• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump’s history of breaking decorum with remarks on race, ethnicity

Mine has been sorely tested.



If the backlash isn't greater than the usual mid-term for a first-term president, I may not have much of any hope left. If DP is any measure, we are now in a time - at least in America - when to a large subset of the population, denial of objective reality is a perfectly acceptable means of addressing anything one does not wish to hear. I'm not sure what to call it, but "anti-information" is worse than ignorance an apathy. A democracy simply cannot function like this in the long run.

I guess I'll just have to wait and see....








Say, Canada is still taking American ex-pats, yes?



Yes, we even have offices set up to handle information requests from the US which includes Muslims immigrants etc. who believe they are seeing the writing on the wall. Bring mittens and money.

RE Bold: Back when it was first invented they called what's happening in the US right now "propaganda". If you read 1984 you will see the current United States represented almost perfectly. Only "Big Brother" is replaced by Trump - with the same appeal, that the country is in peril and only he can fix it.
The same theme originated in the European languages through "The Prince" by Machiavelli who's protagonist theorized that by keeping the people in, perpetual fear allows him to do anything he wants, from stealing people's wives, to murder and on.

"MAGA" is the epitome of the ism, as it assumes the country is on its way to hell, and that only a tough-talking gunslinger can get the job done. What is also mirrored is the propensity to keep the people distracted by outrageous statements and actions, what was referred to as "keeping the pot stirring". In "The Prince" the distractions are a series of petty wars, or spats between the elite of Italy

Finally, I wouldn't consider DP any kind of bell weather, the internet tends to attract the extremes, and DP is tame considering what's happening at other sites. And, from what I see many of the right wingers who were reasoned thinkers have disappeared from most sites, being replaced by more what appear to be sock puppets regurgitating the White House line.
 
I was also talking about liberalism in general.

1929-1932 saw conservativism and laissez faire economics get undermined by the reality of the depression



Which is where the greatest "progressive" gains were made, social security, I believe unemployment, and unions' right to strike was upheld and strengthened.
 
Yes, we even have offices set up to handle information requests from the US which includes Muslims immigrants etc. who believe they are seeing the writing on the wall. Bring mittens and money.

RE Bold: Back when it was first invented they called what's happening in the US right now "propaganda". If you read 1984 you will see the current United States represented almost perfectly. Only "Big Brother" is replaced by Trump - with the same appeal, that the country is in peril and only he can fix it.
The same theme originated in the European languages through "The Prince" by Machiavelli who's protagonist theorized that by keeping the people in, perpetual fear allows him to do anything he wants, from stealing people's wives, to murder and on.

"MAGA" is the epitome of the ism, as it assumes the country is on its way to hell, and that only a tough-talking gunslinger can get the job done. What is also mirrored is the propensity to keep the people distracted by outrageous statements and actions, what was referred to as "keeping the pot stirring". In "The Prince" the distractions are a series of petty wars, or spats between the elite of Italy

Finally, I wouldn't consider DP any kind of bell weather, the internet tends to attract the extremes, and DP is tame considering what's happening at other sites. And, from what I see many of the right wingers who were reasoned thinkers have disappeared from most sites, being replaced by more what appear to be sock puppets regurgitating the White House line.

I took 1984 a little differently, or at least, different in the sense that it was farther on down the line in progression of propaganda.

We don't quite seem to have double-think (though we have stepped on the language-manipulation treadmill). What I call "anti-information" is the sense of general freedom to just plain ignore what one doesn't wish to hear. It may be suggested by those in government who wish to benefit (Trump, for now), but isn't compulsory. It's very much voluntary. But it's not yet to the degree that one must say it and act as one must believe it. We're at more of a crossroads, or fork in the road.



Though there are other trends that worry me. Even under Obama, the expansion of NSA domestic spying. So that's government. But what about the private sector?

Systems like Amazon's Alexa.Video-game stations that can monitor you (Xbox One). Everything that goes into tracking users on the internet, tracking adds, email services scanning emails, etc^etc. They flew 100 mini-drones within a warehouse at a recent electronics tech show. Grain-sized tracking devices for pets or....guess who. Increasingly mechanized/automated military machinery.

