President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Yeah, because it's a kid we're all just supposed to think it's awesome.

 

Trump appears to make up a conversation with steel company executive

"At an event in Minnesota last week, Trump said, “The head of U.S. Steel called me the other day, and he said, ‘We’re opening up six major facilities and expanding facilities that have never been expanded.’ They haven’t been opened in many, many years.” The president told the same story last night, saying U.S. Steel called him to announce the opening of six plants.

By all appearances, that conversation did not happen. The Washington Post explained this morning:

Here’s a puzzler: Why is the president of the United States announcing the opening of new factories that a major U.S. company has not announced?

U.S. Steel is a publicly traded company, so it is supposed to disclose materially important information. The opening of six major facilities and the expansion of even more would be huge news.

It would, indeed, if the news were real. U.S. Steel has apparently been reluctant to tell reporters that the president’s story isn’t real, but that doesn’t make it true. Indeed, the Post added, “The president is wrong. But apparently U.S. Steel is afraid to say that out loud.”

 

Instead of 'political correctness,' say 'politeness' and you'll see the confusion over 'civility.'

 

Surprised Stephanopoulos was able to hide his boner in that picture when he heard that statement.

 

A whole lot of people who whine about “political correctness” just want to be able to use offensive language to insult people. That’s not being civil.

 

I think his point was to weigh one person by their actions, is not discrimination.

To say, "You're a Trump supporter, and all Trump supporters are bad," would be discrimination. To say, "Here are the specific things you've done which makes me not want you in my place of business," is not discrimination.

 

Surprised Cohen didn't have vaginal cramps when he confessed his true feelings.

What else ya got?

 

Quite often.

You're calling @Jake from State Farm a dummy on another thread. You're bullying boadie in absentia on the Tebow thread. You're often mocking and insulting @typefitter. You're the classic passive-aggressive uncivil person.

 

When I listened to Stern, Stuttering John was the guy who asked stupid questions to celebrities (usually written by Jackie the Jokeman).

This guy did the prank calls (I forget his name) edit - captain janks

When did stuttering john start prank calls?

 

I believe one of the first times he said “I don’t have time to be politically correct” was at a debate in response to Megyn Kelly asking him why he repeatedly refers to women as pigs.

 

That's obviously a big part of being Conservative, I guess, although I'm really not sure what that means anymore. To me adherence to the founding documents is the base point. Specifically the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

So what that means is all men are created equal and given rights from their creator. Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, freedom of speech, freedom to worship how we choose, freedom to protect, etc.

Therefore the government has negative liberties. It cannot grant rights it can only act to protect inalienable rights. So I don't think there is a whole lot that a national government should do. Much of what should be done by a government should be done within a county and within a state. Schools, roads, welfare, etc. Practically that means the smallest federal government possible. No Obamacare, no department of education, no national welfare, no department of agriculture, etc. That stuff where needed can be done on a state level.

The modern liberal seems to think of government as having positive liberties. For example FDR wanted to guarantee everyone a house and a job. Obama wanted to guarantee medical insurance. Those aren't rights given by a Creator. I don't agree with positive liberties at all.

 

People who are against "political correctness" often just want to be able to keep using demeaning language—like "pigs" for women, or "retard" or "faggot." They see it as some shackle of their ability to express themselves or some weakening of the culture. But we see time and again that the same people who use words like "libtard"—like, look at that word and explain to me how that's remotely okay?—or "snowflake" can be plenty aggrieved when it's their own side that they feel is being demeaned. Then it becomes a question of civility.

I'll give you an example here on the board. @QYFW, whose handle is literally an admonishment to stop whining, and who will accuse liberals of all sorts of awful things, lost his mind when @poindexter started calling YF "Rainman" or some variation thereof. (poin was referencing the movie character, not our resident moron.) Q thought it was making fun of autistic people, and Q has a special needs son. (I do, too, but I didn't get the insult. Rainman is the hero of that story. But on the boards and in PMs, Q demanded that I stand up to poin.)

You could make the very clear argument that in that instance, Q was being politically correct. I'm sure if you were to call him that, he would rebuff the label, and frame it some other way. But here's what he did: He took insult at a word that he saw as demeaning, and he took further insult at those who didn't share his insult. What is that? That seems to me to be the very thing that Trumpists rail against. That's their definition of political correctness.

It's amazing how often conservatives see the light when the knock hits close to home. Like Dick Cheney when his daughter came out. It shouldn't have to take a personal connection to see why language matters, and why being kind isn't a weakness. But here we are.