The WOKE Thread (Merged from WTF?)

[pawnman]

25 minutes ago, brawnie said:

The majority of Trump supporters support him just because his name reads “Trump (R),” so I don’t see how that’s any different.

...the president saying that the white supremacists at Charlottesville were “very fine people,”

 

Still pushing that hoax, eh?  Let's look at the whole quote:

 

Quote

“And you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides,” Trump declared on August 15, before arguing with reporters that he was not defending white nationalists. “And you had people — and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned too — but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists.” 

He explicitly excluded white supremacists and neo-Nazis from the "very fine people" comment.

[Prozac]

9 hours ago, dream big said:

Has your life worsened between 2016 and now? Apart from Covid, which is a global pandemic, how has Trump hurt your life? A lot of good changes between his election and now.  Lower taxes, ISIS eliminated, strong economy.  Not bad things at all.

Biden? He won’t make it more than a few months past the election.  Which means Kamala Harris as your POTUS.  A radical California politician who stands against everything American.  Higher taxes, open borders, gun grabber...you name it.

Trump’s “dumpster fire” is much more palatable.  Questions? 

Apart from Covid? Really? Isn’t handling a crisis an important measure of presidential leadership? Maybe THE most important measure? I can’t think of one recent president that hasn’t had to handle a major crisis. A savvy president will use the opportunity to band Americans together and cement his support (think W after Sep 11). All Trump had to do was pretend to take this seriously and encourage all Americans to come together and beat the virus. He’d be a shoe in for re-election right now if he’d done that. But Trump’s biggest weakness and his biggest failure is that he only sees himself as President of his own supporters. Politics for him is a zero sum game that involves vanquishing your opponent into oblivion rather than acknowledging that the other side is here to stay and compromise is the only path to stability and prosperity in a democratic society. His “fuck blue America” attitude will be his downfall and unfortunately he’s infected the whole republican party with it. He’s transformed the entire GOP into a cynical, xenophobic, isolationist shell of its former self and all of America will be worse off for a generation due to the damage he’s done. He spent three years lining your wallet? Well I guess that’s good for you. Me? Well call me a naive idealist but I expect much more out of the leader of the free world. 

[Negatory]

1 hour ago, pawnman said:

Still pushing that hoax, eh?  Let's look at the whole quote:

 

He explicitly excluded white supremacists and neo-Nazis from the "very fine people" comment.

Just cause you want it to be a hoax doesn't make it a hoax. The "unite the right" movement, protesting the removal of Gen Lee's statues, was the entire impetus to the Charlottesville gatherings and conflicts.  They organized a march down Charlottesville's streets holding torches and chanting "blood and soil," the English translation of a Nazi slogan. In the end, one of the neo-nazi white supremacists rammed his car into a group of counterprotestors, killing one and injuring 19. Your choice - just like it's the president's choice -  to support them by saying that there are fine people on both sides, do what you want. But this was not just a small group of "state's rights" or "small government" protestors. And don't pretend like there were 10 different groups on either side - this was Unite the Right and counterprotestors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the_Right_rally

Also, I'd like to point out the other hypocrisy in this example. Even on this thread, you guys say to not take Trump comments literally, and that you have to actually look for what his point is. But now you are saying to only take his comments literally, and ignore the underlying meaning. You can't have it both ways.

Edited August 23, 2020 by brawnie
grammar

[TreeA10]

On 8/20/2020 at 1:11 PM, 17D_guy said:

Dude, he does it to everyone.  It's not some pre-thought out plan to troll...he says dumb shit like a Lt fighting the debrief.  There's no though to it outside, "Get out of trouble/say something "smart"/slam the person mean to me."  People still acting like this dude has a plan...how?

There's been things he's said that has freaked out Ben Shapiro, the folks over at FoxNews, and Drudge.  Real bastions of SJW thought.

Unless we've now changed the story and all media is against him?
 

You are not wrong.  He does need to someone to dart him and take his phone away.  Let him compose Tweets that are reviewed by at least 2 other people before hitting send.  As far as speeches go, keep him somewhat close to whatever is on the teleprompter.

