Trump, having given racists permission to come out of the closet, now tells that that, if they really want to make America great again, they need to “toughen up” and start doling out the violence

Since we had our discussion a week or so ago about the circumstances within the Republican party that made Trump’s ascent possible, and whether or not the comparison to Hitler is justified, quite a bit has happened. Most notably, we’ve seen Trump’s aggressive, authoritarian rhetoric intensify. And, with this ramped up rhetoric, we’ve seen a marked increase in acts of violence perpetrated against protestors, especially protesters of color, at his rallies.

In the past week or so, we’ve seen peaceful protesters at Trump events violently shoved and sucker-punched to the head. We’ve also heard Trump’s supporters yelling things like, “Go to fucking Auschwitz,” and “Go back to Africa.” And, in spite of these things, Trump continues to encourage his followers to “knock the crap out of” those in the audience who are there to protest, going so far as to offer to pay the legal fees of those who step up and actually do it. “We’ve become weak,” he says to his supporters, recalling a better time in American history when such people would have been “carried out on stretchers.” One of the things contributing to our decline as a nation, he says, is that “There are no consequences to protesting anymore.”

“Knock the hell out of them. I promise you I will pay for the legal fees. I promise.” -Donald Trump

What I find the most troubling is the fact that Trump is increasingly using words and phrases intended to dehumanize those whom he sees as impediments to his quest to “Make America Great Again.” “These are not good people,” he recently told a crowd of his supporters, indicating a group of protestors. “They contribute nothing,” he added. He then went on to say, “These are the people that are destroying our country.” [At the risk of losing credibility by once again drawing the comparison to Hitler, the way Trump talks about protesters reminds me a great deal of how the Nazis talked about the Jews, referring to them as der untermensch, or “the subhuman.”]

trumpdehumanizing

Given these comments made by Trump, and the enthusiasm by which they’ve been met, is it really any surprise that, swept up in the moment, people might begin to act in ways that they wouldn’t in everyday polite society?

Alvin Bamberger, the 75 year old Korean War veteran caught on tape a last week violently shoving a young black woman from a Trump rally in Louisville, Kentucky, explained the circumstances in a letter of apology written to the president of the Korean War Veterans Association. “Trump kept saying ‘get them out, get them out’ and people in the crowd began pushing and shoving the protestors,” Bamberger wrote. “Unfortunately a lot of this behavior was happening right next to where I was standing, and, having been pushed to the floor myself, my emotions got the best of me, and I was caught up in the frenzy. I physically pushed a young woman down the aisle toward the exit, an action I sincerely regret.” He also claimed repeatedly not to be a racist, and asked to be “forgiven for (his) actions.” While we can debate Bamberger’s sincerity, I don’t think there’s any doubt that the environment in that room, fostered by Trump, was a huge contributing factor.

Trump’s ascendency has brought things to the mainstream that have always been buried just below the surface. Trump has made it OK for people to say things out loud that, up until a few months ago, they may have just muttered to themselves in their own cars. Trump, through his words and actions, has shown racists that they can come out of the closet without fear of retribution. And, as we’re seeing, they’re taking full advantage of the opportunity.

A lot of us thought that it could never happen here. While we knew that there was the potential for such things to happen, we thought that our political leaders would stop it, or that the media would pull the plug before it got this bad. It hadn’t occurred to us that a good many of our political leaders might actually nurture it along, as it promised to serve their agendas, or that the media might encourage it, seeing as how it’s good for ratings… And now we find ourselves collectively staring into the abyss, asking ourselves why we let it get this far… How did we get to a point where the Republican candidate for President of the United Sates is actually saying that, if we want to “be great again,” we need to increase the level of violence in society?

downthetubes

President Obama, speaking about Trump at SXSW yesterday, asked the audience, “How can you be shocked?” He went on to say, “This is the guy, remember, who was sure that I was born in Kenya — who just wouldn’t let it go. And all this same Republican establishment, they weren’t saying nothing. As long as it was directed at me, they were fine with it. They thought it was a hoot, wanted to get his endorsement.”

Here’s a clip from Obama’s speech.

…”What is happening in this primary is just a distillation of what’s been happening inside their party for more than a decade. I mean, the reason that many of their voters are responding is because this is what’s been fed through the messages they’ve been sending for a long time — that you just make flat assertions that don’t comport with the facts. That you just deny the evidence of science. That compromise is a betrayal. That the other side isn’t simply wrong, or we just disagree, we want to take a different approach, but the other side is destroying the country, or treasonous. I mean, that’s — look it up. That’s what they’ve been saying.

So they can’t be surprised when somebody suddenly looks and says, you know what, I can do that even better. I can make stuff up better than that. I can be more outrageous than that. I can insult people even better than that. I can be even more uncivil. I mean, conservative outlets have been feeding their base constantly the notion that everything is a disaster, that everybody else is to blame, that Obamacare is destroying the country. And it doesn’t matter whether it’s true or not. It’s not, we disagree with this program, we think we can do it better — it’s, oh, this is a crisis!

So if you don’t care about the facts, or the evidence, or civility, in general in making your arguments, you will end up with candidates who will say just about anything and do just about anything. And when your answer to every proposal that I make, or Democrats make is no, it means that you’ve got to become more and more unreasonable because that’s the only way you can say no to some pretty reasonable stuff. And then you shouldn’t be surprised when your party ultimately has no ideas to offer at all…

Now, I think it’s pretty clear, it’s just a matter of time before there is bloodshed. It’s inevitable at this point. I knew it the moment I read what John McGraw, the Trump supporter who sucker-punched the man at the rally in North Carolina, had said to reporters after the incident. “The next time we see him, we might have to kill him,” McGraw said of the victim. “We don’t know if he’s ISIS. We don’t know who he is, but we know he’s not acting like an American.”

