Donald Trump in a nutshell

[Faithofchristian]

You don't really think that pumping a bunch of crap into the atmosphere/environment has no affect on the earth we live on? Really?

Acid Rain: Push Toward Coal Makes Global Pollution Worse

NASA study found that the hole in Earth's ozone layer is closing up due to a decline in the chemicals causing it

Then maybe you should let the scientist know that, so they can put a cork on top of the volcanoes, seeing volcanoes releases gases into the air.

 

[Quagmire]

Those of you who voted for Trump to spite Hilary take a good look at the man you helped in power. I'm no Clinton supporter as I voted for Bernie but seriously this is the man that is in office.

"A well educated black..." Not a man, not a woman, not a human just....black...

And this is the man you voted for?

What he Actually said was: "A well educated black has a tremendous advantage over a well educated white in terms of the job market".

If he had just said, "a man", "a woman", "a human", he still would have had to use some sort of racial identifier in order to express his point.

Not a Trump fan, I'm just saying: why spin something when something like this is available in the same video: "Black guys counting my money? I hate it. the only people I want counting my money are short guys who wear yarmulkes everyday".

 

[tytlyf]

Then maybe you should let the scientist know that, so they can put a cork on top of the volcanoes, seeing volcanoes releases gases into the air.

Volcano's don't even come remotely close to human pollution. Sounds like a debunked RW claim to protect Big Oil profits.

The myth that a single volcanic eruption puts more CO2 into the atmosphere than all of mankind to date, let alone 10,000 times more, is one of the most pervasive as well as one of the most demonstrably false climatological claims out there. It stems, ultimately, from a geologist named Ian Plimer, infamous for writing a widely discredited book titled Heaven and Earth, which attempted to argue that humans have had an insignificant effect on global climate.

In a 2009 editorial written for Australia’s ABC news, he echoed a sentiment he had argued with similar inelegance in his book by providing the following statement, widely spread nearly word-for-word in climate skeptic circles, without any supporting citation: “Over the past 250 years, humans have added just one part of CO2 in 10,000 to the atmosphere. One volcanic cough can do this in a day.”

This brief statement — a mere 28 words — yields a remarkably dense buffet of spurious claims and outright falsehoods. It also is rife with ambiguity. What numbers is he actually comparing? What is a volcanic “cough”? From a fact-checking standpoint, there are no interpretations of Plimer’s second sentence that can produce a factual assertion. The only way to make the first sentence work is with a scientifically useless comparison. All other interpretations fall well short of reality.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/volcano-carbon-emissions/
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/400-papers-published-in-2017-prove-that-global-warming-is-myth/
Huckabee's Hot Air on Volcanoes - FactCheck.org

 

[Faithofchristian]

Volcano's don't even come remotely close to human pollution. Sounds like a debunked RW claim to protect Big Oil profits.



https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/volcano-carbon-emissions/
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/400-papers-published-in-2017-prove-that-global-warming-is-myth/
Huckabee's Hot Air on Volcanoes - FactCheck.org

Yeah try telling that to those who were killed by Volcano gases.

Why do you suppose they are having people to evacuate out of Hawaii because of the volcano lava and gases

 

[Epic Beard Man]

What he Actually said was: "A well educated black has a tremendous advantage over a well educated white in terms of the job market".

If he had just said, "a man", "a woman", "a human", he still would have had to use some sort of racial identifier in order to express his point.

Not a Trump fan, I'm just saying: why spin something when something like this is available in the same video: "Black guys counting my money? I hate it. the only people I want counting my money are short guys who wear yarmulkes everyday".

Okay but it makes no sense. Such as if I said an educated "red" or an educated "yellow" what the heck does that mean? calling someone an educated "black" is not an identifier in the least rather, its a deconstruction of a person. But the latter portion was obvious to me already.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Now all of sudden rating don't matter.
Any other time people like yourself would jump on board over the ratings.

"People like myself" have never jumped "on board over the ratings." Ratings give no indication whatsoever about what quality of news is being produced. It only matters to Fox News and the President. And you apparently.

