Biden Out of Race

[aneftp]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Comparing plagiarism and “character flaws” to rape and pedophilia is a bit odd…even for you.

Biden admitting it. Trump and Elon were never Charged

So what’s worst? Think

 

[PainInTheAnes]

Brown v. Board of Education was a Supreme Court decision, so definitely not just a state issue.

The fact of the matter is Trump is very obviously using the National Guard in a “Democrat state” to create a crisis that doesn’t exist. It’s optics for his state media. If you can’t see it as over-reactionary histrionics then I don’t know what to say.

Politics is optics? I'm not sure what point you're making here. If nothing else it's a good political move by Trump to prevent obstruction of ICE.

 

[GravelRider]

Biden admitting it. Trump and Elon were never Charged

So what’s worst? Think

You are a lost cause.

So the kid in high school who gets busted for plagiarizing an essay is worse than the pedophile rapist who never got caught? Got it.

 

[GravelRider]

Politics is optics? I'm not sure what point you're making here. If nothing else it's a good political move by Trump to prevent obstruction of ICE.

So we are activating the National Guard for politics and optics now? Sure, got it.

Yet another bizarre thing for “conservatives, libertarians, individual rights, et. al.” to be ok with. I guess if Trump decrees it then we must never question.

 

[pgg]

Is the any better than plagiarism Joe Biden. Americans voted for him despite him never being an honest person. Even in his dementia years. He was still not honest.

Right, because plagiarism is right up there with raping underage girls.

WTF, man?

Everyone has character flaws.

You don’t get into power being a nice guy. Remember that.

Your inability to detect or understand any kind of gradient of minor to bad to heinous when it comes to "character flaws" is astonishing.

Again. WTF, man?

 

[aneftp]

You are a lost cause.

So the kid in high school who gets busted for plagiarizing an essay is worse than the pedophile rapist who never got caught? Got it.

Two wrongs don’t make a right.

It’s like u would rather vote for a bad person who’s not that bad but still bad human being.

Right, because plagiarism is right up there with raping underage girls.

WTF, man?



Your inability to detect or understand any kind of gradient of minor to bad to heinous when it comes to "character flaws" is astonishing.

Again. WTF, man?

flaws are flaws.

Did trump or even Elon ever get criminally charged for rape ? Nope.

These are simply accusations. Unless you simply don’t believe in the laws of this country

So what is it’s a civil lawsuit. God forbid if u (me) we get hit with wrongful death lawsuit and found liable. Would be ok if the public call u a murderer for a civil lawsuit?

Anyway even the civil lawsuit is a long way from running its course on appeals. I took the most liberal jurors to even convict trump.

Try that cases or the bs stormy Daniels case in Alabama and try to get a juror to find trump liable. Ain’t gonna to happen

That’s why the criminal Georgia and Florida cases failed.

 

[DocMcCoy]

Seems a lot of these “Don’t tread on me” conservatives don’t mind disproportionate use of state force to rob citizens of their first amendment rights. Sending in the military certainly isn’t over-the-top histrionics either.

Meh, not a fan for sure. But I don't remember first amendment rights including burning vehicles and assaulting federal agents while performing their duties. Another case of "mostly peaceful" protests. Not really sure how they are being "robbed" of their rights, that seems like code for you are sad they won't be able to get away with doing violence. If mobs start assaulting law enforcement in my town, I certainly wouldn't be surprised to see an escalation. Thank God I don't live in a god forsaken place like LA.

 

[PainInTheAnes]

So we are activating the National Guard for politics and optics now? Sure, got it.

Yet another bizarre thing for “conservatives, libertarians, individual rights, et. al.” to be ok with. I guess if Trump decrees it then we must never question.

It seems like he's activating them to prevent the obstruction of ICE functioning. It also happens to look good politically. These things can both be true.

What's bizarre to me is this notion you have of conservatives being individual rights absolutists.

