GOP Sen. Johnny Isakson Slams Trump's 'Deplorable' Attacks On McCain

  
Via:  tessylo  •  4 weeks ago  •  164 comments

GOP Sen. Johnny Isakson Slams Trump's 'Deplorable' Attacks On McCain

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T




GOP Sen. Johnny Isakson Slams Trump's 'Deplorable' Attacks On McCain







710c91c0-4b9c-11e7-8912-374be9390b1b_H-1 Hayley Miller,HuffPost 16 hours ago 






This iframe is not allowed

Sen. Johnny Isakson of Georgia, breaking with a silence adopted by virtually all of his GOP colleagues, tore into President Donald Trump for his recent attacks on the late Sen. John McCain nearly seven months after the Arizona Republican’s death.

In an interview published Wednesday in The Bulwark, a news outlet recently established by conservative critics of Trump, Isakson said “America deserves better” than the president’s persistent assaults on McCain.

“I just want to lay it on the line, that the country deserves better, the McCain family deserves better,” he told the website. “I don’t care if he’s president of United States, owns all the real estate in New York, or is building the greatest immigration system in the world. Nothing is more important than the integrity of the country and those who fought and risked their lives for all of us.”

He also said McCain “was better than I am, and I know it. John was the best of my generation. John McCain was and is a great human being.”

Isakson, chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, doubled down on his criticism of Trump in an interview with Georgia Public Broadcasting’s “Political Rewind” program, calling the president’s recent attacks on McCain “deplorable.”

“You may be a Republican, you may be a Democrat ― we’re all Americans,” Isakson said. “We should never reduce the service that [veterans] give to this country.”

Asked during the radio interview if he believes Trump is unstable, Isakson skirted a direct answer, saying he respects the office of the presidency “no matter who’s in it.”

0f20b98ccd1c4fe9fdb4e28f51853066

Trump, after a series of weekend tweets assailing McCain, on Tuesday told reporters he was “never a fan” of McCain, who died last August after battling brain cancer. The president slammed the lawmaker for helping to kill a GOP bill to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act in July 2017.

“I think that’s disgraceful,” Trump said ahead of a joint press conference at the White House with far-right Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro. “Plus, there are other things. I was never a fan of John McCain and never will be.”

And Trump could not resist revisiting the subject on Wednesday. In a speech at a tank plant in Lima, Ohio, Trump complained that he gave McCain “the kind of funeral that he wanted,” but “didn’t get a thank you.”

According to Politico, Trump in Ohio reiterated that “I’ve never liked him much.” His comments received a cool reception, Politico reported.

As part of various tributes to McCain, his coffin lay in state at the U.S. Capitol, and his main funeral service was conducted at Washington’s National Cathedral. It was unclear what Trump was referring to in his comment about McCain’s funeral.

The president was pointedly not invited ― per McCain’s instructions ― to the gathering at the National Cathedral. Those delivering eulogies there included former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

Trump and McCain had several public spats before the senator died. Trump in 2015 infamously mocked McCain’s five-year internment as a prisoner of war during the Vietnam War, saying that because he was “captured” he wasn’t “a war hero.”

Trump avoided military service as a young man during the Vietnam War era. When he was draft-eligible, he received deferments because a doctor diagnosed him with bone spurs in his feet.


 
Nothing is more important than the integrity of the country and those who fought and risked their lives for all of us. Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.)

The president revived his attacks on McCain when he tweeted on Saturday that the decorated Navy veteran’s legacy was stained by his vote against repealing and replacing Obamacare. Trump also falsely accused McCain in a Saturday tweet of “spreading” the infamous Steele dossier, which alleges Russian blackmail against Trump, to the media. He also mocked the late senator’s academic record from when he was a student years ago at the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland.

Meghan McCain, a co-host of ABC’s “The View” and a daughter of the late senator, defended her father against Trump’s attacks on Saturday.

“No one will ever love you the way they loved my father,” she tweeted. “I wish I had been given more [Saturdays] with him. Maybe spend yours with your family instead of on twitter obsessing over mine?”

But few Republican lawmakers have responded by directly challenging Trump’s jabs at the late senator. McCain’s close friend, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), became a target of ridicule for a tepid response to Trump’s weekend tweets that did not specifically call out the president.

“As to [McCain] and his devotion to his country: He stepped forward to risk his life for his country, served honorably under difficult circumstances, and was one of the most consequential senators in the history the body,” Graham tweeted on Sunday. “Nothing about his service will ever be changed or diminished.”

This iframe is not allowedThis iframe is not allowed

Graham, up for re-election in 2020, has transformed from a staunch Trump critic into one of the president’s loudest cheerleaders since McCain’s death.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) ― who has been crucial to pushing Trump’s agenda through Congress ― defended McCain’s legacy on Twitter an hour before Isakson’s radio interview Wednesday. But, like Graham, he not directly take issue with Trump’s attacks.

“It was a blessing to serve alongside a rare patriot and genuine American hero in the Senate,” McConnell tweeted. 

This iframe is not allowed

Following McCain’s death last year, Isakson berated Trump from the Senate floor when the flag at the White House only remained at half staff for only a day. The White House later lowered the flag again to half staff until the end of the various funeral services for McCain.

“Anybody who in any way tarnishes the reputation of John McCain deserves a whipping,” Isakson said then, “because most of those who would do the wrong thing about John McCain didn’t have the guts to do the right thing when it was their turn.” 

This story has been updated with Trump’s Wednesday comments on McCain.

  • This article originally appeared on HuffPost.








Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
Find text within the comments Find 
 
Tessylo
1  seeder  Tessylo    4 weeks ago

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're stiff
Kick 'em all around

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
1.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Tessylo @1    4 weeks ago

The video of the memorial for J-Mac of past and present Oval Office holders sitting in close proximity spoke volumes.  Those with civility and class, and one without.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.2  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Tessylo @1    4 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.2    4 weeks ago

How deplorable

 
 
 
r.t..b...
1.2.2  r.t..b...  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.2    4 weeks ago
Here's another take on that D-Bag McCain.

Your moniker belies your commentary. McCain understood the price of Freedom and what it took to be a true Warrior in tangible ways you could only imagine. You represent neither, sir.

 
 
 
bbl-1
1.2.3  bbl-1  replied to  Tessylo @1.2.1    4 weeks ago

bot?

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2.4  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  bbl-1 @1.2.3    4 weeks ago

Yup!

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2.5  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.2    4 weeks ago

No the D-Bag is whoever is in this little propaganda video you have here and . . . . . . . 

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.2.6  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Tessylo @1.2.5    4 weeks ago

That's an unsubstantiated allegation whereas the McCain's dismal record of service and horribly petulant behavior not to mention the other disreputable acts identified in the video are all generally verifiable or supportable opinions based on the factual record.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2.7  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.2.6    4 weeks ago

Deplorable

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
1.2.8  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.2.6    4 weeks ago
That's an unsubstantiated allegation whereas the McCain's dismal record of service

That kind of disgusting talk can come only from someone who's skin has never been in the game.  

 
 
 
WallyW
1.3  WallyW  replied to  Tessylo @1    4 weeks ago

McCain turned out to be a worthless turncoat RINO.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  WallyW @1.3    4 weeks ago

How deplorable.  

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
1.3.2  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Tessylo @1.3.1    4 weeks ago

Not to mention the pure chickenshittery of it. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
2  seeder  Tessylo    4 weeks ago

STFU Scumbag Rump!

 
 
 
Kavika
3  Kavika     4 weeks ago
“Anybody who in any way tarnishes the reputation of John McCain deserves a whipping,” Isakson said then, “because most of those who would do the wrong thing about John McCain didn’t have the guts to do the right thing when it was their turn.” 

And there you go, hit the nail on the head. 

 
 
 
MUVA
3.1  MUVA  replied to  Kavika @3    4 weeks ago

When he ran for president some on the left slammed him there are many articles showing the democrats destain for him.I  think what Trump did is wrong and shows little class but also think that what the democrats did to him when he ran for president shows little class also.

