Donald Trump

Trump Tells His Critics to 'Go Back' Where They 'Came From.' His Love-It-or-Leave-It Attitude Is Totally Wrong and Arguably Racist.

Is the angry reaction to the president's incendiary comments "all about politics"?

|

Explaining why he opposed a resolution condemning Donald Trump's inflammatory remarks about "'Progressive' Democrat Congresswomen," House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R–Calif.) said the president's tweets were not racist. "Let's not be false about what is happening here today," McCarthy told reporters. "This is all about politics and beliefs of ideologies individuals have."

All is doing a lot of work in that sentence. McCarthy apparently is referring both to Trump's tweets and to the reaction they provoked. Let's take those one at a time.

Here is what Trump tweeted on Sunday morning:

So interesting to see "Progressive" Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don't they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can't leave fast enough. I'm sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!

Trump did not name the congresswomen he had in mind. But based on the reference to friction with Pelosi, people have widely assumed he was talking about Reps. Ilhan Omar (D–Minn.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.), Rashida Tlaib (D–Mich.), and Ayanna Pressley (D–Mass.). All four happen to have darker complexions than Donald Trump, which ordinarily would not be enough to fairly accuse a politician of racism when he is ostensibly criticizing his political opponents' views. But Trump's bizarre suggestion that these four American citizens "go back" to the countries they "originally came from" complicates McCarthy's position a bit, especially since that country is the United States for all but Omar, who emigrated from Somalia when she was 10 years old.

At best, Trump is guilty of mindless love-it-or-leave-it jingoism. And given that he is drawing on a bigoted trope with a long, sad history in the United States, the imputation of racism is hard to dismiss. The evidence on that score is at least as strong as the evidence that Omar revealed her anti-Semitism when she complained that "Israel has hypnotized the world," said congressional support for Israel "is all about the Benjamins baby" (alluding to the financial influence of Jewish donors), and bemoaned "the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country."

Omar has said she was not aware that her comments, which last March inspired a House resolution that broadly condemned bigotry without mentioning her by name, could be interpreted as anti-Jewish, and she apologized "unequivocally" for the second one. Trump could try a similar defense, except that he wholeheartedly endorses the charge of anti-Semitism against Omar and other critics of Israel.

"When will the Radical Left Congresswomen apologize to our Country, the people of Israel and even to the Office of the President, for the foul language they have used, and the terrible things they have said," the president wondered yesterday. "So many people are angry at them & their horrible & disgusting actions!" He added, "If Democrats want to unite around the foul language & racist hatred spewed from the mouths and actions of these very unpopular & unrepresentative Congresswomen, it will be interesting to see how it plays out. I can tell you that they have made Israel feel abandoned by the U.S." In other words: I'm not a bigot; you're a bigot.

To which the Anti-Defamation League, which strongly criticized Omar for her "anti-Semitic tweets," replied: Please leave us out of it. "As Jews, we are all too familiar with this kind of divisive prejudice," said ADL National Director Jonathan Greenblatt. "While ADL has publicly disagreed with these congresswomen on some issues, the president is echoing the racist talking points of white nationalists and cynically using the Jewish people and the state of Israel as a shield to double down on his remarks. Politicizing the widespread, bipartisan support for Israel and throwing around accusations of anti-Semitism is damaging to the security of Israel and the Jewish community. He should lead by example, stop politicizing these issues and stop smearing members of Congress."

It is not surprising that Democrats who for years have been portraying Trump as a puppet of white supremacists would deem his latest remarks racist. But contrary to what McCarthy implies, they are not alone in drawing that conclusion.

"I am confident that every Member of Congress is a committed American," Rep. Mike Turner (R–Ohio) tweeted yesterday. "@realDonaldTrump's tweets from this weekend were racist and he should apologize. We must work as a country to rise above hate, not enable it."

Rep. Will Hurd (R–Texas) called Trump's remarks "racist and xenophobic." I suppose Rep. Justin Amash (I–Mich.), a Trump critic who is no longer a Republican, does not count, but it looks like he was the first non-Democratic member of Congress to condemn the president's comments. "To tell these American citizens (most of whom were born here) to 'go back' to the 'crime infested places from which they came' is racist and disgusting," he tweeted on Sunday morning. Even Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.), a Trump critic turned sycophant, thinks the president should "aim higher" with his rhetoric.

So yes, the response to Trump's remarks is largely "about politics"—not just the predictable partisanship of Democrats but also the fear of Republicans who are keen to avoid offending Trump's fans. But it is not all about politics. A few sitting Republican legislators are still willing to publicly defend the quaint notion that the president should try not to engage in ad hominem, racially incendiary attacks on his political opponents. One suspects (or maybe hopes is more like it) that others share this view but are too afraid to speak out as members of a party that has been taken over by Trump and his supporters.

As is often the case with Trump, it's hard to tell whether he is genuinely clueless or just pretending to be. "We will never be a Socialist or Communist Country," he tweeted yesterday. "IF YOU ARE NOT HAPPY HERE, YOU CAN LEAVE!" Today he amplified that point: "Our Country is Free, Beautiful and Very Successful. If you hate our Country, or if you are not happy here, you can leave!" He added: "Those Tweets were NOT Racist. I don't have a Racist bone in my body!"

Clarifying his message to reporters yesterday, Trump said, "If you're not happy here, then you can leave.  As far as I'm concerned, if you hate our country, if you're not happy here, you can leave….If you're not happy in the U.S., if you're complaining all the time—very simply, you can leave. You can leave right now. Come back if you want; don't come back. It's OK too.  But if you're not happy, you can leave."

We get it. But no matter how many times the president says it, and putting aside any inference of racism, it is still a moronic rejoinder to people who criticize current U.S. policy, as every American has a right to do, even while remaining in the United States. Trump himself paved his road to the White House by portraying America as "a laughingstock" (something he still says), decrying the "American carnage" left by his predecessors, and promising to Make America Great Again, thereby implying that it is not so great anymore. It would have been absurd to tell him to shut up or "go back" to Germany if he hates this country so much, and it is no less absurd to use a similar line against critics with different political views.

I feel a bit silly even having to say that, but such is the state of what currently passes for political debate in this country. Maybe I should go back to Poland, or possibly Israel.

Update: The House resolution condemning Trump's "racist comments" passed today by a vote of 240 to 187. Four Republicans joined 235 Democrats and Amash in voting for the measure: Hurd plus Reps. Susan Brooks (Ind.), Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), and Fred Upton (Mich.). Turner, despite his criticism, voted no.

[I've corrected the list of Republicans, which initially named the wrong Brooks.]

NEXT: Court Rules Police Officer Who Shot 10-Year-Old Is Protected by Qualified Immunity

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 Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. How much nefarious activity goes unnoticed while we wallow in Trump’s tweets?

    This is a win win for both political parties.

    1. Agreed.
      And especially in the case of the Somali refugee … this is why we should END immigration. ALL immigration.
      At some point in the future we may reconsider immigration on a limited basis. But for now, we should e killing the criminal invaders.

      1. A young Syrian refugee was arrested before his attempt to blow up an African American church here in Pittsburgh 2 weeks ago…because he believed Nigerians attended the church and wanted to avenge his Muslim brothers being fought by the Nigerian government.

        He had already purchased the explosives.

        But not a peep in the national media, or here

    2. There is nothing un-libertarian about wallowing.

    3. What Trump said was completely correct, and not even slightly racist.

      Sullum is an idiot.
      MAGA baby!

      1. Sullum is a lying demagogue.
        There was absolutely nothing racist about Trump’s tweet, and, like every lying race-baiter, Sullum fails to illustrate in his column anything that backs his claim.

        1. Yeah but you know it when you see it. That’s a super libertarian argument.

      2. Totally agree. Of course, anything a white person, especially a white male, states criticizing anyone “of color” is automatically branded as “racist”. Good for Trump – he has the balls to say what many jelly-spined Republican politicians may be thinking but are too cowardly to say out loud.

        1. If ‘anything a white person, especially a white male, states criticizing anyone “of color” is automatically branded as “racist”’, then the only way white people can avoid being called racists is if they are not permitted to criticize a “person of color”, no matter what that “person of color” says or does.
          That doesn’t sound like any way for there to be equality between the races.

          1. Not in the current politically-correct climate. Whites, especially white males, are blatantly discriminated against.

          2. Equality among the races isn’t the goal.
            Segregated and resentful identity groups are.
            Divide and conquer.

      3. Sullum will still get invited to the woke cocktail parties though.

    4. Don’t you know America is horrible. We’ve got a lot of problems in America……

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RwO8fYo9fBg

    5. ITT, I catch Little Jeffy plagiarizing my joke, and having a terrible sock.

    6. Sullum makes the best argument for clamping down on illegal immigration and to change our policy from “first come, first enter” to evaluating the merit of all immigrants: the dilution of American culture (yes, the culture that makes us different than the rest of the world) by people like these low-class women.

    7. Sullum also misses the fact that Pelosi violated House rules by bringing a condemnation of this to a vote- and all but a handful of cowardly GOPers sat idly by and let her do it. Trump says what we the people want to say- our “representatives” rarely do that. Which is why he won.

  2. Is the response all about politics?

    Have you seen the history of of Omar et al?

