Someone was listening

[Jim in CT]

when a bernie sanders fan shot up a gop softball ira rice and almost killed steve scalise, was that bernie’s fault? after all, bernie has used some pretty harsh language to describe conservatives who like capitalism - only caring about the wealthy, greedy one percenters, etc.

are all presidential
candidates responsible when their fans attack those they criticize? or only when trump does it?

i don’t like trumps language any more than the liberals here. but some
consistency would
be nice.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Trump and his wife Ivanka both condemned wife Nationalism - good for them. finally.

I feel sorry for the police having to rush in w/no body armour and pistols to help protect us when there up against military style weapons.

not “finally”. from two years ago...”racism is evil, and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs”.

Paul, is that not clear? is that not denouncing racism?



https://www-m.cnn.com/2017/08/14/pol...CSkIb3IULCJ2I-
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

See below for how that article started out. Doesn't sound like Pres. Trump did it willingly. This was after calling Neo Nazi's 'fine people". He had to read from a teleprompter bc if he didn't we all know he would have put his foot into his mouth again.

You might also want to read that other thread I bumped up.

Do you know where old DS has been lately?



President Donald Trump, facing mounting pressure from Republicans and Democrats alike, did what he declined to do over the weekend during an event at the White House on Monday when he directly condemned white supremacists and neo-Nazis in a brief statement to reporters

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

See below for how that article started out. Doesn't sound like Pres. Trump did it willingly. This was after calling Neo Nazi's 'fine people". He had to read from a teleprompter bc if he didn't we all know he would have put his foot into his mouth again.

You might also want to read that other thread I bumped up.

Do you know where old DS has been lately?



President Donald Trump, facing mounting pressure from Republicans and Democrats alike, did what he declined to do over the weekend during an event at the White House on Monday when he directly condemned white supremacists and neo-Nazis in a brief statement to reporters

however he said it, he said it two years ago. true or false?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by spence

Newsweek had an article stating in the past year or so Trump has bought over 2200 facebook ads mentioning an "invasion" and nearly all about immigration.

But...but...but Clinton said deplorable! Give me a break.

Cue the straw talk Jeff.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by PaulS

See below for how that article started out. Doesn't sound like Pres. Trump did it willingly. This was after calling Neo Nazi's 'fine people". He had to read from a teleprompter bc if he didn't we all know he would have put his foot into his mouth again.

You might also want to read that other thread I bumped up.

Do you know where old DS has been lately?



President Donald Trump, facing mounting pressure from Republicans and Democrats alike, did what he declined to do over the weekend during an event at the White House on Monday when he directly condemned white supremacists and neo-Nazis in a brief statement to reporters

He didn't call NeoNazis fine people, he called people supporting their right for free speech fine people. There were people on BOTH sides, protesting to remove and protesting to keep the statues. Those were the people he called "fine people". Not the Neo Nazis or White Supremacist nor the Antifa protestors (also assholios).

I know you are a smart guy but on this one you are intellectually lazy - not sure though if by design or by default.

So Paul, please set aside a little over 4 minutes, watch the following video, the unedited segment when Trump spoke of both sides. Then still tell me that you honestly believe he was calling the Neo Nazis and White Supremacists "Fine People"

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

however he said it, he said it two years ago. true or false?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, he did after the majority of the country was in an uproar at his saying neo Nazis where some fine people.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

He didn't call NeoNazis fine people, he called people supporting their right for free speech fine people. There were people on BOTH sides, protesting to remove and protesting to keep the statues. Those were the people he called "fine people". Not the Neo Nazis or White Supremacist nor the Antifa protestors (also assholios).

I know you are a smart guy but on this one you are intellectually lazy - not sure though if by design or by default.

So Paul, please set aside a little over 4 minutes, watch the following video, the unedited segment when Trump spoke of both sides. Then still tell me that you honestly believe he was calling the Neo Nazis and White Supremacists "Fine People"

bingo. it’s a complete media
myth that he was referring to white supremacists as fine people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Yes, he did after the majority of the country was in an uproar at his saying neo Nazis where some fine people.

Watch the video in my reply to you and tell me that is what he said, that the Neo Nazis were fine people.

Yet at LEAST you and Wayne pull this "Fine People" and "Both Sides" stunt repeatedly.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

she did say deplorable. and is she in the oval
office at the moment?

