For those that Ha ha'd

[GMDino]

(02-05-2019, 12:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I directed that post to everyone that suggests FLOTUS has no right to feel bullied; as I cited no one. No doubt you and Dino fall into that category, but so do a great many people. Believe it or not if I want to speak with someone directly I will quote them or call them by name

As I said perhaps you just fall into the category of those that support the hate. Of course Melania prokes them so it's OK. At least Meleania stated she disagreed with the actions/words. 

No one has said she has "no right to feel bullied".  A lot of people have said she is not "the most bullied person ever".

And some people think pointing that out is "hate".  Or that showing examples of the FLOTUS not condemning bullying (including by her own husband) while running the #bebest program or whatever it is is "hate".

But then some people seem that they must defend certain people no matter what and once they are dug in they will not give up. 

[hollodero]

(02-05-2019, 12:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I directed that post to everyone that suggests FLOTUS has no right to feel bullied; as I cited no one. No doubt you and Dino fall into that category, but so do a great many people. Believe it or not if I want to speak with someone directly I will quote them or call them by name

? She has the right to feel anything.
I have the right to call those feelings justified or unjustified, or rather the one than the other.

You're the one insisting that whoever calls it more unjustified than justified just hates on her because of her husband. Which just isn't true.

(02-05-2019, 12:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I said perhaps you just fall into the category of those that support the hate. Of course Melania prokes them so it's OK. At least Meleania stated she disagreed with the actions/words. 

If someone comments gross antisemitic deeds as "maybe" going too far, I see that as a weak condemnation. That has nothing to do with partisanry or hate. It's just too weak a condemnation and one can say that without getting accused the way you accuse people. Like Being opposed to something Melania says or does = democrat = speaking only out of unfounded hatred for Donald Trump. That just is neither true nor fair. And tough to comprehend.

[*bfine32*]

(02-05-2019, 12:42 PM)GMDino Wrote: She said the jewish person provoked people into making anti semitic threats.

And to you that is a "possible solution" on how to avoid it.

You used to be funny.  That's just sad.



Whatabout!  

The interviewer took the interview with Melania as an opportunity to slur her husband and his fans reacted. Just like Melania I don't agree with it, but maybe.

Whataboutism is all you've and Pat (see directed at you 2) have done. 

"FLOTUS publishes a message about diversity during BHM and receives hate"

"But whatabout the time....."

[*bfine32*]

(02-05-2019, 12:55 PM)hollodero Wrote: ? She has the right to feel anything.
I have the right to call those feelings justified or unjustified, or rather the one than the other.

You're the one insisting that whoever calls it more unjustified than justified just hates on her because of her husband. Which just isn't true.



If someone comments gross antisemitic deeds as "maybe" going too far, I see that as a weak condemnation. That has nothing to do with partisanry or hate. It's just too weak a condemnation and one can say that without getting accused the way you accuse people. Like Being opposed to something Melania says or does = democrat = speaking only out of unfounded hatred for Donald Trump. That just is neither true nor fair. And tough to comprehend.

Are you opposed to her posted a message about embracing diversity to kick off BHM?

Answer that question, look at some of the responses to her message, and those supporting those that post those messages and then you'll be on your way to discovery. 

As to the rest of the back and forth. You guys (addressing the audiance as a whole) roll with it's OK to condemn her words. I'm done. I realize folk's motivation to defend their hate is stronger than my motivation to bring it to light. 

[GMDino]

(02-05-2019, 12:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The interviewer took the interview with Melania as an opportunity to slur her husband and his fans reacted. Just like Melania I don't agree with it, but maybe.

Whataboutism is all you've and Pat (see directed at you 2) have done. 

"FLOTUS publishes a message about diversity during BHM and receives hate"

"But whatabout the time....."

"slur" "hate"

You agree with it.

She said something nice about black history month.

Yay.

People responded to something else she said on that post so..."hate".

I guess the internet just isn't the place for thin-skinned people.

[GMDino]

Here is the post from the FLOTUS.

February is #BlackHistoryMonth. Let us come together in celebration of our diversity to remember our past and look towards our future.

— Melania Trump (@FLOTUS) February 1, 2019

I encourage people to read the responses.  Many praise her as the "best ever".  Some are off topic about her husband bullying.  Some are off topic about building a wall.  Some are awful comments.

