So how's The Wall coming along, Donnie?

I don't think you did either. But you weren't vocal against others who expressed racist sentiments. This makes your stance on Trump criticism highly hypocritical.

 

When you factor in that Trump, as a private citizen, fostered disrespect for Obama this makes your defense of him laughably sycophantic.

 

Growing up in an all white community I'm pretty familiar with a large number of racist terms directable at black people.

I'm pretty sure "novelty" is not one of them.

 

Actually I was told someone else here used it first. But at any rate "novelty president" is not a racist term. Hillary Clinton would've been a novelty president as is President Trump.

 

At any rate, what President Obama was called or how he was treated has no bearing on the treatment of President Trump. To say otherwise indicates you are endorsing a playground mentality.

 

You're right.

Trump earns his disrespect.

 

The office of the president does not though. After President Trump leaves office there will still be a presidency.

 

And -?

 

I don't think people should be showing such disrespect. Though you can claim it is directed at President Trump personally it can't help but "rub off" on the office as well.

 

I don't have any feelings for the office. The creature inhabiting it, I do.

 

Why?

 

Already answered

Margaret.

 

Not to my satisfaction. If someone shits in the punchbowl, he needs to be called on it, no matter who he is or what office he holds. The alternative is a slow creep toward a Putinesque/Kim regime, where speaking out gets you "disappeared."

Maybe you'd be happier in Russia.

 

I don't want to go to Russia. Unless I had an opportunity to do some research in their Cold War era archives but that's another story. I actually considered learning the language for that purpose.

You can criticize someone aplenty without insulting and disrespecting them.

 

How did I know you'd ignore the topic sentence and go straight to the "Me, ME, MEEEEE!"?

 

''

You suggested I might be happier in Russia. I simply countered that.

 

Let's try this again: If someone shits in the punchbowl, he needs to be called on it, no matter who he is or what office he holds. The alternative is a slow creep toward a Putinesque/Kim regime, where speaking out gets you "disappeared."

 

I didn't think this thread was about Bill Clinton anyway?

And I didn't think you believed in "slipperly slope" arguments?

 

Trick Question: Who's the current occupant of the White House?

 

You tell me.

 

You mean you don't know? Well, that explains everything...

 

Donald J. Kitchens.

 

So, in short, when people say bad things about Trump, it rubs off on the office of President, but when people said bad things about Obama, those things DIDN'T rub off on the office to.

 

Never said that. You're as bad as garamet.

 

Oh, yes, you did.

Additionally, you referred to Obama as a "novelty" President. Implying that the only reason he was President was because of his skin color. How is this any different than the various slams people have made against Trump? What, in your mind, is a "fair" insult to one who holds the office of President, and one which "damages" the office?

 

Insulting their physical appearance for one.
Insulting their family for another.
Calling them a traitor for one.

And saying Barack Obama would never have been elected president (or even nominated) if it wasn't for his being black is not an insult, it is merely a point that millions upon millions of Americans wanted to vote for a black person to be president.

Conservative pundit Charles Krauthammer (no fan of President Obama) even said openly that he felt proud of the United States when Barack Obama was elected and then sworn in as president because he believed is showed to everyone just what great strides the American people had made in overcoming racism.

 

So you're saying those are fair game? Personally, I'd leave the kids out of it, unless they had an active role in the administration. (This means Barron Trump's out, but Ivanka, Don Jr., and the other one, are all fair game.)

And that's off-limits? I know lots of people called Obama a traitor, but I don't recall you saying that this was beyond the pale for them to do so.

It is if you ignore his other qualifications for being President (of which he had many). Do you think that the majority of people who voted for Obama did so based solely on the color of his skin? Or do you think that they did because they thought he was the better person for the job? Or do you think that whatever his abilities might have been, that people voted for him because they were more afraid of Sarah Palin getting the reigns of power if something were to happen to John McCain?

Yet, he doesn't seem to have implied that Obama was a "novelty" President, based on that statement. He's simply praising the fact that Americans didn't overwhelmingly vote for McCain. In a highly racist society, someone like Obama wouldn't have even won the nomination, let alone the Presidency. In the '60s Bobby Kennedy said that it might be possible, in 40 years, for a black man to be elected President, which was seen as an outrageous idea at the time.