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

[hadit]

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.

Same thing.

Only if you are not educated enough to understand the difference.

Of course. The one represents you taking responsibility for your actions, the other sounds like you were just a pa

Except you have provided no evidence of such.

Its not up to me to provide evidence. What made you think it was?

You made the claim.

Nope. Just repeating documented history.

IOW, you're hoping everyone will just accept your oft-repeated claim without you divulging your sources for discussion.

Nope. If you need clarification read history. Its not my job to spoon feed you.

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

 

[Asclepias]

An honest "national conversation" about ANYTHING would require both sides of an issue, at some point, to look in the mirror and address their own misdeeds.

Does anyone expect that to happen right now? Really?
.

There is nothing honest about this nation. That is a pipe dream of epic proportions.

 

[hadit]

Down that road lies thought crimes.

Didnt Tom Cruise make a movie about that? This isnt the movies.

Nope, this is real life, where real people get hurt for real. When leftists loot and riot, real people lose businesses and property. Real people get hurt.

Looting isnt a thought crime. Are you getting confused?

Intolerance of intolerance is, however.

Intolerance of intolerance is not a thought crime either.

Actually, it is, because it seeks to punish someone for their thoughts, which itself is a thought crime.

 

[Asclepias]

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

Same thing.

Only if you are not educated enough to understand the difference.

Of course. The one represents you taking responsibility for your actions, the other sounds like you were just a pa

Its not up to me to provide evidence. What made you think it was?

You made the claim.

Nope. Just repeating documented history.

IOW, you're hoping everyone will just accept your oft-repeated claim without you divulging your sources for discussion.

Nope. If you need clarification read history. Its not my job to spoon feed you.

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

 

[Asclepias]

Didnt Tom Cruise make a movie about that? This isnt the movies.

Nope, this is real life, where real people get hurt for real. When leftists loot and riot, real people lose businesses and property. Real people get hurt.

Looting isnt a thought crime. Are you getting confused?

Intolerance of intolerance is, however.

Intolerance of intolerance is not a thought crime either.

Actually, it is, because it seeks to punish someone for their thoughts, which itself is a thought crime.

Actually its not because it only is intolerant of intolerance.

 

[bodecea]

I can't stand it when people start a sentence with, "We need to have a conversation about [insert latest social rage].". It's BS. Nobody wants to have a conversation about anything. Yes I'm looking at Liberals here.

But left wing companies such as the shit stink coffee seller Starbucks instructs its employees to get in the faces of customers about "needing" to have a conversation about the liberal cause( whine) du jour...Fuck 'em

Oh really? Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.

Are you really unaware of Starbuck's doing that? They instructed their baristas to do it for a while until the backlash knocked the feet out from under them.

Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.....you saying it happens, sadly, isn't enough. Can you show one person, just one person, who had a Starbucks barista "get in their face"?

 

[hadit]

Same thing.

Only if you are not educated enough to understand the difference.

Of course. The one represents you taking responsibility for your actions, the other sounds like you were just a pa

You made the claim.

Nope. Just repeating documented history.

IOW, you're hoping everyone will just accept your oft-repeated claim without you divulging your sources for discussion.

Nope. If you need clarification read history. Its not my job to spoon feed you.

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

If you actually have, then you would agree that when leftists "demonstrate", they trash where they are, destroy property, and harm people. That is opposed to rightwingers demonstrating, which peaceful and leaves the area cleaner than when they got there.

 

[Asclepias]

Only if you are not educated enough to understand the difference.

Of course. The one represents you taking responsibility for your actions, the other sounds like you were just a pa

Nope. Just repeating documented history.

IOW, you're hoping everyone will just accept your oft-repeated claim without you divulging your sources for discussion.

Nope. If you need clarification read history. Its not my job to spoon feed you.

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

If you actually have, then you would agree that when leftists "demonstrate", they trash where they are, destroy property, and harm people. That is opposed to rightwingers demonstrating, which peaceful and leaves the area cleaner than when they got there.

Switch leftist with rightwingers and i do agree.

 

[hadit]

I can't stand it when people start a sentence with, "We need to have a conversation about [insert latest social rage].". It's BS. Nobody wants to have a conversation about anything. Yes I'm looking at Liberals here.

But left wing companies such as the shit stink coffee seller Starbucks instructs its employees to get in the faces of customers about "needing" to have a conversation about the liberal cause( whine) du jour...Fuck 'em

Oh really? Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.