And Trump isn’t doing anything to decrease the tension. He’s not asking his supporters to be civil. He isn’t ratcheting down his rhetoric. In fact, as I noted earlier, he’s pushing the boundaries even further… Here, if you haven’t yet seen it, is video of his recent statements compiled by Rachel Maddow.

Trump, for what it’s worth, did come out this morning and say, “I don’t condone violence,” but, at the same time, he continued to maintain that none of it we’ve seen thus far has been his fault, as, in each case, the episodes were instigated by protestors who were sent by his democratic opponents, especially Bernie Sanders, who he refers to as “our communist friend.” As the folks at Talking Points Memo point out, however, while Trump has “repeatedly claimed that instances of crowd violence at his rallies occurred when protestors – ‘bad dudes’ – attacked his supporters and his supporters fought back. Until the events last night in Chicago, there is no evidence that anything like this ever happened. Not once.” Tensions, however, are increasing on both sides. As it becomes more and more likely that Trump will be Republican nominee for President, people are beginning to push back. As we saw yesterday in Chicago, where Trump protestors took to the streets, things are beginning to intensify. And, at this point, I don’t know how we can turn things around. So, as I see it, it’s not a matter of if someone will die, by when.

The only question I have is how people will react when the first person dies at a Trump rally. Will that be the end of Trump, or will it just be the beginning?

This entry was posted in Civil Liberties, Politics, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

101 Comments

  1. Peter Larson
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 12:38 am | Permalink

    Why is anyone surprised?

    It will be interesting when he becomes President.

    And pretty terrible.

  2. Peter Larson
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 1:36 am | Permalink

    What we need is more cameras on the streets watching black people in Ypsilanti Township.

  3. Jean Henry
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 7:29 am | Permalink

    That last sentence is over the top. I’m not questioning that someone might die in all this– from either side– it only takes one asshole to kill someone. But the idea that Trump would rise from such an event seems to underestimate the fundamental human decency of the majority of American people (no matter their political beliefs) a great deal. My hope, because I don’t believe that the mass of people in those rallies are all evil incarnate, is that the participants there will begin to self-manage the crowd. I could be wrong. He has the nomination in hand. I am of mixed feeling about protest, but a part of me wishes we would just let them be until the general at this point. Why poke the bear? My feeling is that Trump will crumble in debate with either Sanders or Clinton, but especially Clinton. Narcissists freak out when they feel they are being criticized. HRC is very very scary calm under fire. I think he’ll fall apart. But I’ve been wrong before.

  4. Demetrius
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 8:05 am | Permalink

    Trump is a racist, an opportunist, and semi-fascist.

    But as odious as I find Trump and his supporters, I don’t agree with attempts to protest inside, or shut down his rallies. (Protesting outside is another matter.)

    Trump has a right to speak, and his supporters have a right to assemble peacefully to hear what he has to say. Most people here would be outraged if the other side was trying to disrupt/shut down Hillary or Bernie rallies, and I don’t see how this is any different.

    Also (ironically) I think that at this point, the protesters are giving more power to Trump than they are taking away – since they are fueling his claims that those who oppose him are “troublemakers,” “not good Americans,” or “Communists” (like Bernie).

  5. Frosted Flakes
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 8:21 am | Permalink

    People have a right to speak and people have a right to assert their right to speak without being labeled as some kind of demon who is opposed to the soldiers of goodness.

    Practically the only thing I have agreed with Trump on is the idea that political correctness can be a destructive force. I think he is taking that core belief and going a bit nuts with it, but I do think he is basically correct in that opinion.

  6. Anonymous
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 8:22 am | Permalink

    Jean, I can easily see a scenario where something terrible happens at a Trump rally and it works to his benefit. If an attempt were made on his life, or that of someone at one of his rallies, he would use that to prove how dangerous his enemies truly are. Look, for example, at what Hitler did with the burning of the Reichstag.

    http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/burns.htm

  7. Peter Larson
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 8:25 am | Permalink

    It is likely that he cancelled the event in Chicago for publicity. People have a right to protest, but it’s not going to work out well for anyone but Trump if they try to shut his events down.

    More and more, politics in America are starting to look like politics in less established countries. We used to have relatively low levels of political violence, but I see that’s starting to change, and the blame can’t all go to Trump.

  8. Frosted Flakes
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 8:43 am | Permalink

    Very good points, Demetrius and Peter.

    There is a very real threat of Trump becoming president. I don’t know what the answers are but Liberal people need to put less time swimming around in their own good righteous feeling they get when they demonize Trump; Liberal people need to be putting more thought into the idea that their outrage, and depending how it is expressed, is actually going to help Trump win. Being right is fun and all but the liberal reaction might become part of the problem. Does Trump have a right to peacefully assemble free from outside disruption? Fuck yes they do.

  9. Bob
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 8:46 am | Permalink

    The Trump protesters are the only bright spot concerning the GOP race. It’s an international embarrassment. The notion that the protests are strengthening Trump is ridiculous. He’s not even going to get votes from establishment Republicans. Many are already suggesting they will vote for Hillary.

  10. Tim
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 8:48 am | Permalink

    The vast majority of mainstream media are now bent on transforming America into a third world sh1t hole. Why? Because it makes the rich richer, destroys the middle class and makes the poor poorer. The mainstream media behave this way because the uber wealthy oligarchs control the media – and hence the white hating, America hating narrative. Case in point: The liberal and conservative progressives unite in blaming trump for the violence at his rallies – even after progressive groups admit to planning and stoking the violence and admit their intent on blocking political free speech and assembly rights. It’s no different than the forced silence non-progressives must increasingly endure by the progressive, white hating fascists on college campuses. Mizzou is now down 20% in enrollment and has a 32 million dollar deficit. Progressives destroy all they touch.

