[Max Goodman]

Originally Posted by William A. Baurle

The first thing that jumps out at me in the article is at the very beginning, when the author is saying, not just intimating, but directly stating, that Trump was making "a clear provocation to commit murder, however he and his handlers may try to spin it."

This is exactly the kind of clear exaggeration that almost certainly falls into the defamation category, if you ask me, though I'm not in the legal profession.

The angry rhetoric of politicians and commentators with large followings kills. Churchgoers George Tiller and those Dylan Roof killed are likely among its victims. That there can never be proof that the words of anyone in particular caused a nut to kill someone makes it hard to criticize this dangerous speech and easy to criticize those who try to do so.

[Gregory Palmerino]

Originally Posted by William A. Baurle

Occum's

Was that a typo, or am I missing the joke?

Yep, typo. Actually, there is a town in Connecticut called Occum not far from where I live. So there you go.

[William A. Baurle]

Originally Posted by Max Goodman

The angry rhetoric of politicians and commentators with large followings kills. Churchgoers George Tiller and those Dylan Roof killed are likely among its victims. That there can never be proof that the words of anyone in particular caused a nut to kill someone makes it hard to criticize this dangerous speech and easy to criticize those who try to do so.

Certainly! You'll get no argument from me about that.^

But it doesn't make what I wrote untrue.

Trump wasn't inciting someone to commit assassination any more than Ozzy Osborne caused anyone to commit suicide, or Frank Zappa, for that matter, with his song "Suicide Chump":

Well go on and get it over with then,
find you a bridge and take a jump.
But you better get it right the first time,
'cause nothin's worse than a suicide chump.

All I said was that the author of the article stretched the truth and exaggerated, not that Trump's mutterings are not beneath his office and responsibility.

[Andrew Mandelbaum]

Originally Posted by William A. Baurle

Certainly! You'll get no argument from me about that.^

But it doesn't make what I wrote untrue.

Trump wasn't inciting someone to commit assassination any more than Ozzy Osborne caused anyone to commit suicide, or Frank Zappa, for that matter, with his song "Suicide Chump":

Well go on and get it over with then,
find you a bridge and take a jump.
But you better get it right the first time,
'cause nothin's worse than a suicide chump.

All I said was that the author of the article stretched the truth and exaggerated, not that Trump's mutterings are not beneath his office and responsibility.

The sort of political currency Trump has been printing and the economy of The Enemy it empowers cannot be easily disconnected from responsibility for the environment that breeds Roof-isms. This is a basic historically verifiable fact. The sort of violence that these outliers have picked up is exactly what these ideas do. It is their specialty. That these fellows are canary in the coal mine early bird specials doesn't form an alibi.

The Zappa defense is silly. Musicians have never used the mechanisms of constructed myths of internal danger, lost greatness, and the monopolization of truth in their own person to kill millions. Authoritarian figures have.

[Gregory Palmerino]

Trump's Agenda this coming week:

1. discredit judicial branch
2. discredit intelligence community
3. discredit fourth estate
4. Throw rally to whip up support from the masses.

Making America Great Again one insult at a time.

[William A. Baurle]

Originally Posted by Andrew Mandelbaum

The sort of political currency Trump has been printing and the economy of The Enemy it empowers cannot be easily disconnected from responsibility for the environment that breeds Roof-isms. This is a basic historically verifiable fact. The sort of violence that these outliers have picked up is exactly what these ideas do. It is their specialty. That these fellows are canary in the coal mine early bird specials doesn't form an alibi.

The Zappa defense is silly. Musicians have never used the mechanisms of constructed myths of internal danger, lost greatness, and the monopolization of truth in their own person to kill millions. Authoritarian figures have.

My stance is unchanged.

You once said I wasn't responding to what you were actually saying. I kind of feel the same way, not just in reference to you, Andrew.

What have I actually said in my posts? I've been urging people to remain objective, to keep a cool head, and to keep watch. I've also said Trump will probably be impeached. I've also said I don't support him, and that I'd be celebrating along with everyone else if he IS impeached. I've also said I don't like him. I've also insulted him quite a few times.

Conversation cited by the author of the article in question was about gun control and the Second Amendment:

Donald Trump’s comment on Tuesday about how “Second Amendment people” could stop Hillary Clinton if she gets elected is hardly subtle. This is a clear provocation to commit murder, however he and his handlers may try to spin it.

