Donald Trump

Trump Claims He's 'Never' Called Anyone 'Mentally Retarded.' Wrong.

You know, it's not hard to check the record.


Sipa USA/Newscom

President Donald Trump claimed yesterday that he's "never used" the term "mentally retarded" to describe anyone, including embattled Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Trump was responding to one of the many claims in Fear, Bob Woodward's upcoming book about the administration. According to excerpts published in The Washington Post, Trump said of Sessions: "This guy is mentally retarded. He's this dumb Southerner….He couldn't even be a one-person country lawyer down in Alabama."

In a tweet yesterday, Trump fired back, claiming among other things he has "never" called anyone "mentally retarded":

But that's not true. As the Toronto Star's Daniel Dale points out, Trump called a magazine writer "retarded" in an April 2004 interview with radio host Howard Stern. The writer had called Trump's business acumen into question.

Sticklers might object that he left out the word "mentally." OK: In September 2004, Trump was back on Stern's show. This time, he said a golf instructor was "mentally retarded— I mean, he's really not a smart guy."

Those instances don't appear to be outliers. The Daily Beast reported in October 2016 that Trump used to regularly insult deaf actress Marlee Matlin, either suggesting she had a mental disability or outright calling her retarded.

Trump may not be telling the truth regarding his comments about Sessions either, according to Axios's Jonathan Swan:

It's no secret that Trump has a history of this kind of behavior. He might as well stop lying about it.

NEXT: 'Judge Kavanaugh Was Not Responsible for the Parkland School Shooting'

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. You’re the retard, Joe.

    1. SIV, 2018 Sanderson Chicken Farm Debate Champion

    2. No, your retarded!

  2. I must admit I’m guilty as well. Calling Trump and his inbred supporters is in no way meant to impugn the character of normal everyday retards.

    1. Or to display the same personality as Trump, but with much less money, power, and fame, and a different proprietary blend of political preferences, much more associated with people of the vaginal persuasion.

      1. Your euphemisms confuse me. You mean Tony has the politics of a hetero dude? You gonna take that shit Tony?

  3. How deranged do you have to be to know if the President, or anyone else, has ever used the word ‘retarded’ in public?

    1. If it weren’t for the loathing for the President, this would come across as something between outright stalking and obsessed pre-teen girl hyper-infatuation.

      1. Your position might more sense if Trump hadn’t been a TV star and publicity junkie.

        1. Your position might more sense if Trump hadn’t been a TV star and publicity junkie.

          Corey Feldman being a movie star doesn’t mean the teen girls memorizing his favorite poem and color aren’t crazy.

          I just assumed Trump *had* said the word ‘retard’ the same way HRC *didn’t* take sniper fire in Bosnia, Bill *did* have sexual relations with that woman, etc. except his using the word retard was no singular incident like Bosnia or a secret like some salacious sexual relationship. Not that any of it has fuck all to do with crafting policy.

          1. Isn’t the big story supposed to be that he insulted Southerners, not retarded people? That’s what it should be, if anything.

            1. But who hasn’t insulted Southerners, amIright?

      2. Why would anyone doubt that he’s used that word before? Why do we keep playing this game where everyone pretends like the electorate didn’t already know that Trump was an offensive character to begin with? This brand of gotcha #resist porn is stupid on so many levels

        1. I will provide the benefit of doubt to Just Say’n and figure Just Say’n is not poorly educated, generally ignorant, diffusely bigoted, and profoundly incompetent enough to describe Bob Woodward’s book at “gotcha #resist porn.”

          For most people, the problem is Trump’s lying as much as his boorishness. (Some people doubt that Trump has used the word before because they are gullible enough to swallow the lies.)

          1. “Some people doubt that Trump has used the word before because they are gullible enough to swallow the lies.”

            I highly, highly doubt that that represents even 5% of the population.

            1. You should check the list of what Republicans believe — from birtherism and creationism to FBI conspiracies, from Pizzagate and the Scalia murder to Obama’s Muslim beliefs, from Qanon to Vince Foster and millions of unlawful voters — let alone the figures on whether a substantial chunk of the yahoos swallow what Trump tells them.

