trump's remarks make him unfit for office, or an arrant racist, but tarring immigrants (Latino, Hispanic, Chicano - whatever is the least offensive and most accurate term) as racist is an old-school racist remark. I doubt Trump is a racist, but he might have poor judgment or be a hypocrite, since he has no problem using these rapists on his construction projects.

If you believe that speaking for honoraria is a black mark on someone's character, however, I don't see how you can ignore Trump's foot-in-mouth idiocy.

Blurtman says

But is it elitist to dismiss other views

The term "elitist" is dog-whistle terminology for tickling the resentments of voters with inferiority complexes.

Avoiding the fact or appearance of "elitism" is political correctness. This country has prospered because smart people go farther than dumb ones.

HydroCabron says

This country has prospered because smart people go farther than dumb ones.

By that token DT must be very smart as he has prospered more than 99% of his fellow Americans.

mell says

by calling them racist and/or stupid on Twitter, Facebook or Tumblr (or Patnet) and then claiming the moral and intellectual high ground.

I agree, but I find it weird that accusing them of having said they created the internet, or given speeches for money, is not on your list. Is that because that's what Republicans do? Do you really believe that fixating on speaking fees is a "going frontal on ... [a] candidate and debating them hard politically"?

mell says

HydroCabron says

This country has prospered because smart people go farther than dumb ones.

By that token DT must be very smart as he has prospered more than 99% of his fellow Americans.

As are Hillary, John Edwards, Warren Buffett, and Hollywood liberals.

HydroCabron says

mell says

by calling them racist and/or stupid on Twitter, Facebook or Tumblr (or Patnet) and then claiming the moral and intellectual high ground.

I agree, but I find it weird that accusing them of having said they created the internet, or given speeches for money, is not on your list. Is that because that's what Republicans do? Do you really believe that fixating on speaking fees is a "going frontal on ... [a] candidate and debating them hard politically"?

I think both parties are broken, but I am more concerned about the direction the Democrats are going and the infiltration of the progressive left. These days you are a PR machine and without your set of advisors and writers that define who you are you cannot get far anywhere, not just politically. The people sense that and that's why they respond so in favor of candidates who break those rules, but a lot are also afraid of losing it all by not toeing the ruling social media party line. There are business owners now who get death threats because they have/fly the confederate flag at their store while black entrepreneurs seize in on the opportunity to sell those flags as they become rare. This society is broken and it accelerated so much during the last administrations. Pluralism has ceased to exist. People are looking for somebody who doesn't give a shit without being protected by the government machine and while they are being slaughtered by the media.

Mexican is not a race, it's a nationality.

mell says

I am more concerned about the direction the Democrats are going and the infiltration of the progressive left. These days you are a PR machine and without your set of advisors and writers that define who you are you cannot get far anywhere, not just politically

I have no quarrel with the definition of the Democratic Party as a PR machine.

I think you're being unfair to describe them as worse than the Republicans. Do you know about the career of Frank Luntz? Are you aware of the near-religious devotion of the GOP to focus groups? You know that the political wing (out of Rove's office) effectively ran the Bush White House for 8 years, right?

On Friday, the New York Times ran an article on Karl Rove's focus-group analysis of the best attacks on Hillary: the primary areas of interest were her speaking fees (works on Blurtman for sure) and the money she made writing a book. I am not kidding.

The Democrats are surely as bad, but how can they possibly be worse than this?

HydroCabron says

On Friday, the New York Times ran an article on Karl Rove's focus-group analysis of the best attacks on Hillary: the primary areas of interest were her speaking fees

Well I think her fees are crazy but I agree on Rove, he is a pretty good strategist which I have little sympathy for though. That's why I like candidates such as Rand Paul or Donald Trump who are surely on Rove's enemy list as well as they are not part of the mainstream Republican culture.

HydroCabron says

The Democrats are surely as bad, but how can they possibly be worse than this?

