Trump's remarks were tongue in cheek!

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2024

Harris hates her own country: According to The Man Who Screams, Ruth Marcus misunderstood.

She doesn't have an ear for these things! Over at the Washington Post, Marcus has offered this reaction to one candidate's recent remarks:

Preemptively blaming Jews, Trump crosses a dangerous line

Donald Trump has always had an odd—and, frankly, offensive—way of talking to and about Jews. As much as he seeks to inoculate himself from any suggestion of antisemitism by invoking his Jewish son-in-law, Jewish (by conversion) daughter and Jewish grandchildren, he too often finds himself enjoying the support, and even the company, of outspoken antisemites and then has a hard time disavowing them.

But when it comes to his comments about Jews, Trump has managed to outdo himself—at a campaign event billed as condemning antisemitism in America, no less. “I’m not going to call this as a prediction, but in my opinion, the Jewish people would have a lot to do with a loss if I’m at 40 percent” Jewish support in the polls,” Trump said Thursday, likely overstating his backing among Jewish voters.

This was no one-off. Later that day, attending the annual summit of the conservative Israeli American Council, Trump raised the subject again. “If I don’t win this election … the Jewish people would really have a lot to do with that if that happens, because at 40 percent that means 60 percent of the people are voting for the enemy,” he warned.

This is both of a piece with Trump past and crossing a hazardous new line, at a time when antisemitism in the United States is exploding and the broader American Jewish community feels vulnerable and besieged. In Trump’s previous comments about Jews and the election, he has seethed with resentment that ungrateful Jewish voters have failed to reward Trump for all the wonderful things he claims to have done for them and Israel.

Marcus continues from there.

Quite a few people have been taken aback by the candidate's remarks at the summit of the Israeli American Council. On Saturday night, along came the Fox News Channel's Mark Levin to explain how wrong they've all been.

As you can see by clicking this link, Levin quoted some of Trump's remarks from that widely discussed address. He then gave this explanation:

LEVIN (9/19/24): It was tongue in cheek. It was tongue in cheek. Everybody there knew it.

How did he know that Trump's remarks had been tongue in cheek? Levin didn't exactly explain, but moments earlier, he'd said that some of his family members were present at the event.

"It was a fantastic speech," Levin said. "It was a tempered speech. It was a factual speech. The people left there, the vast majority were Jews, very excited and very happy."

So the gentleman said—and everything is possible! For ourselves, we decided to check the relevant part of the speech in question.

(You can do that too. Click here, then move ahead to the 41-minute mark.)  

We'll admit it! We didn't detect the slightest sign that the candidate's comments were tongue in cheek. But so it goes at times like these, as candidates make their presentations and advocates offer their views.

Back to Levin! Two minutes after the remarks we've quoted, he offered his view of Candidate Harris. He told viewers what people will say in the future if that candidate gets elected:

LEVIN: For hundreds of years, thousands of years, they'll wake up and say, "Oh my God, what did we do? We elected someone president of the United States who's wholly unqualified, who didn't reveal herself, who turns out to be a Marxist Islamist, who failed as vice president. Oh my God, what did we do?"

A bit later, Levin and his guest, Pete Hegseth, further informed Fox viewers about Candidate Harris. The gentlemen offered this:

LEVIN: ...She's power-hungry, as most ideologues are. So if you hate your own people, which is why the border is open—they want to reshape the population, as the New York Times said. If you hate your own people, if you hate your own history, if you hate your own country—well, why wouldn't she sell out to the enemy?

HEGSETH (chuckles): Ask Barack Obama! Ask Joe Biden!

"Trader Pete" continued from there. But we'd call that a thoughtful analysis from two of our most nuanced thinkers!

In our view, sensible people can ask serious questions about Candidates Harris and Walz. At present, some perfectly reasonable questions aren't necessarily getting answered.

That said, it's all anthropology now! It's all about the way we humans are inclined to behave at highly fraught times such as these.

It's all anthropology now! We first told you that some years ago, and it's never seemed more true. We're heading down the stretch of the kind of event which challenges our human wiring and tests our limitations, even among us Blues.

