Yeah...And a white guy who dates black men is a white supremacist? Go figure.

And even if he is a racist douchebag...doesn't he have a right to free speech?

Opposed to the pipeline but can't openly criticise the strongarm tactics of the goons. Getting all in a huff over radical protesters but fine with corporate-military jackboot thug government. Spare us your pseudo-moderate thinly veiled ultraconservative self-righteous wishwash. I respect authentic bacon like mule and luke over artificially flavored saccharin "conservative lite". No fat, no calories, no substance, no guts, just pure whining ego. You're no Ghandi. You are just looking for an excuse to justify violent suppression of dissent.

The giveaway was your word "initiate". Not ok to initiate violence. OK to kick ass if someone else starts something though, right?

What "corporate-military jackboot thug" and "strong arm tactics" are you referring to?

The only people who are justifying violent suppression of opposing views are the very people that were rioting at Berkeley...the people you are defending. They used violence to suppress free speech.

Correct...self-defense in response to violence is morally justified. Initiating violence is not.

Ahhh, remember this? http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-warns-supporters-may-riot-fears-violence-escalate-n540516

Very,very lame! When the right as they call em,take's to the streets like maniac's,rioting,burning car's,beating up innocent men and women like the progressive liberal's have done over and over and over,and are still doing right now,then get back with me.

Ahhhhhhhhh! 😛

[Edited on 2/3/2017 by LUKE]

Yeah...And a white guy who dates black men is a white supremacist? Go figure.

And even if he is a racist douchebag...doesn't he have a right to free speech?

Last I checked with the righists, only American citizens have full constitutional rights.

What a world we live in when a white, gay, jewish man is labeled a nazi.

Who labeled him a Nazi?

So he's not a citizen? I have no idea...never even heard of him until two nights ago. But yeah...then that definitely justifies the violence...right.

Odd that you say these thugs don't represent your views and yet you seem to be defending their actions.

And a white guy who dates black men is a white supremacist? Go figure.

I'm not surprised that this scenario confuses you.

So he's not a citizen? I have no idea...never even heard of him until two nights ago. But yeah...then that definitely justifies the violence...right.

Odd that you say these thugs don't represent your views and yet you seem to be defending their actions.

Where did I defend their actions?

Stop being so obtuse and say what you want to say.

Yup. Rightist in disguise, pretending to not like either side. Always so transparent.

So he's not a citizen? I have no idea...never even heard of him until two nights ago. But yeah...then that definitely justifies the violence...right.

Odd that you say these thugs don't represent your views and yet you seem to be defending their actions.

Where did I defend their actions?

Stop being so obtuse and say what you want to say.

Just "drawing conclusions"... 😉

What "corporate-military jackboot thug" and "strong arm tactics" are you referring to?

Dog attacks on peaceful protestors, children at Standing Rock, for starters:

[img] [/

Don't know much about what happened at Standing Rock, but assuming the protestors were peaceful and on their own property, then I would be opposed to any tactics being used against them whether by private security or government agents. If dogs were unleashed upon peaceful protestors, then whoever did it should be held accountable. And like I said, I am opposed to the pipeline and believe that anyone - farmers, Indians, whoever they may be - have a right to their property and the government cannot take it to build a pipeline. Not sure how I can state it any clearer.

If you voted for our President who used the F word during his campaign, mocked the disabled, and urged violence, then you brought this on yourself.

Yup. Rightist in disguise, pretending to not like either side. Always so transparent.

There are more than one of them on this forum. 😛

So he's not a citizen? I have no idea...never even heard of him until two nights ago. But yeah...then that definitely justifies the violence...right.

Odd that you say these thugs don't represent your views and yet you seem to be defending their actions.

Where did I defend their actions?

Stop being so obtuse and say what you want to say.

Just "drawing conclusions"... 😉

I am going to draw a conclusion. I have been reading your posts for a while now and I think you have no real beliefs. You just like to argue.

Oh, OK....so the fact that you disagree with my beliefs, or can't understand them because they don't fit into your neat little right vs. left compartmental view of the world...I guess that means I don't have any beliefs.

Yeah...And a white guy who dates black men is a white supremacist? Go figure.

