Comments by "wvu05" (@wvu05) on "DAMN: Dem Plays Candace Owens' Hitler Comment to Her Face" video.

@MrDavidBFoster She said that she was offended, and offered as her defense going to Jerusalem and working for a man who practices Orthodox Judaism. It's the equivalent of the "I have black friends" defense. At no point (other than saying that she resented the audio being played) did she actually address the proper context and show how she was being misinterpreted. An example would be if she said, "If the Congressman played the audio further, it would show that I said this which invalidates the complaint," but she didn't do that, so what is the context of her actual words. Not that she has Jewish friends, not that she supported moving the Israeli embassy to Jerusalem (not realizing that this is a controversial position even among Jewish people), but what were the actual words that show the proper context since she feels that this was out of context?
2
@MrDavidBFoster You posted something that you said showed the "full context." It didn't. I pointed that out. If you want to post something over and over again and it turns out that it isn't what you say it is, someone is bound to call it out. So, what was the "context" in the video you gave? Someone being angry about the tactic someone used without actually clarifying what was her own words is not "full context."
2
@MrDavidBFoster And I will choose that freedom to be honest rather than being dishonest by posting something that doesn't provide context when saying "full context." Here's a little Logic 101: saying "that is not what I believe" is not the same as "I didn't say that thing that you have me saying."
2
@oasis71 Cadogan: In my day, it was country first, God second. Sutherland: Yes, and the war to end all wars bitterly proved that point.
2
@poorpauly1308 Which party elected David Duke to office again? Which party preferred him for governor? And who did he endorse for President in 2016 and '20?
2
@MrDavidBFoster You think the context saves her? The I have a Jewish boss defense? There is nothing that she says that refutes the actual argument. She said that his problem was trying to export what he did. Looking at what Hitler tried to do even before Lebensraum doesn't make her argument any better. Complaining about being misrepresented doesn't exactly provide the context that was allegedly there and exonerating.
1
@MrDavidBFoster That's why I asked. A lot of people keep posting that as though there's some big truth bomb that makes what she said in the recording somehow not look like she said that what Hitler tried to do would have been fine as long as he stuck to Germany instead of going for Lebensraum.
1
@MrDavidBFoster Then what did she say? She said the problem was that he was a "globalist." She said that the problem wasn't his "trying to make Germany great again, but trying to force everyone else to be German everywhere." If your argument is that she was taken out of context, then it is your responsibility to show a context where she didn't say that. Showing her getting angry at the audio being played is not the same thing as showing something in the original audio that would have said that the interpretation of Congressman Lieu, David, myself, and the others who have the interpretation that she seemed fine with what Hitler did as long as he kept it to Germany.
1
@chopped_charlie We'll take Candace Owens, and Jesse Lee Peterson, but you have to take OJ back.
1