Why won't the media call Trump a Racist?

[NYcarbineer]

Anyone calling anyone else a "racist" is essentially irrelevant at this point.

The PC Police have so over-used and diluted the word that it's closer to a punchline than a credible description.

Sad, since racism does still exist. It's an important word, but the PC Police have wrecked it in their cynical quest for political advantage.
.

So there's no such thing as a racist anymore. whoa, that's retarded.

 

[Mac1958]

Anyone calling anyone else a "racist" is essentially irrelevant at this point.

The PC Police have so over-used and diluted the word that it's closer to a punchline than a credible description.

Sad, since racism does still exist. It's an important word, but the PC Police have wrecked it in their cynical quest for political advantage.
.

I agree but Drumpf is really over the top. He is a driving force behind even more racism.

He's a caricature, and he's inspiring the same behavior.
.

 

[Mac1958]

Anyone calling anyone else a "racist" is essentially irrelevant at this point.

The PC Police have so over-used and diluted the word that it's closer to a punchline than a credible description.

Sad, since racism does still exist. It's an important word, but the PC Police have wrecked it in their cynical quest for political advantage.
.

Trump, and to a lesser extent Carson have moved beyond PC. They are spouting outright hate about Mexicans, blacks and Muslims and just chuckle and say.....Guess you guys are just too PC

Who guys?
.

 

[Votto]

The answer is simple. The media has been so bullied by Conservatives about being "unfair" to the right that they are afraid to criticize even the most offensive behavior. Trump is well aware of the castration of the media when it comes to criticizing his newfound party and is taking full advantage of it

Why the media is duty-bound to call Donald Trump a racist

But for some reason, when covering the people vying for the most powerful office in the land, the media is hesitant to apply the "R" word, no matter how apt it may be. And that hesitation could have extraordinarily serious consequences for the country.
But just denying the refugees fleeing terrorism and repression wasn't enough. The anti-terrorism furor has grown into an anti-Muslim furor. Trump has called for shutting down mosques and refused to rule out a national registry for Muslims. Marco Rubio is trying to out-Trump Trump by calling not just for shutting down mosques, but even cafes or websites where Muslims gather.
But look at where we are today. Leading candidates for presidents are flirting with requiring adherents of a single religion to be registered. To carry identification cards. To be subject to additional surveillance. To be refused entry to the nation even if they're escaping horrific repression. To have their houses of worship closed down.
Those are racist, fascist policies. To avoid the comparison with early Nazi repression against Jews is to avoid telling the full story. And that's just what the media is doing by refusing to call these proposals racist.

Why are they afraid of Donald? Cuz their skeered?

 

[Votto]

Donald Trump is the leading candidate for the Republican nomination for president. He has expressed outright racism against Latinos, Muslims, and African-Americans. His words have already had real-world consequences. Trump supporters kicked and beat a Black Lives Matter protester at a rally Saturday. The next day Trump said "maybe he should have been roughed up." Two men cited Trump when they beat a homeless Latino Boston man in August. Trump said his supporters were "passionate."
The America Trump promises to build is ugly: walled off, repressive, and racist. If the media fails to call racism what it is, if they fail to tell the full story, then that ugly fantasy might just become our ugly reality

How can Trump be a racist if he wants to have an immigration policy on par with Mexico's immigration policy? Better yet, how can Trump's immigration policy be racist against Latinos and Mexico's policy is not?

Mexico's current immigration policy is nothing at all like Drumpf's yammering and swaggering. Nothing at all.

The term "Mexican" is no longer PC. Instead, us the term "future Dreamers"

 

[Mac1958]

Anyone calling anyone else a "racist" is essentially irrelevant at this point.

The PC Police have so over-used and diluted the word that it's closer to a punchline than a credible description.

Sad, since racism does still exist. It's an important word, but the PC Police have wrecked it in their cynical quest for political advantage.
.

So there's no such thing as a racist anymore. whoa, that's retarded.

That's not what I said.