At a rally in Wilmington, N.C. , Trump told the crowd that “Hillary wants to abolish — essentially abolish the Second Amendment.” Of course, this isn’t true. This is how Trump and his NRA friends refer to people who want tougher gun control laws. But that wasn’t the most inflammatory thing he said.

“And if she gets to pick her judges,” Trump went on. “Nothing you can do, folks.”

Then his lack of impulse control kicked in:

“Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is,” he added.

He was suggesting that “Second Amendment people” — clearly, gun owners — deal with Hillary before she gets to appoint Supreme Court justices who will permit strong gun laws. And he didn’t mean invite her to an NRA meeting.

I've bolded the Trump bits. Notice that the conversation was in reference to the Second Amendment. Notice he says Hillary wants to abolish the Second Amendment, etc. Now that may or may not be true, but it doesn't matter insofar as the point I was making, which is simple: the author of the article is being nothing short of hysterical in stating, as he does at the top of the article, that Trump is making a "clear provocation to commit murder." (I underlined that bit in the quote).

No, no he wasn't.

Most likely he was suggesting that people who spend their time lobbying for and protecting their second amendment right will ratchet up their efforts, being as Hillary (in his mind, anyway) was out to abolish that right.

You can say that some nutter out there with an itchy finger might take those words as an incitement to kill Hillary—that I agree with, but it doesn't mean that Trump was literally trying to get someone to kill her. If he wanted to do that, he could have done so behind the scenes, and who the hell knows, maybe he did! But I doubt it, since his greatest yen was to defeat her and win the election.

Please pay attention to what I'm actually writing. YES, his unpremeditated mutterings are beneath his office and his responsibility. That's the second time I'll say that, but being an unguarded pep-talking coach of a POTUS does not mean he's out to kill millions. He's a plain-talking business man who could probably sell candles in hell, but he's no Hitler. He hasn't got the brains (or the sheer hatred and demented passion) for it.

He'll be ousted soon enough.

[Michael Cantor]

He was hinting, in his cruel and stupid and unclear way, that somebody should shoot Hillary.

I've stopped posting on this thread because it's deteriorated into Conversations with William. But every once in a while I can't ignore something.

[Nigel Mace]

E vero, Michael!

[William A. Baurle]

Originally Posted by Michael Cantor

He was hinting, in his cruel and stupid and unclear way, that somebody should shoot Hillary.

I've stopped posting on this thread because it's deteriorated into Conversations with William. But every once in a while I can't ignore something.

Nice of you to drop by, in your usual cruel and stupid and unclear way, Michael.

Sorry, couldn't resist. You're not stupid or cruel, though you do like to be sideways and indirect.

I'll be by later to respond more fully. Gotta go to work.

Where's everyone's contributions to Ralph's Black History Month thread?

[William A. Baurle]

Alright, Michael, I'll give in. Maybe you're right.

But if a man running for POTUS is dumb enough to drop a hint that somebody ought to shoot his running mate, what are the chances that he'll last long enough as President to initiate an actual fascist state? I say his chances are mighty slim. You gotta have something on the ball to carry that kind of nuttiness all the way through. And/or, you need a silver-tongued demon like Goebbels as your right hand man. Has he got someone like that in his entourage? What do I know, maybe he does. We'll see.

What I really think is that if he really wanted her offed, he could have had it done. What are the odds that a billionaire couldn't get that done? Much more likely is that he wanted, most of all, to beat Hillary in the election. He seems like the kind of knuckle-dragger that would like nothing better than to defeat a woman in a race for the presidency, especially the wife of a former president. This was like a blown up version of Billie Jean King and Bobbie Riggs, only this time the piggy won.

But I could be wrong.

Nigel, sorry, I'm from Arizona. Us folk don't unnerstand none of that foriner talk, reckin.

Andrew, sorry this deteriorated into Conversations with William. Just remember, I'm not defending a man so much as defending my principles. I'll try and butt out.

But seriously, all that venom vented in the News of the Day threads, and virtually no-one has anything to contribute to Ralph's Black History Month thread? So far just Gregory, Julie, and I have added something. That's just baffling and sad. Is it because I've tried to get y'all to add something that you resist? Well that's even more baffling. Can't be. Something is rotten in Denmark.

You don't need to post your own poem, you can post a favorite poem by a black poet. Ralph has already said he didn't see any problem with that, and it would be in the spirit of the thread.

Only 10 days left.