Genius 253 Last One - Parsing Help...
Crosswords4 mins ago
Is Donald Trump Justified Here?
Donald Trump has said that U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel had "an absolute conflict" in presiding over the litigation on the Trump University case, given that he was "of Mexican heritage" and a member of a Latino lawyers' association.
Mr. Trump said the background of the judge, who was born in Indiana to Mexican immigrants, was relevant because of his campaign stance against illegal immigration and his pledge to seal the southern U.S. border. "I'm building a wall. It's an inherent conflict of interest," Mr. Trump said.
Is this stance understandable, or an indication of his true racist self?
http://
Mr. Trump said the background of the judge, who was born in Indiana to Mexican immigrants, was relevant because of his campaign stance against illegal immigration and his pledge to seal the southern U.S. border. "I'm building a wall. It's an inherent conflict of interest," Mr. Trump said.
Is this stance understandable, or an indication of his true racist self?
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Togo
But there is a difference.
I think it's obvious. You don't.
By increasing the number of non-white trainees, the BBC is trying to prove that race should not be a determining factor on whether someone can or cannot do a job. They're not trying to replace all their white scriptwriters because they think that they are not up to the job. They're attempting to increase the diversity in this area.
What Trump is doing is saying, "District Judge Gonzalo Curiel cannot do this job because of his race."
Very different.
But this is a diversion. The question isn't about the BBC, it's about Trump.
But there is a difference.
I think it's obvious. You don't.
By increasing the number of non-white trainees, the BBC is trying to prove that race should not be a determining factor on whether someone can or cannot do a job. They're not trying to replace all their white scriptwriters because they think that they are not up to the job. They're attempting to increase the diversity in this area.
What Trump is doing is saying, "District Judge Gonzalo Curiel cannot do this job because of his race."
Very different.
But this is a diversion. The question isn't about the BBC, it's about Trump.
You said I outlined the potential conflict of interested in my OP.
I didn't. I was quoting Trump.
And he isn't building a wall. He hasn't been confirmed as the Republican candidate yet, yet alone got the vote from the American people.
Trump is confusing present and future tenses.
But anyway - this is precisely what Trump is saying.
If someone says, "I don't trust this man because of his Anglo-Saxon heritage and pale skin", it's fair to paraphrase it as "I don't trust this man because he's white".
That is what Trump is doing.
If he isn't saying that - what do you think he's saying?
I didn't. I was quoting Trump.
And he isn't building a wall. He hasn't been confirmed as the Republican candidate yet, yet alone got the vote from the American people.
Trump is confusing present and future tenses.
But anyway - this is precisely what Trump is saying.
If someone says, "I don't trust this man because of his Anglo-Saxon heritage and pale skin", it's fair to paraphrase it as "I don't trust this man because he's white".
That is what Trump is doing.
If he isn't saying that - what do you think he's saying?
mikey4444
I'm curious to be honest. I think it's obvious...but because of this, I really want to understand those who can't see it. The fact that I think they're wrong and they think I'm wrong is fascinating...you know...like when you see a film with a friend and they hate it and you love it? I find that really interesting, because we've seen exactly the same content - but have drawn diametrically opposing conclusions.
I call it 'The Hobbit Trilogy Syndrome'.
I'm curious to be honest. I think it's obvious...but because of this, I really want to understand those who can't see it. The fact that I think they're wrong and they think I'm wrong is fascinating...you know...like when you see a film with a friend and they hate it and you love it? I find that really interesting, because we've seen exactly the same content - but have drawn diametrically opposing conclusions.
I call it 'The Hobbit Trilogy Syndrome'.
SP, you quoted Trump and you posted the question. Therefore you are well aware of the potential problem he’s talking about.
//If someone says, "I don't trust this man because of his Anglo-Saxon heritage and pale skin", it's fair to paraphrase it as "I don't trust this man because he's white".//
No, that isn’t fair at all because Trump isn’t saying he doesn’t trust the judge because the judge has a darker skin – he’s saying that since the judge is of Mexican heritage and is aware of Trump’s negative views on Mexican immigration into the USA, the judge may be biased against him. I simply don’t believe that you don’t understand that.
Mikey, //I have yet to understand the support for this awful man.//
As I said before, you don’t understand the question. This isn’t about support for Trump or otherwise. It’s a question of principle.
//If someone says, "I don't trust this man because of his Anglo-Saxon heritage and pale skin", it's fair to paraphrase it as "I don't trust this man because he's white".//
No, that isn’t fair at all because Trump isn’t saying he doesn’t trust the judge because the judge has a darker skin – he’s saying that since the judge is of Mexican heritage and is aware of Trump’s negative views on Mexican immigration into the USA, the judge may be biased against him. I simply don’t believe that you don’t understand that.
Mikey, //I have yet to understand the support for this awful man.//
As I said before, you don’t understand the question. This isn’t about support for Trump or otherwise. It’s a question of principle.
Togo
I'm not sure why you're focussing on me rather than the question, but I'll go along -diversity is from the Latin 'dīvertere'. It means to alter direction.
