Trump attacks John Lewis

Original post by joe cooley

Has anyone denied the positive changes brought about by the civil rights movement?

Of course no one on this thread has,a racist strawman argument put forward by yourself because you are unable to defend the damage done to black America by the Democratic party.

Denying the contributions of a key figure in the movement is pretty much they same thing. Where would it have gone without the likes of Lewis and MLK?

Reply 84

jape

16

Original post by WBZ144

Denying the contributions of a key figure in the movement is pretty much they same thing. Where would it have gone without the likes of Lewis and MLK?

As someone who hasn't questioned the contributions of John Lewis to the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s:

1. The Democratic Party is systematically undermining black America, knowingly so, so as to keep ahold of their favourite political fief
2. John Lewis had no grounds to call the President-Elect illegitimate or to testify against Jeff Sessions on the grounds of his phantom racism

His Civil Rights record really is irrelevant here, even if other people tried to make it a thing.

Reply 85

Original post by jape

Marbury vs. Madison was a mistake.

The USA would not have survived without it.

The Constitution gave control of the purse to Congress. If Congress' Acts were not reviewable, Congress could have made supply conditional on the President retaining the confidence of Congress and acting in all things as Congress willed.

The Constitution gave the Presidency the power of the sword. If the President was not willing to be bound by what Congress decreed, then he would have to raise his standard, declare war on Congress and raise money at the point of that sword.

Reply 86

Original post by WBZ144

What do you mean by "again", when you didn't ask that question in the first place?

I mentioned his achievements because he was accused of being "all talk" by a man who actually is "all talk". Like your former post highlights, his greatest achievement seems to be the fact that he has said some un-PC things. If that was supposed to demonstrate that he has bravery equivalent to that of the Freedom Riders, it's laughable.

You're confused.

Trump said:

“Congressman John Lewis should spend more time on fixing and helping his district, which is in horrible shape and falling apart (not to mention crime infested) rather than falsely complaining about the election results,”

And

“All talk, talk, talk — no action or results,” he added. “Sad!”

Now, if you can show when and where Trump criticised Lewis's achievements in the civil rights movement, you could have a point.

Well?

Reply 87

astutehirstute

11

John Lewis' alleged political achievements (as far as I can see he is pretty much a nobody, but lets accept that he has them for the sake of argument) are irrelevant.

He is a member of Congress and this stunt of "boycotting" Trump's inauguration sets a terrible example of extra democratic politics for the country. Members of the legislature attend by convention, whether they agree with the incoming President's politics, or not. That is the point of democracy. Bitter rivals do each other the courtesy of sitting in the same chamber and debate. They don't boycott.

As for Trump's criticism of Lewis' failure as a Congressman it is certainly an inconvenient truth (for Lewis) that Atlanta is one of the worst cities in the whole of America for violent crime (the sixth worst I think?), and the 5th District, Lewis' District is at the epicentre of it.

It isn't politically correct to point that out, obviously, (no American will miss Trump's none too subtle linking of violent crime to the black constituents of that district), but then he doesn't do political correctness.

That is part of his appeal if not his charm.

Reply 88

Original post by InnerTemple

Then why were you asking us for Lewis's achievements? I think they are relevant because Trump's comments were that Lewis was all talk and no action. When quite clearly Lewis is very much a man of action.

By the way, Joe, you're hilarious.

Joe Cooley: "What has Lewis ever done?"
Others: *list massive achievements*
Joe Cooley: "Not those achievements. What has he done other than all those things?"
Others: *list achievements*
Joe Cooley: "Hang on, what have his achievements got to do with anything?"

Well yes, i made an invalid point and decided to change tack.

Is that against the rules?

Reply 89

Original post by joe cooley

You're confused.

Trump said:

“Congressman John Lewis should spend more time on fixing and helping his district, which is in horrible shape and falling apart (not to mention crime infested) rather than falsely complaining about the election results,”

And

“All talk, talk, talk — no action or results,” he added. “Sad!”

Now, if you can show when and where Trump criticised Lewis's achievements in the civil rights movement, you could have a point.

Well?