Spence, why didn’t we see this level of carnage (mass shootings and garden variety gang violence) in the 1950s? Is it because we had better laws back then? Were guns not available back then? Did Eisenhower single
handedly suppress violence? Or is it all Trumps fault?

Or is violence correlated with the breakdown of the nuclear family?

Have fun answering that. You can’t, not in a way that doesn’t take a big dump all over your worldview.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Safer for who?

The average black man who feared being killed because he looked at a white woman?

A guy who could be picked up at random from a Georgia street and lynched?

Safer for the black driver looking for a gasoline station willing to sell to him? Or a restaurant? Or if he needed a hospital and the only one who admitted blacks was 100 miles away? 300 miles?

Safer for a union organizer who feared being shot down or clubbed to death by the company’s thugs?

Safer for people with polio?

Safer for car drivers who had no safety belts or airbags?

Safer for all those kids sitting around lead paint and asbestos?

Safer for those guys being conscripted and sent off to the hell that was Korea?

Safer for the homosexual who could be chased down and beaten and the police wouldn’t care?

Safer for the women who needed an abortion but could only seek out “back alley” operations?

Safer for the people who had to deal with the Mafia?

The answer is NO. It wasn’t safer.

Was it better for women who had no outlets for their talents except housework, motherhood, and the companionship they offered their husbands?

We did get some things in the 50s, TV, gas guzzling cars, suburbs, malls, the FBI, partisan politics, the Cold War and the Red Scare, consumerism, disposable appliances, the Pill (debuted in 1960, but “birthed” in the Fifties), Playboy, counter-culture, preemptive wars.

But don't worry Trump is the only one who can save you from something that has been improving since the 80s, just like he's saving you from the economy that has been consistently growing for a decade and he claims that nobody else could.

And remember there's always a tweet for that, if only he thought his tweets applied to him.

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible.

2:01 PM · Nov 8, 2013·Twitter Web Client

[Pete F.]

Mayor of Dayton Nan Whaley: "I've heard that [President Trump's] coming Wednesday but I have not gotten a call. And you know he might be going to Toledo, I don't know."

[Pete F.]

White-Nationalist Terrorism Must Be Stopped
Conservatives have not been afraid to confront extremism in our world, and we must not be afraid to confront terrorism here at home.

by George P. Bush

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...topped/595471/

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Safer for who?

The average black man who feared being killed because he looked at a white woman?

A guy who could be picked up at random from a Georgia street and lynched?

Safer for the black driver looking for a gasoline station willing to sell to him? Or a restaurant? Or if he needed a hospital and the only one who admitted blacks was 100 miles away? 300 miles?

Safer for a union organizer who feared being shot down or clubbed to death by the company’s thugs?

Safer for people with polio?

Safer for car drivers who had no safety belts or airbags?

Safer for all those kids sitting around lead paint and asbestos?

Safer for those guys being conscripted and sent off to the hell that was Korea?

Safer for the homosexual who could be chased down and beaten and the police wouldn’t care?

Safer for the women who needed an abortion but could only seek out “back alley” operations?

Safer for the people who had to deal with the Mafia?

The answer is NO. It wasn’t safer.

Was it better for women who had no outlets for their talents except housework, motherhood, and the companionship they offered their husbands?

We did get some things in the 50s, TV, gas guzzling cars, suburbs, malls, the FBI, partisan politics, the Cold War and the Red Scare, consumerism, disposable appliances, the Pill (debuted in 1960, but “birthed” in the Fifties), Playboy, counter-culture, preemptive wars.

But don't worry Trump is the only one who can save you from something that has been improving since the 80s, just like he's saving you from the economy that has been consistently growing for a decade and he claims that nobody else could.

And remember there's always a tweet for that, if only he thought his tweets applied to him.

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible.

