Why Aren’t We Having a National Conversation About Leftist Violence?

[Liberty777]

I say no kids allowed at any rallies that way if there's a problem just square off n handle it. All these pussies screaming fuck u n fuck this, why raise ur blood pressure when u can follow ur primal instinct.

 

[WillowTree]

So, to refocus. Why isn't there a national conversation about leftist violence? And do not attempt to blame it on Trump. They burned Fergusuon and Baltimore long before Trump. They played knock out long before Trump. You cannot blame the violence in Chicago and San Francisco on Trump.

 

[hadit]

Liberals behaving badly is par for the course.



SHOCK VIDEO: 'Dreamers' flip off Trump supporters, shout expletives at passing cars

Boo Hoo..The Trump supporters deserved it

Are you saying that bad behavior is acceptable if the target "deserved it"? And who gets to decide if they did?

Nope bit that's the bar Trump supporters set. Apparently violence is ok if someone erks your nerves.

I don't agree with that but again, the Trump supporters have given the green light on that. The results aren't surprising.

Now, to be fair to Trump supporters, the anti's are deliberately going to rallies and provoking conflict. Thus, we can safely say that if they were to stay away from Trump rallies, they wouldn't get involved in violent conflict with Trump supporters. Amazing how that works.

So being there is the newest excuse for violence. Got it, let me just add that one to the list also while you cry about liberal violence as being inexcusable.

I'll say these three things for the record:

1. Violence from Trump supporters at Trump rallies is inexcusable. Just record the haters being haters.
2. Violence from anti-Trump haters at Trump rallies is inexcusable. Just stay away from the rally if you can't control your hatred.
3. Deliberately going to a Trump rally and inciting violence is not only inexcusable, it makes you look like a moron.

Not to put too fine a point on it, if there were no agitators at the rallies, there would be no violence at the rallies, it's really kind of basic and easy for even children to understand.

 

[Asclepias]

So, to refocus. Why isn't there a national conversation about leftist violence? And do not attempt to blame it on Trump. They burned Fergusuon and Baltimore long before Trump. They played knock out long before Trump. You cannot blame the violence in Chicago and San Francisco on Trump.

All those things you mentioned were debated and talked about. What more were you looking for?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Boo Hoo..The Trump supporters deserved it

Are you saying that bad behavior is acceptable if the target "deserved it"? And who gets to decide if they did?

Nope bit that's the bar Trump supporters set. Apparently violence is ok if someone erks your nerves.

I don't agree with that but again, the Trump supporters have given the green light on that. The results aren't surprising.

Now, to be fair to Trump supporters, the anti's are deliberately going to rallies and provoking conflict. Thus, we can safely say that if they were to stay away from Trump rallies, they wouldn't get involved in violent conflict with Trump supporters. Amazing how that works.

So being there is the newest excuse for violence. Got it, let me just add that one to the list also while you cry about liberal violence as being inexcusable.

I'll say these three things for the record:

1. Violence from Trump supporters at Trump rallies is inexcusable. Just record the haters being haters.
2. Violence from anti-Trump haters at Trump rallies is inexcusable. Just stay away from the rally if you can't control your hatred.
3. Deliberately going to a Trump rally and inciting violence is not only inexcusable, it makes you look like a moron.

Not to put too fine a point on it, if there were no agitators at the rallies, there would be no violence at the rallies, it's really kind of basic and easy for even children to understand.

Agitation is not an excuse for violence. Unless you're like a snarling animal who doesnt know how to handle things you dont like without violence. I like how you said its inexcusable them provided an excuse *wink wink* I get cha

 

[hadit]

So, to refocus. Why isn't there a national conversation about leftist violence? And do not attempt to blame it on Trump. They burned Fergusuon and Baltimore long before Trump. They played knock out long before Trump. You cannot blame the violence in Chicago and San Francisco on Trump.

