Does what the President (allegedly) says, matter?


So, I suppose this group believes that Democrats concocted a scheme to lie and accuse Trump of calling Hati and Africa a sh**hole while in the presence of Republicans and staffers?

For those of you who believe he said it and he’s just lying about it, does it matter what the President says? I mean setting aside his justification (or does the justification make it right).

Just interested in what you guys think about this story.


First of all . . . NO . . . I don’t think anyone here believes the Dems " . . . concocted a scheme to lie and accuse Trump of calling Hati and Africa a sh**hole while in the presence of Republicans and staffers". At least I don’t.

(Interesting to me that this . . . i.e. the right thinks the Dems are concocting lying schemes against Trump . . . is one of your frequent themes, as if the right is a bunch of Alex Jones conspiracy theorists. Do the Dems run some POLITICAL operations against Trump? Sure . . . just as the Pubs run POLITICAL operations against the Dems.)

Now . . . as far as Trump’s language? This doesn’t make it any less unpleasant, but why all the focus on Trump’s vulgarity, when Hillary can cuss up a storm that would make Trump look like an angel?

And Trump on Haiti? Klinton (their foundation) did a lot worse to Haiti than just call it names.


I’m not sure what you mean, can you give me an example?

You don’t see a problem calling two predominantly black places (Hati, a country and Africa a continent) a "sh**hole?

Then following up with a desire to have more people from Norway, a country of predominantly white people and Asia, a continent of lots of kinds of people (but few black ethnic areas).

Even if you think the story isn’t worth reporting, it’s a stupid thing to say just because of the poor optics. Now, I can see the responses including something like… “Trump is just trolling Dems”. That might work, but Pubs have also condemned him. Course, those Pubs are Rhino’s, right?

We all can, but I don’t do it at company meetings and Trump shouldn’t do it when having a meeting with people he can’t trust to keep his seemingly racist comments to himself. Even if you argue he’s not being racist, he should have been smart enough to realize that his opposition would capitalize on it and create a plausible explanation that his comment is racist and by extension the accusation that he is racist.

So now your saying that because Hillary allegedly did something to Haitians that it makes Trumps alleged comments ok? Or are you asking me about how I feel about what the Clintons did with respect to Hati?


What was “racist” about PRESIDENT Trump’s alleged comments?


Why was it wrong for Clinton to call Trump voters deplorables?

Why, if there’s nothing wrong with what he said, why does he deny it now?


Do you agree with Trump’s statement? Does it make you proud as an American?


This is what happened according to information given to Mark Simone from people in attendance:

A list of the countries having TPS (temporary protected status) was read off. The list consists of ElSalvador, Haiti, Honduras, Nepal, Nicaragua, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. The President’s comments were referring to the entire list, Haiti and African countries were not singled out. SO MUCH FOR ANY RACIST IMPLICATIONS.

As to the substance of the comments:

These countries are shitholes, just like Detroit, the south side of Chicago, the barrio of LA, downtown Albuquerque and a host of other American cities after decades of compassionate, progressive, democrat policies and administration.

Yes, csbrown, I agree with the President’s statements and he continues to make me proud as an American.

PS I am surprised that the Pendragon of the Objective Moral Order hasn’t chimed in on this thread yet. You know, that guy with the avatar of an 18th century philosopher. I miss his insults.


Abraham Lincoln: "There is nothing to make an Englishman shit quicker than the sight of General George Washington."
Barack Obama: “Obama really drew the ire of the pious, calling opponent Mitt Romney a ‘bullshitter.’
Joe Biden: "This is a big fking deal."
Dick Cheney: “Cheney reportedly told Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy to ‘go f
k [himself]’”
George W. Bush: “Commented on the presence of New York Times reporter Adam Clymer. Believing he had an audience of one, Bush called Clymer a ‘major-league asshole.’”
Barack Obama: "I don’t think I should take any sht from anybody on that, do you?"
Richard Nixon: “The Watergate tapes put the phrase ‘expletive deleted’ on the map.”
Lyndon Johnson: "I do know the difference between chicken sh
t and chicken salad,"
John F. Kennedy: "This is obviously a f**k-up."
Harry Truman: “In Truman’s eyes, General Douglas MacArthur was a “dumb son of a bitch,” and Nixon was ‘a shifty-eyed goddamned liar.’”

I don’t have a source right now but will find it if need be. Barack Obama on seeing the bust of Winston Churchill in the Oval Office: “Get that f***ing thing out of here.”


Not Nigeria; it’s growing tremendously, it’s on track to be one if not the economic leader of the Continent.

Further, immigrants we tend to get from there are highly functional; greatly outperforming our own African-Americans. Yes, we have data on that.

Even if this was just an issue of culture (it’s not, personality traits are also at play), bringing them in, works in our favor. The zeitgeist, the spirit of the moment in Nigeria right now, is that if you work hard, you’ll prosper. There’s no greater American attitude.

That attitude is alot more healthy than many European nations I could point to.


When the hell did we start talking about Nigeria and what does it have to do with this topic? I’m not sure if your post even qualifies as a red herring.