2:01 PM · Nov 8, 2013·Twitter Web Client

i was talking about gun violence, that was crystal clear. racism was worse then, good to see a kool aid drinker admit that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

i was talking about gun violence, that was crystal clear. racism was worse then, good to see a kool aid drinker admit that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It still exists
You don't need to read the El Paso killer’s manifesto. Just turn on Fox News.
Shortly after a gunman murdered 20 people in a Walmart in El Paso, TX, on Saturday, the hashtag “#whitesupremacistterrorism” began trending on Twitter. The “terrorism” portion of that epithet references the alleged shooter’s apparent intent of “coercing and intimidating a civilian population” with the massacre. The suspect is described as a “white supremacist” because of his ideological rationale for carrying out the act, as described in a manifesto posted to the web forum 8chan shortly before the attack.

The alleged killer wrote in the document that he wanted “to exact revenge against ‘the Hispanic invasion of Texas,’ to forestall what he called ‘cultural and ethnic replacement,’ and to ‘reclaim my country from destruction,’” echoing the perpetrators of similar mass shootings, as National Review’s editors noted in denouncing him.

Those ideas, once again drenched in blood, were at one time largely restricted to fringe forums populated by hardcore white supremacists and conspiracy theorists. But in recent years, you could have easily heard them recited while watching a random night of Fox News’ prime-time lineup.

Fox personalities have worked to mainstream the racist conspiracy theory that non-white immigrants threaten to “replace” white American populations. Hosts Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham, whose shows regularly revolve around the purported dangers immigration poses to the cultural fabric, have been particularly taken with that argument, and they are not subtle in its promotion.

“Your views on immigration will have zero impact and zero influence on a House dominated by Democrats who want to replace you, the American voters, with newly amnestied citizens and an ever increasing number of chain migrants,” Ingraham told her audience shortly before the 2018 midterms.

“It's not a conspiracy theory, it's happening in public,” Carlson has argued. “[Democrats’] political success does not depend on good policies, but on demographic replacement, and they'll do anything to make sure it happens.”

Carlson is particularly beloved by white nationalists, who believe he “is making the white nationalist talking points better than they have,” as the son of the founder of hate website Stormfront put it in March. The Fox host regularly warns of the dire consequences immigration poses to the country. He has said that immigration “is absolutely destroying America” and will “change this country completely and forever”; argued that “we’re being invaded” by migrants in a way that could trigger a national “collapse”; and claimed that “we are importing people from places whose values are simply antithetical to ours,” putting the nation’s ability to “survive” at risk.

The description of migration across the southern border as an “invasion” has become so common on Fox that it hardly warrants mention at this point. That is simply the language the network’s personalities -- even its purported “straight news” anchors -- use to describe migrants, often as Fox airs B-roll of columns of Hispanic men marching north.

Though the alleged shooter's ideas seem to echo what Fox airs every night, the language in his manifesto differs from the network's in one small way: Its references to race are explicit, while Fox’s commentators often talk around that. But this is largely a distinction between text and subtext. The invaders who Fox hosts keeps warning might destroy the country through demographic replacement are Black and brown, as both the hosts and their audience know.

The network appears deeply committed to airing talking points previously confined to the fever swamps. Their use has continued even as white supremacists enact mass murders, and Fox has defended Carlson and Ingraham from advertiser boycotts triggered by their bigoted language on immigration.

Fox’s use of this rhetoric of demographic replacement and migrant invasion has not occurred in a vacuum. It has been mirrored by Republican politicians, including President Donald Trump, who similarly deploy those racist tropes. That's no coincidence -- both Fox and the GOP depend on riling people up with racist appeals for their success. Their behavior won't change unless their incentives change.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Watch the video in my reply to you and tell me that is what he said, that the Neo Nazis were fine people.

Yet at LEAST you and Wayne pull this "Fine People" and "Both Sides" stunt repeatedly.

If you think he was only defending the people who didn't want the traitor Lee statue to come down - keep believing that and keep defending him. BC I doubt there was anyone there who only thought the march was about the statue - and if there were any that naïve, then when they saw the Neo Nazis they should have left. "Jews will not replace" us should have given them a good indication it wasn't only about a statue. Trump was all over the place in that conference. He repeatedly tried to blame the "alt left" and somehow put them on equal footing w/the Neo Nazis and white supremacists.

