My Pillow guy goes off script at WH briefing

[+OverSword]

Quote

 

President Donald Trump kicked off Monday’s press briefing on the coronavirus much like every other, by running through daily updates about the deadly virus and the White House efforts to eradicate it.

But unlike in typical briefings throughout the pandemic, in which various members of the administration discuss what their agencies are doing to combat the virus or help blunt its economic toll, Trump yielded the stage first to a handful of business leaders — one of them a staunch supporter who went off script in a moment of effusive praise for the president.

 

Read the rest and watch the "offensive" video here

Of course you can't invoke God without invoking twitter rage

 

 

Of course also tweets complaining about things that were never said

 

And they get nastier and nastier

 

But why was he at the White House?  What was the crime he is guilty of?

Quote

 

“MyPillow has joined the fight against COVID-19. We are now manufacturing masks for our nation’s healthcare workers. These masks will not be for sale to the public. Please keep all those impacted in your prayers. We will get through this together." said Mike Lindell, Inventor & CEO of MyPillow.

Lindell says the company is currently making 10,000 masks per day and expects to produce 50,000 cotton face masks by Friday. The masks will be distributed to healthcare workers across the county. 

 

Link

People are just nasty.  

[+and-then]

46 minutes ago, OverSword said:

People are just nasty. 

They are, indeed and they hate what they can't bring down to their level.  Imagine a world where those people, that ideology, had the power of the state behind it.  

[Tatetopa]

3 minutes ago, and then said:

They are, indeed and they hate what they can't bring down to their level.  Imagine a world where those people, that ideology, had the power of the state behind it.  

They do.

[+and-then]

15 minutes ago, Piney said:

You mean like the Religious Right? 

They are both extremists.......

I hear this complaint a lot and I never see actual examples of how evangelicals are imposing their views on anyone.  What I'm speaking of isn't merely offending a stranger by mentioning a faith they don't share.  If you have real examples of religious extremists in control of government agencies who are using that power to enforce conformity, I'd like to see them.  Because THAT is exactly what happened under Obama's IRS, CIA and FBI.  I mean... there's annoying and then there's state power crushing dissent and they aren't nearly the same animal.

[Piney]

Just now, and then said:

I hear this complaint a lot and I never see actual examples of how evangelicals are imposing their views on anyone. 

Oh, so the anti-gay marriage and anti-abortion talk doesn't exist? 

Mike Pence with his outright homophobia and promotion of electro-shock conversion therapy on his radio show never happened? 

[+and-then]

1 minute ago, Piney said:

Oh, so the anti-gay marriage and anti-abortion talk doesn't exist? 

Mike Pence with his outright homophobia and promotion of electro-shock conversion therapy on his radio show never happened? 

Those are opinions based on the faith of individuals.  Are you aware of any instances where Pence or any other member of our government has used the power of government to inflict this ideology on anyone or would it be better said that this government has people in it who are simply unwilling to be shouted down by their opposition?  Remember opposition?  Free exchange of ideas, even hateful ones?  I have no need to defend anyone's faith or lack of it, I'm talking about using government authority to IMPOSE an ideology on citizens.  If that is happening, I think we both know that the media would blow that story into the stratosphere with round the clock coverage.

[Piney]

1 minute ago, and then said:

I'm talking about using government authority to IMPOSE an ideology on citizens. 

There's many who would if they could on both sides. 

[Tatetopa]

48 minutes ago, and then said:

On that, we'll disagree.  Care to point to the use of government power to crush dissent?  To shackle the press?  To disappear political enemies?  To weaponize the IRS, CIA or FBI against political enemies.  All that was done under Obama's watch.  Making those accusations about Trump just makes you seem weak and foolish because you cannot defend it with examples. If you'd like to see what it looks like then wait awhile, it's coming again. 

Why does everything wind up being about Trump?  You threw me off when you said world.

 

1 hour ago, and then said:

They are, indeed and they hate what they can't bring down to their level.  Imagine a world where those people, that ideology, had the power of the state behind it. 

