45 comments on “WESTWARD THE WAGONS

  1. Arpaio isn’t the racist, and neither is Trump. If you think you can prove me wrong, have at it, just don’t cherry-pick out-of-context quotes or blatantly mischaracterize either of them when you do it.

    • Took a quick look at your site – the home page – and a little confused about your claim
      of mischaracterized out of context quotes – perhaps you failed to notice the linked
      article exists in it’s entirety and permeated with a common thread of racism, no editing,
      nothing taken out of context, and no redacting.
      Leaves me to wonder if you’re just having a slow blog day and decided to do a little
      Trump/Arpaio trolling?
      As to proof that Arpaio and Trump are racist the most damning and obvious evidence
      are their own words and deeds – perhaps you’d care to provide an example how they aren’t ?
      If so something more than the mantra of “fake news”,”alternative facts”, or Fox News
      links will be necessary.
      I’ll begin with Trump’s ad campaign to villify the St. Regis Mohawk and his racist efforts
      to that end:



      Your gravatar says you “play” with words and write “deranged stories”. Is that an attempt
      to be edgy or is it an accurate depiction?

      • I didn’t say out of context quotes were IN your article, just that (in answer to “As to proof that Arpaio and Trump are racist the most damning and obvious evidence
        are their own words and deeds – perhaps you’d care to provide an example how they aren’t ?”) when you go to try proving they’re racist, how about citing some of those words, and doing so in context, without any mischaracterization. Quote them like that, and see if you can still come to the logical conclusion that they’re racist. My assertion is that you CAN’T. That’s all I’m saying. 😉

      • Then perhaps you’d care to address the links I posted
        in my response?
        The contextual nature of fines levied and having to spend
        50k to run additional ads admitting authorship.

        My assertion being you CAN’T – but following any attempt
        to I’ll afford you the opportunity to address multiple
        others if you like.
        I can “cite” numerous examples but in providing links I
        believe it makes it more difficult for deniers to deny,
        a reality that usually leads them to resort to the
        impoverished claim of “fake news”.

      • No, I’d care to address one or two specific quotes YOU will vouch for as quote YOU are willing to say are proof he’s a racist. I didn’t slam you with a bunch of links you’d have to jump through, read, dissect, and lug back here to address point by point, and you’re off your rocker if you think you can expect ME to all of that. If those are the articles you want to cite, copy and paste the two most damning quotes they cite. If you read through them and think any are actually going to hold up to scrutiny, go for it.

      • I would expect any rebuttal/discussion to feature
        an assortment of links from various sites, after
        all it’s reasonable to assume opinions are predicated
        on what is heard, read, or experienced.
        And yes I actually expect people to do the math,
        to make an effort – seems a little disingenuous to
        characterize that as slamming someone, after all
        reading includes dissecting as an act of comprehension
        doesn’t it?
        Sounds like you’re going the Conway Huckabee/Sanders
        route now.

      • I shouldn’t have to write a thesis and cite sources to have a conversation though, should I. is not college, I am not being paid, and while I’ve done the research I have no obligation to you to show my work, nor do you have to show yours. You do specifically have to cite at least one quote though. Why’s my ask for just one quote so hard to deliver on? Why is it easier for you to muddy the waters with a bunch of other peoples words. Just take what Trump himself (or anyone else you call a racist) has actually said that demonstrates they’re a racist. If you can’t even speak for yourself and have to rely on the words of others…. well, that’s just not how I roll. I take in all sorts of information. but when I’m expressing my opinion I’m expressing my opinion after having taken all that in, not just parroting what I read. You should try it sometime.

      • Is this an exhibition of your professed playing word
        games? If so it isn’t going to work here – since you
        at least claim to have the ability to do “research”
        and engaged in it clicking on a link hardly qualifies
        as writing a thesis, but maybe that’s just the way
        you roll.
        I too have expressed my opinions and been willing to
        provide links where others can do the math for themselves,
        understand the process in forming my opinions and in turn
        arrive at their own conclusions – maybe something you should
        try on occasion.
        But I’ll really simplify this for you with the below
        quote – note that I’m relying on a direct quote spoken
        by none other than Dear Leader to literally millions of
        people and forever archived on the net.

        ““46 million people watched the State of the Union address,
        the highest number in history” and then some more verbal
        diarrhea directed to his minions at Fox about they had their
        highest numbers ever during said event.

      • I’m just trying to get you to engage in a conversation instead of trying to give me excuses as to why you can’t. If you don’t want to then I guess that’s fine, but you should just say that instead of trying to come up with a bunch of BS reasons. How is the statement on the State of the Union evidence of his racism? I’m not seeing anything like that in the quote.

      • Strikes me as though something of a conundrum has occurred
        with the position you’ve adopted re your definition of
        research and how you arrive at the opinions you hold.
        The problem is that your research and opinion can only be
        predicated on one of two things ( the gathering of information).
        Either you availed yourself of links and sites on the net or
        you have been in close personal attendance 24/7 with Trump
        since the beginning of his campaign and not only heard every
        word he’s uttered but also witnessed every event.
        If so do you also claim Trump’s inauguration was attended by
        more people than any of his predecessors?
        Well actually there is a third possibility – you just make up
        everything on the fly and aren’t concerned with facts.
        Care to elucidate? No thesis necessary.

      • I do the same thing you do, minus the attempts to sidestep the questions. Like in your last comment, you said you think of it more as laying the foundation? I think of it as redirection to something you think you can win it. Why don’t you just show me the quotes that prove he’s racist? Wouldn’t that be easier than going around and around in circles, explaining yourself when all you need to do is site one quote that definitively shows how racist is?

