O.K. It is your turn now. Would you be willing to reveal which utterances of Mr. Trump you suspect might be racist in nature or were meant to curry favor of those who have revealed more openly racist tendencies? I am fascinated by the lengths both Trump supporters and detractors will travel to avoid openly giving objective assessments of their preferred candidates.
I haven’t personally seen any racist comments and actions by Trump using traditional word meaning. That’s why I am asking for documented ones.
Today, some think they own the language and put whatever subjective meaning they want to “racist.”
Jeremy used Birther. Why is it an outrage/racist for a person running for President to have to produce a birth certificate? Red, yellow, black or white? Its required in the Constitution one must be a US citizen.
Jeremy used Charlottesville. I watched the whole weekend and Trumps comments. I never heard him give approval to either sides unlawful actions. The Supremicist and KKK had a march permit we are told, especially Friday without incident. That’s lawful. Take it up with the courts and 1st amendment. As the weekend went on both sides broke the law. I saw BLM/Antifa attack the “whites” in riot gear. Likewise the “whites fighting.” I did not see Trump giving approval to either. Several times over the weekend I heard him voice disapproval to what supremicist believe but that doesnt give BLM/Antifa the right to do what they did. Thats what I heard in principle. There was a good article here about the SDA church and how one member pointed out how the visiting pastor misused the pulpit for his biased political view and walked out and why. He failed to mention BLM/Antifa as causing problems.
There are some illegals, Mexicans Included, who have been rapist, murderers and worse. I never took Trumps meaning to mean all Hispanics, etc. are such. He wanted to correctly control the border which he correctly called a crisis for over a year before politicians and press recently acknowledged wasn’t a manufactured crisis. I call that foresight!
As far as the new young Turks of the Dem. party.
They have been bad mouthing pretty much anything the President does. They had been openly averse to Israel including their recent legislation comparing Israel to Hitler’s Germany and wanted to ban trade with them.
I saw “all” his tweet. He said they should go back to their “heritage country” and fix those corrupt places then come back and show us “how it’s done.” The point, address the realistic wrongs in the world and not just our country. This may broaden your horizons and myopic views. I considered it "voiced against an attitude"and not a racist remark. Pelosi was called a racist by them for trying to calm down “the women of colors” rhetoric. True? No Pelosi political fan here!
If you want to say Trump has been a “womanizer” with voluntary women in the past, I wont argue the point. I dont find that disqualifying to his excellent organization financial skills and worldview for the good of the whole country.
Some dont like his tone. I appreciate someone who does what he says and knows how to do something despite his tone. Who pushes back at false accusations as President and doesnt let others control the conversation. He isnt a choir boy. I dont want a sweet mouth that let’s the country populate with weeds and bad decisions under his guidance but has an infectious non confrontational personality.
So M, that’s my answer and I would like specific racist comments from you and/or Harry that are racist “in intent” indeed. Harry Truman used to say, “the buck stops here!” Responsibility is not first of all about being liked! Sometimes things just need to be said…especially when no one else will!
MAGA hat could it be considered racist? NO. I believe Jesus would want for us to be “:One Nation Under God.” That would MAGA. Every freedom that we hold dear as Americans every principal, equality, alienable rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, inclusion, tolerance, freedom of speech. Every one originated as a Christian idea at that.
bigotry | ˈbiɡətrē |
intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself
prejudice | ˈprejədəs |
preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience
racism | ˈrāˌsizəm |
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior: a program to combat racism.
• the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races
These seem to be rather common difinitions, so maybe they can be used in this discussion.
DT did not use the words ‘heritage country’ when the 4 persons were told to ‘go back where they come from’. It is interesting the ‘word’ spin that is constanly being done when people talk about this subject. Reminds me of the Clinton saga about whether or not he had sex with a women. He was disparaged up one side and down the other for ‘word’ spin! But now it is an accepted position to take.