Are you really unaware of Starbuck's doing that? They instructed their baristas to do it for a while until the backlash knocked the feet out from under them.

Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.....you saying it happens, sadly, isn't enough. Can you show one person, just one person, who had a Starbucks barista "get in their face"?

You first have to acknowledge that their idea of "getting in their face" may not be the same as yours. Define it as "I ordered a cup of coffee and you started talking about race relations instead of just getting my coffee" and I don't think there's any argument.

 

[Asclepias]

I can't stand it when people start a sentence with, "We need to have a conversation about [insert latest social rage].". It's BS. Nobody wants to have a conversation about anything. Yes I'm looking at Liberals here.

But left wing companies such as the shit stink coffee seller Starbucks instructs its employees to get in the faces of customers about "needing" to have a conversation about the liberal cause( whine) du jour...Fuck 'em

Oh really? Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.

Are you really unaware of Starbuck's doing that? They instructed their baristas to do it for a while until the backlash knocked the feet out from under them.

Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.....you saying it happens, sadly, isn't enough. Can you show one person, just one person, who had a Starbucks barista "get in their face"?

You first have to acknowledge that their idea of "getting in their face" may not be the same as yours. Define it as "I ordered a cup of coffee and you started talking about race relations instead of just getting my coffee" and I don't think there's any argument.

You are using fuzzy logic. Everyone knows what "getting in their face" means.

 

[hadit]

Of course. The one represents you taking responsibility for your actions, the other sounds like you were just a pa
IOW, you're hoping everyone will just accept your oft-repeated claim without you divulging your sources for discussion.

Nope. If you need clarification read history. Its not my job to spoon feed you.

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

If you actually have, then you would agree that when leftists "demonstrate", they trash where they are, destroy property, and harm people. That is opposed to rightwingers demonstrating, which peaceful and leaves the area cleaner than when they got there.

Switch leftist with rightwingers and i do agree.

Good. Now all you have to do is show multiple incidents where right wing demonstrations resulted in riots complete with smashed store windows, burning cars and motorists pulled from their vehicles and smashed in the head with bricks while their attackers dance around them.

 

[hadit]

But left wing companies such as the shit stink coffee seller Starbucks instructs its employees to get in the faces of customers about "needing" to have a conversation about the liberal cause( whine) du jour...Fuck 'em

Oh really? Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.

Are you really unaware of Starbuck's doing that? They instructed their baristas to do it for a while until the backlash knocked the feet out from under them.

Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.....you saying it happens, sadly, isn't enough. Can you show one person, just one person, who had a Starbucks barista "get in their face"?

You first have to acknowledge that their idea of "getting in their face" may not be the same as yours. Define it as "I ordered a cup of coffee and you started talking about race relations instead of just getting my coffee" and I don't think there's any argument.

You are using fuzzy logic. Everyone knows what "getting in their face" means.

Not everyone agrees on that, but you really knew that.

 

[Asclepias]

Nope. If you need clarification read history. Its not my job to spoon feed you.

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

If you actually have, then you would agree that when leftists "demonstrate", they trash where they are, destroy property, and harm people. That is opposed to rightwingers demonstrating, which peaceful and leaves the area cleaner than when they got there.

Switch leftist with rightwingers and i do agree.

Good. Now all you have to do is show multiple incidents where right wing demonstrations resulted in riots complete with smashed store windows, burning cars and motorists pulled from their vehicles and smashed in the head with bricks while their attackers dance around them.

i dont have to do anything. You need to stop being lazy and look it up.

 

[Asclepias]

Oh really? Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.

Are you really unaware of Starbuck's doing that? They instructed their baristas to do it for a while until the backlash knocked the feet out from under them.

Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.....you saying it happens, sadly, isn't enough. Can you show one person, just one person, who had a Starbucks barista "get in their face"?

You first have to acknowledge that their idea of "getting in their face" may not be the same as yours. Define it as "I ordered a cup of coffee and you started talking about race relations instead of just getting my coffee" and I don't think there's any argument.

You are using fuzzy logic. Everyone knows what "getting in their face" means.

Not everyone agrees on that, but you really knew that.

All intelligent people agree on that. i disregard people that play dumb.

 

[hadit]

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

If you actually have, then you would agree that when leftists "demonstrate", they trash where they are, destroy property, and harm people. That is opposed to rightwingers demonstrating, which peaceful and leaves the area cleaner than when they got there.

Switch leftist with rightwingers and i do agree.

