Trump's inability to restrain himself (Attacks on Greta Thunberg) (2 Viewers)

[coldseat]

I realize the title is inflammatory (to some), but in this instance it's well warranted. His attacks and mocking of Greta Thunberg are disgusting and unacceptable. I know we're just supposed to ignore him because he does this with everybody, but we shouldn't. There is no time and place where we should accept a US President mocking a 16 year old minor. NEVER! For any reason. If you don't have a problem with this, there's a problem with you.

Her activism for climate change and the fact that it irks Trump is irrelevant to how she should be treated, especially publicly by a US President.

This is what Trump represents to the world. This is the face they see when they think of America now, a 70-year old man attacking a 16-year old girl concerned about her future and the future of the planet she lives on. This is one of the main reasons he needs to go.

Trump again mocks teen climate activist Greta Thunberg - CNN Politics

President Donald Trump on Thursday again publicly mocked teen climate crisis activist Greta Thunberg, tweeting that the 16-year-old Swede who has inspired protesters worldwide has "anger management" issues.

www.cnn.com

 

[Dadsdream]

So what I am taking away from this exchange is you, DD (and probably others) have no idea who is backing her or how they came to be in that position, just throwing crap out there about shadowy conspiracies and dark forces using her for their own nefarious plots.

If that’s not the case, then I await your response about where you got this idea that she is being exploited for some sort of conspiracy by someone.

You didn’t get the idea by googling like you just did. Have the courage of your convictions, DD, just straight up admit where you got the idea. Are you ashamed of where you got the idea?

Woah. Stop. Right. There. Throwing up crap?

I straight up got the idea from my own knowledge, education and experience in the realm of politics.

No teenager goes to the UN for a speech without somebody sponsoring it for their own reasons. That's simple logic.

I am not ashamed of thinking for myself at all.

 

[samiam5211]

Woah. Stop. Right. There. Throwing up crap?

I straight up got the idea from my own knowledge, education and experience in the realm of politics.

No teenager goes to the UN for a speech without somebody sponsoring it for their own reasons. That's simple logic.

I am not ashamed of thinking for myself at all.

Do you think the UN speech was the first time anyone heard Greta speak?

 

[Dadsdream]

The implication of this is that you think 16 year olds should be actively prevented from campaigning, in order to prevent them from achieving a high enough profile such that they become subject to personal attacks from the President of the USA.

Which is a weird take.

It's the personal attacks from the President of the USA that are wrong. Not the being 16 years old. Not the campaigning. The personal attacks.

I disagree. Putting a teenager in an international spotlight, making her the spokesperson for a political movement, that puts her in the line of fire and subject to the same recriminations that anybody else would face. It goes with the territory. Make no mistake, she was selected and put there.

 

[Dadsdream]

Do you think the UN speech was the first time anyone heard Greta speak?

Nope. Who paid for the trip?

 

[First Time Poster]

Trump supporters are just going to have a hard time convincing anyone that if President Obama were on Twitter trolling and bullying a 16 year old gun rights activist that your reaction would be, "oh well, her handlers shouldn't have put her in the spotlight like that. She's free game. Troll on Obama." There is nothing credible that any of you can provide that would lead anyone to believe that your rhetoric would be consistent in that fashion. So, that whole line of reasoning is DOA. You enjoy him trolling her like that and her politics makes it acceptable in your eyes. I wish you all would just own that and regain a modicum of credibility.

That being the case, it is shameful. For him and y'all. He is the freaking President of the United States. All of the equivocating is more poor rhetoric. A law professor is not the President. An ordinary citizen is not the President. He has the most power. The largest platform. He is in charge of the most powerful economy and military in the world. He exudes the greatest influence. You all want him to be treated like the President but none of you expect him to act like the President. He isn't a reality tv star anymore. This isn't a Howard Stern interview anymore. You want him to enjoy all of these unlimited, unchecked powers of the executive, granted to him by the constitution, but not hold him to a standard of not trolling a damn child on Twitter?! She isn't a head of state. She isn't in charge of some national or international agency. Yes, she is an activist but she is also 16 years old. It is beneath his office. It is beneath him as a man. It should be beneath y'all.

 

[dtc]

You don't know a lot about Aspergers do you lol ?