      • “I think sometimes a black may think they don’t have an advantage or
        this and that. I’ve said on one occasion, even about myself, if I
        were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black,
        because I really believe they do have an actual advantage.”

        Do you believe this or believe Trump would actually love to be

        Related to Judge Gonzalo Curiel
        He is a member of a club or society, very strongly pro-Mexican,
        which is all fine. But I say he’s got bias. I want to build a wall.
        I’m going to build a wall. I’m doing very well with the Latinos,
        with the Hispanics, with the Mexicans, I’m doing very well with them,
        in my opinion. And we’re going to see, you’re going to see, because
        you know what, I’m providing jobs. Nobody else is giving jobs. But
        just so you understand, this judge has treated me very unfairly, he’s
        treated me in a hostile manner. And there’s something going on.

        He referred to Puerto Ricans as “politically motivated ingrates” when
        they pointed out the shortcomings of the hurricane response – that
        people had no food, water, electricity.

        “Miss Housekeeping” Trump’s words for an Hispanic Miss Universe.
        In your mind this may be about “winning” but in mine it’s about
        the common welfare of the people of this country.

        Now do your dance about Trump is misunderstood and should be
        applauded for being what his stooges have characterized as being
        “authentic” overlooking the fact that the same authenticity can
        be ascribed to every despot whose ever existed.

      • The first two don’t really strike me as racist, he mentions race, but that’s because everybody else all around him is talking about race and so is using their terminology. That’s why he said he’d be the best jobs president on the planet, because everybody was talking about jobs and so he said he’d be the best. People were talking about how Clinton was doing great with African-Americans, so he started saying African Americans love me, not exactly racist. And as for the advantage thing, I don’t know their affirmative action policies in place, and it doesn’t really seem to be a knock on black people as a whole, I mean you are aware of affirmative action, right? Things like that on our log books, and they do give an advantage, that’s kind of the whole point of them, and observing the fact doesn’t make you a racist.

        regarding the judge, that judge was a member of La Raza, so Trump taking note of how has race played a role, that was a valid criticism. If the judge didn’t want that kind of criticism, he shouldn’t have woven his heritage so strongly into his persona, just like I said he was a member of the Mexican supremacist group La Raza. And I say was, but I’m pretty sure he actually still is, presently. So I don’t have a problem with anything from sit on that count. he didn’t refer to Puerto Ricans as politically motivated in great either, he referred to Puerto Rican public officials as politically motivated ingrates. See it kind of matters to pay attention to what exactly he actually said. the context in Puerto Rico is it a bunch of Mayors and other officials we’re redirecting supplies, making it seem like there weren’t any, selling some of them off, and all around you just trying to make Trump look bad in the middle of a catastrophe, instead of helping the people in the middle of that catastrophe. ask for the Miss housekeeping nickname, you do realize he’s spent a lot of time around the contestants right? you’ve never busted anybody’s balls before, poked fun at them? I do that was friends and family all the time, not sure what the problem is.

        as for him being misunderstood, he can only miss understand him the way you have if you’re buying into bulshit, or if you’re trying to misunderstand him in the worst possible way. That’s not his doing so much as you’re doing okay. And before you start calling me a white nationalist or racist or anything, you might want to factor in that a massive chunk of my family happens to have the last name Gonzalez. Two of my younger. And on the other side of my family big parts of it are African-American, and my aunt and uncle on that side adopted a girl who happens to be Vietnamese years and years ago, that’s my older cousin. main point being, I never would have voted for the guy if I actually thought he was a racist, and despite what I’ve been called, I can’t help but laugh at people who call me a racist. I mean they can, you can, but you’re flat-out wrong you do. And if you can’t figure out that somebody with my background would never support a racist, I guess that says more about you than it does me, doesn’t it.

      • The differences between you and I are notable – the main
        one being I won’t refrain from “busting anyone’s balls”
        like Trump when called for.
        So if an Italian belongs to the Sons of Italy do you infer
        that to mean they are incapable of rendering a just decision?
        Or would that only be the case if Trump had to be appear before
        an Italian judge and didn’t like the ruling?
        And no I’ve never been around a bunch a beauty pageant
        contestants but if I were to be I wouldn’t take that to be
        a license to barge into their dressing rooms unannounced in
        the hopes of coping a quick feel, catching a titillating
        glimpse or planting an uninvited kiss on anything that
        Yeah, I know he was only pretending.
        In your explanation about how Trump talks and why are you
        saying he has no original thoughts and only speaks what is
        spoken by others?
        Does that explain his Hollywood Access words – you know the
        one’s he apologized for and now wants to float the narrative
        that gee, it wasn’t really him, doesn’t even sound like him?
        Which is the lie, or is all just pretense and hyperbole?
        What do you make of Trump’s support of Roy Moore – you good
        with that in the GOP mindset of GOP uber alles?
        Are you comfortable with the party line that all the women
        lied just as is claimed about those who have come forward accusing
        your boy are all liars as well?
        Be careful now as that’s exactly what Trump and Moore have called
        them – no pretense involved in doing so – liars, period.
        My question related to Trump’s ongoing lie about the size of his
        inauguration crowd really only required a yes or no – the man lied
        and continues to lie about it or he didn’t – are you willing to
        offer a straight up yes or no?
        As to the racial diversity in your ethnicity you like everyone
        else should be proud of it. My own ethnicity makes it impossible
        for me to support a racist in any way shape or form.
        Are you, were you accepting of Trump’s refusal to release his
        tax forms because he was under “audit” and would when completed?
        Where are they?
        Would it all be so innocent if the the Miss Universe contestant were
        a black woman and Trump referred to her as Miss Picanniny or Miss
        How about if she were Asian and Trump referred to her as Miss Ramen
        Noodles, or if she were Native American and Trump “nicknamed” her
        Pocahontas or squaw?
        And just out of curiosity if you don’t consider it too personal which sites
        and media outlets do you visit when doing your research?

