I agree. The SPLC has paid people to be KKK members and provided funds for lumber and gasoline to conduct cross burnings.
(I would be comfortable with demanding that the SPLC be denounced, incidentally. I think directly funding the KKK is a pretty bad thing.)
i expect MAJOR legal battles, MANY will have a very hard time dealing with reality, if allegations hold.
These are big sacred cows. Well funded sacred cows.
To think of all the angst and heartache that might have been prevented.
0 x
i’m perfectly comfortable with an older, wiser, more docile Trump.
”Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.” Robert Martz
i expect MAJOR legal battles, MANY will have a very hard time dealing with reality, if allegations hold.
These are big sacred cows. Well funded sacred cows.
To think of all the angst and heartache that might have been prevented.
[/quote]
I mean, the government is moving for summary asset forfeiture. They'll probably pursue criminal charges against the people involved, too.
Two of the KKK members contacted the SPLC for help because they wanted to get out of the KKK. Instead, the SPLC paid them to stay in.
i expect MAJOR legal battles, MANY will have a very hard time dealing with reality, if allegations hold.
These are big sacred cows. Well funded sacred cows.
To think of all the angst and heartache that might have been prevented.
I mean, the government is moving for summary asset forfeiture. They'll probably pursue criminal charges against the people involved, too.
Two of the KKK members contacted the SPLC for help because they wanted to get out of the KKK. Instead, the SPLC paid them to stay in.
i didn’t realize it was moving so quickly. i haven’t read any details.
i pray for net improvement everywhere fraud, waste, criminal activity is revealed.
esp for the sake of younger people. esp for them.
0 x
i’m perfectly comfortable with an older, wiser, more docile Trump.
”Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.” Robert Martz
JohnH wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2026 12:59 pm
The source of your confusion is that you consider anyone who worn make a blanket denunciation of Trump to be a “Trump supporter”.
No. He said this.
Szdfan wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2026 12:25 pm
What adds to my confusion is that some people who have spent years defending Trump or arguing against his critics bristle at being described as “Trump supporters.”
0 x
A wee little man can’t say, I’m sorry. A big man owns his mistakes and apologizes.
A wee little man trusts himself and his own discernment. A big man is humble enough to know that he needs the counsel and input of others.
JohnH wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2026 12:59 pm
The source of your confusion is that you consider anyone who worn make a blanket denunciation of Trump to be a “Trump supporter”.
No. He said this.
Szdfan wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2026 12:25 pm
What adds to my confusion is that some people who have spent years defending Trump or arguing against his critics bristle at being described as “Trump supporters.”
The genesis of the problem here is that he feels comfortable calling someone a Trump supporter simply because one's denunciations aren't strong enough. Of course, part of it is that he views someone who doesn't denounce strongly enough as "spending years defending Trump or arguing against his critics", which is probably the result of failing to really understand the individual or know what else they spend their time doing.
For example, for myself, I have persuaded a number of people to step back from politics and not pin their hopes on Trump winning, not vote at all, and to spend a lot less time keeping up with the news. In some people's mind, though, persuading people not to vote for Trump still makes me a "Trump supporter".
JohnH wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2026 12:59 pm
The source of your confusion is that you consider anyone who worn make a blanket denunciation of Trump to be a “Trump supporter”.
No. He said this.
Szdfan wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2026 12:25 pm
What adds to my confusion is that some people who have spent years defending Trump or arguing against his critics bristle at being described as “Trump supporters.”
The genesis of the problem here is that he feels comfortable calling someone a Trump supporter simply because one's denunciations aren't strong enough. Of course, part of it is that he views someone who doesn't denounce strongly enough as "spending years defending Trump or arguing against his critics", which is probably the result of failing to really understand the individual or know what else they spend their time doing.
Interesting that you apparently can read my mind and know my intentions and motives better than I do.
I never said that people are Trump supporters because their denunciations aren’t strong enough. I said that I find it confusing when people spend years defending Trump or arguing against his critics and then object to being described as Trump supporters. Those are two different claims.
1 x
"Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless."
Szdfan wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 10:32 pm
I never said that people are Trump supporters because their denunciations aren’t strong enough. I said that I find it confusing when people spend years defending Trump or arguing against his critics and then object to being described as Trump supporters. Those are two different claims.
It's entirely possible to defend someone / argue against their critics, yet not be a "supporter". For example, I did that in a discussion about Jill Biden the other day. I simply felt her conduct was worth defending, but I don't think you'd ever describe me as a "Biden supporter", now, would you?
Szdfan wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 10:32 pm
I never said that people are Trump supporters because their denunciations aren’t strong enough. I said that I find it confusing when people spend years defending Trump or arguing against his critics and then object to being described as Trump supporters. Those are two different claims.
It's entirely possible to defend someone / argue against their critics, yet not be a "supporter". For example, I did that in a discussion about Jill Biden the other day. I simply felt her conduct was worth defending, but I don't think you'd ever describe me as a "Biden supporter", now, would you?
It has to do with spending years defending a person or a philosophy or a system. When people defend something or someone in isolated situations, we don't necessarily think of them as a supporter.
1 x
A wee little man can’t say, I’m sorry. A big man owns his mistakes and apologizes.
A wee little man trusts himself and his own discernment. A big man is humble enough to know that he needs the counsel and input of others.
Ernie wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 10:56 pm
It has to do with spending years defending a person or a philosophy or a system. When people defend something or someone in isolated situations, we don't necessarily think of them as a supporter.
Well, that's because for the last 10+ years, this forum has had a few folks who seem to have made it their primary occupation to simply complain about a certain politician non-stop.
I am not entirely sure why. A lot of people here don't vote at all, and our view would be to avoid voting and getting involved in politics at all. But for whatever reason, this forum seems to be a medium in which to vent one's complaints about politicians one doesn't like. (We have a few non-Mennonites here who do the same for left wing people they don't like.)
