|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Jan 10, 2021 20:41:38 GMT -6
Agreed I think especially this year we needed a place to talk and vent. We have done a good job keeping it all in here
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Jan 12, 2021 17:22:22 GMT -6
Well, I don't necessarily agree with this, but leftwing echo chamber Slate looks at things this way: A History of Violent Protest Big structural change in America doesn’t happen without violence."The anguished unrest that spread across the country may have made you feel uncomfortable and angry. But Kellie Carter-Jackson says that’s the point: Peaceful protest may not be able to spur the structural change so many people are seeking."
Personally, I think things went too far in DC, but who am I to argue with Slate? |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 12, 2021 19:31:18 GMT -6
You should listen to the entire podcast, and then consider if you think DC was parallel to the summer protests.
If you think the American revolution was about overthrowing democratic government in process for example...
The only mad King advocating quashing American democracy in this story is The Duke of Orange.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Jan 12, 2021 20:12:34 GMT -6
Well no, of course there is no parallel. The summer protests were by the good guys and the DC protests by the bad guys, so there can be no parallel.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 13, 2021 10:11:56 GMT -6
Well no, of course there is no parallel. The summer protests were by the good guys and the DC protests by the bad guys, so there can be no parallel. There were no good guys involved in law breaking. That is not the difference.
The DC event was different in more important ways and you cannot deflect from the serious nature of a planned insurrection by organized radical right wing extremists which not only destroyed property but physically threatened lawmakers doing their job.
It is not reasonable to compare the mostly local reaction to police officials taking local lives (occuring often the day before the proptests) to an event planned weeks in advance that capitalized on use of the President's office to go far beyond any legitimate recount or election challenge by planning to create a reaction to fraudulent claims of widespread voter fraud with a million dollar campaign funded by the President to do so. The election was 2 months ago...
Other rather important differences are the lack of any spontaneous event or outrage that created the anger that fueled it. Well, nothing remotely spontaneous other than of course the President's and others inflammatory rhetoric at an event.
This was an event where the organizers invited radical elements with a promise of "wild" things, planned and organized speakers intending to further incite the crowd, planning for weeks, but failed to plan for any adequate crowd control at that planned event. Having gathered the crowd near the target, the President then with intent sent the resulting angry mob toward that target.
There was some similarity in there being resulting violence to property although this mob actually planned an assault on police officers in order to do the damage.
Just the same? I don't think so.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 13, 2021 10:44:57 GMT -6
There is a good question what to do with the President.
He's been missing in action doing the duties of his office since November, and we can hope he does little harm in the next week. His brand has been hurt although he is the master of surviving disastrous incompetent decisions, so you have to wonder what harm he does in coming years.
Nothing other than solitary isolation is a perfect remedy, I suppose, although I am sure there would be some reaction to make him a sort of orange Nelson Mandela.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Jan 13, 2021 13:50:41 GMT -6
What I find interesting is that 00 continues to mock a person based on his appearance.
Do you do that to fat people? Short? Ugly?
Doesn't seem very enlightened.
Back to the point, the impeachment thing is just a parting shot, because the Senate won't take it up, there's no time.
I'm not surpised that you support this waste of time and taxpayer money. After all, you have well over 10,000 posts, most made during "work" hours.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 13, 2021 15:12:15 GMT -6
What I find interesting is that 00 continues to mock a person based on his appearance. Do you do that to fat people? Short? Ugly? Doesn't seem very enlightened. Back to the point, the impeachment thing is just a parting shot, because the Senate won't take it up, there's no time. I'm not surpised that you support this waste of time and taxpayer money. After all, you have well over 10,000 posts, most made during "work" hours. You obvioulsy did not read the article linked. I simply wanted to lay out possibilities. Doing nothing seems awfully cowardly. As a hard line law and order Republican like yourself, willing to shoot and kill the law breakers, it looks to me like somebody who aided, abetted and encouraged their action deserves taking a little time.
BTW, I did not say I supported impeachment which would take a little time. Not much, since the charges are fairly straightforward and awfully hard to deny. Most Republicans will say Trump deserves to be censured at the least, many will just take Mcconnel's olive branch for cover and say it is moot.
I think the 14th Amendment argument is a good one. Not sure it should take much if any Congressional time in theory.
Perhaps you are right and I should say nothing about any of Trump's disabilities, including his strange obsession with tanning booths.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Jan 13, 2021 15:24:16 GMT -6
He's out in a week. It's a waste of time (just like the first impeachment), which is clear to anyone with a functional brain.
"Encouraged" maybe. "Aided and abetted?" Maybe you're thinking of someone else.
Don't you have some fat people to shame? After all, they're obsessed with McDonalds fries.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 13, 2021 16:57:54 GMT -6
So your answer on dealing with your icon?
Nothing?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Jan 14, 2021 9:21:26 GMT -6
He is not, and has never been, my icon. I've been pretty clear throughout my postings about my thoughts on Trump.
I think he's done some thing very well, and some things not so well, and a few things pretty terribly. I know that I'll get more of what I want with Trump than with Biden.