The bottom line is this. The ones calling for "national conversations" are sympathetic to leftist causes. Thus, any violence from the the conservative side of the aisle is immediately seized upon as proof the need for a "conversation", while repeated, easily anticipated violence from the left is ignored and excused.

 

[Votto]

Why isn't it? Because the lamestream medias are Biased.


snip:





Why Aren’t We Having a National Conversation About Leftist Violence?

If a mob of conservatives attempted to shut down a major Hillary Clinton event, as rioters did the other day during a Donald Trump event, America would be thrust into an insufferable national dialogue about the growing violent tendencies of the Right to crush debate. There would be a flood of anxious op-ed pieces and cable news roundtables featuring chin-stroking pundits contemplating the future of discourse in America. No one would be spared.

And you better believe every conservative politician in the country would be asked to comment on this bloodcurdling development.

Do you, sir, feel that your own rhetoric about immigration and guns has somehow contributed to this ugly trend we’re seeing?

Does the GOP need to soften its tone on abortion to stop this kind of violence from happening in the future?

You might remember that, during the 2009-2010 Obamacare debates, every false and exaggerated claim about Tea Party violence induced a thousand wringing hands to grapple over the fascistic tendencies and ugly underbelly of conservatism.

You might remember the Democratic leadership in Congress decrying “acts of violence” against House members in concerted effort to create the perception that bloodshed was imminent. You will no doubt remember the fake bravery of Nancy Pelosi and friends carrying a gavel across big crowds of wholly peaceful people protesting leftist health care policy as if they were facing down Orval Faubus.

The media was happy to portray the peaceful Tea Party as a movement surreptitiously driven by racism without a shred of proof outside its opposition to Barack Obama. You will remember Paul Krugman blaming peaceful assembly and free speech for an insane person’s “assassination” attempt against Kathleen Gifford, and Ezra Klein lamenting how scary things get when conservatives oppose liberal doctrine. Every shooting in America necessitates a thorough investigation into political proclivities of the perpetrator. Is he angry at the president? Did he ever register as a Republican? Is he fond of the Confederate flag? But only when the facts mesh with the helpful narrative do we hear about it.

all of the article here:
Why No National Conversation About Leftist Violence?

Give them a free pass.

Move along, nothing to see here.

 

[Esmeralda]

Why isn't it? Because the lamestream medias are Biased.


snip:





Why Aren’t We Having a National Conversation About Leftist Violence?

If a mob of conservatives attempted to shut down a major Hillary Clinton event, as rioters did the other day during a Donald Trump event, America would be thrust into an insufferable national dialogue about the growing violent tendencies of the Right to crush debate. There would be a flood of anxious op-ed pieces and cable news roundtables featuring chin-stroking pundits contemplating the future of discourse in America. No one would be spared.

And you better believe every conservative politician in the country would be asked to comment on this bloodcurdling development.

Do you, sir, feel that your own rhetoric about immigration and guns has somehow contributed to this ugly trend we’re seeing?

Does the GOP need to soften its tone on abortion to stop this kind of violence from happening in the future?

You might remember that, during the 2009-2010 Obamacare debates, every false and exaggerated claim about Tea Party violence induced a thousand wringing hands to grapple over the fascistic tendencies and ugly underbelly of conservatism.

You might remember the Democratic leadership in Congress decrying “acts of violence” against House members in concerted effort to create the perception that bloodshed was imminent. You will no doubt remember the fake bravery of Nancy Pelosi and friends carrying a gavel across big crowds of wholly peaceful people protesting leftist health care policy as if they were facing down Orval Faubus.

The media was happy to portray the peaceful Tea Party as a movement surreptitiously driven by racism without a shred of proof outside its opposition to Barack Obama. You will remember Paul Krugman blaming peaceful assembly and free speech for an insane person’s “assassination” attempt against Kathleen Gifford, and Ezra Klein lamenting how scary things get when conservatives oppose liberal doctrine. Every shooting in America necessitates a thorough investigation into political proclivities of the perpetrator. Is he angry at the president? Did he ever register as a Republican? Is he fond of the Confederate flag? But only when the facts mesh with the helpful narrative do we hear about it.

all of the article here:
Why No National Conversation About Leftist Violence?