Examples of liberal ideals of individual freedom that run counter to conservative ideals: decriminalizing all drugs for recreational use, no questions asked abortion at any gestational age, children being free to choose their social paths in life from age 3, non-conformity to social norms, assisted suicide, pornography use as a neutral concept, social isolation or non-participation is morally neutral. There are many others.

Libertarians may be more apt to endorse absolute individual freedom, but few conservatives I know believe in the idea of "do whatever you want, whenever you want, as long as it doesn't hurt someone else physically."

 

[GravelRider]

Two wrongs don’t make a right.

It’s like u would rather vote for a bad person who’s not that bad but still bad human being.

flaws are flaws.

Did trump or even Elon ever get criminally charged for rape ? Nope.

These are simply accusations. Unless you simply don’t believe in the laws of this country

So what is it’s a civil lawsuit. God forbid if u (me) we get hit with wrongful death lawsuit and found liable. Would be ok if the public call u a murderer for a civil lawsuit?

Anyway even the civil lawsuit is a long way from running its course on appeals. I took the most liberal jurors to even convict trump.

Try that cases or the bs stormy Daniels case in Alabama and try to get a juror to find trump liable. Ain’t gonna to happen

That’s why the criminal Georgia and Florida cases failed.

You are abnormal.

No one was talking about Biden or the character flaws in all politicians. That was not even the topic. The topic was Elon essentially accusing Trump of raping underage women because of his involvement with Epstein, right? That’s what is insinuated when people associate you with Epstein. But your response was literally “yeah but Biden plagiarized.” Do you not see how odd that is? To take topic like Trump’s involvement with Epstein and how that insinuates raping underage women and compare it to plagiarism shows a degree of sociopathy that I just don’t understand.

 

[GravelRider]

It seems like he's activating them to prevent the obstruction of ICE functioning. It also happens to look good politically. These things can both be true.

What's bizarre to me is this notion you have of conservatives being individual rights absolutists.

Examples of liberal ideals of individual freedom that run counter to conservative ideals: decriminalizing all drugs for recreational use, no questions asked abortion at any gestational age, children being free to choose their social paths in life from age 3, non-conformity to social norms, assisted suicide, pornography use as a neutral concept, social isolation or non-participation is morally neutral. There are many others.

Libertarians may be more apt to endorse absolute individual freedom, but few conservatives I know believe in the idea of "do whatever you want, whenever you want, as long as it doesn't hurt someone else physically."

At least questioning the use of overly aggressive state-sponsored force against individual citizens was something I used to associate with people who tended towards conservative viewpoints. I guess not any more.

 

[chessknt]

At least questioning the use of overly aggressive state-sponsored force against individual citizens was something I used to associate with people who tended towards conservative viewpoints. I guess not any more.

Yep. They said it was histrionics when fascism got thrown around but then they sit there quietly while secdef threatens to deploy the military against us citizens on US soil. What else would American fascism look like if not that?

 

[GravelRider]

Yep. They said it was histrionics when fascism got thrown around but then they sit there quietly while secdef threatens to deploy the military against us citizens on US soil. What else would American fascism look like if not that?

Remember, they’re only going after criminals and gang members.

Trump Targets Workplaces as Immigration Crackdown Widens

Many industries have become dependent on immigrant labor. Some workplace raids have been met with protest.

www.nytimes.com

 

[DesiredMemberName?]

Yep. They said it was histrionics when fascism got thrown around but then they sit there quietly while secdef threatens to deploy the military against us citizens on US soil. What else would American fascism look like if not that?

The road to fascism is lined with people telling you to stop overreacting.

 

[PainInTheAnes]

At least questioning the use of overly aggressive state-sponsored force against individual citizens was something I used to associate with people who tended towards conservative viewpoints. I guess not any more.

I don't know how you could associate those two things. Conservatives have always trended towards police suppression of what they view as socially disruptive. The 1960s generally comes to mind. Personally, I am case by case on it, but to me this looks like run of the mill ICE raids being stopped by protests. What is the government agency supposed to do there? Decide not to carry out their work?

 

[PainInTheAnes]

The road to fascism is lined with people telling you to stop overreacting.