Diversity is based on the Latin word 'dīversitās'. It means 'change, difference, variation, dissimilarity'.
Whilst the two words appear to be from the same root - they are not. They mean completely different things.
I am not mangling the English language. I just try to use words in their correct context.
But anyway - enough about me...
I'm not sure why you're focussing on me rather than the question, but I'll go along -diversity is from the Latin 'dīvertere'. It means to alter direction.
Diversity is based on the Latin word 'dīversitās'. It means 'change, difference, variation, dissimilarity'.
Whilst the two words appear to be from the same root - they are not. They mean completely different things.
I am not mangling the English language. I just try to use words in their correct context.
But anyway - enough about me...
Divert...reroute · redirect
Diverse...· sundry · multiple · varied · varying · miscellaneous · assorted · mixed · variegated · heterogeneous · different · differing · distinct · unlike · dissimilar · distinctive · contrasting · conflicting
Note the synonyms "conflicting and dissimilar for diverse. Diversity is just a diversion.
Diverse...· sundry · multiple · varied · varying · miscellaneous · assorted · mixed · variegated · heterogeneous · different · differing · distinct · unlike · dissimilar · distinctive · contrasting · conflicting
Note the synonyms "conflicting and dissimilar for diverse. Diversity is just a diversion.
naomi24
No - I'm not aware of the potential problem. Just because Trump has said theirs a problem, doesn't mean it's true.
If Gonzalo Curiel has spent his career championing the rights of illegal immigrants, or has a record of handing down very soft sentences to Latino criminals or had publicly voiced opposition to Trump's position on the wall, then I would say - "Yep...conflict of interest."
What Trump is saying is something completely different. He is say that the Judge's racial background is the determining factor on whether the case will get a fair hearing.
You wrote:
[i]No, that isn’t fair at all because Trump isn’t saying he doesn’t trust the judge because the judge has a darker skin – he’s saying that since the judge is of Mexican heritage and is aware of Trump’s negative views on Mexican immigration into the USA, the judge may be biased against him. I simply don’t believe that you don’t understand that.[i]
Do you not know what racism is???
I now see where the problem is.
Okay...this is how is goes:
If you say, "I don't think that Mexicans can do a good job, because of their Mexcian heritage", that's racist.
Please tell me you get that racism isn't about skin tone.
Seriously...that's quite...I really don't know the word to use.
Astonishing.
Yeah...really astonishing.
But now I completely understand where you're coming from.
No - I'm not aware of the potential problem. Just because Trump has said theirs a problem, doesn't mean it's true.
If Gonzalo Curiel has spent his career championing the rights of illegal immigrants, or has a record of handing down very soft sentences to Latino criminals or had publicly voiced opposition to Trump's position on the wall, then I would say - "Yep...conflict of interest."
What Trump is saying is something completely different. He is say that the Judge's racial background is the determining factor on whether the case will get a fair hearing.
You wrote:
[i]No, that isn’t fair at all because Trump isn’t saying he doesn’t trust the judge because the judge has a darker skin – he’s saying that since the judge is of Mexican heritage and is aware of Trump’s negative views on Mexican immigration into the USA, the judge may be biased against him. I simply don’t believe that you don’t understand that.[i]
Do you not know what racism is???
I now see where the problem is.
Okay...this is how is goes:
If you say, "I don't think that Mexicans can do a good job, because of their Mexcian heritage", that's racist.
Please tell me you get that racism isn't about skin tone.
Seriously...that's quite...I really don't know the word to use.
Astonishing.
Yeah...really astonishing.
But now I completely understand where you're coming from.
-- answer removed --
Trump does not have a leg to stand on. There have been others who have highlighted a Judge's ethnicity in regard to impartiality, and they have been given short shrift by the judicary.
// “Courts have repeatedly held that matters such as race or ethnicity are improper bases for challenging a judge's impartiality,” wrote the chief judge, Ralph Winter, a Reagan appointee. “Nor should one charge that a judge is not impartial solely because an attorney is embroiled in a controversy with the administration that appointed the judge. … Finally, appointment by a particular administration and membership in a particular racial or ethnic group are in combination not grounds for questioning a judge's impartiality. Zero plus zero is zero.” //
http://
Trump's attempt to nobble the Judge will come to nothing, based on previous attempts to do the same.
// “Courts have repeatedly held that matters such as race or ethnicity are improper bases for challenging a judge's impartiality,” wrote the chief judge, Ralph Winter, a Reagan appointee. “Nor should one charge that a judge is not impartial solely because an attorney is embroiled in a controversy with the administration that appointed the judge. … Finally, appointment by a particular administration and membership in a particular racial or ethnic group are in combination not grounds for questioning a judge's impartiality. Zero plus zero is zero.” //
http://
Trump's attempt to nobble the Judge will come to nothing, based on previous attempts to do the same.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank9 mins ago
Home & Garden9 mins ago
ChatterBank12 mins ago
Crosswords13 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.