Author Topic: SOP  (Read 1424 times)

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
SOP
« on: June 08, 2022, 04:27:00 PM »
Remember this gem:
“I want to tell you Gorsuch, I want to tell you Kavanaugh: You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won't know what hit you." - Democrat leader Chuck Schumer

And this one:
Quote
Leftist activists are directing protestors to confront conservative Supreme Court Justices at their homes in Maryland and Virginia.

Justices John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Amy Coney Barrett, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch are all targets by an organization called, “Ruth Sent Us.” The organization has published the justices’ supposed home addresses online for the radical protestors to locate.

Well, message received:

Quote
A man carrying a gun, a knife and zip ties was arrested Wednesday near Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh's home in Montgomery County, Maryland, after threatening to kill the justice, authorities say.

Nicholas John Roske, of Simi Valley, California, was identified in a criminal complaint charging him with the attempted murder of a Supreme Court justice. He was dressed in black when he arrived by taxi just after 1 a.m. outside Kavanaugh's home in Chevy Chase.

Roske had a Glock 17 pistol, ammunition, a knife, zip ties, pepper spray, duct tape and other items that he told police he would use to break into Kavanaugh's house and kill him, according to a criminal complaint and affidavit filed in federal court in Maryland.

So we got Schumer promoting violence against justices and leftist activists group supplying the directions. I suppose we’re gonna talk about this insurrection?

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2022, 05:18:18 PM »
Now that you've finally admitted that the insurrection against Congress on January 6 was actually an insurrection, directed from the top (aka Donald Trump), I see no reason why we can't talk about this one, too.  ;D

Thank God you've finally realized what has been obvious to all of us this past year and a half!

But let's not make any false-equivalences between a violent insurrection involving dozens and dozens of people who were beating on the police, smashing windows and furniture, smearing poop on the walls and threatening Congressmen and women while they were trying to peacefully transfer power after a fair election with a single crazy person with a gun near Kavanaugh's house.  That's would be like comparing a running cow with a stampede of a herd!  No one would be that stupid!  ;D

Let's condemn both and condemn using incendiary language that might inspire people to do illegal acts, especially when based on exaggerations or even out-and-out lies meant to deceive naïve followers.  It will be nice to hear you condemn Trump and his lies and rhetoric along with Schumer's badly-phrased sentence. 

So, let's talk. :)

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2022, 05:59:25 PM »
I see your hypocrisy is intact … as are the logical fallacies you so rely on.

The reality is the left is ok with this. From congressional baseball practices to justice’s homes, assassination is cool (remember the leftist assassination chic of the bush years). When it comes to violence, it’s always liberals.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #3 on: June 08, 2022, 06:03:07 PM »
Crunch, I would like to suggest that you stop trying to tell people on the Left what they really think. You're not particularly talented at it.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #4 on: June 08, 2022, 06:24:10 PM »
I see your hypocrisy is intact … as are the logical fallacies you so rely on.

The reality is the left is ok with this. From congressional baseball practices to justice’s homes, assassination is cool (remember the leftist assassination chic of the bush years). When it comes to violence, it’s always liberals.

You say "when it comes to violence, it's always liberals."  Are you completely insane, stupid, or just an liar?

Who commits the most murders each year for the past decade, the extreme Left or the extreme Right?  And if you say the Left, get out of here!  We don't need lying asses on this board!  >:(

The extreme Right has been terrorizing this country for years.  Look it up!  Don't take my word for it.

Look at how "peaceful" Trump supporters were on January 6.  And they were Trump supporters--review the people who are being indicted and convicted during this "peaceful" protest.  They are ALL Trump supporters or Right-wing extremists, or both!

So don't you dare call me a hypocrite, or deny that the Right is far more violent than most of the Left.  You reek of clear, open, obvious hypocrisy like you were rolling in crap.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #5 on: June 08, 2022, 07:40:20 PM »
So don't you dare call me a hypocrite, or deny that the Right is far more violent than most of the Left.  You reek of clear, open, obvious hypocrisy like you were rolling in crap.

