Donald Trump Vent Thread

[Lurker]

First topic message reminder :

[Lurker]

['Wolfie]

The picture on the right, when he was making fun of a disabled journalist?  That was the moment it hit me just what an unredeemably vile, sub human piece of utter filth he was.   How he had no soul, no humanity, nothing but greed, emptiness and blackness surrounding him.  I watched him egg those people on to be as despicable as he was and knew that the filth would come crawling out of the woodwork to follow him, like flies on a corpse.

oh, please

1)  the guy he was talking about NEVER waves his arm about cos he can't move it
2)  DT does that all the time (waves his arms about wildly when talking about others) basically implying that his opponent is in a flap

this has been debunked so many times it has become boring

You're a deliberate liar,  gelico; pure and simple...

Trump has been abusing disabled people all his life..  Fact.

Trump supports paedophiles..   Fact.

You support and cheer on Trump..

'Nuff said.

[nicko]

Prove it !

By the way, I don't like trump, but I don't like bullshit lies either.

[Original Quill]

Prove it !

      By the way, I don't like trump,   but I don't like bullshit lies either.

You're also too quick to judge, nicko.

A whore is generally one who takes money for sex. The point made by both wolf and sassy is that Melania fits the definition, only in a different setting. Distilled down, a woman who only marries for money is taking money for sex. The only difference is that she has a marriage license.

Would you be happier if they said she is a licensed whore?

The other issue is, sassy is right when she points out that Michelle Obama was much more virtuous and righteous than Melania, yet she was called a whore. You try to avoid this point by arguing that you never raised Michelle Obama.

Once you establish the rule, you can't cherry-pick the results to suit your point. If you condemn calling one a whore, you've got to condemn all cases where someone unfairly calls a woman a whore. The attack on first ladies initially began with Michelle, and you are telling us you were silent?? Shame on you...you betray your own rule. Fake moralist, I says.

[nicko]

I never call ANY woman a whore, how would you feel if your Wife was called a Whore?

[Original Quill]

I never call ANY woman a whore,   how would you feel if your Wife was called a Whore?

You're evading the point. You criticize those for calling Melenia a whore, yet you weren't there when Michelle was treated the same. You cherry-pick by results.

Makes you look like a false soldier in your own cause, eh?

[eddie]

I don't recall anyone ever calling Michelle Obama a whore. Perhaps I'm wrong.

[Cass]

I don't recall anyone ever calling Michelle Obama a whore. Perhaps I'm wrong.

Oh they did. And a man. And a monkey.

[Original Quill]

I don't recall anyone ever calling Michelle Obama a whore. Perhaps I'm wrong.

The Internet is well-populated.  I saw it many times, and many more malicious things.

Really, the individual adjective is less important than the rancor, and you saw plenty of that with Michele Obama.  She is truly a righteous person, and she was maligned merely because she is black...an uppity negress.

Contrariwise, I think the reason why people speak up for Melenia is she is a caucasion female, with distinctly teutonic features...in other words, she looks northern European, like US!

[Cass]

I don't recall anyone ever calling Michelle Obama a whore. Perhaps I'm wrong.

The Internet is well-populated.  I saw it many times, and many more malicious things.

Really, the individual adjective is less important than the rancor, and you saw plenty of that with Michele Obama.  She is truly a righteous person, and she was maligned merely because she was black...an uppity negress.

Contrariwise, I think the reason why people speak up for Melenia is she is a caucasion female, with distinctly teutonic features...in other words, she looks northern European, like US!

That is pretty much nail on head.

