Will President Trump PLEASE stop Tweeting...

PinkFridge

Fri, Dec 01 2017, 1:42 pm

youngishbear wrote:

Who is this they?

The recent attack on a mosque in Egypt is stark proof that this religion of over a billion has many factions, sects, tribes, or whatever-you-call-its.

Yes, which is why it is necessary to exercise some level of caution.
Jeanette, re your post: that's the fallout from chillul Hashem. It's why you'll have programs like Headlines, which attempt to disseminate practical halacha in navigating the world; asifos in various communities (whether or not there is immediate change, the effort is necessary); lobbyists from Agudah, OU, Chabad who are well-spoken, legal-savvy, and Torah-savvy to represent us - or who we should be - and take pulses to make us aware of how much we should be who we should be.

I really don't know what the Muslim counterpart is. Kol hakavod if there is.

youngishbear

Fri, Dec 01 2017, 1:48 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

While I don't think its appropriate to make fun of people based on appearance, I'm a bit more tolerant of comedians, and definitely more tolerant of comedians vis a vis Trump, given the fact that he himself demeans people based on appearance. He's called women "fat pigs," "dogs," "slobs" and "disgusting animals." When he was angered by Megyn Kelly, he talked about "blood coming out of her whatever." With respect to Carly Fiorina, "Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?" His attack on Heidi Cruz's appearance. His response to allegations that he z3xually assaulted Natasha Stoynoff, "Take a look, you take a look. Look at her, look at her words, you tell me what you think. I don't think so." If he thinks its appropriate to speak of others that way, then he certainly cannot complain when others respond in kind.

I'm not complaining on his behalf, but on mine. I think we lose the moral high ground and allow a double standard if we indulge in crudeness.

Honestly all a comedian needs to do these days is replay clips of Trump talking. John Oliver read a transcript of what Trump said and I had tears streaming - mirth mingling with misery, I suppose.

SixOfWands

Fri, Dec 01 2017, 1:51 pm

youngishbear wrote:

You're right, of course.

youngishbear

Fri, Dec 01 2017, 2:05 pm

It also distracts from the fact that most of us who are anti-Trump dislike him for important reasons. If we poke fun of nonsense, the impression is that our criticism is motivated by blind bias and not actual concerns.

sequoia

Fri, Dec 01 2017, 2:42 pm

John Oliver is brilliant. And he’s absolutely right that “whataboutism” is a key Soviet propaganda technique.

Americans may not know this, but for DECADES, the response to any criticisms of the Soviet regime - the Gulag, political prisoners, lack of free speech, religious persecution, institutional anti-Semitism - was the stock phrase, “Well, you lynch Negroes.” Needless to say, after a while it just became a joke/parody.

Here’s the important point: while for years educated people have been using this phrase as a joke, proponents of the Russian regime are using it completely seriously today! The pro-Russian blogger Natalia Radulova, for instance, has a public facebook page which consists almost entirely of posts about alleged police brutality in the US, France, Israel, and other Western countries. That is the *content* of her argument.

This all came to a head recently when Morgan Freeman put out a video expressing his views on Russian interference in the election, and Putin’s character in general. Russian internet exploded in a gleeful barrage of disgusting racism. Reading it was painful. But the “point” was that Freeman as a Black American and a descendant of slaves had no right to express any criticisms of Russia because of how racist America supposedly is! The hypocrisy was mind-boggling. They were using terms like the n-word and insulting him while proclaiming their moral superiority!

So it’s a technique that’s alive and well today. Instead of engaging with the core of the argument, one creates a distraction with whataboutism. What about slavery? What about lynching? What about Ferguson? What about Clinton?

southernbubby

Fri, Dec 01 2017, 2:50 pm

John Oliver is very funny and enlightening but sometimes he is so off-color that I don't want to see it. I enjoyed it until he put up too much graphic zexual stuff and I don't enjoy dirty humor.

youngishbear

Fri, Dec 01 2017, 3:47 pm

Sequoia, Whataboutism is the tu quoque logical fallacy with an easier to understand name. It's the reason I got so tired of discussing politics. People constantly engage in this distraction and it becomes impossible to discuss the merits or shortcomings of any issue without taking a detour into the past or future or a different planet altogether.

imasoftov

Sat, Dec 02 2017, 3:03 pm

MiracleMama wrote:

... it seems his only intention is to rile up the media and his detractors. So if it's bothering people so much, I guess it's mission accomplished.

