Hats as Hate

[Tanngrisnir]

Marxist? LOL

Liberal/progressive? LOL, comrade.

Waffling at best. Either your morals work no matter who it is or they aren't morals they are political expediency. Was it wrong?

Newp. Not waffling in the least. Not at all surprising, given your utter inability to honestly address the entire situation.

Glad we could agree that it wasn't slander.

 

[OpportunityCost]

Liberal/progressive? LOL, comrade.

Newp. Not waffling in the least. Not at all surprising, given your utter inability to honestly address the entire situation.

Glad we could agree that it wasn't slander.

Cant bring yourself to admit calling kids future school shooters is wrong because they are your political "enemy". You are morally bankrupt, but that's not exactly news to anyone here.

 

[Rich2018]

Nancy I'd only fighting for the rights she agrees with. The rest she wants gone.

Like what rights ?

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Cant bring yourself to admit calling kids future school shooters is wrong because they are your political "enemy". You are morally bankrupt, but that's not exactly news to anyone here.

LOL! Whatever rationalization that you have to use to pretend you've scored some victory. And for you to whine and pull your hair out over morals?

Ah, the delicious irony of the unware.

Thanks for admitting that it wasn't slander. Super-duper glad I could educate you on yet another topic.

 

[Moon]

If the campaign wants to clarify and state at what point in US history they are referring to it might clear things up. But as long as it is vague then I would say it is left up for everyone interpret its meaning.

Which leads to the twisty, bendy Stretch Armstrong interpretation you and others have posted.

 

[OpportunityCost]

LOL! Whatever rationalization that you have to use to pretend you've scored some victory. And for you to whine and pull your hair out over morals?

Ah, the delicious irony of the unware.

Thanks for admitting that it wasn't slander. Super-duper glad I could educate you on yet another topic.

Yeah, it was slander, you know it was.

I know its ironic how ****ing unaware you are.

You haven't educated anyone on this site about anything, any time, any where.

 

[Thoreau72]

I'm sorry you talk about 2 very specific slogans about very specific events and then compare the way they threaten or offend others versus a generic political slogan such as "Make America great again"?

the hats don't mean anything but what they say. people who are overly sensitive to the false narrative the progressives keep spewing about the hats being racist because they take some things Trump has said out of context in no way equates to a logical argument about what a piece of apparel means.

Just as the Confederate Flag or various Confederate era statues mean something more to some than they may mean to you or me, so too do the MAGA hats mean something more to others than they might mean to you or me.

Simply put, beauty and many other qualities are in the eye of the beholder. In a sense that is the notion that is behind what is called political correctness or hate speech. Some folks are offended, some are not. Those seeking to apply sanctions personally against Israel by way of participating in BDS actions have been declared criminals by Israel and AIPAC. Political correctness enforced under law.

So actions that many see as meaningless are seen by others as being horrible behavior. I guess it depends on whose ox is being gored, eh?

 

[Luckyone]

Nick Sandmann, a student at Covington Catholic, says he was a silent bystander in viral video. But his MAGA hat spoke for him.


To call this kind of article disingenuous would be generous in the extreme. To see it promoted by NBC, one of the traditional bastions of broadcast journalism, really tells us where we are as a country and it tells us a WHOLE lot about where the major players in the media stand, politically. There really isn't much doubt at all any more that most of the broadcast and print media has become the propaganda arm of the political class. They aren't even hiding it any more.

Where we are as a country is ALL on the shoulders of Trump. He is the one that has brought on lying as a profession, fake truths as reality and hate and misunderstandings as a rule of life.

Don't blame the media, blame Trump for bringing a Presidency that lives in the gutter.

 

[Thoreau72]

Where we are as a country is ALL on the shoulders of Trump. He is the one that has brought on lying as a profession, fake truths as reality and hate and misunderstandings as a rule of life.

Don't blame the media, blame Trump for bringing a Presidency that lives in the gutter.

I'm no Trump fan, but the truth is that the media is the one who lies as a profession. Our media has been promoting lies long before Trump was elected.

 

[Luckyone]

I'm no Trump fan, but the truth is that the media is the one who lies as a profession. Our media has been promoting lies long before Trump was elected.

I do not agree with you. That the media can make mistakes, yes that is human nature and also the nature of the media given that there is money involved and the media will always try to "jump the gun" and report something that may not have clearly determined yet. Nonetheless, one thing that is not always stated but is a reality is that the media is always open for lawsuits if they misreport something, especially if they do it on purpose. In my experience of 73 years, I have found that the media usually bends backward to get the facts straight. The U.S. has always been known as a land of law and of lawsuits. Perfect example is the 3500+ lawsuits that the President has been involved in his life. The media is very exposed to that, so lying is not something they can afford to do. They can though, offer their opinion on something and that can have a biased slant. Lying, no!