Did I say that he directly criticised Lewis' achievements? My point is that it is ludicrous and ironic for a man who is all talk to accuse a man like Lewis of being "all talk", someone who has taken action and produced results (the point in time when he produced the most results is not relevant, as Trump did not specify a particular time period for Lewis' alleged "inaction"). That point still stands.

Reply 90

Original post by jape

As someone who hasn't questioned the contributions of John Lewis to the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s:

1. The Democratic Party is systematically undermining black America, knowingly so, so as to keep ahold of their favourite political fief
2. John Lewis had no grounds to call the President-Elect illegitimate or to testify against Jeff Sessions on the grounds of his phantom racism

His Civil Rights record really is irrelevant here, even if other people tried to make it a thing.

If his Civil Rights record is irrelevant here, how is your first point relevant when it relates to the same topic (even if it is true, which I doubt)?

Moreover, the reason why his Civil Rights record is relevant is that Trump accused him of not taking action or producing results. His record contradicts that statement. Trump's response was not to refute those who question the legitimacy of his presidency. If it was, I'm sure that we would all the discussing the legitimacy of his presidency instead.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 91

Original post by WBZ144

Did I say that he directly criticised Lewis' achievements? My point is that it is ludicrous and ironic for a man who is all talk to accuse a man like Lewis of being "all talk", someone who has taken action and produced results (the point in time when he produced the most results is not relevant, as Trump did not specify a particular time period for Lewis' alleged "inaction" :wink:

. That point still stands.

Trump did not specify a particular time period for Lewis' alleged "inaction"

“Congressman John Lewis should spend more time on fixing and helping his district, which is in horrible shape and falling apart (not to mention crime infested) rather than falsely complaining about the election results,”

Clearly he did.

Reply 92

Original post by astutehirstute

He is a member of Congress and this stunt of "boycotting" Trump's inauguration sets a terrible example of extra democratic politics for the country. Members of the legislature attend by convention, whether they agree with the incoming President's politics, or not. That is the point of democracy. Bitter rivals do each other the courtesy of sitting in the same chamber and debate. They don't boycott.

Yes, it does but it is a very difficult call for Trump's opponents for this reason:-

Original post by joe cooley

Simple fact is, Trump doesn't play by the same rules as mainstream pols.

Trump expects others to play by rules he disregards and ultimately if the others continue to do that, despotism results.

Reply 93

Original post by joe cooley

Trump did not specify a particular time period for Lewis' alleged "inaction"

“Congressman John Lewis should spend more time on fixing and helping his district, which is in horrible shape and falling apart (not to mention crime infested) rather than falsely complaining about the election results,”

Clearly he did.

Highlighting that he thinks that Lewis is doing a poor job as a Congressman is not the same as stating that the "all talk" and "no action or results" part only applies to Lewis' work at present. So it's understandable that some of us believe him to be referring to Lewis' character in general.

Reply 94

macromicro

17

Original post by nulli tertius

Yes but this doesn't allow him to criticise Trump's democratic mandate without subjecting himself to political criticism.

Trump has gone out of his way to attack ordinary Americans, and those are the actions of a bully. He has also attacked McCain's war record, which are the actions of a detestable human, but you can't really say that an opposition politician is above political criticism.

The point is not that Lewis is immune to criticism by virtue of prior achievements, rather that Trump's criticism was absurd in light of Lewis's prior achievements.

Reply 95

Original post by macromicro

The point is not that Lewis is immune to criticism by virtue of prior achievements, rather that Trump's criticism was absurd in light of Lewis's prior achievements.

Then why were people angry rather than laughing?

Reply 96

macromicro

17

Original post by nulli tertius

Then why were people angry rather than laughing?

Why do you presuppose that the expected reaction to absurd criticism is laughter not anger? There is very little to laugh about in the face of Trump as President, presumably.

Reply 97

Original post by macromicro

The point is not that Lewis is immune to criticism by virtue of prior achievements, rather that Trump's criticism was absurd in light of Lewis's prior achievements.

So,any criticism of Lewis while allowed is absurd, due to his past achievements?

Reply 98