What do you really think.

jc44

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #6 on: June 09, 2022, 06:17:50 AM »
As I understand it - he did turn up with all those things (but if you believe in everyone's right to remain heavily armed at all times then what is the problem) - then he turned himself in before doing anything more than turning up near the house. I am all for people who are about to commit a crime tuning themselves in before doing so.  If that is the mark of the Left then hurrah for the Left!

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #7 on: June 09, 2022, 05:13:15 PM »
A day after the assination attempt on Kavanaugh, the group "Ruth Sent Us" decides to make it known where Justice Barrett's kids go to school:

Quote
If you’re in the DC metro area, join us. Our protests at Barrett’s home moved the needle to this coverage.

Falls Church is a People of Praise stronghold. She sends her seven kids to a People of Praise school that she sat on the Board of Directors for. She attends church DAILY.

How many of you will heed Lori Lightfoots literal "call to arms"?

This is what Wayward Son calls peaceful, despite the fact it is 100% illegal. The Whitehouse and the DOJ and House Democrats refuse to act (the senate passed a bill to protect Justices, Pelosi refuses it).

This is the left in America. I know you hate looking in the mirror, and that Trump broke you, but look you must.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #8 on: June 09, 2022, 05:26:25 PM »
What specifically is illegal, Crunch?

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #9 on: June 09, 2022, 05:43:33 PM »
Quote
How many of you will heed Lori Lightfoots literal "call to arms"?

Don't know who that is but will assume those that would heed such a 'call to arms' would fall under the same type of idjits who would head such things on the left or right

I personally do not support protesting public figures (or anyone) at their homes. full stop. It ought not be condoned or defended. 

If anything illegal happens due to this Lori's 'call to arms' I fully expect they she/her/them/he/him (just incase I presumed wrongly) be held accountable 

This may be a subsegment of the left but is not the left - not fully yet anyway
« Last Edit: June 09, 2022, 05:48:08 PM by rightleft22 »

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #10 on: June 09, 2022, 05:46:53 PM »
For my part, I'm okay with protesting at homes (or anywhere else you're likely to encounter a public figure in "public"), but only because of practicality. So many celebrities and politicians now can literally move from an armored, tinted vehicle into a secured tunnel and from there into a windowless chamber that they don't actually have to witness any form of public response at all. I am firmly on the side of humanizing these figures and forcing them to experience interactions with angry commoners, and home protest is unfortunately one of the few ways remaining to do that.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #11 on: June 09, 2022, 05:53:31 PM »
For my part, I'm okay with protesting at homes (or anywhere else you're likely to encounter a public figure in "public"), but only because of practicality. So many celebrities and politicians now can literally move from an armored, tinted vehicle into a secured tunnel and from there into a windowless chamber that they don't actually have to witness any form of public response at all. I am firmly on the side of humanizing these figures and forcing them to experience interactions with angry commoners, and home protest is unfortunately one of the few ways remaining to do that.

Perhaps if such public figures lived alone. So can't agree. Way to easy for things to get out of hand and a unnecessary drain on police.

Keep business, business things are far to personal as it is.

Allowing the above would I think stop many from going into public service.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #12 on: June 09, 2022, 06:04:35 PM »
It's worth noting that it's presently allowed. That's actually why I was asking Crunch what he thought was "100% illegal." You can protest outside your neighbor's house right now, for any reason, as long as you're standing on a public easement and not disturbing the peace.

My own position on business, especially when business is politics, is that all business is personal. Pretending otherwise is part of what sustains systemic injustice.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #13 on: June 09, 2022, 06:10:53 PM »
So when Republican leaders whip a violent mob into a frenzy, that's not their fault. But when a fringe group whips a handful of people into an angry picket line, and one person later goes to the same location contemplating violence, that's full responsibility for all Democrats. No wonder AI bots get schizophrenic and fail to parse human language.