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Yeah, it was slander, you know it was.

I know its ironic how ****ing unaware you are.

You haven't educated anyone on this site about anything, any time, any where.

LOL! So, IOW, we both know it wasn't slander and you're incapable of demonstrating that it was.

It's always fun handing and education out to you.

You're most welcome!

 

[veritas1]

Don't quit your day job, that comment was weak as hell and pathetic. But since the comment came from you, not surprised.

You made a dopey rant and received an appropriate response.

 

[OpportunityCost]

LOL! So, IOW, we both know it wasn't slander and you're incapable of demonstrating that it was.

It's always fun handing and education out to you.

You're most welcome!

there are a lot of dumb Trump supporters out there that are racist and white supremacy enablers and the rest that voted for Trump are now regretting it.

It slanders Trump supporters. It puts them into two groups, those that are regretful about their support and the rest that are according to him racist, white supremacy enablers.

You need to step off the troll gas and use your head, its a nasty remark, it is slanderous.

 

[AGENT J]

Nick Sandmann, a student at Covington Catholic, says he was a silent bystander in viral video. But his MAGA hat spoke for him.



I'd like to point out that this piece, while opinion, isn't on some off the wall blog or some "news" site with a well know and recognized political lean. It's from NBC.

This is what MAIN STREAM MEDIA is putting out to the public -


"Aligning oneself with Trump's movement is an aggressive political statement"

That's where we are today. The author then goes on to describe all kinds of incidents where a Trump supporter "taunted or attacked someone from a marginalized group". He does that while ignoring all the incidents where someone from the "Resistance" has attacked Trump supporters.

To call this kind of article disingenuous would be generous in the extreme. To see it promoted by NBC, one of the traditional bastions of broadcast journalism, really tells us where we are as a country and it tells us a WHOLE lot about where the major players in the media stand, politically. There really isn't much doubt at all any more that most of the broadcast and print media has become the propaganda arm of the political class. They aren't even hiding it any more.

Not sure why i would ever care since this is under opinion. For me since its under opinion it doesnt matter what journalist/news org it comes from, why would it really. Id there any solid reason for it to?
in dramatic terms do I agree that the hat = evil, nope of course not thats silly but at the same time it would be also as illogical to assume anybody wearing the hat = innocent

its an opinion piece :shrug: i can only go by my life experiences and ive never seen anybody wear the hat in real life not even trump supporters. Even the trump supporters i know have said themselves they would never wear the hate because they are not one of the nutters. again thats only their opinion but that came from trump supporters.

My point is to ignore the hat has a negative stigma associated with it because of what many people who wear it have said and done is to ignore reality and its just as ignorant and biased as claiming the hat MUST = evil.

You cant point out an opinion piece then go to use dramatic terminology like "promoted by NBC, one of the traditional bastions of broadcast journalism, really tells us where we are as a country and it tells us a WHOLE lot about where the major players in the media stand, politically." that pure hypocrisy and just as illogical as judging the hat all negative or positive.

Now do i agree that all news media has some bias some lean and is an issue in todays world of politics? absofreakinlutely! of course i do but this isnt an example of it or what i would use as some revolutionary clue like you false try to make it. Hell opinion pieces like this arent even new by any stretch of the imagination LOL

There are nutters that think all those kids are the devil or the hat = evil, there are nutters that think all those kids are innocent and did nothing wrong and theres zero reason to be suspicious of the hat and theres no negative stigma with it. the reality and truth is in the middle so ignore the nutters and dont placate to them or become one of them by claiming this opinion piece is some new eye opening monumental revelation thats never happened before and the sign of end of times. reality is this isnt new, its sad IMO but certainly not new.

 

[Praxas]

You made a dopey rant and received an appropriate response.

All your comments are dopey responses. I said the truth, sorry you got butthurt about it.

 

[Hypothetical]

Just as the Confederate Flag or various Confederate era statues mean something more to some than they may mean to you or me, so too do the MAGA hats mean something more to others than they might mean to you or me.

Simply put, beauty and many other qualities are in the eye of the beholder. In a sense that is the notion that is behind what is called political correctness or hate speech. Some folks are offended, some are not. Those seeking to apply sanctions personally against Israel by way of participating in BDS actions have been declared criminals by Israel and AIPAC. Political correctness enforced under law.

So actions that many see as meaningless are seen by others as being horrible behavior. I guess it depends on whose ox is being gored, eh?

that may be true, anything can mean anything to anyone, but I'll be damned if I will allow something with no inherent meaning of badness to be infused with it because of overly sensitive "offended" people. both the swastika and the Confederate flag have actual mean history behind them, not MAGA.

thus I have to assume as a reasonable person that being so "offended" is merely an attempt to control the narrative. when you go to the extent that you punish people in the court of public opinion for absolutely nothing other than people's asinine opinions you no longer have anything like a free country.

