Comrade Trump Jr. compares Syrian Refugees to Skittles

[rightwinger]

So, we're now equating Islamofascist nutters to lawful gun owners?


What a bunch of loons.

It demonstrates how crappy the analogy is. And make no mistake, it is a crappy analogy.

It is an awfully callous analogy that we need to throw away the whole bowl because one or two pieces may be bad

 

[ptbw forever]

This is the new "binders full of women" statement that only Democrats are stupid enough to be offended by, isn't it?

The company that makes Skittles was offended by it

They are Democrats, are they not?

 

[GaryDog]

This is the new "binders full of women" statement that only Democrats are stupid enough to be offended by, isn't it?

Meh, same result. Trump will lose just like Romney. Keep downplaying it, tho.

 

[Trump.Stamped]

Skittles Issues Terse Response to Trump Jr. Refugee Tweet

Just another spoiled rich kid. I am sure dad is very proud of Comrade Junior for such a sick analogy,,,

That's absolutely ridiculous. I would have used Milk Duds or Raisinettes.

 

[rightwinger]

This is the new "binders full of women" statement that only Democrats are stupid enough to be offended by, isn't it?

The company that makes Skittles was offended by it

They are Democrats, are they not?

No, they are businessmen

 

[ptbw forever]

This is the new "binders full of women" statement that only Democrats are stupid enough to be offended by, isn't it?

The company that makes Skittles was offended by it

They are Democrats, are they not?

No, they are businessmen

If anything they would be flattered that a presidential candidate's campaign staff member from a major political party would even mention their candy.

Trump Jr. could have literally pick any food item for that analogy.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Attention.. Attention.. We will be having a mock Skittles Drill in the forum in 15 mins. Liberals will need to find and go to their safe place.

 

[rightwinger]

This is the new "binders full of women" statement that only Democrats are stupid enough to be offended by, isn't it?

The company that makes Skittles was offended by it

They are Democrats, are they not?

No, they are businessmen

If anything they would be flattered that a presidential candidate's campaign staff member from a major political party would even mention their candy.

Trump Jr. could have literally pick any food item for that analogy.

They didn't want their product becoming synonymous with denying humanitarian aid

 

[ptbw forever]

This is the new "binders full of women" statement that only Democrats are stupid enough to be offended by, isn't it?

The company that makes Skittles was offended by it

They are Democrats, are they not?

No, they are businessmen

If anything they would be flattered that a presidential candidate's campaign staff member from a major political party would even mention their candy.

Trump Jr. could have literally pick any food item for that analogy.

They didn't want their product becoming synonymous with denying humanitarian aid

So what you are telling me is that if Trump Jr. used M and Ms or Starbursts, Skittles wouldn't have a problem with it?

 

[Auld Phart]

Two of Trumps "Skittles"

Which one do you think is a terrorist?

Two of Trumps "Skittles"

Did he say ALL the 'skittles' are terrorists?

or are you painting with a

 

[Auld Phart]

Skittles Issues Terse Response to Trump Jr. Refugee Tweet

Just another spoiled rich kid. I am sure dad is very proud of Comrade Junior for such a sick analogy,,,

And just 150 years ago they said the same about Irish immigrants...

yup, and we never had problems with the Irish mobs did we?

 

[Moonglow]

Skittles Issues Terse Response to Trump Jr. Refugee Tweet

Just another spoiled rich kid. I am sure dad is very proud of Comrade Junior for such a sick analogy,,,

And just 150 years ago they said the same about Irish immigrants...

yup, and we never had problems with the Irish mobs did we?

There has not been a nationality that has moved to the US that didn't have mobs and committed violence or acts of criminality..

 

[rightwinger]

Two of Trumps "Skittles"

Which one do you think is a terrorist?

Two of Trumps "Skittles"

Did he say ALL the 'skittles' are terrorists?

or are you painting with a

It is those two "skittles" that Trump doesn't want to help because he is afraid of terrorist infiltration

It is Trump who is using a broad brush in handling the Syrian crisis

 

[Auld Phart]

You just don't get it.

NO, you are AVOIDING 'it'.

No one tells you when you wake up in the morning, 'Here are 3 pairs of socks to wear today - 1 of them will kill you. Now pick'.

THAT is the analogy Jr offered, and that is the question I am asking you. It's a pretty simple damn 'Yes' or 'No' question....that you REFUSE to answer because you KNOW - we ALL do - your answer is 'NO'!

One last time, man up - 'You are given a bowl of skittles and told there are several in the bowl that WILL kill you. Do you grab a handful at this point and eat them?'