It all comes down to how you are (or feel) personally affected by the consequences. With influence of the hard right-wing religious groups waning more and more I don't think a Republican president would be worse, from my libertarian viewpoint. I'd rather take a religious society without hate crime/speech, thought crime and tailored anti-discrimination/affirmative action laws plus low (income) taxes than a non-religious one that goes towards cultural marxism and high taxation on my skills. But everybody has to figure this out for themselves.

Blurtman says

Is Trump a racist?

I would say yes. A little more so than the typical "white" person (myself included) that denies their own racism. It's too easy to think you don't see race, when you are a member of the group that is in the majority and on top.

This essay (big on facebook right now) reflects an interesting frame of reference, for those capable of checking it out.

https://thsppl.com/i-racist-538512462265

mell says

It all comes down to how you are (or feel) personally affected by the consequences.

Why should I vote solely on what's personally best for me? I don't understand this philosophy.

mell says

With influence of the hard right-wing religious groups waning more and more I don't think a Republican president would be worse, from my libertarian viewpoint.

They are indeed waning, but if you look at how abortion clinics are being treated in Mississippi (one left) and Texas (probably down to a dozen by the end of the year), they are still a pretty potent force.

I am not surprised that a libertarian would feel better voting Republican these days - economic issues are growing more important in the Republican Party than nutty young-earth anti-science lunacy - but ALL libertarians have always voted Republican for as long as I can recall, even when the religious right ran the party.

mell says

that goes towards cultural marxism and high taxation on my skills

The liberal anti-free-speech stuff is truly disgusting. I hope it will not get worse, and I hope it will provoke some reflection among my right-wing friends as to how awful it was for liberals when the right wing was dictating what one could say and not say. And, indeed, what you still can't say - there is plenty of political correctness on both sides.

Imagine if a presidential candidate discussed his atheism. Would you rate his chances of election at 0.00o% or 0.0000%?

During the "all liberals are Friends of Saddam" era, it was understood that you should shut up and like the war.

I don't believe Marx had much to say about cultural issues. He was an economic bloviator.

mell says

high taxation on my skills.

I doubt that even under the most insane social-program lover president that your top marginal rate would go above 36%, and that of the ultra-rich above 41%. If that happens, I will personally contribute $2000 to the Republican nominee, vote Republican in all state and local elections, and
walk precincts to get out the vote in general elections.

Blurtman says

Is Trump a racist?

No

" I Racist"

https://thsppl.com/i-racist-538512462265

Excerpt:

What they are affected by are attacks on their own character. To my aunt, the suggestion that “people in The North are racist” is an attack on her as a racist. She is unable to differentiate her participation within a racist system (upwardly mobile, not racially profiled, able to move to White suburbs, etc.) from an accusation that she, individually, is a racist. Without being able to make that differentiation, White people in general decide to vigorously defend their own personal non-racism, or point out that it doesn’t exist because they don’t see it.

The result of this is an incessantly repeating argument where a Black person says “Racism still exists. It is real,” and a white person argues “You’re wrong, I’m not racist at all. I don’t even see any racism.” My aunt’s immediate response is not “that is wrong, we should do better.” No, her response is self-protection: “That’s not my fault, I didn’t do anything. You are wrong.”

Racism is not slavery. As President Obama said, it’s not avoiding the use of the word Nigger. Racism is not white water fountains and the back of the bus. Martin Luther King did not end racism. Racism is a cop severing the spine of an innocent man. It is a 12 year old child being shot for playing with a toy gun in a state where it is legal to openly carry firearms.

But racism is even more subtle than that. It’s more nuanced. Racism is the fact that “White” means “normal” and that anything else is different. Racism is our acceptance of an all white Lord of the Rings cast because of “historical accuracy,” ignoring the fact that this is a world with an entirely fictionalized history.

marcus says

I would say yes.