Good. Now all you have to do is show multiple incidents where right wing demonstrations resulted in riots complete with smashed store windows, burning cars and motorists pulled from their vehicles and smashed in the head with bricks while their attackers dance around them.

i dont have to do anything. You need to stop being lazy and look it up.

Then you have nothing.

 

[bodecea]

I can't stand it when people start a sentence with, "We need to have a conversation about [insert latest social rage].". It's BS. Nobody wants to have a conversation about anything. Yes I'm looking at Liberals here.

But left wing companies such as the shit stink coffee seller Starbucks instructs its employees to get in the faces of customers about "needing" to have a conversation about the liberal cause( whine) du jour...Fuck 'em

Oh really? Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.

Are you really unaware of Starbuck's doing that? They instructed their baristas to do it for a while until the backlash knocked the feet out from under them.

Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.....you saying it happens, sadly, isn't enough. Can you show one person, just one person, who had a Starbucks barista "get in their face"?

You first have to acknowledge that their idea of "getting in their face" may not be the same as yours. Define it as "I ordered a cup of coffee and you started talking about race relations instead of just getting my coffee" and I don't think there's any argument.

Excuse me...you are the one who used the term "get in the faces of customers'....and now you want to play semantics.

So...you concede that you have absolutely no evidence of any Starbucks barista "getting in the face" of any customer. So, why did you lie? What was the purpose?

 

[hadit]

Are you really unaware of Starbuck's doing that? They instructed their baristas to do it for a while until the backlash knocked the feet out from under them.

Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.....you saying it happens, sadly, isn't enough. Can you show one person, just one person, who had a Starbucks barista "get in their face"?

You first have to acknowledge that their idea of "getting in their face" may not be the same as yours. Define it as "I ordered a cup of coffee and you started talking about race relations instead of just getting my coffee" and I don't think there's any argument.

You are using fuzzy logic. Everyone knows what "getting in their face" means.

Not everyone agrees on that, but you really knew that.

All intelligent people agree on that. i disregard people that play dumb.

If you really think everyone has the same idea of what constitutes "in your face", there's no hope for you.

 

[Asclepias]

I have both read and lived history, and you are incorrect.

If you actually have, then you would agree that when leftists "demonstrate", they trash where they are, destroy property, and harm people. That is opposed to rightwingers demonstrating, which peaceful and leaves the area cleaner than when they got there.

Switch leftist with rightwingers and i do agree.

Good. Now all you have to do is show multiple incidents where right wing demonstrations resulted in riots complete with smashed store windows, burning cars and motorists pulled from their vehicles and smashed in the head with bricks while their attackers dance around them.

i dont have to do anything. You need to stop being lazy and look it up.

Then you have nothing.

Wrong again.

 

[hadit]

But left wing companies such as the shit stink coffee seller Starbucks instructs its employees to get in the faces of customers about "needing" to have a conversation about the liberal cause( whine) du jour...Fuck 'em

Oh really? Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.

Are you really unaware of Starbuck's doing that? They instructed their baristas to do it for a while until the backlash knocked the feet out from under them.

Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.....you saying it happens, sadly, isn't enough. Can you show one person, just one person, who had a Starbucks barista "get in their face"?

You first have to acknowledge that their idea of "getting in their face" may not be the same as yours. Define it as "I ordered a cup of coffee and you started talking about race relations instead of just getting my coffee" and I don't think there's any argument.

Excuse me...you are the one who used the term "get in the faces of customers'....and now you want to play semantics.

So...you concede that you have absolutely no evidence of any Starbucks barista "getting in the face" of any customer. So, why did you lie? What was the purpose?

Actually, I did not. You are referring to the post to which you replied. That was not mine. Do you deny that Starbucks baristas were instructed to have conversations about race with their customers?

 

[Asclepias]

Give us a link to those kinds of things happening.....you saying it happens, sadly, isn't enough. Can you show one person, just one person, who had a Starbucks barista "get in their face"?

You first have to acknowledge that their idea of "getting in their face" may not be the same as yours. Define it as "I ordered a cup of coffee and you started talking about race relations instead of just getting my coffee" and I don't think there's any argument.

You are using fuzzy logic. Everyone knows what "getting in their face" means.

Not everyone agrees on that, but you really knew that.

All intelligent people agree on that. i disregard people that play dumb.

If you really think everyone has the same idea of what constitutes "in your face", there's no hope for you.

i dont have a problem allowing you to feel that way.