I condemn the Chicago mayor's statements. I condemn the calls to harass justices at their homes, or in fact anyone at their homes. These people also have next door neighbors, let alone the people who live with them in their houses. For similar reasons, I condemn the convoy truckers who created misery for all the people living in the homes that they put under siege. And the protestors that gathered outside Gov Whitmer's private residence. The right likes to pretend that they are oh so well behaved, when really any political point of view has their own share of *censored*.

As far as legality, y'all are lazy or both right.

Quote
Virginia is one of the few states that does ban residential picketing (some cities and counties do as well); but its statute is precisely of the sort held to be unconstitutionally content-based by Carey. It too excepts "the picketing in any lawful manner, during a labor dispute, of the place of employment involved in such labor dispute," which is the very exclusion that doomed the statute in Carey.

So good chance it could be struck down, but is in fact currently illegal.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #14 on: June 09, 2022, 06:23:26 PM »
I'd also like to point out that what's being called Lightfoot's "literal call to arms" here is actually -- amusingly enough -- clearly her literal use of the phrase "call to arms" in its sense as a political metaphor. As in, she is literally calling for a metaphorical call to arms, which is the second dictionary definition of the term and one that's quite routinely used even by churches and charities. (I should also note that the person here complaining about her literal call to arms also defended a Republican campaign ad from a few years back that put crosshairs on the faces of various Democratic political figures, which I'd argue is a somewhat more fraught version of a similar metaphor that, unlike Lightfoot's usage, actually implied that specific individuals should be "targeted" by some action.) I don't have a horse in this race; I'm not a huge fan of Lightfoot for a variety of reasons. But Crunch, don't pretend that you're clutching your pearls, terrified that Lightfoot is inspiring people to shoot up conservative members of SCOTUS; it's beneath you.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #15 on: June 10, 2022, 10:14:07 AM »
Quote
Pennsylvania Democratic congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan has attributed her past electoral success to her focus on "civility" and "unity." Now, she says the Republican Party is "diseased" and must be "cleansed."

Houlahan's comments came during a May 27 appearance on the Daily Beast‘s The New Abnormal podcast, which saw the congresswoman disparage Republicans as deplorable and anti-democratic.

"This is, in my opinion, a diseased Republican Party. And it needs to be cured and cleansed," Houlahan said.

Nothing like a good cleansing, and we all know what that means.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #16 on: June 10, 2022, 10:21:32 AM »
What specifically is illegal, Crunch?

You know, I sometimes wonder why you guys are so grossly misinformed. It's insanely easy to figure this out with even the most rudimentary search. Of course, CNN is not reporting it so maybe that's why you seem to never actually know what you're talking about.

18 U.S. Code § 1507 - Picketing or parading:
Quote
Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Every single one of the protesters should be arrested. Immediately. However, the Whitehouse, leadership in both the house and senate, and the DOJ, all Democrat-controlled, refuse to do anything. We have an attempted assassination already (wanna bet that guy ultimately gets charged with a lesser offense or a token sentence?).

But yeah, go on and tell me how the right spent an entire summer burning down cities, created so-called "autonomous zones" where people were raped and murdered, etc, etc, etc, ad nasueum.




yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #17 on: June 10, 2022, 10:22:38 AM »
...
Quote
"This is, in my opinion, a diseased Republican Party. And it needs to be cured and cleansed," Houlahan said.

Nothing like a good cleansing, and we all know what that means.

What does it mean? Does it imply more or less violence than "if you don't fight you won't have a country anymore"?

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #18 on: June 10, 2022, 10:25:42 AM »
... We have an attempted assassination already (wanna bet that guy ultimately gets charged with a lesser offense or a token sentence?).
...