    This is how I know the progressive party is chock full of white people hating sociopaths. The evidence is plain as day. That both liberal and conservative progressives have joined forces in blaming the violence on Trump destroys their credibility and emboldens support for Trump. The white hating, America-hating media isn’t fooling anyone anymore. If there are three things that both liberal and conservative progressives are 100% transparent on, it’s their shared hatred of of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly – except of course for liberal and conservative white hating progressives – and you’d have to be deaf and blind to miss the progressive, all consuming hatred of white people.

  11. EOS
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 9:16 am | Permalink

    @ Tim – Great post. I’m assuming that the label conservative progressives are the Neo-Cons. Is there a differentiation between the two?

  12. kjc
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 9:30 am | Permalink

    “Liberal people need to put less time swimming around in their own good righteous feeling they get when they demonize Trump”

    But then who will be the object of your self-righteousness?

  13. from Ann Coulter
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 9:53 am | Permalink

    Ann Coulter on Twitter: “I would like to see a little more violence from the innocent Trump supporters set upon by violent leftist hoodlums.”

  14. Frosted Flakes
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    Maybe this is better for you KJC:

    Be self-righteous all you want but please, please , please think about how your actions effect actual positive change.

  15. Brainless
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 10:33 am | Permalink

    “mainstream media are now bent on transforming America into a third world sh1t hole”

    What a load of horseshit. You have no proof of this. You know know anybody who even work in mainstream media. You just spout off whatever the fuck some old sex-starved pill-popper told you to say. Asshole.

  16. Shane Davis
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    I went from being disgusted and car wreck intrigued to frightened and angry.

    Why are so many Americans hungry for segregation and racial violence?!

  17. Lynne
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 10:38 am | Permalink

    I am very conflicted about all of this. I worry that the protests will bring Trump support but otoh, I think it is very important to stand up and say something when faced with bigotry.

    One thing I am sure of though, is that those protesters are not violating anyone’s freedom of speech

    https://xkcd.com/1357/

  18. Steve P
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 11:05 am | Permalink

    Yes! because this recovering economy, good health care access, and everyone of different races and creeds getting along thing…is for weaklings!

  19. Jean Henry
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 11:14 am | Permalink

    Just a note here that a campaign that alienates women, people of color, immigrants and all members of the third largest religious group in America is unlikely to succeed at the polls in the general– because conservative white males are a shrinking minority in this country. One with a growing victim complex it would seem from Tim’s account. Tiny tiny tears for them. Let’s wait it out.

  20. Susan Gilchrist
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 11:17 am | Permalink

    Perhaps we should become a nation of only millionaires and elite.

  21. site admin
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 11:22 am | Permalink

    Here, in stark contrast, is how Obama handles protestors.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAuSWknJhu4

  22. Ilana Houten
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 11:47 am | Permalink

    People are frustrated with the status quo. The candidates have provided two options: effect real change (Sanders), or listen to the simplistic soundbites and rah rah rhetoric of that appeals to peoples’ baser instincts aka mob psychology, which inevitably leads to violence.

  23. they want to die
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    Omarosa on Protestors at Donald Trump Campaign Rallies: ‘You Get What’s Coming to You’

    http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/omarosa-tells-donald-trump-protestors-you-get-whats-coming-to-you-w167085

  24. site admin
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

    Chicago author Ted McClelland, who has been interviewed on the site before, posted the following to Facebook this morning.

    “This was my very first thought. Trump used Chicago protesters as props in his narrative that the nation is descending into chaos, and only he can control it. He didn’t cancel the rally because he was afraid for his safety, he cancelled it because he knew he could get more publicity by going on cable channels to complain that his right to free speech was being violated than he could by shouting over protesters. You got played, Chicago.”

  25. Meta
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 12:22 pm | Permalink

    Muslim student at Wichita State reports attack by man shouting ‘Trump, Trump, Trump’

    A Muslim student at Wichita State University says he and a Hispanic friend, who also is a student, were attacked over the weekend by a man who shouted racial epithets and “Trump, Trump, Trump” before riding away on his motorcycle.

    Khondoker Usama, the student body vice president at Wichita State, who is Muslim, said he and a Hispanic friend, who so far has chosen to remain anonymous, were filling their vehicle at the gas pumps at a Kwik Shop near campus at 21st and Oliver early Saturday when a man in his 20s or 30s started calling a black customer at the convenience store a racial epithet.

    “Then suddenly it turned onto us, calling us ‘brown trash, go home. Trump will win,’ ” Usama said.

    Then the man approached the students and, according to Usama, said, “You want to live in this country, you better leave.”

    But Usama said his friend told the man: “This is my country; who are you to tell me that?”

    The exchange was heated, Usama said, and he tried to defuse the situation, but his friend got punched and taken to the ground. He said he tried to get between the attacker and his friend but then was pushed himself. He thought he saw the attacker reaching for his pocket and feared he had a weapon, he said, so he backed away and called 911.

    “He kept kicking the student who was laying on the ground,” Usama said. “He was kicking him; it was a gut-wrenching scene. He saw that I was calling the police and got back on his motorcycle and circled around us and was saying ‘Trump, Trump, Trump, we will make America great again. You losers will be thrown out of the wall.’

    “None of us knew that person,” Usama said. “I don’t know why anyone would do anything so hateful and so wrong to any individual.”