    Yes, it’s all about politics. FFS. Reason — where Dems get the benefit of the doubt. Always.

  3. >>>Trump did not name the congresswomen he had in mind.

    so totes racism.

    1. Article even misses that he wasn’t talking about “his” critics, he was talking about critics of the American system of government. The system that they or their recent relatives fled their systems to get to.
      Its not exactly nuanced, so how doe the author miss that point?

      1. Trump also heavily criticized America and its system of government in his election campaign. “Make America Great Again” implies that it’s not great now.
        Now, the far-left critics are certainly more radical in both their criticisms and what they want changed about the system. But criticizing how the country is and saying that you want to make it better (whatever you think that means) is standard politics. So is telling sore losers to leave the country if they don’t like it, I guess.

        1. Make America great again.
          A call to action of the listener.
          After 2 decades of Lewinsky, Bush, 9/11, Iraq, recession, Obama – yea, most Americans were a little down on US greatness.
          Hope and change, fundamentally transform, citizen of the world bullshit.
          Read it however you want, but Americans don’t like being played as punk bitches

        2. America is being brought down by the progtards. So Trump is right and the progtards are wrong.

  4. Also odd how few Dems are willing to call out the bigotry of the Dems.

    I’ll remind you that Northam is still governor of VA and the party has decided to let bygones be bygones.

    1. Hey, you missed Robert Byrd! What about him? That is proof Democrats are all racists!

      1. Hey Kiddie Raper, all democrats ARE racists. And a lot of you are sexual predators too.

        Progressives are the lowest form of hominid life.

      2. I know you were trying to be facetious, but yes, the Democrats really are hate filled racists.

      3. Proof? No. Evidence? Yes.

      4. Byrd is long dead, but someone he mentored got the most votes in the last presidential election.

        If association to a racist makes you racist, then Hillary is one by that definition.

    2. They were ready to ditch him. The next two in line are Democrats. Unfortunately Fairfax has a MeToo problem and Herring does blackface. The next in line has a G after his name so let’s memory hole the whole thing. How about a gun control special session to take your mind off it?

      1. “”How about a gun control special session to take your mind off it?”‘

        I think that’s done.

  5. Its asinine to call the tweet racist, just its asinine to call Omar anti-semitic for daring to question our foreign policy with regards to Israel.

    That said, it was an embarrassingly stupid tweet. Was he too dumb and lazy to check if they were actually born here before firing it off?

    1. That said, it was an embarrassingly stupid tweet. Was he too dumb and lazy to check if they were actually born here before firing it off?

      It’s a lot more interesting that everyone just assumed that Pressley was included in this. Unlike the other tards in that clique, she’s managed to keep a low profile and knows how not to alienate the party leaders in an institution where seniority is everything.

    2. This +1000. Twitter is stupid so either get off of it or live in shit; it’s that simple.

    3. It’s asses all the way down.

      1. We do have one nice pair of tits in the group, I’m hoping we’ll find out one of them at least has a nice ass.

        1. Your penis is very small.

          1. Seems like Lester is projecting here

    4. Whenever you find yourself asking if Trump was being dumb and lazy, the answer will always be yes. That doesn’t mean he’s not also racist of course.

      1. In all fairness, there are photos of AOC proudly hoisting the Puerto Rican flag, and Tlaib lovingly fondling the Palestinian flag. Even if they were born here, they still have some affinity for their countries (or, not countries) of origin.

        1. That was a weird comment to try to respond with facts.

        2. Puerto Rico, while not a State, is part of the United States, just like all the States, except the original 13, were part of the United States when they were territories.

          1. Thanks for clearing that up. i MisSed tHaT daY of hiSTOry iN miDDle ScHoOL.

        3. Being born in Puerto Rico makes you an American whether the alt-right likes it or not.

      2. Oh fuck you progtard. Nothing is more stupid, lazy, evil conniving, or racist nor any some progressive piece of shit.

        You’re a sack of shit. Only difference between you and the sack of shot is the sack.

  6. Arguably Racist

    That “arguably” is gonna cost you a few party invites, bub.

    1. Did he tell all Somalis to go back to Somalia? Maybe he should have, after all the interactions I have had with Somalis. Give me more Nigerians and Cameroonians, please

      1. Are the Somalis as bad as West Virginians?

        Catholic priests?

        Alabamians?

        Sovereign citizen American patriots?

        Mississippians?

        1. So was it West Virginia, Alabama, or Mississippi where you were beat up a lot growing up, bigot?

        2. Shove a .45 up your ass and pull the trigger, you useless retard.

        3. What about those arkansasian Clintons?

        4. Youd also be wise to learn that given the concubine like role wives play in Muslim society, rape and sexual assault are much more rampant in the middle east and central Asian than they are in America.

          1. He’s not much on learning.

      2. Nigerians are awesome.
        Good people.

        1. Except that crown prince guy who never got back to me about that money he was going to give me. 🙁

          1. As I understand it, the prince is being heavily persecuted.
            He’s told me time and again that he’s a man of his word.
            I trust him.
            He’s got a tough path, and we’re just going to have to do whatever it takes to help him get free.
            It shouldn’t be more than a few more wire transfers now.

          2. And those two MAGA Nigerians who beat up Jussie smollett. Those guys suck. Haha

            1. Whatever happened with that? Guess I should turn on the news, or go to reason.com, tomorrow am to find out the conclusion of that story.

    2. Robby would have said “Arguably racist, to be sure, …”

  7. What is interesting is what President Trump thinks about his base supporters. You can argue that President Trump is or is not a racist. What is not arguable is that he believes a significant part of his supporters are racist and so his tweets are appeals to that group.

    1. Where was race mentioned?

      1. Birthers don’t “mention” race either but it is clear that the black man should not have been POTUS to those redneck assholes.

        1. Save your exceptional rejoinders for the Pedo meet-ups, shriek.

        2. So Hillary’s campaign was racist?

        3. Sure, but not because he was black, but because the bio relesed by his publisher claimed that he was born in Kenya. Also because his opponent for the Democratic nomination for Senate claimed it, as did a HRC staffer.

      2. There may be a FINE distinction between racism and geographical prejudice (xenophobia). Mexican is NOT a race, nor is Islam. “Racism” is too often used as a general pejorative and it misses the subject of the actual bias. Similarly, the “Gang of 4” congresswomen may not be “anti-Semitic” if their quarrel is with the policies of the (Jewish) state of Israel.

        1. And by the (Jewish) state of Israel, you mean the (((Jewish))) state of Israel, don’t you?

          1. Pretty sure Omar means (((Americans))) and (((the US)))

        2. ” the policies of the (Jewish) state of Israel.”

          And their overlords that control the media, and the moneymen who control their lobbyists, right?

          I mean, who could possibly think the statement “Jews have too much control over the United States government” refers to anything other that the nation of Israel…

          1. Hey, remember when Mattie rushed here to tell us all how horrible that statement was?

            Yeah, me neither.

      3. What white male has President Trump told to go back to his country? Race was implied by the persons he chose to attack. This is not a close call, the tweets were racist.

        1. What country would a white male come from?

        2. The British embassy official?

        3. The PM of Australia?

        4. I can think of several Canadian actors who love to criticize the US I’d love to go back to Canada (though I doubt many Canadians want them back). I’d start with Jim Carey. I doubt Trump would disagree with that sentiment either.b

        5. Didn’t Trump offer to pay for several progressives such as Rosey O’Donnell to move to Canada?

        6. You have an amazing track record of writing things that aren’t even close to reality.

      4. That’s exactly why they call it a dog whistle. So that apologists like you can pretend it didn’t happen.

        1. Or conversely they call it a dog whistle, so people can make claims that aren’t supported by the actual commentary.

        2. what race are the people who weren’t mentioned by name?

        3. Why is it, generally speaking, that progressives have to tell everyone what a dog whistle actually means? And how racist they are? If you are the only one who understands the racism, what does that say about you?

        4. If you know what a dog whistle sounds like, that means you’re a dog.

        5. @Rhayader
          “That’s exactly why they call it a dog whistle. So that apologists like you can pretend it didn’t happen.”

          Here the phrase “dog whistle” is doing all the work, allowing the Rhayader to describe somebody as advocating a position that differs from what they actually said. Basically allowing him to misrepresent (lie) about their position. A common linguistic tic found in bad faith arguments.

          1. Maybe projection, too. Few people seem to be as blatantly racist as those constantly crying about racism.

      5. Kiddie Raper, kill yourself.

      6. I thought he was talking about the French.

    2. If Trump believes a significant part of his supporters are racist, he has a higher opinion of them than the Left does – they believe every single one of Trump’s supporters is a not-so-secret member of the KKK and the Nazi Party. And if you’re not out there protesting and throwing bricks and ritually scarifying yourself for your sin of being born a straight white male, that’s all the proof they need that you are one of them as well.

      1. I don’t believe all Trump supporters or all Republicans are racist. What I find interesting is that whatever small percentage they maybe, they get the lion’s share of attention from their party. The modern conservative movement, that included Barry Goldwater and Ronald Regan, traces its origins to the William Buckley’s break with the John Birch Society. Yet over the last decade, since President Obama’s election, we have seen the Republican party drift back to a xenophobic conservatism. It does appear that the racist/xenophobic faction is in the drivers seat of the party.