Given the guy called the cops on himself saying he was contemplating suicide. Yeah he gets a lesser offense. The only statement that is close to damning is him saying he traveled to kill a judge.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #19 on: June 10, 2022, 11:35:25 AM »
Just to be clear, Crunch: while you own guns so that you can create a zone free from government control if you deem it necessary, the difference between the one you'd create and the one that Portland liberals created is that yours for some reason wouldn't have anyone in it who'd rape or murder?

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #20 on: June 10, 2022, 11:49:27 AM »
Also: while I'm not a lawyer, I should note that my understanding of 18 USC 1507 is that it's been whittled down by numerous Constitutionality challenges to the point that, in practice, it bans direct threats and public disturbance. If you're standing quietly outside a judge's house with a sign like "Please don't take away my right to vote," for example, even if you're clearly referring to a specific case before that judge, the code doesn't apply.

Obviously setting fire to an effigy or shouting through loudspeakers or the like is more problematic, and there are stricter restrictions on criminal trials as well. But the reason that some people are pushing so hard for new law to be created in this case is that multiple First Amendment carve-outs have found strongly in favor of protesters. 

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #21 on: June 24, 2022, 05:42:36 PM »
Just to be clear, Crunch: while you own guns so that you can create a zone free from government control if you deem it necessary, the difference between the one you'd create and the one that Portland liberals created is that yours for some reason wouldn't have anyone in it who'd rape or murder?

Why do you focus on such logical fallacies?

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #22 on: June 24, 2022, 05:44:07 PM »
Everyone ready for this weekend’s nights of rage from the left? I wonder which city will be the first to peacefully burn?

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #23 on: June 24, 2022, 06:01:37 PM »
Remind me again how you intend to use your guns to defend yourself from the federal government, Crunch?

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #24 on: June 24, 2022, 06:53:46 PM »
The rationale for using guns against the federal government is if, and I'll have to hit Godwin's Law on this, the government starts doing something like sending masses of people to the ovens, or acting like Stalin and murdering people suspected of not liking him on social media (just making it modern times relevant there), or going Pol Pot or Mugabe or any one of numerous examples throughout history in which the rulers turned on the people. It may be that the pro and anti second amendment people are divided by whether or not they think that could ever happen here.

But anyway, that's the situation in which you're going to use your guns to fight the feds, or whatever government jackboots are coming for you which could also be the national guard or the police or even some of the citizen militias because all of them could be co-opted by the forces of evil. You'd hope that there are enough like minded citizens, or would be victims, on your side including elements in the military and police and national guard and other militias that you'll be able to successfully defend yourself, but even if not at least you might have a chance to go down fighting instead of being a helpless lamb ripe for slaughter.

Bottom line, the 2nd Amendment is there for the worst case scenario.

Of course, that makes it tough to get rid of by persuasion because you have to convince people that's never going to happen. Not now, not in the next few generations and not in several hundred years. It's tough enough to prove a negative and it becomes pretty much impossible to prove that a potential future can never occur. So that's what your up against in getting rid of aka "reinterpreting" the second.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #25 on: June 24, 2022, 07:14:02 PM »
So when people rush out and buy twenty rifles every time a Democrat gets elected, it's because they want to ensure their stockpile for the next generation?

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #26 on: June 24, 2022, 07:45:41 PM »
Yup.

Better to have 'em and not need 'em than need 'em and not have 'em.

The other part of that mentality is that having a highly armed citizenry makes a Hitlerian or Stalinist type pogrom very unlikely. You have it because you might need it. But there is only a very miniscule chance you'll ever need it precisely because you have it. And so if you don't have it, your odds of needing it just went way, way up and then of course you're not going to have it when you do need it. That's the mindset you're dealing with. The tens of thousands dying of gun violence every year may be saving tens or hundreds of millions down the road because there is no violence more deadly than that which comes from a government.

Kind of like, "See, our government will never turn on us so we don't need guns."

"Um... the reason they won't turn on us is only BECAUSE we have guns."