It's the liberals who are violent? Really? How many liberals have bombed health clinics that did abortions and killed doctors and nurses who provided that LEGAL service?

How many liberals have bombed government buildings like in Oklahoma City?

 

[Asclepias]

So, to refocus. Why isn't there a national conversation about leftist violence? And do not attempt to blame it on Trump. They burned Fergusuon and Baltimore long before Trump. They played knock out long before Trump. You cannot blame the violence in Chicago and San Francisco on Trump.

The bottom line is this. The ones calling for "national conversations" are sympathetic to leftist causes. Thus, any violence from the the conservative side of the aisle is immediately seized upon as proof the need for a "conversation", while repeated, easily anticipated violence from the left is ignored and excused.

The OP is not sympathetic to leftist causes. Did you forget the OP in your wild claim?

 

[hadit]

Are you saying that bad behavior is acceptable if the target "deserved it"? And who gets to decide if they did?

Nope bit that's the bar Trump supporters set. Apparently violence is ok if someone erks your nerves.

I don't agree with that but again, the Trump supporters have given the green light on that. The results aren't surprising.

Now, to be fair to Trump supporters, the anti's are deliberately going to rallies and provoking conflict. Thus, we can safely say that if they were to stay away from Trump rallies, they wouldn't get involved in violent conflict with Trump supporters. Amazing how that works.

So being there is the newest excuse for violence. Got it, let me just add that one to the list also while you cry about liberal violence as being inexcusable.

I'll say these three things for the record:

1. Violence from Trump supporters at Trump rallies is inexcusable. Just record the haters being haters.
2. Violence from anti-Trump haters at Trump rallies is inexcusable. Just stay away from the rally if you can't control your hatred.
3. Deliberately going to a Trump rally and inciting violence is not only inexcusable, it makes you look like a moron.

Not to put too fine a point on it, if there were no agitators at the rallies, there would be no violence at the rallies, it's really kind of basic and easy for even children to understand.

Agitation is not an excuse for violence. Unless you're like a snarling animal who doesnt know how to handle things you dont like without violence. I like how you said its inexcusable them provided an excuse *wink wink* I get cha

What excuse? Violence is not acceptable, and deliberately agitating for violence is also not acceptable. I notice that you continue to excuse bad behavior if the target "deserves it", even to the extent of KKK wannabes verbally attacking black drivers.

 

[hadit]

So, to refocus. Why isn't there a national conversation about leftist violence? And do not attempt to blame it on Trump. They burned Fergusuon and Baltimore long before Trump. They played knock out long before Trump. You cannot blame the violence in Chicago and San Francisco on Trump.

The bottom line is this. The ones calling for "national conversations" are sympathetic to leftist causes. Thus, any violence from the the conservative side of the aisle is immediately seized upon as proof the need for a "conversation", while repeated, easily anticipated violence from the left is ignored and excused.

The OP is not sympathetic to leftist causes. Did you forget the OP in your wild claim?

How many times do you see national media figures calling for national conversations on liberal violence? That is the point. If you can show me repeated such calls, I will be glad to admit I was not aware of them.

 

[Asclepias]

Are you saying that bad behavior is acceptable if the target "deserved it"? And who gets to decide if they did?

Nope bit that's the bar Trump supporters set. Apparently violence is ok if someone erks your nerves.

I don't agree with that but again, the Trump supporters have given the green light on that. The results aren't surprising.

Now, to be fair to Trump supporters, the anti's are deliberately going to rallies and provoking conflict. Thus, we can safely say that if they were to stay away from Trump rallies, they wouldn't get involved in violent conflict with Trump supporters. Amazing how that works.