Whoa, that's a straw man. And, of course, a lie.

DING!

As USMB's King of the Straw Man, you are allowed one (1) "that's not what I said" per thread.

You may attempt to communicate with me on another thread, and I will determine at that time whether I will respond.

You are pathological.
.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

The answer is simple. The media has been so bullied by Conservatives about being "unfair" to the right that they are afraid to criticize even the most offensive behavior. Trump is well aware of the castration of the media when it comes to criticizing his newfound party and is taking full advantage of it

Why the media is duty-bound to call Donald Trump a racist

But for some reason, when covering the people vying for the most powerful office in the land, the media is hesitant to apply the "R" word, no matter how apt it may be. And that hesitation could have extraordinarily serious consequences for the country.
But just denying the refugees fleeing terrorism and repression wasn't enough. The anti-terrorism furor has grown into an anti-Muslim furor. Trump has called for shutting down mosques and refused to rule out a national registry for Muslims. Marco Rubio is trying to out-Trump Trump by calling not just for shutting down mosques, but even cafes or websites where Muslims gather.
But look at where we are today. Leading candidates for presidents are flirting with requiring adherents of a single religion to be registered. To carry identification cards. To be subject to additional surveillance. To be refused entry to the nation even if they're escaping horrific repression. To have their houses of worship closed down.
Those are racist, fascist policies. To avoid the comparison with early Nazi repression against Jews is to avoid telling the full story. And that's just what the media is doing by refusing to call these proposals racist.

Isn't racism or bigotry to not like people you perceive as a threat to your personal safety. Might be in error, but the error doesn't make the view racist. Especially if there's some truth to it.

There isn't any truth to it, that's the point.

Being Muslim doesn't make one a 'terrorist,' nor a 'terrorist sympathizer,' nor 'prone to terrorism.'

Consequently, the notion of 'registering' American citizens who are Muslim, or 'investigating' mosques in the United States, manifests as racism and bigotry – it's ignorant, unwarranted, and devoid of merit.

There are some who have even said certain segments of our population should wear some sort of identification. Amazingly, they either fail to see the connection between that the nazi's forcing Jews to wear ID, or, more likely, they're in favor of it.

 

[Votto]

The answer is simple. The media has been so bullied by Conservatives about being "unfair" to the right that they are afraid to criticize even the most offensive behavior. Trump is well aware of the castration of the media when it comes to criticizing his newfound party and is taking full advantage of it

Why the media is duty-bound to call Donald Trump a racist

But for some reason, when covering the people vying for the most powerful office in the land, the media is hesitant to apply the "R" word, no matter how apt it may be. And that hesitation could have extraordinarily serious consequences for the country.
But just denying the refugees fleeing terrorism and repression wasn't enough. The anti-terrorism furor has grown into an anti-Muslim furor. Trump has called for shutting down mosques and refused to rule out a national registry for Muslims. Marco Rubio is trying to out-Trump Trump by calling not just for shutting down mosques, but even cafes or websites where Muslims gather.
But look at where we are today. Leading candidates for presidents are flirting with requiring adherents of a single religion to be registered. To carry identification cards. To be subject to additional surveillance. To be refused entry to the nation even if they're escaping horrific repression. To have their houses of worship closed down.
Those are racist, fascist policies. To avoid the comparison with early Nazi repression against Jews is to avoid telling the full story. And that's just what the media is doing by refusing to call these proposals racist.

Isn't racism or bigotry to not like people you perceive as a threat to your personal safety. Might be in error, but the error doesn't make the view racist. Especially if there's some truth to it.

There isn't any truth to it, that's the point.

Being Muslim doesn't make one a 'terrorist,' nor a 'terrorist sympathizer,' nor 'prone to terrorism.'

Consequently, the notion of 'registering' American citizens who are Muslim, or 'investigating' mosques in the United States, manifests as racism and bigotry – it's ignorant, unwarranted, and devoid of merit.