 
 
 
Kavika
3.1.1  Kavika   replied to  MUVA @3.1    4 weeks ago
When he ran for president some on the left slammed him there are many articles showing the democrats destain for him.

Those were during elections, something that both parties due. It's only Trump that attacks his military record and him personally. He is attacking a dead man. If you can't differentiate between the two, that's on you. 

 
 
 
MUVA
3.1.2  MUVA  replied to  Kavika @3.1.1    4 weeks ago

Sorry the democrats did more than just the usual election attacks they tried to smear him and his service at the time it is disingenuous at best this love for him now.  

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
3.1.3  FLYNAVY1  replied to  MUVA @3.1.2    4 weeks ago

I came close to voting for Johnny Mac.... His selection of Caribou Barbie for a running mate changed my mind.  That and flipping on waterboarding not being torture.

While we are on the topic of smear tactics, anyone remember "Swiftboating"?

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.4  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @3.1    4 weeks ago

'When he ran for president some on the left slammed him there are many articles showing the democrats destain for him.I  think what Trump did is wrong and shows little class but also think that what the democrats did to him when he ran for president shows little class also.'

That's disdain.

So what if we slammed McCain?  So what?  I said some not so nice things about Mr. McCain in the past.  I've evolved.  I never kicked him when he was down like your 'president'.  That piece of shit deplorable scum bag of a 'president' has no class, no morals, no shame, no conscience, no class,  no NOTHING resembling a decent human being.  

What Rump did and always does, shows NO CLASS, he won't STFU about Mr. McCain.  He is a deplorable scumbag.  

I don't appreciate you coming here and saying I have no class.  You're welcome not to comment.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.5  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @3.1.2    4 weeks ago
'Sorry the democrats did more than just the usual election attacks they tried to smear him and his service at the time it is disingenuous at best this love for him now.'
I again do not appreciate your continued attacks on the left and excusing the turd 'president'.  

Your unfailing support of this turd and sham of a human being is duly noted.  Move along now.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.6  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @3.1.3    4 weeks ago

Interesting how the turd 'president' said Mr. McCain was last in his class at Annapolis.

Rump sued the schools he went to to not release his records.  Hmmmmm

 
 
 
Kavika
3.1.7  Kavika   replied to  MUVA @3.1.2    4 weeks ago
Sorry the democrats did more than just the usual election attacks they tried to smear him and his service at the time it is disingenuous at best this love for him now.  

I didn't vote for Bush 1 but that doesn't mean that by honoring him at his funeral and showing the respect I had for him is disingenuous...Perhaps you might want to think that out again before you make another nonsensical comment.

 
 
 
Veronica
3.1.8  Veronica  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @3.1.3    4 weeks ago

Me too.  I wanted to beat George W in the primaries in 2000, but when he didn't I was glad he tried in 2008 until he listened to "his handlers" and selected Sarah Palin to run with him.  I was then very disappointed.

 
 
 
katrix
3.1.9  katrix  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @3.1.3    4 weeks ago

I would have voted for him in 2000.

I would have considered him that last time but, as you said, he chose Caribou Barbie as his VP.  That was an absolute showstopper for me. 

Especially when a candidate is old, their choice of a VP does matter.  Biden, for example, needs to pick a very good VP if he wants to assuage the concerns of people like me, who don't like electing Presidents who are that old. 

 
 
 
katrix
3.1.10  katrix  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.6    4 weeks ago
Interesting how the turd 'president' said Mr. McCain was last in his class at Annapolis. Rump sued the schools he went to to not release his records.  Hmmmmm

He sued because he knew that now that he was making school performance such a big deal, and calling for others to release their records, someone would call him out on his hypocrisy and want to see his.  And he knew they'd prove what a crappy student he was.  President Bone Spur is a joke.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
3.1.11  FLYNAVY1  replied to  katrix @3.1.9    4 weeks ago

As an old fart, I agree with you..... If Biden seeks and earns the nomination, a solid and younger VP pick is very much in order.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
3.1.12  KDMichigan  replied to  katrix @3.1.10    4 weeks ago
He sued because

I keep looking but I can't find where President Trump sued to keep his college transcripts sealed. Maybe you could be so kind as to post your source for me ?

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.13  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  KDMichigan @3.1.12    4 weeks ago

https://www.vox.com/2019/2/27/18243099/michael-cohen-trump-fordham-grades

My mistake -

It was by far the least explosive allegation that former Trump personal attorney and fixer Michael Cohen made before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday, but it was in some ways the most bizarre: Donald Trump threatened his alma mater with legal action if his college records or SAT scores were released.

Cohen provided the committee with a letter he sent on then-candidate Trump’s behalf to Fordham University in 2015, which said, “if in the event any of his records are released or otherwise disclosed without his prior written consent, we will hold your institution liable to the fullest extent of the law including damages and criminality.”

Michael Cohen: I threatened Fordham to keep quiet about Trump’s SAT scores and grades

In 2015, Cohen wrote a letter to Trump’s alma mater demanding that the candidate’s grades and SAT scores be sealed.

By Jane Coastonjane.coaston@vox.com  Feb 27, 2019, 11:40am ESTSHARE
GettyImages_1127752178.0.jpg Michael Cohen, President Trump’s former personal attorney, testifies before the House Oversight and Reform Committee on February 27, 2019. Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images

It was by far the least explosive allegation that former Trump personal attorney and fixer Michael Cohen made before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday, but it was in some ways the most bizarre: Donald Trump threatened his alma mater with legal action if his college records or SAT scores were released.

Cohen provided the committee with a letter he sent on then-candidate Trump’s behalf to Fordham University in 2015, which said, “if in the event any of his records are released or otherwise disclosed without his prior written consent, we will hold your institution liable to the fullest extent of the law including damages and criminality.”

The letter is directed at both Fordham University (where Trump attended before transferring to the University of Pennsylvania in 1966) and the College Board, which administers the SAT. “We will hold your institution liable to the fullest extent of the law” including “damages and criminality,” the letter reads in part, concluding, “Please guide yourself accordingly and contact me to inform me that the records have been permanently sealed.”

(It’s worth noting that Fordham and the College Board are two separate organizations, yet Cohen addressed both in his letter to Fordham. He was, apparently, not a very good lawyer.)

A spokesperson for Fordham University confirmed receiving the letter to BuzzFeed News, adding that the university also received a call from a member of the Trump campaign.

The letter came three years after Trump posted a video to YouTube in 2012 in which he offered then-President Obama a $5 million donation if he released “his college records and applications” and “passport applications and records.”

This iframe is not allowed

A prominent birther, Trump repeatedly argued both before and during his presidential campaign that Obama was not qualified to attend Columbia and Harvard. In an interview with the Associated Press in 2011, Trump said, “I heard he was a terrible student, terrible. How does a bad student go to Columbia and then to Harvard? I’m thinking about it, I’m certainly looking into it. Let him show his records.”

 
 
 
katrix
3.1.14  katrix  replied to  KDMichigan @3.1.12    4 weeks ago

I sit corrected.  He threatened to sue if his high school or college records were released, but since the records weren't released, he didn't sue.  What a fucking hypocrite he is, demanding that others show their records, and lying about his performance, while making sure the truth would never come out.

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.15  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.13    4 weeks ago

And then there is this, which is a little off topic, but still relevant I think:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/donald-trump-2016-wharton-pennsylvania-214425

?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2

Wikimedia Commons

LETTER FROM WHARTON

Why Penn Won’t Talk About Donald Trump

As Trump becomes the university’s most famous alum, campus leaders scramble to protect its brand.

By DAN SPINELLI

 

November 06, 2016

PHILADELPHIA—Like its rivals in the top tier of American colleges, The University of Pennsylvania boasts a colonial-era founding, a student body of overachievers and a leafy Gothic revival campus. Yet Penn lags behind its rivals in one department: Its legacy in the White House. Harvard has the Adamses, Roosevelts and Kennedys; Yale has the Bushes. Princeton has Woodrow Wilson, while Columbia claims President Barack Obama. Penn, for all its Ivy League luster, musters only a half-claim to William Henry Harrison, who never earned a diploma and died after a month in office.

