Meryl Streep

[silverscreenselect]

Have you seen a video of the reporter in question, Bob? He has NO SUCH mannerisms. Zero.

So, Trump's (and yours and Flock's and BiT's) defense is that he was mocking the man for a different type of disability than the one he actually had.

That makes it so much better.

[Bob Juch]

[silverscreenselect]

Trump acted out a guy who was in trouble and didn't know what to do, acting like he didn't remember writing the article, when he knows he really did. You saw what you saw because that's what you wanted to see, and because your favorite singer, celebrity or main stream fake news source told you to see that, spazz-man.

No, I see a man who is shaking his body and his hands uncontrollably trying to imitate a person with palsy. Just like Rush Limbaugh did a similar exaggerated impression of Michael J. Fox a few years back. You saw what you saw because you're desperate to assign any non-bigoted reason for anything any rightwinger chooses to do.

And I never said that you or Trump or any specific person used Amos and Andy language. What I was saying is that what Trump did is similar to someone calling mistakenly calling a dark skinned person by the N-word and then claiming they weren't being bigoted because their statement wasn't true. That's a ridiculous argument and you apparently noticed that. But that's precisely the argument you're making about Trump.

I review a number of books on Amazon at the author's request, and I come across some strange things. One author had a character who was a middle-age black woman who was a social worker for a couple of troubled teenagers. She was college educated, but the author saddled her with nearly illiterate, slang-riddled dialogue in which she described her upbringing involving picking cotton and eating watermelon. There were similar slurs about a Japanese character in the book who talked like someone out of a bad World War II movie. I gave the book an unfavorable review and called the author out on it; his response was basically that he wasn't being racist, he was being humorous and that's the way he writes. When I later looked up his Facebook/Twitter pages I not surprisingly found he was a diehard right winger. Needless to say, that's the last book of his he ever asked me to review. That's the mindset a lot of rightwingers have in plays right into the things that Trump says and does and then has indignant apologists like you straining to find non-bigoted explanations.

[earendel]

I presume that all of you realize that you aren't going to change the other person's opinion on this.

[BackInTex]

Have you seen a video of the reporter in question, Bob? He has NO SUCH mannerisms. Zero.

So, Trump's (and yours and Flock's and BiT's) defense is that he was mocking the man for a different type of disability than the one he actually had.

That makes it so much better.

If you consider being a moron a disability, then Yes.

[BackInTex]

I presume that all of you realize that you aren't going to change the other person's opinion on this.

Quit trying to spoil our fun.

[flockofseagulls104]

Trump acted out a guy who was in trouble and didn't know what to do, acting like he didn't remember writing the article, when he knows he really did. You saw what you saw because that's what you wanted to see, and because your favorite singer, celebrity or main stream fake news source told you to see that, spazz-man.

No, I see a man who is shaking his body and his hands uncontrollably trying to imitate a person with palsy. Just like Rush Limbaugh did a similar exaggerated impression of Michael J. Fox a few years back. You saw what you saw because you're desperate to assign any non-bigoted reason for anything any rightwinger chooses to do.

And I never said that you or Trump or any specific person used Amos and Andy language. What I was saying is that what Trump did is similar to someone calling mistakenly calling a dark skinned person by the N-word and then claiming they weren't being bigoted because their statement wasn't true. That's a ridiculous argument and you apparently noticed that. But that's precisely the argument you're making about Trump.

I review a number of books on Amazon at the author's request, and I come across some strange things. One author had a character who was a middle-age black woman who was a social worker for a couple of troubled teenagers. She was college educated, but the author saddled her with nearly illiterate, slang-riddled dialogue in which she described her upbringing involving picking cotton and eating watermelon. There were similar slurs about a Japanese character in the book who talked like someone out of a bad World War II movie. I gave the book an unfavorable review and called the author out on it; his response was basically that he wasn't being racist, he was being humorous and that's the way he writes. When I later looked up his Facebook/Twitter pages I not surprisingly found he was a diehard right winger. Needless to say, that's the last book of his he ever asked me to review. That's the mindset a lot of rightwingers have in plays right into the things that Trump says and does and then has indignant apologists like you straining to find non-bigoted explanations.

You misunderstand me SSS. What I am pointing out is that YOU are the bigot here. Look up the definition of the word and do some introspection.

[flockofseagulls104]

I presume that all of you realize that you aren't going to change the other person's opinion on this.

Quit trying to spoil our fun.

Really? I thought I was coming very close....

[earendel]

I presume that all of you realize that you aren't going to change the other person's opinion on this.

Quit trying to spoil our fun.