              1. Your buddies were literally saying that an “OK” hand sign was a secret white power symbol. And those weren’t some random people watching Alex Jones. Those were totally objective “reporters” at HuffPo and Slate.

                1. You may want to reconsider who are the gullible people right now

                  1. The gullible people:

                    Trump supporters.

                    People who prefer superstition to reason.

                    People who avoided the education needed to develop sound judgment.

                    People who fund faith healing and televangelists’ jets.

                    People who reject “mainsteam” media for FreeRepublic, Stormfront, Breitbart, Instapundit, and Gateway Pundit.

                    People who prefer dogma to science.

                    People who like current popular country music.

                    1. People who prefer superstition to reason.

                      I prefer to Reason; and they got so much foil-hat shit over there they might as well rename themselves Superstition.

                    2. Thank God for people like you, Kirkland. Somebody to stand up for the folks who are rational and educated and scientific and…..well, elite. Don’t know what we’d do without you and your calm, reasoned tribe.

                      Say, has that Meskin jew-girl with the Polish grandparents lynched anybody today?

              2. You should check the list of what Republicans believe — from birtherism and creationism to FBI conspiracies, from Pizzagate and the Scalia murder to Obama’s Muslim beliefs, from Qanon to Vince Foster and millions of unlawful voters

                Oooh, do Democrats next.

                You’re not a Democrat, so it should be easy, right?

                I’ll start: They believe feelings are more important than genetic reality.

                1. More important to whom?

                  I think you should phrase that differently.

        2. Um, how about because if he lies so easily about this, he probably lies really easily about other, more substantial things?

          1. I’ll mind you most of the writers here would’ve voted for Hillary.

            So voting for casual, happy liars is not disqualifying for them.

            1. That’s not true. Most of the writers voted for GayJay.

              1. Yeah, but they would have voted for her in some weird, irrelevant counterfactual world. It is known.

              2. A vote for GayJay was a vote for Hillary.

                1. Or Trump. Depending on who you would have voted for if you weren’t you and the world wasn’t the world.

                  1. Personally, I preferred to think of a vote for GayJay as a vote for Jill Stein.

          2. Woah- a lying politician!

            At least it’s obvious when Trump lies. But, sure let’s keep playing this game where no other politician lies and Trump’s lies are so crafty

            1. What the fuck? In what system of logic does calling Trump a liar imply that other politicians are not liars? Libertarians should criticize all politicians in power whenever possible and especially the president. Your Reason Derangement Syndrome is outta control, brother.

              1. I said he was a liar up front. I doubt few people believe otherwise.

              2. Reason Defense Brigade ASSEMBLE! These slights will NOT be tolerated!

              3. It probably has something to do with the outrage over Trump’s incessant lying being turned up to 19.

          3. Still doesn’t have the “Lie of the Year” by WaPo.
            And about something as substantial as one seventh of the US economy.
            And it wasn’t opinion, or a belief, as are many of the things you commies – the party of lies – call lies by conservatives.
            He knew, damn well he was lying and it didn’t bother him, or you, one bit.
            So spare us the sanctimony.

      3. If it weren’t for his habitual denial of the obvious, this would come across as a story about the president telling a fib.

    2. How deranged do you have to be to care much less know the answer?

    3. I would just sort of assumed that this president had. Who cares? It’s a pretty common insult word. Some people think it’s the meanest thing in the world for actually mentally deficient people, but think it’s just a mildly rude word for people you think are idiots at this point.

  4. What is the relevance to anything whether or not Trump called someone mentally retarded?

    1. As long as he doesn’t say “cling to guns and religion.”

      1. I’ll say this, Trump has never insulted the electorate. That probably explains why he bested Hillary. I’m sure progressives will insult their way back into government, though

        1. He just called southerners retards!

        2. And your statement only rings true if you exclude all nonwhite people from the electorate, because he’s had a thing or two to say about Mexican-Americans and Muslims.

          1. Pshht, Tony. Only white males matter.

        3. I’ll say this, Trump has never insulted the electorate.

          “dumb southerner”

          “mentally retarded”

          “poorly educated”

          1. Those are are direct insults at specific people. It’s quite different from labeling half of the population as “deplorable” or people who cling to “their God and religion”.