Democrats don't help their argument much when they mark the police as an institution out to be corrupt racist murderous thugs either. It basically confirms even Democrats agree that the government is violent, evil, and cannot be trusted with the power to kill. If those are the type of people we have running around now just imagine if an evil madman gets hold of power. And then add on all the stuff about Trump and Democrats pretty much make an iron clad case for the second amendment all on their own.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #27 on: June 24, 2022, 09:19:22 PM »
The other part of that mentality is that having a highly armed citizenry makes a Hitlerian or Stalinist type pogrom very unlikely. You have it because you might need it. But there is only a very miniscule chance you'll ever need it precisely because you have it. And so if you don't have it, your odds of needing it just went way, way up and then of course you're not going to have it when you do need it. That's the mindset you're dealing with. The tens of thousands dying of gun violence every year may be saving tens or hundreds of millions down the road because there is no violence more deadly than that which comes from a government.

This argument would be a lot more effective if so many of the 2nd amendment fetishists weren't also chomping at the bit to line the enemies of the Republic up against the wall.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #28 on: June 24, 2022, 09:37:34 PM »
Nobody has better locks on their doors than a thief.

Maybe that's why they are so worried about the danger, because they know what they'd do if they had the power.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #29 on: June 25, 2022, 10:31:51 AM »
I find it really hard to understand, cherry, how you can strongly support the idea of violent resistance against the government, which is why you need your guns, then turn around and criticize violent resistance against the government. I mean, I thought your point was that citizens need to be armed in order to provide a check on the government?

You might personally set a high bar for when you might exercise your right to political self-defense, but there are going to be a lot of people from BLM to people who hate the other BLM who decide that the right time is when the government wants you to pay for grazing, or people who want cops to stop choking people until they are dead.

*censored*, the guys in michigan were ready to do it over a mask mandate.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #30 on: June 25, 2022, 10:56:04 AM »
It's a bit like in the "When is vigilantism justified?" where it really comes down to it being justified when an individual is willing to sacrifice their life, either in prison or by dying, to take the law into their own hands. It's up to everyone to decide for themselves. I'm not saying that's necessarily the optimal way to go about it, but that's just how it is, the reality of it, for all practical purposes. If you could take away that ability by banning guns then when the government starts sending all Jewish people or whatever the demographic is to gas chambers, the point at which most people hopefully would be willing to stand up, they won't be able to. And you might have made it more likely because now the government is less afraid. If the millions of Jewish people murdered by the Nazis had been armed, could they have resisted better? Would Hitler have been tempted to find a different "solution"? I don't know but what we do know is what happened after they had their guns taken away.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #31 on: June 25, 2022, 05:04:46 PM »
You don't think there are better ways to stop Illinois Hitler? Mass strikes, cyber attacks, actual members of the military. For your scenario to happen, you have to assume that there are enough fascist racists in the military to execute Krystallnacht Chicago. And I see no reason to think that's it's more likely that the Nazis are armed civilians like the proud boys. I'm content to put my fate in the hands of our fighting men and women, and not in your hands.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #32 on: June 25, 2022, 05:15:11 PM »
Do you think that Japanese Americans should have been better armed, and then the government wouldn't have dared here's them to the desert? Native Americans were pretty well armed. More competitive with the us cavalry than the Michigan militia would be facing off with today's army. Didn't seem to keep them free, did it? The maintenance of this armed rebellion fantasy is allowing gun deaths to rise unchecked.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #33 on: June 25, 2022, 06:53:34 PM »
The Japanese Americans weren't being sent to ovens though. Though many of them did die that wasn't the point of it all. It was wrong but it wasn't genocide. As for the Native Americans, being able to go down fighting and take some of the people trying to wipe you out or drive you out isn't the same thing as being guaranteed a victory, or having any chance of victory at all. But at least you can take some of the enemy down with you when you die instead of just getting slaughtered anyway while you're defenseless. Look at many of the pogroms and genocides and mass murders governments have committed. Not being able to defend yourself often only guarantees you no mercy at all. It's hard to say if the Native Americans would have been better off being totally helpless and pleading for mercy or if they are better off now because their ancestors put up a fight. At least they got some reservations out of it. Some peoples no longer exist at all or were totally driven out of their lands.

