Synagogue Shooting in Pittsburgh

The leadership of Congress (both sides) refused to join Trump in Pittsburgh after local Jewish leaders asked him not to come. Has that ever happened before?
 
The leadership of Congress (both sides) refused to join Trump in Pittsburgh after local Jewish leaders asked him not to come. Has that ever happened before?
Trump has unified the nation in ways previous leaders could only dream!

Both sides of Congress opposed Nixon after Watergate. Probably the best example.
 
Trump has unified the nation in ways previous leaders could only dream!
Not really, but he is surely giving enough spunk to his supporters, who imagine George Soros as some communist warlock (also, note the noose next to Obama).

45111375_2404034052946221_8209237388191334400_n.jpg
 
It's hard to imagine a single tragedy that is not political, at some level. It's not my experience that this is a controversial perspective on the left.

So you agree Ryika was wrong in mocking the right for politicizing it.
 
A Jewish Synagogue was tagged with hate speech messages last night here in Irvine.
 
A Jewish Synagogue was tagged with hate speech messages last night here in Irvine.
This could be the alt-right deliberately ramping up the hate just in time for the mid-terms. Or it could be a few whackjobs who would have done it yesterday. Unfortunately we'll have to see how the violence escalates to be sure.
 
I'd really like to see some examples of the right politicizing it.

You can't. From where you stand there is no "right." What I call "the right" is for you just the "nearer on the left." That's what happens to extremists.
 
I'd really like to see some examples of the right politicizing it. .

In response to a question about whether the shooting Saturday at the Tree of Life Synagogue should spark questions of increased gun control, Trump said: “If they had protection inside, the results would have been far better. If they had some kind of protection within the temple it could have been a much better situation. They didn’t.”

It might not seem like it to you, but this is a shout-out to the 2nd Amendment crowd.

Trump also noted that the New York Stock Exchange opened the day after the terrorist attacks Sept. 11, 2001. But it actually opened six days after those attacks.

Here he's lying about his response to the event in order to not change his political tone.
 
It might not seem like it to you, but this is a shout-out to the 2nd Amendment crowd.
Probably shouldn't even bother. There are so many examples of the right politicising tragedies like this that in order to deny it you need to be either; so far right that you think Mussolini was a commie, or; such a partisan hack/ideologue you can't admit your side has ever done wrong. Maybe both. Unless Mouthwash lives under a rock in Rupert Murdoch's garden, he can't possibly have failed to notice this.
 
Those would be pretty dumb takes, but I don't see them in either link.

The first link shows it clearly. Apparently nothing short of shoving it right in your face will do:
fScDWso.jpg


Here is an Atlantic staff writer calling for the 'shunning' of pro-Trump Jews: "Any strategy for enhancing the security of American Jewry should involve shunning Trump’s Jewish enablers. Their money should be refused, their presence in synagogues not welcome. They have placed their community in danger."

There are also countless pieces about how the shootings were Trump's fault:
https://www.scmp.com/news/world/uni...mp-arrives-pittsburgh-wake-synagogue-massacre
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...2607289efee_story.html?utm_term=.11c5c04132fc
https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.pr...ttsburgh-but-he-prepped-the-shooter-1.6595902
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli.../bend-the-arc-pittsburgh-jewish-leaders-trump

It might not seem like it to you, but this is a shout-out to the 2nd Amendment crowd.

Not only doesn't it seem like it, it isn't. It's very clearly a suggestion to have Israeli-style armed guards at Jewish synagogues and schools, which is already being done in Europe.

Here he's lying about his response to the event in order to not change his political tone.

If the best you can do is pointing out that a notoriously unfiltered politician talked about his response to the attack in order to change the political tone (which is *not* using the attack itself to make political points), then I'm just going to assume the right is basically innocent here and that making these accusations has simply become reflexive for the left.

(Have to admit it is clever to politicize a tragedy by smearing the other side for politicizing it.)
 
Back
Top Bottom