Why are we so afraid to admit the obvious?

[Coyote]

Guilty until proven innocent: Clinton and Ellison, but not Kavanaugh.

But...Clinton was CAUGHT. And the blue dress. And the DNA from it. Obviously he is guilty. And Anita Broderick...was she lying? I don't think so.

Not sure about Ellison.

I was thinking Hillary.

 

[candycorn]

What is so terrifying about just admitting the obvious?

Because denial is comfortable, and truth is brutal Mac

~S~

Maybe I missed it; are. There a bunch of left leaning posters here swearing we are at “”war” (literally) and are proudly stating they have no interest in finding common ground?

If so, can you highlight them saying so?

Only when the mob is not out searching for patrons to harass in restaurants.

Ohhhhkay. I cited the right wing knobs (2 of the many I could cite) declaring we are “at war”. The challenge was to show the left leaning posters who do that. Shouldn’t be too hard…if you buy into the dogma that “both sides” are to blame.

 

[candycorn]

Guilty until proven innocent: Clinton and Ellison, but not Kavanaugh.

But...Clinton was CAUGHT. And the blue dress. And the DNA from it. Obviously he is guilty. And Anita Broderick...was she lying? I don't think so.

Not sure about Ellison.

I was thinking Hillary.

She clearly knew that…

When you have to be intellectually dishonest like Gracie and the OP are…one would think that it would signal to them how thin their argument is.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

,l,m

Not Trump's fault. Same as it was not Bernie's fault when his supporter tried to kill Republicans. Grow up, loser.

Cite Bernie’s speeches where he incited violence.

Are you kidding? At every GOP rally his supporters were the violent ones. Heck his whole rhetoric is "revolution". You know many revolutions w/o violence? You're obviously trolling now.

There are plenty of recpvolutions without violence.

Please cite a quote of Bernie inciting violence.

I am not going there with you, Coyote. If you cannot see that his revolutionary rhetoric can inspire violence then I cannot help You. Did you not watch the news of Trump supporters getting attacked? Who do you think the attackers were? Old ladies who supported HRC or lost millenials who have no clue as to what they are doing.

Quote then, is it that hard to do?

So you are going to play this game. The man says that because of Republicans we cannot have equality in pay, free healthcare and free college and is shocked when a whacko supporter decides to shoot those same Republicans? As I said, I am not Playing this game with you Coyote. Your playing naive act will not work here.

 

[candycorn]

,l,m

Cite Bernie’s speeches where he incited violence.

Are you kidding? At every GOP rally his supporters were the violent ones. Heck his whole rhetoric is "revolution". You know many revolutions w/o violence? You're obviously trolling now.

There are plenty of recpvolutions without violence.

Please cite a quote of Bernie inciting violence.

I am not going there with you, Coyote. If you cannot see that his revolutionary rhetoric can inspire violence then I cannot help You. Did you not watch the news of Trump supporters getting attacked? Who do you think the attackers were? Old ladies who supported HRC or lost millenials who have no clue as to what they are doing.

Quote then, is it that hard to do?

So you are going to play this game. The man says that because of Republicans we cannot have equality in pay, free healthcare and free college and is shocked when a whacko supporter decides to shoot those same Republicans? As I said, I am not Playing this game with you Coyote. Your playing naive act will not work here.

The only one playing a game is you.

For one thing, the campaign rhetoric you cite is almost as benign as it gets. I recall in the early 1980’s a Tip O’Neil said something to the tune of Reagan having ice water in his veins. In 1984, Dukakis said “The fish rots from the head down.” There were countless innuendo and statements by Bush questioning the patriotism of those opposed to his war. Your citation of Bernie is an object lesson in lameness when you try to tie that to a nut job who opened fire.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

,l,m

Are you kidding? At every GOP rally his supporters were the violent ones. Heck his whole rhetoric is "revolution". You know many revolutions w/o violence? You're obviously trolling now.

There are plenty of recpvolutions without violence.

Please cite a quote of Bernie inciting violence.

I am not going there with you, Coyote. If you cannot see that his revolutionary rhetoric can inspire violence then I cannot help You. Did you not watch the news of Trump supporters getting attacked? Who do you think the attackers were? Old ladies who supported HRC or lost millenials who have no clue as to what they are doing.

Quote then, is it that hard to do?

So you are going to play this game. The man says that because of Republicans we cannot have equality in pay, free healthcare and free college and is shocked when a whacko supporter decides to shoot those same Republicans? As I said, I am not Playing this game with you Coyote. Your playing naive act will not work here.

The only one playing a game is you.

For one thing, the campaign rhetoric you cite is almost as benign as it gets. I recall in the early 1980’s a Tip O’Neil said something to the tune of Reagan having ice water in his veins. In 1984, Dukakis said “The fish rots from the head down.” There were countless innuendo and statements by Bush questioning the patriotism of those opposed to his war. Your citation of Bernie is an object lesson in lameness when you try to tie that to a nut job who opened fire.

I agree but his supporters were violent there is no disputing that. And it is not his fault.

