Skip to main content

That time when I defended Samuel L. Jackson and Donald Trump Jr.

Both Samuel L. Jackson and Donald Trump Jr. have received backlash for recent social media posts, but said backlash is unwarranted, in my opinion.

In Jackson's case, he tweeted the following post, which included a picture of "After Dick Mints":

"Must have been a party at The White House, Mitch, Paul, Rudy & others were spotted wearing knee pads & carrying these lined up outside."

The post insinuates Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, Rudy Giuliani, and others were getting ready to suck President Trump's little Trump. Due to this, several responders alleged Jackson of homophobia.

I disagree with this assertion. To my knowledge, the post had nothing to do with homosexuality and the morality of it. What it did have to do with was men willing to do anything for power. Jackson wasn't saying that McConnell, Ryan, Giuliani, and others were acting immorally due to performing a sexual act on a member of the same sex. He was saying the before-mentioned politicians were acting immorally due to placing a single man, a party before the country, and willing to do anything to satisfy said man, even if millions of citizens suffered as a result. Also, it'd be safe to assume some of the people mentioned in Jackson's tweet are in fact homophobic, so is poking at homophobics' homophobia homophobic? I don't think so.

As far as Donald Trump Jr. goes, he posted this tweet yesterday:

"Gonna be a great Father's Day with these little monsters (his kids). Hope all of you dads out here get to enjoy as much as I will. #fathersday #familytime #kids #weekend"

Some of the responses were as follows:

- "Must be nice to spend Father's Day with your kids as opposed to worrying if you'll ever see them again. You empathy is historic. #TrumpFail"

- "The level of willful ignorance here is beyond belief."

- "Much love to all the dad's WORKING this weekend, not all dad's get weekends off."

- "Once again, what kind of father trots out his children for ridicule when his own father implements a policy that tears children away from their parents and slashes child healthcare budgets? It's just taunting, snarky and not fatherly. Shame on you, if you have any shame."

- "Fun Fact: Research shows that absence of a jailed parent can lead to emotional, behavioral and mental-health issues for children. #FathersDay #KeepFamiliesTogether"

Can't we leave the kids out of this? Granted, Jr. prompted the comments by posting the tweet and picture, but for as much as I (we) may disagree with his father's positions and policy proposals, is it so wrong for members of his family to want some normalcy in their lives at times? Time would be much better served if we focused more on Donald Trump's inhuman immigration policies and less time on pictures Jr. posts of he and his kids.

https://www.hotnewhiphop.com/samuel-l-jackson-laughs-off-backlash-he-received-from-tweet-viewed-as-homophobic-news.52903.html

https://www.bustle.com/p/donald-trump-jrs-fathers-day-tweet-is-getting-backlash-for-more-than-one-reason-9427657

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"