[Lurker]

Anti-Christ Donald Trump proves how stupid he is by starting a Muslim world war. The idiot is moving the US embassy to Jerusalem and thumbing his nose at thousands of years of history and pissing off the Muslim world prompting WW III.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-recognizes-jerusalem-israel-s-capital-n827096

[Lurker]

Miss Sarah Huckabee Sanders Piggy

[Guest]

I don't recall anyone ever calling Michelle Obama a whore. Perhaps I'm wrong.

she's been called a whole bunch of names, to be fair eddie. i'm sure i've heard that awful Gavin McInnes call her names.

the fact is though, they met at work, roughly the same age, they courted and got engaged. ''He didn't promise me riches just an interesting life''. she has always behaved with dignity as the first lady.

whereas, trump could well be melania's sugar daddy sort of thing

anyhoos, for those who give it out should also be able to take it in return, is my view

[Cass]

I don't recall anyone ever calling Michelle Obama a whore. Perhaps I'm wrong.

she's been called a whole bunch of names, to be fair eddie.  i'm sure i've heard that awful Gavin McInnes call her names.

the fact is though, they met at work, roughly the same age, they courted and got engaged.  ''He didn't promise me riches just an interesting life''.  she has always behaved with dignity as the first lady.

whereas, trump could well be melania's sugar daddy sort of thing

anyhoos, for those who give it out should also be able to take it in return, is my view

Well said. Have a thingy.

[Guest]

she's been called a whole bunch of names, to be fair eddie.  i'm sure i've heard that awful Gavin McInnes call her names.

the fact is though, they met at work, roughly the same age, they courted and got engaged.  ''He didn't promise me riches just an interesting life''.  she has always behaved with dignity as the first lady.

whereas, trump could well be melania's sugar daddy sort of thing

anyhoos, for those who give it out should also be able to take it in return, is my view

Well said. Have a thingy.

thingy,,,,,lol

just gave you back a thingy

[nicko]

Just read your reply Quill, answer the question, "would you like your Wife to be called a Whore?" Don't make my question into a question of your own, would you like it, yes or no.?

[SEXY MAMA]

C.u.n.t.

[Lurker]

[Original Quill]

Just read your reply Quill,    answer the question,    "would you like your Wife to be called a Whore?"   Don't make my question into a question of your own, would you like it,  yes or no.?

I've not seen your question until this post.

First tell me why that is relevant. I'm not the president. It just seems to be an off-point intro into an insult-fest. Does it lead to a better analysis to make it personal? Not that I'm overly sensitive, but it does destroy the spirit of the thread. So far, this discussion has been distinguished by it's lack of insults. Is that about to change?

To the question: I'm not married, so there being no wife it's impossible to answer. Suppose, hypothetically, I had married an ex-prostitute. Would that change my answer? It would have to. So, until we fill in the role there is no answer.

Now you. You have avoided my question. As I said above, prostitution is not the issue. It is the animus. Why, if your rule is to object to offensive stories and adjectives about a first lady, were you not at the walls in defense of Michelle Obama? Why did you compromise your standards? Was it because of your politics? Or was it because of subliminal feelings you have about the African race? You are obsessed because the tutonic lady is attacked, but silent when the black lady is attacked. That begs an explanation.

[Fred Moletrousers]

The problem is, as I see it, that calling a woman a "whore" is today more a matter of hurtfully intentional gratuitous insult than of occupational accuracy, particularly in the social media.

We have all seen spitting, baying mobs of ultra Left demonstrators and agitators screaming "whore" at female Tory politicians - and similarly intimidating mobs of far Right demonstrators and agitators screaming "whore" at female Labour politicians.

If that's the sort of impression that Trump's detractors in this forum are happy to convey of themselves in their obsessive traducement of the present First Lady, then that is up to them. But I personally am no more inclined to join in vicious attacks on Melania Trump than I would have been in joining in vicious attacks on Michele Obama had I seen any of them - just one reason being that I have seen and read for myself  little about the background of either of them and would not necessarily have believed any of it, particularly given the sort of histrionic and malicious rubbish that regularly appears online.

Having said that, Trump himself is a legitimate target of hatred in my opinion. The stupid bastard has just sown the seeds of another Middle East war because much as I support and admire the Israelis, I know that Jerusalem, which I know somewhat if not particularly well, can never be the internationally-accepted capital city of one side or the other because of its uniquely significant religious and historic status.

[Original Quill]

If that's the sort of impression that Trump's detractors in this forum are happy to convey of themselves in their obsessive traducement of the present First Lady, then that is up to them.