[Negatory]

2 hours ago, dream big said:

Anyone remember sequestration in 2013? Flying hours cut, mishaps skyrocketed down range.  I 100% blame Obama for that.  Yeah..I’ll take Trump any day of the year. 

I assume you also blame Trump for the slashing of the UPT syllabus and the perceived mishaps of the last year, as well. Why hasn’t Trump increased the pilot bonus? Does he want our Air Force to fail?

Or maybe these decisions fall much more squarely on the SECAF/CSAF/Congress.

[DosXX]

1 hour ago, Prozac said:

Apart from Covid? Really? Isn’t handling a crisis an important measure of presidential leadership? Maybe THE most important measure? I can’t think of one recent president that hasn’t had to handle a major crisis. A savvy president will use the opportunity to band Americans together and cement his support (think W after Sep 11). All Trump had to do was pretend to take this seriously and encourage all Americans to come together and beat the virus. He’d be a shoe in for re-election right now if he’d done that. But Trump’s biggest weakness and his biggest failure is that he only sees himself as President of his own supporters. Politics for him is a zero sum game that involves vanquishing your opponent into oblivion rather than acknowledging that the other side is here to stay and compromise is the only path to stability and prosperity in a democratic society. His “ blue America” attitude will be his downfall and unfortunately he’s infected the whole republican party with it. He’s transformed the entire GOP into a cynical, xenophobic, isolationist shell of its former self and all of America will be worse off for a generation due to the damage he’s done. He spent three years lining your wallet? Well I guess that’s good for you. Me? Well call me a naive idealist but I expect much more out of the leader of the free world. 

To make matters worse when prodded on the failures of the national response claims "I don't take responsibility at all" while rating himself a "10 out of 10", the most toxic of all leadership attitudes to take in a crisis.

I think it's important to also mention the active undermining of historically apolitical institutions. Some examples include: publicly pressuring the Fed to lower interest rates, the Bible photo op ordeal with the General Milley, tweeting about active high profile judical affairs such as Gallagher and Crozier, picking a partisan oil lobbyist as head of EPA, politicizing NASA's commercial crew success, leaving state department positions vacant, putting alt righters such as Miller and Bannon in positions of power, etc. If you're cynical enough to believe that all our institutions are working against American interests, or that there's some secret society headed by Soros running all our institutions, then I can't blame you for voting for him. In any case, Presidents get too much blame and credit for the economy; federal government policy/manning, foreign affairs/treaties, and cultural leadership are what the President actually have control over, and for this election I think Biden is less of a dumpster fire.

Not say all the the President has done is bad, of course. He earned a lot of praise from me when he chose Mattis for SecDef. However Mattis' words shortly after his resignation leave little else to be said about the state of the executive branch.

[Homestar]

8 hours ago, brabus said:

 

The majority of the “trumps a dumpster fire” crowd boils down to they don’t like his personality, how he communicates (verbal and written), etc.

 

It has more to do with his blatant lack of morality. 

[Homestar]

4 hours ago, dream big said:

Anyone remember sequestration in 2013? Flying hours cut, mishaps skyrocketed down range.  I 100% blame Obama for that.  Yeah..I’ll take Trump any day of the year. 

Obama failed to pass a budget? I don’t remember how it went down.....

[lloyd christmas]

51 minutes ago, Homestar said:

It has more to do with his blatant lack of morality. 

I think it is safe to say that judging politicians based on their morality is a mistake.  