So being there is the newest excuse for violence. Got it, let me just add that one to the list also while you cry about liberal violence as being inexcusable.

I'll say these three things for the record:

1. Violence from Trump supporters at Trump rallies is inexcusable. Just record the haters being haters.
2. Violence from anti-Trump haters at Trump rallies is inexcusable. Just stay away from the rally if you can't control your hatred.
3. Deliberately going to a Trump rally and inciting violence is not only inexcusable, it makes you look like a moron.

Not to put too fine a point on it, if there were no agitators at the rallies, there would be no violence at the rallies, it's really kind of basic and easy for even children to understand.

Agitation is not an excuse for violence. Unless you're like a snarling animal who doesnt know how to handle things you dont like without violence. I like how you said its inexcusable them provided an excuse *wink wink* I get cha

I resemble that remark except i know how to handle things without violence but I just prefer to use violence in some cases.

 

[Asclepias]

So, to refocus. Why isn't there a national conversation about leftist violence? And do not attempt to blame it on Trump. They burned Fergusuon and Baltimore long before Trump. They played knock out long before Trump. You cannot blame the violence in Chicago and San Francisco on Trump.

The bottom line is this. The ones calling for "national conversations" are sympathetic to leftist causes. Thus, any violence from the the conservative side of the aisle is immediately seized upon as proof the need for a "conversation", while repeated, easily anticipated violence from the left is ignored and excused.

The OP is not sympathetic to leftist causes. Did you forget the OP in your wild claim?

How many times do you see national media figures calling for national conversations on liberal violence? That is the point. If you can show me repeated such calls, I will be glad to admit I was not aware of them.

Why would they do that when the violence is all on the right side? To be honest I hate watching the news so I dont see much violence from either side unless someone sends me a video or I see it mentioned on here.

 

[hadit]

Nope bit that's the bar Trump supporters set. Apparently violence is ok if someone erks your nerves.

I don't agree with that but again, the Trump supporters have given the green light on that. The results aren't surprising.

Now, to be fair to Trump supporters, the anti's are deliberately going to rallies and provoking conflict. Thus, we can safely say that if they were to stay away from Trump rallies, they wouldn't get involved in violent conflict with Trump supporters. Amazing how that works.

So being there is the newest excuse for violence. Got it, let me just add that one to the list also while you cry about liberal violence as being inexcusable.

I'll say these three things for the record:

1. Violence from Trump supporters at Trump rallies is inexcusable. Just record the haters being haters.
2. Violence from anti-Trump haters at Trump rallies is inexcusable. Just stay away from the rally if you can't control your hatred.
3. Deliberately going to a Trump rally and inciting violence is not only inexcusable, it makes you look like a moron.

Not to put too fine a point on it, if there were no agitators at the rallies, there would be no violence at the rallies, it's really kind of basic and easy for even children to understand.

Agitation is not an excuse for violence. Unless you're like a snarling animal who doesnt know how to handle things you dont like without violence. I like how you said its inexcusable them provided an excuse *wink wink* I get cha

I resemble that remark except i know how to handle things without violence but I just prefer to use violence in some cases.

Then would you say you "deserved it" when you get thumped?

 

[hadit]

So, to refocus. Why isn't there a national conversation about leftist violence? And do not attempt to blame it on Trump. They burned Fergusuon and Baltimore long before Trump. They played knock out long before Trump. You cannot blame the violence in Chicago and San Francisco on Trump.

The bottom line is this. The ones calling for "national conversations" are sympathetic to leftist causes. Thus, any violence from the the conservative side of the aisle is immediately seized upon as proof the need for a "conversation", while repeated, easily anticipated violence from the left is ignored and excused.

The OP is not sympathetic to leftist causes. Did you forget the OP in your wild claim?

How many times do you see national media figures calling for national conversations on liberal violence? That is the point. If you can show me repeated such calls, I will be glad to admit I was not aware of them.