At any rate, Trump's remarks were tongue in cheek. Inside the hall, everyone knew!

40 comments:

  1. Harris is an Islamist now? That's new, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  2. He was probably also speaking tongue-in-cheek when he post on Truth Social about his visit with sponsors of Hamas:

    "It was great seeing my friends His Highness Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, Amir of Qatar and His Excellency Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani, Prime Minister of Qatar at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida,"

    ReplyDelete
  3. It must be wonderful to control the media narrative. Trump made a strong claim that Harris would allow anti-semitism to flourish, and that he would protect Jews. This is perfectly analogous to Harris claiming that Trump would allow racism to flourish and she would protect black Americans.

    Amazingly, much of the media turned Trump's comment on its head and said Trump was the one promoting anti-semitism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you referring to his speech to the Israeli American Council?

      Trump was called anti-semitic because he told Jews if they didn't vote for him "they should have their head examined." That's got nothing to do with his criticisms of Harris.

      It must be wonderful to have your comments be so devoid of fact.

      Delete
    2. Hector, in 2020, Biden told a black man he couldn’t really be black if he wasn’t voting for him.

      Anonymices have leveled insults here toward Clarence Thomas and Thomas Sowell via epithets of their being tokens and Uncle Toms.

      ““They should have their heads examined” would be a straight forward, if debatable, argument from any liberal if said in the context of what Democrats have done for civil rights.

      On the other hand, “You arent really Jewish” would be sheer disparagement.

      Delete
    3. "have (one's) head examined" --
      What one is said to need to do if one does, says, or believes something that seems completely crazy, delusional, or stupid.

      Trump is saying that it would be completely crazy or stupid for a Jew not to vote for him. Now, you can disagree, but there's nothing anti-semitic about making such a claim.

      Delete
    4. "you can disagree, but there's nothing anti-semitic about making such a claim."

      Right. I didn't say there was. I merely pointed out that your statement that Trump was being called an anti-semite for his criticism of Harris wasn't true. He was being called an anti-semite because of the 'head examined' remark.

      Delete
    5. Hector I am not getting your point. Suppose Harris said black people who vote for Trump should have their heads examined. Would you find that statement racist? Why?-

      Delete
    6. In fact, Harris was asked that question with regard to black male voters who support Trump, and instead of saying that they need their heads examined she responded that you can't treat voters as monolithic blocks of people who should all be expected to vote the same way, and that it was her campaign's job to win them over.

      Delete
    7. I don’t see Trump’s comments as antisemitic in this instance. Dumb, yes, and insulting to a group of people who are generally well educated. It’s insulting to suggest that all American Jews consider Israel their number one priority when evaluating candidates. In addition, there are many American Jews who find Netanyahu’s ongoing aggression towards the inhabitants of Gaza unsupportable. This is especially true of the young. Trump has enough trouble with young educated voters, without further insulting them. The war that has been ongoing for a year now has had a detrimental effect on support to Israel among younger Americans and may have long term consequences to US/Israel relations.

      Delete
    8. "Hector I am not getting your point."

      Yes, you're not. I'm not expressing an opinion on whether any statement under discussion is racist or not.

      I'm correcting you regarding which statements of Trump's were being criticized by others for being racist.

      Delete
  4. In comments regarding a neo-Nazi rally held in Charlottesville, Trump referred to the neo-Nazis there as "very fine people."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This lie has been debunked over and over. See https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/

      Or, you can find a video of Trump's actual comments, where he says the exact opposite.

      Delete
    2. It is possible for reasonable people to disagree with Snopes. I prefer to consider the evidence of Trump's associations with neo-Nazis such as Nick Fuentes and The Proud Boys, or Victor Orban. These associations provide a context for interpreting Trump's intentions with his Charlottesville remarks. He was signalling to his Nazi base that he was still with them.

      Delete
    3. @7:36, if you want to argue that Trump really supports neo-Nazis and white supremacists, you may have a plausible argument. But, claiming that Trump SAID he supports Nazis and white supremacists' is a flat-out lie. What Trump SAID was the exact opposite.