There are some who have even said certain segments of our population should wear some sort of identification. Amazingly, they either fail to see the connection between that the nazi's forcing Jews to wear ID, or, more likely, they're in favor of it.

You are right, of course. What we need is more hope and change

 

[rightwinger]

The answer is simple. The media has been so bullied by Conservatives about being "unfair" to the right that they are afraid to criticize even the most offensive behavior. Trump is well aware of the castration of the media when it comes to criticizing his newfound party and is taking full advantage of it

Why the media is duty-bound to call Donald Trump a racist

But for some reason, when covering the people vying for the most powerful office in the land, the media is hesitant to apply the "R" word, no matter how apt it may be. And that hesitation could have extraordinarily serious consequences for the country.
But just denying the refugees fleeing terrorism and repression wasn't enough. The anti-terrorism furor has grown into an anti-Muslim furor. Trump has called for shutting down mosques and refused to rule out a national registry for Muslims. Marco Rubio is trying to out-Trump Trump by calling not just for shutting down mosques, but even cafes or websites where Muslims gather.
But look at where we are today. Leading candidates for presidents are flirting with requiring adherents of a single religion to be registered. To carry identification cards. To be subject to additional surveillance. To be refused entry to the nation even if they're escaping horrific repression. To have their houses of worship closed down.
Those are racist, fascist policies. To avoid the comparison with early Nazi repression against Jews is to avoid telling the full story. And that's just what the media is doing by refusing to call these proposals racist.

Isn't racism or bigotry to not like people you perceive as a threat to your personal safety. Might be in error, but the error doesn't make the view racist. Especially if there's some truth to it.

There isn't any truth to it, that's the point.

Being Muslim doesn't make one a 'terrorist,' nor a 'terrorist sympathizer,' nor 'prone to terrorism.'

Consequently, the notion of 'registering' American citizens who are Muslim, or 'investigating' mosques in the United States, manifests as racism and bigotry – it's ignorant, unwarranted, and devoid of merit.

There are some who have even said certain segments of our population should wear some sort of identification. Amazingly, they either fail to see the connection between that the nazi's forcing Jews to wear ID, or, more likely, they're in favor of it.

Whether the media uses the racist word is mostly irrelevant. They need to stop letting Trump off the hook so easily. He needs to be held accountable for his rhetoric.
Trump doubling down on his hateful rhetoric should not go unchallenged

 

[Correll]

Donald Trump is not willing to go along with that consensus. So he has adopted a retro racism, telling primary voters in no uncertain terms that if you're looking for the candidate who will indulge and validate your ugliest impulses, Trump is your man. And nearly as shamefully, his opponents tiptoe around the issue, unwilling to criticize him too severely.

Being against Third World Immigration is not racist.

Actually, it is

Saying we want only white people to immigrate here or saying we want only Christians is blatant racism

Looking at what Third World Immigrants bring to US and judging whether we WANT that is not racism.

It's not racist to look a unskilled Mexican and say, we don't need more unskilled laborers.

It is not racist to look at a Muslim who has been taught to hate Jews and say, we don't want to increase Antisemitism here.


Racism is claiming that people are better or worse based on genetics.

Being sane is looking at populations and judging them on their behavior and the content of their character.

And we don't need anything the Third World has to offer.

 

[Correll]

Why won't the media call Obama a racist? He is one

Why is Classless Ass so afraid to discuss Drumpf's racism that she has to change the subject?

Stay on topic. If you want to like about President Obama, go start a thread.

Twenty years in REv. Wright's Black Liberation Theology Church.

The lack of outrage from the left on that undermines their credibility when they claim to be upset about Trump's supposedly racism.

Thus it is a relevant on topic question.

No its not relevant.

The topic is Drumpf.

If you want to lie about President Obama, go start a thread.

Wow. Good debating move. Just repeat yourself. Did you learn that somewhere or create it yourself?