Why would they do that when the violence is all on the right side? To be honest I hate watching the news so I dont see much violence from either side unless someone sends me a video or I see it mentioned on here.

So we agree there is no call for a national conversation on leftist violence, as the OP states. And, to claim that the violence is "on the right side" is to make violence from either side excusable and acceptable. Lynch mobs were excusable, because to the mob, the target "deserved it" and the violence was on the right side. After all, that black guy looked at that white girl too long. Hang him.

Down that road lies ever escalating violence, culminating in all out war.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

Why isn't it? Because the lamestream medias are Biased.


snip:





Why Aren’t We Having a National Conversation About Leftist Violence?

If a mob of conservatives attempted to shut down a major Hillary Clinton event, as rioters did the other day during a Donald Trump event, America would be thrust into an insufferable national dialogue about the growing violent tendencies of the Right to crush debate. There would be a flood of anxious op-ed pieces and cable news roundtables featuring chin-stroking pundits contemplating the future of discourse in America. No one would be spared.

And you better believe every conservative politician in the country would be asked to comment on this bloodcurdling development.

Do you, sir, feel that your own rhetoric about immigration and guns has somehow contributed to this ugly trend we’re seeing?

Does the GOP need to soften its tone on abortion to stop this kind of violence from happening in the future?

You might remember that, during the 2009-2010 Obamacare debates, every false and exaggerated claim about Tea Party violence induced a thousand wringing hands to grapple over the fascistic tendencies and ugly underbelly of conservatism.

You might remember the Democratic leadership in Congress decrying “acts of violence” against House members in concerted effort to create the perception that bloodshed was imminent. You will no doubt remember the fake bravery of Nancy Pelosi and friends carrying a gavel across big crowds of wholly peaceful people protesting leftist health care policy as if they were facing down Orval Faubus.

The media was happy to portray the peaceful Tea Party as a movement surreptitiously driven by racism without a shred of proof outside its opposition to Barack Obama. You will remember Paul Krugman blaming peaceful assembly and free speech for an insane person’s “assassination” attempt against Kathleen Gifford, and Ezra Klein lamenting how scary things get when conservatives oppose liberal doctrine. Every shooting in America necessitates a thorough investigation into political proclivities of the perpetrator. Is he angry at the president? Did he ever register as a Republican? Is he fond of the Confederate flag? But only when the facts mesh with the helpful narrative do we hear about it.

all of the article here:
Why No National Conversation About Leftist Violence?

It's ok when Liberals do it.

 

[Asclepias]

Now, to be fair to Trump supporters, the anti's are deliberately going to rallies and provoking conflict. Thus, we can safely say that if they were to stay away from Trump rallies, they wouldn't get involved in violent conflict with Trump supporters. Amazing how that works.

So being there is the newest excuse for violence. Got it, let me just add that one to the list also while you cry about liberal violence as being inexcusable.

I'll say these three things for the record:

1. Violence from Trump supporters at Trump rallies is inexcusable. Just record the haters being haters.
2. Violence from anti-Trump haters at Trump rallies is inexcusable. Just stay away from the rally if you can't control your hatred.
3. Deliberately going to a Trump rally and inciting violence is not only inexcusable, it makes you look like a moron.

Not to put too fine a point on it, if there were no agitators at the rallies, there would be no violence at the rallies, it's really kind of basic and easy for even children to understand.

Agitation is not an excuse for violence. Unless you're like a snarling animal who doesnt know how to handle things you dont like without violence. I like how you said its inexcusable them provided an excuse *wink wink* I get cha

I resemble that remark except i know how to handle things without violence but I just prefer to use violence in some cases.

Then would you say you "deserved it" when you get thumped?

Probably not. I would just say the consequences of my actions caused me to get thumped.