I agree that Republicans have made legitimate the trashing of the first lady (and the first family) of the president.  What made them feel it was acceptable is the color of the incumbents.  Blacks are traditionally abused in America.  By now it's been that way for nine years.  What are you going to do?  

It was originally a media standard: the family is off-limits.  But now, it has been normalized.  The fault appears to be the rise of the alt.right press, and new standards of verbal warfare.  Truth is irrelevant, and spin is all that matters.  Moreover, there is no longer an 'off-limits'.  Adjectives and abuse of Michelle Obama has made it de rigueur to spin about any first lady.

In Trump-world, the laws of the universe are no longer the same.

[Fred Moletrousers]

If that's the sort of impression that Trump's detractors in this forum are happy to convey of themselves in their obsessive traducement of the present First Lady, then that is up to them.

I agree that Republicans have made legitimate the trashing of the first lady (and the first family) of the president.  What made them feel it was acceptable is the color of the incumbents.  Blacks are traditionally abused in America.  By now it's been that way for nine years.  What are you going to do?  

It was originally a media standard: the family is off-limits.  But now, it has been normalized.  The fault appears to be the rise of the alt.right press, and new standards of verbal warfare.  Truth is irrelevant, and spin is all that matters.  Moreover, there is no longer an 'off-limits'.  Adjectives and abuse of Michelle Obama has made it de rigueur to spin about any first lady.

In Trump-world, the laws of the universe are no longer the same.

Well, Quill, I'm not going to present myself as either a paragon of online virtue or a shy retiring violet when it comes to expressing an opinion on any matter, but as I can in all honesty say that I never contributed to any abuse of Michelle Obama (indeed, the only post I can remember making about the lady was that she was beautiful, poised, elegant and reminded me of Jackie Kennedy) I am certainly not going to join in all the opprobrium of the present First Lady.

And use of the word "whore" against any woman is an anathema to me, and in that respect I am far more in sympathy with Nicko's views than those of anyone else.

Nor have I ever been abusive towards black people in America - or anywhere else.

And on that basis I shall play no further part in this debate.

[Original Quill]

I agree that Republicans have made legitimate the trashing of the first lady (and the first family) of the president.  What made them feel it was acceptable is the color of the incumbents.  Blacks are traditionally abused in America.  By now it's been that way for nine years.  What are you going to do?  

It was originally a media standard: the family is off-limits.  But now, it has been normalized.  The fault appears to be the rise of the alt.right press, and new standards of verbal warfare.  Truth is irrelevant, and spin is all that matters.  Moreover, there is no longer an 'off-limits'.  Adjectives and abuse of Michelle Obama has made it de rigueur to spin about any first lady.

In Trump-world, the laws of the universe are no longer the same.

Well, Quill, I'm not going to present myself as either a paragon of online virtue or a shy retiring violet when it comes to expressing an opinion on any matter, but as I can in all honesty say that I never contributed to any abuse of Michelle Obama (indeed, the only post I can remember making about the lady was that she was beautiful, poised, elegant and reminded me of Jackie Kennedy) I am certainly not going to join in all the opprobrium of the present First Lady.

The point is not about you.  Your first-person viewpoint, while always interesting, is not where the action is.

The way it works is a small corner of the world starts it, and then we come in and take off with it.  It's not truth in the original fact, but truth in the story we take up.

The distortion of the original fact started with attacks on Michelle Obama.  It was perpetuated second-hand by nine years of insults, and now it slips over to Melania.  It was inevitable.

And use of the word "whore" against any woman is an anathema to me, and in that respect I am far more in sympathy with Nicko's views than those of anyone else.

Of course.  Again, it's not the word, but the animus.

Nor have I ever been abusive towards black people in America - or anywhere else.

And on that basis I shall play no further part in this debate.

The evil is not in you personally, it's out there.  That's why I resist temptations to personalize the issue, a la nicko's comments.  The single person does not make the point.  I speak of themes and movements, because they are bigger.  They are the problem.