 

[Correll]

Donald Trump is running the most explicitly racist campaign since 1968

All the way back in 1981, Republican strategist Lee Atwater explained how his party's candidates had changed the way they talked about race and government to white voters over time. "You start out in 1954 by saying, '******, ******, ******,'" Atwater said. "By 1968 you can't say '******' — that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states' rights, and all that stuff, and you're getting so abstract. Now, you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites."
Atwater's point — that you could get whites to vote on the basis of racial resentments without using explicitly racist language

Yes, the one straw of which the entire edifice of the Myth of the Southern Strategy is built.

ONe interview with a man nearly 30 years after the facts, in which he never claims that he ever spoke these thought out loud to Nixon or anyone.

Meanwhile Nixon was the one that enforced busing, the exact opposite of what the real racists actually wanted.


Stop it already.

I don't know if it is possible to commit mass murder with boredom as a weapon, but are you really prepared to take that chance?

So your argument is that the segregationist South became a Republican stronghold by accident?

From that Right Wing Rag the New York Times. Read and learn.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-4.html?oref=slogin&_r=0

 

[NYcarbineer]

Donald Trump is running the most explicitly racist campaign since 1968

All the way back in 1981, Republican strategist Lee Atwater explained how his party's candidates had changed the way they talked about race and government to white voters over time. "You start out in 1954 by saying, '******, ******, ******,'" Atwater said. "By 1968 you can't say '******' — that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states' rights, and all that stuff, and you're getting so abstract. Now, you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites."
Atwater's point — that you could get whites to vote on the basis of racial resentments without using explicitly racist language

Yes, the one straw of which the entire edifice of the Myth of the Southern Strategy is built.

ONe interview with a man nearly 30 years after the facts, in which he never claims that he ever spoke these thought out loud to Nixon or anyone.

Meanwhile Nixon was the one that enforced busing, the exact opposite of what the real racists actually wanted.


Stop it already.

I don't know if it is possible to commit mass murder with boredom as a weapon, but are you really prepared to take that chance?

So your argument is that the segregationist South became a Republican stronghold by accident?

From that Right Wing Rag the New York Times. Read and learn.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-4.html?oref=slogin&_r=0

Not until you answer my question.

 

[Correll]

Why won't the media call Obama a racist? He is one

Why is Classless Ass so afraid to discuss Drumpf's racism that she has to change the subject?

Stay on topic. If you want to like about President Obama, go start a thread.

Twenty years in REv. Wright's Black Liberation Theology Church.

The lack of outrage from the left on that undermines their credibility when they claim to be upset about Trump's supposedly racism.

Thus it is a relevant on topic question.

BOOM!!!! That should leave a mark on them for life. they think they have some RIGHT to go around judging who is a racist and who isn't. when they start cleaning up their own first. then the rest of my give a crap

BBBut the left can never be racists....just ask them

You defend your racism with the 'yeah but what about the other guy' defense?

That's not actually a defense. That's a confession.

Which would be relevant if we said anything like that.

Obama was ACTUALLY a member of a racist organization for twenty years.

And you libs gave him a pass on it.

So you when you pretend to be outraged over supposed racism like wanting to enforce the immigration laws, you reveal yourselves to be complete hypocrites.

 

[DGS49]

Sounding like a broken record on this point, but this whole discussion illustrates the fact that the Left ALWAYS resorts to ad hominem attacks. ALWAYS!

The word "racist" is not even remotely applicable to the words and conduct in question. Trump, a Caucasian, has suggested MONITORING Arab Muslims coming into this country as "refugees." Arab Muslims are also CAUCASIANS! Muslim is not even a nationality, let alone a race.

Trump's ACTUAL WORDS - and not the words of the "Gotcha Reporter" - are what is relevant. What, EXACTLY, did Trump say that indicates he believes Caucasians are superior, or some other race is inferior to Caucasians? Let me see a quote. It does not exist.

Trump believes that the U.S. ought to take its own immigration laws seriously, and to erect a sufficient barrier to prevent people from illegally coming here.

If that makes him a "racist," then you might want to interchange "sentient American" for "racist" because every sentient American feels the same way.