        1. What racist policies would you be referring to that these minority members are driving?

          1. Clearly the ones that have resulted in record high minority employment.

        2. Yea, totally not possible that people simply objected to a global socialist being elected president to shit all over the country

          1. See, I’d like to believe that. And I don’t want to do what many others are always accusing chemjeff of, i.e. assuming the worst motives for people who disagree with me. But I’ve noticed a common thread..claims that certain policies or political ideas are not motivated by hate or distrust for others, but the evidence shows otherwise.

            For example, during the Obama presidency, it was claimed repeatedly that the Tea Party had nothing to do with cultural, ethnic, or similar status…but once Obama was gone the supposed guiding principle of “financial restraint and small government” was cast aside and we now have a government controlled entirely by populist Republicans and lo and behold, we spend the most ever. So it wasn’t really about “financial restraint and small government.”

            IF “love it or leave it” is to be taken as anything but “leave it if you do not agree 100% with the beliefs of populist nationalists” then explain to me why they didn’t all simply leave when Obama was president.

            Another example: if we’re also supposed to accept that the hard right wants a less authoritarian government with less power, as they call it, more “freedom”…why do these same groups uniformly support militarization of the police and discredit any claims of unbalanced policing? Because they perceive said militarized police as protecting them from the “others.”

            A third example: everyone was all “muh free markets” until 2016. Now everbody loves tariffs and other protectionist policies, government picking winners and losers, etc. once again… because they feel it protects them from the “others.”

            1. “For example, during the Obama presidency, it was claimed repeatedly that the Tea Party had nothing to do with cultural, ethnic, or similar status…but once Obama was gone the supposed guiding principle of “financial restraint and small government” was cast aside and we now have a government controlled entirely by populist Republicans and lo and behold, we spend the most ever. So it wasn’t really about “financial restraint and small government.””

              The Tea Party was strangled in its offices long before Obama left the presidency.

              “IF “love it or leave it” is to be taken as anything but “leave it if you do not agree 100% with the beliefs of populist nationalists” then explain to me why they didn’t all simply leave when Obama was president.”

              You’re pulling a chemjeff here. ‘The Squad’ almost exclusively talks shit about Americans and our history. That’s different from talking shit about Obama – whose philosophy was also rooted in anti-Americanism. People were ticked that the president of the US dismissed American exceptionalism and considered himself, and the test of us, a “citizen of the world”. People were pissed that he nationalized businesses and industries like GM and healthcare. Their position was always pride in the US and shame for Obama. The Squad’s position is that the US is and has always been shameful, thus they want to fundamentally transform it.

              “Another example: if we’re also supposed to accept that the hard right wants a less authoritarian government with less power, as they call it, more “freedom”…why do these same groups uniformly support militarization of the police and discredit any claims of unbalanced policing? Because they perceive said militarized police as protecting them from the “others.””

              You have a point here.

              “A third example: everyone was all “muh free markets” until 2016. Now everbody loves tariffs and other protectionist policies, government picking winners and losers, etc. once again… because they feel it protects them from the “others.””

              The pro-Trump status quo was not a free market, and picked winners at least as much as tariffs. Perhaps the R base has turned against “free trade” because it’s the “free trade” being pimped by the very establishment Rs who have been stabbing their base in the backs for the last 2 decades.

        3. ”What I find interesting is that whatever small percentage they maybe, they get the lion’s share of attention from their party.”

          You meant from the media right? I’m gonna give you the benefit of the doubt here cuz you had to mean the media.

          1. No I did not mean the media. I remember a time when President Bush and Carl Rove were looking to build bridges to the Hispanic Community. They saw Hispanics as hardworking, family oriented, religious people who were natural fits to the conservative movement. I remember an autopsy after the 2008 election that call for Republicans to reach out to minorities to bring them into the base. But the influencers in the Republican party have deemed that old white men are the target audience and they get the attention. Am I wrong here?

            1. Yet, they still enforced immigration law and had roughly the same opinion of illegal border crossers as Trump.

        4. Media spin on xenophobia is not reality, it is a slur, and political talking point to discredit opposition.

    3. What is interesting is how many people have NO CLUE what other thing Trump did this week that seems to have gone mostly unnoticed due to his carefully worded tweets.

      I mean the man is an amazing magician… whether that’s on purpose or just a stunningly long run of good luck I can’t tell… Just saying his, not really racist but close enough to trigger the left while the rest of America went “I mean… yeah it’s dumb but…” was an amazing use of capital to accomplish like four things at the same time while the real story just kind of happened back in the corner while everyone was watching the one sided cat fight.

      1. Of which thing are you referring?

  8. What a petty little thing to criticize about Trump when he, like all Republicans, is literally worse than Hitler, an out-and-out racist, a white supremacist, dedicated to re-instituting slavery, a genocidal dictator, a deplorable knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing mental case. Not to mention which, every single Trump supporter in the country fits that same description. But sure, Trump is the one shockingly and shamefully lowering and coarsening public discourse.

    See, this is what bugs the shit out of me – Trump is simply a horrible human being, a disgusting, lying, egotistical, fat-headed pig and yet I’m forced to defend him because his enemies are such vile, foul, evil creatures and they’re determined to force me to pick a side here. Sorry, if you can’t stand one more black face without a black voice or one more brown face without a brown voice, I’m going to be a white face with a white voice and fuck you all to hell.

    1. I find myself in the same situation. I end up pointing out that many of the “awful” Trump policies were created by Obama, Bill Clinton, or Dem congresses of the past. I also point out that although Trump’s tweets are often way out of bounds, his actual policies (when they get through Congress or the courts) do not signal the end of the nation, as my friends often predict they will.

      1. Luckily, Trump is inept and has passed almost no significant legislation even though the GOP had a headlock on DC power until Jan 2019.

        1. “Trump is inept and has passed almost no significant legislation”

          Presidents don’t pass legislation, that’s what Congress does. That’s why it’s called the Legislative Branch.

          1. you missed this part even though the GOP had a headlock on DC power until Jan 2019

            But you know that. And I know you knew it.

            I just wanted to post one more time that Trump is inept. No wall, no new trade agreements in force, no health plan, no nothing except a corporate tax loan that we must pay back after his new Trillion $ Deficits.

            1. Taking less of people’s money is a loan? At least it’s easy to see where you stand on property rights.

            2. >>no nothing

              no Hillary.

            3. “Trump is inept.”

              He knows that Congress passes laws, not the President. So he’s one up on you.

            4. Oh, so everything belongs to The Gubmint, we are just borrowing it?

            5. Kiddie Raper, you should kill yourself before you rape another little boy.

            6. Having a Senate, where a 40%+1 minority can stop almost any legislation in its tracks is NOT “having a headlock on DC power”.
              The last time a US political party had a “headlock on DC power” we had 0blamocare rammed down our throats, and even the voters of Massachusetts revolted, and elected a Republican to try to stop it.

        2. Two more originalist Nazgul is good enough. Can you imagine who Herself would have nominated?

          1. This made me a single-issue voter. The prospect of Sec. Clinton nominating even one person to SCOTUS.

        3. The president doesn’t pass legislation, they sign it, or not.

          The first step act is pretty significant and removes some of the harm Joe Biden helped create in the 1990s.

    2. No, nobody is forcing you to defend Donald Trump. If you can’t find anyone to vote for, abstention is a great option. If you can’t in good conscience argue in favor of a particular side, don’t partake in the argument.

      1. No, no one is forced to defend Trump. But so much of the criticism is so off-base that it’s hard not to.
        I found myself in a similar position with Obama. I can’t stand the guy or most of his policies, but many of the attacks on him were just ridiculous.
        If you care about reasonable political discourse, you need to defend people you don’t like very much sometimes.

        1. Who had time to attack oBama for anything baseless? There were always a plethora of problems he was creating at any given time.

          Do you think Obama created a plethora of problems?

        2. Can you name some of those ridiculous attacks?
          Because he states, and the sycophantic media repeats, that he had a scandal-free administration.
          There was nothing ridiculous about criticizing him for violating bankruptcy laws, Fast and Furious, IRS targeting conservative groups, Benghazi, etc.
          But he was covered for, in each instance.

        3. “”But so much of the criticism is so off-base that it’s hard not to.””

          I rarely defend people. I defend premises. People who are heavily invested in identity politics can’t see the difference.

      2. He’s pointing out the idiocy of your side, you moron. If you could take two seconds to think you’d quickly realize that by pointing out that idiocy, he has no choice but to come across as a Trump defender.

        1. Saying “Team Blue is wrong” is not equivalent to saying “Team Red is right”.

          1. No shit, dumbass.
            But you would interpret it that way, because you’re a partisan psychotic

            1. You really are tiresome.
              Don’t you have some more Democrats to murder with your buddy Shithead?

              1. Don’t you have some more Democrats to stick up for?

              2. Given that your pals want to enslave actual humans it isn’t murder, it’s self defense. Like when someone shoots an illegal to keep them from raping a small child. Like the one in New Jersey you let in that raped that six year old in her own bedroom.

                It’s your fault Pedo Jeffy. You have a lot of blood on your hands.