[pawnman]

5 hours ago, brawnie said:

Just cause you want it to be a hoax doesn't make it a hoax. The "unite the right" movement, protesting the removal of Gen Lee's statues, was the entire impetus to the Charlottesville gatherings and conflicts.  They organized a march down Charlottesville's streets holding torches and chanting "blood and soil," the English translation of a Nazi slogan. In the end, one of the neo-nazi white supremacists rammed his car into a group of counterprotestors, killing one and injuring 19. Your choice - just like it's the president's choice -  to support them by saying that there are fine people on both sides, do what you want. But this was not just a small group of "state's rights" or "small government" protestors. And don't pretend like there were 10 different groups on either side - this was Unite the Right and counterprotestors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the_Right_rally

Also, I'd like to point out the other hypocrisy in this example. Even on this thread, you guys say to not take Trump comments literally, and that you have to actually look for what his point is. But now you are saying to only take his comments literally, and ignore the underlying meaning. You can't have it both ways.

So I guess we're completely ignoring when he said neo-Nazis and white supremacists should be condemned?

[SocialD]

1 hour ago, lloyd christmas said:

I think it is safe to say that judging politicians based on their morality is a mistake.  

 

You win the internet for the day!

[Negatory]

41 minutes ago, pawnman said:

So I guess we're completely ignoring when he said neo-Nazis and white supremacists should be condemned?

It’s easy to say that, and I won’t argue that he did. Anyone would say Nazis are bad when questioned directly, of course.

“You had people -- and I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists; they should be condemned totally -- you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists.“

But he also said numerous times that this group had fine people in it that werent neo-Nazis or white supremacists. The group doesn’t deserve such leniency just because they had Trump flags with them. It legitimizes a group, which included such people as David Duke, as a group that was more moderate than they really were. I, and much of America, disagree that there were “many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists.” Call a spade a spade.

[Danger41]

4 hours ago, Homestar said:

It has more to do with his blatant lack of morality. 

One of my favorite political pieces I’ve ever seen.

“Let’s imagine: It’s time to elect a world leader, and your vote counts. Which would you choose:

“Candidate A: Associates with ward healers and consults with astrologists; has had two mistresses; chain-smokes and drinks eight to ten martinis a day.

“Candidate B: Was kicked out of office twice; sleeps until noon; used opium in college; drinks a quart of brandy every evening.

“Candidate 😄 Is a decorated war hero, a vegetarian, doesn’t smoke, drinks an occasional beer, and has had no illicit love affairs.

“Which of these candidates is your choice? You don’t really need any more information, do you? Candidate A is Franklin Roosevelt. Candidate B is Winston Churchill. Candidate C is Adolf Hitler.”

[slackline]

One of my favorite political pieces I’ve ever seen.

“Let’s imagine: It’s time to elect a world leader, and your vote counts. Which would you choose:

“Candidate A: Associates with ward healers and consults with astrologists; has had two mistresses; chain-smokes and drinks eight to ten martinis a day.

“Candidate B: Was kicked out of office twice; sleeps until noon; used opium in college; drinks a quart of brandy every evening.

“Candidate Is a decorated war hero, a vegetarian, doesn’t smoke, drinks an occasional beer, and has had no illicit love affairs.

“Which of these candidates is your choice? You don’t really need any more information, do you? Candidate A is Franklin Roosevelt. Candidate B is Winston Churchill. Candidate C is Adolf Hitler.”

If that isn’t the most flawed argument to say the morality of the person we choose to lead the free world doesn’t matter, I don’t know what is...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Homestar]

57 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

One of my favorite political pieces I’ve ever seen.

“Let’s imagine: It’s time to elect a world leader, and your vote counts. Which would you choose:

“Candidate A: Associates with ward healers and consults with astrologists; has had two mistresses; chain-smokes and drinks eight to ten martinis a day.

“Candidate B: Was kicked out of office twice; sleeps until noon; used opium in college; drinks a quart of brandy every evening.

“Candidate 😄 Is a decorated war hero, a vegetarian, doesn’t smoke, drinks an occasional beer, and has had no illicit love affairs.

“Which of these candidates is your choice? You don’t really need any more information, do you? Candidate A is Franklin Roosevelt. Candidate B is Winston Churchill. Candidate C is Adolf Hitler.”

Somewhere in this post there is logical fallacy....(Googles Reductio Ad Hitlerum or Godwin's law)

Am I asking too much when I wish a political party nominate a person of at least average moral character?  I'm not asking for a saint.  I'm asking for someone with average levels of human compassion and decency....and one who has the first idea of how to manage during a crisis.