What is prejudice to caucasian persons I often find, very, very often, is different than to a person of color, nationality, etc. Telling someone to go back to their own country sounds different to the caucasian because they feel this is their country, even though they immigrated just like everyone else.
The other tendency I notice when such articles as the one being talked about, is we often try to decide who is or isn’t rather than sit back and listen to the perspective of the author. It is an important subject, to me, because it effects all aspects of our Christian experience and how we view the life of Christ. I sm reminded of the last supper with everyone saying ‘who, not me’!
Jaray, that was the Intent of his comment. Go back to these countries, fix their corruption and come back and show us how to do it!
We have a lot of critics these days…easy to do. The new young Turks have no idea as to how to actually fix something. By the way Omar does strongly have prejudice towards/against white males. Appears racist to me.
“So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly…
and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how.…
…it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!”
July 14 Having trouble with text…not meant to be bold.
This zeitgeist about needing to have a difficult conversation is recurring and counterproductive.
It’s quite obvious to most of us, black or white, that every time these “difficult” conversations are had, it doesn’t take but a minute for a conflict to arise due to an unfortunate use of words or a misunderstanding of what is meant, irrespective of intention. What is meant by this “difficult” conversation isn’t really a conversation at all but merely a kowtowing mea culpa.
Now that’s not to say that a mea culpa isn’t required unless it’s already occurred? A conversation by definition is a dialogue. The minute a white person offers a perspective that may well be ill informed or shows an inability to walk in the other persons shoes, they will be pounced upon.
What exchange of words will draw a line in the sand and in what context/environment? I would suggest that none will do the job in the day and age of the permanently enraged twitterverse and the “chihuahua effect”.
This suggestion of a national conversation, particularly in the social media age will do nothing but make things worse. An ongoing acknowledgment of past wrongs plus actual assistance is what is required. A conversation about the apparent comfort of most Americans of all hues with inequality will be much more productive. The fact that many white communities are now exhibiting the same socials issues due family breakdown and dysfunction points to the cause of the problem and it’s not structural racism.
Fix the tax system, justice reform, provide basic healthcare, more equal funding of education and tax support for families etc etc and real change will occur. Much better to look forward than more conversations that are always like the ones families decide to have each year at holiday gatherings after numerous alcoholic drinks.
i’m still convinced of kavanaugh’s guilt, in addition to clarence thomas’ guilt, bill clinton’s guilt, and very definitely trump’s guilt…these are all men who’ve been credibly accused, and in the case of kavanaugh and thomas, have benefitted from GOP unwillingness to confront facts - actually trump is benefitting even more from GOP unwillingness to face facts…the fact that these men have been successful doesn’t remove their guilt…
as for trump’s impeachment, stay tuned…nancy pelosi’s reasoning on this particular question is wearing thin…and for someone who has vowed to give up the gavel in 2020, it’s only a matter of time before her caucus ditches her control…
but keep in mind that mueller hinted strongly, in his exchange with rep. mike quigley, that an indictment of trump is under seal, and can’t therefore be affected by the 5-yr statute of limitations for obstruction…nancy may know more about this than she’s letting on, hence her snide comment that she’d prefer to send trump to jail than impeach him…that is, she may already know that jail is a certainty for trump, and therefore feels no need to risk losing the house over an impeachment launch…
Oh Jeremy, Jeremy. What delusion on the left of US politics. Muellar was inept and simply a front man. He apparently has dementia and it was just a Dem. Clinton supporter Lawer group on a witch hunt.
No prosecutor recommendations of charges for collusion or obstruction which is what “prosecutors” are suppose to do. No such legal term for prosecutor to exonerate… .a joke, embarrasment and blight on our legal system.
You are “exonerated” legally simply by inadequate evidence to prosecute. This is simply a harassment show by Dems. For their supporters.
It doesnt matter what you are the Dems think. He is innocent before law until shown guilty!
Hope we are as a nation blessed by another 4 yrs. Of his leadership so he can finish some things started on immigration, business regulation, taxes, health care and trade and national defense.