    Read more:
    http://www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article65903602.html

  26. Heather
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

    Last sentence of article: someone did die at the rally in Chicago- a black man who happened to support Trump… I am not a Trump supporter, but hate that anytime there is a difference between a republican and a democrat, the republican is likened to Hitler. I am Jewish by the way and this sort of rhetoric is completely transparent and just more propaganda!

  27. Chris Danguilan
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

    You know, maybe in a weird way, giving people the opportunity to voice their racism in public might start the dialogue that addresses it. In tension one finds catharsis. Get the racism out of the closet makes people see how comfortable they are owning it.

  28. Bob Saunders
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

    NOTES FOR TRUMP’S NEXT SPEECH:

    “…after a success, and let me say without false modesty and ridiculous modesty, after such a resounding success that the whole Chamber admitted, including the opposition…

    Then comes the time when you just say: When two elements are struggling and are irreducible, the solution is force.

    There was no other solution ever in history and there never will be…

    We all know that what I have in mind is not the whim of the person, is not lust for government, is not ignoble passion, but it is only boundless and powerful love of country.”

    (translated from Italian by Google Translate)
    Benito Mussolini – Discorso alla Camera dei Deputati sul delitto Matteotti

    https://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Italia_-_3_gennaio_1925,_Discorso_sul_delitto_Matteotti

  29. wobblie
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

    No tolerance for racist bigots. When they crawl out from under their rock they need to be smashed. You do not defeat bigotry by ignoring it. You confront it and say not in my community. We saw how pathetic their militias are in Oregon. If Trump’s KKK and neo-nazi supporters want violence I say bring it on. We will steam roller them. By the way the Nazi no longer try to march in Ann Arbor. Could it be because year after year we mobilized and confronted them.

  30. Peter Larson
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 2:12 pm | Permalink

    People should stop claiming that their particular group is not guilty of violence, when it is clear that everyone is.

    It’s like people love living in a finger pointing state of denial.

  31. The Lion's Guard
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 2:53 pm | Permalink

    This comes from Raw Story.

    Hours after a protester rushed the stage at Trump’s Dayton rally, a Twitter group called “The Lion’s Guard” called on supporters of the GOP front-runner to join a make-shift militia, according to RT.

    “Do you want to provide security protection to innocent people who are subject to harassment and assault by Far-left agitators?” Lion’s Guard asked in a call to action. “If so, you are welcome to join. That’s the mission — to protect innocents who can’t hire their own security guards.”

    Lion’s Guard said that their members would be unarmed, “but willing to forcefully protect people if need be.”

    “We are *defensive*, *protective* of innocents who are being beaten and harassed for their political views.”

    Within hours, the account reportedly had over 500 followers, and members were already asking for “uniform suggestions.”

    RT noted that Lion’s Guard later suspended its account after claiming that someone had threatened the founder’s child. But the group also said that a website was being created to “make it easier to coordinate action.”

    http://www.rawstory.com/2016/03/trump-militia-forms-to-forcefully-protect-rally-goers-against-far-left-agitators/

  32. EOS
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

    That many people think of themselves as merely a member of a group is itself the problem. What’s wrong with thinking “you and I” rather than each of us being the designated spokesperson for very large heterogenous groups. Each individual is unique and responsible for their own behavior. The individual who commits the violent act is the only one responsible for the violence. Inflammatory words do not compel action. I don’t like Trump at all, but I am certain that he has supporters who are educated and non-racist. What is the necessity of smearing an entire group? Do all you people who are jumping on Mark’s bandwagon of demonizing Trump really believe he is a racist nazi or do you just think this is an appropriate campaign tactic? Are you actually persuaded by Soros’ and Ayer’s tactics? At any point in time can you step back and realize that a different ideology does not equate to evil intentions or dehumanizations? How did everyone come to accept this collectivism? Why is it so easy for large groups to be so openly hostile to a different opinion?

  33. Demetrius
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 4:04 pm | Permalink

    @ EOS

    Being a presidential candidate is not the same as being an ordinary citizen. Of course candidates cannot be held responsible for the actions of every supporter … but when Trump says (of a protester) “I’d like to punch him in the face,” or offers to pay the legal fees of anyone at his rallies who is charged with violence … he is setting an ugly tone for which he must accept responsibility. For instance, if I leave gasoline and matches lying around, I may not be guilty of arson, but …

    Again, I disagree with the tactics of the protesters inside these rallies. Trump has a right to speak, and people attending have a right to hear him speak. If troubles arise, they need to have authorized law enforcement on hand to deal with that … not stoke the fires of vigilante-ism.

    I agree with several others above, who said that Trump is clearly *loving* having to shut down rallies, because it makes him look like the victim (!) and reinforces the idea that his people are decent, law-abiding citizens, and the protesters are unruly thugs.

    I’m fairly allergic to “Nazi” and “Hitler” allusions … but I’m not sure it would be a stretch to call what we’re witnessing a Weimar-esque moment.

  34. Demetrius
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

    Hard to watch this and think Trump doesn’t own some responsibility.

    http://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000004269364/trump-and-violence.html

  35. Jean Henry
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

    Curious, EOS, have you changed positions? Are you now supporting Trump or are you still thinking for yourself?

    As for group identification, are you prepared to leave behind ‘Christian’ and ‘Conservative’ in support of that ideal?

    Have you ever or would you ever consider voting for a Democrat?

    We are all values-based voters. Sometimes our values align with others and we form groups, institutions, even nations. This is basic human behavior. Anthropologists have documented such groupings in every culture and subculture. Biologists have seen it in apes too but I digress… Sometimes in order to create greater group cohesion, humans in one group will deride another. I think that’s what you don’t like. At least when it is aimed at your group. Many people share this aversion.

    Only you and Pete Larson think groups and groupings are avoidable and inherently toxic. Glad to see you two agree on something.