Not to say there aren't times where peaceful protest or going along aren't better. It worked for Gandhi. The Japanese Americans didn't have the numbers to effectively resist so certainly as bad as things were for them and as much as they lost they were better off not fighting in that case. But it didn't work for the Jews in Germany. "Never again." You don't have to be a Jew to take that to heart.

Now I've lived in Japan and have visited Singapore. Never felt safer. You're walking around in the middle of the night there and compared to in America it's like a weight is lifted off of you, the shadow of sudden death from a violent thug doesn't follow you around. There's certainly something to be said for a mostly or totally gun free society.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #34 on: June 25, 2022, 07:06:44 PM »


The armed rebellion fantasy isn't well addressed by the gun grabbers though. It's like there's not even any attempt at persuasion. It's just called crazy talk. "You could never win." The Taliban just did. "It could never happen." Democrats just told us what a crazy megalomaniac Trump was and how he tried to illegally and violently hold onto power. "Trust your government." Democrats don't even make that argument. They can't even use math because the numbers are far more weighted against mass murder by governments being much more dangerous, millions dead instead of tens of thousands. Foreign countries can't even be pointed at because for every Iceland there is a Mexico. All we hear is Nike, "Just do it."

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #35 on: June 25, 2022, 07:57:46 PM »
Thanks for acknowledging that there are benefits to gun restricted countries. It is refreshing to see someone admit something that doesn't support their argument, even though it clearly doesn't negate the argument.

As far as the Japanese, are you SURE killing them wasn't the point? I mean, they dropped them into the middle of a desert with food more or less designed to dehydrate. When they could just as easily have relocated them to temperate areas in the Sierra Nevadas.

I'll reciprocate: A lot of my argument hinges on the military. There are examples, including Nazi Germany, where the group to be targeted was first culled out of the military to prevent sabotage from within the ranks. It can also be shown that the military isn't necessarily the paragon of virtue that I fantasize that it is. Vietnam happened, and many soldiers from conscript to general had no problem with genocidal adjacent orders. US soldiers helped round up Japanese Americans, even when the senior military leadership knew most of those people were not a threat. I can sometimes project my reverence for my oath to the Constitution onto everyone who has taken it, and for some of them it is meaningless. Then there's the problem also demonstrated in Pakistan, Turkey, and many other places where the military is actually the one to turn on the government - but not to protect the people from a bad government. They just want power and control for their own agenda and resort to a coup, usually claiming to be the exact kind of freedom fighter that you conjure. General Zod had to take over to save the people from the corrupt President!

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #36 on: June 25, 2022, 08:25:24 PM »
The armed rebellion fantasy isn't well addressed by the gun grabbers though. It's like there's not even any attempt at persuasion. It's just called crazy talk. "You could never win." The Taliban just did. "It could never happen." Democrats just told us what a crazy megalomaniac Trump was and how he tried to illegally and violently hold onto power. "Trust your government." Democrats don't even make that argument. They can't even use math because the numbers are far more weighted against mass murder by governments being much more dangerous, millions dead instead of tens of thousands. Foreign countries can't even be pointed at because for every Iceland there is a Mexico. All we hear is Nike, "Just do it."

Most of the people who belonged to the Taliban in 2001 are quite dead. Today's Taliban are new people using an old name. I'm not sure I'd be calling that a win.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #37 on: June 27, 2022, 01:37:55 AM »
Everyone ready for this weekend’s nights of rage from the left? I wonder which city will be the first to peacefully burn?

Well, you called it, Crunch.  Just look at this footage I found of rioters in Portland from Fox News.

Compare it to footage of the protest from January 6.