China, Russia, North Korea, Philippines, Central America 

 

51 minutes ago, and then said:

To shackle the press?  To disappear political enemies?  To weaponize the IRS, CIA or FBI against political enemies

China, Russia, North Korea, Philippines, Central America for starters

[XenoFish]

2 hours ago, OverSword said:

invoking twitter rage

The first 4 letters give it away.

[RoofGardener]

1 hour ago, and then said:

I hear this complaint a lot and I never see actual examples of how evangelicals are imposing their views on anyone.  ....

Umm.. surely that's practically a definition of an evangelist ? One who tries to impose their views on others ? 

[+and-then]

55 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Why does everything wind up being about Trump?  You threw me off when you said world.

 

China, Russia, North Korea, Philippines, Central America 

 

China, Russia, North Korea, Philippines, Central America for starters

It's my belief that once the progressive Leftists regain power they will quickly move to undo everything Trump has accomplished.  They'll have more trouble getting that done because he didn't rely solely on EOs to govern.  My allusion to living in a world where those things are done was meant to focus on how Obama governed and how the Left will run things as soon as they have the power to do so.  They have a history of doing it this way and there really isn't any dispute on that.  Roughly half the country want to maintain America as founded and the other half want to move forward with a social agenda that is anathema to our Constitutional Republic.  

A party that openly declares a desire for open borders AND a welfare state, is a party that cannot be interested in the survival of the country.  The two simply cannot exist together.  So, the choice we have is to try to maintain our Constitutional framework while looking for compromise or to allow the same evil here that exists in the states you mentioned.

23 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Umm.. surely that's practically a definition of an evangelist ? One who tries to impose their views on others ? 

Not in my experience.  I think that that reputation comes from overzealous church members who are trying to share what they see as "good news".  I have never attempted to push my faith on to anyone but I know some Christians feel it is their mission to "plant the flag" so to speak.  The issue of zealotry does come up in congregations and I have never agreed that any person's acceptance of Christ's message was a duty I owed them or anyone else.  

He said, Himself, that His word would not return void.  IOW, while those who believe what He says, ARE called to share that message, they are NOT required to demand or to coerce in any way the response of the listener.  Christians are not perfect.  Thankfully, perfection isn't a requirement  

What I've seen change in the past couple of decades is a hardening of animosity against those who call themselves after Christ and those expressions of loathing or anger or pettiness are all defended by pointing out the failings of Christ followers.  If they understood His message, they'd realize that it isn't about perfection.  It's about striving to live as He did and when you fail, you get back up and try again.  

Edited April 17, 2020 by and then

[Agent0range]

1 hour ago, and then said:

Those are opinions based on the faith of individuals.  Are you aware of any instances where Pence or any other member of our government has used the power of government to inflict this ideology on anyone or would it be better said that this government has people in it who are simply unwilling to be shouted down by their opposition?  

Soo...the signing of a law prohibiting gay marriage is not a member of the government inflicting their ideology on someone else?

[+and-then]

6 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

Soo...the signing of a law prohibiting gay marriage is not a member of the government inflicting their ideology on someone else?

Where did this occur?

More to the point, has it been allowed to stand?  I recall the USSC making a blanket judgment for all the states that marriage of same sex individuals was their right and I haven't heard of any state imposing their will in defiance.  

The basic disconnect that I see in the country today is that traditional Americans, all races and sexes, see a social movement that directly conflicts with their beliefs about the world.  We've always had our differences but we've managed to compromise for the good of all.  That has changed to the extent that modern social movements now demand changes for their worldview but deny the traditional Americans the right to peacefully coexist or to publicly defend their worldview.  Surely you have recognized this?  One party uses media and entertainment fora to shout down and vilify anyone who has the temerity to disagree with them.

Do you hold them in the same contempt that you do Christians whose major offense is to disagree?  Let me give you the most powerful example I can think of today.  The state of New York recently passed legislation that while not specifically stating this intent, allows babies to be killed when they are completely viable outside the womb.  Surely, if we are going to demand Christians accept some of these changes in society, we must also compel secular movements to come to terms in compromise?  To do otherwise just widens a schism that's dangerously close to dissolving our Union.

Edited April 17, 2020 by and then

[+OverSword]

1 hour ago, Piney said:

Oh, so the anti-gay marriage and anti-abortion talk doesn't exist? 