Acting in seeming profit-movitve, corporations are putting into place and consumers are lapping up the machinery for a true police state fashionned in 1984's image. And with things like our NSA, our government has already proven that it is willing to demand the ability to deeply intrude on our private lives and then go way beyond the permission granted. That, even under the alleged progressive.

So what happens when all communications are traceable? When cameras are on every street corner (London)? When drones become the size of flies, then smaller? We'd need just one bad man with a military backing, and it's done. And in 5-15 years, the technology will be in place.



I hope this proves to be paranoia.

I've always been a big fan of sci-fi, and I could swear we're just a few hops from one of Philip K. Dick's dystopias.
 
Last edited:
To a point, but not to the point to disqualify anonymous sources when gathered, cultivated, and verified diligently.

We'd never know about Flynn, the Russian Trump Towers meeting, or a plethora of other events without those anonymous sources. The administration only gave-it-up when they got outed.


The problem is -- anonymous sources are rarely truly identified, like the source for the writer of Rolling Stones who offered up a frat rape story. Reporters don't employ the same level of vetting their sources as reporters who use sources that go on the record.

It's always been an issue.
 
Alright, Reverend.

But the vast majority of what we know about the Trump Campaign problems, has been through anonymous sources or broken through anonymous sources. Without them, we'd have precious little understanding of the events surrounding the Trump Campaign and Administration.

Or Watergate, for that matter.
 
Wonder how many of you who are complaining about not believing anonymous sources, are also birthers?

Just wondering if it's not OK to believe sources who very often turn out to be true, but it is OK to believe a known liar - someone who has lied 2,000 times since he has been in office?

Just wondering where the line is drawn.
 
Unlike some, I'll make a concession: yes, I did read the title and mistook it for one of the many other threads I'm in at the moment. I did indeed mistake it for a "****hole" thread.

I appreciate that....Takes a little integrity to admit when one is mistaken.

But are you willing to make a concession yourself?

Hmmm...Don't know, it's never good when we let our opposition frame what it is that we should be conceding...

This reported comment is exactly in line with the "****hole" comment and a ton of other comments he's made.

Ok, first...The "**** hole" comment is below what I think a President should be saying, and I am not a fan of that...But, I am also not a fan of people hearing that in a private meeting, and break their necks to get a line to the press to get it out there to defame the President...Now, anyone can make **** up, and it is a fact that some of these supposed news outlets have been caught "reporting" things on the President that have had to be retracted later due to their zeal to put out damaging gossip about Trump...

It's in line with the "grab them by the *****" comments, by his nearly deliberate ingnorance regarding ethnicity, by his history of pushing places like his golf clubs to only hire "hot" women, etc etc etc. He's a lout and this is a loutish comment.

Again, "in line" doesn't make the story true, or Breaking news.

This is pretty much "heroin addict buys heroin, news at 11" territory.

We get it, you can't stand the man....

And here's the thing: not everyone's memory is as short as Trump supporters wish it were. If this were some uncharacteristic remark, I'd doubt it. I don't doubt it because it's perfectly in line with all sorts of things he's even recorded saying. Then, there's the kicker; before 2016, not one single person on the right screaming "fake news" on this site and elsewhere was worried about unnamed sources.

You have a minor point on hypocrisy, and in many threads before I have said myself that hypocrisy is the 'mothers milk' of politics, I get that...But the coverage on Trump from nearly all of the news media has been documented at 97% negative....That is outrageous...I don't think any other President has had to endure that sort of onslaught....Yet, he is getting things done. Not that anyone would know it given the dishonesty of our "journalists"....

Tails I win, heads you lose.

Just how liberals love to frame things.

I repeat: Do you really understand how pathetically transparent it is when someone calls everything they don't want to hear "fake news"? I mean, fine. I get it. There's a subset of Trump supporters who are never going to admit anything is wrong, who will tell any lie to defend him no matter how deranged it is.

And my answer remains...
 
OK. I have been a news editor, producer and news host (with a perfect face for radio). Let's say I am EIC (Editor in chief) election night and my on air crew are clearly saddened by the results.

I have two options: Suspension or dismissal.

A news gatherer/journalist shall NEVER insert himself in any way into the subject material, shall never show preference, give preference nor ignore any aspect because of their own leanings, attitudes, or mood. There are no exceptions.

I was given a strong warning the day after Nixon resigned. It was obvious in my voice I was downright gleeful.