            1. Stop making things up. HRC called half of Trump’s supporters, not the entire population, as deplorable (meaning racists and bigots who have no interest in getting better), and she was being nice.

              1. Gee, I wonder why Democrats have been reduced to a regional party?

                To suggest that millions of people are racist bigots because they wouldn’t vote for a warmongering corporate cronyist is unbelievably laughable.

                1. It was a mistake for her to tell the truth. Amateur politician move.

                  1. The only truthful thing that Clinton ever said in her entire life was when she accidentally admitted that we were funding ISIS in Syria.

                2. The regional breakdown:

                  Democrats are preferred in the accomplished, modern, educated, skilled, tolerant communities.

                  Republicans are the pick in the ignorant, economically inadequate, bigoted, backward, superstitious communities.

                  1. Democrats are preferred by people who work for government or whose industries are subsidized by government. And single people.

                    Republicans are preferred by families with children.

                    1. New York and California have plenty of families with children.

                      What Oklahoma, Mississippi, South Carolina, and other Republican states have plenty of are superstitious goobers, unreconstructed bigots, and shambling, left-behind communities.

                    2. New York and California have plenty of families with children.

                      Yes, and progressive families send them to private or charter schools rather than the dysfunctional public school system, if they haven’t escaped to their suburban whiteopias.

                    3. Well you sure got Oklahoma Tony’s number.

                    4. Republicans are preferred by families with children.

                      Because having children is totally not subsidized by government.

                    5. That’s a rather dumb take, considering that child tax credits are essentially none existent once you reach a rather small income cap.

                      And there really isn’t much of a comparison between a tax credit and living off of government funds. Nice try, though

                    6. Do you want to tackle the marriage penalty next, Cathy? Maybe you got a hot take about how the government disincentivizes marriage and subsidizes people being single.

                      Oh, that’s different you say. Of course it is

                    7. Why would you think you knew what I thought about the “marriage penalty,” which isn’t real because it depends on the ratio of the two incomes? Assuming there are two.

                      And why would anyone get state married if it wasn’t to save on their taxes?

                    8. “And why would anyone get state married if it wasn’t to save on their taxes?”

                      Spoiler: You don’t save on your taxes unless you make poverty wages.

                    9. Spoiler: You don’t save on your taxes unless you make poverty wages.

                      That’s simply incorrect. A significant differential in earnings will also lead to tax savings if you get married.

                      There’s also the taxes on employer contributions to health insurance to factor in.

                    10. And why would anyone get state married if it wasn’t to save on their taxes?

                      That a box-wine guzzler like Cathy wouldn’t understand this beyond her own simple-simon worldview is hardly surprising.

                    11. box-wine guzzler

                      Hey! There is nothing wrong with box wine!

                    12. It only disincentivizes marriage if both parties make decent money. People screw up the whole thing by thinking everyone has to be the same. I don’t promote prescribed gender roles, but I do like the familial division of labor.

                      So where are the rich, libertarian women who want me as a house-husband?

                    13. Child tax credits don’t cover the free government babysitting almost all parents take advantage of.

                      How many could afford to spend the $20k a year themselves?

                    14. If free government babysitting means “public schools” then yeah. But, many people utilize private schools too.

                      But, I’m not going to defend public schools. Even though that is a practice of local government almost entirely.

                    15. Yes, the people who send their kids to private school are at least covering the cost of their own child care. But that doesn’t include the vast majority of parents.

                      And I didn’t even mention the fact that all insurance must now include maternity coverage, even though it’s impossible to insure against a condition that is 100% freely chosen by its sufferer.

                    16. “And I didn’t even mention the fact that all insurance must now include maternity coverage, even though it’s impossible to insure against a condition that is 100% freely chosen by its sufferer.”

                      Maternity coverage is not required to be 100% covered. I know this from experience.

                      But, birth control is 100% covered.

                    17. Maternity coverage is not required to be 100% covered.

                      Yeah, I didn’t say it was 100% covered, I said it was required to be covered even though maternity is a self-imposed medical condition.

                      So, to recap, parents don’t pay for their own pregnancies, don’t pay for their own childbirth, and don’t pay for their own childcare. In many cases, the state covers 100% of the cost of all three.