Mike Pence with his outright homophobia and promotion of electro-shock conversion therapy on his radio show never happened? 

Gay marriage and abortion are both legal but didn’t used to be, so where is the current influence? 

[Piney]

Just now, OverSword said:

Gay marriage and abortion are both legal but didn’t used to be, so where is the current influence? 

The Religious Right wants it reversed. 

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, Piney said:

The Religious Right wants it reversed. 

Come on, Piney... the "religious right" has been about as thoroughly beaten down as any political movement can be.  It's been shrinking for years and if there is any significant attempt to lobby for forcing religion on those who don't want it, I fail to see where it is.  What I see is a growing, visceral response against Christianity that has attempted to remove every root and branch and then to salt the ground it lived on.  Those who support that are in the majority and they have their say.  What I'm against is basically criminalizing the faith tradition of some Americans just because their views are out of favor with the mainstream.

I don't dispute that those who call themselves Evangelicals can be obnoxious and even dangerous in small town America.  But the part of the discussion that I think gets skipped over is that in this country we're ALL supposed to have the right to our speech about our beliefs.  It should only become an issue if the government tries to favor one over others or establish an official religion.  The "Establishment Clause" has been effectively changed into a club to beat down one religion and it was never intended to beat down ANY faith tradition.  Remember?  That clause has TWO parts and the second one is ignored as though it doesn't exist:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...".

 

[Hankenhunter]

3 hours ago, and then said:

I hear this complaint a lot and I never see actual examples of how evangelicals are imposing their views on anyone.  What I'm speaking of isn't merely offending a stranger by mentioning a faith they don't share.  If you have real examples of religious extremists in control of government agencies who are using that power to enforce conformity, I'd like to see them.  Because THAT is exactly what happened under Obama's IRS, CIA and FBI.  I mean... there's annoying and then there's state power crushing dissent and they aren't nearly the same animal.

 

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, Piney said:

The Religious Right wants it reversed. 

For my part, I don't believe that any church congregation that calls itself after Christ's name should be taking part in politics AS A CHURCH or movement.  They have a right, and a duty to individually take part in elections but when they form political bodies and exhort the faithful to a candidate other than Christ... they are out of line.  OTOH, the argument can be advanced that their activities are due at least in part to the restrictions that keep increasing on what they used to take as "normal".  It doesn't justify their actions but it does explain some of their motives.

 

[+and-then]

2 minutes ago, Hankenhunter said:

 

What does a demographic pie chart have to do with my statement?  I assume you are using it to deny the government overreach during Obama's administration?   Care to try to explain what one has to do with the other?

[_Only]

5 hours ago, OverSword said:

 

People are just nasty.  

I had to delete my Twitter account, and to this day have to tell myself "don't do it" when about to read Twitter replies to others, and in the rare times (I try to stay away from 'regular' social media these days) when I still succumb, I always feel dirty and catch myself feeling that I hate this world for at least a brief period after doing so. 

But I think a big part of the problem is people are not only now given a platform to be so hateful to each other, but are (however indirectly or directly) being trained to. This is why humans can't have nice things.

Edited April 17, 2020 by _Only

[Setton]

4 hours ago, and then said:

They are, indeed and they hate what they can't bring down to their level.  Imagine a world where those people, that ideology, had the power of the state behind it.  

And never a hint of irony 

[XenoFish]

21 minutes ago, _Only said:

This is why humans can't have nice things.

It's because humans can't be nice.

[_Only]

1 hour ago, XenoFish said:

It's because humans can't be nice.

Oh, we can! It's just in the case of Twitter, the nice humans are the ones who take the general rule that starts with  "if you don't have anything nice to say".

[XenoFish]

2 minutes ago, _Only said:

Oh, we can! It's just in the case of Twitter, the nice humans are the ones who take the general rule that starts with  "if you don't have anything nice to say".

The nice ones probably aren't on Twitter. 

[Alchopwn]

Trump supporters stage an armed protest againt covid-19 lockdown:  You can't shoot a virus (except out of your nose and mouth).

What I like about this problem is the way it is going to solve itself in the next couple of weeks. #UnintendedConsequences

Edited April 18, 2020 by Alchopwn