So you're telling me the Islamic State still exists???

[windwalker]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

 

 

I agree it's a lot better than pandering - but he is still addressing his audience of terrorist funders talking about good versus evil as if they are not signed up to an ideology which actually does not believe in equality and freedom but in Theocracy and authoritarianism.  He's describing ISIS etc as if they operate to a different code, in a different sphere with a different Koran.  They don't - it's the same one.  This explains the faces of the Saudis - at once indifferent and sneeringly antagonistic, sitting as they do in opulence while setting the world on fire.  He's appealing to them to drive out evil when they don't even think it is evil.  So calling them losers and so on does not amount to a strategy as far as I can see.

 

 

 

 

The first part of any strategy is defining what one is basing it on.  The President has clearly articulated the problem, solutions and out comes if not addressed or addressed.

 

He posed it as a choice one that will happen either with or without those present in the room.  What it did for them was to give them a way of separating what they believe and practice from those that are labeled as losers allowing the reformation process that they need to start and continue.  The point being that it must change from the inside, can not be changed from the outside..

 

I do agree that Islam, as a practice allows much if not all the things the losers do...by design. 

By being very direct the President is telling those in the room and those outside the room what will happen regardless

of what they either do or not do....  The losers, gotta go....

 

 

Edited May 29, 2017 by windwalker

[Aetherous]

The evil loser once tried to get his teacher in trouble for being "Islamophobic".

[Marblehead]

Strange how some people can be so fucking hypocritical.

 

 

 

[Marblehead]

Last I heard there are now 16 people in custody regarding the investigation.

 

[Brian]

2 hours ago, Marblehead said:

You didn't notice some of those Arab delegates squirming is their seat while Trump was talking?

 

That wasn't the obsequious apologetics to which they have become accustomed.

[liminal_luke]

15 hours ago, redcairo said:

I like relabeling them losers, Luke. Here's why:

 

1. Generally: I think one of the genuine problems we have as a social-culture with issues such as islamic terrorism (which is the vast vast vast vast majority of terrorism here and in Islamic countries, though not all others) is that nobody wants to call anything what it is and all the whitewashed phrasings and labelings pretty much err on the side of making everything prettier and not so bad. So first off, the fact that he is just brutally clear in the various things he has said about -- totally outside the normal "political speech" -- I think is great.

 

2. Second, specifically to the label losers, I like it -- if you call them muslims people get pissed ("because my muslim neighbor hasn't bombed anybody yet so how rude") and if you call them terrorists you merely highlight their terror and I suspect make them feel like yeah, we're he-man, we're bad-ass, be terrified. He is trying to instantiate -- and there is a bigger picture to this -- a change in how the world thinks about this including arabic countries, and to create a reaction that is not about terror but about disgust. Marginalization, to minimize the terror. Enough disgust that it loses the glossy, may be less attractive to young people to join, and so that even other muslims will be more willing to report them and not support them. You can't just call them killers and slavers -- hell by Islam's standards you've done good for Allah if you're those things.

 

You (and others) see it as just a simple, childish name calling. I see it as a deliberate, and probably carefully thought out beforehand, "strategy" -- just like you'd have in business or marketing -- intentionally simple spit-wadding level. He is refusing to give them the "drama" that they WANT and the terror that they WANT, and instead "reframing" it into something else.

 

RC

 

14 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

RC,

 

You may be right.  Like I say, I have an almost gut-level negative reaction to that kind of talk.  But then again, it`s not really my reaction that matters.  If it really is a well thought out strategy and it works, well, more power to him.

 

LL

 

Some further thoughts...

 

It`s not just terrorists (losers, if you prefer) that listen to Trump.  His supporters also listen to the speech in which he spit-waddishly calls them losers.  You posit that the level of Trump`s thinking is well above the level of his discourse, that he`s purposely speaking in a simplistic and emotionally inflamed way for some strategic purpose. That`s a sophisticated analysis on your part (perhaps influenced by your business expertise?), and not one that the vast majority of Trump supporters would come to on their own.  Most people, including me, assume that Trump is talking on a spit waddish level because he himself functions at a spit waddish level.  Occam`s razor and all that.

 

Like a Starbuck`s barista frothing milk for a cappuccino, President Trump froths the more savage passions of his conservative base.  Perhaps this increases his support; it certainly seems to around here.  It also has the effect of bringing the whole country down to a more spit waddish level.  Not a good thing, in my opinion. 