As anyone can see, the pro-abortionists are much more violent and destructive than the Right has ever been.  It's going to be a long, bloody summer, isn't it?  :'(

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #38 on: June 27, 2022, 09:44:09 AM »
Everyone ready for this weekend’s nights of rage from the left? I wonder which city will be the first to peacefully burn?

Well, you called it, Crunch.  Just look at this footage I found of rioters in Portland from Fox News.

Compare it to footage of the protest from January 6.

As anyone can see, the pro-abortionists are much more violent and destructive than the Right has ever been.  It's going to be a long, bloody summer, isn't it?  :'(

#1, your links are reversed. #2, there is no equivalence between footage of damage done versus a montage of events as they happened with people in it. To draw your conclusion, you'd have to take footage of the capitol grounds on Jan 7th, and show that the broken windows were worse than the graffiti. Or you'd have to show the people in Portland as they were tagging the building from the most violent available perspective and show that they were less violent.

Of course, choosing Portland really is cherry picking anyway, especially your choice of event.

Quote
“If abortions aren’t safe then you aren’t either,” a flier advertising the march​ read, Oregonlive​ reported. This slogan has, especially in the last month, been loosely associated with Jane’s Revenge, a collective of pro-abortion terrorists that has allegedly targeted dozens of pro-life pregnancy centers nationwide with firebombing and arson.

This fringe group is definitely violent and dangerous and deserves condemnation. Which is the real difference. I would assume there are exactly 0 Democratic Party politicians who support Jane's Revenge, as opposed to Republican Party politicians who downplay Jan 6th, fomented it, supported it, and fight accountability. We cannot, however, pretend that these violent groups don't exist or that the left is somehow morally superior and incapable of doing something like Jan 6th given the right provocation.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #39 on: June 27, 2022, 09:50:02 AM »
I think TheDrake was using sarcasm to show the difference in the level of violence.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #40 on: June 27, 2022, 10:24:43 AM »
Quote
This fringe group is definitely violent and dangerous and deserves condemnation. Which is the real difference. I would assume there are exactly 0 Democratic Party politicians who support Jane's Revenge, as opposed to Republican Party politicians who downplay Jan 6th, fomented it, supported it, and fight accountability. We cannot, however, pretend that these violent groups don't exist or that the left is somehow morally superior and incapable of doing something like Jan 6th given the right provocation.

Totally agree. That said the right only needs to point to a example on the left to muddy the waters and change the conversation, and it works.
Those I know on the right would not have added the last statement for self reflection. Any call to self reflection and the point is proved, the right is justified. 

(Not calling for the end of self reflection :) )
« Last Edit: June 27, 2022, 10:26:55 AM by rightleft22 »

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #41 on: June 27, 2022, 10:39:25 AM »
It was just one or two (thousand or tens of thousands) bad apples.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #42 on: June 27, 2022, 11:01:58 AM »
It was just one or two (thousand or tens of thousands) bad apples.

Without a call to self reflection there is no need to notice any hypocrisy as when to make the argument that a bad apple represent the whole and when it does not.  You pick to what is convenient to your intention.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2022, 11:11:49 AM by rightleft22 »

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #43 on: June 27, 2022, 12:32:03 PM »
I think TheDrake was using sarcasm to show the difference in the level of violence.

No, I'm quite serious. How would we go about gauging commitment to violence. The level of violence includes the nature of the acts, the frequency of the acts, the number of people committing it, and the number of people supporting it. But even if you decide that the Qspiracists are 4x more violent than Jane's Revenge, where does that get you?

All violence should be condemned. When there's a statement about violence on the left, there is no value in saying "what about violence on the right though?" It doesn't need to be brought up. Just say it is wrong to break windows, no matter what your cause is or how many people are doing it. You can call out the hyperbole of claiming the "left is burning down cities" without resorting to discussions about a solitary event more than a year old. And if you are going to make a comparison, don't be sloppy about it.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #44 on: June 27, 2022, 05:57:37 PM »
Everyone ready for this weekend’s nights of rage from the left? I wonder which city will be the first to peacefully burn?