  36. stupid hick
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

    Tim, you probably won’t take advice from a self-proclaimed stupid hick, but someone has to tell you your comment is borderline delusional. Ask your mother, or someone who cares about you. Jesus loves you.

  37. EOS
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 5:58 pm | Permalink

    @ Jean,

    As I wrote above, I don’t like Trump at all and I don’t support him.

    If I label myself as a Christian or a Conservative, in no way does that imply that I am responsible for the actions of all other persons who identify as such. The terms help define my ideology, but on any given topic I probably disagree with most others who label themselves as Christians or Conservatives. Any group that you can name consists of widely variant individuals.

    I do not think groups are avoidable or inherently toxic. Neither Pete or I said anything like that. As you pointed out, groups are a part of every culture and we are social animals. But I am not attracted to groups who deride another and question anyone who is.

    What I despise, is the practice of people labeling someone to be a member of a group and then assuming that individual has any specific characteristic, merely because they “belong” to the group. Or that the individual has to march in lockstep with the entire dogma of the majority opinion in their “group”. Or that the collective is responsible when an individual acts out. It’s a logical fallacy.

    For example, there are a large number of self identified black conservatives, greedy Christians and poor Republicans.

    I vote for Democrats in local primary elections – it’s the only choice. I have voted for Democratic Presidential candidates in the distant past, but don’t think it is likely that I ever will again. I wouldn’t rule it out completely. (But it would be a cold day in hell!)

  38. Kat
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 7:47 pm | Permalink

    “There are a large number of self identified black conservatives, greedy Christians and poor Republicans.”

    Are you saying, EOS, that all black Republicans are just faking it?

  39. Jean Henry
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

    We agree. Though I do believe that many communities are self-re-enforcing of their own standards (logic aside… because I prefer it so.) and that the act creating community consensus is not necessarily corrupted. (but I have to concede that it usually is) Those standards could be ones of greater compassion and acceptance than is practiced by the majority culture, for instance. I’m interested in the idea that these essential community forming behaviors and any number of base human impulses like consumption can be harnessed for the greater good, not via charity but truly for the well being of all involved. I have no idea if I am right. It’s a long game experiment.

    My guess is we both have experienced living in communities in which our beliefs were non-conforming and derided. It’s no fun. I wish that experience engendered more apparent empathy in you. It seems that in coming up with your own solutions to say poverty etc without factoring in your ‘subjects’ stated experience in that process, you may believe you are helping when in fact it’s not so. I would encourage you to live out your experiments too. See if they work to empower as you believe. Logic can fail when it rubs up against human behaviors.

    Nice to see you defend Pete. Let’s see how that goes.

  40. Bob Krzewinski
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 8:00 pm | Permalink

    Mark – You are not loosing any credibility by comparing Trump with the rise of the Nazis. Thats all in took in the Germany of the 1930’s was a madman talking “tough”, a population taught to feel they were under attack, and plenty of “villains” to blame the country’s problems on. In that light, maybe this from President Obama in 2011 fits our time now – http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/obama-tells-jews-never-again-is-not-just-a-phrase-but-a-principled-cause-1.339697

  41. Bob
    Posted March 14, 2016 at 8:12 pm | Permalink

    EOS likes Peter Larson

  42. Peter Larson
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 3:10 am | Permalink

    EOS likely believes that if , for example, people somehow will themselves into thinking that they are no longer black or white, that racism will suddenly disappear, but fails to note how “blackness” was historically imposed on people who come from or have genetic roots in the African continent for economic gain.

    Simply having the victim here ignore the problem will not make it go away.

    I view organized groups as being inherently dangerous, in that they methodically exclude or operate to control groups for their own benefit. As an example, southern whites organized to control those they defined as black to maintain a source of cheap agricultural labor. Simply ignoring one’s blackness (as it is defined in that particular exploitative system) would not have made it all magically disappear.

  43. EOS
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 4:44 am | Permalink

    No Kat,

    They are not faking it. But thanks for proving my point. It is wrong to assume that an individual belongs to a certain political party based on the content of melanin in their skin. I concede that the majority of Blacks are Democrats. If I had to make a bet, chances are more likely that any given back individual is a Democrat. But to assume that any particular Black individual is a Democrat is racist. To assume that any particular White woman supports Hilliary is sexist.

    To see each individual as possessing unique qualities is certainly not ignoring the problem in the hopes that it will go away. It is the means by which the problem will be resolved. The compulsion of the media and many in power to categorize individuals into groups, to hold the group accountable for the actions of all, and to use the group dynamics to coerce individuals into lockstep is the source of all “isms” today.

  44. Bob
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 5:45 am | Permalink

    Peter Larson is black. He speaks for all black people.

  45. Peter Larson
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 6:25 am | Permalink

    Definitely not. It was merely an example.

    I dislike the term “black” but person with with ancestors of sub-Saharan continental origin is hard to say, and obfuscates the point that “blackness” was created by Europeans for specific economic purposes.

    Bob, I understand that you don’t like me, though we have never met. That’s fair. I have also never met EOS, but dislike her as well. Regardless, I wish you the best.

  46. Jean Henry
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 7:09 am | Permalink

    That was fun. EOR uses ‘logic’ to support magical thinking, by just skipping over elements of history or human behavior that are inconvenient. Jump to a post racial world by never ever talking about race. Since that will never happen, she will never see her philosophy tested. That’s true of most of what EOS says. She can be right endlessly. Beliefs are handy that way. (no I don’t know EOS’ gender but I figure I win either way by going with the feminine.)

    Bob, Pete isa self-deprecating, overly honest crank, but you hurl your shit at others. It’s boring and weird.

  47. stupid hick
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 7:26 am | Permalink

    EOS, points well taken but not to dodge every Christian conservative’s responsibility to be his brother’s keeper and reign in extremist (and admit it, racist) Trump Republicans. All of them racist, maybe not, but many of them? Definitely. It’s quite plain, not a liberal conspiracy. Don’t be silent about it, help your conservative siblings lest they become killers.

  48. EOS
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 7:47 am | Permalink

    Stupid Hick,

    But I am busy being my brother’s keeper by trying to rein in extremist (and admit it, racist) liberal progressives using brown-shirt tactics to create anarchy and foment racial divisiveness. Building bridges, planting seeds, and loving my neighbors.

  49. Jean Henry
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 8:13 am | Permalink

    “brown shirt tactics?” —please do tell, EOS.

  50. EOS
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 8:30 am | Permalink

    What Soros and Ayers did in Chicago and are planning at future rallies. It’s no secret.

  51. Peter Larson
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 9:01 am | Permalink

    EOS is likely into Trump.

  52. Anonymous
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 9:15 am | Permalink

    Soros was beaming commands into the minds of those caught on tape hitting black people at Trump rallies. It’s all so clear.

  53. EOS
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 9:37 am | Permalink

    Dirty politics ala Clinton/Obama meant to take out both Sanders and Trump

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/03/credible-account-says-clinton-behind-violent-protests-trump-rallies.html

  54. Lynne
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    FWIW, I think it is fair to say that all Trump supporters are racist in some way. At the very least, they are overlooking Trump’s blatant racism, which is itself a racist act in a way.

  55. Jean Henry
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    Sometimes the simplest explanation is the correct one. People had strong feelings about Trump. Social media makes all sorts of events take off. You don’t need billionaire money to do that anymore. No one needs to get paid. That kind of organizing is easy when dissatisfaction is high. I assume you are talking about Soros funding of BLM??? I can assure those activists are not taking any instructions from funders. What the right and the left have in common is the belief that people are easily bought– even on issues of great importance, even among people who seek power for reasons of agency and creating progress.

  56. EOS
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 10:12 am | Permalink

    So you willfully blind yourself to the reality that both Ayers and Obama have long histories of “community organizing” in the Chicago area? Blinded to the history of dirty politics in Chicago? Sure, merely social media. I’m not that naive.

  57. Jean Henry
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 10:19 am | Permalink

    You know EOS– sometimes I’m inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt on your intentions. Sometimes you seem to have thought things through semi-independently and come to co cousins I can understand, given Your ideological framework, if not agree with. And then you post links to completely unsubstantiated conspiracy theories that spin from scant evidence to the most complex and insidious co conclusions. This election cycle I’ve seen the left do the same. Ideology is a destroyer of truth. I would invite any Sanders supporter to read that garbage EOS posted, substitute a few names for the big money bad guys and the activist groups and candidates they support, and tell me if it doesn’t smack familiar. It probably won’t. Or I’ll get done rant about relativism and false equivalencies. I have spent my entire political life seeing patterns very partisan people won’t acknowledge. Swing slippery slopes. Oh well. At least I get my vote. Glad the electoral and political system you all deride is present and functioning to balance out the gleeful madness on either end of the spectrum this cycle.

  58. Jean Henry
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 10:22 am | Permalink

    Apologies for typos, non-sequiturs etc– out/on phone.

  59. EOS
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 10:27 am | Permalink

    Both Trump and Sanders supporters are being scammed. I’m sharing the information with Sanders supporters (largely). MoveOn.org has admitted responsibility and promised more disruptions. That’s not in doubt and certainly not any conspiracy. Google it.

    I don’t have a dog in this fight. I’m hoping and praying that both parties come up with new candidates at their conventions. Otherwise, we are all screwed.

  60. Posted March 15, 2016 at 10:32 am | Permalink

    EOS, you don’t think Trump is actually in this only to throw it and secure the presidency for Hillary? You know they are friends and Trump has been a long time contributor to her campaigns, right?

  61. EOS
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 10:54 am | Permalink

    Robert,
    Trump has supported the Clintons and Democratic causes for a long time. I don’t like the man, understand him, or have a clue about his motives. If he is trying to throw the election, it is backfiring, and the masses seem to not care about his flaws, only that he is a choice that the establishment hates.

  62. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 11:19 am | Permalink

    I agree with you…on everything except that the plan to throw the election is backfiring. Everything Trump is doing harms the Republican Party. So far, he has effectively blocked any legitimate Republican candidate from assembling the delegates they’d need to win the nomination. That is all that is necessary at this point. Then, if he can get the nomination, the only thing he’ll have to do is make sure he sabotages support for him in the key states.

    Sanders might be doing the same thing. He may only be in this race to keep some attention on the Democrats primaries and to ensure that there is a contest in as many states as possible, so that organizations can be built in each of these in preparation for the general. It seemed to work perfectly in 2008.

  63. EOS
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 11:27 am | Permalink

    So what is the game plan if Hillary gets indicted?

  64. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 11:31 am | Permalink

    I think the fix is in on that. I don’t think there is any chance of Hillary being indicted, no matter what she may have done.

  65. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 11:40 am | Permalink

    I think the stink the FBI has been making about it is a ruse to draw as much anti-Clinton attention to it as possible, and keep that energy focused there away from other items and issues which could damage her less predictably and further beyond the Dems control.

  66. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 11:43 am | Permalink

    I think a similar thing was done with Jennifer Flowers in 1992. All the attention was drawn to Flowers and away from other women who had made complaints against Bill. I suspect Flowers was putting on a show to draw attention away from more legitimate sources.

  67. Jean Henry
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 11:43 am | Permalink

    Hooey! That’s rich! Wow. You guys have it all figured out. All we need now is some Nigerians coming in again to sell access to the secrets of the illuminati.