Do you feel like the government was more, or less fascist in the period of 1965-1970 compared to now?

Examples of government violence resulting in deaths by the National Guard or police firing on crowds in that period:

1. Kent State massacre
2. Watts Riot
3. Newark Riot
4. Detroit Riot

 

[rowsdower88]

Meh, not a fan for sure. But I don't remember first amendment rights including burning vehicles and assaulting federal agents while performing their duties.

This phrase is doing some VERY heavy lifting.

There are good arguments and examples that suggest the conduct of ICE should be questioned and curtailed. There is a good argument that ICE and its leaders are instigating the protesters and worsening the situation.

Unless you're saying the national interest lies in trawling Home Depots and courthouses for otherwise law abiding immigrants, I think the state and local officials have a better idea how to handle the situation.

 

[DocMcCoy]

This phrase is doing some VERY heavy lifting.

There are good arguments and examples that suggest the conduct of ICE should be questioned and curtailed. There is a good argument that ICE and its leaders are instigating the protesters and worsening the situation.

Unless you're saying the national interest lies in trawling Home Depots and courthouses for otherwise law abiding immigrants, I think the state and local officials have a better idea how to handle the situation.

That is BS if ICE is there in an official and legal capacity, which they are. Of course, we can question and protest that. Doesn't mean you can assault them and obstruct justice without consequences.

"OTHERWISE LAW ABIDING IMMINGRANTS", now THAT is some heavy lifting.

State and local officials have been on record that they want no part in the current administration's immigration plan.

 

[rowsdower88]

That is BS if ICE is there in an official and legal capacity, which they are. Of course, we can question and protest that. Doesn't mean you can assault them and obstruct justice without consequences.

Good thing I didn't say that. It wouldn't surprise me at all that ACTUAL immigration law enforcement would be better served by not bringing in the national guard and potentially the marines. Weird right? Almost like the point isn't to enforce immigration law.

"OTHERWISE LAW ABIDING IMMINGRANTS", now THAT is some heavy lifting.

Going after the guy appearing for his court hearing or looking for work at home depot is easier and makes the numbers go up faster than going after actual criminals. That's all I'm saying if you wanted clarification.

 

[chessknt]

Department of Defense Security for the Protection of Department of Homeland Security Functions

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

www.whitehouse.gov

To the extent that protests or acts of violence directly inhibit the execution of the laws, they constitute a form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.

Conservatives agree with their president on this? Protests that inhibit execution of (their comprehension of) laws is rebellion and can be put down with the military on US soil? What happened to civilian police force and states rights? Are we still having TDS or do we think it might be time to start calling a fascist a fascist?

 

[PainInTheAnes]

Department of Defense Security for the Protection of Department of Homeland Security Functions

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

www.whitehouse.gov

Conservatives agree with their president on this? Protests that inhibit execution of (their comprehension of) laws is rebellion and can be put down with the military on US soil? What happened to civilian police force and states rights? Are we still having TDS or do we think it might be time to start calling a fascist a fascist?

Do you feel like the government was more, or less fascist in the period of 1965-1970 compared to now?

Examples of government violence resulting in deaths by the National Guard or police firing on crowds in that period. These were protests or riots motivated by clear injustice being perpetrated by the government and police:

1. Kent State massacre
2. Watts Riot
3. Newark Riot
4. Detroit Riot

What about the 1990s? The LA riots were pretty brutally suppressed by the national guard.

More fascist now or more fascist back then? I’m guessing you do have some context for all of this given you seem to be able to define the word well.

 

[rowsdower88]

Do you feel like the government was more, or less fascist in the period of 1965-1970 compared to now?

Examples of government violence resulting in deaths by the National Guard or police firing on crowds in that period. These were protests or riots motivated by clear injustice being perpetrated by the government and police:

1. Kent State massacre
2. Watts Riot
3. Newark Riot
4. Detroit Riot

What about the 1990s? The LA riots were pretty brutally suppressed by the national guard.

More fascist now or more fascist back then? I’m guessing you do have some context for all of this given you seem to be able to define the word well.

