Trump's remarks | Imamother

↑ Fox ↓

Mon, Aug 21 2017, 9:02 am

marina wrote:

The Serial Killer Conference this year had about 25-50 attendees, but yeah, the Ventriloquists Association Conference had about 500 participants.

Is this a definitive analysis for you about the risks serial killers pose to our society? Why?

Oh, please! It's a joke. No need for anyone to clutch her pearls or virtue signal by saying, "Well, I don't think Nazis are a joke." Actually, laughing at neo-Nazis and white supremacists would probably be far more effective in disabling their movement than all the counter-protests. Who wants to join a group that's the butt of everyone's jokes?

As for serial killers, they pose a miniscule statistical threat. I can't answer for the ventriloquists.

↑ marina ↓

Mon, Aug 21 2017, 9:24 am

Fox wrote:

Sorry, I guess I no longer know when you are joking.

↑ 33055 ↓

Mon, Aug 21 2017, 1:11 pm

marina wrote:

Here's a review I read that contrasts the varying historical accounts of Dr. Simms' actions:

http://www.urologichistory.mus.....s.pdf

Despite these varying accounts, I think we can agree on two important points: (1) he bought the slaves; (2) black women were not considered full human beings at that time, individuals with their own agency and decision-making power.

Given those two points, it's very difficult to imagine that these women submitted to this surgery without anesthesia, but with informed consent.

In other words, I strongly disagree with your "willing participants" characterization, at least as a term to describe the overall group he worked on.

I can't read your document. The writing is way too small for me.

According to what I read he did not own the slaves he treated and the use of anesthesia was in its infancy being first used by his colleagues the same time as his treatments were being developed, and it was not without controversy. He started treating them before the first successful operations were performed with anesthesia. Remember information traveled slowly in those days. He said He was not aware of a more stable anesthesia at the time.
He did, however, give the women opium for the pain after surgery.

He treated the woman for a terrible debilitating condition.

It is not possible to look at his treatment separate and apart from the unethical institution of slavery. Slave women could not give informed consent for anything. They couldn't give informed consent to, say, get their broken leg fixed. Would it be better to figure out how to treat broken legs on slaves or leave them life long cripples?

I read one of his modern day detractors wriite that slavery was such an abomination that it didn't matter if the slaves no longer suffered this horrible condition.

↑ 33055 ↓

Mon, Aug 21 2017, 1:17 pm

marina wrote:

Quote:

The American Cancer society's purpose is to raise money to cure cancer. If by canceling their event they lost an opportunity for goodwill from Trump for say more money for research, was this the right decision consistent with their mission? Suppose this resulted in more pain, suffering, and death? Is this right because they didn't like the timing of when he condemned the white supremacists and they joined the flow?

Or what if by staying they risked alienating their donor base?

Same with CEOs. I'd like to think that as business leaders, especially if beholden to shareholders, these people acted after a careful analysis of costs and benefits, both short term and long term.

If they acted impulsively, just being like OMG TRUMP IS RLLY BAD DUDE WE GOTTA GO, it would be difficult to imagine how they became CEOs in the first place.

I did write that the donors should look at the purpose of the organization.

Sometimes CEOs are just plain and simply out of touch being fed a leftist slant on the news. Starbucks brand suffered a massive hit when when the CEO announced the hiring of 10,000 immigrants.

↑ WhatFor ↓

Mon, Aug 21 2017, 4:53 pm

Some of the people/entities that are out of touch by thinking that Trump's remarks were inappropriate and are acting like 2 year old babies:

