5 ms·

It would be much appreciated if you could leave the political hyperbole somewhere else. You can make a point without stooping to tenuous, politically motivated

It would be much appreciated if you could leave the political hyperbole somewhere else. You can make a point without stooping to tenuous, politically motivated, and controversial accusations.

dredmorbius 9y ago
Those are in fact the most relevant elements of this question. They are elements which, as in the case of the Netherlands, don't matter at all, until they mean everything.
- mythrwy 9y ago
  Accusing the current administration of openly supporting neo-nazi groups is political flamebait. You are certainly entitled to your opinion on how "serious" the situation is but I, (and probably others) would appreciate it if you kept the hyperbole and rhetoric minimized. Your original point stands fine without it, and in fact that accusation weakens your entire post and makes it appear little more than a simple troll.
  - dredmorbius 9y ago
    Sometimes the truth is flamebait. Doesn't make it any less true. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865686908/Sen-Mike-Lee-reacts-strongly-to-Trumps-remarks-on-Charlottesville.html http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865686908/Sen-Mike-Lee-re... http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/346348-hatch-my-brother-didnt-die-fighting-hitler-for-nazis-to-go-unchallenged-today http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/346348-hatch-my-brother-d...
    - mythrwy 9y ago
      Neither article of which suggests in any way what you posted. Your opinion, and your feelings are not the "truth". I understand you have strong feelings, but please, stop polluting this space.
    - nebabyte 9y ago
      > Sometimes the truth is flamebait "Sometimes the truth is X" is not a universally applicable maxim. If you really believe the above, you should probably look up what "flamebait" means.
    - wutbrodo 9y ago
      Hold on. That article says that Trump claimed there was "blame on both sides", followed by open repudiation of neo-Nazis and the KKK as "criminals and thugs". I'm not being intentionally obtuse: failure to condemn neo-Nazis and white supremacists is a pretty huge failing for a president (though no worse than what I expect of Donald Trump), and those who condemned his remarks were absolutely right. But words have meaning, and calling this "open support" is flat lying. He's unbelievably terrible at the job of president and human being: you don't need to lie in order to make the case that he is. Just because your bubble (and my own) consists entirely of people who are aware of how terrible he is doesn't mean everyone is, and lying for political reasons is exactly the kind of thing that makes big chunks of the country inhabit alternate realities where all news is fake and the notion of a fact disappears from political discourse. You should be ashamed of yourself.
      - throwawayknecht 9y ago
        Trump pardoned someone who bragged about his self-described "concentration camps" and policing practices targeting people of Latin American descent, then bragged about how he wasn't going to listen to judges who told him to stop doing it. (Among literally hundreds of other instances of corruption, cover-ups, civil rights violations, and humanitarian abuses.) I don't know how much more explicit you expect his support of white supremacists to be. (Honestly, I doubt you're engaging genuinely at all.)
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
        wutbrodo 9y ago
        > I don't know how much more explicit you expect his support of white supremacists to be. Dude, are you kidding me? You're looking at someone who said: “Racism is evil and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans,” and you can't think of a way for him to support them less? Are you really that obtuse, or are you just playing dumb? Here's a really simple, utterly obvious way he could have been closer to "open support" (other than uh, openly expressing support......): _not repudiating them_. I honestly can't believe I just sincerely explained a tautology to someone.

It would be much appreciated if you could leave the political hyperbole somewhere else. You can make a point without stooping to tenuous, politically motivated, and controversial accusations.

dredmorbius 9y ago

Those are in fact the most relevant elements of this question. They are elements which, as in the case of the Netherlands, don't matter at all, until they mean everything.

mythrwy 9y ago
Accusing the current administration of openly supporting neo-nazi groups is political flamebait. You are certainly entitled to your opinion on how "serious" the situation is but I, (and probably others) would appreciate it if you kept the hyperbole and rhetoric minimized. Your original point stands fine without it, and in fact that accusation weakens your entire post and makes it appear little more than a simple troll.
- dredmorbius 9y ago
  Sometimes the truth is flamebait. Doesn't make it any less true. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865686908/Sen-Mike-Lee-reacts-strongly-to-Trumps-remarks-on-Charlottesville.html http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865686908/Sen-Mike-Lee-re... http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/346348-hatch-my-brother-didnt-die-fighting-hitler-for-nazis-to-go-unchallenged-today http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/346348-hatch-my-brother-d...
  - mythrwy 9y ago
    Neither article of which suggests in any way what you posted. Your opinion, and your feelings are not the "truth". I understand you have strong feelings, but please, stop polluting this space.
  - nebabyte 9y ago
    > Sometimes the truth is flamebait "Sometimes the truth is X" is not a universally applicable maxim. If you really believe the above, you should probably look up what "flamebait" means.
  - wutbrodo 9y ago
    Hold on. That article says that Trump claimed there was "blame on both sides", followed by open repudiation of neo-Nazis and the KKK as "criminals and thugs". I'm not being intentionally obtuse: failure to condemn neo-Nazis and white supremacists is a pretty huge failing for a president (though no worse than what I expect of Donald Trump), and those who condemned his remarks were absolutely right. But words have meaning, and calling this "open support" is flat lying. He's unbelievably terrible at the job of president and human being: you don't need to lie in order to make the case that he is. Just because your bubble (and my own) consists entirely of people who are aware of how terrible he is doesn't mean everyone is, and lying for political reasons is exactly the kind of thing that makes big chunks of the country inhabit alternate realities where all news is fake and the notion of a fact disappears from political discourse. You should be ashamed of yourself.
    - throwawayknecht 9y ago
      Trump pardoned someone who bragged about his self-described "concentration camps" and policing practices targeting people of Latin American descent, then bragged about how he wasn't going to listen to judges who told him to stop doing it. (Among literally hundreds of other instances of corruption, cover-ups, civil rights violations, and humanitarian abuses.) I don't know how much more explicit you expect his support of white supremacists to be. (Honestly, I doubt you're engaging genuinely at all.)
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - wutbrodo 9y ago
        > I don't know how much more explicit you expect his support of white supremacists to be. Dude, are you kidding me? You're looking at someone who said: “Racism is evil and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans,” and you can't think of a way for him to support them less? Are you really that obtuse, or are you just playing dumb? Here's a really simple, utterly obvious way he could have been closer to "open support" (other than uh, openly expressing support......): _not repudiating them_. I honestly can't believe I just sincerely explained a tautology to someone.