The Right again attacks Greta

[Deleted User 1461]

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... -abuse?amp

[Momto2boys973]

“Stretches” are a Trumpers bread and butter.

Then they turn around and used Trumps son to attack Trump and that was perfectly fine.

Who is this "they" you speak of? If I remember correctly a professor (one person,, no "they") made an analogy about being able to give someone a royal name but not being able to make him royalty. And she used the name Baron as an example. And all of a sudden it becomes "THEY" attack Trump's son? Quite a stretch.

[Deleted User 276]

“Stretches” are a Trumpers bread and butter.

Then they turn around and used Trumps son to attack Trump and that was perfectly fine.

Who is this "they" you speak of? If I remember correctly a professor (one person,, no "they") made an analogy about being able to give someone a royal name but not being able to make him royalty. And she used the name Baron as an example. And all of a sudden it becomes "THEY" attack Trump's son? Quite a stretch.

Gumbys?

[BionicBunny]

Then they turn around and used Trumps son to attack Trump and that was perfectly fine.

Who is this "they" you speak of? If I remember correctly a professor (one person,, no "they") made an analogy about being able to give someone a royal name but not being able to make him royalty. And she used the name Baron as an example. And all of a sudden it becomes "THEY" attack Trump's son? Quite a stretch.

Just as one person or a few people don’t necessarily represent the democrats the same can be said for republicans but the same is said when a republican makes a statement. It’s “ they”. I’m just using the same language. However I am also including those who agree with what the professor did or dismiss it as being acceptable. That would all include “ they”.

[Momto2boys973]

I’m a Conservative and a Republican and I don’t see this as an “attack” on Trump’s son. Not even a little. But I can see the temptation for Trump supporters to twist it around for sympathy and it seems to me they’re the ones using Barron for political purposes by doing so.

Then they turn around and used Trumps son to attack Trump and that was perfectly fine.

Who is this "they" you speak of? If I remember correctly a professor (one person,, no "they") made an analogy about being able to give someone a royal name but not being able to make him royalty. And she used the name Baron as an example. And all of a sudden it becomes "THEY" attack Trump's son? Quite a stretch.

Just as one person or a few people don’t necessarily represent the democrats the same can be said for republicans but the same is said when a republican makes a statement. It’s “ they”. I’m just using the same language. However I am also including those who agree with what the professor did or dismiss it as being acceptable. That would all include “ they”.

[BionicBunny]

As I have stated it’s using a child to attack the parent and just as bad.

I’m a Conservative and a Republican and I don’t see this as an “attack” on Trump’s son. Not even a little. But I can see the temptation for Trump supporters to twist it around for sympathy and it seems to me they’re the ones using Barron for political purposes by doing so.

Who is this "they" you speak of? If I remember correctly a professor (one person,, no "they") made an analogy about being able to give someone a royal name but not being able to make him royalty. And she used the name Baron as an example. And all of a sudden it becomes "THEY" attack Trump's son? Quite a stretch.

Just as one person or a few people don’t necessarily represent the democrats the same can be said for republicans but the same is said when a republican makes a statement. It’s “ they”. I’m just using the same language. However I am also including those who agree with what the professor did or dismiss it as being acceptable. That would all include “ they”.

[Momto2boys973]

I agree, but it’s either off limits for all or none. But it’s not OK in cases when the kid is doing something you don’t like and not OK when he’s doing something you like. If kids are off limits, then how much they’re in the spotlight or how old they are doesn’t matter. They’re ALL off limits.
But if it’s OK to go after a kid because she’s “out there”, then it’s also OK for a kid whose parent put him “out there”.
Have some consistency in your argument.

And really... what she said barely qualifies as “using” the kid unless you really twist it around. She “used” Trump’s choice of a name, that’s all. Anyone can see that the kid has no blame on his name whatsoever.

As I have stated it’s using a child to attack the parent and just as bad.

I’m a Conservative and a Republican and I don’t see this as an “attack” on Trump’s son. Not even a little. But I can see the temptation for Trump supporters to twist it around for sympathy and it seems to me they’re the ones using Barron for political purposes by doing so.

Just as one person or a few people don’t necessarily represent the democrats the same can be said for republicans but the same is said when a republican makes a statement. It’s “ they”. I’m just using the same language. However I am also including those who agree with what the professor did or dismiss it as being acceptable. That would all include “ they”.

[DSamuels]

I disagree. Kids are off limits unless they purposely put themselves in the spotlight. They can’t have it both ways.

You can’t say “I’m going to tell you what to do, think, etc but you can’t talk about or criticize me because I’m just a child and off-limits.”

I agree, but it’s either off limits for all or none. But it’s not OK in cases when the kid is doing something you don’t like and not OK when he’s doing something you like. If kids are off limits, then how much they’re in the spotlight or how they are doesn’t matter. They’re ALL off limits.
But if it’s OK to go after a kid because she’s “out there”, then it’s also OK for a kid whose parent put him “out there”.
Have some consistency in your argument.

And really... what she said barely qualifies as “using” the kid unless you really twist it around. She “used” Trump’s choice of a name, that’s all. Anyone can see that the kid has no blame on his name whatsoever.

As I have stated it’s using a child to attack the parent and just as bad.

I’m a Conservative and a Republican and I don’t see this as an “attack” on Trump’s son. Not even a little. But I can see the temptation for Trump supporters to twist it around for sympathy and it seems to me they’re the ones using Barron for political purposes by doing so.

[Deleted User 638]

I disagree. Kids are off limits unless they purposely put themselves in the spotlight. They can’t have it both ways.

You can’t say “I’m going to tell you what to do, think, etc but you can’t talk about or criticize me because I’m just a child and off-limits.”

I agree, but it’s either off limits for all or none. But it’s not OK in cases when the kid is doing something you don’t like and not OK when he’s doing something you like. If kids are off limits, then how much they’re in the spotlight or how they are doesn’t matter. They’re ALL off limits.
But if it’s OK to go after a kid because she’s “out there”, then it’s also OK for a kid whose parent put him “out there”.
Have some consistency in your argument.

And really... what she said barely qualifies as “using” the kid unless you really twist it around. She “used” Trump’s choice of a name, that’s all. Anyone can see that the kid has no blame on his name whatsoever.

As I have stated it’s using a child to attack the parent and just as bad.

Blame her parents for putting her in that situation. The girl doesn't deserved to be attacked. Adults who do it are despicable.

[Francee89]

I disagree. Kids are off limits unless they purposely put themselves in the spotlight. They can’t have it both ways.

You can’t say “I’m going to tell you what to do, think, etc but you can’t talk about or criticize me because I’m just a child and off-limits.”

I agree, but it’s either off limits for all or none. But it’s not OK in cases when the kid is doing something you don’t like and not OK when he’s doing something you like. If kids are off limits, then how much they’re in the spotlight or how they are doesn’t matter. They’re ALL off limits.
But if it’s OK to go after a kid because she’s “out there”, then it’s also OK for a kid whose parent put him “out there”.
Have some consistency in your argument.

And really... what she said barely qualifies as “using” the kid unless you really twist it around. She “used” Trump’s choice of a name, that’s all. Anyone can see that the kid has no blame on his name whatsoever.

As I have stated it’s using a child to attack the parent and just as bad.

Why can’t you say “it’s acceptable to attack their arguments, it’s unacceptable to attack/mock/insult them personally”? It’s entirely possible to talk about them without insulting them, and frankly, if the child is wrong why shouldn’t an adult be able to beat a child solely the merits of their arguments? That seems like it would certainly fall into the #BeBest standard Melania Trump herself claims to tout.