隴山隴西郡

寧靜純我心 感得事物人 寫樸實清新. 閑書閑話養閑心,閑筆閑寫記閑人;人生無虞懂珍惜,以沫相濡字字真。
個人資料
  • 博客訪問:
文章分類
歸檔
正文

going politically incorrect: Hillary Clinton?

(2016-09-15 09:15:01) 下一個

going politically incorrect: Hillary Clinton?

"Hillary Clinton, speaking at a New York fundraiser on Friday night, generalized that

“you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables” referring to Trump’s support among racists, xenophobes, and sexists in America. We'll see how she goes with that or if she can get away with it as she used to."

How do you fell being labeled now? Trump camps, full of force, attack Hillary's political incorrectness.

Hey, you, be grateful: Without PC, you would never have been here. Neither can you say anthing, nor can you set a needle on this land of freedom.

May the Lord continue to bless America with love, persperity, freedom, safety, and happiness as He has!

~~~

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/readersreact/la-ol-le-deplorable-20160913-snap-story.html

The truth about Donald Trump's 'deplorable' supporters

To the editor: A  significant number of Donald Trump’s supporters cheer his racial and gender disparagement, his thinly disguised white supremacism, his incitement to violence and his ignorant nativism.

( “Republicans go on attack over Clinton’s words,” Sept. 11)

 

Exactly what about these supporters is not deplorable?

Barbara Carlton, El Cajon

 

::

To the editor: I believe some of Trump’s supporters are bigoted or racist. They hate “political correctness” because they want to openly express their bigotry or racism but they don’t want to be denounced for doing so.

Hillary Clinton denounces them for their bigotry and racism and then, ironically, they denounce her for being politically incorrect.

There is intolerance, and then there’s intolerance of intolerance.

The first is reprehensible, while the second is not.

Michael Asher, Valley Village

::

To the editor: I was upset to read that Clinton was responding to the bogus Republican outrage by “expressing regret” for her commenting upon the obvious.

If anything, Clinton should have clarified her remark in excruciating detail.

Trump and his minions retweet the rabid sputum of white supremacists. Her only expression of regret should have been for the deplorable state of the present Republican Party.

Kevin Gallivan, Tujunga

::

To the editor: The people who support Trump claim they like straight talk.

Why then are they so incensed when Clinton speaks the truth?

In my book, if you support Trump then you know what he stands for, therefore you are just like him. It’s not like he’s hidden his disdain with regard to people who don’t happen to belong to the Caucasian stock of humans.

The straight talk will not hurt her. In my opinion it will help.

Nato Flores, Los Angeles

::

To the editor: It is truly sad that a portion of the U.S. electorate feels so beaten down, angry and disenfranchised that they would be swayed by the hateful rhetoric that has been part of the Trump campaign since Day One.

It sounds like a classic case of Stockholm syndrome. Their constant diet of right-wing talk radio, Fox News and the large amount of misinformation on various Internet-based outlets only fuels their disdain for all things Clinton.

I think the characterization of Clinton’s remarks as a gaffe was erroneous. She was only speaking the truth.

Gary Tereshkow, Palm Springs

::

To the editor: After insulting tens of millions of Trump supporters with her ridiculous “basket of deplorables” attack, Clinton did not apologize.

She didn’t even deliver a “quick, but partial, apology,” as your article says.

Instead, Clinton did what career politicians always do when caught in the act: She had a surrogate issue a statement expressing “regret.”

In this instance, the regret wasn’t about the insult, it was about the number of people she insulted (“half”).

Michael Sanchez, Laguna Beach

::

I am not deplorable.

Rose Ettaro

West Hills

 

::

To the editor: Since the inception of this political campaign, Trump has distorted the truth, blatantly disrespected our president, slammed ethnic groups, made a mockery of those who put their life on the line for our freedom, and refused to learn about the issues at home and abroad in order to be an effective leader.

He is coddled by the media and not held to the same standards.

But Clinton is accused of elitism and disrespect the minute she says something about him and the fire he is fanning (hatred, racism, etc.).

The way I see it, this campaign is not about who is the better candidate but a race between a man and a woman — and it’s clear to me that misogyny is alive and well.

Doris K. Reed, Los Angeles

::

To the editor: Only half?

Peter Del Greco, Santa Monica

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook

 
Copyright © 2016, Los Angeles Times
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Opinion

Show us the reasons for Voter ID

To the editor: Zoltan Hajnal fails to address for me the reason why voter ID laws suppress minority votes.

( “Strict voter ID laws hurt minorities,” Opinion, Sept. 8)

It is absurd that in a society where you can't cash a check, board an airplane and often need to validate your identity to use a credit card that ID proof to cast a vote is considered discriminating. Is it possible these folks legally don't qualify to vote ?

Read Full Article
 
 
 
Opinion

Learning takes more than teaching. It requires mentoring, training, parents and more

To the editor: Karin Klein’s opinion piece suggests mentoring to improve teaching skills. A good idea, but it doesn't address the core of the problem.

First, define “teacher ... ’’

Time is up! What’s the right answer? People talk of “teaching” as if means “magically instill knowledge.” It doesn't work that way; learning takes work.

( “How to make a better teacher,” Opinion, Sept. 5)

My definition: a teacher helps students learn. Students put forth needed effort. Teachers help.

Read Full Article
 
 
Opinion

Undecided voters should look beyond the candidates to 'implications of party'

To the editor: To say the 2016 election offers a choice between the lesser of two evils is to suggest that the candidates are equally flawed, albeit in different ways. They are not.

One has shown bad judgment, certainly, but boasts a laudable résumé in public service, demonstrates a thorough understanding of all the issues, and exhibits consistency in her campaign messaging.

( “What undecided voters are waiting for,” Opinion, Sept. 7 and “Voters are struggling to commit,” Sept.

Read Full Article
 
 
 
Opinion

How best to do bilingual education

To the editor: I strongly agree with your editorial. In fact, bilingual education is even more effective than the Times' sources indicate.

( “Return to bilingual education,” Editorial, Sept. 7)

The most rigorous research design is to compare the progress of children in bilingual programs and children in all-English programs with similar backgrounds.

In general, these studies have shown that children enrolled in bilingual programs do better than children in all-English programs on tests of English reading.

Read Full Article
 
 
 
Opinion

Who's responsible for picking up the Rams' security tab?

To the editor: In “No freebies for the Rams,” The Times editorial board this week pointed out: “With all the celebrating and backslapping by city leaders on the return of professional football to Los Angeles, apparently somebody forgot to figure out who's going to pay for all the security around the Coliseum.”

Oh, right, there’s that.

As the editorial said, “The debate is over who should cover the cost outside the stadium — including parking lots and surrounding neighborhoods — on game days, which are expected to draw up to 70,000 fans.”

Read Full Article

 

 


更多我的博客文章>>>

 

 

[ 打印 ]
閱讀 ()評論 (0)
評論
目前還沒有任何評論
登錄後才可評論.