Jeremy at least has the hair to admit what guys like TW and Batch don’t seem to be able to say. The problem got out of hand long ago. Then again if you preach a certain way, and if you then insist others do the same or get their walking papers, there is only one ending.
I don’t disagree with you, but Jeremy can say anything he pleases. He’s not an employee of the church, much less the president of the church, or the face/mouthpiece of a huge ministry, that’s is for all intents and purposes, a big part of the SDA church’s evangelism. What he says, or doesn’t say, has no impact on him, or anyone else, in reality. The others have to speak in a very couched way to keep things from falling apart, or from being too honest about how things really work, and what they may really believe.
Do I hear a parrot talking…go back, go back…
Useing such rhetoric seems to be suggesting you can not propose changes or speak out against what is seen as wrong or unjust without first ‘fixing’ some other country. Maybe we should have demanded the current POTUS go back to his origins and fix their issues! Makes as much sense!!!
But enough of the wailing and nashing of teeth over political drama. As Christians, followers of Christ, why not make out world, that is where we live and have influence, a better place for all. We can make a difference, if we live it. Matters not what the .org does, says or what ever, Christ ask us as individuals to make a difference. Treat, speak and act towards others in the way we wish to be treated.
All I have ever desired. I respond to political drama and dont initiate it.
Much of what is presented here has had political overtones. Some understanding of religion has been used as the moral absolute/superiority for certain political agendas.
I reject the idea. Most often it is just different political theory for perceived problems. Nothing to do with WWJD.
Ps. He did visit Scotland and felt Brexit would be positive for Britain.
No, no, no. I said that he said it all in that part that I quotes from him about Trump’s racism. Otherwise I have noticed that lately he @vandieman posted some very strange comments on the Bible, including the “pathetic” part.
What I said that I agreed with was with @Harry_Elliott’s comment.
“The ship is going through,” and not even racism, etc., can sink it. That is comfort for all races on the ship.
The good ship lollipop or the “invisible church” of Jesus Christ made up of all "true believers"only known to Him?
Ah, gentlemen (mostly). I find it interesting and even sad, that whenever Jason writes, people focus on terminology (and politics) rather than on his message. To me, his message is that people need to listen to and talk with (not at) each other, need to (try to) understand the other’s point of view and experiences, and need to understand their own part in hurting others. It’s not about who is racist or not; it’s about seeking to see life as others saw and see it in their lives. Seeking to understand that our view of the world is not the only one. Understanding that there can be more than one “right” way to view the world (this is especially hard for Adventists, I think).
Most of us are guilty of some level of discrimination; usually in the form of thinking ourselves “better than” someone else. It may be in the areas of thought processes, theology, economic management, abilities, and, of course, politics in both the country and the church. It may be simply thinking that our perceptions of reality are the only “right” ones.
But unless we are willing to listen to each other, respectfully and thoughtfully, communication will continue to break down and we will continue to hurl accusations at each other rather than actually communicating. As this thread continues to demonstrate.
Sorry to disagree. Jason, I suggest, invariably has an underlying political message and over the past 3 yrs. I think you would discover there were less than 2-3x’s that weren’t in some way pejorative to the POTUS and built his point from there.
I agree, we ALL at times are likely to practice at some level some form of racial, ethnic prejudice. It is a human condition not limited to one race. We should seek to look upon others for the quality of their character rather than the color of their skin…MLK. I see the young Turks “women of color” as very prejudiced, i.e. Their focus is always on gender or color.
And, those who agree with the Dem. Bull may just be the same. Oh sorry George, your not speaking to or inferring me.
We dont t like each other. Let’s leave it at that. Dont shadow me and I wont respond to you.
I want to go on record with George, that I don’t like you either. Please put me on the list of people who side with George.
Your late. I already knew of at least 6 here that didnt. That’s life. I’ve learned regarding politics mixed with religion that if you want a friend get a dog. I have 2.