 

[Asclepias]

So, to refocus. Why isn't there a national conversation about leftist violence? And do not attempt to blame it on Trump. They burned Fergusuon and Baltimore long before Trump. They played knock out long before Trump. You cannot blame the violence in Chicago and San Francisco on Trump.

The bottom line is this. The ones calling for "national conversations" are sympathetic to leftist causes. Thus, any violence from the the conservative side of the aisle is immediately seized upon as proof the need for a "conversation", while repeated, easily anticipated violence from the left is ignored and excused.

The OP is not sympathetic to leftist causes. Did you forget the OP in your wild claim?

How many times do you see national media figures calling for national conversations on liberal violence? That is the point. If you can show me repeated such calls, I will be glad to admit I was not aware of them.

Why would they do that when the violence is all on the right side? To be honest I hate watching the news so I dont see much violence from either side unless someone sends me a video or I see it mentioned on here.

So we agree there is no call for a national conversation on leftist violence, as the OP states.

Nope. Plenty of people claim there is leftist violence but the facts are that its the righties with the violence problem Always has been and always will be since the founding of this country.

 

[Asclepias]

Why isn't it? Because the lamestream medias are Biased.


snip:





Why Aren’t We Having a National Conversation About Leftist Violence?

If a mob of conservatives attempted to shut down a major Hillary Clinton event, as rioters did the other day during a Donald Trump event, America would be thrust into an insufferable national dialogue about the growing violent tendencies of the Right to crush debate. There would be a flood of anxious op-ed pieces and cable news roundtables featuring chin-stroking pundits contemplating the future of discourse in America. No one would be spared.

And you better believe every conservative politician in the country would be asked to comment on this bloodcurdling development.

Do you, sir, feel that your own rhetoric about immigration and guns has somehow contributed to this ugly trend we’re seeing?

Does the GOP need to soften its tone on abortion to stop this kind of violence from happening in the future?

You might remember that, during the 2009-2010 Obamacare debates, every false and exaggerated claim about Tea Party violence induced a thousand wringing hands to grapple over the fascistic tendencies and ugly underbelly of conservatism.

You might remember the Democratic leadership in Congress decrying “acts of violence” against House members in concerted effort to create the perception that bloodshed was imminent. You will no doubt remember the fake bravery of Nancy Pelosi and friends carrying a gavel across big crowds of wholly peaceful people protesting leftist health care policy as if they were facing down Orval Faubus.

The media was happy to portray the peaceful Tea Party as a movement surreptitiously driven by racism without a shred of proof outside its opposition to Barack Obama. You will remember Paul Krugman blaming peaceful assembly and free speech for an insane person’s “assassination” attempt against Kathleen Gifford, and Ezra Klein lamenting how scary things get when conservatives oppose liberal doctrine. Every shooting in America necessitates a thorough investigation into political proclivities of the perpetrator. Is he angry at the president? Did he ever register as a Republican? Is he fond of the Confederate flag? But only when the facts mesh with the helpful narrative do we hear about it.

all of the article here:
Why No National Conversation About Leftist Violence?

It's ok when Liberals do it.

Intolerance of intolerance is no vice.

 

[hadit]

The bottom line is this. The ones calling for "national conversations" are sympathetic to leftist causes. Thus, any violence from the the conservative side of the aisle is immediately seized upon as proof the need for a "conversation", while repeated, easily anticipated violence from the left is ignored and excused.

The OP is not sympathetic to leftist causes. Did you forget the OP in your wild claim?

How many times do you see national media figures calling for national conversations on liberal violence? That is the point. If you can show me repeated such calls, I will be glad to admit I was not aware of them.

Why would they do that when the violence is all on the right side? To be honest I hate watching the news so I dont see much violence from either side unless someone sends me a video or I see it mentioned on here.

So we agree there is no call for a national conversation on leftist violence, as the OP states.

Nope. Plenty of people claim there is leftist violence but the facts are that its the righties with the violence problem Always has been and always will be since the founding of this country.

Except you have provided no evidence of such.