Having said that, I do not buy this "fifth column business. I have never known competing news outlets to even speak to one another and I have never seen reporters exchange information. Hell, we didn't even drink together unless it was at the "what you see, hear here, stays here" Press club.

What Trumps people are reacting to is the overwhelming negative coverage....caused by Trump's actions and words. FFS he's now being condemned world wide and in his own party for calling other countries "**** holes." The MSM doesn't make this **** up. If there does seem to be a lot of energy behind it, I suspect it's in horror and disgust at what he's saying and doing. It's almost daily that some thunder from the White House stuns everyone.

In the end it's not the media who's told several thousand lies. If reporters and the electorate do not believe him who's fault is that?
Oh, I can definitely see the 5th column reference, though more-so in metaphorical terms.

There's a lot of anti-Trump government employees that are leaking to the media. Now whether they are described as "anti-Trump", or as "Patriotic Americans", depends on one's POV. Is this leaking/reporting an organized political endeavor? Likely not. But it is happening, and I believe the term 5th Column describes the way Reverend HellHound sees it. I don't see it as far as he does, but I do think it might accurately describe what he believes he sees. And I can see some of the rationale for those perceptions, while I don't fully agree with them.
 
The problem is -- anonymous sources are rarely truly identified, like the source for the writer of Rolling Stones who offered up a frat rape story. Reporters don't employ the same level of vetting their sources as reporters who use sources that go on the record.

It's always been an issue.
It's an issue, but it's not a "throw the baby out with the bathwater" issue. It comes with the territory. Each case is unique, and remember an anonymous source already ended one Presidency.
 
It's an issue, but it's not a "throw the baby out with the bathwater" issue. It comes with the territory. Each case is unique, and remember an anonymous source already ended one Presidency.

My sense is that sources being anonymous is less of a problem, than just using one source only. I seem to remember that journalists not long ago would only publish something that had been verified by a second source at least. With the rush of 23/7 news, there often is a rush to be first with a story.
 
Yes, Trump has a race problem.



https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-s-history-breaking-decorum-remarks-race-ethnicity-n837181

First few pages of thread: "Unconfirmed!" "Unnamed, anonymous officials!"

Later in the thread: "So? She's Korean, isn't she?"

Do you have a link to Trump's last 50 years of his remarks on race/ethnicity, before he became President?
You know, the time he was in the public lime-light, hobnobbing with rich and famous of all colors and religions of all countries in the world.
You know, the link that explains to us the supposedly drastic change of Trump living the last 2 years differently to his previous 50 years regarding race/ethnicity

:lamo
 
We already know who Trump is.

The overarching question is 'who are we?'

I strongly suspect that question will be answered in 2018/2020.

With any luck we shall, but our politics are all sorts of screwed up. Trump is an absolute embarrassment, but I also think a product of the Republocrat control that has stagnated our Republic. We are so starved for some alternative that we elected a crazy charlatan, some megalomaniac blowhard.

Well we were fudged no matter what in that election. Clinton v. Trump? How about a redo with different candidates.
 
Oh, I can definitely see the 5th column reference, though more-so in metaphorical terms.

There's a lot of anti-Trump government employees that are leaking to the media. Now whether they are described as "anti-Trump", or as "Patriotic Americans", depends on one's POV. Is this leaking/reporting an organized political endeavor? Likely not. But it is happening, and I believe the term 5th Column describes the way Reverend HellHound sees it. I don't see it as far as he does, but I do think it might accurately describe what he believes he sees. And I can see some of the rationale for those perceptions, while I don't fully agree with them.



Government employees have been leaking material to the press since writing was invented. I made a career out of brown envelopes slipped under my office door and something of a study out of what motivates people. You would be surprised to know that more often than not it is a result of a sense of duty as opposed to partisan politics. The second place motive is lost love, or rather kilted or cheated on lovers.

I scooped the government of Saskatchewan on the announcement of a general election through a secretary at a rural printing shop who got a look at the advanced ad material and called me. I had no idea who she was, she knew my name from the radio. It seems she was cheated on by her lover, an aide to a government member of the legislature. Scorched earth when you anger a woman!

It was my experience covering politics over nearly three decades was that most information that came out of the opposing side was usually old or bull****.
 
Back
Top Bottom