You and I have vastly differing definitions of "fun".

[silverscreenselect]

You misunderstand me SSS. What I am pointing out is that YOU are the bigot here. Look up the definition of the word and do some introspection.

I admitted what I did in elementary school, something that troubles me today. You seem to want to parse every word of mine for some trace of bigotry. Knock yourself out. You are one of the few people who, when your willful ignorance is pointed out to you, delight in reaffirming it at least a dozen times in a single thread as with Trump.

[flockofseagulls104]

You misunderstand me SSS. What I am pointing out is that YOU are the bigot here. Look up the definition of the word and do some introspection.

I admitted what I did in elementary school, something that troubles me today. You seem to want to parse every word of mine for some trace of bigotry. Knock yourself out. You are one of the few people who, when your willful ignorance is pointed out to you, delight in reaffirming it at least a dozen times in a single thread as with Trump.

What willful ignorance would that be?

[silverscreenselect]

What willful ignorance would that be?

The willful ignorance that, when shown Bob's posting of the Trump video at least a dozen times, it is anything other than a slur against handicapped people. How else would you describe his actions?

[flockofseagulls104]

What willful ignorance would that be?

The willful ignorance that, when shown Bob's posting of the Trump video at least a dozen times, it is anything other than a slur against handicapped people. How else would you describe his actions?

I am not ignorant of the video. And I have explained what I see many times. It is you and Bob that are showing willful ignorance. His gestures are his way of emphasizing what he is saying. You insist on taking it to another level, based only on your bigotry.

[Bob78164]

What willful ignorance would that be?

The willful ignorance that, when shown Bob's posting of the Trump video at least a dozen times, it is anything other than a slur against handicapped people. How else would you describe his actions?

I am not ignorant of the video. And I have explained what I see many times. It is you and Bob that are showing willful ignorance. His gestures are his way of emphasizing what he is saying. You insist on taking it to another level, based only on your bigotry.

The only way to see this video that way:



Is to watch it with your eyes and mind closed. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

The willful ignorance that, when shown Bob's posting of the Trump video at least a dozen times, it is anything other than a slur against handicapped people. How else would you describe his actions?

I am not ignorant of the video. And I have explained what I see many times. It is you and Bob that are showing willful ignorance. His gestures are his way of emphasizing what he is saying. You insist on taking it to another level, based only on your bigotry.

The only way to see this video that way:


Is to watch it with your eyes and mind closed. --Bob

I wonder if you noticed in this #FAKE NEWS clip that the CNN Fake news reporter slipped in the word 'debunked'. If you care to listen to what Trump said, he was referring to an article that Serge wrote in the Washington Post in which he reports that several people were taken into custody on 9/11 in NJ and they were celebrating the destruction of the Twin Towers. That report written by Serge was apparently overlooked by the Post when researching a 'fact check' fake news article in which they stated Trump was lying. Serge was claiming he didn't write the article that the evidence proved he wrote. http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2 ... tional.phpThe statement that Trump made about 9/11 celebrations was NOT debunked, and Serge's article is the proof. Trump was dramatically illustrating Serge's trying to lie his way out of a corner. The only way you could interpret that as mocking handicapped people is that you want to interpret it that way.

The physical evidence (the article Serge wrote a day or so after 9/11), the topic of the speech, the fact that Serge does not have any similar impairment, the instances where Trump used the same gestures to illustrate frustration on the part of his opponents coupled with an ounce of common sense indicates there is an extraordinary amount of reasonable doubt of your accusation. The motive for this accusation? To deflect attention away from the fact that the Post wrote a hit piece that was shoddily researched and missed an article that appeared in the Post itself. And the motive on your part? You have publically vowed to oppose and demonize Trump both personally and professionally.

As you like to say: show me some evidence to convince me that your accusation is true. I think you've lost this case, counselor.

[silverscreenselect]

the fact that Serge does not have any similar impairment,

Reading this makes me think that I might have been wrong about Trump. Maybe he can solve the healthcare crisis. After all, according to you, he can look at a person and tell at a glance just what type of handicap that person does or does not have and then carefully select a derogatory slur that doesn't happen to fit with that person's handicap, knowing that the reporter or any other fair minded person who sees the video over the course of the next year couldn't possibly be offended by it.

And it's certainly not insulting to handicapped people to make fun of someone you think is incorrect or stupid by shaking your arms and body uncontrollably.