[Aetherous]

1 minute ago, liminal_luke said:

President Trump froths the more savage passions of his conservative base

 

Projecting.

[liminal_luke]

1 minute ago, Aetherous said:

 

Projecting.

 

Ah, I dunno.  You may be even-tempered Aetherous, but the same can`t be say for many of your conservative companions.  For the record, I`m equally critical of leftist foolishness -- of which there is plenty.  

[Aetherous]

What you're attempting to discuss in this thread is really a non-issue. There are no problematic conservatives, frothing at the mouth, getting worked up into a frenzy, anywhere...and certainly not because Trump called terrorists "losers".

[liminal_luke]

We disagree, Aetherous.  I see conservatives repeating his losers comment right here on Taobums in a way that seems pretty frothy to me.  RC might have been right when she said Trump stooped to a spit-waddish name calling level for a specific purpose; I do not believe that most of his supporters who parrot the language share the same sophistication.

[rene]

10 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

...

 

That`s a sophisticated analysis ... and not one that the vast majority of Trump supporters would come to on their own.

...

 

Vast majority? Wow. That is probably the ugliest thing I've ever heard you say, Luke. You're better than that.

[Aetherous]

2 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

We disagree, Aetherous.  I see conservatives repeating his losers comment right here on Taobums in a way that seems pretty frothy to me.  RC might have been right when she said Trump stooped to a spit-waddish name calling level for a specific purpose; I do not believe that most of his supporters who parrot the language share the same sophistication.

 

Like I said, that's just your projection.

 

Here's a tip: instead of thinking about this subsection of the forum as your place to fight and feel disharmonious, why don't you use this place as an opportunity for cultivation?

Edited May 29, 2017 by Aetherous

[rene]

Aetherous, please 'unthank' my post to Luke.

.

Edited May 29, 2017 by WuDao
thank you, aetherous

[Brian]

11 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

What you're attempting to discuss in this thread is really a non-issue. There are no problematic conservatives, frothing at the mouth, getting worked up into a frenzy, anywhere...and certainly not because Trump called terrorists "losers".

I dunno...

 

These Trump supporters look pretty frothed and frenzied to me:

http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/46/66/41/10184825/3/rawImage.jpg

[Aetherous]

5 minutes ago, WuDao said:

Aetherous, please 'unthank' my post to Luke.

 

I simply share your perspective on him, that he's better than that.

[liminal_luke]

5 minutes ago, WuDao said:

 

Vast majority? Wow. That is probably the ugliest thing I've ever heard you say, Luke. You're better than that.

 

Please understand, WuDao.  What I said about the vast majority of Trump supporters wasn`t such an insult.  I said that the vast majority of Trump supporters would not independently come to the same sophisticated analysis that RC did.  That`s also true of the vast majority of people who don`t like Trump.  You might have noticed that I also said that I myself would not have come to that conclusion.

 

In my assessment RC is a very astute thinker.  Few people can match her, Democrat or Republican.  To say that the "vast majority" of any group of people are not going to independently arrive at her level of insight isn`t a great insult, it`s just the truth.

[windwalker]

13 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

We disagree, Aetherous.  I see conservatives repeating his losers comment right here on Taobums in a way that seems pretty frothy to me.  RC might have been right when she said Trump stooped to a spit-waddish name calling level for a specific purpose; I do not believe that most of his supporters who parrot the language share the same sophistication.

So why not address them directly and maybe your view will change or they might understand.  The conversation is with those here, of which I am one.  Why this concern for those not here who you'er not interacting with...Indeed do they even exist for you if "you" do not interact with them.

Edited May 29, 2017 by windwalker

[liminal_luke]

Brian,

 

Your point that leftwing protesters are "frothy" is well-taken and one that I have already acknowledged in my reply to Aetherous.  Like I say, it`s not hard to find examples of left wing foolishness. All I`m saying, is that there`s also conservative frothiness.  Do you disagree?

[rene]

10 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

Please understand, WuDao.  What I said about the vast majority of Trump supporters wasn`t such an insult.  I said that the vast majority of Trump supporters would not independently come to the same sophisticated analysis that RC did.  That`s also true of the vast majority of people who don`t like Trump.  You might have noticed that I also said that I myself would not have come to that conclusion.