The Rabbinical Council of America
American Friends of Magen David Adom
American Red Cross
American Cancer Society
Cleveland Clinic fla
Susan G. Komen
Salvation Army
Autism Project of PB County
Life/ Leaders in Furthering Education
Palm Beach Zoo
Kravis Center
Kenneth Frazier (Merck CEO)
Kevin Plank (CEO Under Armour)
Brian Krzanich (CEO Intel)
Scott Paul (Alliance for American Manufacturing)
Denise Morrison (CEO, Campbell Soup)
Inge Thulin (3M CEO)
Richard Trumka and Thea Lee (President and former Deputy Chief of staff at AFL-CIO).
The members of the Strategic and Policy forum (including CEOs of Blackstone, GM, Cleveland Clinic, JP Morgan, GE, and more)
Members of the Arts Council
The Anne Frank Center
Ben Shapiro
Marco Rubio
Patrick Tiberi
Jeb Bush
Bob Corker
Cory Gardner
Mitt Romney
The Economist
Naftali Bennet
Yair Lapid
Lindsey Graham
Orrin Hatch
Nancy Pelosi
300 members of the Yale graduating class of 1985

People who are in touch and believe that Trump's remarks were appropriate:

Donald Trump
David Duke (the KKK)
Mike Pence
Steven Mnuchin
Jerry Falwell Jr
Andrew Anglin (founder of Daily Stormer)

↑ marina ↓

Mon, Aug 21 2017, 5:12 pm

Squishy wrote:

If you click on the link, the article downloads as a pdf which you should be able to enlarge as you wish. This is a useful article because it presents the various narratives about this doctor's life.

Several authors apparently note that even after this doctor perfected his treatment, he could not get any white women to agree to treat their horrific conditions, until he used anesthesia.

Also, just think about it yourself. What would you have to be going through right now to let someone operate on your inner organs without any pain killer? I don't think leakage is going to do it for me.

↑ 33055 ↓

Mon, Aug 21 2017, 5:22 pm

WhatFor wrote:

You are being ridiculous.

Acting like babies is not disagreeing with the president. Acting like babies is having crying meltdowns because DT won the presidency or rioting when you don't like a college speaker. Still waiting for the idiots on the left to leave the country like they promised.

Please tell me how each of the above acted like babies. For example, The Economist did what they do and skewered him, but I wouldn't characterize them as acting like babies. Why did you add them to the list?

As I keep saying my biggest fear is the polarization of politics. Most adults in this country don't respect those that get overly dramatic, weep, cry, riot and literally leave work when they don't like something.

↑ 33055 ↓

Mon, Aug 21 2017, 5:46 pm

marina wrote:

I went through childbirth knocked out. I never even experienced a contraction. I would opt for gas at the dentist along with a shot if it was still protocol. I am a firm believer in pain avoidance. And leakage would not do it for me either.

Looking at this through today's lens, of course no one would opt for surgery without anesthesia. For one thing, we have modern hygiene.

But, it was more than just leakage. The leakage caused all kinds of complications because of the unsanitary conditions that slaves lived in. There was no cure for the complications. There was no hope for these women.

We need to look at this at a time when women had babies in the field and resumed work right after. They were subject to the lash. They were subject to unimaginable horrors. It was widely believed that blacks had a higher pain tolerance than whites. He did give then pain meds after.

What he did was not unethical then.

↑ 33055 ↓

Mon, Aug 21 2017, 7:36 pm

marina wrote:

I'm not a huge fan of using 2017 norms to judge the ethics of someone in 1865, whether a slave owner, wife beater, or opiate distributor. But that doesn't mean that now, in 2017, I would protest if statues of them were removed.

I agree with you. I wouldn't protest either.

I like that de Blasio announced today that they will use objective criteria to decide what statues NYC will get rid of. Now only if the criteria is applied objectively. Columbus is the statue that is on chopping block in NYC today.

If by applying an objective criteria against White Supremacists and imperialists it might very well be decided Mount Rushmore must be dynamited.

Do you have any idea which if any of our national heros who lived before contemporary times could survive the purge?

↑ Jeanette ↓

Tue, Aug 22 2017, 3:01 pm

Squishy wrote:

So you are now saying that CEOs who pulled out of his advisory councils are NOT acting like two year olds?

Are you also concerned about times the president has been less than mature in his statements? Or is it only a problem when protesters do it?

↑ imasinger ↓

Tue, Aug 22 2017, 3:26 pm

Squishy wrote:

Do you have any idea which if any of our national heros who lived before contemporary times could survive the purge?