I think in some ways more fascistic and in others less.

For example, I think the surveillance state we have created is more fascistic now than in the 60's and 70's. We've seen a decline in many individual rights to privacy and autonomy over this time period. Simultaneously, we've see a rapid enlargement in individuals' right to use guns.

I think it's more useful to describe events or policies as fascistic (or not) as opposed to a holistic approach over decades.

 

[DocMcCoy]

Department of Defense Security for the Protection of Department of Homeland Security Functions

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

www.whitehouse.gov

Conservatives agree with their president on this? Protests that inhibit execution of (their comprehension of) laws is rebellion and can be put down with the military on US soil? What happened to civilian police force and states rights? Are we still having TDS or do we think it might be time to start calling a fascist a fascist?

It’s not their comprehension of law, it’s LAW. You can argue whether the law should be enforced (i.e., going after illegals), as one can argue whether going 5 miles over the speed limit warrants a ticket. But the law is clear.

The civilian police force in LA, refused and defied the immigration agenda. As for states rights, federal law enforcement can investigate federal crimes in any state without needing the states permission.

California only has its self to blame.

I know you feel like this is some grave injustice, but it’s mainly TDS.

 

[chessknt]

It’s not their comprehension of law, it’s LAW. You can argue whether the law should be enforced (i.e., going after illegals), as one can argue whether going 5 miles over the speed limit warrants a ticket. But the law is clear.

The civilian police force in LA, refused and defied the immigration agenda. As for states rights, federal law enforcement can investigate federal crimes in any state without needing the states permission.

California only has its self to blame.

I know you feel like this is some grave injustice, but it’s mainly TDS.

I know you are far to the right but do you not see the critical difference between using the military to enforce laws and using civilian forces to do so?

And the law is not as black and white as you like to pretend. They call it assault on a Police officer if you trip and catch yourself on one of them.... There won't be any due process if the military gets to start shooting people and they stand apart from the civilian justice system entirely--will that be a line in the sand for you or is that ok too as long as they shoot bad people who break the law? What exactly will they need to do for you to finally believe that it is fascism?

 

[chessknt]

Do you feel like the government was more, or less fascist in the period of 1965-1970 compared to now?

Examples of government violence resulting in deaths by the National Guard or police firing on crowds in that period. These were protests or riots motivated by clear injustice being perpetrated by the government and police:

1. Kent State massacre
2. Watts Riot
3. Newark Riot
4. Detroit Riot

What about the 1990s? The LA riots were pretty brutally suppressed by the national guard.

More fascist now or more fascist back then? I’m guessing you do have some context for all of this given you seem to be able to define the word well.

Were the USMC used in any of those? Congress used to work back then and actually acted as a check instead a rubber stamp. We don't have that now.

 

[nimbus]

Do you feel like the government was more, or less fascist in the period of 1965-1970 compared to now?

Examples of government violence resulting in deaths by the National Guard or police firing on crowds in that period. These were protests or riots motivated by clear injustice being perpetrated by the government and police:

1. Kent State massacre
2. Watts Riot
3. Newark Riot
4. Detroit Riot

What about the 1990s? The LA riots were pretty brutally suppressed by the national guard.

More fascist now or more fascist back then? I’m guessing you do have some context for all of this given you seem to be able to define the word well.

Those events are all considered stains on our history. Not something to be repeated.

 

[We'llBeDoneIn15Minutes]

Look at all of these peaceful illegal alien protestors. Thanks Joe. Illegal diversity is our strength!!

 

[PainInTheAnes]

Were the USMC used in any of those? Congress used to work back then and actually acted as a check instead a rubber stamp. We don't have that now.

So, no opinion? I’m not sure what those non sequiturs have to do with the question. More or less fascist than 1970, where the government straight up took 15 or so students to the firing squad?

 

[PainInTheAnes]

Those events are all considered stains on our history. Not something to be repeated.

And they’re not being repeated, which proves my point. The “fascism” argument is way overwrought, unless we’ve always been fascist.