Now, on the brink of this week’s election, Penn is just a few swing states away from finally earning its spot on that wall of fame. The problem for the campus right now: The candidate who could put it there is Donald J. Trump.

Trump graduated in 1968 from Wharton, Penn’s school of business, and isn’t shy about reminding the world. “I went to an Ivy League school,” Trump told a crowd recently in St. Augustine, Florida. “I went to an Ivy League school. I’m very highly educated. I know words, I have the best words,” he said at a rally last December; Wharton, he said on Meet the Press, “is probably the hardest there is to get into,” adding, “Some of the great business minds in the world have gone to Wharton.”

While Hillary Clinton’s Wellesley College prepares for an election night jubilee, the mood at Donald Trump’s alma mater in West Philadelphia is closer to terrified. At Wharton, one of the world’s most respected (and demanding) business schools, students have recoiled at being linked to a wheeler-dealer whose business record suggests more skill at financial chicanery than genuine company-building. Thousands of alumni have signed an anti-Trump open letter. (There has been no pro-Trump open letter.) And on Penn’s main campus, “Trump” has become a lightning rod for a year’s worth of student protests on issues like Islamophobia and sexual assault. Perhaps the most galling moments for Penn arrived when Trump tried to play the Wharton card to excuse his pantomimed mocking of a disabled reporter. “Who would mock a disability?” Trump told Jake Tapper. “I would never. I’m a smart person. I went to the Wharton School of Finance.”

“It may be the first time I’ve seen someone in the public eye so blatantly use the Penn credential as kind of an excuse for behavior,” says Arielle Brousse, a 2007 graduate who is development director for the Kelly Writers House, an arts and culture hub at Penn. “Suddenly, we’re in this situation where the most public usage of 'I went to Penn ...' is so bombastic and not rooted in Penn values.” Anxious students are plenty worried themselves. “I think a Donald Trump presidency would devalue my degree. One hundred percent,” one senior, Rhea Singh, told me recently.

The irony of Penn’s situation wasn’t lost on Jon Huntsman, a 1987 Penn graduate who made his own presidential run in 2012. Recently, Huntsman attended a Board of Trustees meeting, where he ventured a joke: “I remember sitting in this meeting twenty years ago, and the great lament was: We don’t have enough Penn people running for politics at the highest level!” Huntsman deadpanned. The meeting rippled with nervous laughter.

On campus, Trump’s rise has caused more than anxiety: It has increasingly set students against Penn’s leaders, whom they accuse of taking Trump’s donations and remaining quiet while he gleefully violates the school’s basic principles of tolerance. Inside College Hall, school officials are paralyzed: Legally unable to make political statements, they responded early on by putting a gag order on administrators with regard to Trump, which has left them unable to publicly grapple with the biggest question on campus: Will the rise of Trump—suddenly the most famous Penn alumnus on the planet—actually bring the school down?

***

Trump spent only two years at Penn, having transferred to Wharton as a junior from Fordham in New York City. He was hardly a stellar student (never making the dean’s list, despite repeatedly telling the New York Times he graduated first in his class). He lived off-campus and didn’t take part in much campus life, spending his weekends in New Yorkworking in his dad’s real estate business. But Trump’s association with Penn grew steadily after 1968. His son Donald Jr. graduated from Wharton in 2000, followed by his daughter Ivanka, who entered Wharton in 2002 after spending two years at Georgetown, and graduated in 2004. Tiffany Trump, the mogul’s daughter with second wife Marla Maples, graduated from Penn earlier this year. The Trumps became the archetypal Ivy League legacy family—well-known, well-heeled, “brand loyal.”

And generous. An investigation published last week by the campus newspaper, the Daily Pennsylvanian, found that Donald Trump may have given over a million dollars to Penn over the course of the past three decades. The university responded in kind, and bestowed plenty of rewards on Trump himself. The Wharton Club of Washington, D.C., named him one of the “leading alumni” at the group’s 2014 Joseph Wharton Awards Dinner. In 2007, he was included in Wharton Alumni Magazine’s list of the school’s 125 most influential people. (In a blurb accompanying his name, the magazine called Trump “The Best Known Brand Name in Real Estate.”)

As Trump’s divisive campaign unspooled, his unpopularity at Penn planted deeper roots than the typical campus antipathy toward conservative candidates. Wharton sophomore Owen O’Hare, a College Republican here, said students feel “disgust” and “bewilderment” at Trump’s rise. “Just the fact that he graduated from Penn without any greater respect or understanding for other people, other cultures and other viewpoints is somewhat shocking,” he said. O’Hare plans to vote for Hillary Clinton. Other campus Republicans have voiced support for Trump but have stayed mostly in the shadows, refraining from any public demonstration of the sort that has affected other schools: A short-lived “Penn for Trump” group folded after a few months last year.

Wharton alums have cooled to Trump as well. This reflects, in part, reputational anxiety at Wharton, a school that was already trying to change its image as a boys club for would-be financiers. After the 2008 crash, Wharton began to rebrand itself, turning to entrepreneurship, analytics and innovation as its educational themes. “Wharton is so much more than a ‘finance school,’” Wharton Dean Geoffrey Garrett has said. But to Trump, his degree is always from “The Wharton School of Finance,” which has not been the school’s official name since 1972. Over 4,000 members of the Wharton community penned an open letter that denounced the candidate this past summer, insisting that Trump “does not represent us” and that the school has been used “to legitimize prejudice and intolerance.” The letter included the names of at least 30 professors. “There are a lot of Wharton students who have the right idea about how they fit into the world, but who are feeling a little diminished by this,” said Brousse, the development officer.

Outside the walls of Wharton, Penn’s undergraduates on the greater campus have reached a stage of almost daily revulsion at Trump’s latest comment. Last month, after the leak of Trump’s sexually aggressive Access Hollywood tape, anti-sexual-assault activists staged a protestoutside College Hall, the seat of the administration. They protested not only Trump’s behavior but also the echoes they saw in student controversies on campus—linking Trump’s tape to a sexist party invitation sent by one of Penn’s elite, off-campus clubs, which encouraged freshman women to “wear something tight” and “f--k off to a tease” (whatever that means). Flyers posted on campus called Trump “an active advocate of rape culture.” Penn’s Muslim community has been no less distraught: In December 2015, Trump’s call for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States enraged Muslim students, who spoke at the time to the Philadelphia Inquirer about feeling unsafe on campus. “How am I supposed to feel comfortable if this nation is telling us that we should leave the country?" Engineering School sophomore Lamin Elsawah told the Inquirer.

Some students have begun to call on the administration, in various ways, to renounce Trump. “I do think that Penn and the Board of Trustees should come out with a statement denouncing his political views, assuring the students that they don’t agree with one of our alumni,” said Singh, the Penn senior, who also serves as vice president of the Class Board. An increasingly common question here, overheard in Van Pelt Library or the dining hall at 1920 Commons, is whether the administration should be doing more to assure students it doesn’t tolerate Trump’s views. It’s not the first time the administration has been accused of slow walking student demands: In September, a senior set the campus astir when an op-ed in the Daily Pennsylvanian demanded that Penn speak up about racial injustices nationwide, prompting Penn President Amy Gutmann and Provost Vincent Price—after years of pressure and protest—to finally put in writing that “Black lives matter.”

The person for whom Trump’s rise may be the most significant problem is Gutmann, now in her 12th year. From the beginning of Trump’s incendiary candidacy, she’s faced intense pressure to comment on Trump, from students, alumni, petitions, in-person requests, meeting arrangements and the media. Her own academic background suggests she has given the matter serious thought: As a professor, she fashioned a distinguished legacy as a political theorist, writing on the centrality of deliberation in building democratic civil society. But since Trump announced his candidacy, deliberation is the last thing Penn will do: Gutmann has consistently declined to comment on Trump for the Daily Pennsylvanian, and her silence has also stirred the ire of some alumni. In September, Nathaniel Popkin, a 1991 graduate, circulated a petition that criticized Gutmann for remaining silent on Trump. “Penn’s soaring reputation is based on its intellectual rigor alongside its embrace of multiculturalism,” the petition reads. “The close association of Donald J. Trump with the University undermines this distinguished identity.”