 

[candycorn]

,l,m
There are plenty of recpvolutions without violence.

Please cite a quote of Bernie inciting violence.

I am not going there with you, Coyote. If you cannot see that his revolutionary rhetoric can inspire violence then I cannot help You. Did you not watch the news of Trump supporters getting attacked? Who do you think the attackers were? Old ladies who supported HRC or lost millenials who have no clue as to what they are doing.

Quote then, is it that hard to do?

So you are going to play this game. The man says that because of Republicans we cannot have equality in pay, free healthcare and free college and is shocked when a whacko supporter decides to shoot those same Republicans? As I said, I am not Playing this game with you Coyote. Your playing naive act will not work here.

The only one playing a game is you.

For one thing, the campaign rhetoric you cite is almost as benign as it gets. I recall in the early 1980’s a Tip O’Neil said something to the tune of Reagan having ice water in his veins. In 1984, Dukakis said “The fish rots from the head down.” There were countless innuendo and statements by Bush questioning the patriotism of those opposed to his war. Your citation of Bernie is an object lesson in lameness when you try to tie that to a nut job who opened fire.

I agree but his supporters were violent there is no disputing that. And it is not his fault.

Trump said “anyone who can do a body slam” (referring to a fellow Republican) “is my kind of guy”. Do you think that encourages or discourages violence from his flock?

 

[oreo]

Given the spate of recent violence, the board is understandably abuzz with threads and comments about who is to "blame". And of course, each end is essentially putting 100% of the blame on the other end. Each end is laying out a long list of examples of violence, rhetoric and incitement by the other end.

Guess what? They're both right. Facts are facts.

I have a great deal of respect for the power of ideology. It can make people say and do insane things. It can absolutely blind a person to the obvious. But is it so strong that we'd rather see this country burn down than challenge our own tribe to stop the madness?

When the hate is flowing from both ends like water from a fire hose, does it really matter which end is "worse"?

What is so terrifying about just admitting the obvious?
.

We know for a FACT that violence has increased in this country since Trump was elected. When you campaign on hate, violence and division, you are going to attract hateful, violent people that want division. And that's exactly what Trump accomplished.



There is a new arm of the Republican party called the ALT RIGHT because of the manner in which he campaigned, and they showed up in Charlottesville, VA to help him meet his stated goals.

As the official start of the “Unite the Right” rally kicked off in Charlottesville, Virginia, former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke said the gathering of white supremacists, neo-Nazis and far-right individuals pointed to a future fulfillment of President Donald Trump’s “promises.”

David Duke Says White Supremacists Will 'Fulfill' Trump's Promises
Steve Bannon and the alt-right: a primer

So I really don't want to hear the it's on both sides. It's mainly coming from the right wing of the Republican party, whom are incited by Donald Trump.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I am not going there with you, Coyote. If you cannot see that his revolutionary rhetoric can inspire violence then I cannot help You. Did you not watch the news of Trump supporters getting attacked? Who do you think the attackers were? Old ladies who supported HRC or lost millenials who have no clue as to what they are doing.

Quote then, is it that hard to do?

So you are going to play this game. The man says that because of Republicans we cannot have equality in pay, free healthcare and free college and is shocked when a whacko supporter decides to shoot those same Republicans? As I said, I am not Playing this game with you Coyote. Your playing naive act will not work here.

The only one playing a game is you.

For one thing, the campaign rhetoric you cite is almost as benign as it gets. I recall in the early 1980’s a Tip O’Neil said something to the tune of Reagan having ice water in his veins. In 1984, Dukakis said “The fish rots from the head down.” There were countless innuendo and statements by Bush questioning the patriotism of those opposed to his war. Your citation of Bernie is an object lesson in lameness when you try to tie that to a nut job who opened fire.

I agree but his supporters were violent there is no disputing that. And it is not his fault.

Trump said “anyone who can do a body slam” (referring to a fellow Republican) “is my kind of guy”. Do you think that encourages or discourages violence from his flock?

It’s a joke. Geez. Triggered much? Subliminal messages can be much more dangerous than overt guy talk no one takes verbatim. At least no one sane.

 

[candycorn]

Quote then, is it that hard to do?

So you are going to play this game. The man says that because of Republicans we cannot have equality in pay, free healthcare and free college and is shocked when a whacko supporter decides to shoot those same Republicans? As I said, I am not Playing this game with you Coyote. Your playing naive act will not work here.

The only one playing a game is you.

For one thing, the campaign rhetoric you cite is almost as benign as it gets. I recall in the early 1980’s a Tip O’Neil said something to the tune of Reagan having ice water in his veins. In 1984, Dukakis said “The fish rots from the head down.” There were countless innuendo and statements by Bush questioning the patriotism of those opposed to his war. Your citation of Bernie is an object lesson in lameness when you try to tie that to a nut job who opened fire.

I agree but his supporters were violent there is no disputing that. And it is not his fault.

Trump said “anyone who can do a body slam” (referring to a fellow Republican) “is my kind of guy”. Do you think that encourages or discourages violence from his flock?

It’s a joke. Geez. Triggered much? Subliminal messages can be much more dangerous than overt guy talk no one takes verbatim. At least no one sane.

• So if some crazy ass person takes Bernie seriously….it’s Dems inciting violence and Bernie is responsible.
• If some crazy assed person takes Trump seriously….it’s that guy’s fault and Trump is not responsible.

Do those two statements above represent your postion?

 

[candycorn]

*crickets*

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

No they just didn't let you get away with the sin of moderation towards the undefensible. You equated apples with oranges.

Feel free to elaborate at any time and in kind, further prove the OP's point.

Shouldn’t the OP be calling out his own tribe if he’s wanting others to do it? Or are you looking past the detail that he refuses to practice what he preaches?

Care to share who he left out? Maybe you need to take a reading test and go back and read his OP again

 

[sparky]

• So if some crazy ass person takes Bernie seriously….it’s Dems inciting violence and Bernie is responsible.

• If some crazy assed person takes Trump seriously….it’s that guy’s fault and Trump is not responsible.

personal responsibility would be assumed by the speaker(s) , as well as those who take action due to said speech CC

i don't see any of that happening, do you?

~S~

 

[Norman]

Everyone should admit the obvious. We have taken in millions and millions of people to this country who aren't and don't want to be American. Dumbest policy mistake in the history of mankind. We are at a brink of war.

 

[Lakhota]

Given the spate of recent violence, the board is understandably abuzz with threads and comments about who is to "blame". And of course, each end is essentially putting 100% of the blame on the other end. Each end is laying out a long list of examples of violence, rhetoric and incitement by the other end.

Guess what? They're both right. Facts are facts.

I have a great deal of respect for the power of ideology. It can make people say and do insane things. It can absolutely blind a person to the obvious. But is it so strong that we'd rather see this country burn down than challenge our own tribe to stop the madness?

When the hate is flowing from both ends like water from a fire hose, does it really matter which end is "worse"?

What is so terrifying about just admitting the obvious?
.

A Trump supporter Sent packages through the mail that contained bombs. Another idiot was so enraged by the hysteria preached by the blob about the migrants heading northward that he shot a dozen people in Pittsburgh.

No dumbass. Both sides aren’t right.

Amen! Assholes who peddle this equivalency bullshit are very stupid - or lying.

 

[Norman]

Given the spate of recent violence, the board is understandably abuzz with threads and comments about who is to "blame". And of course, each end is essentially putting 100% of the blame on the other end. Each end is laying out a long list of examples of violence, rhetoric and incitement by the other end.

Guess what? They're both right. Facts are facts.

I have a great deal of respect for the power of ideology. It can make people say and do insane things. It can absolutely blind a person to the obvious. But is it so strong that we'd rather see this country burn down than challenge our own tribe to stop the madness?

When the hate is flowing from both ends like water from a fire hose, does it really matter which end is "worse"?

What is so terrifying about just admitting the obvious?
.

A Trump supporter Sent packages through the mail that contained bombs. Another idiot was so enraged by the hysteria preached by the blob about the migrants heading northward that he shot a dozen people in Pittsburgh.

No dumbass. Both sides aren’t right.

Amen! Assholes who peddle this equivalency bullshit are very stupid - or lying.

True, Islamists favored by the left send in real bombs.

Democrat crazies use real guns to hunt down conservative politicians.

And unlike republicans, a dangerously large crowd cheer for the actions.

 

[sparky]

We are at a brink of war

War with who Norm?

Seriously, you folks pinning away are ALL tools of those politicans you're listening to

they are dividers because they are inept ,want power ,want followers to THINK their fellow Americans are to BLAME for our socio-economic demise

both parties sold us out , or have you not noticed the steady decline in the last 3 decades ? yeah, both parties had their chance

~S~

 

[JoeB131]

Given the spate of recent violence, the board is understandably abuzz with threads and comments about who is to "blame". And of course, each end is essentially putting 100% of the blame on the other end. Each end is laying out a long list of examples of violence, rhetoric and incitement by the other end.

Guess what? They're both right. Facts are facts.

I have a great deal of respect for the power of ideology. It can make people say and do insane things. It can absolutely blind a person to the obvious. But is it so strong that we'd rather see this country burn down than challenge our own tribe to stop the madness?

When the hate is flowing from both ends like water from a fire hose, does it really matter which end is "worse"?

What is so terrifying about just admitting the obvious?

Yes, Stormy Mac, both sides are to blame, not the ONE GUY in the White House spewing daily fear tactics about the scary brown people "massing" at the southern border.

Some day, Stormy Mac, you will get over your obsession that we just need two Republican Parties.

 

[sparky]

Obviously many miss the obvious here......~S~

 

[JoeB131]

Care to share who he left out? Maybe you need to take a reading test and go back and read his OP again

Why, the OP is the same stuff he always spews. Partisanship is bad because the Democrats won't accept his views on stuff.