You may be missing the point. The issue is not whether there is or is not racism. Of course there is. All races are racist. But the issue is whether negative remarks about Mexicans is racism. If I could interpret what I would argue is faulty information processing, it would go something like this:

a. Donald Trump made derogatory remarks about Mexicans. (True)
b. Mexicans are Hispanics. (True for the sake of argument)
c.. Hispanics are a race. (False).
d. Donald Trump is a racist. (Inconclusive)

And then:
1.) I hate Donald Trump
2.) I love Donald Trump
which are two sides of the same coin, opinions formed by the misinformed.

komputodo says

I've never heard a mexican call another person racist in mexico.

Everyone knows that many lighter skinned (more European) Mexicans are known to feel superior to darker skinned Mexicans.

marcus says

Everyone knows that many lighter skinned (more European) Mexicans are known to feel superior to darker skinned Mexicans.

Yes, and "Indian" is a slur, reflecting the shame of conquest and subjugation by the original Hispanics, the Spaniards. See Richard Rodriguez "Brown" for more.

I personally do not want to play a let's pretend game where we pretend there is a made up group of white people, Asians, African Americans, Indians, Indian-white people mixes that is interchangeably referred to as Hispanic or Latino. Frankly I wouldn't really care, expect affirmative action gives members of this made up group special privileges, and members of this group act essentially as a union seeking special treatment.

Look at the outrage Elizabeth Warren created when she claimed to be an Indian. To qualify for affirmative action programs as an Indian, you have to prove you are a member of a tribal register. Had she claimed to be an Hispanic, no proof at all would have been required. The whole system is a fraud which folks like SCJ Sotomayor use to advance their careers.

Blurtman says

But the issue is whether negative remarks about Mexicans is racism. If I could interpret what I would argue is faulty information processing, it would go something like this:

a. Donald Trump made derogatory remarks about Mexicans. (True)

b. Mexicans are Hispanics. (True for the sake of argument)

c.. Hispanics are a race. (False).

d. Donald Trump is a racist. (Inconclusive)

Really ? You think there is a single person who went from. your a, to b, to , c, to d ?

I find it amusing that your focus goes to the technicality of whether Mexicans are a race. Okay, so they aren't technically a race. That's true.

So therefore making derogatory remarks about Mexicans is not racist. Seriously, that' s the best you can do ?

Blurtman says

You may be missing the point.

No trust me, I get your point. When people talk about racism against Mexicans, you have a choice. You can accept the use of the word (racist) as it often is used by millions as applicable to prejudice against Mexicans, or you can get hung up on trivial semantics giving yourself an easy out from even considering the question.

Your issue is that you are actually too hung up on race, to even understand what racism is. And that is kind of amusing.

marcus says

I find it amusing that your focus goes to the technicality of whether Mexicans are a race. Okay, so they aren't technically a race. That's true.

-Yes, we both agree. Please tell the outraged liberals.

So therefore making derogatory remarks about Mexicans is not racist. Seriously, that' s the best you can do ?

-The best I can do about what?

Blurtman says

You may be missing the point.

No trust me, I get your point. When people talk about racism against Mexicans, you have a choice. You can accept the use of the word as it often is used by millions as applicable to prejudice against Mxicans, or you can get hung up on trivial semantics giving yourself an easy out from even considering the question.

Your issue is that you are actually too hung up on race, to even understand what racism is. And that is kind of amusing.

-Assuming it is the case that millions are in error, words matter. Communication cannot exist, otherwise. And along those lines, prejudice and racism are not synonymous. It is easy to understand how "millions" can be confused, considering the bogus Hispanic designation, and the constant misuse of Latino by the media, pols, and special interest groups.

Blurtman says

And along those lines, prejudice and racism are not synonymous. It is easy to understand how "millions" can be confused, considering the bogus Hispanic designation, and the constant misuse of Latino by the media, pols, and special interest groups.

Why don't you go have a good cry about it?

If he wont or can't back up his assertion with the reality of it then he probably is.

He is right in a larger sense, but with much clarity.