The willingness of Americans to look past human decency in support of their (R) or (D) baffles me.

Standing by for the inevitable whataboutist post....

Edited August 24, 2020 by Homestar
Googles

[dream big]

11 hours ago, Prozac said:

Apart from Covid? Really? Isn’t handling a crisis an important measure of presidential leadership? Maybe THE most important measure? I can’t think of one recent president that hasn’t had to handle a major crisis. A savvy president will use the opportunity to band Americans together and cement his support (think W after Sep 11). All Trump had to do was pretend to take this seriously and encourage all Americans to come together and beat the virus. He’d be a shoe in for re-election right now if he’d done that. But Trump’s biggest weakness and his biggest failure is that he only sees himself as President of his own supporters. Politics for him is a zero sum game that involves vanquishing your opponent into oblivion rather than acknowledging that the other side is here to stay and compromise is the only path to stability and prosperity in a democratic society. His “fuck blue America” attitude will be his downfall and unfortunately he’s infected the whole republican party with it. He’s transformed the entire GOP into a cynical, xenophobic, isolationist shell of its former self and all of America will be worse off for a generation due to the damage he’s done. He spent three years lining your wallet? Well I guess that’s good for you. Me? Well call me a naive idealist but I expect much more out of the leader of the free world. 

You completely missed the point.  Trump didn’t mishandle Covid.  My point was that Covid is an international pandemic and blaming Trump for its’ effects is next level stupid. Further, besides Covid, the country has been doing extremely well during his tenure.  So I fail to see why that should change besides your feelings. 

[slackline]

Trump didn’t mishandle Covid.   

Just sitting here scratching my head on this statement...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[brabus]

7 hours ago, dream big said:

His “fuck blue America” attitude will be his downfall and unfortunately he’s infected the whole republican party with it.

The “Fuck everyone who’s not a progressive socialist!” will be the downfall of the Democratic Party. See how this goes? You are an idiot if you can’t see this bullshit coming from both sides. The problem with America is 80% of us are generally moderate +/- center a bit, but the other 20% are bat shit crazy and have consumed politics, the media, etc. Instructional Fix: The 80% get off their asses and do something about it, instead of just bitching in private and doing nothing about it. FWIW, I live in a very liberal/libertarian area. The amount of hate, intolerance, and “assimilate to us or you should fuck off and die!” is HEAVY from the left and almost non-existent from the libertarians and conservatives. It’s truly amazing to see the difference in discourse...us moderates are absolutely disgusted with it, which helps push me over the edge to the other side. So that dovetails into...
 

We have trump because of the insane bullshit the far left was pedaling - and they’ve quadrupled down in the last 3 years. I mean WTF, lots of moderates don’t want trump, but we also don’t want anti-constitution people who are attempting to shove socialism down our throats and fundamentally alter America in a negative way. Bring the Democrats back towards the center, push the far left lunatics into a new “Progressive” party, and we can have a 4 party system (the other being Libertarian) that will give better options than Trump or Kamala. The democrats even may have had me at Tulsi, but she was too moderate for them.

Edited August 24, 2020 by brabus

[tac airlifter]

45 minutes ago, slackline said:

Just sitting here scratching my head on this statement...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

With the benefit of hindsight, what should he have done differently?  
 

whatever your answer is, imagine trying to implement that COA in the Feb 2020 environment with the other party calling you racist for curtailing travel from China.  
 

There was so much flip flopping on recommendations in the early days, that all politics aside I’m really curious what you think was so obvious.  

[FLEA]

14 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

With the benefit of hindsight, what should he have done differently?  
 

whatever your answer is, imagine trying to implement that COA in the Feb 2020 environment with the other party calling you racist for curtailing travel from China.  
 

There was so much flip flopping on recommendations in the early days, that all politics aside I’m really curious what you think was so obvious.  