It’s not Trump’s politics that would require rebuke from Penn, in this line of thinking: It’s the way his rhetoric and behavior conflict with the school’s basic tenets of tolerance. The third sentence of Penn’s Code of Conduct highlights the university’s core values of “intellectual growth,” “learning from others” and “mutual tolerance”—which Trump’s critics see directly contradicted by the candidate’s proud anti-intellectualism and racially loaded politics.

The closest Gutmann has come to publicly weighing in on Trump happened last January, when she was pressed to comment during a once-a-semester editorial meeting with the Daily Pennsylvanian. Expressing visible discomfort, she told the group, “Discrimination against Muslims in our society is absolutely unacceptable. It is a form of invidious discrimination. It is, I believe, a disgrace for our society to engage in discrimination on the basis of religion or race.” She did not mention Trump by name. This semester, after Trump’s season of political meltdown, Gutmann effectively canceled the regular meeting, cutting down the hourlong gathering of 30 student staffers and granting half the usual time to just three student staffers. No one considered asking her about Trump.

Beyond just keeping quiet, administrators under her purview have taken an unusual step to enforce silence: In the summer of 2015, shortly after Trump announced his candidacy, administrators sent an email to Wharton faculty, urging them not to speak to the media, and direct queries about Trump to the school’s communication staff—which would then, in all likelihood, decline comment. (The details of the email, first reported in the Daily Pennsylvanian, were described independently to POLITICO by two Wharton professors, who believed their Wharton email system had deleted it automatically after six months.) Numerous Wharton faculty cited the policy in declining interviews for this story, even while some had joined the 4,000 Whartonites who signed the anti-Trump letter. One faculty member, who signed the letter, wrote in an email: “It’s Wharton’s policy that faculty are not to comment to members of the media about Trump.” No such directive is reported to exist for non-Wharton faculty. But the same edict of silence does apply to university administrators and staff, according to communication officers who spoke to me for this story.

Internally, the directive has surprised Penn public relations staffers. “You can’t infringe on the academic freedom of faculty,” said one senior communications administrator, who spoke on background due to his senior position. (Others speculated that the email may simply have been a convenient cover for faculty to duck the deluge of media requests about Trump.) Asked whether the directive threatened academic freedom at Penn, Wharton Director of Media Relations Peter Winicov demurred. “Unfortunately, we have no information about this,” Winicov wrote in an email. (Asked to clarify numerous times—including on a follow-up call and personal office visit—Winicov declined to respond.) Vice President for University Communications Stephen MacCarthy said he couldn’t even discuss the Trump email with me off the record. “The topic is just off limits,” he said.

As a nonprofit, the university is blocked from taking an official stance on political figures, says Ron Ozio, director of media relations. And the administration had another concern as well: For much of the time of Gutmann’s silence—including when she gave her statement to the Daily Pennsylvanian—Trump’s daughter Tiffany attended the college. She graduated last spring, just weeks before the national party conventions. Criticizing Trump would go beyond just bashing an alum: It would be blasting a tuition-paying parent. “It would be a disaster,” said one former Penn administrator, explaining the ramifications of a Gutmann statement on Trump. (This former administrator stood behind the administration on this: He said he hoped Gutmann wouldn’t give in to the “moralistic assholes” demanding she speak out.)

The university’s directive for silence has led to significant pretzel-twisting among organizations in the Penn community. The Penn Women’s Center, for instance, has tweeted about Trump from its official account (“Millions of women share sexual assault stories on Twitter after Donald Trump comments #notokay”), yet staffers there are barred from commenting on Trump even tangentially to the media, a spokesperson told me.

Would it be possible for Penn to take a stronger stance without impugning Gutmann’s neutrality? Possibly. “Look at Temple just across the way. When Bill Cosby’s rape accusations came out, they were very quick to remove him from their Board of Trustees,” Singh, the college senior, pointed out. Unlike Cosby, though, Penn doesn’t have a tangible relationship to sever with Trump. Its position is trickier, as it faces pressure to weigh in on a candidate who might contravene the school’s values, yet is still supported by about 40 percent of Americans (and, to be sure, an unknown percentage of Penn).

For the next few days, Penn students will take up their beef with Trump the old-fashioned way: Getting out the vote. Pennsylvania is a swing state, one of a few that could determine the election, and on Locust Walk, the campus thoroughfare that Trump once trekked to Wharton, Clinton campaign volunteers are busying themselves at manned foldout tables. Student volunteers from Penn Leads the Vote, a nonpartisan outfit, sit nearby. The College Republicans have largely shifted their resources to a razor-close Senate race here. With just days until Election Day, finding any measurable support for the school’s most world-famous alum is about as likely as the Penn Quakers winning the Final Four.

They’ve spent years dreaming of a Penn president. Now, the students, parents and alumni of Penn find themselves in a position they would not have expected: looking directly at the prospect of an alum in the White House, and working hard to make sure that it never happens.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
3.1.16  KDMichigan  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.13    4 weeks ago
Rump sued the schools he went to to not release his records.  Hmmmmm

[deleted]

You can post whatever bullshit you want but the fact is President Trump sued no school.

FYI no President has released his school records. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.17  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @3.1.2    4 weeks ago

P.S. MUVA kodos on your unwavering support of the turd in chief.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.19  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  KDMichigan @3.1.16    4 weeks ago

They wouldn't have disclosed his abysmal grades anyway without the turd's permission.  

 
 
 
KDMichigan
3.1.20  KDMichigan  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.19    4 weeks ago
They wouldn't have disclosed his abysmal grades anyway without the turd's permission.  

Make up your mind. 1st it was Trump sued the school to not release his records followed by two articles that did nothing to prove your claim and now it's the school wouldn't have released his records anyhow? jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.21  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  KDMichigan @3.1.16    4 weeks ago

If they wouldn't release them anyway what does the turd have to hide hmmmm?

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.22  Texan1211  replied to  KDMichigan @3.1.20    4 weeks ago
Make up your mind.

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.23  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.21    4 weeks ago
If they wouldn't release them anyway what does the turd have to hide hmmmm?

It's so cute you actually believes grades matter now.

Kind of like believing that Trump "hid" something in plain sight in his tax returns.

LOL!

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
MUVA
3.1.24  MUVA  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.5    4 weeks ago

Did you not read my comment I did support what Trump said what I actually  said is that Trump isn't the only one that attacked McCain.Did you vote for McCain if not why?

 
 
 
KDMichigan
3.1.25  KDMichigan  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.21    4 weeks ago
what does the turd have to hide

You are the one making stuff up. Why don't you make something else up and tell us?

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.26  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @3.1.24    4 weeks ago

I'm also tired of your whataboutism

 
 
 
WallyW
3.1.27  WallyW  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.26    4 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
3.1.28  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  MUVA @3.1.2    4 weeks ago
Sorry the democrats did more than just the usual election attacks they tried to smear him and his service at the time it is disingenuous at best this love for him now.  

Sorry but George W. (Moron) Bush is not a Dem  and wasn't when his campaign slandered McCain in the SC primary  in 2000 for having a mixed-race love child:

Eight years ago this month, John McCain took the New Hampshire primary and was favored to win in South Carolina. Had he succeeded, he would likely have thwarted the presidential aspirations of George W. Bush and become the Republican nominee. But Bush strategist Karl Rove came to the rescue with a vicious smear tactic.