Ratings means that more people tunes into FoxNews more than any other news stations, CNN has the lowest ratings of them all.
That's because people knows CNN produces fake news more than any other news stations.

People like yourself who can't actually demonstrate that CNN produces "fake news?" Sorry for not taking that seriously. I'll have to wait until you actually produce some evidence of that claim. Meanwhile, I think it was only yesterday that Fox News misrepresented an old photo of a Philadelphia football player kneeling and told their viewers that it was a photo of him kneeling in protest at a football game; when in fact, it was actually a photo of that player PRAYING before a game. They get good ratings though, so who cares, right?

Fox News apologizes for implying Eagles players were kneeling in protest. They were praying.
Fox News apologizes for implying NFL player was protesting when he was praying


Like I just said, a news station's ratings have nothing to do with the quality of news they produce.

I guess I'll continue to wait for you to demonstrate your claim that CNN "produces fake news more than any other news stations." Or at all.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Then maybe you should let the scientist know that, so they can put a cork on top of the volcanoes, seeing volcanoes releases gases into the air.

Scientists already know that human beings can pollute the air they breathe. They're the ones who do the research.

 

[TheBannerofHomuraAkemi]

Yeah try telling that to those who were killed by Volcano gases.

Why do you suppose they are having people to evacuate out of Hawaii because of the volcano lava and gases

He never said they were not dangerous, but not a major factor of Climate Change. .Try again

 

[Quagmire]

Okay but it makes no sense. Such as if I said an educated "red" or an educated "yellow" what the heck does that mean? calling someone an educated "black" is not an identifier in the least

Yeah, actually it is. It may be an out-of-date one (then again this video clip is almost 40 years old) but the idea he means to convey is obvious. It's about the intention of the speaker, rather than the sensibilities of the listener.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Yeah, actually it is. It may be an out-of-date one (then again this video clip is almost 40 years old) but the idea he means to convey is obvious. It's about the intention of the speaker, rather than the sensibilities of the listener.

I'm an African-American man. If someone yelled "hey black" I could be a jacka** and be particular and respond "that is not my name, by the way my skin pigmentation is medium brown." Some identifiers are inappropriate regardless if you call them identifiers, but in the case of Trump and as you have seen Don Lemon's response, it is not an appropriate identifier if any (in Trump's case given the history of his racial discrimination tactics in housing I do not think he meant that comment in a positive way and in fact racists tend to take out the man/woman aspect and refer to someone of their complexion/ethnic group to dehumanize the person this is something David Duke tends to do). What if I called Caucasians an "educated pink" or an "educated pale person" would you think these are appropriate identifiers or should I say Caucasian-American? Or if I don't want to say that why not "white man or woman." To those on the other end of the spectrum not acknowledging me as a man or as a black man and just use the incorrect verbiage of referring to me as an educated black, is considerably disrespectful. But I assume you wouldn't understand that being that you're not of my demographic.

 

[Quagmire]

I'm an African-American man. If someone yelled "hey black" I could be a jacka** and be particular and respond "that is not my name, by the way my skin pigmentation is medium brown." Some identifiers are inappropriate regardless if you call them identifiers, but in the case of Trump and as you have seen Don Lemon's response, it is not an appropriate identifier if any.

Yes, but note the "is" and "are" in your sentence. As I pointed out, the video clip in the Op is from almost 30 years ago (I know I said 40 earlier. Ooops). I can't remember when "African-American" came into use, and "Black" began to be considered derogatory (I know when I was in high-school in the 70's "Black" was still considered the progressive term).

What if I called Caucasians an "educated pink" or an "educated pale person"

They would probably think you were either a little odd, or purposely trying to be rude, since "white" is the term that's usually used to identify Caucasians (even though I've never met anyone who was literally white).

would you think these are appropriate identifiers or should I say Caucasian-American?

Anything other than "cracker" or "hillbilly" is OK with me.

Or if I don't want to say that why not "white man or woman." To those on the other end of the spectrum not acknowledging me as a man or as a black man and just use the incorrect verbiage of referring to me as an educated black, is considerably disrespectful.