      • “The differences between you and I are notable – the main
        one being I won’t refrain from “busting anyone’s balls”
        when called for.” Not a difference, that’s actually common ground. In fact if you’re serious about that, you’re no different than me or Trump, you just feel the need to pretend like him busting peoples balls (often in response to their attacks at him) is him being a bully or him being a racist. Are you bullying me? I wouldn’t say so, in spite of you being perfectly willing to bust my chops or anyone else. If I couldn’t take criticism or handle conversation, that’d be on me.

        “So if an Italian belongs to the Sons of Italy do you infer
        that to mean they are incapable of rendering a just decision?”
        Depends. Are they an Italian supremacist group who thinks that their ethnicity s more special than everyone else’s? ‘Cause that’s how La Raza views things.

        As for beauty contestants, I don’t recall anyone pressing charges, so, unsubstantiated demonization. The Access Hollywood tape? Guess what; he talks like a sleazed, probably acts like one sometimes too, but even if he did what he was bragging about in the tape, it wouldn’t be sexual assault unless he did it, the chick said stop, don’t you dare, and he kept doing it. No one’s ever *credibly* claimed that that happened. And Moore? lol really? Those accusations fell apart before the election was over, and where are those accusers now? If Moore was really guilty, wouldn’t they still want justice, or was that just a ploy to beat him out of the AL senate seat? I say the latter seems more likely. Crowd size I already address; I won’t give you a yes or now because you know full well that no, he didn’t have the same size of a crowd he claims he did, but he’s also upfront about exaggerating, individuals can (and should) check out what the actual crowd size is for themselves. Trump knows anyone/everyone can do that, at will, so he’s not trying to dupe anybody. If he were, he’d pick a lie that’s harder to check on.

        “As to the racial diversity in your ethnicity you like everyone
        else should be proud of it. ”
        I didn’t say I wasn’t.

        “My own ethnicity makes it impossible
        for me to support a racist in any way shape or form.”

        Well then I guess we’ve got another bit of common ground, don’t we, because that’s basically what I said, and I mainly touched on my background to emphasize the point.

        Tax returns? lol I don’t care about those. Some of his tax info leaked, Maddow got the scoop, and she was so excited she spilled what was in it live, before reading it first, and made a fool of herself. According to what we DO have of Trump’s tax return info, he pays more than Bernie Sanders, Barack Obama, or Hillary Clinton. Look it up. That was on Rachel Maddow’s show, MSNBC.

        Concerning my research, I look everywhere and cross-check as much as I can. I watch CNN as much as I can stomach, and MSNBC, and Fox. I couldn’t possibly list ALL the different sites I check in on regularly but ehre are a few, a sample list: Breitbart, Huffington Post, Lifezette, Politico, Washington Post, Washington Examiner, New York Times, and crap tons of others, all at odds with each other.

      • A “leaked “ tax return for one year – now who do you think would be behind that?
        One tax return that Trump can crow about and no others. Don’t you think if it was a real leaker there would have been more than one?
        I wouldn’t really expect you to care about the tax returns, it’s too volatile a subject, but I suspect they may turn up as a result of Mueller’s investigation.
        He pays more than Bernie Sanders? Whoa great point dismissing the fact he makes a kazillion times more money than Sanders.
        And speaking of Mueller do you buy into the party line it’s all about a “witch hunt”?
        I agree Maddow made a complete fool of herself, certainly not as often as Hannity does but a fool nonetheless, and speaking of fools Brietbart certainly qualifies with the bilge they “report” like “pizza gate”, Sandy Hook etal.
        Curiel belongs to La Raza Lawyers of California just as Afro Americans belong to the Black Congressional Caucus – the purpose of LRAC is to support Hispanic attorneys, and a good thing with defendants like Trump.
        Would you say the BCC believes Afro Americans are superior?
        How about SC judge Sonia Sotomayor belonging to NCLR/UnidosUS – should that disqualify her from being a judge?
        What about the “gray panthers” or AARP whose focus is elders – think they believe elders are superior
        if they fight for senior rights and fair treatment?
        You know what always amazes me is the history of conservatives when it comes to dark skinned people – people like Caesar Chavez they attempted to cast as a communist, especially if they form any kind of group or organization like the UFW.
        I’m sure you’re aware of what La Raza means, in common usage it means “the people” and I personally see nothing racist in that as every indigenous nation’s own name for their people in this country translates to “the people”.
        It’s like a person saying they’re Irish, Polish, Jewish, German, or anything else.
        Of course conservatives who thrive on conspiracy theories ala Alex Jones, Breitbart, and the boogey man interpret La Raza to fit the narrative they promote.
        So to Hispanics the LRAC is about an organization composed of and for their community – sinister isn’t it?
        Are there racists in every ethnicity? Sure are, doesn’t mean everyone is though.
        Why aren’t I surprised you would leap to Roy Moore’s defense? Why aren’t I surprised in doing so that you fail to mention Moore is being sued by at least of one of his accusers?
        Why aren’t I surprised you failed to mention Moore is seeking a change of venue, sort of judge shopping for a “hearing” rather than a jury?
        Or the fact that Alabama Republican Senator Richard Shelby kicked Moore to the curb as did a large number of other Republican Solons like Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Steve Daines, Lindsey Graham, John Kasich, who also kicked Moore to the curb – think you know something about Moore they don’t or are they just “sellouts”?
        Though you avoided a part of my question I’ll ask it again – do you believe every woman who has accused Trump is lying? If not do you believe as long as he didn’t beat and rape them he has no accountability?