 

[chessknt]

So, no opinion? I’m not sure what those non sequiturs have to do with the question. More or less fascist than 1970, where the government straight up took 15 or so students to the firing squad?

Absolutely more. We are careening in to civil war territory with the use of active duty military on civilians. Huge difference because the military only answers to their own justice system and the president. If he can use them to brutalize his enemies into submission under the premise of calling opposition rebellion we don't have a Republic anymore.

 

[DocMcCoy]

I know you are far to the right but do you not see the critical difference between using the military to enforce laws and using civilian forces to do so?

And the law is not as black and white as you like to pretend. They call it assault on a Police officer if you trip and catch yourself on one of them.... There won't be any due process if the military gets to start shooting people and they stand apart from the civilian justice system entirely--will that be a line in the sand for you or is that ok too as long as they shoot bad people who break the law? What exactly will they need to do for you to finally believe that it is fascism?

That’s what’s funny. I’m not far right, it just appears that way on this particular platform because of how far left it is at baseline.

The law is black and white, it’s how it is enforced that isn’t.

Tell me what is illegal about how ICE is conducting operations in LA? I understand you don’t like it, but what law are they breaking? Now how about the violent protestors?

BTW, service members don’t stand apart from the civilian justice system entirely. In addition to UCMJ, they can face “civilian” prosecution as well. They don’t get a free pass to “shoot people”. But way to catastrophize another argument. I would hate to see another Kent State, at the same time I highly advise “protestors” not to shoot fireworks or throw Molotov cocktails at service members.

 

[PainInTheAnes]

Absolutely more. We are careening in to civil war territory with the use of active duty military on civilians. Huge difference because the military only answers to their own justice system and the president. If he can use them to brutalize his enemies into submission under the premise of calling opposition rebellion we don't have a Republic anymore.

I think we have different values of the function of government then. I feel that safety from governmental violence is pretty foundational when making the call about what our government is or isn’t, and the regular citizen is far, far safer from the government than any previous generation.

 

[rowsdower88]

BTW, service members don’t stand apart from the civilian justice system entirely. In addition to UCMJ, they can face “civilian” prosecution as well. They don’t get a free pass to “shoot people”.

Pretty sure I've seen a couple reporters already shot with rubber bullets.

Los Angeles protests erupt as highway shut down, cars torched

www.9news.com.au

They'll get away with as much harm as they can.

 

[Gern Blansten]

Pretty sure I've seen a couple reporters already shot with rubber bullets.

Pretty sure that the second Die Hard movie used that in the plot for when they wanted to pretend to shoot someone but not hurt them.
Did these rubber bullets kill someone this time? How are rubber bullets “getting away with as much harm as they can?”
Los Angeles is in chaos due to violent protesters who intend to cause harm to law enforcement officers. I see no reason not to have national guard troops come in to assist and put all violent protesters behind bars.

 

[rowsdower88]

Pretty sure that the second Die Hard movie used that in the plot for when they wanted to pretend to shoot someone but not hurt them.
Did these rubber bullets kill someone this time? How are rubber bullets “getting away with as much harm as they can?”
Los Angeles is in chaos due to violent protesters who intend to cause harm to law enforcement officers. I see no reason not to have national guard troops come in to assist and put all violent protesters behind bars.

Weird thing to say when there is a video of a reporter clearly being shot with a rubber bullet in my link from a distance of 20ft (Reporter Lauren Tomasi).

Right now, they can get away with shooting the press with rubber bullets. They don't even need to justify such an action to you apparently.

An appropriate response to witnessing violence like this would be "that is bad, they shouldn't be shooting reporters with rubber bullets".

 

[pgg]

Look at all of these peaceful illegal alien protestors. Thanks Joe. Illegal diversity is our strength!!

CA is doing its level best to help the rest of the nation's Democrats lose the most winnable midterm elections in my lifetime.

 

[rowsdower88]

The signal leaks revealed that there is no actual chain of command in the Trump White House.

Does Hegseth take this as an official order? Is there any legal backing here if he does?