[Jim in CT]

Pete, for god’s sake, we have god knows how many millions of illegals
living here, and it's an enormous financial burden. it’s not racist or demanding blood, to point that out. not that there arent those that go too far, on all sides. hilary called tens of
millions of trump supporters deplorable and irredeemable, maxine waters said to let trump supporters know they aren’t welcome
Anywhere. funny i’ve never heard you complain about that. because your outrage is selective, which means it’s also fake.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by PaulS

If you think he was only defending the people who didn't want the traitor Lee statue to come down - keep believing that and keep defending him. BC I doubt there was anyone there who only thought the march was about the statue - and if there were any that naïve, then when they saw the Neo Nazis they should have left. "Jews will not replace" us should have given them a good indication it wasn't only about a statue. Trump was all over the place in that conference. He repeatedly tried to blame the "alt left" and somehow put them on equal footing w/the Neo Nazis and white supremacists.

He put Antifa in the same category as Neo Nazis and White Supremacists - that is correct, no? They are all people that will use violence to further their means, right?

He said the peacefully protesting people for and against the removals of the statues were fine people, right?

That the Neo Nazis and White Supremacists as well as the Antifa people ARE the bad people, they came looking for a fight. As a result people got hurt and one woman was killed. He is not saying those people are "Fine People", not even close.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Pete, for god’s sake, we have god knows how many millions of illegals
living here, and it's an enormous financial burden. it’s not racist or demanding blood, to point that out. not that there arent those that go too far, on all sides. hilary called tens of
millions of trump supporters deplorable and irredeemable, maxine waters said to let trump supporters know they aren’t welcome
Anywhere. funny i’ve never heard you complain about that. because your outrage is selective, which means it’s also fake.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why are you now worried about financial burdens, the current administration is certainly not fiscally conservative. In fact no less of a right wing mouthpiece than Rush Limbaugh said:"Nobody is a fiscal conservative anymore. All this talk about concern for the deficit and the budget has been bogus for as long as it’s been around." So apparently your outrage is fake.

And speaking of selective outrage and fakery.

It seems you are also one of the same group of people that blame the “breakdown in the American family” for the mass shootings and also support a many times divorced President who sleeps with porn stars and sexually assaults women.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by JohnR

He put Antifa in the same category as Neo Nazis and White Supremacists - that is correct, no? They are all people that will use violence to further their means, right?

He said the peacefully protesting people for and against the removals of the statues were fine people, right?

That the Neo Nazis and White Supremacists as well as the Antifa people ARE the bad people, they came looking for a fight. As a result people got hurt and one woman was killed. He is not saying those people are "Fine People", not even close.

How many people have Antifa killed?

And I'm not defending them but compared to Neo Nazis and White supremacist they are in a different class.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Why are you now worried about financial burdens, the current administration is certainly not fiscally conservative. In fact no less of a right wing mouthpiece than Rush Limbaugh said:"Nobody is a fiscal conservative anymore. All this talk about concern for the deficit and the budget has been bogus for as long as it’s been around." So apparently your outrage is fake.

And speaking of selective outrage and fakery.

It seems you are also one of the same group of people that blame the “breakdown in the American family” for the mass shootings and also support a many times divorced President who sleeps with porn stars and sexually assaults women.

you’re beyond dishonest. i’m always concerned about impossible
financial burdens. obama
added too much debt, trump
is making the same
mistake. you’re beyond cowardly, beyond being full of sh*t, you just make up gibberish as you go.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by PaulS

How many people have Antifa killed?

And I'm not defending them but compared to Neo Nazis and White supremacist they are in a different class.

No, they are in the same class. They are people willing to resort to violence to move a political agenda. They are dangerous, they deserve zero glorification, and they deserve zero respect or accommodation. They are where actual violent communists and anarchists meet actual violent fascists.

[PaulS]

we can disagree on that. Antifa is a response to the neo-nazis and white supremacists. They certainly have been charged with some illegalities but I don't think there have been any people associated with antifa charged with murder
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Watch the video in my reply to you and tell me that is what he said, that the Neo Nazis were fine people.

Yet at LEAST you and Wayne pull this "Fine People" and "Both Sides" stunt repeatedly.

John your the expert when it comes to the line.. both sides do it .. you use it often

but are your suggesting Trumps racist vitriol . In no way shape or form has influenced anyone in acting violently ...?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

John your the expert when it comes to the line.. both sides do it .. you use it often

but are your suggesting Trumps racist vitriol . In no way shape or form has influenced anyone in acting violently ...?

so the line here all deny that Al Sharptons rhetoric ever inspires violence ( therefore it’s ok when everyone running for potus in the left calls sharpton a hero), but you’re convinced trump
is responsible.

i think trumps language is potentially dangerous. not to a rational person, not even to a slightly crazy person, but to the very disturbed. i think it’s equally reckless when democrats and the media say the conservatives are all nazis and racists and hate poor people and want to enslave women. you only talk about trumps vitriol, and while
he is in a class by himself in terms of frequency and severity, he’s not the only one saying disgusting things. but the liberals here dismiss all of it from the left.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by PaulS

we can disagree on that. Antifa is a response to the neo-nazis and white supremacists. They certainly have been charged with some illegalities but I don't think there have been any people associated with antifa charged with murder
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Then we disagree, significantly. A mob, alt-left or alt-right, that uses violence to achieve its means, is dangerous. But because they are merely reacting to assholios on the right, it is OK in your book?

This violence (by Both Sides) will continue to get worse until Good People (from Both Sides) recognize that it is a violent fringe that is growing where the fault lies on bad actors and crappy ideology of Both Sides.

Maybe the Antifa commies are not as competent yet: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...gration-centre

Check out Antifa and Soca ili st Rif le As sociat ion on reddit, you'll find plenty of ne're do wells, incels, and Lost Boys there too. You just don't have as much an issue with their motivation.

PS - read the link on the Lost Boys - 4 years old but still seems plenty of evidence to support it (and written by one of the OG Never Trumpers) https://thefederalist.com/2015/07/09...the-lost-boys/

Originally Posted by wdmso

John your the expert when it comes to the line.. both sides do it .. you use it often

but are your suggesting Trumps racist vitriol . In no way shape or form has influenced anyone in acting violently ...?

Ahhh, the difference in my "Both Sides" is I point out the bad and good comes from "Both Sides" whereas you draw a strong demarcation between the sides. And when you want to trash Trump you use this his "Both Sides are Good People" to sat he is providing cover from right wing extremism.

[Got Stripers]

Words matter on BOTH sides, but those coming from the president always can do more harm or more good.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

you’re beyond dishonest. i’m always concerned about impossible
financial burdens. obama
added too much debt, trump
is making the same
mistake. you’re beyond cowardly, beyond being full of sh*t, you just make up gibberish as you go.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How am i dishonest when I cite things you've said.

Now you've, once again, fallen back on but Obama.

Limbaugh said that and he is a right wing mouthpiece, has been for years. He ranted about fiscal conservatism when it suited his rhetoric and now claims it is bogus.

Financial burdens in your mind are only those things you and Tucker judge to be unaffordable.

Remember, the great negotiator, Trump, threw away his border wall, immigration reform and more because some on the right and particularly some of his advisors will never accept any amnesty for any illegal immigration. Politics is the art of making compromise a win, and fails if the other side consistently loses.

Just keep defending Trump as usual, using false equivalents.


The market is interesting today, Trump will deny responsibility for that also.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

How am i dishonest when I cite things you've said.

o.

wrong.

you claimed that “now” i’m worried
about financial burden. either show
me where i said i wasn’t previously concerned about financial burdens, or kindly say you made it up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

No, they are in the same class. They are people willing to resort to violence to move a political agenda. They are dangerous, they deserve zero glorification, and they deserve zero respect or accommodation. They are where actual violent communists and anarchists meet actual violent fascists.

Seems like right reason wrong action vs wrong reason wrong action = not the same.

Or more simply, Antifa is going to tap into a small fragment of the population who think they want to be dogooders and get a rise out of it. The white nationalist thing is pulling on the ugly roots of our broader society and is much, much more serious.

Some in the GOP have called for Antifa to be labeled a terror group. To terrorize the American people to not be Fascists? Do the math.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Some in the GOP have called for Antifa to be labeled a terror group. To terrorize the American people to not be Fascists? Do the math.

that’s all antifa does, speak out against fascism? tell that to
this guy, beaten by antifa not because he supports fascism, but because he tried to stop antifa from beating a transgender. only the left would say “we’re opposed to fascism, now do as we say or we’ll beat you to a pulp.”

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2...a-attack-port/

“do the math”.

here’s some math.

80 > your IQ.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device