That "medical condition" as you call it and which she calls her "superpower" is the driving force behindh her campaign - not "handlers"

I have a nephew with that diagnosis and good luck with trying to change his mind or his focus once he gets going. He is superintelligent, extremely focused and persistent and will spend days, weeks, months reading everything written on the topic down to the finest details and don't ever discuss one of his "focus" topics with him because he will run in circles around you because he litterally have every fact memorized. He is also a 22 year old young man with a good job in IT, but who lives in a group home because he tends to forget important stuff like eating and socializing

If Greta is anything like Thomas then the parents had no other choice than to follow her lead once she got going...

Or discuss modern European history with one of our regulars over on the SR board. I won't name him for fear of it seeming that I'm calling him out, but never underestimate the knowledge a person can have.

 

[dtc]

One had no choice about his father becoming president.
One chose to be an environmental activist.

Past presidents have made it very clear what is acceptable and what is not acceptable regarding their underage children.
That didn't stop people from endlessly making crass remarks about Jenna Bush or Chelsea Clinton or Malia Obama.
But it did allow the presidents to draw a protective, fatherly line in the sand about what was right and what was wrong.

Deliberately putting a juvenile in the world spotlight to further environmental activism is a cold and calculated move and a deliberate choice, and the juvenile will be treated like anybody else who steps into that arena.

Your first statement and previous ones refer to her as being forced, cajoled or tricked into being the face of some hidden agenda and in every other breath you say she chose it.

Which is it?

 

[coldseat]

Hi, Dragon.

OK, you don't like calling it a "medical condition" so let's call it a "malady" or an "affliction" or a "trait," or any one of a thousand other words from the thesaurus. Regardless, it is irrelevant. Whatever it was that caused her to initially gain notoriety is now irrelevant.

She's being used to parrot talking points fed to her by handlers that picked her to be the face of environmental activism.
They will just as quickly cast her aside when she develops opinions of he own which don't coincide with theirs.

Nice talking with you, Dragon, as always.

You can call it a disorder, because technically, that's what it is. She just doesn't have a neurotypical brain. All that means is that her brain works differently, process things in the world around her differently. There are things that she may struggle with that other neurotypical people may not struggle with, but at the same time she's able to focus and do things easily that others with neurotypical brains can not do.

When properly understood and treated, it's not a malady, affliction or anything else that's negative, it's just different. That's why neurotypical people struggle so much with people with asperger, because they're different.

I can guarantee you that Greta has command and understanding of the information, facts and figures she's using. She's not being fed anything. I can also guarantee you that she is doing this because she wants to and feels she needs too.

 

[Dadsdream]

Your first statement and previous ones refer to her as being forced, cajoled or tricked into being the face of some hidden agenda and in every other breath you say she chose it.

Which is it?

A little bit of both.

 

[samiam5211]

Nope. Who paid for the trip?

Do you think those same people funded her from the start like a Manchurian candidate planted by a cult of Al Gore acolytes?

 

[dtc]

A little bit of both.

I imagine it would be easier to nail jello to a hot frying pan than to get a straight answer out of someone who's defending Trump's myriad attacks against whomever most recently has become his focus.

I find it to be quite bothersome, but unsurprising at this point. Trump is an evil man. Those who defend his petty, vindictive, and egotistical attacks are, in fact, plainly supporting evil acts undertaken with bad intention.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Oh, one last thing.
Were the president's remarks crass, rude and totally in character for him, unfortunately? Yes.


Who paid for her trip to the UN?
Who pays for the flights, the hotels, the food, the fliers, the posters, the billboards?
Somebody has to pay for all that.
Somebody has to manage scheduling, agenda, press releases, speeches, script writing.
You think all of that is being handled by a teenage girl by herself?
You're a bright lady. Since you're asking the question, why don't you look that up for yourself and let me know?

I typed Greta Thunber's Handlers and got this:

Luisa Neubauer - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

You can take it from there.

I assume you're referring to climate change activist Greta Thunberg. Misspelling that particular name could erode your credibility with your audience.

 

[Dadsdream]

I assume you're referring to climate change activist Greta Thunberg. Misspelling that particular name could erode your credibility with your audience.

She's no Ronald Reagan, that's for sure.