We're talking about a video clip from 1989 where someone is comparing the lot of educated "black" people to that of educated "white" people.

. . . he says "Black"

. . . and later in the same sentence, in exactly the same context he says "White".

He's using those terms as identifiers. And, I would guess that at the time neither was considered disrespectful (I actually tried to google the term "African-american" to find out when it came into popular use, but after looking at a cpl of pages I realized it isn't going to be that easy to get a definitive answer).

But I assume you wouldn't understand that being that you're not of my demographic.

I think the only way I could possibly understand your point would be if I choose to purposely ignore the context, like you're doing.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Yes, but note the "is" and "are" in your sentence. As I pointed out, the video clip in the Op is from almost 30 years ago (I know I said 40 earlier. Ooops). I can't remember when "African-American" came into use, and "Black" began to be considered derogatory (I know when I was in high-school in the 70's "Black" was still considered the progressive term).



They would probably think you were either a little odd, or purposely trying to be rude, since "white" is the term that's usually used to identify Caucasians (even though I've never met anyone who was literally white).



Anything other than "cracker" or "hillbilly" is OK with me.



We're talking about a video clip from 1989 where someone is comparing the lot of educated "black" people to that of educated "white" people.

. . . he says "Black"

. . . and later in the same sentence, in exactly the same context he says "White".

He's using those terms as identifiers. And, I would guess that at the time neither was considered disrespectful (I actually tried to google the term "African-american" to find out when it came into popular use, but after looking at a cpl of pages I realized it isn't going to be that easy to get a definitive answer).



I think the only way I could possibly understand your point would be if I choose to purposely ignore the context, like you're doing.

You're right I'm not concerned with context. Given Trump's history, I do not accept his identifier because that is not how I refer myself nor other African-Americans like me...case closed. We're going in circles just accept the fact that I DON'T accept what he says is accurate.

 

[Quagmire]

You're right I'm not concerned with context. Given Trump's history, I do not accept his identifier because that is not how I refer myself nor other African-Americans like me...case closed. We're going in circles just accept the fact that I DON'T accept what he says is accurate.

I don't think anybody is asking you to.

 

[Cacotopia]

Yeah try telling that to those who were killed by Volcano gases.

Why do you suppose they are having people to evacuate out of Hawaii because of the volcano lava and gases

putting corks on volcanoes sounds like you want to initiate a cataclysmic volcanic eruption. Which is fine by me personally.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Ratings means that more people tunes into FoxNews more than any other news stations, CNN has the lowest ratings of them all.
That's because people knows CNN produces fake news more than any other news stations.

Since when has ratings been correlated with accuracy of reporting?

 

[james dixon]

I admire his drive and thick skin though.

If I could get close enough I'd **** on that thick skin of his

lol

 

[tytlyf]

Yeah try telling that to those who were killed by Volcano gases.

Why do you suppose they are having people to evacuate out of Hawaii because of the volcano lava and gases

No one is talking about volcano gases, you're set on the falsehood that volcano's contribute more to climate change than humans. Don't change the topic.

 

[tytlyf]

That's because people knows CNN produces fake news more than any other news stations.

Not true. Fake news struck again. Now you're gonna tell me that politifact is liberal lame-stream media. Propaganda is powerful.

CNN's file: | PunditFact
FOX's file: | PunditFact

 

[Faithofchristian]

No one is talking about volcano gases, you're set on the falsehood that volcano's contribute more to climate change than humans. Don't change the topic.

Not changing the topic at all, humans have very little to do with climate change.
It's nothing but a big hoax

 

[tytlyf]

Not changing the topic at all, humans have very little to do with climate change.
It's nothing but a big hoax

Wrong, humans have everything to do with why the temperatures the past century are rising much faster than what is normal. Rush and Fox aren't climate experts, you're wrong on the topic.

Big Oil tells you climate change is a hoax, curbing their pollution costs money. And that hurts capitalism.

So you think pollution has no effect on the atmosphere?