Why do you feel that's a worthwhile endeavor, for the president, or for anyone else?

imasoftov

Sat, Dec 02 2017, 3:06 pm

Perhaps what might work better for all concerned would be if he would resign and then he'd have all day free to tweet.

sarahleah88

Sat, Dec 02 2017, 5:22 pm

Donald Trump is mentally unfit and emotionally disturbed. I have said it before and will say it again. Has nothing to do with politics.

southernbubby

Sat, Dec 02 2017, 7:23 pm

sarahleah88 wrote:

Donald Trump is mentally unfit and emotionally disturbed. I have said it before and will say it again. Has nothing to do with politics.

While that looks very likely to be true, he is also smarter than the average bear. It is interesting (as I just read in Time magazine) that the Russian ads placed on Facebook focused on "divisive social and political messages" (Time Magazine, December 11, 2017 page 24) and the ads targeted both sides: the goal was not conversion so much as conflict an an end in itself (ibid).

Basically Trump's idea is to create controversy where none exists because controversy gets noticed. Does my life really change if a Confederate statue is moved or NFL players kneel during the national anthem? Is it personally worth it for me to argue these or any other issues that might never cross my path in real life?

Then, when people have to take a stand, they group together, either online or in person, and voice their opinion as a group rather than as an individual and it is the group that matters. Most of America's counties were not battlegrounds in the election; the majority all voted the same way. IOW, when we share our opinions on the playground, we cause our neighbors to vote like we do. We only care about those issues if someone lights a fire under them.

Fox

Sun, Dec 03 2017, 4:11 pm

marina wrote:

The legitimate news sources I've seen tend to debunk the myth of these no-go zones. Plse back yourself up w sources on this, and plse do not cite Breitbart lol

Ooh! Is this like a scavenger hunt? Will I have to find a bobby pin in a color other than brown?

I'm not sure what you mean by a "legitimate" news source. If that means one that doesn't have to fire multiple reporters or editors for s-xual harassment, suspend correspondents without pay for reporting false stories, or fire longtime anchors for promoting obviously forged evidence . . . well, that's going to narrow the list considerably.

However, you are 100 percent correct about one thing: there is no such thing as a "no-go zone." Rather, they are "vulnerable areas" (Sweden) or "sensitive urban areas" (France).

You can easily Google "no-go zones" and find links to a wide variety of news organizations, scholars, politicians, and law enforcement officials who have described areas in which it is difficult to provide certain basic services because of Islamic-dominated neighborhoods in which sharia is enforced to varying degrees.

The "debunking" stories I've read seem to mostly consist of (a) asking a few locals if they feel they live in a no-go zone, and (2) asking a police public relations representative, who always says, basically, "No, we do have sensitive urban areas, but no no-go zones."

I highly recommend Raheem Kassam's No-Go Zones. Yes, he is employed by Breitbart -- though I'm not sure why that would invalidate his reporting -- but the book is published by Regnery Publishing. I honestly think you would find it very evenhanded, and I haven't heard anyone seriously challenge what he has to say, aside from shrieking, "Breitbart cooties!"

I was especially amused by his description of Dearborn, MI, which is identified as an example of relatively successful Muslim imigration. Frankly, Kassam could have been reporting on Lakewood -- it sounded like the same list of annoyances and complaints that we regularly discuss. For example, a slight gap in a fence was illicitly widened to provide a shortcut from a residential area to a mosque. If you can imagine! Some of the longtime Muslim residents of Dearborn resent the newcomers, whom they feel are ill-mannered. Oh, and get this: popularity of Dearborn among Muslims has caused property prices to skyrocket!

Kassam did not specifically mention whether misbehaving in Costco was an issue in Dearborn, but based on our knowledge of Lakewood, I think we can assume so.

southernbubby

Sun, Dec 03 2017, 4:14 pm

Here are his latest tweets this weekend. Cute huh?

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2.....inton

Zeleze

Mon, Dec 04 2017, 7:02 am

I think Trump's the biggest mistake or the 21st century

His tweets are just so foolish and childish in my opinion.

My fear is what will he bring upon the Middle East with all his naive moves and decisions