AIUI, the issue is more that a number of statues under discussion were erected specifically in order to express a non inclusive agenda, many during the Jim Crow era.

I'm curious what the reaction is to this piece, in our local Op Ed section.

↑ 33055 ↓

Tue, Aug 22 2017, 6:43 pm

Jeanette wrote:

Your reasoning is extremely flawed. Because The Economist published a well-written critique of Trump does not mean the Yale class of 2005's letter didn't mischaracterize Trump. It does not obviate the baby behavior of them and others.

Only 52% of Americans polled think Trump,s response wasn't strong enough. 59% of the Republicans think he was strong enough. It is not seen as the universal blunder you wish to paint it as. Reasonable people can disagree. Closing them off from conversations only serve to polarize them. Wouldn't be better to explain rather than exit?

To be clear, less than mature is a different standard that idiotic baby nonsense. If the President packed it up and "literally went home" because he didn't like the way someone commented on the riot, I lose as much respect for him as I do with the left.

My kids watched the way our country mocked The President for looking at the eclipse. The left carried on and on about the eclipse being fake news, etc. My kids then saw the whole clip. He did nothing more than I did and what the people all around us did. He glanced at the sun for a moment.

My kids, without me saying a word, were disgusted by the news coverage. They came to the conclusion themselves. Next time there is criticism of Trump they will filter it through this false wolf cry as will millions of fine people.

↑ 33055 ↓

Tue, Aug 22 2017, 7:01 pm

imasinger wrote:

Statues of Columbus, Dr. Sims, Theodore Roosevelt would all survive this test, so that good.

Also, the fact there is a test rather than random reactionary destruction is good.

Would you mind posting the editorial which accompanied this?

↑ mommy3b2c

Wed, Aug 23 2017, 4:53 am

blini wrote:

It may be as you say, and if so, I feel sorry for anyone who was tricked.

Are we talking about statues? I think Lincoln is a bit different because he was tireless about ending slavery, and it's feasible to think that his racial views (from that speech - that's what you mean, right?) might've changed over time. It's also feasible that he felt he had to speak that way to appease voters. I mean racial intolerance wasn't just a southern thing. Or it could be that he felt that way. A lot of the abolitionists liked separate but equal, or even not so equal just not enslaved. But the sum - emancipation - probably outweighs the parts.

The next one is Washington... Well, that's a hard one because slavery was so entrenched. I think founding the country probably outweighs the evils here for most Americans.

But the statues that are being protested are for people in open rebellion against the United States, and were likely - I'd have to fact check myself - erected during the Jim Crow era, years after the actual war. I think they have a place in society - in a museum. Just my opinion.

I just want to point out that it's a misconception that Lincolns goal was to end slavery. His goal was actually to preserve the union.

↑ imasinger

Wed, Aug 23 2017, 5:32 am

Squishy wrote:

That was the editorial. Smile

. There was a written piece with much the same message published a few days earlier, here:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opi......html

↑ Jeanette ↓

Wed, Aug 23 2017, 9:19 am

Squishy wrote:

What do you consider publically berating and namecalling a Republican senator in his own home state? Is that also immature babyish behavior?

I personally see nothing babyish in quitting a council that wasn't doing anything anyway and was just for show. Trump wanted to surround himself with powerful leaders to show that he's a big boy president who can get big business leaders to do his bidding. It no longer served their purposes to go along with his charade so they resigned. Maybe if you could point to actual responsibilities or accomplishments of the council I'd think differently.

↑ WhatFor ↓

Wed, Aug 23 2017, 9:44 am

I encourage everyone who hasn't already watched them to go back to the videos on his remarks- first on Saturday, then the two sets of remarks later in the week.

Stop relying on other parties to tell you what was said. Watch it for yourself. All three sets of comments in their entirety from beginning to end. Because it should matter to you how the US president responds to racists who want to eliminate Jews from the US.

Before watching his speech last night, take a quick peek at specific parts of his speech that people were upset about.

Then watch his entire speech from his rally in Arizona last night. Watch how he quotes himself, and pay attention to what parts of his quote he leaves out.