                    18. Don’t hurt yourself with that stretch, Cathy.

                      “So, to recap, parents don’t pay for their own pregnancies, don’t pay for their own childbirth, and don’t pay for their own childcare. In many cases, the state covers 100% of the cost of all three”

                      None of that is accurate. You even admitted as much. The notion that healthcare providers did not cover a portion of child delivery before a government mandate is rather divorced from reality. And arguing that public schools provide childcare avoids costs of rearing a child before kindergarten.

                      And in order for your argument to make any sense we need to pretend that married couples do not also pay for government education through their property taxes or pay for labor through their insurance premiums.

                      What is true is that singles enjoy government mandated contraceptives and abortions in many states in addition to not facing a higher tax if they earn a decent income. Married couples where both parents work and one earns a good salary face a much higher tax bill than if that individual were not married and filing jointly.

                      You got to work on your progressive talking points couched in free market arguments

                    19. Married couples where both parents work and one earns a good salary face a much higher tax bill than if that individual were not married and filing jointly.

                      Well, that may be true, but I am not state-married, I have a decent income, and my wife is a stay-at-home mom. I pay a couple grand extra a year than I would if we were state-married.

                      A lot of intended social engineering is written into the tax code, but the final result is a clusterfuck that doesn’t do anything with any consistency.

                    20. It’s cute that you think teachers’ unions subsidies are free daycare.

                    21. It used to be that the public schools provided free babysitting. But with all the minimum days anymore, they’re not very reliable for even that in California. It’s like they assume everyone can afford an illegal nanny.

                  2. Democrats are preferred in the accomplished, modern, educated, skilled, tolerant communities.

                    Explains lily-white Vermont.
                    Lily-white Beverly Hills.
                    Lily-white progressive groups.

                    Hell, Utah has more diversity than almost any progressive group in existence.

                    1. What are you saying here? White people can’t be accomplished, modern, educated, skilled or tolerant?

                  3. Democrats are preferred in the accomplished, modern, educated, skilled, tolerant communities.
                    Pretty ignorant of your own base.

                    Chicago democrat on democrat crime

                    Year to Date
                    Shot & Killed: 339
                    Shot & Wounded: 1760
                    Total Shot: 2099
                    Total Homicides: 397

                    1. I’m going to guess that most of the people murdering each other in Chicago aren’t actually members of a political party.

            2. No one has said that half of the population is half-educated, bigoted, disaffected, economically inadequate, gullible, etc.

              It’s 35 percent, tops.

              1. It’s 35 percent, tops.

                Mostly in the country’s can’t-keep-up urban ghettos.

            3. How does “poorly educated” differ from “deplorable” or “clingers” in this context?

        4. He did sort of insult the entire country in implying that America was no longer great and needed to be made great again.

      2. Spot on, Tony. “Retard” is a personal insult. “Clinging to guns and religion” is a whack at the 4th and 1st Amenments.

        1. Forgot to add Second Amendment.

      3. insulting voters who know they’ve been insulted was much better

  5. Like cats chasing a laser pointer.

    1. They’re going to catch it one day.

  6. This is why Bill Kristol re-tweets you guys. Always focused on the hard hitting stuff.

    1. If Kristol was re-tweeting MY stuff, I’d ask what I was doing wrong for a war-mongering pile of shit to think I’m on to something.

      Reason has no such concerns.

  7. Did OBL write this?

  8. Like anyone commenting here doesn’t think Sessions isn’t mentally retarded.

  9. Offered in the hopes of getting better writing here:

    “Treating the Six Known Symptoms of ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome'”

    1. One of these days, Sevo, you will not fuck up a link.

      1. I think he does it on purpose so he doesn’t have to deal with the commenting software, which is borked. His link isn’t pretty, but it also isn’t a 50+ character “word” that gets the post kicked back for a redo.

  10. I’m thinking about rhubarb pie. With ice cream.

  11. We’re still waiting for a link to the video or audio where Trump says that “all Mexicans” are criminals and rapists….

  12. is Reporting on Tweets a class at Mizzou yet?