Well, you called it, Crunch.  Just look at this footage I found of rioters in Portland from Fox News.

Compare it to footage of the protest from January 6.

As anyone can see, the pro-abortionists are much more violent and destructive than the Right has ever been.  It's going to be a long, bloody summer, isn't it?  :'(

#1, your links are reversed. #2,

Whoopsie! I must have been tired and mixed them up.  I guess my conclusions should be reversed, too. ;) :)

Quote
... there is no equivalence between footage of damage done versus a montage of events as they happened with people in it. To draw your conclusion, you'd have to take footage of the capitol grounds on Jan 7th, and show that the broken windows were worse than the graffiti. Or you'd have to show the people in Portland as they were tagging the building from the most violent available perspective and show that they were less violent.

Of course, choosing Portland really is cherry picking anyway, especially your choice of event.


My problem was that that Fox News clip was about all I could find.  ::)

With cell phones and the Conservative Media chomping at the bit, I was expecting footage at least as violent as the George Floyd riots, but all I found was that silly panning shot of graffiti.   ???  Was I looking in the wrong places?  Was Fox sleeping on the job?  Or was there simply very little actual violence this last weekend, with no buildings burned, few windows smashed, and no extreme acts worse than writing on the wall?

I fear that things are going to get bad, but I don't think it will be from riots and such.  I believe it will come from clashes between those defending a woman's right to control her own body and those defending the right of a fetus to live, with some instances of one side or the other forcing their beliefs on the general public.  Both sides feel they are in the right and won't compromise.  After all, the most reasonable compromise (fetus' right can override the woman's right at point of viability--i.e. when there is a good chance it can survive on it's own) just got struck down by the SCOTUS.

The rage from the left comes as a response to violence against people.  This will be a slow burn and will build over time, especially as the Right tries to further their position and try to pass a Federal law banning abortions, against the will of the majority of the American people. :(

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #45 on: June 27, 2022, 06:12:57 PM »
Now I understand where I messed up.

I meant Wayward was using sarcasm, not TheDrake.
Mea Culpa.

See, it's not so hard to admit when you are wrong.  Unless it was a Soros/Gates deep state plot.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #46 on: June 28, 2022, 08:48:40 AM »
Now I understand where I messed up.

I meant Wayward was using sarcasm, not TheDrake.
Mea Culpa.

See, it's not so hard to admit when you are wrong.  Unless it was a Soros/Gates deep state plot.

Actually, I'm secret antifa paid by George Soros with child pornography.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #47 on: June 28, 2022, 10:39:01 AM »
Hey, do you have Soros' phone number?  I haven't been getting my Liberal Activist Payments lately, and I'm starting to get mad.  >:( ;)

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #48 on: June 28, 2022, 12:36:10 PM »
Hey, do you have Soros' phone number?  I haven't been getting my Liberal Activist Payments lately, and I'm starting to get mad.  >:( ;)

Hit him up in his IG DM, @commiesocialist1930

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: SOP
« Reply #49 on: June 28, 2022, 05:04:47 PM »
Here's some footage that is more comparable.

Attempts to break into the Arizona Senate Building

That seems pretty January 6th adjacent. Senators had to shelter in place for 20 minutes.

Quote
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security on Friday warned that threats of political violence, particularly against judges and state officials, will likely intensify in light of the Supreme Court's decision to eliminate the constitutional right to an abortion, according to an intelligence memo obtained by CBS News.

Domestic extremists, Homeland Security officials said in their intelligence memo, "will likely exploit" the Supreme Court's ruling to "intensify violence against a wide range of targets." Federal and state officials, and their facilities, could be "most at risk" of being targets of political violence, DHS concluded.

Public protests in response to the high court's decision could become "attractive targets" for individuals seeking to commit acts of political violence, according to the memo, which also predicted that attacks against both reproductive services and pregnancy resource facilities could escalate.