      • You’re talking to someone who is a Democrat for most of his life, I only registered as a republican so I can vote for Trump in the primaries for the 2016 election. As for all the groups you mention, I do think they have racial supremacist undertones. Do you see a white caucus in Congress, or is there just a black one? Why is that? Are they so incapable of representing themselves, and getting representation, that they need the extra help? Isn’t that a little condescending? Same as affirmative action, actually, extremely demeaning the black people to think that they’re to a net to get the jobs themselves on their own merits. I think they can, and I think things like is that, giving an advantage to One race or gender over another, is the kind of bigotry that Democrats accuse Republicans of, but the Democrats directly engage in all the time. You’re doing it right now, not as bad as a professional politician, but you’re doing it, and yeah, Sotomayor is extremely biased, and a lot of it has to do with her ethnic background because she herself put so much stock into it. That was her play, and people reacted accordingly, not my fault. To your question as to whether or not Mueller’s investigation is a Witch Hunt, his indictments pretty clearly show that yeah, it has been a Witch Hunt the whole time. He’s got jack shit on Trump. And Breitbart didn’t report on pizzagate, that was a bunch of conspiracy theorists who fancied themselves independent journalists. And Cesar Chavez, he may not have been a communist but he was sure an asshole. and ask for Moore’s accusers, do let me know how that lawsuit goes. I bet she loses. Concerning Shelby, Kasich, McConnell, Graham, and all the rest, those are spineless pieces of shit. They’re career politicians and they’re part of the reason I voted for Trump. and since you repeated the question, and I did miss it, regarding Trump’s accusers I’ve looked at each accusation individually as it unfolded back during the election, and kept up with it here and there since then. I don’t think any of those accusations have any credibility, and even if some of them did, there’s a difference between sexual assault and being a sleaze. You apparently need to learn that difference. Because no, if you didn’t force himself on those women in any way, or if he made a move and they said no, it’s only sexual assault if he kept going from there. The only women that claimed he did any such thing are contradicted by other people who were present at the times and places they claimed it happened In.

      • “The only women that claimed he did any such thing are contradicted by other people who were present at the times and places they claimed it happened In.”

        You don’t even want to attempt that if you’re referencing Trump.

        “Do you see a white caucus in Congress, or is there just a black one? Why is that? Are they so incapable of representing themselves, and getting representation, that they need the extra help? Isn’t that a little condescending?”

        In a nation based on the concept of entitlement and privilege I think it’s fairly obvious all
        minorities have at least at some point needed “extra help” and many still do.
        I could begin with the five hundred nations of my own people and segue into events like the
        civil rights movement that needed the extra help of good decent people – I could mention
        the Chinese brought in to help build the railroads and were exploited – or the Japanese who
        lost everything they owned and were placed in “internment camps”.
        I could say the Tuskegee airmen who were subject to “medical experiments” needed a little
        help and slaves during the “glorious” antebellum days of the Civil War needed a little
        The Irish who were treated as little more than slave labor, exploited Mexican farm workers
        crowded a dozen or more into a shanty and ripped off at the owners stores – such examples
        leave you with no understanding of why ethnic specific organizations or groups come into
        Children working in sweat shops and mines who needed a little help – elders who can’t
        make ends meet and need a little extra help.
        Those at or below the poverty level and even middle class families that need a little help.

        “A little condescending” – really?

        No white caucus? Maybe not in name but surely as a defacto entity – an entity
        that flaunts a bogus claim of “family values”.
        I wouldn’t boast about being a member of either political party and as to “sleaze” which
        you seem to be admitting Trump is ( and therein begs the question is sleaze the right
        leadership or example for this country?) let’s personalize this – if Trump groped some
        female member of your family would you be so forgiving? Would you say well it’s a he
        said she said and maybe she should have pre emptively said no the moment he entered the
        room rather than at the moment he grabbed her?
        How about if it were multiple female relatives or a mixture of relatives and friends
        or just women in your neighborhood?
        If a man grabs a woman it’s only sexual assault if he continues inspite of her protestations?
        So by the Trumpian dictionary definition what does the “mere” grabbing of woman amount to?
        Hopefully something more than sleaze.
        You’re talking to someone here whose mother and sister were raped neither “asking” for it,
        someone who would rather eat their shoe than pledge blind allegiance to any political party
        or a sleaze, someone who believes in equality.
        One time members of the honored clan, conservative heroes now are perceived as “spineless
        pieces of shit” for daring to suggest the Emperor without clothes is a piece of shit?
        Gotta love it – conservatives reduced to cannibalism eating their own and in that
        the decline of their empire.
        Uh, you might want to double check whether Brietbart ever weighed in on and promoted
        “pizzagate” and their Sandy Hook narrative.
        You must have inside access to claim Mueller doesn’t have “jack shit” on Trump, that
        or surrendered to wishful thinking – no one knows what he has short of current indictments
        and the rollovers like Flynn – but if you look at those and requests to German banks for
        financial records coupled with the legion of “exaggerations” there’s a clue.

      • The thing you may want to consider, before I bother responding any further, is that if you’re being serious when you say you believe in equality, then you need to check some assumptions about me. You seem to have it in your head that I somehow don’t believe in equality. Obviously, right, cause I’m a fan of Trump? But I do. And what you need to ask yourself is, how can I – and how can, I would wager, a good portion of the people you know and interact with on a daily basis – believe in equal rights regardless of gender, ethnicity, or creed AND support Trump (not in spite of a belief in equality, but because of it). Ask yourself, what could possibly lead to a person who shares your belief in equality also supporting Trump? What rational explanations are there? If you can begin to arrive at an answer as to how that could be the case, maybe that’ll give you some insight into why so many people support him, particularly the Obama voters (like me) who switched parties (or crossed party lines) to vote for Trump. And the independents, usually the metric of who (between left and right) is being the most sensible at any given time, went our way too. See, one term I don’t use to describe myself very often, but that’s pretty accurate, is that I’m pretty much a classical liberal. Terms I use a little more… “individualist” or “capitalist”. For a long time that landed me pretty solidly on the left. Then I watched Obama’s presidency unfold (I supported his candidacy when I was in high school, and voted for him the 2nd time) and thought well, it’s those fucking Republicans. They’re stonewalling his agenda, their criticisms aren’t justified, and so on. That’s what I thought when I voted for him for his 2nd term (I’d chalked up his inability to pass his legislation as the fault of Republicans mostly, for blocking his every step, and to Democrats in Congress for losing the House and Senate, at least at the time). I figured you know what, these pricks are just holding him up at every turn at this point, and while I didn’t agree with him on a few things I thought maybe if we give him a 2nd term, maybe THEN he’ll be able to ram it down their throats without worrying about reelection, gloves off. I thought, maybe some of those key campaign promises he seemed to be contradicting or forgetting so far, at the end of his 1st term, he’d make sure to deliver on, fight for harder. The irony is that he did exactly that, and I hadn’t really realized until about halfway through his 2nd term. I started reassessing how he’d done as far as making good on those campaign promises, from the 1st and the 2nd time. The more I looked, the more he came up short. I wasn’t as biased against Republicans as you seem to be, I just thought they were a bunch of rich, corporatist pricks. Matter of fact, I still pretty much think that. Anyways, the point is I rarely voted Republican, had no fondness for them, and wasn’t looking forward to the slew of corporatist shilly they were sure to throw our way. I wasn’t disappointed because right before people started announcing a few key names were already being floated as likely candidates; Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, and so on. But then when the race started getting underway and Trump did his announcement speech… and I watched him say, in more forceful language here and there, the same exact things I’d heard from Democrats I’d supported. Barack Obama himself said virtually the same thing (2007, 2008) an it’s one of the reasons I voted for him. I mean for Christ’s sake, he said in his 1st term that he couldn’t (and shouldn’t, even if he could) just unilaterally legalize a bunch of people who’ve immigrated here illegally, the President doesn’t have the constitutional authority. Then I watched him try doing it (DACA and DAPA, the latter of which was beaten in court, found to be unconstitutional) in spite of what he’d said in his 1st term. Bill Clinton said things about illegal immigration almost identical to Trump, and a lot of other Democrats (cutting off for most of them around 2007 to 2010, depending on which one you look at) had said. Even including the likes of Diane Feinstein, who I’ve never cared much for tbh. I had all those memories, and my own outlooks hadn’t really changed all that much since I’d voted for the 44th President, but Trump went and announced his candidacy, and then people declared him a racist for saying those things. Before then I knew a little about him, an over the top, theatrically, highly successful businessman in (mostly New York) real estate, worth billions. I think I’d heard about the “Apprentice” show probably, never watched it though. But when I started looking into it I was impressed, just not with the show itself. I’m not a big fan of reality tv. I was impressed with the massive success and awesome performance that show had. The more I dug into the details of his background, the big deals, the big fuck ups, the being worth basically negative 10 billion in the mid-90’s, etc. and the bouncing back from that. I’ve heard plenty of his bankruptcies, for example. Have you ever heard anyone give you the ration of successful businesses versus bankrupt ones though? 4 bankruptcies, right (might be 5, can’t recall of the top of my head), all of which were for restructuring purposes btw, so they could resume paying all debts owed, not the type of bankruptcy that means you’re out of cash, shut down. So, add another handful of fails for the Steak and the Airline and stuff, five or six ventures let’s say. How many companies does Trump either have a controlling interest in, or own outright? When he announced his candidacy for President, the number was somewhere just north of 400. Research it. Don’t take my word. There’s a lot of material of his failures, and not a lot in terms of quantity that cover the details or scope of his successes. But, take a book or two of his and fact check it against other stuff published at the time about things he referenced or said in whichever book you pick. Or do the same thing with some of his highest profile, most polished speeches (where he keeps the exaggerations to a minimum, it seems, though they still come into it occasionally). I don’t know why I took the time to type all this out to be honest but, hey, idk, maybe this’ll give you a bit of insight into where I’m coming from, both in this conversation, and (mainly) in how I might have looked at and assessed all of the difference points of controversy and contention you’ve brought up throughout our back and forth. I think we probably have more common ground than you seem to think.

      • Well you’d be wrong about the number of people I know and interact with supporting Trump – I can think of two – and that’s across the spectrum of ethnicities from Phd’s to dropouts, neither of which share my views about equality.
        As to rational explanations they can offer there aren’t any, though they are heavy on pure unadulterated Trumpism and the laundry list of alternative facts and excuses.
        Trumpism has zilch to do with equality – it’s about the last desperate gasp of white privilege, the fear of losing control and being overrun by the barbarians – you know – Mexican rapists, AIDs infected Haitians, and those from “shithole countries” – rather Norwegians which would be a downgrade if they left their own country to come here.
        It’s about the bullshit of evangelicals, white nationalists being joined by “good people”, pandering to corporations and one percenters.
        It’s about a “tax break” Paul Ryan tweets glowingly about a woman whose getting an extra buck fifty a week in her take home, which he swiftly deleted when twitter lit up.
        It’s about the realization that the “tax bill” adds to the national debt and ideas being floated by Trump that a twenty five cents a gallon fuel tax sounds good in an effort to mitigate the impact.
        A buck fifty a week equals six dollars a month, seventy two dollars a year, big fing deal as his corporate buds receive millions funded by cuts to health care and longstanding essential social services.
        If a person uses twenty gallons of fuel a week that translates to five dollars, twenty bucks a month or two hundred a forty a year in TAXES.
        Of course the Reps profess to be aghast at such a proposal during a midterm election year, but if they survive those elections it will be a different story.
        Whatever the benefits of the “largest tax reform bill in history” ( another lie by the great exaggerator) are claimed to be the out of pocket increase for essentials like healthcare, prescriptions, pre and post natal care will go in the tank and offset them – equality? you bet.
        Everything is going to go up with the carte blanche Trump has handed his cronies.
        Equality in education with someone like Betsy DeVos who doesn’t give a rip about anything but charter schools and those owned by churches. Have you actually looked at her “policies”?
        DeVos who believes students should be saddled with a debt they’ll be paying on with interest for years but is okay with the “tax bill” that benefits her.
        The “honest way” to go about political discourse is to address the issues, not avoid them or offer excuses.
        As a people the nations have been on the bottom rung of the socio economic ladder from day one the words of all being created equal were first penned – at best we’ve been a photo op during campaigns, neither you nor anyone else can convince me that will change under this administration – your boy did everything in his power including lying through his fangs to disrupt an economic opportunity involving ndn casinos. Guess that’s evidence of his superior business acumen.
        Your boy couldn’t even conduct an honoring ceremony for code talkers without taking a “pocohontas” swipe.
        Everything was taken from us and the land grab not only continues but has been ramped up by this corrupt administration – ignitable water and fracking induced earthquakes are just fine as long as someone gets to make a buck – yeah, equality.
        Our sacred sites have no value – think they’ll be fracking or running a pipeline in Arlington, Montecello, or The Hermitage.
        Are you familiar with Andrew Jackson Trump’s hero, the man who defied the SC to conduct his personal war against the nations?
        Climate change is a lie and if it isn’t oh well eat, drink, and be merry then kick the can down the road.
        This man is demonstrably stupid, egocentric, and a full blown pathological liar that called in to media sites using the alias John Baron to promote his “friend” Trump as being a real ladies man – all this and you voted for him?
        A man who says his daughter is so hot if she weren’t his daughter he’d being going after her. what kind of father speaks in such a way? No wait, I know, he’s merely being authentic – and that’s the core problem the authenticity of who he is.
        An egomaniac who believes if everything that surrounds him is gold plated or the color gold it’s his personal provenance.
        A man who when announcing his candidacy showed his heart in calling Mexicans rapists – but no, he isn’t a racist and according to his ignorance Mexicans love him.
        A man who has been sued and ponied up a settlement ( I never settle) for his racist policies at his casino, his rentals – but no he isn’t a racist, he loves everybody more than anyone could or has ever loved everyone.
        The why’s of your disagreement with me are clearly understood.
        As to Obama I’ve criticized him in this blog for the “new legal regime” he championed related to indefinite detention, reference to ISIS as the jv squad and a few others things – like I said, no blind party allegiance, no favorites, no excuses.
        And if you’re attempting to say the Reps didn’t have an agenda to obstruct Obama I find it difficult to believe you actually believe that – they were very open in saying so.
        I’ve also given Bush credit for his approach to AIDS treatment in Africa but generally think of him as underwhelming.
        I think both the Clinton’s have become toxic to their party and the best thing they could do is shut the hell up and go away.
        Trump’s controlling business interests by and large are about selling his name or mere paper entities, something to put his name
        on like Trump Publishing LLC – Trump Publishing? What is that some megalithic publishing concern of just more meaningless
        ego stroking bs? I might add more than one venture has wound up falling flat on it’s face with Trump being sued. Success? Oh yeah.
        MAGA – America first with MAGA hats and product lines made in China, Bangladesh and who knows where else.
        Rip Obama for playing golf a total of twenty nine times during eight years and this clown has already doubled that number – floats the birther bs for years then says Obama was born in the U.S.period and now wants to float all that again – more lies.
        Trump is an equal opportunity offender, a serial one at that, that’s as far as his perception of equality goes.
        He has to read “polished speeches” to keep his “exaggerations” to a minimum – that alone speaks volumes.
        He and Kelly are all in for Porter until it hits the fan, then a complete reversal with Trump declaring no one is more opposed to domestic abuse than he is – there again he is the greatest at all things.
        Trump’s such a victim falsely accused by women his attorney pays a porn star 130k to remain silent – 130k out of his own pocket?
        He signs legislation revoking restrictions dealing with those who have mental health issues possessing guns and then says it isn’t about guns but mental health.
        And now, only now when gutless politicians on the NRA payroll are confronted by the latest shooting and an uprising of students suggests maybe something, some watered down loophole riddled piece of Republican legislation is need – Ave Caesar!
        Trump won the electoral College by the largest number ever – like hell he did and yet continues to insist he did – more lies.
        The EC an instrument meant to guard against the election of a lunatic populist and yet went with one…. fail, so sad.
        He’s bashed Mitt Romney and now in his desperation to keep himself protected by a Republican controlled Senate and Congress says Mitt’s a good ‘ol boy and has his full endorsement – the same reason he endorsed I like ‘em young Roy Moore.
        The problem isn’t what people don’t know about Trump it’s about what they do know.
        Drawing comparisons between something Clinton or Feinstein have said related to immigration doesn’t match the ongoing litany coming from Trump.
        Personally I believe immigration reform is needed and have said so citing our closet neighbor Canada and other countries having a merit based system that takes into consideration refugees and special circumstances with no mention of “shithole countries”, ethnicity, nor religious beliefs.
        None of which of course have racist overtones.
        A highly successful businessman is it? well here’s little food for thought related to his “success”.