Rove invented a uniquely injurious fiction for his operatives to circulate via a phony poll. Voters were asked, "Would you be more or less likely to vote for John McCain…if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?" This was no random slur. McCain was at the time campaigning with his dark-skinned daughter, Bridget, adopted from Bangladesh.

https://www.thenation.com/article/dirty-tricks-south-carolina-and-john-mccain/

You won't find anything like that from any of McCain's Dem opponents.  Sure, they went after him for policies and politics but never something that low and deplorable.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
3.1.29  Sean Treacy  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @3.1.28    4 weeks ago
nted a uniquely injurious fiction for his operatives to circulate via a phony poll. Voters were asked, "Would you be more or less likely to vote for John McCain…if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?" This was no random slur. McCain was at the time campaigning with his dark-skinned daughter, Bridget, adopted from Bangladesh.

Never happened.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.30  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.29    4 weeks ago

Yes, it did happen.  

 
 
 
lady in black
3.1.31  lady in black  replied to  MUVA @3.1    4 weeks ago

I was torn between McCain and Obama, but unfortunately when McCain picked the grifter from Alaska he lost my vote knowing that air head would be a heartbeat away from the presidency.  

 
 
 
Split Personality
3.1.32  Split Personality  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.29    4 weeks ago

The “revolting” e-mail—alleging that “McCain chose to sire children without marriage”—was from Richard Hand, a professor of the Bible at Greenville’s Christian-fundamentalist Bob Jones University, Bush’s very first campaign stop, on February 2. With the school’s ban on interracial dating still in effect then, the veteran political reporter Curtis Wilkie told me “he might as well have gone to a goddamned Klan rally” as go to B.J.U.

Bush came under attack for it, mostly from Democrats and commentators. McCain said little. (It wasn’t until nine days after the primary that he declared that the G.O.P. is “the party of Ronald Reagan, not Pat Robertson … the party of Abraham Lincoln, not Bob Jones.”) But Danielle Vinson, an associate professor of political science at Greenville’s Furman University, who studied the primary in depth, told me that what the media didn’t grasp is that “B.J.U. people are very active, very political; they’re a great campaign resource.” As it turned out, Wilkie said, “Bush knew what he was doing going to Bob Jones”—shrewdly “pandering” to the evangelical vote, just as called for in the Reed game plan.

“This whole thing, it was orchestrated by Rove, it was all Bush’s deal.… It was pretty rank,” said Fletcher, “and they had an institution that was peddling all that shit, and it was a university, Bob Jones University. I’m telling you, if there was a campaign headquarters in South Carolina, there it was. Hand was part of it, but Hand wasn’t the only one.”

Mark Carman, who owns the Capitol City News & Maps store, told me of going to a candidates’ debate in Columbia, “and when we got back to our car, there was a flyer under the windshield wiper saying something about McCain having a Negro child. My wife is African-American—she just tore it up.”

State representative Jim Merrill, a political operative in 2000 who’d backed Dan Quayle before moving to McCain, told me, “We caught a couple of kids red-handed putting flyers on cars outside a seniors’ center in Hilton Head. One of the kids said a guy had paid him 50 bucks to do it.” Who was that guy? He had no idea.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2004/11/mccain200411?verso=true

Yes, it happened.

https://www.seattlepi.com/local/opinion/article/Rove-s-dirty-tricks-Let-us-count-the-ways-1246665.php https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/05/why-karl-rove-uses-dirty-tricks-they-work/370811/
 
 
 
MUVA
3.1.33  MUVA  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.26    4 weeks ago

Tuff shit I'm sick of false outrage and the word turd and revisionist history.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
3.1.34  Sean Treacy  replied to  Split Personality @3.1.32    4 weeks ago

That doesn't address the claim.

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.35  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @3.1.33    4 weeks ago

Outrage and revisionist history?  jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

[Deleted]

Turd is a good word to describe this shitstain of a 'president'  Would you prefer scumbag?

Again, if you don't like my seeds, don't comment.  Move along.

 
 
 
MUVA
3.1.36  MUVA  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.35    4 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.37  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @3.1.36    4 weeks ago

Don't you have work to do?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
3.1.38  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.37    4 weeks ago

It's National Goof-Off Day

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
3.1.39  Trout Giggles  replied to  MUVA @3.1.36    4 weeks ago
Why do you post seeds to get people tickets for the echo chamber?

When you get a ticket that's all on you. Nobody held a gun to your head and told you to make CoC violating comment.

You blaming Tessy for you getting tickets is like saying the Devil made me do it

ps Tessy....you're not the Devil...I am

 
 
 
MUVA
3.1.40  MUVA  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.37    4 weeks ago

Actually I'm putting a engine back together waiting for parts from land and sea thanks for asking.

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.41  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.1.39    4 weeks ago

jrSmiley_68_smiley_image.pngMy kind of girl!

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
3.1.42  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  MUVA @3.1.2    4 weeks ago
Sorry the democrats did more than just the usual election attacks they tried to smear him and his service at the time it is disingenuous at best this love for him now.  

The fuck they did.  I've already put up the reminder of how, during the SC primary in 2000, the Rove/Bush chickenshits accused him of fathering an out-of-wedlock child with a woman of color when, in fact, the child was  adopted from India.  No Dem ever came within light years of that kind of vicious, racist, cowardly  attack lie.  

 
 
 
MUVA
4  MUVA    4 weeks ago

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/2644617/Barack-Obama-attacks-John-McCain-in-first-US-presidential-campaign-speech.html

Why wasn't John Mccain elected president did you vote for him when he ran?I never supported him because he was a war monger.  

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
4.1  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  MUVA @4    4 weeks ago

If only Trumps attacks on McCain were as innocuous and unoffensive as Obama's.

"I don't believe that Senator McCain doesn't care what's going on in the lives of Americans - I just think he doesn't know"."

"Unlike John McCain, I will stop giving tax breaks to corporations that ship our jobs overseas, and I will start giving them to companies that create good jobs right here in America."

"Senator McCain likes to talk about judgment, but really, what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush was right more than ninety percent of the time? I don't know about you, but I'm not ready to take a ten percent chance on change."

So Obama was critical of McCain's votes in the Senate, critical of certain policy positions McCain took, pointed out how he felt he was politically different from McCain, but not a single personal attack. No claim that McCain wasn't a war hero, no bashing McCain's record of service, no dismissing the torture McCain endured while a POW. Such well defined, legitimate "attacks" would be refreshing compared to the vile, disgusting personal attacks of the current dumb-fuck in chief Donald who is nothing more than a poorly educated narcissistic schoolyard bully. 

 
 
 
r.t..b...
4.2  r.t..b...  replied to  MUVA @4    4 weeks ago
Why wasn't John Mccain elected president did you vote for him when he ran?I never supported him because he was a war monger. 

Immaterial. The incoherent rantings of our philander-in-chief having nothing to do with McCain's election efforts. It is a heart issue, one in which he demonstrates a complete lack of respect for the sacrifices the late Senator made for his country, sacrifices he himself avoided. He is but a petty, petulant churl. Kudos to those who call him out for his remarks, and shame on those who in any way excuse them.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
4.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  MUVA @4    4 weeks ago

McCain should have won the 2000 primary. I would have voted for him in the general. I always admired the man but didn't always like his policies.

There was no way I was voting for him in 2008 after he picked Palin to be his running mate. That was a colossal mistake on his part

 
 
 
Veronica
4.3.1  Veronica  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.3    4 weeks ago

Isn't funny how we all hated McCain until Trump came along, but many of us would have voted for him.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
4.3.2  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Veronica @4.3.1    4 weeks ago

I suspect he would have been elected president if it hadn't been for Sarah P.

I think John admitted somewhere that she was one of his biggest mistakes.

 
 
 
Veronica
4.3.3  Veronica  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @4.3.2    4 weeks ago

I think you are correct.  

 
 
 
cjcold
4.3.4  cjcold  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.3    4 weeks ago

Yep. Always liked him for being able to cross party lines to do what he thought was right for We the People.

We could use more politicians like McCain and fewer like Trump.

 
 
 
katrix
4.3.5  katrix  replied to  cjcold @4.3.4    4 weeks ago
We could use more politicians like McCain and fewer like Trump.