      Delete
    4. Anonymouse 7:36pm, it’s ironic that Comma La used essentially the same argument in the 2020 primary when she accused Biden of caring about his former-segregationist politician pals, and opposing busing, rather than considering the former little girl (herself) who had daily participated in integration via busing.

      Biden knew, well understood, the past of his old colleagues. Trump was a political newbie who didn’t understand shite from shinola about Fuentes.

      That moment with Harris is what got her on the ticket. It had been real history. Biden’s history. Right there in little old Washington, DC.

      Delete
    5. Did he or did he not say very fine people? He hates Jews.

      Delete
    6. He hates Jews? He hates his daughter? He hates his son-in-law? He hates his grandchildren? He hates Israel, who has supported a lot more than Obama or Biden?

      Delete
    7. "Trump was a political newbie who didn't know shite from shinola about Fuentes."

      And you assume this why? Fuentes , on the other hand, very likely knew he had a place at the table with Trump, given the Donald's well publicized history of Obama birtherism, and racist commentary on the Central Park five, not to mention his family's history of racist policy in their apartment management. You think Trump walked into the dining room at Mar a Lago one evening only to stumble upon a table where Fuentes and Kanye West were sitting? You think that his team didn't know in advance who Nick Fuentes is and what he represents? How naive.

      Delete
    8. Yes, he used the words, " Very fine people." But, WHICH people did he say were very fine? We know for sure that he DIDN'T say Nazis or White Nationalists were very fine, because he clearly said that description didn't apply to those two groups. He said in the same statement he wasn't talking about neo-Nazis and white nationalists, who he said should be "condemned totally."

      Delete
    9. Trump said that good people congregate at night with tiki torch bearing racists and antisemites carrying banners that say "Jews will not replace us", in a demonstration well publicized to have been organized by white supremacists.

      Delete
    10. David, If you were in a room of neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and "fine people" on the Right who were marching in the "Unite the Right" march, how would you differentiate them? Or could you?

      Delete
    11. Trump didn't call neo-Nazis and white supremacists "fine people". He was calling the mythical Republican voters who aren't neo-Nazis or white supremacists "fine people".
      Sure, he was lying about the existence of such people, but Trump lies all the time. Even a Trump fanboy, David in Cal, has confirmed that Trump lies all the time..

      Delete
    12. The suspense of waiting for the media to ask Trump, "Who were the fine people on the Right who attended the 'Unite the Right' march?", is killing me. I bet it lasts.

      Delete
    13. The idea that there are modern American Conservatives who aren't neo-Nazis and/ or white supremacists has been debunked over, and over, and over.

      Delete
    14. Has Snopes debunked the lie that there is a Republican voter who isn't a bigot, or is did the lack of proof from anyone in the world debunk it without Snopes?

      Delete
  5. ""Trader Pete" continued from there. But we'd call that a thoughtful analysis from two of our most nuanced thinkers!

    In our view, sensible people can ask serious questions about Candidates Harris and Walz. At present, some perfectly reasonable questions aren't necessarily getting answered."

    In this way, Somerby endorses the criticisms of Harris raised by Levin and Hegseth. He doesn't refute any of the obvious untruths and disinformation -- he pretends we need to know more about Harris, while quoting lies.

    I won't bother asking whether Somerby is being tongue-in-cheek because it doesn't matter. Damage is done to Harris's prospects when Somerby, who says he will vote for her, repeats MAGA lies about her. He could instead look up the answers and use them here to refute this garbage, but he never does that.

    Worse, it doesn't look like he is even trying any more to give a convincing impersonation of a Democratic voter. Levin is scum but Somerby says he is raising good points. Do we need to know any more about where Somerby stands?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Somerby endorses the criticisms of Harris raised by Levin and Hegseth." Nope.

      "He doesn't refute any of the obvious untruths and disinformation..." It's obvious from the sarcastic tone that he thinks their statements are absurd. And he says he watched the "tongue in cheek" part of the video and he saw no sign it was tongue in cheek.

      "Damage is done to Harris's prospects when Somerby, who says he will vote for her, repeats MAGA lies about her." Nope.