        ” We don’t rely on American banks. We have all the funding we need out of Russia.” Eric Trump

        “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross section of a lot of our assets. We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia. ” Trump jr

        “I have nothing to do with Russia: no deals, no loans, no nothing. Donald Trump

        If all of Trump’s denials are true is he then calling his sons liars?
        And is it possible that the reason Trump hasn’t signed off on the sanctions against Russia sitting on his desk is because he’s afraid he’ll anger them and they’ll spill the beans at least as far as “the funding”?

      • Is there something I might not be able to see if I’m on my phone? Because it seems like I’m missing something, surely THAT can’t be what your citing as the reason you think he’s a racist.

      • I would call it laying a foundation to demonstrate
        that this is a man of questionable character and
        Which if you admit he did lie about this makes it
        more difficult to defend racist behavior when presented
        and denied.
        So a simple question – did he lie?

      • He exaggerated. Is intentionally exaggerating line? Is it lying if you tell people that you do that? Because you said that truthful hyperbole is a tactic he uses since back when he wrote his first book. Seriously, there’s a chapter on it. It’s not like he’s making it a secret, so is it really lies, or since he tells people exactly what he’s doing, are the people who thinks he’s lying just to dumb to take what he says at face value?

      • Geez – you really are an apologist – one of those
        “alternative facts” – a lie he has continued to insist
        is true – flipped out on his staff demanding they
        involve the Nat’l Park Service and Spicer jump out
        and make an abject fool of himself declaring the lie
        was a fact “period”.
        So let’s see then, his mental health issues translate to
        his lie about voter fraud was also nothing more than a
        mere exaggeration – would that be correct?
        You’re right though – there is no secret about who
        and what Trump is.

      • If there’s no secret about it, and terms of the hyperbole at least, then I fail to see how that’s really as dishonest as you make it out to be. If he’s being transparent about doing it, how is it deceptive? See to me that’s the difference between hyperbole and outright lying, he’s not pretending that he’s not doing hyperbole, so he’s not really lying is he.

      • You’re correct in saying he’s not pretending about hyperbole,
        he isn’t pretending that he’s a pathological liar in the midst
        of the sure knowledge apologists will spin and conflate.
        So by your metric as long as a person would announce that
        they’re going to lie that too would be acceptable because they
        aren’t “pretending”.
        Clarify to me if you can how insisting the size of his
        inauguration crowd qualifies as anything other than a lie?
        Lying isn’t acceptable as a norm, neither you nor anyone else
        should make an effort to convince anyone that it is.

        You weave a tattered web that depends on a lack of scrutiny.

      • How are they gonna lie to your face when they’ve warned you beforehand how they talk? It has to be an attempt to mislead (rather than self promote) in order to qualify as a lie. If his focus is on marketing and branding and building things up, then he’s not exactly making concerted efforts to dupe anyone. Transparency and honesty involved here severely undermines the assertion that he’s a “liar”.

      • So lying is never about self promotion? And it remains exaggeration as long
        as an individual insists it’s true?
        Trump “exaggerated” so much he threw a tantrum? But it’s all good because he
        has a reputation for “exaggeration”?
        Lies are never meant to “dupe” anyone?

      • Here we go – straight forward questions and it’s a twisting
        of words – how predictable….. infact I’ve been predicting
        with about an eighty percent accuracy to others following
        along what the nature of your replies would be.
        The only people you’ve had anything positive to say about
        are Trump and Moore, everyone else is a liar or a piece
        of shit – there’s a statement in that alone.
        I get it, you’re all in with Trump and this administrations
        agenda – that’s your privilege, also your privilege to
        skip over or avoid answering obvious questions arising from
        from your own statements – but like they say – people are
        entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts.
        You’re wasting your time here as the “playing with words” is
        too transparent.

      • Write me off if you want I guess, I just reply when I’ve got free time after my phone notification dings and have been going back and forth with you in all sincerity. I think the conclusions you;ve come to about a lot of this stuff is flawed. I’m not just trying to get across that I disagree with you, that’s obvious, I’m trying to get across why. If you want to deliberately misunderstand or mischaracterize what I’m saying with your “questions”, fine by me, but not the most intellectually honest way to go about political discourse. I get that your taking a liking to mocking that little one liner I threw in my bio section a few years back, off the cuff, but I’m not “just playing with words” unless trying to have a straightforward conversation is “playing” by your definition.

      • A straightforward conversation is expansive, inclusive of
        what is germane.That I believe would be a valid definition
        of intellectual honesty.

