Trump Fires Comey
Tollorin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
17 May 2017, 4:04 pm
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
If you want a civil war then keep supporting this because that is where this is heading, you think if they do manage to overthrow Trump that the next president will have any authority? This is the end of the United States, if their is no reciprocation then there is nothing left to do besides kill each other. You'll have to worry about a lot more than a forest station being occupied. Remember what JFK said about democratic revolution, by denying it you're making violent revolution inevitable.
There hasn't been a peaceful transfer of power, this democracy is a joke and facade. Democrat 'resistance' is destroying this country.
There hasn't been a peaceful transfer of power, this democracy is a joke and facade. Democrat 'resistance' is destroying this country.
Lets not get carried away. virtually all the anti-Trump protest has been non-violent. The right have eagerly scoured for footage of riots to stir up the redneck masses.
Peaceful? Hardly. The definition of peaceful in this case seems defined by protests which lack vandalism, arson and physical assaults - of which there have still been a plenitude of for which scouring for footage is hardly necessary.
There's hours of footage of insane Trump derangement behavior readily and permanently available. But even barring those extremes, they've hardly been all that peaceful. Or dignified for that matter.
All those scores of liberals acting exactly the way they predicted the rednecks would act. Showing the world the new term for a redneck, a deplorable, a radical, a drama-queen, a paranoiac etc is, a liberal with Trump derangement syndrome.
And now the derangement has taken the form of a 17th century style witch hunt. I expect the final results of this to be inconclusive. But if there's an actual not guilty verdict, will it lead to further violent protests? Probably.
The violent protestors don't represent the rank and file democrat supporters who are by and large lower-middle class workers and students who are (on average) more educated than the average republican nutjob
Actually those actions do represent them. That's what the liberal democrat side is associated with now. Violence and paranoia. That's why you keep encountering it and keep having to make disclaimers.
And these are supposedly better educated people who have lower paying jobs than their supposedly less educated counterparts? That seems pretty non sequitur to me.
And if you're going to generalize who the nutjobs are, it's clearly the average democrat who's taken on the role of nutjob via democrats making death threats to electors, grand scale vandalism, arson, spitting in police officers faces, punching people out, trying to set people on fire, dressing up as genitalia and on and on.
Not the lest of which is a revival of McCarthyism style paranoia over Russia and the absurd blacklist witch hunt type investigations that go along with it, with a former SNL comedian and a fake Indian at the forefront demanding a special prosecutor.
All you have to do is detach yourself from the political ideology you've let yourself get indoctrinated into, and see things in a nonpartisan objective way.
First, I don't think you really look at things in a "detached way" and that your positions are much more ideological that yourself believe so.
Two, some so-called liberals may have been in violent manifestations, but I have yet to heard of liberals taking part of mass shooting like a few conservatives, or I should say fascists, did.
Three, some conservatives groups have paid protester to do violent acts in order to discredit liberals. (Don't remember the links of the videos)
_________________
Down with speculators!! !
17 May 2017, 8:41 pm
Tollorin wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
If you want a civil war then keep supporting this because that is where this is heading, you think if they do manage to overthrow Trump that the next president will have any authority? This is the end of the United States, if their is no reciprocation then there is nothing left to do besides kill each other. You'll have to worry about a lot more than a forest station being occupied. Remember what JFK said about democratic revolution, by denying it you're making violent revolution inevitable.
There hasn't been a peaceful transfer of power, this democracy is a joke and facade. Democrat 'resistance' is destroying this country.
There hasn't been a peaceful transfer of power, this democracy is a joke and facade. Democrat 'resistance' is destroying this country.
Lets not get carried away. virtually all the anti-Trump protest has been non-violent. The right have eagerly scoured for footage of riots to stir up the redneck masses.
Peaceful? Hardly. The definition of peaceful in this case seems defined by protests which lack vandalism, arson and physical assaults - of which there have still been a plenitude of for which scouring for footage is hardly necessary.
There's hours of footage of insane Trump derangement behavior readily and permanently available. But even barring those extremes, they've hardly been all that peaceful. Or dignified for that matter.
All those scores of liberals acting exactly the way they predicted the rednecks would act. Showing the world the new term for a redneck, a deplorable, a radical, a drama-queen, a paranoiac etc is, a liberal with Trump derangement syndrome.
And now the derangement has taken the form of a 17th century style witch hunt. I expect the final results of this to be inconclusive. But if there's an actual not guilty verdict, will it lead to further violent protests? Probably.
