Nick Kyrgios may have made another enemy on Monday. But he may have made more than a few friends, as well.
Following his 4-3 2-4 4-3 4-3 4-3 Fast4 format win over Rafael Nadal in Sydney, Kyrgios wore a shirt depicting United States President-elect Donald Trump in devil horns with the statement “F— Donald Trump” written below.
“I didn’t think the level was going to be that high, but I don’t think Rafa knows any other way than to go out there and give 100 percent,” the controversial Australian commented. “We weren’t taking it easy at all, so I’m going to take great confidence from that.”
But it was his wardrobe while making those comments that was the story.
Nick Kyrgios rocking the anti-Trump fashions after an exhibition in Sydney tonight. pic.twitter.com/7gytWZ8Oeu
— Ben Rothenberg (@BenRothenberg) January 9, 2017
Asked why he was wearing the shirt, Kyrgios said the reason was self-explanatory.
If some scientists say that man made global warming is real anyone who disagrees should be put in prison. But when 100% of scientists say that human life begins at conception it has nothing to do with abortion.
Simple Stanley Strawman argument.
Wikileaks revealing secrets about Hillary is evil. Hillary putting highly classified data on an insecure server is fine.
Just like Orange does today.
Simple Stanley is a hypocrite. Nothing new.
LIBERAL LOGIC
(4). Exposing Hillary’s secrets is a foreign coup. The NYT’s revealing highly classified anti-terror programs is heroic.
LIBERAL LOGIC
(5). WikiLeaks is a source for truth justice and the American way if it’s exposing critical national security programs that have nothing to do with domestic surveillance. WikiLeaks is an agent of fascism if it reveals anything that Hillary wants hidden.
LIBERAL LOGIC
(6). Electoral college electors ignoring how the people voted in their state is true democracy.
Fidel Castro, who wore military attire and got his power through a military campaign he led, is a beacon of freedom and truth. Retired American generals are unfit to serve in government.
Do you believe in evolution Simple Stanley?
Simple Stanley doesn’t know the meaning of logic. Fascists rarely do.
A year ago, Francis criticized candidate Donald Trump for wanting to build a wall along the border with Mexico, saying, “A person who thinks only about building walls … and not building bridges is not Christian.”
Preach it Frank.
Conan O’Brien @ConanOBrien 2h2 hours ago
Every time Trump signs something, I think of how that pen he’s using once dreamed of a better life: writing poetry, scratching butts, etc.
Hawkie…
have you seen these ?
https://www.artofmarkbryan.com/politics/
Very good.
I’m going to have nightmares now.
Just came across this thread. Made my way through the first two pages of comments, but couldn’t be bothered to get through all of it. Still, I learnt a lot. Who knew that Hawkeye was a Bernie Sanders-supporting socialist hailing from up north, who was capable of making reasonable arguments free of sarcasm and personal invective toward those with whom he disagrees? (even if only when arguing with Natashao) Maybe we have more in common than I thought (I’m from Minnesota). At any rate, let me add my two cents. I think there may be more agreement to this argument than meets the eye, at least once personal attacks and other irrelevancies are stripped away. Summarizing in two main points:
1. Natashao and Whitelight are absolutely right to call attention to the morally horrific nature of US foreign policy. I take their main point to be this: Why the moral outrage against Donald Trump, given that his predecessors (as of his inauguration and even today) are guilty of far worse crimes by any objective moral measure? It reeks of hypocrisy. The basis of their claim is rock solid. In the postwar period, the United States is responsible for the deaths of *far* more innocent civilians of other countries than is any other state -please note the qualification; Stalin and Chairman Mao are excluded- and it’s not even close. The worst case is in Indochina, where the figure runs into the millions; but it also runs into the millions in the middle east since the 1st Gulf War (1991) -here I am including not just deaths caused directly by war, but the millions of Iraqi children who died due to the draconian “oil for food” programme of the 1990s, and other similar deaths of which Madeleine Albright once infamously said, “we think the price is worth it”. Any self-respecting patriotic American aware of this record should hang his head in shame: it is blood on all of our hands.
The bombing in Kosovo, to which Natashao (and Djokovic) has called attention is one sorry chapter in that history. It was an absolutely preventable event, but Bill Clinton was determined to go to war and did not negotiate with Milosevic in good faith (one of the conditions at the Rambouillet talks that preceded the bombing in March 1999 was that NATO troops were to have full and unfettered access to all of Serbia!)
It should go without saying that pointing out facts such as these does not mean endorsing Milosevic or Saddam Hussein or Putin, or any other authoritarian leader. But it should be obvious, from even a cursory study of recent history, that the US has never had (and does not currently have) any problem with such leaders. Witness the current leadership in countries throughout the middle east, notably Saudi Arabia. In recent decades it has been happy to deal with leaders that butchered their own people by the thousands, notably in Central America (El Salvador and Guatemala come to mind; the latter case with respect to which I believe Bill Clinton actually apologized). Moreover, the claim that Russia interfered in the election is laughable -not because it is necessarily false, but because the type of interference is so mild compared with absolutely standard US operating procedure in countries throughout the world for many decades. When the US doesn’t like the outcome of an election, it simply organizes or backs a military coup. Some notable examples: Iran (1953); Congo (1960); Chile (1973). More recently, Obama turned a blind eye when the democratically elected leader (Morsi) in Egypt was deposed in a coup, and Egypt now enjoys the military dictatorship it did for decades. Ok, enough on this side of the coin.
2. The other side is much easier. Donald Trump is a danger to society and a menace to the world. So much was obvious before he took office, but he has surrounded himself with a few very dangerous people. As Hawkeye has pointed out, his climate change denial could spell the end of us all; and of course having his finger on the nuclear button could bring about that result much more quickly. He may not have yet killed as many innocent civilians in Yemen as Obama and Hillary, but he is off to a rip-roaring start, and there is no reason to think he won’t surpass them (if he can stay in office; I’m picking him to be out by year’s end). Basically, everything about the guy is terrifying. On top of it all, he seems to be a truly odious human being. All of this is so obvious that a 20-yr old tennis player who himself has not infrequently shown signs of being brain dead can see it.
Ending with a question: I am curious as to why Ricky thought Nick’s t-shirt was worth discussing in the first place?
Just a follow up. Does anyone know of any evidence that Russia’s alleged tampering in the US election was anything more than making it clear the extent to which the DNC was in the bag for Hillary? Basically, any evidence that Russia was trying to publicize nothing more nor less than what Bernie Sanders had been saying for the past year? Again, maybe it’s true, but it’s such small potatoes it’s hard to take it seriously. Given all the good reasons to criticize Trump and even to get him impeached, it’s strikes me as exceedingly odd to focus on the Russian influence, which is comparatively minor. I guess it’s a bit like getting Al Capone on tax evasion.