At this point, my guess is you will either refuse to answer the question again or lie and say 'yes' yo save face.

If I were you, I would just drop it, as I said, because you are just embarrassing yourself.

No one is answering your challenge because it's a crappy analogy. People aren't Skittles. If I refuse to eat the Skittles in the bowl the good ones aren't going to be killed by their government. Analogies are useful, but they have limits. You can only push an analogy so far and this analogy breaks down as soon as you compare people to candy.

The better analogy is this:

A building is burning down. One of the people still in the building is an arsonist who likely will set another fire. Do you keep all of the people locked up in the burning building, or do you let them out?

What's your answer?

Speaking of crappy analogies...

A building is burning down. One of the people still in the building is an arsonist who likely will set another fire. Do you keep all of the people locked up in the burning building, or do you let them out?

 

[Contumacious]

'Generalization' - the tell-tale sign of a BIGOT.

You mean like the generalization that Syrians are terrorists?

One would have to be retarded to the max to believe that after the number that uncle tom Obama has done to Syria that many of them would not want to retaliate against the US and Americans.


.

We let Vietnamese refugees into the country and many had a grudge against the us. They made good citizens

Incorrect.

In the 1950's Viet Nam was divided into two , the Communist North and the non communist South.

The US fought to liberate SOUTH VIETNAM from the tyrannical North.


In Syria, on the other hand

the US invaded that Country in order to support and defend Israel The US has invaded Syria in order to allow Israel to retain the Golan Heights and in order to make Israel the only power in the middle east. The US has financially and militarily aided ISIS and Al Nusrah , which are populated by former Baathists , Sunni, Iraqis who were displaced when Bush II invaded that Country.

So Syrians know, or should know, that the Obama administration invaded and destroyed their country PRIMARILY to comply with Israel demands.


.

The US has invaded Syria in order to allow Israel to retain the Golan Heights

Israel has easily held the Golan Heights for nearly 50 years.
They needed no help against little Assad.

in order to make Israel the only power in the middle east

They are the only military power in the middle east.

Well, your neocrazy homies didn't think so.


Neither does Obama, he is in Syria, ain't he?

This doctrine was prefigured in a 1996 paper prepared for then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by a working group consisting of several individuals who are now in top spots in the Bush administration. "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" recommended that Israel set itself free from its embarrassing and debilitating dependence on U.S. military and diplomatic support: no matter how unconditional, this support constrained Israel and prevented it from pursuing its true interests. The paper, co-authored by Richard Perle, James Colbert,Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser, portrayed Syria as the main enemy of Israel, but maintained the road to Damascus had to first pass through Baghdad:

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq – an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right – as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq."


,

 

[Dr.Traveler]

You just don't get it.

NO, you are AVOIDING 'it'.

No one tells you when you wake up in the morning, 'Here are 3 pairs of socks to wear today - 1 of them will kill you. Now pick'.

THAT is the analogy Jr offered, and that is the question I am asking you. It's a pretty simple damn 'Yes' or 'No' question....that you REFUSE to answer because you KNOW - we ALL do - your answer is 'NO'!

One last time, man up - 'You are given a bowl of skittles and told there are several in the bowl that WILL kill you. Do you grab a handful at this point and eat them?'

At this point, my guess is you will either refuse to answer the question again or lie and say 'yes' yo save face.

If I were you, I would just drop it, as I said, because you are just embarrassing yourself.

No one is answering your challenge because it's a crappy analogy. People aren't Skittles. If I refuse to eat the Skittles in the bowl the good ones aren't going to be killed by their government. Analogies are useful, but they have limits. You can only push an analogy so far and this analogy breaks down as soon as you compare people to candy.

The better analogy is this:

A building is burning down. One of the people still in the building is an arsonist who likely will set another fire. Do you keep all of the people locked up in the burning building, or do you let them out?

What's your answer?

Speaking of crappy analogies...

A building is burning down. One of the people still in the building is an arsonist who likely will set another fire. Do you keep all of the people locked up in the burning building, or do you let them out?

Eh, closer to reality than the Skittles analogy. Syria is pretty much like a building on fire right now and the refugees are trying to get out. How we react to that situation says a great deal about us as a nation. There's a lot of folks on the board that want to "Make America Great Again!" If we react like other countries have and turn our back on people who need help, then Great isn't an adjective we get to use. Especially if that decision to turn our backs on the problem is motivated by fear. That isn't greatness, that's the other thing.