His comments included Nigeria:

He also contrasted them against immigrants from Norway as “what should be” the preference.

I say, contrast what he says against Amy Chua, writer of Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, and
The Triple Package: How Three Unlikely Traits Explain the Rise and Fall of Cultural Groups in America.

…who includes Nigerians in her own list of cultures which outperform others… pretty dramatically.

Trump here is buying into a stereotype that Africans are simply helpless, when it actually depends on where you’re looking.

Nigerians, Ghanans, Botswanans are people I’d take over most Eastern and Southern Europeans.

And the French. Because the French suck.


Ok,Slim, I hadn’t read the Hindustantimes yet today. I’ll take your word for the Nigerian economic boom. I’m sure there are many Nigerians who could contribute to America and assimilate, a merit based system will do that. A carte blanch system like the (seemingly permanent) Temporary Protected Status system will get many Email Scammers, mud hut dwellers and probably some Boko Haram. This was the President’s point, made in his own unique way.


Lagos is prospering BECAUSE of the input into its economy by U.S. petroleum companies like Exxon-Mobil. Like other African countries, I fully expect it to eventually “nationalize” it’s oil production, kick out the American companies and fall into typical failure like Zimbabwe did or like Venezuela.


[quote=“csbrown28, post:6, topic:70027, full:true”]
Do you agree with Trump’s statement? Does it make you proud as an American?

Yes. I agree that the countries touted ARE, for the most part, shitholes. Do you deny it? One CNN reportress, when asked if she’d rather live in Norway or Haiti, claimed she couldn’t decide because both counties had “good things” about them. She’s obviously never been even CLOSE to Haiti. The population has literally denuded the country of trees while the Dominican Republic somehow has managed to remain lush. Everyone but the very top live in abject poverty, literally scavaging for food. The Red Cross and other blood banks will not accept a blood donation from anyone who admits to recently having traveled to Haiti until it’s first been HIV tested. There’s a REASON for that.


Yes… Government bureaucrats somehow know who the productive workers are…

Because y’know, none of them slack off.


I do regard the choice of words (real or imagined; I lean toward real in this case) to be poor (and one I’ve been guilty of using). But the sentiment I believe is accurate.

Are you saying that predominantly black countries/continents should be shielded from harsh criticism on the basis of the color of their skin?

“Seeming” to who? PC cops? Race baiters? BLM? In those three cases, who cares?

Since many (possibly most) voted for Trump out of desparation to not get her, it was an insult and lie.

Imagine that; Hillary lied. Who knew…


Nope, but I think there is a certain amount of decorum that all President’s should use.

But what criticism are you speaking of? If a country is the third world, it doesn’t mean that people that come here aren’t intelligent or incapable of learning.

I’m going to go out on a limb here and let you prove me wrong, but I’m going to guess that immigrants from places like Hati when given the opportunity, excellent vs their American counterparts.

The President is just clinging to racial stereotypes.

Now you might make the distinction and say that the President is an ignorant racist rather than an overt racist, but he’s still a racist.

How about other nations, some of which we rely on for cooperation in the war against terrorism? How about voters who become ever more motivated to cast a vote simple as their own way to demonstrate a rebuke of DJT?

I’m NOT a progressive, but the more this silliness goes on the farther the shift to the left is going to come.

You had nothing to worry about your 2cd amendment rights under Obama, but if a raging progressive takes office, I suspect that will change.

As are the ignorant assumptions made by the President and the unspoken assertion that people that immigrate from poor countries will take more from the system then they will add to it.


It’s the really the adoption of the post-modern idea that everything comes back to culture.

Culture does influence people, and effects their effectiveness, but it’s not the only thing at play.

Biological, in-built personality traits are also at play, and every population on earth, has a portion of the people with the personality traits who will, under almost any circumstance, float towards the top.

People with higher trait Conscientiousness, and Openness to ideas/experience.

And you don’t know who those people are, simply by going off their work skills or education. It may be they haven’t cultivated those things yet, because their home culture didn’t provide the means to access/express it.

But once you give them fertile ground to operate in, like ours, those personality traits then do start to express themselves.

It explains to a wide degree why 1st and 2nd generation immigrants (because people with the traits are more likely to pass it on), are disproportionately the entrepreneurs and industry tycoons, in every country. To include ours.


I don’t think I disagree with any of that.


The other idea for "why 2nd generation immigrants? ", is that they’re in a better position not to simply have those traits, but to experience the rights things to turn those traits on.

There are proteins in your brain, that represent certain, discrete cognitive abilities, proteins that stay dormant until such time as you encounter a situation that calls out for them.

And once you’ve been in a situation that wakes those proteins up, you then have those capabilities for the rest of your life.

Contentiousness then, in many cases, is about someone palpably seeing others or themselves occupying rock bottom, and deciding “I must do everything that I can to avoid that.

Thus, it could very well be, that it’s the proteins they inherent from their parents that in-build the capacity, then it’s the situation ( and their parents insistence let’s say), that awakens the capacity.

Hence why there’s a bit of a 3rd/4th generation drop-off. The necessity to turn on those proteins by that generation, isn’t quite there.