  68. EOS
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 11:44 am | Permalink

    I’m afraid that you might be right, and if so, it could destroy our country.

  69. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 11:55 am | Permalink

    Jean Henry, do you have a logical argument you can share? Or do you only have mockery to offer?

  70. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 11:56 am | Permalink

    Wait, let me guess…it’s not worth your time.

  71. Lynne
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

    Interesting theories to be sure but unfortunately, without evidence, they are not more than pie in the sky musings. I admit that I’ve smoked some things that have led me down the same paths but for some reason, many of these theories just don’t seem as plausible when I am sober. I wonder why ;)

  72. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    What sort of thing might qualify as evidence?

  73. Bob
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 12:49 pm | Permalink

    Jean, I honestly can’t follow much of what you write. And your jokes are terrible.

    Peter, I think we did meet, years ago. I wasn’t that crazy about you in person either.

  74. Lynne
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

    Well, you need more evidence than a past relationship with the Clintons if you are going to suggest seriously that Trump or Sanders is in this race to pave the way for Clinton. I mean, it is possible to be sure but so far, I haven’t seen anything to genuinely suggest it to be true. The idea that Sanders got into the race initially in order to create a race in the primaries is pretty plausible but once he started getting some momentum, he certainly has begun to act like someone who genuinely is interested in the job. And who knows what motivates Trump? He doesn’t necessarily seem like someone who would do that kind of favor for anyone. But who knows? Still, I think that unless there is any evidence to the contrary, the assumption should be that they are sincere in their desire to be president.

  75. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 1:04 pm | Permalink

    I’d certainly be interested in any evidence to the contrary anyone would like to share.

  76. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

    I’ll admit, it’s all circumstantial evidence. Still, these circumstances almost everybody considers chance seem pretty convenient to goal of getting Hillary into the White House. And I say that as a person who does not hate Hillary like so many people seem to, and will almost certainly vote for her in November.

  77. Peter Larson
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

    Bob,

    I am truly sorry that I am such a detestable person. I don’t like myself, either.

    I wish you well, though.

    Pete

  78. Jean Henry
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

    The evidence to the contrary is common sense. Look at all the money Donald Trump has ever given away to people with power. It covers the political spectrum. they all give money to one another because they all do business with one another. I have worked with any number of non-profits locally and it’s really not much different here. People give to the charities and causes supported by people who do business with them. It’s not so much corrupt as gross, and human, but I digress. BAck to common sense. Running for president is a lot of hard work. You dont work 12 hours a day 7 days a week flying all over the country to throw the election in order to elect your supposed friend. No one runs for president who doesn’t want to be president. It is hard to argue the absurd.

    Bob, you just proved my point. What is your point?

  79. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

    Jean Henry, you obviously haven’t worked in politics in any capacity. Trump would have been promised a payoff of some sort. It could take one of many forms, but being granted favoritism in certain business dealings where the government regulates, is one which seems pretty easy to imagine.

  80. Anonymous
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 1:41 pm | Permalink

    My favorite threads are the ones that go off the rails.

  81. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

    Trump isn’t working any harder than he usually does. He’s just going around the country shooting his mouth off like a fool. I’m sure he enjoys the attention, and I would assume he’s been promised something, or is already receiving the benefits of an agreement.

  82. Anonymous
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 1:45 pm | Permalink

    I could maybe buy that Trump got in just to raised his Q rating a bit and make it a little easier for Hillary, if not for the fact that this stuff started a long time ago for him. His birtherism goes back to 2008. If you’re right, that’s one hell of a long con, setting the groundwork a decade ago. The truth is that he’s a dangerous nut who really thinks of himself as a brilliant leader.

  83. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 1:47 pm | Permalink

    By the way, these sorts of spoilers are fairly common in electoral politics at the more local levels, and it is not a particularly well kept secret.

  84. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

    Anonymous, the “birther” thing Trump was pushing back in 2008 helped Obama, and you can ask any of Obama’s campaign strategists about that. The ‘birther’ BS acted as a magnet to a lot of people out there that just hated Obama and were looking for anything which seemed to validate their hatred. A blatantly edited/altered birth certificate was even released by the administration in order to further fuel it. The strategy worked. Level-headed people were further driven away from the Obama-hostile crowd and they saw them as just kinda nuts. This helped neutralize some of the opposition.

  85. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 2:05 pm | Permalink

    If Mark does decide to run for congress, I’ll recommend early on that he let me set EOS up as his opponent.

  86. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 2:07 pm | Permalink

    …because if Peter Larson runs against him, his goose is cooked.

  87. wobblie
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 2:28 pm | Permalink

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/top-liberal-leaders-call-for-massive-anti-trump-campaign-220760

  88. Demetrius
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 3:45 pm | Permalink

    Despite the specifics of his campaign, rallies, etc., I think one of the things that’s most notable is just how far Trump has pushed the “Overton Window” with regard to what is deemed acceptable speech/conduct in a mainstream Presidential campaign. Generalizing about Mexicans as “rapists and drug dealers,” calling certain women “fat pigs,” talking about women journalists “bleeding out of their wherever,” talking about wanting to “punch protesters in the face,” offering to pay legal bills for those who attack them, etc. While politicians have long used “dog whistle” messages to successfully project racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. to certain voting blocks … it is hard to imagine any previous mainstream candidate attempting (or getting away with) even a fraction of what Trump has said and done. Mitt’s 2012 “47%” comment was relatively mild by comparison, and it pretty much tanked his chances … and yet, by the end of tonight, Trump may well be the Republican front-runner. Amazing.