***The chairman of the joint chiefs frantically refreshing his Truth Social feed for direction***

 

[pgg]

Los Angeles is in chaos due to violent protesters who intend to cause harm to law enforcement officers. I see no reason not to have national guard troops come in to assist and put all violent protesters behind bars.

I disagree with you and McCoy on a lot lately, but the left's defense of these protests is ridiculous. Clearly violent and destructive acts to resist enforcement of obviously longstanding and court-upheld laws.

And I say that as one who extends tremendous leeway to protestors, because the essence of a useful protest is that it inconveniences or annoys people (sometimes even me). There's a fine line between Constitutionally protected assembly and trespassing. When our system is at its best it is more tolerant of protestors skirting the edge of law, not less. Blocking freeways, delaying/impeding access to businesses, all are historically permitted ... for a while ... and law enforcement eventually gets around to putting a stop to it with arrests. A misdemeanor court appearance and a fine is the end result. This is fine.

But what do you do when law enforcement won't do its job? Brown v Board of Education is a great example of when local authorities needed to be forcibly compelled to comply. Do ICE deportations rise to that level of immediate need? I'm skeptical.

There's probably a better solution than sending the national guard in. If we know anything about deploying troops anywhere for any reason at any time, it's that at leaat one of those hammers is going to find a nail to hit. Use of military force should always be a last resort. I can't help but think the Trump administration had better options for dealing with recalcitrant local authorities to get its immigration policies enacted.

I'm not sure if this is just more Trumpian incompetence, or if he knows and understands that this will play well to a national audience that is
1) largely intolerant of illegal immigrants
2) unsympathetic (at best!) to see rocks hitting windshields with tires burning in the background
3) is (was?) careening toward a GOP midterm bloodbath

 

[aneftp]

One of my sisters lives 1 mile away Insurrection protests in her highrise downtown LA place. I just got back from Europe and wasn’t paying too much attention to her family group texts or pics she was sending. I’m glad trump trying to get some law and order in place. Cause the democrats weren’t doing anything to get rid of the protesters.

And I just got back from the riots in Paris after they won the soccer (fubol) title. Interesting the French looted the foot locker a but left the Lululemon store next door alone. Guess they didn’t need any of those expensive yoga pants but wanted the free shoes.

 

[DocMcCoy]

Weird thing to say when there is a video of a reporter clearly being shot with a rubber bullet in my link from a distance of 20ft (Reporter Lauren Tomasi).

Right now, they can get away with shooting the press with rubber bullets. They don't even need to justify such an action to you apparently.

An appropriate response to witnessing violence like this would be "that is bad, they shouldn't be shooting reporters with rubber bullets".

Right that’s the same kind of shooting people we are talking about. I’m not surprised you believe that since you apparently think less than lethal crowd control measures shouldn’t be used against violent protestors? It’s a pretty far cry from another Kent State. What do you think an appropriate response to rioters launching fireworks, bricks, and rocks at law enforcement, lighting property on fire, failing to disperse is? You believe this was an actual attack on the press?

A NORMAL response to the RIOTERS is this is bad, they shouldn’t be attacking law enforcement. You should try an experiment. Head down to your nearest law enforcement office, masked up and carrying a Mexico flag. Yell death to America and launch a piece of concrete at an officers head. Tell me how you think that encounter is going to end.

 

[rowsdower88]

Right that’s the same kind of shooting people we are talking about. I’m not surprised you believe that since you apparently think less than lethal crowd control measures shouldn’t be used against violent protestors?

That reporter sure looked like a violent protester. Lmao, you are getting more uncharitable by the day.

Cops can/should use less than lethal crowd control measures against violent protesters.

What do you think an appropriate response to rioters launching fireworks, bricks, and rocks at law enforcement, lighting property on fire, failing to disperse is? You believe this was an actual attack on the press?

Yes. The cop shot her man, looked pretty intentional to me. Unless you want to believe he was aiming for someone off camera and accidentally hit her from ~20ft away? In which case, we have some incompetence/negligence issues on display.