What any critically thinking, impartial viewer will say is that he has been treated horribly by the media. His words have been twisted, spun, and deliberately misinterpreted/taken out of context on countless occasions. Twitter has banned him, yet sponsors of actual terrorism, such as the Ayatollah Khamenei, still have active accounts. The implication being that Trump is somehow worse than Khamenei. Do you agree with that?
"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." That was his actual quote. That is not incitement. But that's not how the media spins it. They concentrate on "march to the Capitol..." and leave off the rest, which changes the tone substantially.
My answer is nothing should be done. It's pointless. Why do you think "something" must be done?
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 14, 2021 10:44:55 GMT -6
"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." That was his actual quote. That is not incitement. But that's not how the media spins it. They concentrate on "march to the Capitol..." and leave off the rest, which changes the tone substantially. My answer is nothing should be done. It's pointless. Why do you think "something" must be done? You say pointless to do anything. Do nothing. Tell him it was just fine what he did? No censure, no consequence is a hell of a message to the next man who is tempted to misuse the power of the Presidency or power of political voice?
There was insurrection, interference with lawful government process. The speech did incite that interference.
Whether Trump intended the resulting insurrection, he incited it. Careless, intentional, reckless, incompetent? He bears responsibility.
Let's see now, you gather a crowd members of which have history of violent protest by promising wild things happening, you fire them up, you send them down the mall. What could go wrong?
How exactly is he held accountable for that? Do nothing? He has no remorse for his part in this. Hypocritically, he condemns those who he set in motion. After waiting more than a week... What the hell did he expect? Proud boys, white power advocates, militia members, they were going to be part of a non violent protest, emulating MLK?
You say the words the media cites are out of context. The speech was full of irresponsible misstatement, exaggeration. The speech was intended to motivate a very large crowd including many violent extremists to "march on the Capitol." If you want to talk about leaving out the rest, that is what you have done.
If you look at the text of the speech and other speeches including Guliani's at the event, you cannot deny it was intended to raise emotions. It states as fact, extreme interpretation of allegations many which have been disproved or rejected in court. He criticized the Supreme Court, his Vice President, Republican and Democrat election officials, state and federal judges and legislatures. This was a call to reject law and order.
The stated intent was to somehow influence Congress to do what it had no legal power to do. To intimidate, maybe punish them. Otherwise what was the intent?
I think something should be done not because Trump made legitimate attempt to contest the election, that was finished long before this event, and failed, rebuffed by the law.
He went more than a step too far.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Jan 14, 2021 11:12:33 GMT -6
The Democrats are terrified of Trump running in 2024. That's what this is really about.
By impeaching him in the House and convicting him in the Senate, they may be able to prevent him from running again.
That's the goal. The rest of it is all smoke. And you blissfully go along with it because that's what MSNBC/CNN/Twitter/Facebook/Slate/Salon/Mother Jones/Vanity Fair/NYT/WAPO/et al tell you to, because "that's what all the cool kids are doing."
Censure? Ok, whatever. Impeachment? Crazy. Even if he's blocked from running again, he will remain a force to be reckoned with on both sides. For better or worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 14, 2021 12:18:07 GMT -6
Censure? Ok, whatever. Impeachment? Crazy. Even if he's blocked from running again, he will remain a force to be reckoned with on both sides. For better or worse.
What happened to law and order? Doing nothing, your favorite, and saying nothing was wrong with his actions, rewards his dereliction of duty since November as he withdrew from governing to pursue his questionable and even fraudulent claims about the election being stolen, and it rewards his over the top plan to intimidate Congress to circumvent the election. That is not much of response to his rejecting the law.
The party that is driven by fear is the GOP. The elected officials fear being opposed in primaries by candidates funded by the 400 million Trump supposedly raised to fight for his rights to appeal the election. They fear his desire to take revenge should he not go along with him.
The GOP is now a party split into two groups, one apparently "Trump uber alles," one a conservative and moderate party favoring among other things free trade, small government, America as a great melting pot, and US being the leader of an international coalition to oppose other dangerous ideologies. All abandoned by Trump.
We need that middle of the road group to have the strongest voice in our nation.
Why did he lose this election? Black voters who cannot support a man who caters to the extreme racist elements on the far right, independent voters, and moderate GOP voters cost Trump the election, not fraud.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Jan 14, 2021 20:24:10 GMT -6
What I find interesting is that 00 continues to mock a person based on his appearance. Do you do that to fat people? Short? Ugly? Doesn't seem very enlightened. Back to the point, the impeachment thing is just a parting shot, because the Senate won't take it up, there's no time. I'm not surpised that you support this waste of time and taxpayer money. After all, you have well over 10,000 posts, most made during "work" hours. Jeez, McGurkin, get your head out of your ass. 00 is on the good side so if he ridicules someone's appearance, that is a good ridiculing. Only if a bad person ridicules someone's appearance is it a horrific, insensitive thing. Likewise good rioters that burn down public buildings and newly built low income housing and throw Molotov cocktails at police, and destroy and loot businesses are doing good, and good mayors and good governors that allow them to run rampant for days on end, are good leaders, and are never EVER to be compared to the bad people at the capitol. EVER. That is, if you know what's good for you and want to keep your social media privileges. Do you not understand the distinction between good and bad? |
|