          2. Stop crying every time your lefty boos get criticized.

          3. Good thing he didn’t say paper tiger argh!!! Neither did you, but my summary is better.

          4. No, but apparently saying that people are innocent until proven guilty is equivalent to defending rapists.


          5. chemjeff radical individualist
            July.16.2019 at 7:31 pm

            Saying “Team Blue is wrong” is not equivalent to saying “Team Red is right”.

            Yet anytime someone even suggests that Team Blue might be wrong, you fly in and shriek ‘Republican!!’ and ‘Trumper!!’

  9. Where is there any mention of race in this tweet? “Racist” now seems to mean “anything that offends a leftist”.

    I don’t find these tweets to be racist. I am a brown-skinned immigrant who is – amazingly! – grateful to have been admitted to the US. Rep. Omar in contrast, seems to hate the country that gave her refuge and actually elected her to Congress. She has every constitutional right to say whatever she wants, and the rest of us have the right to point out her base ingratitude and hatred for most Americans.

    1. “Racist” now seems to mean “anything that offends a leftist”.

      More precisely, it means “anytime a non-white liberal is criticized for anything.”

    2. Omar in contrast, seems to hate the country that gave her refuge and actually elected her to Congress.

      She’s mentioned that the refugee videos she watched before getting here showed happy, smiling people in a utopian setting. When she arrived, her father took her through New York City (granted, this was right before it became slightly less of a shithole during the Guiliani era), and her response was that “this wasn’t what was promised.”

      The ungrateful bitch had just been brought over from a Somali refugee camp, and the first thing she does is complain that it didn’t have Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism.

      1. it didn’t have Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism

        But we are so close. Just tell her to be a bit more patient and we’ll get there.

      2. but she moved to Minnesota, which should have altered her prejudice against the country as a whole…..or did she then just start complaining about the lack of world-class restaurants and thriving nightlife?

      3. She was TEN YEARS OLD when she moved here. I think I can cut her a little bit of slack for not being able to fully appreciate her new surroundings at that age.

        You’re being deceptive when you leave out that key piece of information.

        “It doesn’t have to be true – it just has to go viral”

        1. She was 12, and she’d just gotten here from a place where she supposedly was under the threat of death every day.

          I’d be willing to cut her some slack if she actually learned to appreciate how good she actually has it, but she still has the same ungrateful attitude she’s had since she arrived here from her useless shithole country.

          Stop sticking up for your lefty boos, you waste of carbon molecules.

          1. Look I get it – you don’t like her. I don’t particularly like her either. But I don’t dislike her so much that it justifies dehumanizing her or holding her to unfair standards.

            I’d be willing to cut her some slack if she actually learned to appreciate how good she actually has it

            How do you know she isn’t grateful to be here? Because she’s not a Republican? Because she exercises her right to criticize her government and her country just like every other citizen has the right to do? Being grateful doesn’t mean “never speaking up for the rest of your life”.

            And YES sometimes her criticism goes too far I think. She doesn’t seem to like the Jews. That’s a big problem. She sometimes comes off as too strident in her criticism. She could probably find a better way to express her complaints. But she is under no expectation to just remain silent forever out of gratitude for being rescued from Somalia.

            Can we just object to her horrible left-wing ideology without bashing the person? Didn’t that used to be a thing? Let’s do that thing again.

            1. From what I’ve seen (and heard) from her, she would dehumanize me the moment it was polit…I mean, ideologicaly expediant. And no amount of you typing the soliloquy you practice for your brown quee, er I mean your circular arguments will change my mind. Only her own words and actions will change my opinion of her.

              1. Notice the lack of the word race in my comment? Cuz it’s a bullshit distraction.

                1. …just like your argument.

                  1. It wasn’t an argument. It’s my perception of her based on what she says and how she behaves in public. Maybe going forward I’ll indicate the difference for morons, but probably not.

                  2. But at least now I know who little jeffy’s Sock is. And that they both might be a part of reason.com.

                    1. Bwahahahaha….you’re an idiot.

            2. How do you know she isn’t grateful to be here

              You mean by the way she’s always bitching about how unfair everything is here?

              Can we just object to her horrible left-wing ideology without bashing the person?

              Her horrible ideology defines who she is.

            3. That bitch should absolutely go bald to Somali, and she should take you with her Pedo Jeffy. It would be funny to see you try and interact with the Somalis the way you do with people here.

              Your chilling wails of agony would truly be a symphony to the ear, you child rape enthusiast piece of shit.

              1. “That bitch should absolutely go bald to Somali”

                Are you drunk or is that a freudian slip? Who’s to say she’s not bald under her headress? The pedo shit is played. Can’t you formulate a thought without resorting to ad hominem? Don’t answer, I already know the answer, toughguy.

                1. “Are you drunk or is that a freudian slip?” “Can’t you formulate a thought without resorting to ad hominem?” Don’t answer, I already know the answer, hypocrite.

        2. She was TEN YEARS OLD

          Enough about Epstein.

    3. I think it’s a bit more specific than “anything that offends a leftist” (though sometimes it does seem like it’s used that way).
      What they are doing is conflating race and culture. Which is wrong and often counterproductive. There are real problems with some cultures. Pointing that out isn’t racist. Even if you extend “racist” to mean prejudiced against ethnic and religious groups or nationalities even if they aren’t tied to a particular race (like Islam, which includes pretty much every race there is).
      That said, I still think Trumps comments were stupid and offensive. But maybe that’s what he was going for.

      1. I have noticed that “racism” is often used as a synonym for “bigotry”. They’re not synonyms, but they derive from the same place: a belief that individuals in a group should be judged based on group characteristics, usually ones that are superficial or immutable.

        1. “a belief that individuals in a group should be judged based on group characteristics, usually ones that are superficial or immutable.”
          AKA Identity Politics.

        2. Yes, Jeff, you are quite bigoted

          1. Blah blah blah.
            I’m bigoted against morons, that’s for sure.

            1. So why are you sticking up for Omar instead of being bigoted against her?

              1. Where am I “sticking up for her”?
                Because calling her a “stupid bitch” for not fully appreciating her new circumstances at the AGE OF TEN is unfair?

                Would “not sticking up for her” mean tolerating and applauding every attack against her, even ones that are out of bounds, unfair, or just plain false?

                Your ethos appears to be – “It doesn’t have to be true, it just has to go viral”

                1. Your ethos appears to be – “It doesn’t have to be true, it just has to go viral”

                  What is this, NPC response number 7?

                    1. ::Presses X::

                2. It’s telling that you get so butthurt every time a leftist gets slagged on here. Omar deserves every bit of contempt she receives, and the fact that you’re so assmad about it is a good indication that it’s not out of bounds.

                  1. Her anti-Semitism, left-wing politics, and her over-the-top criticism of America deserve criticism, yes.

                    Complaining that she didn’t immediately bow down and kiss the ground when arriving in New York City at age 12 is holding her to an unfair standard.

                    See how that works?

                    1. Nah, she’s an ungrateful slag and always has been.

                    2. Psychosis doesn’t work, Jeff.
                      See: the responses you get at this site

                    3. Indeed, he does get some pretty psycho responses.

                    4. Zeb, perhaps you’re not clear on what psychosis is.
                      It’s when one mistakes their fantasy for reality, and acts according to that misperception.

                      Hostile responses aren’t necessarily psychotic, though they can be.
                      Jeff consistently tells other people that the words they say don’t mean what those words mean, then argues against what he has imagined they said. This goes far beyond inferences or implications. When called out for it, he continues to deny that’s what he’s doing by doing exactly that.
                      That is psychotic.

                3. You call her a bitch(you say, I’m to lazy to look cuz of the game you play) but then try to say that even though racism isn’t synonymous with bigotry, it really is when people you don’t like use it. But not people you dislike. Just people who use it from the same place.

                  Also I don’t know what the age of 10 is.

                  1. Also I don’t know what the age of 10 is.

                    ?

            2. You stole that line from me

  10. Hell, this is smart politickin’ by the Con Man. He is just ginning up his redneck conservative white trash base.

    1. Nothing is a bigger piece of trash than you Kiddie Raper.

    2. No, he’s making the Democrats defend people that most Americans fundamentally disagree with. Which is smart politickin’.

  11. And with his comments he has managed to maneuver the Democrat party into backing the extreme left of their party at a time when they are trying to make everyone believe they are centrist.

    1. Yep.
      The Democrats are now the party of Ilhan Omar – the woman who refused to disavow al Qaeda multiple times, drew an equivalence between them and the US, whatabouted whites, and downplayed 9/11

      1. Al Qaeda are right-wing terrorists just like their arch-conservative brethren Fundie- Nut abortion bombers here in the USA.

        Too bad every fucking Evangelical can’t just meet their Islamo-terrorist counterpart on a battlefield and just off each other.

        1. Can you name for me just 2 Evangelical Terrorists of the last 20 years?

          1. Robert Lewis Dear
            Eric Rudolph
            Peter James Knight
            Scott Roeder
            Brenton Tarrant
            Benjamin Matthew Williams and James Tyler Williams

            many more

            1. Bravo, 2 of your list actually met the criteria. Brenton Tarrant was fairly left wing as has been reported multiple times. He specifically floated about how his attack was going to end up in more gun control laws and would damage conservatives.
              The rest of them were all from prior to 2003. And you ambiguous reference to “many more” when only 25% of your list was correct is not promising.