A NORMAL response to the RIOTERS is this is bad, they shouldn’t be attacking law enforcement.

Easiest layup faux outrage statement ever: I agree with this statement.

Doesn't mean it was the right call to send more cops/military to "enforce immigration law". Doesn't mean we don't already have examples of police misconduct during riots/protests.

 

[rowsdower88]

Insurrection protests

They're "insurrection protests" now.

 

[aneftp]

They're "insurrection protests" now.

Well trump is using the military just for show. It’s all a game. But he needs more military for his bday June 14 fly by celebration on Saturday as well

 

[rowsdower88]

3) is (was?) careening toward a GOP midterm bloodbath

The politics of radical or violent protests/riots are complex.

It's true that the public generally prefers nonviolence.

It's also true that at least partially violent protests against racism were immediately followed by Democratic victories in `92 and '20 and that Trump won the next election after Jan 6.

 

[DocMcCoy]

Yes. The cop shot her man, looked pretty intentional to me. Unless you want to believe he was aiming for someone off camera and accidentally hit her from ~20ft away? In which case, we have some incompetence/negligence issues on display.

Surrounded by violent non complying protestors.

“They’ve told people to get out of this area, and protesters have been refusing,” - reporters own words.

It's also true that at least partially violent protests against racism were immediately followed by Democratic victories in `92 and '20 and that Trump won the next election after Jan 6.

Oh so they are a good thing 🤔

 

[rowsdower88]

Surrounded by violent non complying protestors.

“They’ve told people to get out of this area, and protesters have been refusing,” - reporters own words.

DocMccoy: "Uhhh... uhhh... They probably didn't mean to shoot her... but if they did it was definitely justified!"

From the available evidence, do you think the cop shooting her was justified? Y or N

Oh so they are a good thing 🤔

Something can be good politically and not be good morally, or vice versa. Not hard to understand unless you want to be purposefully obtuse. Our morals should drive our politics, not the other way around.

 

[pgg]

The politics of radical or violent protests/riots are complex.

It's true that the public generally prefers nonviolence.

It's also true that at least partially violent protests against racism were immediately followed by Democratic victories in `92 and '20 and that Trump won the next election after Jan 6.

Something can be good politically and not be good morally. Not hard to understand unless you want to be purposefully obtuse. Our morals should drive our politics, not the other way around.

Agreed and understood. Though I think it'll be a tougher sell to characterize these riots as "against racism" to the vast majority of the US public observing them.

I think this'll go down as "good for Trump and R candidates" ... unless the enforcement gets out of hand and the NG seriously hurts or kills someone. Which is a very real risk because any time you deploy troops anywhere for any reason you buy the risk that someone's judgment or risk perception or other decision making will go awry. The national guardsmen at Kent didn't wake up that morning with murderous intent.

 

[GravelRider]

One of my sisters lives 1 mile away Insurrection protests in her highrise downtown LA place. I just got back from Europe and wasn’t paying too much attention to her family group texts or pics she was sending. I’m glad trump trying to get some law and order in place. Cause the democrats weren’t doing anything to get rid of the protesters.

And I just got back from the riots in Paris after they won the soccer (fubol) title. Interesting the French looted the foot locker a but left the Lululemon store next door alone. Guess they didn’t need any of those expensive yoga pants but wanted the free shoes.

Yeah, but Melania Trump plagiarized a speech.

 

[aneftp]

Yeah, but Melania Trump plagiarized a speech.

She ain’t running for the biggest public office in the world.

 

[GravelRider]

She ain’t running for the biggest public office in the world.

Plagiarism is a crime worse than murder. She will rot in Hell for eternity.

 

[aneftp]

Plagiarism is a crime worse than murder. She will rot in Hell for eternity.

I’d agree with u on that. Dishonestly is the worse crime someone can make. And plagiarizing is a form of dishonesty. Most of us have taken ethics course in one form or another

Something. Like Thomas Hobbs social contract I think. It’s been so long on how he interpreted lying.