We are undergoing a movement of disrespect.  We have Trump to thank for spreading it, but the alt-right for inventing it.  We can't pick a single slice out of the middle of the loaf, and say it started with this one.  It started with the beginning of the process.

[nicko]

I'v never said anything about Mrs Obama, I think she's a nice looking Woman, I think Mrs Trump is a nice looking Woman. I would never call either a Whore, Iwould never call any Woman a whore. Your not Married Quill, What if some one called your Mother a Whore? Would you like it?

I'm waiting for a woman on this Forum to condemn it. Seems they all agree with calling her a Whore !

[Original Quill]

I'v never said anything about Mrs Obama,    I think she's a nice looking Woman,    I think Mrs Trump is a nice looking Woman.   I would never call either a Whore, Iwould never call any Woman a whore.   Your not Married Quill,    What if some one called your Mother a Whore?   Would you like it?

But you see, you did personalize it.  You still are.  To personalize it is to bring it down to specifics.  That misses the point.  Themes and movements are general, and you can't generalize about specifics.  

So, to Fred I say: It's not about you.  And to you, nicko, I say: It's not about me, either.  It's about the theme.  We live in an age of purposeful disrespect.  After Michelle Obama, to speak with disrespect about a president's wife is de rigueur.  

Once the toothpaste is out of the tube, you can't put it back.

[Fred Moletrousers]

Well, Quill, I'm not going to present myself as either a paragon of online virtue or a shy retiring violet when it comes to expressing an opinion on any matter, but as I can in all honesty say that I never contributed to any abuse of Michelle Obama (indeed, the only post I can remember making about the lady was that she was beautiful, poised, elegant and reminded me of Jackie Kennedy) I am certainly not going to join in all the opprobrium of the present First Lady.

The point is not about you.  Your first-person viewpoint, while always interesting, is not where the action is.

The way it works is a small corner of the world starts it, and then we come in and take off with it.  It's not truth in the original fact, but truth in the story we take up.

The distortion of the original fact started with attacks on Michelle Obama.  It was perpetuated second-hand by nine years of insults, and now it slips over to Melania.  It was inevitable.

And use of the word "whore" against any woman is an anathema to me, and in that respect I am far more in sympathy with Nicko's views than those of anyone else.

Of course.  Again, it's not the word, but the animus.

Nor have I ever been abusive towards black people in America - or anywhere else.

And on that basis I shall play no further part in this debate.

The evil is not in you personally, it's out there.  That's why I resist temptations to personalize the issue, a la nicko's comments.  The single person does not make the point.  I speak of themes and movements, because they are bigger.  They are the problem.

We are undergoing a movement of disrespect.  We have Trump to thank for spreading it, but the alt-right for inventing it.  We can't pick a single slice out of the middle of the loaf, and say it started with this one.  It started with the beginning of the process.

D'accord, Quill...but this is a board for the expression of personal opinions. I have no remit to act as a mouthpiece for party political or institutional opinions - and nor would I - so I can only react as I do.

[Original Quill]

D'accord, Quill...but this is a board for the expression of personal opinions. I have no remit to act as a mouthpiece for party political or institutional opinions - and nor would I - so I can only react as I do.

Personal opinions about public matters.  The place is called 'NewsFixBoard'...emphasis on news.  You may not have a remit to be a spokesman, but you have a remit not to go off topic and into the personal.

It's a fine line, but when you start talking about yourself, as well as about your interloqutur, you no longer have a topic.

[Lurker]

Trump supporter and Roy Moore supporter...

[Fred Moletrousers]

D'accord, Quill...but this is a board for the expression of personal opinions. I have no remit to act as a mouthpiece for party political or institutional opinions - and nor would I - so I can only react as I do.

Personal opinions about public matters.  The place is called 'NewsFixBoard'...emphasis on news.  You may not have a remit to be a spokesman, but you have a remit not to go off topic and into the personal.

It's a fine line, but when you start talking about yourself, as well as about your interloqutur, you no longer have a topic.