 

[coldseat]

I disagree. Putting a teenager in an international spotlight, making her the spokesperson for a political movement, that puts her in the line of fire and subject to the same recriminations that anybody else would face. It goes with the territory. Make no mistake, she was selected and put there.

You know, you can have your opinion about her "handlers", however irrelevant it is to this discussion, and still condemn Trump, the president of the freaking United States of America, for belittling a 16-year old girl on twitter. The two are not mutually exclusive position. Nor is it acceptable or palatable for the President of the United States to engage a minor publicly in that manner. Never, for any reason.

In fact, if you actually and truly believed that Greta is being manipulated by her "handlers", that makes what Trump is doing even orders of magnitude worse. Because then not only is he picking on and belittling a 16 year old girl on twitter, he's also doing it to one, who according to you, is being abused and mistreated by people that should be protecting you.

So tell me again, how does any of this makes what Trump is doing okay? The answer is simple and if you and other Trump supporters would stop protecting and equivocating for him, you would be able to easily acknowledge that.

 

[Dadsdream]

You know, you can have your opinion about her "handlers", however irrelevant it is to this discussion, and still condemn the Trump, the president of the freaking United States of America, for belittling a 16-year old girl on twitter. The two are not mutually exclusive position. Nor is it acceptable or palatable for the President of the United States to engage a minor publicly in that manner. Never, for any reason.

In fact, if you actually and truly believed that Greta is being manipulated by her "handlers", that makes what Trump is doing even order of magnitude worse. Because then not only is he picking on and belittling a 16 year old girl on twitter, he's also doing it to one, who according to you, is being abused and mistreated by people that should be protecting you.

So tell me again, how does any of this makes what Trump is doing okay? The answer is simple and if you and other Trump supporters would stop protecting and equivocating for him, you would be able to easily acknowledge that.

See Post #121, my obligatory "Orange Man Bad" disclaimer.

Oh, one last thing.
Were the president's remarks crass, rude and totally in character for him, unfortunately? Yes.

 

[efil4]

Trump supporters are just going to have a hard time convincing anyone that if President Obama were on Twitter trolling and bullying a 16 year old gun rights activist that your reaction would be, "oh well, her handlers shouldn't have put her in the spotlight like that. She's free game. Troll on Obama." There is nothing credible that any of you can provide that would lead anyone to believe that your rhetoric would be consistent in that fashion. So, that whole line of reasoning is DOA. You enjoy him trolling her like that and her politics makes it acceptable in your eyes. I wish you all would just own that and regain a modicum of credibility.

That being the case, it is shameful. For him and y'all. He is the freaking President of the United States. All of the equivocating is more poor rhetoric. A law professor is not the President. An ordinary citizen is not the President. He has the most power. The largest platform. He is in charge of the most powerful economy and military in the world. He exudes the greatest influence. You all want him to be treated like the President but none of you expect him to act like the President. He isn't a reality tv star anymore. This isn't a Howard Stern interview anymore. You want him to enjoy all of these unlimited, unchecked powers of the executive, granted to him by the constitution, but not hold him to a standard of not trolling a damn child on Twitter?! She isn't a head of state. She isn't in charge of some national or international agency. Yes, she is an activist but she is also 16 years old. It is beneath his office. It is beneath him as a man. It should be beneath y'all.

Its not. because .....

its Ok when they do it.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

She's no Ronald Reagan, that's for sure.

Joke's on you. I was asking about clean working stand up comic Brian Regan.

Now that you and I can joke and laugh with each other, can you do me a favor and answer the question you've been avoiding? Yes or No: Do you think it is acceptable for the president of this country to mock, belittle, and insult a 16 year old in a massive public forum?

 

[efil4]

Oh, one last thing.
Were the president's remarks crass, rude and totally in character for him, unfortunately? Yes.


Who paid for her trip to the UN?
Who pays for the flights, the hotels, the food, the fliers, the posters, the billboards?
Somebody has to pay for all that.
Somebody has to manage scheduling, agenda, press releases, speeches, script writing.
You think all of that is being handled by a teenage girl by herself?
You're a bright lady. Since you're asking the question, why don't you look that up for yourself and let me know?

I typed Greta Thunber's Handlers and got this:

Luisa Neubauer - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

You can take it from there.

so did you ever discover the answers to your questions?

or is that Wiki page all you are going to link?