First he should establish he wasn't talking about law abiding Mexican nationals that came over here lawfully, nor was he talking about all illegal immigrants that have came over here for the American dream and not engage in criminal enterpise. Then he could explain how our borders are already impenatrable for your average poor Mexican. The only places there isn't a wall is hundreds of miles in the desert. The only way your average Mexican can get accross the border in these remote locations is through a very organized network of violent cartels and criminals. These people are lured to the desert and often killed and the people who were supposed to get them to America often kills them and takes their money and belongings. My BIL who self deported to Peru in 2010. He and We knows he'll never come back to America through Mexico as an illegal Alien again. He would either end up dead or put in jail and returned in route, but mostly dead.

Donald can't tell it like it is, without being in conflit to his calls to build a wall in the first place. We've got one. It only keeps the good ones out.

CaptainShuddup says

First he should establish he wasn't talking about law abiding Mexican nationals that came over here lawfully, nor was he talking about all illegal immigrants that have came over here for the American dream and not engage in criminal enterpise.

He said that. He clarified he meant that the Mexican government makes the border porous when they see fit (or get bribed/corrupted) and don't want to deal with certain people which are the ones with the most problems. This is something that has been pointed out for decades by those who live close by or patrol the border.

CaptainShuddup says

The only way your average Mexican can get accross the border in these remote locations is through a very organized network of violent cartels and criminals. These people are lured to the desert and often killed and the people who were supposed to get them to America often kills them and takes their money and belongings. My BIL who self deported to Peru in 2010. He and We knows he'll never come back to America through Mexico as an illegal Alien again. He would either end up dead or put in jail and returned in route, but mostly dead.

Donald can't tell it like it is, without being in conflit to his calls to build a wall in the first place. We've got one. It only keeps the good ones out.

The entity that can and should solve these atrocious conditions best is the Mexican government and he wants to put than onus back on them which seems reasonable.

marcus says

" I Racist"

https://thsppl.com/i-racist-538512462265

"Black children learn this when their parents give them “The Talk.” When they are sat down at the age of 5 or so and told that their best friend’s father is not sick, and not in a bad mood– he just doesn’t want his son playing with you."

Unmitigated bullshit. I hope you don't teach your kids that this is some sort of daily reality in the US these days, I would take my kids out of your school immediately, no matter if they were black, white or mixed. Nobody deserves to grow up with an artificially fostered racial divide.

The people of Marin county (mostly elite white liberals/progressives advocating for social justice as long as it is not in their backyard) could give a fuck about black millionaires moving into their posh neighborhoods, but they do regularly protest low income housing on their turf because they don't want the poverty and crime that comes with it, and since those housing project hoods are usually the ones that are more racially diverse, Marin stays whitey whiteland. Classist? Sure. Elitist? Sure. Posh nimby snob scum? Perhaps. Racist? No.

We need to fix our borders, Trump is correct.

Millions of illegals significantly distorts the labor market. When there are millions of poor schmucks who will take any pay just to not go hungry that drops wages for the working class. It's no different then outsourcing on a larger scale. And the only way to fix it is Romney's self deportation, which means punishing employers with fines and heavy fees. And putting up a real border that fixes that issue.

Democrats don't want to fix that, they don't give a shit about working Americans getting fucked by this system. They like the idea of more illegals, because illegals have children and their children being poor predominantly vote for Democrats because Democrats always promote hand outs. That's how it is. And if this continues we as a nation will fall like every other socialist empire that simply has too few resources and too little pay. Not to mention there is a cultural impact, which I know liberals don't care about. Liberals don't love America, can't expect them to love it's culture.

FortWayne says

We need to fix our borders, Trump is correct.

Okay. But then he must secretly be supporting democrats. Because if this becomes an issue, there is a risk that the voters will learn the facts, that is that border security is way up under Obama, as is sending criminal illegal immigrants back. Over all numbers of people coming in in recent years is way down, in part due to tighter borders, probably in part due to a worse economy.

By making this an issue, is Trump just trying to make Obama look good ?

marcus says

Okay. But then he must secretly be supporting democrats. Because if this becomes an issue, there is a risk that the voters will learn the facts, that is that border security is way up under Obama, as is sending criminal illegal immigrants back. Over all numbers of people coming in in recent years is way down, in part due to tighter borders, probably in part due to a worse economy.