So expressing an opinion on a specific point raised by a poster in a forum, the purpose of which is for the exchange of opinions, and explaining just why that opinion is held is "going off topic and into the personal"?

And NewsFixBoard may well have "an emphasis on news", but my impression was that the dissemination of news is actually meant to solicit, er, opinions.

Perhaps we are expected to allow Lurker to rant (his word) away about Trump et al in the absence of any reaction other than a green or red line.

What a curious concept.

[Andy]

I agree that Republicans have made legitimate the trashing of the first lady (and the first family) of the president.  What made them feel it was acceptable is the color of the incumbents.  Blacks are traditionally abused in America.  By now it's been that way for nine years.  What are you going to do?  

It was originally a media standard: the family is off-limits.  But now, it has been normalized.  The fault appears to be the rise of the alt.right press, and new standards of verbal warfare.  Truth is irrelevant, and spin is all that matters.  Moreover, there is no longer an 'off-limits'.  Adjectives and abuse of Michelle Obama has made it de rigueur to spin about any first lady.

In Trump-world, the laws of the universe are no longer the same.

Well, Quill, I'm not going to present myself as either a paragon of online virtue or a shy retiring violet when it comes to expressing an opinion on any matter, but as I can in all honesty say that I never contributed to any abuse of Michelle Obama (indeed, the only post I can remember making about the lady was that she was beautiful, poised, elegant and reminded me of Jackie Kennedy) I am certainly not going to join in all the opprobrium of the present First Lady.

And use of the word "whore" against any woman is an anathema to me, and in that respect I am far more in sympathy with Nicko's views than those of anyone else.

Nor have I ever been abusive towards black people in America - or anywhere else.

And on that basis I shall play no further part in this debate.

Whore is not a description to be banded around casually about women.
But Katie Hopkins, she who was photographed being rear ended by someone other than her hubby over a farm gate, qualifies on many counts.
Not least she is a hate filled , vile bitch.

[Fred Moletrousers]

Well, Quill, I'm not going to present myself as either a paragon of online virtue or a shy retiring violet when it comes to expressing an opinion on any matter, but as I can in all honesty say that I never contributed to any abuse of Michelle Obama (indeed, the only post I can remember making about the lady was that she was beautiful, poised, elegant and reminded me of Jackie Kennedy) I am certainly not going to join in all the opprobrium of the present First Lady.

And use of the word "whore" against any woman is an anathema to me, and in that respect I am far more in sympathy with Nicko's views than those of anyone else.

Nor have I ever been abusive towards black people in America - or anywhere else.

And on that basis I shall play no further part in this debate.

Whore is not a description  to be banded around casually about  women.
But Katie Hopkins, she who was photographed  being rear ended by someone other than her hubby over a farm gate, qualifies on many counts.
Not least she is a hate filled , vile bitch.

With respect, what have the bucolic sexual activities of Katie Hopkins got to do with a forum contretemps over whether it is right and proper to refer to the First Lady of the United States of America (or any woman, for that matter) as a whore?

Applying your "farm gate" standards to Hopkins might reasonably give me the excuse to apply a similarly obscure reference to Diane Abbott, a motorcycle and the present leader of the Labour Party, but I prefer to not to.

[Original Quill]

With respect, what have the bucolic sexual activities of Katie Hopkins got to do with a forum contretemps over whether it is right and proper to refer to the First Lady of the United States of America (or any woman, for that matter) as a whore?

I don't understand why you are still arguing this, Fred.  Your ethical framework is over two years old.  Trump changed the vocabulary as well as the standards.

If you don't like first whore, try first pussy.

[Fred Moletrousers]

With respect, what have the bucolic sexual activities of Katie Hopkins got to do with a forum contretemps over whether it is right and proper to refer to the First Lady of the United States of America (or any woman, for that matter) as a whore?

I don't understand why you are still arguing this, Fred.  Your ethical framework is over two years old.  Trump changed the vocabulary as well as the standards.

If you don't like First Whore, try First Pussy.

1. I am "arguing it" because use of the word "whore" when referring to a woman, whether she is the First Lady of the USA or the controversial British journalist Katie Hopkins is in my opinion unacceptable.