  89. Bob
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

    Peter, I’m going to make a spring pledge to lay off on you and wish you well.

    Jean, the point is you just seem to be speaking out of your ass, though with great authority. You don’t seem to have facts to back your statements. How the fuck do you know “all the money Trump has ever given to people with power? ” He’s boasted about it at debates but is it even true? He lies constantly. You keep throwing these statements of fact out, or basing it on “some people I know.” You are entitled to your opinion. So far you’ve been mostly wrong with your election predictions.

  90. Tony
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 7:34 pm | Permalink

    Wow. This thread. I’m saddened by how angry people are and frankly scared that there are people who think this way who are likely neighbors or coworkers.

    Regardless of how you feel about Trump, there are limits to free speech. Just as you can’t yell fire in a theater, you can’t tell a riled-up group of people to punch someone in the face. And for anyone who thinks that 100% of the blame is on the person who threw the punch, you should read up on some of the psychology experiments done decades ago around how people respond to those in authority.

    Trump is approaching or crossed the line into criminal behavior.

  91. Jean Henry
    Posted March 15, 2016 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

    Bob– this stuff is public record and well covered by legit news outlets. Do you ever read a paper? listen to NPR? http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/07/28/426888268/donald-trumps-flipping-political-donations

    As for being wrong about the elections, I was wrong that Trump didnt go away. But right, I think, about why he didn’t– too much media coverage. I was wrong about Hillary in Michigan, along with everyone looking at numbers– in part because I WAS well informed and that information was compromised. HRC is kicking ass today, so that was an anomaly not a pattern, something you guys need to learn to distinguish. Sanders supporters have not been more right than me. I feel very comfortable asserting that.

    I’m sorry my posts might require you to google. It’s not so hard. Try it sometime.

    Glad your laying off Pete. Try not to be such a douche.

  92. EOS
    Posted March 16, 2016 at 4:38 am | Permalink

    @Tony,
    Experiments showing an individual’s response to authority have demonstrated their flaws, not any admirable trait. Eichman and Lt. Calley were only following orders but they were both convicted. You are the Captain of your ship, the Master of your fate. Regardless of the mob you run with, you are individually responsible for your actions. Don’t ever capitulate to the mob, or any leader in the mob. Determine your personal moral compass and resolve to live by it.

    Free speech means that other people can say things that you vehemently disagree with. It is not criminal nor should it ever be.

  93. Frosted Flakes
    Posted March 16, 2016 at 7:31 am | Permalink

    As Tony suggested, Trump’s speech might be considered “incitement”, if actual violence occurs immediately after he encourages it in a non- abstract way.

  94. Westside
    Posted March 16, 2016 at 7:44 am | Permalink

    Wow. So it’s Narcissists who freak out when criticized? Narcissists who have superior knowledge and insight? Narcissists who dehumanize others through name calling and insults? Narcissist who claim connections with high status individuals? Narcissists who claim they are almost always right?

    That does sound like Trump.

  95. EOS
    Posted March 16, 2016 at 7:52 am | Permalink

    Frosted Flakes,

    You and Tony are correct and I was mistaken. I still feel the individual who commits the violent act is the guilty party who should be held responsible, but concede that under limited circumstances the one who incites may also be charged.

  96. Jean Henry
    Posted March 16, 2016 at 8:02 am | Permalink

    Bravo, EOS!

  97. Bob
    Posted March 16, 2016 at 8:18 am | Permalink

    Gosh Jean, you can work Google. Too bad you don’t look past the very first hit, a very flimsy NPR graph. His donation history is way more complex than your shallow assessment. He also brags about his charitable work and personal wealth, both of which are greatly exaggerated. Othere pieces refer to him as the most stingy billionaire ever.
    Regardless, the point is he lies. And you present your personal opinions as facts. “I’ve done some work with charities so…” “Based on the guys I know…” So ridiculous.

  98. Bob
    Posted March 16, 2016 at 8:20 am | Permalink

    And cheering EOS? Jesus fucking Christ. Check your own douche.

  99. (the original) Robert
    Posted March 16, 2016 at 9:42 am | Permalink

    People! People! Please stop fighting. We have to put aside our differences for the moment while we undertake a much more important task. Please stop attacking each other and unite to stop this narcissistic madman from gaining any more influence.

    I am speaking about influential independent journalist Mark Maynard, of course.

  100. Jean Henry
    Posted March 16, 2016 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

    EOS conceded to having been wrong. I think that was a big step. Seemed worthy of acknowledging, as opposed to your extraordinarily subjective critiques of my positions being subjective…

  101. Meta
    Posted April 17, 2017 at 9:23 am | Permalink

    CNN: “Man accused of attacking rally protester says Trump inspired him”

    Donald Trump supporter Alvin Bamberger is accused of assaulting a protester at a 2016 campaign rally in Kentucky.

    But if the 75-year-old veteran lost his cool at the Louisville rally, he did so at the “urging and inspiration” of his President, Bamberger alleges in a lawsuit against Trump.

    “Trump and/or the Trump campaign urged and inspired Bamberger to act as he did,” according to the Ohio resident’s claim, which was filed in Louisville federal court on Friday.

    Bamberger’s lawsuit is the latest against Trump — no stranger to legal claims — in connection with the raucous March 2016 rally.

    A federal judge earlier this month cleared the way for a lawsuit by three protesters against the Trump campaign, Bamberger and a white nationalist.

    US District Judge David Hale ruled out that the attackers were Trump agents but said it’s plausible the would-be President incited a riot. He denied motions to dismiss or strike portions of the complaint.

    Read more:
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/15/politics/donald-trump-rally-lawsuit/index.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect

Sidetrack ad Aubree’s ad BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative Leisa Thompson