When you can't deal with the actual facts or data, then call someone a name. Even if the name is made-up nonsense.

You fucking HOMOPHOBE! DENIER!

 

[Correll]

Donald Trump is running the most explicitly racist campaign since 1968

All the way back in 1981, Republican strategist Lee Atwater explained how his party's candidates had changed the way they talked about race and government to white voters over time. "You start out in 1954 by saying, '******, ******, ******,'" Atwater said. "By 1968 you can't say '******' — that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states' rights, and all that stuff, and you're getting so abstract. Now, you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites."
Atwater's point — that you could get whites to vote on the basis of racial resentments without using explicitly racist language

Yes, the one straw of which the entire edifice of the Myth of the Southern Strategy is built.

ONe interview with a man nearly 30 years after the facts, in which he never claims that he ever spoke these thought out loud to Nixon or anyone.

Meanwhile Nixon was the one that enforced busing, the exact opposite of what the real racists actually wanted.


Stop it already.

I don't know if it is possible to commit mass murder with boredom as a weapon, but are you really prepared to take that chance?

So your argument is that the segregationist South became a Republican stronghold by accident?

From that Right Wing Rag the New York Times. Read and learn.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-4.html?oref=slogin&_r=0

Not until you answer my question.

Your question is moronic.

The South did NOT become republican because of some Strategy to appeal to Southern White Racist.

THe underlying changes that drove that change are imo, very well explored in the New York Times article I linked for you.

So read it.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Why doesn't the media call Obama a racist?
A racist is not just someone who is negative against another race, but also someone who shows preferential treatment for a race.
No one could seriously argue that Obama has not shown preferential treatment especially in white on black violence.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Obama's a Jew hater, yet the left applauds that.

 

[Correll]

The answer is simple. The media has been so bullied by Conservatives about being "unfair" to the right that they are afraid to criticize even the most offensive behavior. Trump is well aware of the castration of the media when it comes to criticizing his newfound party and is taking full advantage of it

Why the media is duty-bound to call Donald Trump a racist

But for some reason, when covering the people vying for the most powerful office in the land, the media is hesitant to apply the "R" word, no matter how apt it may be. And that hesitation could have extraordinarily serious consequences for the country.
But just denying the refugees fleeing terrorism and repression wasn't enough. The anti-terrorism furor has grown into an anti-Muslim furor. Trump has called for shutting down mosques and refused to rule out a national registry for Muslims. Marco Rubio is trying to out-Trump Trump by calling not just for shutting down mosques, but even cafes or websites where Muslims gather.
But look at where we are today. Leading candidates for presidents are flirting with requiring adherents of a single religion to be registered. To carry identification cards. To be subject to additional surveillance. To be refused entry to the nation even if they're escaping horrific repression. To have their houses of worship closed down.
Those are racist, fascist policies. To avoid the comparison with early Nazi repression against Jews is to avoid telling the full story. And that's just what the media is doing by refusing to call these proposals racist.

Isn't racism or bigotry to not like people you perceive as a threat to your personal safety. Might be in error, but the error doesn't make the view racist. Especially if there's some truth to it.

There isn't any truth to it, that's the point.

Being Muslim doesn't make one a 'terrorist,' nor a 'terrorist sympathizer,' nor 'prone to terrorism.'

Consequently, the notion of 'registering' American citizens who are Muslim, or 'investigating' mosques in the United States, manifests as racism and bigotry – it's ignorant, unwarranted, and devoid of merit.

There are some who have even said certain segments of our population should wear some sort of identification. Amazingly, they either fail to see the connection between that the nazi's forcing Jews to wear ID, or, more likely, they're in favor of it.

Whether the media uses the racist word is mostly irrelevant. They need to stop letting Trump off the hook so easily. He needs to be held accountable for his rhetoric.
Trump doubling down on his hateful rhetoric should not go unchallenged

Why was Obama not held accountable for his twenty years as a member of REv. Wright's Church?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Leftwingers are racist fucks....