[flockofseagulls104]

the fact that Serge does not have any similar impairment,

Reading this makes me think that I might have been wrong about Trump. Maybe he can solve the healthcare crisis. After all, according to you, he can look at a person and tell at a glance just what type of handicap that person does or does not have and then carefully select a derogatory slur that doesn't happen to fit with that person's handicap, knowing that the reporter or any other fair minded person who sees the video over the course of the next year couldn't possibly be offended by it.

And it's certainly not insulting to handicapped people to make fun of someone you think is incorrect or stupid by shaking your arms and body uncontrollably.

Get over it, spazz-man, Hillary lost. Who are you to be the defender of everyone's sensibilities? I can give you a list of things I am offended by. Why are my sensibilities of lesser importance than yours?

[flockofseagulls104]

On another note, apparently President Elect Trump picked up on my hashtag and calls CNN #FAKE NEWS. He is not as dumb as he appears to be.

[silverscreenselect]

And while we're at it, let's look at the evidence that Trump was somehow vindicated by Kovalesky's article.

It said that "law enforcement authorities detained and questioned a number of people who were allegedly seen celebrating the attacks and holding tailgate-style parties on rooftops." Note, that those parties and celebrations weren't confirmed, only "alleged" and nowhere is there an indication of the size of the celebrations. I'm sure that there were a lot of people in the New York area looking at the damage that day, and there's also no indication these people were Arabic or Muslims.

Now let's see what Trump said:

[/[W]hen he was questioned by ABC News today about his assertion that “thousands and thousands of people” cheered the collapse of the World Trade Center on Sept. 11 just across the river in New Jersey, Trump doubled down.

“It did happen. I saw it. It was on television. I saw it,” Trump said.

George Stephanopoulos responded, “You saw that with your own eyes? Police say it didn’t happen.”

Trump said: “George, it did happen. There were people that were cheering on the other side of New Jersey where you have large Arab populations. They were cheering as the World Trade Center came down. …

We asked our library to look through contemporaneous news reports. They tells us that that they could not turn up any news accounts of American Muslims cheering or celebrating in the wake of Sept. 11.

So, at best, Trump saw a vague description in a single newspaper article that was buried in the middle and conflated that into a claim that thousands of people were celebrating that he saw on television or he made the thing up and some right winger after the fact lucked into finding that article. And you'll note that the refutations go to the major points of Trump's claim that there were thousands of Muslims celebrating. When questioned, Kovalesky truthfully said that he couldn't recall anything about hundreds or thousands of people celebrating.

If Bob #'s were in court and Flock tried to make the point that Trump was vindicated, he might hold up the Post article, read out the exact words I mentioned and say, all the grandiose claims Trump made of seeing thousands of people celebrating, and out of all the newspaper and television coverage of 9/11 and this one sentence is the best you could come up with. Really?

[silverscreenselect]

I can give you a list of things I am offended by.

I gather that insulting handicapped people is not one of them, unless it happens to be by a fourth grader who, as an adult holds political beliefs with which you disagree.

[flockofseagulls104]

I can give you a list of things I am offended by.

I gather that insulting handicapped people is not one of them, unless it happens to be by a fourth grader who, as an adult holds political beliefs with which you disagree.

You're still in 4th grade? I KNEW IT!

[flockofseagulls104]

Hey Bob, here's another video for you. Looking forward to you and your firm going after Ex-President Obama.



Just to keep the record straight, this is #FAKE NEWS as well. I saw it on Facebook. I am not the Special Adjudicator of Sensibilities. That's SSS's job. I will let SSS tell me how President Obama is not mocking people with disabilities and Trump is. I don't think either of them did.

The news media can and will drag up crap like this against anyone that's in the public eye. They only use it when it fits their agenda. If they wanted to, they could have dragged Pres. Obama through the mud over this. They didn't. Ask yourselves why.

[a1mamacat]

On another note, apparently President Elect Trump picked up on my hashtag and calls CNN #FAKE NEWS. He is not as dumb as he appears to be.

I don't think too many said he was dumb... unclean, slimy, perverted, pathological, maybe, but dumb? He managed to convince enough people that he actually gives a rat's ass about them, and did it all without a twinge of conscience. Pretty smart, actually.

[Estonut]

This was in the same speech as the one that Bob posted ad infinitum. Interesting that his clip cut short of this. This is Trump mocking the statements of a General, who is not disabled in any way. Notice any similarities?

[Bob78164]

This was in the same speech as the one that Bob posted ad infinitum. Interesting that his clip cut short of this. This is Trump mocking the statements of a General, who is not disabled in any way. Notice any similarities?

Hard to tell. That clip is obviously both altered and truncated. It's three repeats of a two-second passage.

Doesn't compare to his mockery of the disabled as seen in this unaltered clip:



--Bob