          2. Do you count the bombers of ladyparts clinics, or those who shoot physicians who perform abortions, as evangelical terrorists, NashTiger — or do you consider them to be heroes and righteous warriors for Jesus?

            1. You should have your pin sized head stomped on repeatedly until you’re dead, you turd.

            2. Name just 2 in the last 20 years

            3. Do you count all the left-wing bombers of the 60s-80s, you slack-jawed hicklib?

              1. Dude, you’re asking for intellectual honesty from Kiddie Raper, who at a minimum, is an avid consumer of child porn, and most likely a guy who violently rapes small children. It’s a fruitless endeavor.

                I just antagonize him, and hope that his extreme self loathing will lead to his eventual demise by his own hand.

        2. That one hurts, doesn’t it, buttplug.
          No need to respond further. Your first reply is all anybody needs to see

  12. Even Trump deserves the courtesy of a direct quote, not just an author’s take on same. Isn’t that a standard to which Reason holds?

    1. LOL – then they wouldn’t be able to use the “fine people on both sides” lie anymore either

  13. Trump is a tactless bloviator and Omar is an ungrateful bigot. All involved are less than laudable people and politicians. However, I do not think it is fair to say that Trump was criticizing anyone of them for their race rather than what they have said and done.

    Also, NYC and State are incompetently and corruptly run political entities.

    1. Yes, “a plague on ALL their houses” — to paraphrase ROMEO AND JULIET.

    2. Nah, no equivalence. Trump is right. Period.

  14. “Love it or leave it” is so dumb. Wanting to change America is not per se hating on America.

    1. You should GTFO. It’s not like Ilhan Omar has a long and illustrious string of commentary on the US.

      1. Agreed.
        Fuck off or die, Jeff

        1. Well well, look which pseudo-psychologist finally woke up.

          1. Pedo Jeffy. You need to leave the US. Don’t come back, ever.

            1. Fuck off, troll. You are a loathsome slanderous pest.

    2. “”Wanting to change America is not per se hating on America.””

      Depends. If you want to change America so much that it no longer resembles America, then perhaps it is.

      Arguing for universal health care isn’t anti-American. Trying to destroy America’s economic system under the guise of universal health care is anti-American.

  15. Of course, DT’s comments are racist. DT had BIG disagreements with John McCain, but DT never publicly told McCain to go back to his country. DT knows he is dealing with non-white citizens.

    1. You mean Panama?

  16. “I am confident that every Member of Congress is a committed American,” Rep. Mike Turner (R–Ohio) tweeted yesterday.

    Primary time for this poor bastard and GOP apostate.

    1. Nah, he’ll just quietly retire and go into lobbying.

  17. The Left Now: Wah wah if Trump wins I’m moving to Canada!

    The Left Now: America fucking sucks, I hate everything about this country and want something fundamentally different

    Trump: Why don’t you leave then

    Left: $!@!^@%^%@^%*#^!%^&#%*&!

    Seriously, to the left —- why the fuck are you here? Please leave and make room for someone who believes in America and supports freedom, individualism, and personal responsibility. I personally know several immigrants who do and several native citizens that don’t. The people born here that have zero gratitude can GTFO

    1. Also, you forgot “America was never great!”, once a chant of pantifa, now a slogan embraced by the “centrist” Democrats like Andrew Cuomo.
      Oh, and Besty Ross and George Washingtom were racists, and so is the flag.
      Oh, and literally everything else that comes out of their disgusting kale-holes

      1. Progressives ALL need to GTFO.

      2. I’m pretty sure that Washington was, in fact, a racist. Almost everybody was at that time period. The problem isn’t in condemning racism, it’s in holding people from hundreds of years ago to today’s standards.

    2. “Please leave and make room for someone who believes in America and supports freedom, individualism, and personal responsibility.”

      Trump should start a GoFundMe page to help defray the costs of them moving to the socialist paradise of their choice. I’ll make the first donation.

      1. Maybe we can get one going here.
        I’d absolutely donate to help Jeff move his unemployable self out of the country

    3. So where is the line between “wanting to fix problems in America” and “wanting to destroy America”?

      I don’t agree with a lot of comments made by a lot of people on either the left or the right, but I don’t doubt their sincere desire on wanting to make America better in their own ways.

      Is it possible to be a patriotic socialist? Or a patriotic fascist? I think so, even though both socialism and fascism are abhorrent. They sincerely think that socialism or fascism would make America better. I don’t.

      1. No it is not possible to be patriotic and Socialist. Socialism is the antithesis of everything America stands for. So is fascism and all other collectivist totalitarian ideologies.

        1. So a supporter of Social Security/Medicare (often described as socialist by the likes of Reagan) can’t be patriotic?

          Got it. Reagan hates America – just heard it from a conservative.

          1. Whoops, I meant “Trump hates America” because he loves SS/Medicare.

            1. Reagan liked it too. His first tax increase was an increase in the FICA tax.

              1. Mainly because Congress had raised the fund and there was no political will to let it go broke. Additionally, Reagan did try to reform it and give citizens more control over their own social security.

                1. Pedo-Jeffy doesnt know where bills originate.

          2. i don’t think you understand the difference between socialist policies and socialism

          3. I still have health insurance and investments that are not owned by government dildo.

          4. Reagan wasn’t constantly complaining about how much the US sucks, you drug-addled pederast.

      2. Progressives are incapable of socialism, and are intrinsically treasonous.

      3. “They sincerely think that socialism or fascism would make America better. ”

        You really think that? I don’t believe that they think anything they promote would benefit America. I believe they think it will benefit THEM…they will be the TOP MEN running things, they will be in charge, they will expect people to (like the preacher from CostCo says) “submit to the rule by their betters” 100% of the time smug in the belief that they are among the “betters”.

        Their proposals are filled with negatives that will weaken America and hurt its citizens, but will give the Government more power. If they cared about America instead of about Government power (with the endless dream of wielding that power, otherwise what good is power?), they would make different proposals.

        I don’t believe for one second that they “sincerely think that socialism or fascism would make America better”.

    4. Why didn’t the right-wingers who thought Obama was ruining the country leave?
      I have nothing but disdain for the contemporary American left. But they get to believe what they want about what’s right for the country too. That is also part of the American system and tradition. The fact that they want to radically change things isn’t a sign that they would rather be elsewhere. Libertarians want to radically change things too.
      You need to attack the ideas. Attacking the people is not productive (unless all you want is a big distraction where everyone looks dumb, which may well be all Trump really wanted here).

      1. And at which point is it impossible to separate a person from their ideology?

        They want to enslave you but they’re nice people? Don’t attack them, attack their ideas? You ARE what you believe. You chose your ideology, and these four have chosen and proclaim it loudly: they want to enslave you.

        1. Persons have human rights and human dignity. Ideas don’t.

          1. Persons who advocate for the enslavement of others have no dignity. They have undignified themselves through the ideas they have chosen to advance. This is no fucking game. They mean it.

            Ocasio-Cortez and the rest of her wannabee slave-driver comrades have no dignity. Not in the eyes of sane freedom-loving individuals.

            1. Every human being has intrinsic worth and dignity.

              1. “Persons who advocate for the enslavement of others have no dignity.”

                Go ahead. Describe how the enslavers of others manifest their dignity.

                1. Because they exist. Human beings are not dogs or animals. Both slaves and slaveowners have intrinsic dignity and worth simply because they breathe air.

                  Suppose a slaveowner is caught and arrested. Should that slaveowner be given a fair trial? Or just shot on sight?

                  1. Sure, quick trial and up the rope.

                    1. Even saying “quick trial” means that you are willing to afford *some* small measure of due process to the accused, even odious human beings like slave owners. That just proves my point – everyone has at least some small measure of human dignity which is why due process and formalities like that are afforded to them.

                    2. Even saying “quick trial” means that you are willing to afford *some* small measure of due process to the accused, even odious human beings like slave owners.

                      Doesn’t mean I consider them to have “inherent dignity.” You might want to discern the difference.

                  2. Oh, now. You’re confusing legal rights with dignity. A fair trial says nothing about the dignity of a slave owner. The slave owner is beneath contempt and has undignified themselves through their own actions.

                    Even the Nazis got a fair trial at Nuremberg. The court dignified the process but not the accused. Then they hanged ’em.

                    1. You’re confusing legal rights with dignity.

                      The reason why we confer legal rights to the accused, even those accused of horrible crimes, is because even the accused have human dignity.

              2. Nope.

                1. Nope.

                  Okay, if you really believe that, then let me ask you this.

                  Is torture ever justified?

                  I’m not talking about waterboarding, I’m talking about clear unambiguous physical torture.

                  If so, under what circumstances?

                  1. Reading your exceptional mewling is torture enough.

                    1. From that dodge, I will assume that you believe the answer is no, torture can’t be justified. If that’s the case, then you are admitting that even potential torture victims, no matter how horrible people they may be, have some intrinsic dignity and worth, enough at least that torturing them would violate that basic human decency.

                    2. Such a rich fantasy world you live in.

                  2. It’s justified under the Jack Bauer exception.

                  3. “Is torture ever justified?” A pedophile has someone locked up somewhere and won’t say where is a good place to start.