 

[AGENT J]

that may be true, anything can mean anything to anyone, but I'll be damned if I will allow something with no inherent meaning of badness to be infused with it because of overly sensitive "offended" people. both the swastika and the Confederate flag have actual mean history behind them, not MAGA.

thus I have to assume as a reasonable person that being so "offended" is merely an attempt to control the narrative. when you go to the extent that you punish people in the court of public opinion for absolutely nothing other than people's asinine opinions you no longer have anything like a free country.

wasnt in your conversation so i dont want to assume but yet i want to be clear on what i think you are saying so i have a simple question. and its a yes no question. we can GLADLY continue the conversation but for integrity and honesty all i need is a yes no then you are free explain and we are free to discuss as you like.

are you denying that the MAGA hat has a negative stigma on it based on what many people who wear it have said and done? yes or no

 

[Tanngrisnir]

It slanders Trump supporters. It puts them into two groups, those that are regretful about their support and the rest that are according to him racist, white supremacy enablers.

You need to step off the troll gas and use your head, its a nasty remark, it is slanderous.

No, sorry, that's simply not slander, no matter how much you need it to be to prop up your laughable fantasy.

It can be a 'nasty' (awwwwww....) remark and still not be slanderous.

Like, for example, how you constantly lie about others being 'trolls'.

Super-duper glad I could set you straight on that.

 

[OpportunityCost]

No, sorry, that's simply not slander, no matter how much you need it to be to prop up your laughable fantasy.

It can be a 'nasty' (awwwwww....) remark and still not be slanderous.

Like, for example, how you constantly lie about others being 'trolls'.

Super-duper glad I could set you straight on that.

Its the same as this hats for hate nonsense. A hat is not inherently racist, just as Trump supporters aren't in 2 groups. You and your group of narrow minded intolerant progressive thought policemen want them to be so badly so you can demonize anyone that so much as supports anything the current President does, it reduces you to what you are doing, trying every red herring you can to avoid talking about the tactics you are using.

 

[Rich2018]

a hat is not inherently racist...

You are of course right.

It's the symbolism.

To use an extreme example, a swastika wasn't inherently racist until Hitler adopted it as the symbol for his party.


The Confederate battle flag was seen as a harmless piece of Southern culture (and 60's hippies) - it was on the General Lee in The Dukes of Hazard.
Now it's seen as a symbol of racism and racial bigotry.

 

[OpportunityCost]

You are of course right.

It's the symbolism.

To use an extreme example, a swastika wasn't inherently racist until Hitler adopted it as the symbol for his party.


The Confederate battle flag was seen as a harmless piece of Southern culture (and 60's hippies) - it was on the General Lee in The Dukes of Hazard.
Now it's seen as a symbol of racism and racial bigotry.

Its the hallmark of SJWs: you will be made to care.

 

[TurtleDude]

There was a time that jackasses like him would be relegated to the print "rags" and the bowels of the internet. Today you find him on NBC. It goes to show how far down the rabbit hole we have fallen.

he sounds like the leftwing counterpart to David Duke or the Infowars CT whack job

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Its the same as this hats for hate nonsense. A hat is not inherently racist, just as Trump supporters aren't in 2 groups. You and your group of narrow minded intolerant progressive thought policemen want them to be so badly so you can demonize anyone that so much as supports anything the current President does, it reduces you to what you are doing, trying every red herring you can to avoid talking about the tactics you are using.

Yawn. Marxists like you never can get this into your heads: it's simply not slander. I'm not demonizing anyone. I haven't used a red herring and you cannot cite any that I have.

You should really try and get less upset about this. It drives you to dishonesty that's most unbecoming.

Why do you 'slander' people by calling them 'trolls'?

 

[Acadia]

Liberals and progressives always bleat and proclaim how tolerant they are. When push comes to shove its just another political posture to get votes, they don't have any more tolerance than anyone else, you included.

As for whether its slander or not, you cant just go into the public square and start calling people abhorrent names because you feel like it. That's what happened to those kids. Can you at least be able to admit it was wrong? Or are you too far gone for that?

Progressives are defined by their intolerance. Remember, we're not talking about liberals. There are too few of them left.

 

[OpportunityCost]

Yawn. Marxists like you never can get this into your heads: it's simply not slander. I'm not demonizing anyone. I haven't used a red herring and you cannot cite any that I have.

You should really try and get less upset about this. It drives you to dishonesty that's most unbecoming.

Why do you 'slander' people by calling them 'trolls'?

Please address the topical matters I brought up, or follow pattern and don't.