  13. Why do we keep pretending like nothing-burgers are of life-altering importance.

    First, whoever the idiot is who decided that “retarded” is now “the R word” and can never be uttered should be taken out and flogged. It was a perfectly apt word – meaning “slowed down or impeded” – which well-meaning folk adopted to replace “imbecile”, “moron” and other terms. “Retarded” was the PC term. Now we’ve decided that it is the offensive term. So kudos to you, “perfectly apt word is now offensive” guy!

    But more particular to the topic, screw everyone who seriously and somberly repeats insults, jokes, offhanded comments, etc. out of context to let everyone know just how offensive and horrible they are (and by extension just how virtuous the speaker is).

    I’m sure this has always been a thing, but the first example I remember at a high level in public was Anita Hill, voice shaking with anger, hurt and shame, telling us that Clarence Thomas said, “Who… left.. a…pubic hair…. on my coke?”

    The horror! And everyone pretended like that nothing of a joke was the most offensive thing they had ever heard.

    1. So here we are with Joe Setyon pretending like this is a serious issue, revealing of some character flaw that must be dragged out in public and expunged.

      It is stupid. It isn’t an issue. Joe, you’ve called people worse. Probably this week. Probably when you were discussing this story with your peers and editor.

      “That guy is an idiot” is not worth commenting on (if you are not “that guy”). Dragging such comments out and repeating them in dolorous tones is not just a stupid exercise, it is fundamentally dishonest. Pretending that you and everyone you know doesn’t use similar invective in ordinary conversation is ridiculous. Of course you do. Maybe you don’t use “The R word”, but you call Trump a dipshit. Or an asshole. Or whatever it is you use. And you call your best friend a dumbass when he forgets to bring the beer to watch the game.

      We could all stand up at a lectern and summon great personal outrage, reading a transcript of Joe’s interaction with his buddy. “And then….. and then he said… He said that I was a… a… I don’t want to say it… a Dumbass. *gasps from the audience*.”

      It is stupid and dishonest and probably a little narcissistic. And I blame everyone who pretends like it is serious discourse, not just the guy who repeated it as if it was worth repeating.

      1. The important point is the dysfunction in the White House, with a worthwhile side of presidential boorishness.

        Bob Woodward’s book is a serious issue. I don’t expect clingers to recognize this.

        1. That would actually be a reasonable conversation. That’s the one that it looks like Woodward wanted everyone to have.

          Instead we have people pretending like calling names is the equivalent of abducting an elementary school kid and keeping him chained to a cot in the basement.

          But people aren’t having the “I wouldn’t want to work for or with him” conversation. Or even the “how are they managing this guy and his shortcomings” conversation. They have everything backward.

          The conclusion is “Trump shouldn’t be President”, and from there they back in to any story they can string together. So “Trump’s White House is filled with acrimony and disarray” becomes a reason for impeachment.

          Clinton’s first couple of years were similarly troubled – the “Arkansas gang” didn’t get along with anyone from outside, and had all sorts of issues finding their feet. Obama lived in secrecy, but despite pubic appearances, he lost all of his vaunted Wall Street economic adviser team in relatively short order. That doesn’t happen if everything is sunshine and roses.

          I have no doubt the guy is a crappy boss. I could have told you that after having seen one episode of “the Apprentice”. In fact, I did say that at the time.

          But that isn’t what this article is about. it is about playing “gotcha” with “using the R word”. Which is stupid.

        2. Another reasonable conversation would be around the claim:

          Bob Woodward’s book is a serious issue

          I think that is probably debatable. I haven’t read the thing, I’ve only seen the reporting. But on the face of it, the book does not seem to be a serious issue at all.

          What it does seem to be is tawdry back-room gossip dressed up in book form for the purpose of sewing discord and reaping the profit.

          If the purpose was to have a discussion about management style, or point out an important issue that is impeding the function of the executive branch and therefore needs addressing, I can think of a lot of better ways to accomplish that objective than publishing a book filled with back-room conversations that were never meant to be aired in public.

          Take it to your personal life. Lets say you said something about a coworker that would have made them upset had they heard it. Someone overhears that and runs to your coworker and says “I just thought you should know….”

          Is that “a serious issue that needs a serious conversation”, therefore rendering the messenger a hero. Or is that tawdry gossip entirely designed to make the teller feel better at the expense of your relationships?

          1. Everything that you said here is what I was thinking.

  14. Again, the whole purpose seems to be to discredit Trump rather than to take aim at any of his polices, even. Even when they take aim at Trump’s policies, around here, seems like the point is to discredit Trump–rather than discredit polices that are anti-capitalist or anti-libertarian. It’s not just about Joe, here, either. There are a handful of staff doing this.

    They make it seems as if capitalism and liberty were only important issues insofar as they make Trump look bad, when making Trump look bad shouldn’t be the end-goal of . . . anyone who isn’t working for the DNC. I guess that’s what TDS is all about. The issue isn’t the drug war, the Constitution, freedom of speech, or capitalism. To those with TDS, those issues are only important insofar as they make Trump look bad.

    You could say TDS makes them go full retard.

    Who cares if Trump called Sessions a retard and then lied about it?

    Why should we care if Trump called Sessions a retard and then lied about it?

    Who cares is Trump claims to have never called anyone a retard and then lied about it?

    Why should we care if Trump called anyone a retard and then liked about it?

    1. Imagine it was Obama, then ask how much you’d care.

      How fun it is to see you tiptoe backward from your incessant Trump support now that it looks like to anyone with any observational skills that he’s inevitably going down for a whole bunch of major crimes.

      1. “inevitably going down for a whole bunch of major crimes.”

        Of course that must be true. Therefore we have to treat petty hearsay like this as though it’s damning evidence in his Nazi war crime trial

      2. um, no. Nobody would care in fact it wouldn’t even make it to print. And we know this because I’m positive Obama said mean things about someone at some point, and we never heard about it. Nor should we because it’s irrelevant.

        1. He said Kanye is a jackass.

          The bitter clinger thing got you guys all kinds of aflutter with existential terror. The fact is Obama couldn’t make so much as a grammatical error without the right coming down with an avalanche of faux outrage. Trump is the worst human being alive and lets you know it on a daily basis with his mouth. Why are we pretending that this isn’t true?

          1. Trump didnt murder American citizens with no warrant.

            So, obama is demonstrably worse.

            1. I’m sure those dead people love having their corpses propped up to score a cheap political point when the subject is quite clearly the blindingly obvious.

              1. All presidents have murdered American citizens. Anyone who says otherwise is not paying attention

              2. So like gun control then.

                1. So like gun control then.

                  That’s different, because reasons.

            2. Trump didnt murder American citizens with no warrant.

              I’d be very, very surprised if that were true.

      3. I’ll be looking for gamblers smug about their observational skills, and with with money to bet on the inevitable outcome of the next major election.

        1. Midterms or presidential?

      4. Imagine some of us didnt like Obama either. As Ken says, public attention on solely the men themselves is misdirected. The point is more efficiently kept to the markets, foreign policies, taxes and spending and budget priorities. Public goals, and debates on what those are.

        Governing; not the government.

        I think we should have spent far less time bitching about Obama’s mom-jeans and golfing than his market manipulation and bombing children, but, yanno, lesson learned. Let’s not repeat it.

        1. No one is ever going to learn that lesson.

          I said it all the time when Obama was president, and I’m still saying it. There are plenty of real and significant things that these assholes do all the time. Stop focusing on petty and/or made up bullshit.

        2. I’m pretty sure even our diehard republican commenters said “Who care’s” to his mom jeans, etc.

      5. “Imagine it was Obama, then ask how much you’d care.”

        It didn’t matter than Obama said all the right things. Obama killed more innocent children with drone strikes than Adam Lanza killed at Sandy Hook Elementary. Do you think I let Obama off the hook for that if he’d never called anyone a retard? If he had called someone a retard, then calling someone a name would be the least of my criticisms against him.

        If progressives would only fault for Obama for killing dozens of innocent children without the cover of a declaration of war by congress–if he’d called someone a retard–then progressives are some of America’s most horrible people.

      6. Virtually everything that came out of 0blama’s lips was a lie.
        We knew it, and didn’t care to the point of saying he should be impeached for it.
        Well, except for the blatant lie of “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan”.
        Such a fraudulent statement to accomplish a goal like socialized medicine should be a high crime.

  15. Incidentally, I care deeply about the separation of powers, the proper purview of democracy, our First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Eighth Amendment rights, free trade, deregulation, capitalism, ending the drug war, fiscal conservatism, low taxes, open immigration, etc.–and I’d feel the same way about all of them regardless of whether Trump says, does, or lies about anything.

    I guess I’m just not a retard.

    My criticism of Trump is centered on those issues. I read pieces like this, and it makes me wish I could support him.

    1. I have been saying that for two years…. quit making such idiotic arguments! I have no interest in defending Trump in any way at all, yet I just wrote a screed because “the resistance” can’t help themselves.

      In just the last 24 hours we’ve had this story, a faked handshake snub, a faked white supremacist (who turns out to be a Mexican Jew!)…. probably 20 others that I didn’t bother reading.

      It is like 1/3 of the country suddenly developed a combination of ADD, OCD and Tourette’s that keeps them spinning from made-up outrage to made-up outrage and renders them incapable of filtering their thoughts, just spewing forth the most inane nonsense as if it were pearls of wisdom.

  16. It’s not a polite word and I try not to use the term around mixed company but I have used it and don’t think it is an objectively bad thing to say. What people probably most dislike about PC culture is how it is regularly equated with morality. But those of us who aren’t craven progressives using sjw jargon to hide the fact that they are amoral psychopaths should know better.

    1. It’s not a polite word

      It’s only impolite because people take offense and/or can get outraged. If I tell you about a noise I heard in the middle of the night and how my kids’ legos scattered across the floor retarded my progress in investigating it, nobody takes offense to the word. If he’d said dullard, imbecile, half-wit, etc. nobody would’ve batted an eye even though those terms more specifically referred to or associate the same people/conditions.

      If he’d called him an inbred Southern hick, do you think the advocates for the chromosomally-different would be tearing him up on Twitter?

      1. Maybe no one on twitter would care if Trump called someone a less “problematic” synonym for retard, but you don’t call your boss or grandmother an imbecile to their face. That is what I mean by impolite. It isn’t subject to political trends. That said, I don’t care if Trump said it or not. It is another non-story for the people who got off on being offended by everything

        1. Maybe no one on twitter would care if Trump called someone a less “problematic” synonym for retard

          “That guy is developmentally delayed. Really not the best performer of his job.”

  17. YES, Looter v Looter, more! Bring it on! No holds barred and gouging discretionary. I cannot get enough of the shrinking 19th-Century Kleptocracy factions stringing each others’ intestines across the sand in the arena. More Roman Holidays, please…

  18. Reason has beaten this horse quite thoroughly. Well done.

    I don’t remember such obsession over the utterances of, well, any other politician ever…but Reason is totes sane and rational about Trump.

  19. According to excerpts published in The Washington Post, Trump said of Sessions: “This guy is mentally retarded. He’s this dumb Southerner…

    I wonder how many of the people feigning outrage right now over Trump saying such mean things about poor Jeff Sessions said the same thing about Jeffy-boy as recently as last week?

    1. Last week Sessions was an Agent of Evil. This week he is a Victim of Evil, and therefore Good.

  20. Earth to reason–until the mentally deficient ‘millennial’ generation started whining calling things or people ‘retarded’ was pretty widespread.

    ‘Gay’ was also a term that was tossed about. As was ‘fag’ example–‘Don’t be such a fag, all he said was that your bike is gay. What are you crying about, you retard?’

    Any ten year old would have said something like that 20 or 30 years ago–no cursing, no profanity–you could have said it with your mother standing right there.

    Trump says retard. Big fucking deal.

  21. Germany could stop burning coal tomorrow and solar would replace it. They only still use it because powerful white people want poor people to get cancer.

    Donald Trump won the election on a technicality; there’s no good reason for the Electoral College.

    The person in front of me who has a beard and a penis is a woman because she says so.

    Strangers on the street and Uber drivers are the biggest threats to your life so you should never go outside.

    If Donald Trump believes he never used the word “retarded” as a pejorative, he has never used the word as a pejorative.
    That’s how the world works now.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.