| JWeinCom said:
How about instead of just insulting me and repeating trite things like "blah blah blah liberal blah blah blah media" you actually explain to me what I've said that is taken out of context and inaccurate. I'll be happy to discuss anything and admit it if I'm wrong. But I'm not exactly holding my breath here. It seems a lot of people want to defend Drumpf without actually addressing anything he says. And no more ad hominen attacks please. |
I recently went through all those quotes and accusations in a different thread, but I'll give you a brief version:
"YOU have the obligation to TAKE IT FUCKING SERIOUSLY WHEN A CANDIDATE SAYS HE WOULD FORCE THE ARMED SERVICE TO INTENTIONALLY MURDER CIVILIANS"
Watch the debate where Trump made his statement. He said "They won't refuse" in a clearly facetious manner to further his tough guy-image. Then the media took the bait.
"YOU have the obligation to TAKE IT FUCKING SERIOUSLY WHEN A CANDIDATE SAYS WE SHOULD CONSIDER A DATABASE FOR MEMBERS OF A CERTAIN RELIGION."
Fact of the matter is that followers of a certain religion do commit more terrorist attacks. Hundreds, if not thousands of civilian lives are at stake. A database of this sort may not be the best way to combat terrorism, but to completely rule out the idea at this point while more terrorist attacks keep popping up regularly would be foolish.
"YOU have an obligation to TAKE IT FUCKING SERIOUSLY WHEN A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE DOESN'T KNOW A GOD DAMN THING ABOUT FOREIGN AFFAIRS."
Trump opposed entering Iraq and accurately predicted that getting rid of Saddam would destabilize the Middle East. His judgement on this issue alone would have saved many lives and prevented the rise of ISIS.
"YOU have an obligation to TAKE IT FUCKING SERIOUSLY WHEN A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE SAYS THAT MOST MEMBERS OF A PARTICULAR RACE ARE RAPISTS AND DRUG DEALERS."
This is true, and Trump never said anything of the sort.
"YOU have and obligation to TAKE IT SERIOUSLY WHEN A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDAT INCITES RACIAL HATRED BY TWEETING IMAGES THAT SAY 81% OF WHITE HOMOCIDE VICTIMS ARE KILLED BY BLACK PEOPLE."
Re-tweeting images of this sort without fact-checking first is indefensible. If one of his workers did that using his twitter, I hope that he was fired. If he did it himself, which I highly doubt, then I would be greatly concerned.
"YOU have the obligation to TAKE IT FUCKING SERIOUSLY WHEN SOMEONE WILL NOT DENOUNCE THE FORMER GRAND WIZARD OF THE KLU KLUX KLAN AND PRETENDS HE DOESN'T KNOW WHO HE IS DESPITE HAVING SPOKEN ABOUT HIM IN PAST INTERVIEWS"
Listen to how Trump expressed himself in that interview. He sensed a trap, which is why he refused to give a straight answer without "seeing the full list".
After his blunder, he disavowed David Duke time and time again before various reporters and news outlets. If getting the ever-essential KKK supporter vote is on Trump's list, he is doing a very poor job.
"It seems a lot of people want to defend Drumpf without actually addressing anything he says. And no more ad hominen attacks please."
Hilarious.