                  4. As an official method of interrogation? Nope. That state can’t be allowed such power. And for the same reasons the death penalty should be a no option.

                    But if your loved ones were in imminent danger of death that could be avoided by torture?

                    If you’re telling me that the dignity of the guy with direct control over the means of their destruction would prevent you from administering a beating that would prevent such, then you’re lying. If not, then you’re complicit. At the very extremes, the rules don’t apply. You’d do whatever it took and then you’d take the consequences of your actions and ask a jury to judge you. And if you were sitting on that jury, how would you vote?

              3. “Every human being has intrinsic worth and dignity”

                Faith alone!

              4. “Every human being has intrinsic worth and dignity.”
                Even Trump? What about Stalin? Mao? Hitler? Jim Carey?

                1. Yes. Every single person has intrinsic worth and dignity, no matter how odious of human beings they might be.

                  Although I could potentially be persuaded in the case of Jim Carrey.

                2. Why do we give even the most vile murderer due process? And don’t brutalize them after conviction?
                  I think it comes from the central value of Western Civilization which is that every individual has a certain moral value and rights that cannot be removed. This isn’t just a political/legal thing. It’s the basis for the whole moral system.
                  Unpersoning people who have ideas you don’t like is what the radical left does.

        2. I have no idea if they are nice people. I’m not defending them. I’m arguing that making it about these particular people, rather than the terrible ideas they represent and which are shared by tons of other people, is a bad move politically. It distracts from the real issue which is that socialism is a terrible idea.

      2. Did right wingers speak as if American history/identity were defined by slavery, genocide, racism, misogyny, homo”phobia”, and various other bigotries and oppressions?

        1. No, of course not. But I’m not saying there is a direct equivalence. I’m saying that telling people to leave the country because they don’t like the results of the last election is stupid and obnoxious.

          1. Did you read Trump’s tweet?
            How the fuck do you get “leave because they didn’t like the election” from it?
            Trump clearly told them to leave because their attitude toward the US and their ideas for governing (ruling, really) are shit. He told them to go to these places they have more pride in and prove their governing ideas correct, then they can come back and show us how they were right.
            He attacked them as avatars of their tyrannical philosophy, challenging them to put up or shut up, and managed to put them as the forefront of their party and ideas.
            Instead of thinking Bernie and Norway when socialism comes up, people will now see AOC, Omar, Tlaib, and the ugliest angriest looking one.

      3. I don’t remember any prominent right winger who threatened to leave over Obama. There were plenty of left wingers who not only said they would leave but had fsking panic attacks in public over the thought of not their president winning.

  18. “I personally know several immigrants who do”. Unpossible. No way they can possibly deal with all the nationalism and white privilege

  19. The tweet was typical Trump hyperbole, completely unnecessary and woefully ill-conceived, but racist it was not.

    Sullum’s played the context-dropping game that all media hacks play when they want to advance their agenda. The fact is that all four are socialists who believe in a massive increase in the size of the state and a subjugation of the individual to the collective. Reason should despise everything they stand for yet here we have the old game of my enemy’s enemy is my friend.

    Trump lays it out:

    Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough.

    And he lays it out correctly. The four argue for policies that have already crippled whole swathes of the globe and hold billions in chains, and they loudly advocate those same policies for America. They deserve to be told to fuck off with their corrupt ideology, that America is a land that values freedom and that they are the enemies, not the friends of Americans.

    You have a president, no matter how clumsily, expressing visceral contempt for the advocates of dictatorship in our very midst, and all Reason can do is shout racism when it’s as plain as day that it’s about ideology.

  20. Reason logic in a nutshell: criticizing shitty ideas from shitty places is racist if the people who believe those ideas are predominantly part of a non-privileged group.

    1. they seem pretty privileged to me which is the ultimate irony

    2. Did you read the article at all?

      Nowhere does it suggest that criticizing shitty ideas is racist. It’s the “go back where you came from”. Which isn’t essentially racist, but it’s not such a stretch to see how people would interpret it that way.

      Everyone needs to relax and make some attempt to understand their opponents rather than just immediately leaping to the worst possible interpretation.

      1. People can interpret things how they wish – just like chemjeff.
        Funny how their interpretations are always of the same type.
        Why the fuck are you trying to be so generous here, zeb?
        “Psychotic racebaiters are people too”?

        1. Why do you refuse to take a stand?
          The “above it all” arbiter bullshit is exactly that: bullshit.
          “Everyone needs to relax and make some attempt to understand their opponents rather than just immediately leaping to the worst possible interpretation.”
          Ok – now follow that up. Actually oppose somebody.
          Or just jerk off to the self-reflection of your preening neutrality

          1. Why do you refuse to take a stand?

            Did you not read what Zeb wrote above?

            “I have nothing but disdain for the contemporary American left.”

            That sounds like a “stand” to me.

            1. Your opinion on anything has no value.
              Indeed, you have no intrinsic dignity or worth.
              Try not to think about it.

          2. Area, come on now, we all know Pedo,Meffy only jacks it to child pornography.

            1. Good Lord. You are a slanderous pest. Find a different hobby.

          3. I don’t refuse to take a stand and I’m hardly neutral. Anyone who pays attention knows what I think of leftist politics. I come here for interesting discussion, not to take a stand. We are pretty much all in agreement here that the left is awful and dangerous. So what’s the point of taking a stand when it’s just preaching to the choir?

            The left fucking sucks, and the 4 congress-critters at the center of this are some of the worst. If their preferred policies were implemented it would be a disaster.

            Happy?

            1. Of course they’re not happy, you haven’t even spelled out in detail the painful death that you wish upon AOC et al. Try more of that and fewer good faith arguments.

            2. Yes, Zeb, I know your position. That’s why I came at you the way I did.
              I do find it frustrating that you are overly generous when you interpret the totalitarians, but whatever floats your boat.
              There is a difference between playing devil’s advocate and contarianism.
              Maybe it’s my mistake.

      2. It’s quite a stretch considering there was no mention of race in said suggestion. I tell Marxist swine to go back to their shitholes every day or to take a free ride with my helicopter tour company. It’s ideologically motivated, which is why just before he went on his latest tirade, he once again reiterated that America will never be a Socialist country.

  21. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.

    He’s just referring to their home districts. Right?

    1. No, you’re not allowed to suggest that. He has to mean go back to some non-white shit hole. That must be what he means since we all know Trump is a racist. Always has been and always will be.

      He can’t possibly be referring to policies and ideologies that put and keep millions in poverty and under the heel of brutal regimes. No. It’s about race. Reason has told you so.

    2. NIce.

    3. Tlaib actually bragged about her district being the 3rd poorest in the nation.
      The pundit-clergy class is so far off in their appraisal of the effects of Trump’s tweet, it’s like 2016 all over again.

  22. The breakdown is quite simple. The two Muslim congresswomen ARE racists. They associated and contributed meaningful work to known racists. If they were fully in power, they would join the BDS movement and vote on sanctions on Israel and condemn them as a genocidal state in front of the international community. Trump and (most) of his base would never do such things.

    The women’s march, which excluded Jewish and white women from their ranks, ARE racists. The antifa thugs that assaulted a gay Asian journalist ARE racists. The radical left that wants to charge people differently based on race ARE racists. Exclusion forms the basis of their ideology because it inevitably involves taking down the upper class to empower the lower class. Who cares if Scar Jo wants to play a trans? THEY do.

    Donald Trump is guilty of occasional bigoted rhetoric, but by now we know he’s an equal opportunity taunter. I would often hear John and Ken (the local radio guys in So Cal sometimes linked by Reason) refer to public buses as illegal alien zones and Garcetti as mayor Yoga Pants. Racism?

    Trump isn’t participating in some civil but passionate discourse. He’s clapping back at unhinged loons who accuse the nation of running concentration camps (even though the officers working inside are mostly Latino Americans) and push for radical changes that would destabilize the entire nation. These people are also concentrated in their efforts to criminalize and demonize their political opponents (BK, Smollett) and will even endorse violence. They literally think America has been taken over by fascists and drastic measures must be taken to defeat them.

    “Fix your own country if you hate ours” is more of a pointed response than Reason would like to admit. He’s addressing a group of radicals whose vision of America (as well as their notion of how it should be) is reckless and dangerous. Have you seen the lunatics compare the antifa who attacked detention facility with John Brown.

    “Pox on both houses” Sure, but one is clearly more infested than the other.

    1. Man, that’s well said.

      “Have you seen the lunatics compare the antifa who attacked detention facility with John Brown.”

      On that note, is it just me or is there a lack of commentary from Reason about that little terrorist attack? Enemy’s enemy again, I guess. ICE hates immigrants so when someone opens fire on them I guess it’s OK.

      1. I have enjoyed watching our nation’s better citizens stomp out right-wing preferences and aspirations for the entirety of my lifetime, and will continue to be entertained by the last-gasp, inconsequential flailings of our vanquished Republicans and conservatives.

        But by all means keep chattering about whatever clingers are chattering about as they prepare to be replaced.

        Open wider, clingers.