 

[miketx]

Skittles Issues Terse Response to Trump Jr. Refugee Tweet

Just another spoiled rich kid. I am sure dad is very proud of Comrade Junior for such a sick analogy,,,

I'd be proud of him! When Trumps elected all this bullshit you liberal traitors embrace will end. I hope you rot in prison for the rest of your worthless life.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

You mean like the generalization that Syrians are terrorists?

One would have to be retarded to the max to believe that after the number that uncle tom Obama has done to Syria that many of them would not want to retaliate against the US and Americans.


.

We let Vietnamese refugees into the country and many had a grudge against the us. They made good citizens

Incorrect.

In the 1950's Viet Nam was divided into two , the Communist North and the non communist South.

The US fought to liberate SOUTH VIETNAM from the tyrannical North.


In Syria, on the other hand

the US invaded that Country in order to support and defend Israel The US has invaded Syria in order to allow Israel to retain the Golan Heights and in order to make Israel the only power in the middle east. The US has financially and militarily aided ISIS and Al Nusrah , which are populated by former Baathists , Sunni, Iraqis who were displaced when Bush II invaded that Country.

So Syrians know, or should know, that the Obama administration invaded and destroyed their country PRIMARILY to comply with Israel demands.


.

The US has invaded Syria in order to allow Israel to retain the Golan Heights

Israel has easily held the Golan Heights for nearly 50 years.
They needed no help against little Assad.

in order to make Israel the only power in the middle east

They are the only military power in the middle east.

Well, your neocrazy homies didn't think so.


Neither does Obama, he is in Syria, ain't he?

This doctrine was prefigured in a 1996 paper prepared for then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by a working group consisting of several individuals who are now in top spots in the Bush administration. "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" recommended that Israel set itself free from its embarrassing and debilitating dependence on U.S. military and diplomatic support: no matter how unconditional, this support constrained Israel and prevented it from pursuing its true interests. The paper, co-authored by Richard Perle, James Colbert,Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser, portrayed Syria as the main enemy of Israel, but maintained the road to Damascus had to first pass through Baghdad:

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq – an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right – as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq."


,

Syria's been a big problem in the region for a good long time. There isn't much else to say on that. They've exploded recently, but this has all been coming for a good long while.

 

[JimH52]

Skittles Issues Terse Response to Trump Jr. Refugee Tweet

Just another spoiled rich kid. I am sure dad is very proud of Comrade Junior for such a sick analogy,,,

apparently the company that makes skittles told him to stop comparing candy to human beings.

although that type of thing does harken back to white supremacist memes.

there's a shock.

http://www.salon.com/2016/09/21/donald-trump-jr-and-the-white-nationalist-alt-right-a-pattern-that-goes-way-beyond-coincidence/


When Donald Jr. spoke to a white-supremacist radio host in March, it set off a few alarm bells, if only because his father’s extreme immigration policies had been so ecstatically received by white nationalist groups. But most people chalked it up to inexperience and let it go. Surely Junior wasn’t as crudely racist as the old man, who was reported to have a book of Hitler’s speeches on his bedside table.

But just a few days later Donald Jr. retweeted a racist science-fiction writer named Theodore Beale, who goes by the handle of “Vox Day,” claiming that a famous picture of a Trump supporter giving a Nazi salute was actually a follower of Sen. Bernie Sanders. The apple hasn’t fallen far from the tree after all.

A couple of days later Trump Jr. stepped in it again, saying the media would be “warming up the gas chamber” for Republicans if they lied and cheated the way Hillary Clinton does. He claimed he was talking about capital punishment, but no American state has used gas as an execution method in recent years, and Donald Jr.’s association with virulent anti-Semites makes that claim ring a little bit hollow.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And then came the Skittles incident. Donald Jr. sent out a deeply offensive tweet with an image of a bowl of Skittles and the words “If I had a bowl of Skittles and I told you three would kill you would you take a handful? That’s our Syrian refugee problem.” It’s a terrible metaphor, wrong in every way, and Donald Jr. took some heat for it. But it’s yet another window into his association with alt-right white nationalism. That bad metaphor has been around in various forms for a long time. In this country it was usually a bowl of M&Ms representing black people. The people who traffic in this garbage changed it to Skittles because that was the candy Trayvon Martin had bought at a convenience store on the night he was shot dead by vigilante George Zimmerman. Yes, it’s that sick.
___________________________________________________________________________________

So Skittles has replaced M&Ms as the "bowl of black people". Comrade Trump Junior may have a few extra white sheets in his closet.

 

[JimH52]

Trayvon Martin and Skittles....another wink and nod to the Alt Right, the KKK of the 21st Century.