What makes a great politician?

[David Lockmiller]

(01-13-2018 10:35 PM)My Name Is Kate Wrote:  The person quoted in David Lockmiller's next-to-last post, Senator J. William Fulbright, former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was a Segregationist. Look it up. So it looks like the accuser is in the same company too, without even knowing it.

Call me a racist, bigot, white supremacist, extremist, etc., if that's what it takes to feel superior and righteous. But I am none of those things.

President Trump never said a word about the people who live in the "********" countries. . . .

If you look it up, what I said in that referenced "next-to-last post" of mine was the following:

"I should like to add another voice to my opinion regarding President Kennedy". . . . Mark Shields, [who] worked for Senator J. William Fulbright, former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in his last campaign in 1974 in Arkansas, quoted Senator Fulbright as having said “Whenever I went to the White House when John Kennedy was president, I was proud as an American that he was my president.”

What exactly was the accusation against you that I made in that next-to-last post, Kate? I do not even mention your name in that next-to-last post of mine.

Then, Kate makes the following accusation against me regarding my last post: "Call me a racist, bigot, white supremacist, extremist, etc., if that's what it takes to feel superior and righteous. But I am none of those things."

In my last post, I first quoted from Kate's previous post as follows:

"The word that President Trump allegedly spoke the other day, does not bother me. It was just a word, crude but accurate."

I then began my last post after quoting Kate with these words:

"It would appear that you are in good company!"

["Good company" was meant as sarcasm to describe the repugnant two classes of people described in the Washington Post article quoted below who happen to share your opinion regarding these poor Caribbean and African countries.]

Thereafter, I immediately quoted from Washington Post article titled "“Trump’s vulgarity: Overt racism or a president who says what many think?” This story was published in the Saturday, January 13 Washington Post (byline dated January 12 at 7:00 PM).

As the title of the article suggests, the question being considered in the article is whether the words used by President Trump were signs of "overt racism" or was President Trump merely "crudely" saying in this White House meeting with members of Congress from both parties what many American citizens actually think.

The quoted paragraph is as follows:

Right-wing extremists and white supremacists welcomed Trump’s comment. Former Ku Klux Klan leader and Louisiana legislator David Duke said on Twitter that the president “restores a lot of love in us by saying blunt but truthful things that no other President in our lifetime would dare say!”

There is only a small distinction, if any, between David Duke describing President Trump as "saying blunt but truthful things" and kate describing President Trump's vulgar verbal expression said in context as "It was just a word, crude but accurate." What is the difference between "crude but accurate" and "blunt but truthful" in describing these poor countries as "********" countries?

Then, Kate made the statement: "President Trump never said a word about the people who live in the "********" countries."

Not true. It has been reliably alleged that President Trump asked why any immigrants from these "******** countries" should be permitted to immigrate to the United States. Instead, he allegedly proposed that more people from "Norway and countries like that" should be permitted to immigrate to the United States.