I agree that it would have been a good time for the derogatory names he delights in calling others. No, I don't wonder why he didn't do that. If it turns up during the investigation that Paddock ever said anything negative about HE, Donald J Trump, perhaps he'll get around to it.
Can you give me instances of Obama shedding tears? Like Benghazi? Or all the other disasters?
On the flip side of that, Did you see any tears from JFK on the Bay of Pigs, the Cuban Missile Cris etc? Just because a leader isn't crying on TV doesn't mean they aren't deeply affected.
As to Trump showing humanity in his speech, I thought he showed both humanity and resolve.
At least he didn't pat himself on the back, but wait a day or two and he will. He's going to Vegas on Wednesday, and he'll be praising the number of people that showed up to see him, and he will soon forget about the victims in this tragedy.
This guy is a white guy, he saves those names for the NFL and people of color.
Maybe he saves 'an act of pure evil' for white guys that murder 50 or more.
[Feel free to erase your comment again once you learn how embarrassing it is.]
He called it "an act of pure evil".
Stow your hatred of Trump, Vic. Inappropriate use of this tragedy on your part.
Calling an 'act' pure evil. Not the same as calling a person a son-of-a-bitch or a fat pig.
That's true Vic. Different words mean different things.
For extra credit, list your words and phrases in descending order of disdain. And, a fifty word essay describing your white hot seething hatred of the leader of the free world.
I don't hate him.
Here's another one for you, there is a difference between 'hate' and 'disrespect'.
Please do not disrespect me any further by not addressing the question at hand. It may be a dandy debate tactic to derail conversation, but every time you do it - I feel disrespected.
You wonder why Trump didn't call Paddock an SOB, worthless pig or loser. As if you didn't know that he said it was an act of pure evil. And then defend yourself by saying they are not the same words.
We're not in grade school Vic. And, even though we don't actually 'know' each other, we talk nearly every day. If you don't have anything to actually add to a conversation, then please bow out. Your silly deflections and word games have become quite tiresome.
Is that how it works in this game, OP bows out while commenters run amok?
I think not. Get your own post.
I can't help but notice you never even looked at
Option A - Be honest.
OP, commenters, does either one have the privilege of being dishonest to the other with impunity?
[Yeah, I know, you don't believe in truth.][
So why do you keep bring it up?
To make sure that anyone reading your tripe understands that it's total BS and that you'll never defend it with reasonable arguments.
Thanks, but I think they know that. It's not like I am a noobie, it's not like I don't say it every day.
How about you get over it?
Accept your dishonesty and 'there is no truth' escape hatch? Ahh, no.
Never occurred to me.
But...what do you think Donald was saying when he said "It was an act of pure evil..."
He sure wasn't saying that the guy was a Nice Guy.
Some people never want to let a tragedy go to waist Sukie. If Trump cured cancer, there would be those who would criticize him. Yesterdays events should be uniting people, not opening a platform for idiotic cheap shots, like the moron at CBS.
It should...just like 911 should have been about uniting people. And we all know how long that lasted.
Still: saying a guy is pure evil...is not an endorsement, and is more or less saying the guy was a bad bastard. Semantics.
Semantics is more important than many realize.