We could.  Are most people so stupid that they think the will find a politician they agree with all the time? It seems that many voters are that stupid.  And many care more about their political party and their little tribe than they do about our great country.  Tribalism doesn't work out well for anyone ...

 
 
 
livefreeordie
4.3.6  livefreeordie  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @4.3.2    4 weeks ago

She was the only reason I considered voting for the leftist bootlicker McCain.  But she wasn’t enough for me to vote for him and I stayed 3rd party

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
4.4  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  MUVA @4    4 weeks ago
Why wasn't John Mccain elected president did you vote for him when he ran?I never supported him because he was a war monger. 

Same here and other reasons having to do with his politics  but  I never thought of much less talked about him like your Scumbag does.  And now you seem very comfortable with trashing him.  Why?  

 
 
 
MUVA
4.4.1  MUVA  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @4.4    4 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
4.5  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  MUVA @4    4 weeks ago

I call BS.  You didn't vote for him because he wasn't a teapartier. 

 
 
 
Kavika
5  Kavika     4 weeks ago
Why wasn't John Mccain elected president did you vote for him when he ran?I never supported him because he was a war monger.  

Obama did not attack him personally nor his military service. Only Trump is low enough to do that. There were reasons to vote against McCain, none of them involve his personal courage or service to this country. PERIOD.

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Kavika @5    4 weeks ago
'Obama did not attack him personally nor his military service. Only Trump is low enough to do that. There were reasons to vote against McCain, none of them involve his personal courage or service to this country. PERIOD.'

jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
MUVA
5.2  MUVA  replied to  Kavika @5    4 weeks ago

I will find the clips of the personal attacks when I get to a computer remember Obama won.

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.2.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @5.2    4 weeks ago

Don't bother posting them here.  

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
5.2.2  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  MUVA @5.2    4 weeks ago
I will find the clips of the personal attacks when I get to a computer remember Obama won.

Oh, yes please do come back.  We'll be watching carefully and can hardly wait.  

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
5.2.3  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Tessylo @5.2.1    4 weeks ago
Don't bother posting them here. 

Don't worry.  He'll either come back with a big pile of bullshit that we'll have a lot of fun with or not come back at all which will also be a source of much mirth. 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
5.2.4  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @5.2.3    4 weeks ago
or not come back at all

[Removed

 
 
 
bbl-1
6  bbl-1    4 weeks ago

Isakson, a day late and a dollar short.  Then again, he was always that.

Whatever it was the GOP had morally or ethically, they threw it away with the Trump.

 
 
 
Rmando
7  Rmando    4 weeks ago

Trump must be some kind of master manipulator. All he does is wave some shiny object in front of his enemies and they run around in circles for days chasing their tales.

If this is the most pressing news of day then it must've been a slow week.

 
 
 
katrix
7.1  katrix  replied to  Rmando @7    4 weeks ago

There was a lot of pressing news on Sunday, such as the mass killing in New Zealand, but Trump thought that insulting a dead hero was more important.

 
 
 
Rmando
7.1.1  Rmando  replied to  katrix @7.1    4 weeks ago

The shootings actually happened last Friday, but to your point- the left seems a lot more interested in what Trump and George Conway have to say instead of what happened in New Zealand.

 
 
 
cjcold
7.1.2  cjcold  replied to  katrix @7.1    4 weeks ago

Every day is a new low for Trump.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
7.1.3  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  cjcold @7.1.2    4 weeks ago

Hey, that suggests a new moniker for him:  "New-Low-Daily Scumbag"

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
7.2  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Rmando @7    4 weeks ago
All he does is wave some shiny object in front of his enemies and they run around in circles for days chasing their tales [sic].

By enemies do you mean Johnny Isak who called him deplorable?  Funny how that word keeps cropping up from so many disparate sources about your Scumbag. 

 
 
 
Rmando
7.2.1  Rmando  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @7.2    4 weeks ago

Trump has many enemies in both parties. That's what happens when the establishment/ swamp gets challenged. They fight to keep the status quo where they're firmly on top and everybody else just takes their orders and likes it or else.

 
 
 
cjcold
7.2.2  cjcold  replied to  Rmando @7.2.1    4 weeks ago

Used to take orders but not so much anymore. Trump IS the swamp he warned us about.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
7.2.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  cjcold @7.2.2    4 weeks ago

and he keeps throwing more trash in that swamp every day

 
 
 
Tacos!
8  Tacos!    4 weeks ago

God, this story is everywhere! I tend to disagree with Trump's criticisms of McCain, but I can't believe the contrived feverish moral outrage over all this. People who, for years, hated John McCain or criticized him enthusiastically suddenly rush to his defense because the evil Trump is the one doing the criticizing now.

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @8    4 weeks ago

There's no 'contrived feverish moral outrage'.  People are just commenting on the turd in chief's petty deplorable self.  

 
 
 
WallyW
8.1.1  WallyW  replied to  Tessylo @8.1    4 weeks ago

A consensus of 97% of Americans don't care what Trump says, about McCain or anyone else.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
8.1.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  WallyW @8.1.1    4 weeks ago

Got a link for that?

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.1.3  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @8.1.2    4 weeks ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Krishna
8.1.4  Krishna  replied to  WallyW @8.1.1    4 weeks ago
A consensus of 97% of Americans don't care what Trump says, about McCain or anyone else.

Link?

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
8.1.5  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Trout Giggles @8.1.2    4 weeks ago
Got a link for that?

Gee, another magic disappearing act from one of these "types."  It's a feature, not a bug. 

 
 
 
r.t..b...
8.2  r.t..b...  replied to  Tacos! @8    4 weeks ago
I can't believe the contrived feverish moral outrage over all this.

Imagine for a moment that McCain had never been elected to office but rather chose to live his life out of the public eye as so many of his compatriots did after that horrendous experience. Trumps criticisms, and those who defend or deflect from them, are nothing but partisan gamesmanship and therefore even more pathetic. Indefensible.

 
 
 
WallyW
8.2.1  WallyW  replied to  r.t..b... @8.2    4 weeks ago

The Dems hated McCain, before they loved him.

 
 
 
Veronica
8.2.2  Veronica  replied to  WallyW @8.2.1    4 weeks ago

And you speak for Democrats now?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
8.2.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  WallyW @8.2.1    4 weeks ago

Same with Goldwater, Reagan etc..

Once they die. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.4  Tacos!  replied to  r.t..b... @8.2    4 weeks ago
Imagine for a moment that McCain had never been elected to office but rather chose to live his life out of the public eye as so many of his compatriots did after that horrendous experience.

He didn't, but OK . . . and therefore: what? If you are making a point, I'm not seeing it.

Trumps criticisms . . . 

are rooted in politics. I don't think that's a mystery.

Indefensible.

I'm not focused on anyone who is defending the criticisms. I'm not defending them per se. I think Trump is wrong on most of them. But I don't think the act of doing it is out of line simply because - as the media and some politicians are painting it - McCain was a man above reproach or he shouldn't be criticized at all because he's dead.

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.5  Tacos!  replied to  Veronica @8.2.2    4 weeks ago

In 2008, they were calling him too old, too physically feeble, and too senile to be president. They called him a warmonger for advocating the surge in Iraq. They accused him of seeking soft assignments and benefitting from nepotism in the Navy. 

Now they paint him as the greatest man who ever walked planet Earth. It's hypocritical bullshit.

Sorry, but I liked John McCain before it was cool. I never thought him perfect, though, or beyond criticism.

 
 
 
Veronica
8.2.6  Veronica  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.5    4 weeks ago

Who is "they"?

 
 
 
Veronica
8.2.7  Veronica  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.5    4 weeks ago

Sorry, you are wrong when it comes to me.  I wanted him to get the nomination in 2000, but GW did.  I would have voted for him in 2008, but he picked a moron for a VP candidate.  So please do not speak for me.

 
 
 
Veronica
8.2.8  Veronica  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.5    4 weeks ago

Who said he was perfect (please show me where on this thread anyone said he was perfect)?

