Click here for Arsenal FC news and reports

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 81 to 84 of 84

Thread: One of these Trump things about which there is considerable outrage.

  1. #81
    [QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136318]
    Quote Originally Posted by Burney View Post

    Don't be absurd, of course it's whataboutery and you know it.

    Judges are paid to be impartial and objective and intelligent in the execution of their responsibilities. Donald Trump made it clear that a particular judge was unable to do that because of his race. That, by any sensible decision, is racism.
    So you are seriously trying to suggest that factors such as sex, political outlook, wealth, upbringing, social background, education, race, religion or class could never influence a judge's decision on an issue close to their heart and that any suggestion that they might is an outrageous slur that, in the case of racial background, instantly constitutes racism?
    Laughable nonsense. Suggesting a potential conflict of interests leading to to a lack of impartiality is not racism. It may not be correct, but it isn't racism and if that's the best argument you've got for Trump being a racist, it's appallingly weak.
    The example of black people arguing that white judges and juries are not impartial in cases involving black people was used to illustrate this fact. People may not agree with the suggestion of bias, but nobody - NOBODY - ever calls it racist. Why not? Because nobody in their right mind believes it is. And if it isn't, neither is what Trump said.

  2. #82
    [QUOTE=Burney;4136367]
    Quote Originally Posted by World's End Stella View Post

    So you are seriously trying to suggest that factors such as sex, political outlook, wealth, upbringing, social background, education, race, religion or class could never influence a judge's decision on an issue close to their heart and that any suggestion that they might is an outrageous slur that, in the case of racial background, instantly constitutes racism?
    Laughable nonsense. Suggesting a potential conflict of interests leading to to a lack of impartiality is not racism. It may not be correct, but it isn't racism and if that's the best argument you've got for Trump being a racist, it's appallingly weak.
    The example of black people arguing that white judges and juries are not impartial in cases involving black people was used to illustrate this fact. People may not agree with the suggestion of bias, but nobody - NOBODY - ever calls it racist. Why not? Because nobody in their right mind believes it is. And if it isn't, neither is what Trump said.
    'So you are seriously trying to suggest that factors such as sex, political outlook, wealth, upbringing, social background, education, race, religion or class could never influence a judge's decision on an issue close to their heart and that any suggestion that they might is an outrageous slur that, in the case of racial background, instantly constitutes racism?
    Laughable nonsense. Suggesting a potential conflict of interests leading to to a lack of impartiality is not racism.' - all you're really doing here is rationalising his racist statement. He said that a judge could not rule impartially because of his race, he didn't mention sex, political outlook, social background or anything else, he said he couldn't perform the job he is meant to do because of his race. If you think that isn't a racist statement I'd be curious as to what is a racist statement in your world.

    'It may not be correct, but it isn't racism and if that's the best argument you've got for Trump being a racist, it's appallingly weak.' - I never said Trump was a racist, I said he made two statements on immigration which I viewed as racist and therefore his views on immigration could not be considered as a rational, logical argument for immigration control.

    'The example of black people arguing that white judges and juries are not impartial in cases involving black people was used to illustrate this fact. People may not agree with the suggestion of bias, but nobody - NOBODY - ever calls it racist. Why not? Because nobody in their right mind believes it is. And if it isn't, neither is what Trump said.' - White judges being accused of racism without anyone calling it racism does not in any way preclude one from coming to the conclusion that Donald Trump made a racist statement. For the record, someone claiming that all white judges are incapable of ruling objectively on a case involving a black man would also be guilty of making a racist statement in my view.

  3. #83
    [QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136272]
    Quote Originally Posted by Monty92 View Post

    This is a reasonable statement on Mexican immigrants, is it Monty? No suggestion of racism in there anywhere, you think?

    "When Mexico sends it people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people,"

    So no, it's a terrible example.
    "Their" rapists or "they're" rapists...........very important distinction

  4. #84
    No, it's textbook Trumpery. He's fishing, trolling. And he knows your sort always fall for it. You can't help yourselves.

    Either we all believe in diversity or we don't. However, when Trump mentions it, he's being racist. As President Obama himself put it "I have transformed the federal courts from a diversity standpoint with a record that’s been unmatched.” A large part of the reason this judge-chap (Curiel?) was appointed in the first place was because of his Mexican heritage. It is this double standard, even hypocrisy, that the Donald is referring to.

    "When judges decide cases, there can never be a universal definition of wise, so I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life," as an earlier Obama judicial appointee stated.

    Unlike you, people who actually *got* the affirmative action memo and grasped its implications understood perfectly what the Donald meant and instantly, instinctively appreciated the justice and truth in it. Namely that, in the current climate, impartiality and objectivity must kowtow to political correctness. This guy's judicial neutrality is a merely a front; if it weren't, he wouldn't be in that job in the first place. Otherwise, what is the point of Diversity.

    Quote Originally Posted by World's End Stella View Post
    Judges are paid to be impartial and objective and intelligent in the execution of their responsibilities. Donald Trump made it clear that a particular judge was unable to do that because of his race. That, by any sensible decision, is racism.
    "Plenty of strikers can score goals," he said, gesturing to the famous old stands casting shadows around us.

    "But a lot have found it difficult wearing the number 9 shirt for The Arsenal."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •