Holy crap - this has to stop!

[tycho1572]

Would you mind fixing that for me, Coyote?

Sure - give me a sec to figure it out

Thanks.

Have I told you lately how much I love you?

Thank you

Bring chocolate and you've won my heart.

Your heart deserves more than chocolate.

But chocolate will do in a pinch. It's a serious addiction alas....

 

[ptbw forever]

Hate exists on both sides, sure. But one side acts out on it.

All sides act on it, because humans are inherently violent animals.

I keep asking for a list of the republican supporters shooting democrat congresspeople. Or of them rioting threatening or assaulting anyone. We have emails that PROVE Hillary Clinton and party conspired to cause just that riots and assaults at Trump tallies. And they happened.

Like I said earlier, attempted assassinations are a dime a dozen. Obama has a whole wiki page full. As for assaults/violence, I don't like naming individuals, as I think it glorifies them. But there are a ton of incidents of right-wing violence. The Giffords incident, the terrible Charlston incident, the knifing of those two women on the subway, that attack on an abortion clinic a few years back, etc. And that's just off the top of my head.

There are crazies on both sides who think their interpretation of what is right justifies whatever means they decide to use. But, despite our hyper-polarization, most people on both sides are reasonable people who just want a pleasant life for themselves and those close to them.

The Giffords incident was done by an apolitical madman.

Dylann Roof voted for Obama.

What sort of Planet Pathetic do you live on where you trawl around the internets looking to find out "who people voted for" just so you can ooze in here with yet another Composition Fallacy, none of which have ever worked as a valid argument??

I mean, break open the piggy bank, waddle down to the Life store and fucking BUY one already.
Sleepin' Jesus.

Read the comment above mine, retard.

The "right wing violence" that moron mentioned is not "right wing violence" at all, despite the media slander.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

While people might be divided by political opinions/issues, we share common ground on many things that really matter.

I like focusing on that common ground. It makes for a better life.

I'm afraid common ground is rare.

On the right, the Tea Party types are trying to control the party. Tea Partiers are Constitutionalists. The other side is the establishment. Like Democrats, they believe in big government too, just their kind of big government.

On the left, an admitted socialist almost won the nomination. The American Communist party not only backed Sanders, but said if he lost, would gladly back up Hilary as they did DumBama both his terms.

So where is the middle-ground between constitutionalism and Communism? There is none. We are becoming a more and more divided country with every election.

Common ground isn't rare. It's just forgotten by some in times of heated debates.

People often choose emotions over common sense. I'd win a prize if I could explain why that happens.

On one side, we have people that believe they can legislate mortality. On the other, we have people that believe they can legislate mortality. The truth is neither can be legislated.

There is no common ground between two groups of people: one that believes government should run our lives, and the other that wants as much government out of our life as possible. There is no middle ground there.

There is no middle ground between two groups of people: one that believes it takes a village, and the other that believes it takes personal responsibility.

There is no middle ground between two groups of people: one that believes we should reward irresponsibility, and the other that believes we should reward success.

If there is middle ground, I have yet to find it.

I see a middle ground if you cease looking at each situation as only two polar extremes...


The role of government in our lives - we can all agree that SOME government role is beneficial. We can agree that there is a legitimate need for the government in making sure our food supplies are safe, unadulterated, and contain what they claim to contain. We can agree there is a role for the government in disease prevention in a public health setting. We can agree that there should be a role for the government in making sure minimum safety requirements are met in buildings so a situation like Grenfell Towers doesn't happen or that when an earthquake hits (like it did in China) our schools don't pancake, killing everyone within.

Conversely, I think we can agree we don't want the government in our bedrooms. Nor do we want our government in our churches telling us what we can or can not believe. We don't want the government criminalizing thought.

In terms of responsibility vs irresponsibility I think we can find some common ground. For example we can agree that there are people who are unfortunate - who have suffered devestating losses, illness', catastrophes that are not of their making or choice. We can, I hope, agree that there should be some sort of safety net for them. Likewise, I think most of us agree success SHOULD be rewarded - in higher payscales, and the ability to spend money more freely.

That doesn't mean there aren't those who do want the extremes - but most don't. So right there is some common ground.

I think when you take the issue apart you will find there are points where we can agree.

Not in my discussions with them.

The left believes that those who were not responsible in life should be supported by those that were. Where is the middle-ground for that?

The role of the federal government is outlined in our US Constitution. There (in the powers of Congress) tell us what the federal government is supposed to provide the people; Cash for Clunkers and government air conditioners are not part of that.

Now that we are 20 trillion in debt, it might be a good time to review the sentiment of James Madison when he said:

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution that grants Congress the right, of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents." Annals of Congress, 1794.

 

[LiberalSnowflake]

If you think hate doesn't exist on both sides, you've been blinded by it.

Hate exists on both sides, sure. But one side acts out on it.

All sides act on it, because humans are inherently violent animals.

I keep asking for a list of the republican supporters shooting democrat congresspeople. Or of them rioting threatening or assaulting anyone. We have emails that PROVE Hillary Clinton and party conspired to cause just that riots and assaults at Trump tallies. And they happened.

Like I said earlier, attempted assassinations are a dime a dozen. Obama has a whole wiki page full. As for assaults/violence, I don't like naming individuals, as I think it glorifies them. But there are a ton of incidents of right-wing violence. The Giffords incident, the terrible Charlston incident, the knifing of those two women on the subway, that attack on an abortion clinic a few years back, etc. And that's just off the top of my head.

There are crazies on both sides who think their interpretation of what is right justifies whatever means they decide to use. But, despite our hyper-polarization, most people on both sides are reasonable people who just want a pleasant life for themselves and those close to them.

The Giffords incident was done by an apolitical madman.

Dylann Roof voted for Obama.

The Giffords guy was definitely a madman, and he was definitely left-leaning in earlier years, but the video-manifestos he left before shooting Giffords were excessively small-government style right-wing.

The other one draped himself in the confederate flag and wanted to literally start a race war. >.> I don't care who he voted for.

Neither are representative of conservatism as a whole, but both these actors justified their actions through strains of right-wing thought.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Libs acting like there is still a contest going on with an undetermined outcome
Hillary Clinton lost the electoral vote to the stunned glee of some and the stunned dismay of some
Apparently a goodly portion never experienced the maturation process of losing a contest. Playing softball just for fun with no rules and no score and quit when you get thirsty is no good
There are beginnings and ends to contests and outcomes with a final score
Hillary got more hits but Trump scored more runs-again a competition thing perhaps foreign to some
So they libs feel as though they could not have lost and thus the contest is still ongoing(Russians,Comey , mueller, investigations, hearings, impeachment)
Trump has done a poor job of at least trying to jump on this with both feet. He talked tough like new Sherrif in town so start acting like one

Clinton lost and Trump won.
Romney lost and Obama won.
McCain lost and Obama won.
Kerry lost and Bush won.
Gore lost and Bush won.

and so on.

2020 someone else will win and someone else will lose.

And when that happens, we should all respect the vote of the people instead of fighting the vote of the people.

...and did you? ....did the right?

Respect the vote of the people in regards to recognizing the legitimacy of the president - yes, absolutely!

But roll over and accept the agenda? No. Our system of government has gifted us with many (non-violent) tools to make sure our voices are heard and we have every right to use them if we disagree with the agenda or if we want to find a middle ground. That's democracy in action vs majority rule

Which would be fine if we lived in a country of Democracy, but we don't. We live in a Republic.

The tools we have to reject the agenda (of anybody) is called voting. It's not rioting, it's not creating phony schemes to impeach a President, it's called voting.

 

[francoHFW]

2) They didn't go after Obama like this because he didn't do dumb arse shit like the Orange Buffoon...

Obama had uber fake news libsocialist press to support him as he accelerated liberal policies that destroyed the family, schools, children, middle class, military, and health care. 1+1=2

Amazing, since he couldn't pass anything, superdupe.

You mean other than take control of 20% of the entire American economy with Obamacare and you mean the stimulus and cash for clunkers and 100 other little things that prevented of the economy from ever recovering Super super superduper liberal Duper super

Yes he passed the stimulus (which worked great)- 2 GOPers actually voted for it!!!!!!! Two nice ladies from Maine.... and the best social reform for the nonrich ever (take control my ass)- and that's it, dupe. You are a silly man lol.

 

[francoHFW]

Libs acting like there is still a contest going on with an undetermined outcome
Hillary Clinton lost the electoral vote to the stunned glee of some and the stunned dismay of some
Apparently a goodly portion never experienced the maturation process of losing a contest. Playing softball just for fun with no rules and no score and quit when you get thirsty is no good
There are beginnings and ends to contests and outcomes with a final score
Hillary got more hits but Trump scored more runs-again a competition thing perhaps foreign to some
So they libs feel as though they could not have lost and thus the contest is still ongoing(Russians,Comey , mueller, investigations, hearings, impeachment)
Trump has done a poor job of at least trying to jump on this with both feet. He talked tough like new Sherrif in town so start acting like one

Clinton lost and Trump won.
Romney lost and Obama won.
McCain lost and Obama won.
Kerry lost and Bush won.
Gore lost and Bush won.

and so on.

2020 someone else will win and someone else will lose.

And when that happens, we should all respect the vote of the people instead of fighting the vote of the people.

...and did you? ....did the right?

Respect the vote of the people in regards to recognizing the legitimacy of the president - yes, absolutely!

But roll over and accept the agenda? No. Our system of government has gifted us with many (non-violent) tools to make sure our voices are heard and we have every right to use them if we disagree with the agenda or if we want to find a middle ground. That's democracy in action vs majority rule

Which would be fine if we lived in a country of Democracy, but we don't. We live in a Republic.

The tools we have to reject the agenda (of anybody) is called voting. It's not rioting, it's not creating phony schemes to impeach a President, it's called voting.

A republic is defined as a representative democracy dupe.

 

[Juicin]

Why are people so upset about labor taking out an elite who represents capital?

All is as it should be

Keep them on their toes.

Don't want to get shot at?

Don't be douche bags to our own poor, it's a good lesson for anyone who has anything worth holding on to. You only have what you have because society accepts the rules in which we play. If enough people don't feel like society is providing for them, these things are bound to happen. Long running theme throughout the world

 

[francoHFW]

[
Dumb shit like what? Closing down sanitary cities so alien criminals have less places to hide? Trying to stop more illegals from entering the country? Trying to safeguard us from terrorists by temporarily stopping them from coming here? Trying to untangle Commie Care that cost many of us to become uninsured and making premiums soar for those still insured? Getting rid of intrusive and expensive regulations on businesses hoping they will keep jobs here and hopefully bring some back? That kind of dumb shit?

Um, he hasn't done a damn thing. Temporarily stopping terrorists? What terrorists? You mean like stopping Saudi citizens? One of the biggest sponsors of world wide terrorism? Oh ,that's right, he curtsied to them...Intrusive regulations? You mean like stopping big business contaminating the water supply? That kind of 'instrusive' legislation..?

How can he do a damn thing with liberal activists judges stopping him? The law is clear (and passed by Congress) that a President has the sole power to stop any group of people he feels is a threat to the US from coming here. The activist courts ruled that he can't exercise that law. Yes, it will be overturned by the Supreme Court, but it goes to show the anti-Americanism of leftists if given power.

Obama already did the moratorium and made vetting super extreme. It's only Trump trying to fulfill ANOTHER campaign lie for the dupes...

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The left is teetering on the edge of nationwide riot and insurrection. Like true neurotics they justify their atrocious behavior. A man insulted someone five years ago, that's good enough to stab a horse in the neck. A baker refused to bake a cake. That's good for a five congressman assassination.

The left should be pushed over the edge. Aoon. Now. We have a Republican as president that will deal with insurrection. A democrat will give the fascists room to destroy.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Why are people so upset about labor taking out an elite who represents capital?

All is as it should be

Keep them on their toes.

Don't want to get shot at?

Don't be douche bags to our own poor, it's a good lesson for anyone who has anything worth holding on to. You only have what you have because society accepts the rules in which we play. If enough people don't feel like society is providing for them, these things are bound to happen. Long running theme throughout the world

Why do you think people won't fight back? The elite who represents capital are perfectly capable of blowing someone's head off.

 

[Juicin]

Why are people so upset about labor taking out an elite who represents capital?

All is as it should be

Keep them on their toes.

Don't want to get shot at?

Don't be douche bags to our own poor, it's a good lesson for anyone who has anything worth holding on to. You only have what you have because society accepts the rules in which we play. If enough people don't feel like society is providing for them, these things are bound to happen. Long running theme throughout the world

Why do you think people won't fight back? The elite who represents capital are perfectly capable of blowing someone's head off.

It's too bad there are about 50x more of us than there are of them, or i'd be scared

 

[francoHFW]

And a perfect example of what I was talking about...

The HATE is on your side. You (collectively) get these nuts worked into a frenzy of hate until one of them thinks he's doing God's service. This is on you. Live with it.

If you think hate doesn't exist on both sides, you've been blinded by it.

Hate exists on both sides, sure. But one side acts out on it.

All sides act on it, because humans are inherently violent animals.

I keep asking for a list of the republican supporters shooting democrat congresspeople. Or of them rioting threatening or assaulting anyone. We have emails that PROVE Hillary Clinton and party conspired to cause just that riots and assaults at Trump tallies. And they happened.

Balogna- staffers BSing, dupe.. And we have stats that show a surge in attacks on gays, blacks, jews etc since Trump.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I don't think folks gave Obama any more chance then Trump.

No, but it's high time both sides decided to change that attitude.

Let's go one policy vote at a time, thanks. And Trump's are CRAP.

Let me correct myself, it's not that you will never learn, it's that you refuse to learn.

 

[francoHFW]

The left is teetering on the edge of nationwide riot and insurrection. Like true neurotics they justify their atrocious behavior. A man insulted someone five years ago, that's good enough to stab a horse in the neck. A baker refused to bake a cake. That's good for a five congressman assassination.

The left should be pushed over the edge. Aoon. Now. We have a Republican as president that will deal with insurrection. A democrat will give the fascists room to destroy.

You are out of your mind. Dems are nonviolent, but your bs.hate propaganda says antifa and black gangsta wannabees are Dems and repeats that bs endlessly, brainwashed functional moron. Trump IS a dangerous idiot and you dupes are the ones always talking about guns to fight gov't and imaginary Dem oppression.

 

[toobfreak]

It all goes back to the types of proactive character assassinations that began with the Democrats when they started it by calling people like Condi Rice and Colin Powell derogatory, racial, token slaves to their "master," and that sort of things. It all goes back to the Dems adherence to Saul Allinsky and his Rule#13. It began with the Democrats, it CONTINUES with the Democrats, it is the MO of the Democrats and it must END with the Democrats, by their base stopping acceptance of this behavior by not supporting them if they continue it and sticking with the issues, admitting they are mere POLICY DIFFERENCES, rather than this continued character assassination. They begin the character assassination in the Congress, in their media, and the inevitable result is that eventually you get loons like this baseball shooter taking it so serious and almost killing someone, like the GOP members who come home and find chalk outlines drawn in their driveways, like the lady GOP congresswoman candidate now getting threatening letters, packages and substances mailed to her house threatening her to drop out of the race. This is all driven by the Dems via their media assault against the GOP. It is incitement to violence just as Hillary's campaign had an outside organization literally hire, pay and bus crazies to all of the Trump rallies and start violent protests, and it is bordering on the criminal now. Actually way past that.

The behavior of the GOP is almost entirely reactive and driven by this. And if you cannot see this, if you think this is a two-sided street, then you have your head so far into the sand that you probably think the war against terror is also a two-sided thing as well and that we hold as much or more to blame in the terror attacks as do the terrorists!

 

[ptbw forever]

Hate exists on both sides, sure. But one side acts out on it.

All sides act on it, because humans are inherently violent animals.

I keep asking for a list of the republican supporters shooting democrat congresspeople. Or of them rioting threatening or assaulting anyone. We have emails that PROVE Hillary Clinton and party conspired to cause just that riots and assaults at Trump tallies. And they happened.

Like I said earlier, attempted assassinations are a dime a dozen. Obama has a whole wiki page full. As for assaults/violence, I don't like naming individuals, as I think it glorifies them. But there are a ton of incidents of right-wing violence. The Giffords incident, the terrible Charlston incident, the knifing of those two women on the subway, that attack on an abortion clinic a few years back, etc. And that's just off the top of my head.

There are crazies on both sides who think their interpretation of what is right justifies whatever means they decide to use. But, despite our hyper-polarization, most people on both sides are reasonable people who just want a pleasant life for themselves and those close to them.

The Giffords incident was done by an apolitical madman.

Dylann Roof voted for Obama.

The Giffords guy was definitely a madman, and he was definitely left-leaning in earlier year, but the video-manifestos he left before shooting Giffords were excessively small-government style right-wing.

The other one draped himself in the confederate flag and wanted to literally start a race war. >.> I don't care who he voted for.

Neither are representative of conservatism as a whole, but both these actors justified their actions through strains of right-wing thought.

You don't understand what "right-wing thought" is, and you bought into shitty propaganda by disgraceful media outlets like "the Guardian"(or "the cuckold", as I appropriately call them), and disgraceful "civil rights" organizations like the ADL.

Roof was an idiot millenial who voted for Obama because all of the rest of his drug addict friends did, and then later realized that Democrats(the party that controls millennials)hate white people, so he decided to kill people who had little or nothing to do with anything to "start a race war". If Dylann Roof is "right wing", then the black lunatic BLM supporter who killed the reporters on live television is "right wing"

Loughner was also an idiot millenial drug abuser, only he just happened to really personally hate Giffords.

 

[francoHFW]

I don't think folks gave Obama any more chance then Trump.

No, but it's high time both sides decided to change that attitude.

Let's go one policy vote at a time, thanks. And Trump's are CRAP.

Let me correct myself, it's not that you will never learn, it's that you refuse to learn.

Learn that after 8 years of mindless GOP obstruction of good ideas, the WORST EVER obstruction, Dems have to vote for the stupidest lies EVER. I don't think so. So you can start ANOTHER depression and more stupidest wars ever? Brainwashed functional morons, including this GD idiot president elected by fraud? He better get smart ferchrissake- so far he's a Bannon idiot dupe...

 

[ptbw forever]

The left is teetering on the edge of nationwide riot and insurrection. Like true neurotics they justify their atrocious behavior. A man insulted someone five years ago, that's good enough to stab a horse in the neck. A baker refused to bake a cake. That's good for a five congressman assassination.

The left should be pushed over the edge. Aoon. Now. We have a Republican as president that will deal with insurrection. A democrat will give the fascists room to destroy.

You are out of your mind. Dems are nonviolent, but your bs.hate propaganda says antifa and black gangsta wannabees are Dems and repeats that bs endlessly, brainwashed functional moron. Trump IS a dangerous idiot and you dupes are the ones always talking about guns to fight gov't and imaginary Dem oppression.

Without Antifa, BLM and La Raza, there would not be a Democrat party able to win elections today.

That is your party's soul.

 

[francoHFW]

It all goes back to the types of proactive character assassinations that began with the Democrats when they started it by calling people like Condi Rice and Colin Powell derogatory, racial, token slaves to their "master," and that sort of things. It all goes back to the Dems adherence to Saul Allinsky and his Rule#13. It began with the Democrats, it CONTINUES with the Democrats, it is the MO of the Democrats and it must END with the Democrats, by their base stopping acceptance of this behavior by not supporting them if they continue it and sticking with the issues, admitting they are mere POLICY DIFFERENCES, rather than this continued character assassination. They begin the character assassination in the Congress, in their media, and the inevitable result is that eventually you get loons like this baseball shooter taking it so serious and almost killing someone, like the GOP members who come home and find chalk outlines drawn in their driveways, like the lady GOP congresswoman candidate now getting threatening letters, packages and substances mailed to her house threatening her to drop out of the race. This is all driven by the Dems via their media assault against the GOP. It is incitement to violence just as Hillary's campaign had an outside organization literally hire, pay and bus crazies to all of the Trump rallies and start violent protests, and it is bordering on the criminal now. Actually way past that.

The behavior of the GOP is almost entirely reactive and driven by this. And if you cannot see this, if you think this is a two-sided street, then you have your head so far into the sand that you probably think the war against terror is also a two-sided thing as well and that we hold as much or more to blame in the terror attacks as do the terrorists!

BS. That crap only happened on Fox, dupe. Where the character assassination goes on. Dems "crimes" never make it to the courts. See lock her up. Hater dupes!!