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.9  Tacos!  replied to  Veronica @8.2.6    4 weeks ago
Who is "they"?

Liberal politicians and media.

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.10  Tacos!  replied to  Veronica @8.2.7    4 weeks ago
Sorry, you are wrong when it comes to me.

I made no comment about you.

So please do not speak for me.

I have made no attempt to speak for you. Are you sure you are replying to the right person?

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.2.11  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.9    4 weeks ago

Links?

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.2.12  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.10    4 weeks ago

You've made many attempts to speak for all of us who dare to condemn the deplorable shit stain in chief for kicking Mr. McCain's corpse.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.2.13  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.4    4 weeks ago
'I'm not defending them per se.'

Yes you are.

 
 
 
Veronica
8.2.14  Veronica  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.10    4 weeks ago

Until asked directly who the "they" in your posts were it could be inferred you were speaking for anyone declaring Trump being an asshole in attacking a decorated military man.

Again - NO ONE here declared McCain as perfect, so if you meant the "liberal politicians and media" please link anything stating that anyone thought or said that McCain was perfect.  

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.14  Tacos!  replied to  Tessylo @8.2.12    4 weeks ago

Links? 

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.16  Tacos!  replied to  Veronica @8.2.14    4 weeks ago

The word "perfect" is my shorthand for the effusive praise heaped on McCain ever since Trump started attacking him. I'm not trying to quote anyone. Every time Trump goes after McCain, it is characterized as being out of line on some kind of moral ground, not so much on the substance of the criticism itself.

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.2.17  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.14    4 weeks ago
Who is "they"?
Liberal politicians and media.
Links?

 
 
 
Veronica
8.2.18  Veronica  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.16    4 weeks ago

So you get to define words now?  Gotcha.  If it is your shorthand, how do you expect anyone reading your comments not to misconstrue what you are saying?

Trump has no moral ground in my opinion, so his nastiness towards McCain is not surprising since McCain knew what he was from the beginning.  Too bad he decided to follow the party line instead of having the balls to stand up and say "NO!"

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.19  Tacos!  replied to  Veronica @8.2.18    4 weeks ago
So you get to define words now?  Gotcha.  If it is your shorthand, how do you expect anyone reading your comments not to misconstrue what you are saying?

I don't see the need to be hostile. I am always happy to clarify any misunderstanding of something I have said. I did that just now for you.

I'm sorry, but if you are trying to make a point, it's just not clear. What is your problem with what I have said? 

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.20  Tacos!  replied to  Tessylo @8.2.17    4 weeks ago

Sorry, but you don't get links. In my experience, you ignore them. And anyway, the comment you are quoting was not even directed at you. If you're feeling really curious, you can check out the other current seed on this story. I posted quite a lot of links over there.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
8.2.21  r.t..b...  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.4    4 weeks ago
I think Trump is wrong on most of them. But I don't think the act of doing it is out of line simply because - as the media and some politicians are painting it - McCain was a man above reproach or he shouldn't be criticized at all because he's dead.

Trump is wrong on all of them. If his criticism was leveled at the politician McCain, so be it (though at this point to what end?) His rants run much deeper than the political, and if not, why continually bring them up? It is not a media initiated event as he is the one who for some reason cannot let it go. Guilt? Envy? Avoiding the real issues at hand? In any case, it is reprehensible. 

 
 
 
Veronica
8.2.22  Veronica  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.19    4 weeks ago

So I am hostile because you cannot be clear.  You can call people hypocritical & that isn't hostile, you can attack the seeder & that isn't hostile, but me asking you questions about your comments (because they seemed to be directed at those posting here) and I am hostile - what a fucking laugh........

 
 
 
r.t..b...
8.2.23  r.t..b...  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.4    4 weeks ago
Imagine for a moment that McCain had never been elected to office but rather chose to live his life out of the public eye as so many of his compatriots did after that horrendous experience.
He didn't, but OK . . . and therefore: what? If you are making a point, I'm not seeing it.

The point being we honor those who have served. Political disagreements aside. It cannot be more simple.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
8.2.24  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  WallyW @8.2.1    4 weeks ago
The Dems hated McCain, before they loved him.

The first clause is a demonstrable falsehood manufactured specifically for the purpose of cover for the despicable, disgusting and deplorable filth coming out of Scumbag's scumhole.  The second is simply poorly worded.  Dems respected McCain even when they disagreed with him.  Of course, McCain's "mavericky" thing was silliness and actually was created by the media which loved him.  And his "Straight-Talk Express" was a bit of a joke but not at all unusual for politicians in general. But Dems didn't attack McCain personally or in any way even close to what Scumbag & Co. having been doing ever since Scumbag decided to run for office.  

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
8.2.25  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.20    4 weeks ago
Sorry, but you don't get links. In my experience, you ignore them. And anyway, the comment you are quoting was not even directed at you. If you're feeling really curious, you can check out the other current seed on this story. I posted quite a lot of links over there.

IOW, you aint got shit, right? 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
8.2.26  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.4    4 weeks ago
I'm not defending them per se.

But just in general, right? 

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.28  Tacos!  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @8.2.25    4 weeks ago

IOW you have no idea what you're talking about.

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.29  Tacos!  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @8.2.26    4 weeks ago

I am doing two things:

1) I am defending the right of Trump to attack McCain just as he might attack anyone else. There is nothing special about John McCain that immunizes him from that.

And 2) I am pointing out the hypocrisy of so many who were highly critical of McCain when he was alive, but because Trump hates him, they talk much better about him.

I hope that helps you understand.

 
 
 
cjcold
8.2.30  cjcold  replied to  WallyW @8.2.1    4 weeks ago

Whether I agreed with McCain or not, Always had respect for him. Trump has no respect for anybody including himself (maybe that's why he hates everybody including himself).

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.2.31  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.29    4 weeks ago

jrSmiley_38_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
cjcold
8.2.32  cjcold  replied to  Veronica @8.2.6    4 weeks ago

The generic "they" who we all consider the "other".

 
 
 
Veronica
8.2.33  Veronica  replied to  cjcold @8.2.32    4 weeks ago

So I was not totally incorrect in assuming Tacos was talking about NT posters with his/her "they"?

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.2.34  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.20    4 weeks ago
'Sorry, but you don't get links. In my experience, you ignore them. And anyway, the comment you are quoting was not even directed at you. If you're feeling really curious, you can check out the other current seed on this story. I posted quite a lot of links over there.'

I didn't want you to post your links on my seed but the moderators refuse to remove them.  Why would I look at your links?  

You're twisting yourself into pretzels defending the indefensible and continue to kick Mr. McCain's corpse.  

It's my seed and I can comment on anything here.  

You're welcome to move along and stop defending the turd in chief.  

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.35  Tacos!  replied to  Tessylo @8.2.34    4 weeks ago
I didn't want you to post your links on my seed

Actually you asked me for links @8.2.11

the moderators refuse to remove them

Maybe that's because you asked for them. Or maybe it's because posting links is pretty common practice around here and isn't a violation of any kind.

Why would I look at your links?

In theory, because you asked for them. But then you get them and you call them off-topic, so . . . jrSmiley_26_smiley_image.gif

You're twisting yourself into pretzels defending the indefensible

The only thing I have defended here is free speech.

continue to kick Mr. McCain's corpse

I haven't done anything like that. I liked John McCain. I voted for John McCain. Did you?

It's my seed and I can comment on anything here. 

I never said you couldn't.

You're welcome to move along

I know I'm welcome to, but I don't feel like it. As you indicated, people have a right to comment and you don't get to tell me that I can't.

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.2.36  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.35    4 weeks ago

I didn't ask you to post all your irrelevant links.  I asked for relevant links.  Not the ones you picked for the other article.  

'I know I'm welcome to, but I don't feel like it.'  Removed

You may have the last word, for now.  

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
8.2.37  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.16    4 weeks ago
The word "perfect" is my shorthand for the effusive praise heaped on McCain ever since Trump started attacking him.