 

In my assessment RC is a very astute thinker.  Few people can match her, Democrat or Republican.  To say that the "vast majority" of any group of people are not going to independently arrive at her level of insight isn`t a great insult, it`s just the truth.

 

You missed my point.

Carry on.

Edited May 29, 2017 by WuDao
clarification

[rene]

7 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

 

I simply share your perspective on him, that he's better than that.

I thought so, too. Thanks for your post.

[liminal_luke]

11 minutes ago, WuDao said:

 

You missed my point.

 

 

If you`d like to explain it to me, I`m listening.

[Brian]

9 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

Brian,

 

Your point that leftwing protesters are "frothy" is well-taken and one that I have already acknowledged in my reply to Aetherous.  Like I say, it`s not hard to find examples of left wing foolishness. All I`m saying, is that there`s also conservative frothiness.  Do you disagree?

I agree there is also "Trump supporter" "frothiness" but on roughly an order of magnitude lower in terms of both frequency and magnitude.  Compare the anti-Bush Tea Party rallies of a bit more than a decade ago to the ironically misnamed "antifa" demonstrations of this year.

 

I'll also point out that exceedingly few "conservatives" are pro-Trump agitators.

[liminal_luke]

19 minutes ago, Brian said:

I agree there is also "Trump supporter" "frothiness" but on roughly an order of magnitude lower in terms of both frequency and magnitude.  Compare the anti-Bush Tea Party rallies of a bit more than a decade ago to the ironically misnamed "antifa" demonstrations of this year.

 

I'll also point out that exceedingly few "conservatives" are pro-Trump agitators.

 

Agreed.  Left-wing frothiness, particularly in the wake of the election, reached a really shocking pitch.  The conservative frothiness I`m referring to is an admittedly more muted phenomenon.  MooNiNite recently posted a video about Milo.  I hadn`t heard of him before, but I looked him up and have been reading his posts at Breitbart.  Now, he`s not as frothy as the people who are protesting his Dangerous Faggot tour, I`ll grant you that.  But still....well, here`s a brief sample of his writing:

 

In fact I’m considered so dangerous that today, January 20th, I am the second most dangerous man in America.  Second only to Daddy, who has taken office today.  That’s right, social justice losers! Donald Trump is your president now and there’s nothing you can do about it.

 

A bit on the frothy side, imo.

[Brian]

8 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

Agreed.  Left-wing frothiness, particularly in the wake of the election, reached a really shocking pitch.  The conservative frothiness I`m referring to is an admittedly more muted phenomenon.  MooNiNite recently posted a video about Milo.  I hadn`t heard of him before, but I looked him up and have been reading his posts at Breitbart.  Now, he`s not as frothy as the people who are protesting his Dangerous Faggot tour, I`ll grant you that.  But still....well, here`s a brief sample of his writing:

 

In fact I’m considered so dangerous that today, January 20th, I am the second most dangerous man in America.  Second only to Daddy, who has taken office today.  That’s right, social justice losers! Donald Trump is your president now and there’s nothing you can do about it.

 

A bit on the frothy side, imo.

Absolutely. He is probably the single most extreme example of "right-wing frothiness." I suspect there's a good bit of melodrama for effect in his presentation but the effect is quite effective, if you follow me.  Look past his theatrics, though, and tell me what you think.

[rene]

49 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

If you`d like to explain it to me, I`m listening.

 

Alright.

 

The ugliness is not in the opinion you hold - but that it overlays, like a perjorative blanket statement, to all members of a group.

 

Statements like these: The vast majority of gay men arent smart enough to tie their own shoes. The vast majority of liberals arent smart enough to see the big picture. The vast majority of conservatives are war mongers. I'd type more but doing so would make me hurl.

 

Undoubtedly, there are stupid gays, liberals and conservatives. But not all of them, and not even most of them.

 

With all the screaming crap, from both sides, it can be hard to remember that the vast majority are not as stupid as others would have us believe. Not nearly.

 

Maybe that is what is really wrong with what's going on: people not being seen as individuals, instead being derogatorily lumped into pre-judged groups.

 

I thought you, likely having experienced the blunt end of that, rose above doing so. My words to you were harsh and I dont have a dog in this hunt, or a side in this topic, but it bows my neck when a whole group is denegrated in that manner from either side - and I dont give a fuck what color the blanket is.

 

This battle (more out there than in here) is no longer about resolutions but instead about the game, strategy & tactics. Sad, that.

 

I've said enough. If my point is still missed, so be it.