That's the internet in a nutshell.

Public figures who don't like it should speak up about it.  ALL of it.  Not just when it affects them.

[hollodero]

(02-05-2019, 01:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Are you opposed to her posted a message about embracing diversity to kick off BHM?

No.
I responded to a post that didn't address that particular message.

(02-05-2019, 01:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Answer that question, look at some of the responses to her message, and those supporting those that post those messages and then you'll be on your way to discovery. 

As to the rest of the back and forth. You guys (addressing the audiance as a whole) roll with it's OK to condemn her words. I'm done. I realize folk's motivation to defend their hate is stronger than my motivation to bring it to light. 

Then you realize something about me that isn't true.
While I might believe (I don't really know) that the motivation you describe does exist - what I see is you calling each and every critizism of her just unfounded hatred, caused solely by her husband. That still isn't true - even if you could prove that it's true for someone. Your reaction to such criticism seems reflexive and automated, not so much the criticism of her weak anti-semitic condemnation or her praising her bullying husband while allegedly standing up to bullying. These are legit points to bring up and while there's no need to necessarily agree, it is still totally OK to condemn these things.
Her BHM message isn't part of my critizism, and I do not say everything she says needs to be condemned automatically.

[GMDino]

[*bfine32*]

(02-05-2019, 03:33 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Is the motivation of this post to compare Politicians insulting each other to a child getting bullied at school?

[GMDino]

(02-05-2019, 03:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Is the motivation of this post to compare Politicians insulting each other to a child getting bullied at school?

"each other"



No.

Try again.

Or don't.

It won't matter.

[BmorePat87]

(02-05-2019, 12:42 PM)GMDino Wrote: She said the jewish person provoked people into making anti semitic threats.

And to you that is a "possible solution" on how to avoid it.

You used to be funny.  That's just sad.

the death threats "maybe went too far"


:andy:

[*bfine32*]

(02-05-2019, 03:51 PM)GMDino Wrote:

"each other"



No.

Try again.

Or don't.

It won't matter.

Sure each other; Small hands and behind the gym come to mind. Of course you can answer the question posed

[*bfine32*]

Thought this could go here as it's kinda relevant:
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/ivanka-trump-fires-back-art-exhibit-critics-say-oversexualizes-160418512.html

Quote:Ivanka Trump has inspired a performance art piece at a Washington, D.C., gallery — and she’s not happy about it.

Artist Jennifer Rubell’s Ivanka Vacuuming installation at the Flashpoint Gallery features a blond model — a dead ringer for President Trump’s daughter — in Stepford Wives mode as she cheerfully smiles while vacuuming up crumbs flung at her by gallery-goers.

[GMDino]

(02-05-2019, 08:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sure each other; Small hands and behind the gym come to mind. Of course you can answer the question posed

Sure..."each other".

So sad.

I wonder if you see ANY irony in the child the FLOTUS used to demonstrate her hatred of bullying is one being bullied...for being named Trump?

I mean I *would* wonder but I understand that irony is beyond some people.

Go on now...go on....shoo....

[GMDino]

People on the internet "hating"!  



Don't read the comments!  Such slurs!

[*bfine32*]

(02-06-2019, 12:25 AM)GMDino Wrote: People on the internet "hating"!  



Don't read the comments!  Such slurs!

There's no call for such venom, Speaker was very respectful and controlled her party. 

But as I've said: some will hate and others will support that hate. 

[GMDino]

(02-06-2019, 12:44 AM)bfine32 Wrote: There's no call for such venom, Speaker was very respectful and controlled her party. 

But as I've said: some will hate and others will support that hate. 

Indeed...including some who are POTUS.

And some will not understand what "hate" is and accept hyperbole from people they support.  Weird.

[GMDino]

Trump to anchors: "When I say something that you might think is a gaffe, it’s on purpose; it’s not a gaffe. When Biden says something dumb, it’s because he’s dumb.”

— Peter Baker (@peterbakernyt) February 6, 2019

#bebest

[fredtoast]

(02-06-2019, 12:44 AM)bfine3 Wrote: But as I've said: some will hate and others will support that hate. 

Yep