2. Trump did not "change the vocabulary as well as the standards" in the United Kingdom - and I happen to live in the United Kingdom.

3. I am experiencing some difficulty in comprehending the rationale behind Andy's suggestion that a woman journalist who was allegedly rogered over a farm gate should qualify as a whore, while a woman politician who allegedly indulged in, er, nooky on a motor cycle holiday with a married politician who has since rewarded her with the job of Opposition shadow to one of the four great offices of state in the British Parliament, should not qualify as a whore.

The term "First Pussy" reminds me too much of the seriously strange being called "Catman"...so I'll pass up on that as well!

[Andy]

Michelle Obama is a stunning woman, both in terms of beauty, intelligence and humanity.
I suspect the Trumpettes will start/ have already started a denigrating smear campaign against her, in the fear that she will stand against Trump ( or the GOP) leader at the the next election.
If she does, I think she will be a popular leader, as she ticks all the boxes that Hilary didn't.
My guess is Trump wont be leader in 3 years time, as he will be wearing a boiler suit that matches his wig.

[Lurker]

Alabama trailer park trash...

[nicko]

Very funny,................shit for brains !

[Andy]

Alabama trailer park trash...

Did she take her teeth out to give Don a smooth BJ, or did she just not fancy his 2"er in her gob, so put her false gnashers around it.

[Original Quill]

2. Trump did not "change the vocabulary as well as the standards" in the United Kingdom - and I happen to live in the United Kingdom.

In an age of video clips and the Internet, Trump has changed the English language. You and I are already in the past.

[Original Quill]

Alabama trailer park trash...

She looks like my brother's third ex-wife, from Georgia.

[nicko]

I n the mean time, Trump is still POTUS AND YOU CAN'T DO A THING ABOUT IT !
Bye the way, I think trump is an idiot !All you pathetic geranium can do is take the piss out of his Wife,

and that will get you what?

[Original Quill]

I n the mean time,  Trump is still POTUS AND YOU CAN'T DO A THING ABOUT IT !    
          Bye the way, I think trump is an idiot !All you pathetic geranium can do is take the piss out of his Wife,

and that will get you what?

You also think all those who teach at the Royal Academy at Sandhurst are idiots. What now are we to believe...that you were never in the military?

[nicko]

When did I say that teachers at the Academy were idiots? I think, no, I know that you make things up,
like you were a Lawyer or Judge or something. For someone who claims to be a member of the Courts your opinions should have had you disbarred for racial hatred.

[Original Quill]

When did I say that teachers at the Academy were idiots?     I think, no, I know that you make things up,
like you were a Lawyer or Judge or something.   For someone who claims to be a member of the Courts your opinions should have had you disbarred for racial hatred.  

Yes, you did. You were arguing against John Keegan, arguing that your experience in the Falklands was superior to his thinking.

[nicko]

Sorry Quill, I don't remember that, perhaps you or someone could bring it up and prove it ?

[Original Quill]

Sorry Quill, I don't remember that, perhaps you or someone could bring it up and prove it ?

Maybe you were in over your head.  Do you recall, in the midst of a debate between Didge and myself, you came in with a comment that unless you were in the Falklands war, you were not proficient in military matters?

At that moments you were trampling upon the ideas of one who teaches at Sandhurst.  I was just the conduit.

[nicko]

You do talk some bollocks Quill, that's not what I meant and you know it. Stick to arguing with Smelly, I enjoy you being thrashed !

[Original Quill]

You do talk some bollocks Quill, that's not what I meant and you know it.     Stick to arguing with Smelly, I enjoy you being thrashed !

The problem is, nicko, that you don't pay attention.  Now, you cop a plea that "that's not what I meant and you know it".  

Whose fault is that?  Am I responsible for giving you review lessons, or should you just pay attention in class!? That's the conversation we were having.

[nicko]

[Original Quill]

[Lurker]

Even Darth Vader hates the orange-faced dummy...

[Sponsored content]