      • I missed this: “Your gravatar says you “play” with words and write “deranged stories”. Is that an attempt
        to be edgy or is it an accurate depiction?”

        Used to be in reference to the fiction I used to write. Haven’t actually done that for a while, but I do still play with words in the same sense any network does, whether they admit it or not. CNN and Fox News are both biased, for example, they can (and have) distort(ed) facts because of those biases, HOWEVER, Fox is usually upfront about their biases. Both still needs to be cross-checked, but one is more transparent, more honest. CNN and most others have always had a veneer of unbiased journalism, straight up reporting without favoring one side or another in any given context. It’s become more and more apparent, particularly over the last 3 or 4 years, that the vast majority of those claiming neutrality and a lack of bias, are not only biased but biased almost exclusively to the left. Then there’s the hyperbole, the characterizations and opinions; well if legit “news” organizations claiming to be neutral figures can do it, then hell, why can’t I? At least I don’t knowingly lie, will willingly correct any mistakes (if I actually made one, that is), and I’m upfront about my biased. You don’t have to wonder where I stand, and I give people something to judge me by that’s an accurate representation of my positions and values. You can like me or not, like my views or not, but the point is I’m not trying to hide them, or dupe you into going along with them. I come as I am, and people can do what they like with that as we cross paths. 😉

      • Well, I can appreciate literary talent, in fact have a friend
        who is budding sci fi author.
        I agree that corporate ownership of the media can, does, and
        has lead to the bias of ownership being evident and why I generally
        prefer sites like Politico etc but that in no way implies I
        believe “fake news” is the coin of the realm – it is a ploy
        dating back decades and a characteristic of despotic leaders.
        When it comes to media bias Fox News is the hands down winner.
        There’s a saying that a person is entitled to their own opinion
        but not their own facts – that applies to both you and I and why
        it is important to have the ability to validate an opinion with
        Trump and Arpaio’s own words are facts – words that go beyond
        written accounts but available as live interviews and archived
        If you are at all familiar with this blog then you know I don’t
        play favorites Dem or Rep – I don’t believe it serves the common
        good for any to do so.
        Too many people today see or hear something from a single source
        and seize on it as gospel – I don’t, I make every effort to verify
        what is being presented before I weigh in, and once having done so
        can provide supporting evidence if need be.
        As to Trump’s antics with the Mohawk I have friends among them and
        the other nations of the confederacy so I have some personal familiarity
        with what went on.

      • You can base spin and on fact just as much as you can base it on deception and fabrications. CNN tends to do the latter lately. Fox does when they can, but frankly they’re too chickenshit to do it that often, it usually results in a continual “red colored glasses” (think rose colored glasses, but right leaning instead of sunshine and roses) bent to the coverage, which is easy to filter out (especially due to their upfrontness about their biases), and occasional distortions here and there that are just as easy to catch as the bullshit CNN churns out. That’s my own assessment anyways, at least concerning those two outlets. I don’t trust websites either; I’m always cross-checking, trying to research who owns what, etc. because those sites are funded by people to, are owned by friends of friends of powerful people… everybody’s got an agenda these days, for the most part. Case in point being Politico. I check their site too but… really, you like them? They hate Trump and it distorts their coverage way more than it should. No where NEAR CNN levels, admittedly, but they’re not a platform I’d say I trust either. They very casually, seemingly without any investment in the subjects of their coverage, slant things against people and organizations they don’t care for, and prop up people/org.s they do care for. I watched that happen all throughout the 2016 election.

      • As a matter of fact I do like Politico, they seem to have
        an evenhanded approach which is why others may not like
        I’m not inclined to believe being “upfront” about bias is
        a mea culpa- especially when they deny it if pressed.

      • The main offenders of denying bias are left leaning outlets, and your perception of Politico as even handed (imho) is a result of your biases. You lean left, pretty obviously, so of course you think they’re “fair”.

      • I understood from the get go that you probably think
        Trump is the best thing since mustard on a burger
        and your perception of “fair” would be radically
        different than mine and if one were to speak of

      • So you basically let your biases dictate the course of the interaction, by assuming that you wouldn’t be able to talk with me at all, and then I wouldn’t be reasonable. Nice way to start a conversation. And you think I’m the problem?

  2. “He exaggerated. Is intentionally exaggerating line? Is it lying if you tell people that you do that? Because you said that truthful hyperbole is a tactic he uses since back when he wrote his first book. Seriously, there’s a chapter on it. It’s not like he’s making it a secret, so is it really lies, or since he tells people exactly what he’s doing, are the people who thinks he’s lying just to dumb to take what he says at face value?”

    “Because you said that truthful hyperbole is a tactic he uses since when he wrote his first book.”

    Care to point out where I made this specific statement or any other that in any way
    associated anything coming from Trumps’s lips with the truth?.
    Children exaggerate, adults as well at times, when it becomes serial in nature it becomes
    a pathology – also known as lying.

  3. I try to stay away from politics for the most part. The media reports what it is told to report or what not to, in order to sway public opinion. Politics is the same. Make everyone want what they want, wag the dog, it is hopeless.

    As for Trump being a racist, many people say he is:

    If all that is true. Well…

    Everyone is biased in some way or another. It is called having an opinion and a mind of our own.

    This discussion is a good one though. I like when people can communicate a difference of opinion and not get ugly.

    • Those who lead are obliged to provide an ethical
      example, and as you say we all have our own, some
      opinions will find common ground and others will
      not – but I remain convinced that on some level
      people have an inherent understanding of the right
      or wrong of things – an understanding they should
      act on.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s