If you mean by "effusive praise" stating  the incontrovertible fact that Scumbag is dogshit compared to McCain then, yeah.  But that's something that can be said for most human beings.   

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
8.2.38  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.28    4 weeks ago
IOW you have no idea what you're talking about.

Considering the source for that comment, I can only "say"  jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
8.2.39  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.28    4 weeks ago
IOW you have no idea what you're talking about.

I know at least two things for certain:  you haven't presented one fact in this whole discussion and you're defending Scumbag's despicable attacks on a man Scumbag could ever hope to be.  Wait, there's a third thing:  you can't even keep track of what you're defending.  One minute you say you're not defending Scumbag and the next telling us you're fine with his attacks.  It seems I'm not the one who has no idea what he's talking about.  

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.40  Tacos!  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @8.2.39    4 weeks ago

Three posts in a row all for lil ole me? Obsessing?

I know at least

I don't think you know what you think you know. You seem to have some need to be in opposition to me. I invite you to give up trying to define me and instead just try listening.

You think you're defending John McCain to me, but I'll bet I was more of a supporter of his when he was alive then you ever were. 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
8.2.41  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.40    4 weeks ago

Oh, c'mon.  You're not  complicated or mysterious.  Obsessing?  Nah....you just keep asking for it and I'm more than happy to oblige.  And I'm not defending McCain at all and more of a "supporter"--with "support" like yours no wonder he lost so badly in 2008.  No, this is about what a scumbag your Scumbag is for his despicable,  lunacy-driven hate attacks on someone who was so much his better and you barely able to generate a "tsk" for it.  

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.42  Tacos!  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @8.2.41    4 weeks ago
barely able to generate a "tsk" for it

WTF is the significance of tsk? That and a dollar will get you on the crosstown bus. Is that worse than calling it bullshit? Because that's what I did. You conveniently keep forgetting that or dismissing it so that you can demonize me as much as you hate Trump. Your obsession in this regard leaves you incapable of understanding the simple nuance that I can disagree with something someone says yet still acknowledge their right to say it.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
8.2.43  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.42    4 weeks ago
WTF is the significance of tsk?

Nothing and that's the point.  It's so insincere that it's basically a green light for Scumbag to sink even deeper into his septic-tank, worm-infested mind.  It tells us you really like what you hear from that despicable POS.  

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.44  Tacos!  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @8.2.43    4 weeks ago
It tells us you really like what you hear

See, now you're just lying. I have said in multiple places - and reminded you of it multiple times - that I don't like or agree with what Trump said. You are deliberately ignoring what I have said about my own opinion so that you can demonize me. Your participation in this regard is dishonest.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
8.2.45  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.35    4 weeks ago

Why would I look at your links?

that statement perfectly encapsulates the ethos of some here.

its perfect

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
8.3  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Tacos! @8    4 weeks ago
I tend to disagree with Trump's criticisms of McCain,

Wow, that is some courageous stand....kinda, sorta. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.3.2  Tacos!  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @8.3    4 weeks ago

I'm not trying to impress you or anyone else with my courage. It's simply a fact. Must everything be a fight?

 
 
 
cjcold
8.3.3  cjcold  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.2    4 weeks ago

This liberal had lots of respect for McCain sticking to his guns and voting his conscience.

 
 
 
cjcold
8.3.4  cjcold  replied to  cjcold @8.3.3    4 weeks ago

Even when we disagreed I still enjoyed listening to his argument.

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.3.5  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.2    4 weeks ago

[Removed]

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
8.3.6  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.2    4 weeks ago
I'm not trying to impress you or anyone else with my courage.

Well, that's very wise of you.

 
 
 
pat wilson
9  pat wilson    4 weeks ago

I knew he was a genuine, good man when at a campaign rally a nut-case woman asked McCain if Obama was an Arab. McCain took the mike away from her and said, "no mam, Barak Obama is a good, christian, family man". He literally shut her up.

 
 
 
luther28
10  luther28    4 weeks ago

I would have to ask, where are the other 51 GOP Senators? Or perhaps a few GOP Reps may have a bit to say (or not it would appear).

This was a moment in which the GOP had an opportunity to grow a spine as a whole by denouncing enmasse Mr. Trumps berating of an American hero, they have failed miserably. Cowards!

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
10.1  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  luther28 @10    4 weeks ago
I would have to ask, where are the other 51 GOP Senators? Or perhaps a few GOP Reps may have a bit to say (or not it would appear).

The silence of Lindsay Graham is a deafening condemnation of his abject cowardice and complete lack of even a shred of decency.

 
 
 
livefreeordie
10.1.1  livefreeordie  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @10.1    4 weeks ago

John McCain was no conservative which is why I voted 3rd Party instead of voting for him in 2008. I call for him to retire from the Senate for over 20 years so an actual conservative could fill that Senate seat.

I’m glad he’s no longer damaging our country with his obsession of trying to please his leftist friends 

 
 
 
Tessylo
10.1.2  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  livefreeordie @10.1.1    4 weeks ago

He's dead.  Move along pastor.

What pastor would condemn and call an honorable man like Mr. McCain a leftist boot lickerand kick a dead man repeatedly and besmirch his honor?

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
10.1.3  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  livefreeordie @10.1.1    4 weeks ago

No one here gives a rat's ass who you voted for or why.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
10.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @10.1.3    4 weeks ago

If no one cares, why comment on it?

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
10.1.5  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Texan1211 @10.1.4    4 weeks ago
If no one cares, why comment on it?

You're commenting on it.  Golly, Tex.  Not that I mind but you don't  have to make it so easy for me.

 
 
 
Texan1211
10.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @10.1.5    4 weeks ago
You're commenting on it. Golly, Tex. Not that I mind but you don't have to make it so easy for me.

reading comprehension could be your friend, if utilized.

I didn't comment on who he voted for--I commented on your rather inane post claiming no gave a rat's ass how he voted, and yet you felt compelled to comment on it when you don't give a rat's ass about it.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
10.1.7  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Texan1211 @10.1.6    4 weeks ago
reading comprehension could be your friend, if utilized.

Some ability to recognize context might work for you, too.  You decided to comment on a comment  which was not about you asking why I would comment.  That is the definition of going mega "meta."  I do love it when you resort so quickly to your trademark snark so I can slap that down, too.  Like I said...you don't have to make it so easy. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
10.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @10.1.7    4 weeks ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
10.1.9  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Texan1211 @10.1.8    4 weeks ago

Great response.   It's some indication that you actually might have a speck of self-awareness after all.  But it does tell us also that you don't have a clue what "meta" means.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
10.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @10.1.9    4 weeks ago
Great response.

It was, and so appropriate, too!

Thanks!

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
10.1.11  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Texan1211 @10.1.10    4 weeks ago
It was, and so appropriate, too! Thanks!

[Removed

 
 
 
Texan1211
10.1.12  Texan1211  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @10.1.11    3 weeks ago
It was, and so appropriate, too! Thanks!

That may qualify as your best post ever. Congrats!

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
11  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו    4 weeks ago

I've gone back over all you comments on this page and here's all I can find that barely comes close (yet  still misses by miles) to expressing the idea of Scumbag being held accountable for his scumbaggery. 

I tend to disagree with Trump's criticisms of McCain 8 [btw, none of Scumbag's comments fall into a category of criticism;  they are personal attacks on McCain's character and his life in general]
I think Trump is wrong on most of them.  8.2.4 [this is what earned the "nampy-pamby" award for what you claimed was criticism of Scumbag]

You case for  being any kind of critic of Scumbag is built on quicksand of your own making. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
11.1  Tacos!  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @11    4 weeks ago

Your thought process on this is clear. If I don't agree with you 100% then it means I worship Donald Trump. Sorry, but I see a little more gray in the world. Good day to you sir.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
11.1.1  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Tacos! @11.1    4 weeks ago
If I don't agree with you 100% then it means I worship Donald Trump.

You indict yourself with you own words, time and time again.  And I thank you for it. 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

FLYNAVY1
Tessylo
WallyW


43 visitors