        1. Oh… so you’re betting that the silent majority are radicals…. might want to think about that one long and hard as you continue to press for radical change to address the things you care about right now at all costs. I’m sure all those people sitting at home who just want to go to work and take care of their family are down for upending society because you can’t stand that people have the wrong opinion.

        2. Haha. Pathetic old hippies and young people indoctrinated into guilt and grievance, but who will grow up to see through your nonsense. That’s all ya got, rev.

          Don’t change a thing. Haha

        3. Kirkland, you really need to up your game if you want to compete with OBL on self-parody.

          1. The Rev is a one trick uneducated bigot that has nothing useful to contribute. OBL makes us laugh from time to time.

          2. I kinda think chemjeff has the crown on self parody, and it’s not particularly close.
            Might be because he’s completely sincere…

        4. Most people would enjoy watching you gang raped with broken bottles then getting two bullets in the head you retarded twat.

    2. “Fix your own country if you hate ours” is more of a pointed response than Reason would like to admit.

      Sure. But the problem is that the US is their country. I don’t think any more of what they say they want to do than you do. Absolutely dreadful ideas. But they are the ideas of Americans, shared by plenty who don’t have any connection to another country.
      So, unless Trump just wanted to stir shit up, it was a dumb move to make it about national origin/ethnicity rather than the terrible ideas that are infecting the left wing of the Democrats.

      1. He poured a barrel of gasoline on the dumpster fire that is the Left.
        He made AOC, Omar, Tlaib, and the other one the personification of those terrible ideas.
        People are tired of victim-virtue.
        They want a fighter.
        “Oh, woe is me! Woe is America!”
        “Ok, fuck off then!”

  23. As a second generation exile I find nothing wrong with Trump’s Tweet. I did not vote for Trump but if the media keeps this up I just might this time around.
    Racist? Xenophobic? maybe but not much different than “they just want to cling to their bibles and their guns” (Saint Obama) but that was about rednecks or hillbillies so I guess that type of racism doesn’t count.

    1. One can’t be racist against white people, because white privilege- idiot progressive

      1. Whoever said that has never been to Asia.

        1. I hear South Korea is the worst of it

  24. Everyone is talking about Trump’s naughty tweets instead of Trumps Executive Order restricting who can apply for asylum.

    Trump has the media dancing like trained monkeys to his tune.

    1. The concept of first country of asylum is defined in Article 26 of the APD: A country can be considered to be a first country of asylum for a particular applicant for asylum if: (a) s/he has been recognised in that country as a refugee and s/he can still avail him/herself of that protection; or (b) s/he otherwise enjoys sufficient protection in that country, including benefiting from the principle of non-refoulement; provided that s/he will be re-admitted to that country. In applying the concept of first country of asylum to the particular circumstances of an applicant for asylum Member States may take into account Article 27 (1).It should be noted that Member States are not required to apply the concept of first country of asylum, as Article 26 is a permissive provision.1 However, in accordance with the APD, those Member States which apply the concept are not required to examine whether an applicant qualifies as a refugee or for subsidiary protection status, where a country which not a Member State is considered as a first country of asylum for the applicant pursuant to Article 26.2 In other words, the Member State may consider such applications as inadmissible.

  25. So, Canada?

    You know, where they all say that they will move if X wins an election.

    Never Mexico? Gee … I wonder why?

    Screw you Jacob.

    1. Canada doesn’t have a lot of Mexicans living there, whereas Mexico does. They never said they’d move to Kenya or India either. Seems like they picked one of the whitest countries around for their “refuge”.

  26. My understanding from the Trumptard set is that racism is imperceptible among white Americans. Saying “go back to your country” to a black person who was born in the US is not racist.

    I also understand that real racism is when black people talk about racism.

    What about nooses on doors? Shooting up black churches? Not racism, right, because nobody said the word “race” or acknowledged its existence in a sentence?

    1. Meh
      Not your finest work, Tony.
      Even your heart isn’t in it anymore.
      A bellwether for progressive tactics if there ever was one

    2. Telling poor and lower class whites to check the privilege isn’t racism? Demanding all whites to pay reparations for slavery isn’t racism? Telling whites that they don’t have a culture worth honoring isn’t racism? Etc?

    3. Tony, you do k ow that a huge amount of the so called racist events of which you speak end up being hoaxes perpetrated by activist minorities, right?

      Probably not. MSM news outlets don’t follow up when those things come out, and it doesn’t fit your narrative anyway.

      1. How do you even manage to feed yourself?

    4. Tony
      July.16.2019 at 7:41 pm
      “My understanding…”

      You have none. Fuck off, shitbag; go fuck your brother.

    5. Saying “go back to your country” to a black person who was born in the US is not racist.

      Well, given that Trump said it to a group consisting of a white person, a black person, a Somali, and a Middle Easterner, in what way is it “racist”?

      And by “your country”, he was referring to the country of the hyphenated-American identity that these women prominently embrace. It’s perfectly reasonable to respond to “I’m Somali-American and I think my culture is wonderful” with “You’re delusional. Go back to Somalia, actually spend some time there, come back, and then we’ll talk again.”

      I’m an immigrant. I don’t identify as a hyphenated American, and I think people who do are fools and bigots (like these four women).

      1. Funny how the left can embrace one’s gender as what they “identify” as, while this invitation to return to where they came from is countered with where, and what, they were born as.
        Can anyone deny that they “identify” as being from somewhere else?

        1. Why don’t you people just take your cousins and go fuck them and stop trying to influence national policy. You can barely even manage potty training.

          1. Tony, your words are wasted – I don’t think Ilhan Omar posts here

      2. So you’re offended by hyphens. One wonders why you would bother bitching about hyphens when obviously everything else is going so well. I mean, it’s just a fucking hyphen.

    6. Most people’s understanding is that you’re a fucking Okie moron.

  27. Reason! Toss the word ‘racist’ around a bit more and it will soon have no meaning. AOC! Keep lying and soon nobody at all will listen. Democrats! ditto
    Us aging white guys can clearly see that when we are gone there is going to be chaos. You young shitheads yammer on about nothing, you cannot even change a tire or fix something around the house let alone build on. When your toilet fills with shit that won’t flush take a good long look, that is the future, your future. Enjoy.
    PS Those beards look really stupid.
    PSS Black leather sport coats look even more stupid.

    1. My plumber is hispanic and my car mechanic is black. Both are in their 20s and fairly conservative. So I do not think losing the old white guys means as much as you hope it does.

      Frankly the sooner your racists asses are buried the better off we will be. Hopefully you don’t breed.

      1. “Frankly the sooner your racists asses are buried the better off we will be.”
        Racist?

    2. “When your toilet fills with shit that won’t flush”

      Solution: boiling water.
      Better than drano.

      Think about it

      1. You’ve got a point. I always tell Tony to drink Drano. It would be far more entertaining to watch him down a quart of boiling water instead.

        Excellent thinking.

  28. Wow, someone opened Pandora’s Box of hate. So much anger, racism. I remember when Obama was inaugurated, this site blew up with racism. No one will admit to their second amendment solution posts, or how they went to another site to be more violent.

    It’s sad, but a bit hilarious seeing everyone trying to be the Tim Cavanaugh of racism.

    Matt Welch should really have to answer to what he’s allowed on here.

    1. Racismracistracismracistracismracistracismracist

      You’ve gotta work on your mantras.
      Your chi is all f’ed up

      1. I’m glad you feel better about yourself.

    2. Why do fucking lefty ignoramuses keep taking on new socks? Is there some pleasure in hiding from a sig which is universally despised?

      1. I see you like low hanging fruit. Are you happy with your ignorance? How are your reading skills? Are you ok?

    3. Obama may be black and white on the outside, but he’s all pinko on the inside. Which is the problem.

      1. Lol, is that the best you got? I’m sorry, did you need someone to cater to your suspension of disbelief?

    4. “…this site blew up with racism.”
      You mean the “racism”, that happens whenever a “person of color” is criticized, even when the race of that person has nothing to do with the criticism?
      The real racist are those who see everything through the prism of the races of the people involved.

    5. Where was the racism?

  29. Oh give me a break. This is just the Democrat/media Trump outrage of the week. Much ado about nothing. I, too, am tired of all the negativity from AOC etc., which is what Trump was saying. Of course negativity is what the press seems to be about (if it bleeds it leads, etc.). So is Reason going to be just another anti-Trump outlet? Where are the sites that actually provide education for the citizenry?

  30. First , I thank the author for reminding me that Trump did NOT name these four representatives . That further weakens the argument that his tweet was racist . Second , these four are known collectively as The Squad and are united in their opposition to Trump and his policies. It can easily be argued that Trump’s tweet was focused on their politics of opposition and resistance instead of their race. The fact that he did not know that 3 of the 4 were born within US borders bolsters this argument. If he is that ill informed , he is probably unaware of their skin color as well.

  31. Democrat immigration policy in a nutshell:
    Let the poor downtrodden peoples of the world come to our women-enslaving racist dystopia so they can refugee-splain what we’re doing wrong.

    1. Lap83 wins
      Close down the thread
      Its over

      1. I’m borrowing that one.

  32. I’m not going to defend Trump’s tweets, especially not this one. Xexophobic, racist, whatever it is, he shouldn’t have said it.