Better than what? After 10 various executive orders that basically stopped all deportations that's not really "better". Not to mention we are still getting killed, people are physically killed, at the border.

FortWayne says

Better than what?

Better than previous administrations. Bringing the subject up only serves to highlight how well (from a from a right wing perspective) Obama has done with this issue.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/02/u-s-deportations-of-immigrants-reach-record-high-in-2013/

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/07/us/more-deportations-follow-minor-crimes-data-shows.html

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/18/in-2013-59-of-deported-immigrants-convicted-of-a-crime/

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2013/jul/01/debbie-wasserman-schultz/more-border-security-and-patrols-under-obama-previ/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/29/the-2007-immigration-bill-set-border-security-targets-weve-hit-most-of-them/

Keep in mind the big increase in deportations under Obama coincide with a period in which incoming illegals were down a lot, because of the economy and because of tightened border security.

Marcus all of your sources are one sided, and biased, and tailored propaganda, they might as well be Democrat. While I clearly remember Obama executive orders making news when he prevented deportations.

FortWayne you're a moron that's incapable of grasping even the most simple facts. Pew research is nonpartisan and almost all of the links I gave you were giving very clear facts and data.

Republican friends say that democrats are hateful when they claim that republicans are just stupid. But it's from dealing with the likes of you. Only a dim witted moron can take simple clear facts and turn them into propaganda, just because they don't like them. IF you have other facts you wish to cite then go ahead, but this is just pathetic.

FortWayne says

your sources are one sided, and biased, and tailored propaganda

You mean like this ?

or this ?

What's it like to realize that your beliefs have no connection to reality ?

I wonder how many of these people who pass judgement on Trump have more than a 3rd grade education? Of course, Trump also needs to take note of who is listening to him today as a candidate. Either case is a sad situation for Trump.

carrieon says

I wonder how many of these people who pass judgement on Trump have more than a 3rd grade education?

Good luck finding a well educated person that doesn't think Trump is a total moron.

Captainshuddup and FortWayne like him. That's a negative correlation between education level and supporting Trump. I have evidence that that negative correlation holds up even among republicans.

Nah. The illegal immigrants and the welfare epidemic are synonymous. Kick them out ad make the welfare freaks work those jobs-or is that racist/sexist/one percentish???? Trump needs to go farther and call out the feminazis and the unwillingness of the feminazis to take on the responsibility of being an equal. I think there are enough disaffected people in all spectrums of life in America who are willing to try something else out.

No Bushies and Clintons again.

it is a free country and one can say whatever they want-there is a reason it is called the first amendment. It is funny how the lefties are now the most opposed to free speech. They do not argue back, but just demand that anyone with a different opinion not voice his opinion. Just like their idol Obama who has used the Espionage acts more than all other presidents combined-some of whom were in much bigger wars. Kim Jong Un is the leftie hero-parrot only the official line and anything against that will be met with swift retribution. Free speech is for suckers!

lostand confused says

The illegal immigrants and the welfare epidemic are synonymous. Kick them out ad make the welfare freaks work those jobs-or is that racist/sexist/one percentish????

Most people on welfare have jobs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HydroCabron says

Most people on welfare have jobs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Stats?
if true, then perhaps one should look at their standard of living. Do they need cell phones, cars etc etc. If they decide to have kids despite their financial status, do we need to support them in the lifestyle they desire. Bare minimum is fine, but nothing more than that. if an illegal can survive without welfare, then so can an American. That will be their incentive to move up and if they are not getting welfare and have some hunger in their belly, then they won't stand for free trade and other such gibberish.

marcus says

Pew research is nonpartisan and almost all of the links I gave you were giving very clear facts and data.

Recently, though, Pew decided to turn the spotlight on the reliability of its own research. What it found was alarming: Fewer than one in 10 Americans contacted for a typical Pew survey bothers to respond. That’s down from a response rate of 36 percent just 15 years ago.

Their poll results are based on the 10% of americans that willingly waste their time answering phone surveys. The lonely and bored I imagine.