The violent protestors don't represent the rank and file democrat supporters who are by and large lower-middle class workers and students who are (on average) more educated than the average republican nutjob
Actually those actions do represent them. That's what the liberal democrat side is associated with now. Violence and paranoia. That's why you keep encountering it and keep having to make disclaimers.
And these are supposedly better educated people who have lower paying jobs than their supposedly less educated counterparts? That seems pretty non sequitur to me.
And if you're going to generalize who the nutjobs are, it's clearly the average democrat who's taken on the role of nutjob via democrats making death threats to electors, grand scale vandalism, arson, spitting in police officers faces, punching people out, trying to set people on fire, dressing up as genitalia and on and on.
Not the lest of which is a revival of McCarthyism style paranoia over Russia and the absurd blacklist witch hunt type investigations that go along with it, with a former SNL comedian and a fake Indian at the forefront demanding a special prosecutor.
All you have to do is detach yourself from the political ideology you've let yourself get indoctrinated into, and see things in a nonpartisan objective way.
First, I don't think you really look at things in a "detached way" and that your positions are much more ideological that yourself believe so.
Two, some so-called liberals may have been in violent manifestations, but I have yet to heard of liberals taking part of mass shooting like a few conservatives, or I should say fascists, did.
Three, some conservatives groups have paid protester to do violent acts in order to discredit liberals. (Don't remember the links of the videos)
All the same the reputation of the liberals as a whole that they worked so hard at cultivating, was severely damaged by them by the way they reacted after the election and continue to react.
Not so much what they've reacted to, but how they have reacted out in the street and all over social media.
17 May 2017, 9:09 pm
EzraS wrote:
... the reputation of the liberals as a whole that they worked so hard at cultivating, was severely damaged by them by the way they reacted after the election and continue to react.
I'd say, before that ... during the campaign, when the primaries were going on, for example. It was when an obscenity-shouting mob shut down a Trump rally in Chicago that I sat up and took notice. Because if the left-wing protestors had anything worthwhile to say for their side, they wouldn't have needed to stoop to bullying and intimidation tactics to go up against Trump's right to free speech and freedom of expression ... instead, they could have presented their own ideas in a civilized manner. That they didn't spoke volumes.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,781
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
17 May 2017, 9:57 pm
the_phoenix wrote:
EzraS wrote:
... the reputation of the liberals as a whole that they worked so hard at cultivating, was severely damaged by them by the way they reacted after the election and continue to react.
I'd say, before that ... during the campaign, when the primaries were going on, for example. It was when an obscenity-shouting mob shut down a Trump rally in Chicago that I sat up and took notice. Because if the left-wing protestors had anything worthwhile to say for their side, they wouldn't have needed to stoop to bullying and intimidation tactics to go up against Trump's right to free speech and freedom of expression ... instead, they could have presented their own ideas in a civilized manner. That they didn't spoke volumes.
Not to defend violent actions, but the reasons behind it all has to do with their outrage against the Trmp campaign's flirtation with Alt Right white nationalists, such as the likes of David Duke, Richard Spencer, and Steve Bannon. It wasn't just that Trump's rallies were often attended by racists showing their support, but that Trump used their language to appeal to them, used their racist internet memes, and specious claims about massive voter fraud by blacks and Latinos, or that 90% of white homicide victims are murdered by blacks. You would not have seen this reaction from the left had Trump chosen to take the highroad.
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
17 May 2017, 11:16 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
the_phoenix wrote:
EzraS wrote:
... the reputation of the liberals as a whole that they worked so hard at cultivating, was severely damaged by them by the way they reacted after the election and continue to react.
I'd say, before that ... during the campaign, when the primaries were going on, for example. It was when an obscenity-shouting mob shut down a Trump rally in Chicago that I sat up and took notice. Because if the left-wing protestors had anything worthwhile to say for their side, they wouldn't have needed to stoop to bullying and intimidation tactics to go up against Trump's right to free speech and freedom of expression ... instead, they could have presented their own ideas in a civilized manner. That they didn't spoke volumes.
Not to defend violent actions, but the reasons behind it all has to do with their outrage against the Trmp campaign's flirtation with Alt Right white nationalists, such as the likes of David Duke, Richard Spencer, and Steve Bannon. It wasn't just that Trump's rallies were often attended by racists showing their support, but that Trump used their language to appeal to them, used their racist internet memes, and specious claims about massive voter fraud by blacks and Latinos, or that 90% of white homicide victims are murdered by blacks. You would not have seen this reaction from the left had Trump chosen to take the highroad.