    The problem is that the alternative to Trump is a political party which has been out and proud racist at least from the time of Jackson. *Some* Democrats had a brief breather after WWII when they ascended the broad sunlit uplands of nondiscrimination, but then they climbed down again. They thought they could be clear of charges of racism so long as they changed their targets.

    If it’s a question of “our racists are better than their racists,” I’ll go with the guy who *doesn’t* want to kill brown babies in the womb or give them a shitty education if they survive the womb.

    1. Changes their *rhetorical* targets.

  33. Sorry, there’s no way to defend Trump’s tweets this time. Telling American citizens to go back where they came from misses the whole point of America.

    1. The whole point of America is to welcome immigrants and refugees, then cheer them on as they claim the character, history, and majority of the population of the nation is despicable… and the only solution is to give the government totalitarian power so Daddy Gov can decide the fate of every individual?

  34. OK. But what if it’s true? What if it turns out, as I suspect to be the case, that even first-generation descendants of immigrants to the USA from countries that are primarily Spanish-speaking or black or Arabic, when they get into politics, do harm to the individual liberty of Americans or even of foreigners? Would it not then be better for us if they got out?

    1. “OK. But what if it’s true? What if it turns out, as I suspect to be the case, that even first-generation descendants of immigrants to the USA from countries that are primarily Spanish-speaking or black or Arabic, when they get into politics, do harm to the individual liberty of Americans or even of foreigners? Would it not then be better for us if they got out?”
      So you are going to judge people’s activities by what criteria?
      Have you met Misek? He’s a master at that; tell him you’re Jewish.

      1. By the criterion of being politicians harming liberty. Yeah, send them somewhere, anywhere!

      2. “So you are going to judge people’s activities by what criteria?”
        The criteria of their actions and stated intentions of what they want to see America become.
        If they are ones that reflect places other than this unique effort to build a nation on individual liberty and responsibility, then their commitment to our foundation is such that they need to take those ideas elsewhere.
        Some first, and many second generation immigrants, in recent times, show these tendencies.

  35. Wtf Reason. Fix your site. Every time I refresh, it pulls up ads, closes the comments, or freezes while loading up some video that I try to close and end up flagging comments.

  36. Trump did not name the congresswomen he had in mind. But based on the reference to friction with Pelosi, people have widely assumed he was talking about Reps. Ilhan Omar (D–Minn.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.), Rashida Tlaib (D–Mich.), and Ayanna Pressley (D–Mass.).

    So his critics assumed.

    you can not spell assume without ass.

  37. His Love-It-or-Leave-It Attitude Is Totally Wrong and Arguably Racist.

    The members of “the squad” make their race and culture an integral part of their political identity and campaigns. They proclaim their pride in cultures that are authoritarian, paternalistic, socialist, misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic, and racist. They throw around unfounded accusations of white supremacy and fascism and demand that groups of people owe them reparations based on race. And when Trump calls them out for it, you accuse Trump of being “racist”? Are you serious?

  38. “Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done.”

    I should probably read the comments first to avoid duplication, but here goes.

    First, Trump didn’t say go back to your “country”. The headline is wrong. He said “totally broken and crime infested places from which they came”. In all honesty, I thought he meant Detroit, and the other Democrat-controlled cesspool cities these people represent. Sure, to Omar there’s also Somalia, but that was not my first connection, Detroit was.

    Second, he wasn’t banishing them, he was asking them to volunteer for a mission. Go out, fix these places (Detroit), “Then come back and show us how it is done”.

    1. WSJ had this to say:

      Trump’s Foes Are Crazier Than He Is
      Both parties have lost their heads, but radical left-wing policies are worse than intemperate tweets.

      1. Conservatives live in constant fear that liberals will pass their policies and prove how fucked up conservatives are with their “do absolutely nothing but give money to rich people” theory. They don’t oppose “leftist” policy. They just don’t want to have to change their minds about anything.

        And how much easier is that when anyone with an (R) after his name is by definition correct about everything. You value individual human freedom and dignity? Well, as long as a guy with an (R) after his name is extrajudicially putting children in cages by the thousands, by definition that must be a pro-freedom policy.

        Mostly it’s about being stupid cunts.

  39. Nothing racist here:
    Donald J Trump
    So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly………and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how……it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!

    So sad to see the Democrats sticking up for people who speak so badly of our Country and who, in addition, hate Israel with a true and unbridled passion. Whenever confronted, they call their adversaries, including Nancy Pelosi, “RACIST.” Their disgusting language……..and the many terrible things they say about the United States must not be allowed to go unchallenged. If the Democrat Party wants to continue to condone such disgraceful behavior, then we look even more forward to seeing you at the ballot box in 2020!
    When will the Radical Left Congresswomen apologize to our Country, the people of Israel and even to the Office of the President, for the foul language they have used, and the terrible things they have said. So many people are angry at them & their horrible & disgusting actions!
    If Democrats want to unite around the foul language & racist hatred spewed from the mouths and actions of these very unpopular & unrepresentative Congresswomen, it will be interesting to see how it plays out. I can tell you that they have made Israel feel abandoned by the U.S.

  40. Just so you know: there’s a running gag among Democrats for, oh, at least the last 5 or so years, that libertarians should go live in Somalia if they like it so much.

    Just sayin’.

    1. that’s a laughable exaggeration, their pirates don’t even wear monocles

    2. I think it’s been a running gag among libertarians for longer than that.

  41. […] in which he called them “anti-Israel, anti-USA, pro-terrorist” and urging them to “go back” to their home countries. (All but Omar were born in […]

  42. […] in which he called them “anti-Israel, anti-USA, pro-terrorist” and urging them to “go back” to their home countries. (All but Omar were born in […]

  43. […] in which he called them “anti-Israel, anti-USA, pro-terrorist” and urging them to “go back” to their home countries. (All but Omar were born in […]

  44. I’m still waiting for REASON to post a comprehensive assessment of Trumps achievements and the achievements of his cabinet. That is the problem with folks that are possessed by their ideology.

  45. I’ve noticed a common thread..claims that certain policies or political ideas are not motivated by hate or distrust for others, but the evidence shows otherwise.

    For example, during the Obama presidency, it was claimed repeatedly that the Tea Party had nothing to do with cultural, ethnic, or similar status…but once Obama was gone the supposed guiding principle of “financial restraint and small government” was cast aside and we now have a government controlled entirely by populist Republicans and lo and behold, we spend the most ever. So it wasn’t really about “financial restraint and small government.”

    IF “love it or leave it” is to be taken as anything but “leave it if you do not agree 100% with the beliefs of populist nationalists” then explain to me why they didn’t all simply leave when Obama was president.

    Another example: if we’re also supposed to accept that the hard right wants a less authoritarian government with less power, as they call it, more “freedom”…why do these same groups uniformly support militarization of the police and discredit any claims of unbalanced policing? Because they perceive said militarized police as protecting them from the “others.”

    A third example: everyone was all “muh free markets” until 2016. Now everbody loves tariffs and other protectionist policies, government picking winners and losers, etc. once again… because they feel it protects them from the “others.”

    1. See reply to your duplicate post above

    2. Republicans are shameless hypocrites, story at every second of every day for 50 years.

  46. […] in which he called them “anti-Israel, anti-USA, pro-terrorist” and urging them to “go back” to their home countries. (All but Omar were born in […]

  47. […] line: the one between “go back” and “send her back.” The former is his advice for members of Congress he perceives as hating America; the latter is the chant his criticism of […]

  48. […] line: the one between “go back” and “send her back.” The former is his advice for members of Congress he perceives as hating America; the latter is the chant his criticism of […]

  49. […] line: the one between “go back” and “send her back.” The former is his advice for members of Congress he perceives as hating America; the latter is the chant his criticism of […]

  50. […] crossing a different line: the one between “go back” and “send her back.” The former is his advice for members of Congress he perceives as hating America; the latter is the chant his criticism of […]

  51. […] line: the one between “go back” and “send her back.” The former is his advice for members of Congress he perceives as hating America; the latter is the chant his criticism of […]

  52. For christ’s sake Reason, Trump’s first tweet was NOT racist! People who use that slur don’t ask you to come back to the US in the same breath after they tell you to “go back where you came from.” Trump was mockingly telling the four to go back where their families had immigrated from and fix those problems before criticizing the US.

    Now, having tried to explain away the words of our racist buffoon president, I must go wash my hands.

  53. Anyone who doesn’t realize these people ARE rabidly Anti American, and everything America has ever stood for is a moron… And we would be better off if they all left.

    That’s just reality. Anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.

    The real question is would it be moral to force them to leave to make America a better place? Probably not. But would the slight immorality be worth it in the long haul?

    Truthfully, probably yes. This is the same argument as when we declared revolution against the British. We could have suffered more under their rule… Or we could initiate force with a righteous cause behind it, and make everything better for most people going forward.

    The refusal to accept this stuff is why pure libertarians will never run anything, and would destroy things if they ever did. Sometimes an immoral act CAN create a more moral society overall, resulting in a net gain in morality/virtue/etc. If something radical doesn’t change on its own soon, Americans who believe in freedom will be faced with the choice to do something immoral to deal with these types of people, or allowing everything to be ruined for eternity. Those are the options. Don’t be a cuck when the time comes!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.