      "...it doesn't look like he is even trying any more to give a convincing impersonation of a Democratic voter." It's obvious to any regular, honest reader that Somerby is a Democratic voter, not impersonating one. But even if he weren't, this would have no relevance in evaluating the merits of his claims or arguments.

      "Levin is scum but Somerby says he is raising good points." Nope.

      "Do we need to know any more about where Somerby stands?" Do we need to know any more about your judgment and/or honesty?

      Delete
  6. "In this way, Somerby endorses the criticisms of Harris raised by Levin and Hegseth."

    Here's what Bob actually said about Levis and Hegseth:

    "But we'd call that a thoughtful analysis from two of our most nuanced thinkers!"

    One clue to the sarcasm is the exclamation point. Unless you're one of those human-like life forms who believes Bob entusiastically endorses the idea that Harris is a 'Marxist-Islamist' who hates her people, her history and her country.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sarcasm is not detectable in print unless the writer signals it explicitly. Somerby never does that. That makes it difficult to know when he is being literal and when he intends a second meaning denying the literal meaning (which is what sarcasm consists of -- a contradiction between literal meaning and tone of voice).

      Somerby never says anything positive about Harris. How then are we supposed to understand that he really does support her? When he says that he is planning to vote for her, why could that not also be sarcasm? And no, exclamation points are not a clue.

      Somerby clings to his plausible deniability, giving his readers the opportunity take his words any way that they prefer, as you are doing now. That isn't how communication works. The goal is clarity, not obfuscation of the type Somerby uses routinely.

      Somerby may think he is being clever with this, but he is actually engaging in reader-abuse.

      Delete
    2. 'That isn't how communication works."

      I'm no literally professor but I'm smart enough to know there's a whole lot of ways communication works.

      And I've observed there are a lot of commenters here who understand irony as more of a household chore than a literary device.

      So you go ahead and believe that Somerby enthusiastically endorses the idea that Harris is a Marxist-Islamist who hates her people, her history and her country.

      And drop us a line now and then to us folks in reality, from wherever you're writing from.

      Delete
    3. "...irony as more of a household chore than a literary device."

      Haw!

      Delete
    4. Does it matter what Somerby’s intention was if his readers take him at face value and she loses votes because of it?

      Delete
  7. “Sarcasm is not detectable in print unless the writer signals it explicitly. Somerby never does that. That makes it difficult to know when he is being literal and when he intends a second meaning denying the literal meaning (which is what sarcasm consists of -- a contradiction between literal meaning and tone of voice)”

    Oh, sure, anonymouse 7:33pm.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you go to college you learn that in Freshman Composition.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. Anonymouse 10:05pm, I’m old as dirt and freshman comp was many years ago, perhaps that’s not the case for you, however, I did not explicitly signal that I was being sarcastic, but you caught my tone immediately. Go sit down.

      Delete
  8. What criticisms do Levin and Pete Hegseth offer about Kamala Harris, and how do these Slope Game views reflect broader conservative concerns about her qualifications and policies?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Fe fi fo fum
    I smell the fart of an Englishman!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hello everyone,
    I will you a secret of getting rich on bitcoin investment “a wise person should have money in their head , but not in the heart.. Everyday is a day of new decisions. Its your choice to be rich or to be poor & keep struggling, start making larger funds in 72 hours with a legit & pro trader like Mr Bernie Doran,Investment plans are open now with a minimum investment of $200 you can earn $2000 in 72 hours.

    Invest $200 earn $2,000
    Invest $500 earn $5,000
    Invest $700 earn $7,000
    Invest $1,000 earn $10,000
    Invest $2,000 earn $20,000
    Invest $5,000 earn $50,000
    Invest $7,000 earn $70,000

    Do not miss this clear opportunity to achieve your financial freedom, those who are not ready to invest now are not ready to retire early, do not depend on a single source of income, let him trade for you today and start making profit for you. He can also help you RECOVER your lost/stolen funds Kindly contact Via WhatsApp: (+14242850682)
    Email : berniedoransignals@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete