If you were with your wife and someone verbally denigrated her right in front of you, you have no thought of whooping said persons ass?
there is always the ignore button. I happen to think double standards and hypocrisy is a huge deal and a major contributor to current events. Including the double standards of the police. So whatevs... I didnt want to read your demeaning post either but hey... whatevs....
That is common theme across the board. We could all be more clear with each other. It would save time and offer reason rather than animus.
of course i would have the thought and i would be very aggressive with my verbal retaliation. But thats all it would be. Verbal. Not physical, unless the other person got physical first. diplomacy. Not angry violence.
and I thought you posted that you get it.......two wrongs don't make a right.....I showed you where violent response is called for .....and if someone called my son a fake half asian or dviss a pretend black I'd tell them those are fighting words...then I tagged...better yet...I'll let my lawyer deal with it....which you seemed to ignore...partial posts can be misleading but hey....you do you....the violence aimed at Capital Hill yesterday deserved to be met with force when necessary....it's pretty simple....I've confronted some horrible behavior by people over the years...one was a case of a neighbor abusing a child decades ago in California....let's say I wasn't very Gandhi like about it.
In my opinion, the complete failure of security of the capital building wasn't about incompetence by the various law enforcement agencies because I can't believe they would all be that bad at their jobs. It feels like someone had to have been in on the coup attempt. I could be wrong though.
i would say that would start with people asking others to clarify prior to judging and condemning. Not everyone is going to know what is and isnt clear to the reader. Its up to the reader to ask for clarification. Not the poster to make sure its clear. If asked, THEN its on the poster to be clearer.
Thats 100% correct. Some things (to me anyway) are cut and dry, like Rivers example. Also, if I come upon someone in need of help /injured from a car wreck or whatever I' wired to respond quickly and help regardless of who it is or situation. Ive had to do this many times in my life. I like to be a peacemaker by nature too. But it doesn't mean I wont fight a criminal or somebody causing danger to my family and/or innocent bystanders.
i simply think they got overwhelmed. They needed support from the national guard, who the DC mayor had requested long before the actual storming of the building. They showed up late at night-- that's the smoking gun I'd go after. Remember Trump replacing all important DOD staff over the past month or so with loyalists? Something to that.
that is why the chief needs to be investigated. It’s totally within the realm of possibility that they coordinated letting them in. Personally, I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt on treason until proven otherwise. I think they are just cowards and saw they were heavily outnumbered and decided to not even put up a fight in some areas.
That's my point. It was obvious to everyone this was going to happen so why wasn't the national guard there to begin with?
This is why it's hard to take you seriously. One side is supporting white nationalist bigotry and conspiracy theories while the other side is pushing for universal health care, "green new deals" and equal rights for minorities and you're pushing this simplistic "both sides are equally bad" stuff. No one said that breaking into buildings or vandalism over the summer was right or okay, but people like you and ABM were way more concerned with that than what caused it in the first place--police being disproportionately more violent to black people than anyone else. When your main concern is about property being vandalized and not innocent black people being killed by police and then you come back with "and anyway both sides are equally bad," yeah, you're going to get blowback because instead of actually taking reality as it is, you're trying to construct a simpler, easier-to-accept narrative of "everyone is to blame, nobody should be singled out."
did you ever stop to think of why we were concerned about it? Thst maybe we were concerned be ause we beleive in the movement and we knew the violence would look bad and suppress support as well as bring the right out in retaliation? maybe we full on support the peaceful movement but believe when it turns violent it curtails the moment snd undermines everything good about it? Curious. Did you ever ask him or me why we are concerned about the violence? Sigh... once again just assuming instead of asking for clarification. Good job!
I think a lot of people believe this (not you, though...you don't believe anything you post here!). But it's not actually true. Trump didn't create anything new--he's the culmination of at least 25 years of Republican politics, quite likely 40 years and arguably 52 years (going back to Nixon). Nixon, Reagan, Newt Gingrich were the ones who really drove this strategy of appealing to white resentment and Republicans since then, including notably the Tea Party in 2010, have simply been riding that wave and furthering it. It was inevitable that a Trump-like figure would eventually emerge for the Republicans. If not Trump, Cruz probably would have been a very similar type of figure politically. Someone was eventually going to make the subtext of Republican politics the main attraction.