Remember when Democrats got pissed that Republicans beat them to the punch on a $1200 unemployment insurance check to curtail economic collapse for the economically underprivileged? 

[Sim]

[Sim]

 

 

[Prozac]

13 hours ago, dream big said:

You completely missed the point.  Trump didn’t mishandle Covid.  My point was that Covid is an international pandemic and blaming Trump for its’ effects is next level stupid. Further, besides Covid, the country has been doing extremely well during his tenure.  So I fail to see why that should change besides your feelings. 

Certainly not blaming Trump for Covid. However, his response was and continues to be an absolute shitshow.
 

His initial reaction to the crisis was that it was a hoax invented by his political opponents. Wrong. Then it was just a few cases and would be down to zero shortly (just as long as cruise ships with infected American citizens on board were kept safely offshore). Wrong. Then it was ban travel from China. Right, but too little too late (Dems we’re wrong here as well....I’ll give you that). Then it was it’ll be gone with the warmer weather. Wrong. Then it was anyone who wants a test gets a test. Wrong. Then it was shutdown the economy, but people protesting the shutdown were freedom fighting patriots. Talk about mixed messaging (but it wasn’t really mixed....Trump obviously didn’t really want to shutdown). Then it was open back up. But it was too early and without adequate safeguards like a national policy on distancing, masks, testing, or contact tracing. Then it was (and still is) Hydroxychloroquine. (Still) Wrong. Then it was inject yourself with disinfectant. What the actual fuck? Then it was let Doctors Fauci and Brix take over for a bit to appease those elitist science people, but, wink wink, we all really know Faici’s a quack. More mixed messaging. Then it was masks are stupid. Wrong. Then it was if we stop testing, we’ll stop seeing so many cases. Well, right, I guess, but sounds suspiciously like the exact same logic my 9 year old uses when he’s trying to convince me something’s not his fault. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so sad. 
 

Trump’s response has been disjointed and ineffective at best and in reality has been nothing short of pathetic. We have some of the highest rates of infection and mortality amongst developed nations and have become a laughingstock around the world while we should be leading the way. We have the gold standard disease research and control organization in the world with the CDC, and yet here we are with our thumbs up our collective asses. 
 

What else could the administration have done? Well, how about taking things seriously from day one for a start? Trump should’ve leveled with Americans early on about the magnitude of the disaster and the fact that we would have to make sacrifices to effect the recovery. He should’ve worn a mask in public and practiced the distancing and other protocols espoused by his own administration, demonstrating the practices Americans would need to use to get through this mess. Isn’t that what leaders are supposed to do? His administration should’ve spearheaded a massive testing and contract tracing program early on that would expedite a safe reopening of the economy. I do give them some credit for working with Congress to pass the initial stimulus bill, but what about the long term future of our economy? There is about to be a housing and lending crisis as thousands of Americans, unable to pay rent, are about to be evicted. What will become of all of the small business unable to cover their costs? Will we just let them fail? They employ half of all American workers. What becomes of them? We needed and continue to need bold ideas from our leaders to address this calamity. Instead we get deflection, excuses, and reality TV gibberish. 
 

So, no, I don’t blame Trump for COVID. But I absolutely do blame him for being completely and utterly ineffective when tested in battle. I guess he’ll try to blame it all on his bone spurs next. 

[SurelySerious]

You know what kills small businesses? States like California continuing to shut everything down. 
 

Edit: oh, and rioters and looters, if you want to go there on your concern for small businesses. 

Edited August 24, 2020 by SurelySerious

[JimNtexas]

Quote

Certainly not blaming Trump for Covid. However, his response was and continues to be an absolute shitshow.

You are mistaken about that.  Trump was acting derisively in January 2020 while Nancy Pelosi was dancing in crowded alleys in San Francisco and Biden was bitching that it was 'Xenophobic'  for Trump to restrict travel from Wuhan China.

Operation 'Warp Speed' is a real thing, something the Democrats would never have thought of.

I tracked this from the beginning. 

https://consolidatedopinions.blogspot.com/2020/04/covid-19-time-line.html