Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
I've never been in combat but the first thing that came to mind were the really strong people who because they were strong did the hardest things and that's why they suffer.
It was a bizarre statement to make.
|
Can you elaborate on what was bizarre? He said some guys can handle it, and some can't (he could have been more elegant, I guess), then went on and on about how we have an obligation to the guys who come back and need help.
He was exactly right. Some guys come back fine, some guys come back damaged. Is THAT an offensive thing to say?
Everything you need to know about this issue, is that the anti-Trump people focus on a few words (some can handle it and some can't), which by itself may sound callous. But when you read the next things he said (about how we all owe a debt to those who come back in need of help), his intent is clear.
How is it "bizarre" to say that some guys come back in need of help, and we owe it to them to provide that help.
Liberals recently did the same thing to Guiliani, who said "Trump would be better than a woman like Hilary with her track record...".
And the liberals quoted Guliani as saying "Trump would be better than a woman". Makes him sound like one of those deplorable sexists.
Again, there are SO MANY valid things to use against Trump. Why do we need to fabricate things.
Trump is a true jerk. But I cannot fathom how anyone could be offended by what he said in this case. It's mind-boggling.