In Rashida Tlaib’s defense, Trump has literally fucked at least 3 mothers by having children by 3 wives, and figuratively wants to fuck all mothers by denying them post-natal care.
-
-
There's also the whole "children in cages" thing, which should be objectively worse than some bad language by any reasonable standard.
Thanks. Twitter will use this info to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Since we have a SCOTUS that pinned girls down and showed his weiner at parties that the GOP resoundingly approved, MFer is mild. And no I don't think she should've said that. And yes I love that she did.
Thanks. Twitter will use this info to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Let the pearl-clutching begin! The same people who defend Donald’s crassness are the ones who’re outraged at that statement.
Thanks. Twitter will use this info to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
or when he said nazis were fine people
Thanks. Twitter will use this info to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
When Republicans clutch their pearls it's a breakdown of civility and when anyone else does they're snowflakes. Sure love this country.
Thanks. Twitter will use this info to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Doesn’t that work the other way around tho? If you were upset with Trump saying those things, should you be upset at this too? This sort of logic seems to work both ways.
-
Depends. If what you were upset about was literally "omg he said a bad word!!!/omg uncivil language", yeah, sure. But since I often have a foul mouth myself that was never the problem.
-
If however your problem was with his dehumanization of the vulnerable, his vilification of the undeserving, his lying about people exercising their legal rights, his tacit or outright encouragement of sexual assault, etc etc...then no. It really isn't the same.
-
I agree, but this was not the equivalence tweeted.
-
Those objecting currently are in fact objecting to The Bad Word/Uncivil Language. Therefore they are hypocritical if they did not also object to the bad words and uncivil language used by 45 previously. However the reverse is not the case, for reasons I explained.
-
One can, as the op has, point out the hypocrisy at play without also implying acceptance of the value system that is being inconsistently applied.
-
On the other hand, if there is indeed anyone out there whose reasons for being upset with 45 denigrating people as pigs and SOBs were in fact based around "nobody should ever use that kind of language at anyone", then indeed they too are hypocritical if they are not upset now.
-
However I, for one, do not actually have any problem with (say) someone who is actually an SOB being called so. Instead, I feel it's totally inappropriate for someone who is peacefully and non-disruptively making a personal protest being called so.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I'm not upset that anybody called the president a motherfucker. What I want to know is... who called that motherfucker a president?
Thanks. Twitter will use this info to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So, calling an actual motherfucker a "motherfucker" is worthy of censure and expulsion, but calling Barack Obama the "most successful food stamp president in American history" or likening him to a "tar baby", or calling Michelle Obama "Mrs. YoMamma" is just SOP. Got it, GOP.
Thanks. Twitter will use this info to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
OR when he used the same word:https://twitter.com/HarveyLawson1/status/1081240526152712193 …
0:38Thanks. Twitter will use this info to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
And now we get to watch the right-wing and MSM act like the kid from Jerry Maguire.pic.twitter.com/LQ5CkihCze
Thanks. Twitter will use this info to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this info to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.