Not buying it, because Hillary, Bernie, or what the heck, Ted Cruz or Jeb Bush could have simply held their own rallies and spoken up on the campaign trail and said exactly what you did about racism to get their message across ... or they could have said whatever they wanted for that matter ... no need for any candidate whosoever it may be, in any political contest, to resort to any hired henchmen or mobs out on the streets, when they all have at their disposal a soapbox to stand on in the marketplace of ideas, battling for hearts and minds with their words.
Last edited by the_phoenix on 17 May 2017, 11:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,781
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
17 May 2017, 11:23 pm
the_phoenix wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
the_phoenix wrote:
EzraS wrote:
... the reputation of the liberals as a whole that they worked so hard at cultivating, was severely damaged by them by the way they reacted after the election and continue to react.
I'd say, before that ... during the campaign, when the primaries were going on, for example. It was when an obscenity-shouting mob shut down a Trump rally in Chicago that I sat up and took notice. Because if the left-wing protestors had anything worthwhile to say for their side, they wouldn't have needed to stoop to bullying and intimidation tactics to go up against Trump's right to free speech and freedom of expression ... instead, they could have presented their own ideas in a civilized manner. That they didn't spoke volumes.
Not to defend violent actions, but the reasons behind it all has to do with their outrage against the Trmp campaign's flirtation with Alt Right white nationalists, such as the likes of David Duke, Richard Spencer, and Steve Bannon. It wasn't just that Trump's rallies were often attended by racists showing their support, but that Trump used their language to appeal to them, used their racist internet memes, and specious claims about massive voter fraud by blacks and Latinos, or that 90% of white homicide victims are murdered by blacks. You would not have seen this reaction from the left had Trump chosen to take the highroad.
Not buying it, because Hillary, Bernie, or what the heck, Ted Cruz or Jeb Bush could have simply held their own rallies and spoken up on the campaign trail and said exactly what you did about racism to get their message across ... or they could have said whatever they wanted for that matter ... without resorting to any hired henchmen or mobs out on the streets.
In fact, Clinton, Sanders, Bush, and Cruz all had spoken up publicly against Trump's courtship with white nationalism, which is why some of the rank-and-file opposition to Trump weren't able to contain their outrage anylonger.
And who says any of those rioters were payed by anyone? Can't people be outraged on their own?
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
17 May 2017, 11:33 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
And who says any of those rioters were payed by anyone? Can't people be outraged on their own?
Paid or not, it's a far cry from "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" as said by Evelyn Beatrice Hall and as normally attributed to Voltaire.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,781
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
18 May 2017, 1:02 am
the_phoenix wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
And who says any of those rioters were payed by anyone? Can't people be outraged on their own?
Paid or not, it's a far cry from "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" as said by Evelyn Beatrice Hall and as normally attributed to Voltaire.
It's easy to repeat that quote, but it's difficult to put it into practice when the other party are spewing ugly hate directed at racial and religious minorities.
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
18 May 2017, 3:29 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
Thing is though, does reality match of with the myth of Trump's negotiating skills? Possibly, he could make things worse, or even cave into Kim. Last I heard, Trump was speaking well of Kim personally, as after all, he loves his strongmen.
Isn't it ironic that despots like Putin and Kim share something in common with the orange one...
Kraichgauer wrote:
As for impeachment - I wouldn't hold my breath with both houses of congress in Republican hands, but that situation might change come the midterm elections.
The Australian media is ramping up the likelihood of impeachment but they also heralded a Hillary victory so I'm not going to hold my breath either
18 May 2017, 3:32 am
EzraS wrote:
And why would the US need to carpet bomb N. Korea with nukes? They didn't need to carpet bomb Iraq with nukes.
It would be dependent if the North Koreans were capable of launching long distance intercontinental missiles with nuclear warheads. At the moment they don't seem to have this capacity but the Chinese and Pakistanis (honestly why are America helping this country?) have been supplying them with technology so this could be possible in future.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,781
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
18 May 2017, 4:52 am
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
And why would the US need to carpet bomb N. Korea with nukes? They didn't need to carpet bomb Iraq with nukes.
It would be dependent if the North Koreans were capable of launching long distance intercontinental missiles with nuclear warheads. At the moment they don't seem to have this capacity but the Chinese and Pakistanis (honestly why are America helping this country?) have been supplying them with technology so this could be possible in future.
The Bush administration had twisted Pakistan's arm into helping us against Bin Laden and Mullah Omar, following 9/11, in return for ending prohibitions on the Pakistani nuclear program. Not a great idea, as their own relationship with the Taliban and Islamic terrorists, as well as their covert sheltering of Bin Laden, casts serious doubt on their commitment to the War on Terror.
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
18 May 2017, 7:01 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
And why would the US need to carpet bomb N. Korea with nukes? They didn't need to carpet bomb Iraq with nukes.
It would be dependent if the North Koreans were capable of launching long distance intercontinental missiles with nuclear warheads. At the moment they don't seem to have this capacity but the Chinese and Pakistanis (honestly why are America helping this country?) have been supplying them with technology so this could be possible in future.
The Bush administration had twisted Pakistan's arm into helping us against Bin Laden and Mullah Omar, following 9/11, in return for ending prohibitions on the Pakistani nuclear program. Not a great idea, as their own relationship with the Taliban and Islamic terrorists, as well as their covert sheltering of Bin Laden, casts serious doubt on their commitment to the War on Terror.
Its funny the strategic games that lead to this type of brinksmanship and possible nuclear war...reminds me the orange one has his itchy finger on the nukes
Mao Tse Tung might have been a fanatical communist yet he was also a keen student of the imperial military strategist Sun Szu. "An enemy of my enemy is my friend"...Looks like Bush was also a fan of Sun Szu as well...
18 May 2017, 7:14 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
the_phoenix wrote:
EzraS wrote:
... the reputation of the liberals as a whole that they worked so hard at cultivating, was severely damaged by them by the way they reacted after the election and continue to react.
I'd say, before that ... during the campaign, when the primaries were going on, for example. It was when an obscenity-shouting mob shut down a Trump rally in Chicago that I sat up and took notice. Because if the left-wing protestors had anything worthwhile to say for their side, they wouldn't have needed to stoop to bullying and intimidation tactics to go up against Trump's right to free speech and freedom of expression ... instead, they could have presented their own ideas in a civilized manner. That they didn't spoke volumes.
Not to defend violent actions, but the reasons behind it all has to do with their outrage against the Trmp campaign's flirtation with Alt Right white nationalists, such as the likes of David Duke, Richard Spencer, and Steve Bannon. It wasn't just that Trump's rallies were often attended by racists showing their support, but that Trump used their language to appeal to them, used their racist internet memes, and specious claims about massive voter fraud by blacks and Latinos, or that 90% of white homicide victims are murdered by blacks. You would not have seen this reaction from the left had Trump chosen to take the highroad.
So the decision was to fight lowroad with lowroad? I really see no way to dignify it. It was destructive to the left and helpful to the right. And it continues to this day with people still appearing nothing more than vengeful, paranoid and hysterical.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,781
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
18 May 2017, 1:26 pm
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
the_phoenix wrote:
EzraS wrote:
... the reputation of the liberals as a whole that they worked so hard at cultivating, was severely damaged by them by the way they reacted after the election and continue to react.
I'd say, before that ... during the campaign, when the primaries were going on, for example. It was when an obscenity-shouting mob shut down a Trump rally in Chicago that I sat up and took notice. Because if the left-wing protestors had anything worthwhile to say for their side, they wouldn't have needed to stoop to bullying and intimidation tactics to go up against Trump's right to free speech and freedom of expression ... instead, they could have presented their own ideas in a civilized manner. That they didn't spoke volumes.
Not to defend violent actions, but the reasons behind it all has to do with their outrage against the Trmp campaign's flirtation with Alt Right white nationalists, such as the likes of David Duke, Richard Spencer, and Steve Bannon. It wasn't just that Trump's rallies were often attended by racists showing their support, but that Trump used their language to appeal to them, used their racist internet memes, and specious claims about massive voter fraud by blacks and Latinos, or that 90% of white homicide victims are murdered by blacks. You would not have seen this reaction from the left had Trump chosen to take the highroad.
So the decision was to fight lowroad with lowroad? I really see no way to dignify it. It was destructive to the left and helpful to the right. And it continues to this day with people still appearing nothing more than vengeful, paranoid and hysterical.
Those individuals who perpetrated violence were just that - individuals - who threw away sense and logic for rage, but hardly represented the whole political left. Is all the right to be burdened with the actions of those violent fanatics who had tried stopping desegregation by force, or who physically assault gay and trans people?
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Trump thinks he looks like Elvis! |
13 Feb 2024, 7:54 pm |
| Donald Trump Likely Going To Prison |
29 Feb 2024, 1:04 am |
| The courts will not save us from Donald Trump |
21 Mar 2024, 8:06 am |
| Trump has Mocked Biden's Stutter Twice |
13 Apr 2024, 10:06 pm |