And even if he is a racist douchebag...doesn't he have a right to free speech?

I never said anywhere that he didn't have the right. Why would you counter an argument that I didn't make? Why get upset at something I never said? This is why we can't have nice things.

And yes, Milo is a complicated person. Everyone has their type, but slave owners thought they were superior to their slave consorts. Not that Milo has ever said he supports slavery, but an ounce of perceived supremacy is still perceived supremacy.

Oh, OK....so the fact that you disagree with my beliefs, or can't understand them because they don't fit into your neat little right vs. left compartmental view of the world...I guess that means I don't have any beliefs.

Who said i disagreed with anything? You are all over the place. That makes it hard to agree or disagree. Like I said, you seem to just want to argue. That, to me, seems pretty pointless.If you have a position, state it. If you just want to argue, don't be surprised when people stop engaging with you. But stop the talking in circles without stating anything other than you disagree.

Oh, OK....so the fact that you disagree with my beliefs, or can't understand them because they don't fit into your neat little right vs. left compartmental view of the world...I guess that means I don't have any beliefs.

Who said i disagreed with anything? You are all over the place. That makes it hard to agree or disagree. Like I said, you seem to just want to argue. That, to me, seems pretty pointless.If you have a position, state it. If you just want to argue, don't be surprised when people stop engaging with you. But stop the talking in circles without stating anything other than you disagree.

If I have a position, state it?

I have made all these statements (see below) in my posts…but you would already know that if you had bothered to read them. I think these are pretty clear statements of my beliefs, ethics and positions on events being discussed. I’m sorry if you can’t understand them…I don’t know how to make them any clearer to help you. If you don’t want to engage it won’t hurt my feelings.

1) The Dems plan to put the country through probably 2 and 1/2 months of political theater and posturing regarding Gorsuch when they already know there is zero chance he will not be confirmed because the GOP will just use the "nuclear" option. I wish the GOP would just go ahead and use the nuclear option to save us all the wasted time and drama.

2) It is never right for anyone - on the right or the left - to initiate violence against others.

3) Dissent and peaceful protests are one thing...but destruction of property and physically attacking those who have opposing views is wrong no matter which side it is coming from.

4) If Trump made those statements (i.e. encouraging violence) then those statements should be called out and condemned. I don't think we should be condoning violence from either side. Nor do I believe we should be basing our personal code of ethics on what the president says. I believe that it is always wrong to initiate violence against another person or group of people.

5) I pointed out the hypocrisy of the left…those who preach tolerance/love while physically assaulting those who disagree with them, and violently suppressing free speech at the “birthplace of the free speech movement.”

6) I pointed out the incompetence of law enforcement at Berkeley.

7) I stated that I am opposed to the pipeline.

8) I stated that self-defense in response to violence is morally justified. Initiating violence is not.

9) I stated this about the Standing Rock incident: Assuming the protestors were peaceful and on their own property, then I would be opposed to any tactics being used against them whether by private security or government agents. If dogs were unleashed upon peaceful protestors, then whoever did it should be held accountable. And like I said, I am opposed to the pipeline and believe that anyone - farmers, Indians, whoever they may be - have a right to their property and the government cannot take it to build a pipeline. Not sure how I can state it any clearer.

My apologies if these positions are not clear enough for you...

[Edited on 2/4/2017 by Redfish7]

Oh, OK....so the fact that you disagree with my beliefs, or can't understand them because they don't fit into your neat little right vs. left compartmental view of the world...I guess that means I don't have any beliefs.

Who said i disagreed with anything? You are all over the place. That makes it hard to agree or disagree. Like I said, you seem to just want to argue. That, to me, seems pretty pointless.If you have a position, state it. If you just want to argue, don't be surprised when people stop engaging with you. But stop the talking in circles without stating anything other than you disagree.

If I have a position, state it?

I have made all these statements (see below) in my posts…but you would already know that if you had bothered to read them. I think these are pretty clear statements of my beliefs, ethics and positions on events being discussed. I’m sorry if you can’t understand them…I don’t know how to make them any clearer to help you. If you don’t want to engage it won’t hurt my feelings.

1) The Dems plan to put the country through probably 2 and 1/2 months of political theater and posturing regarding Gorsuch when they already know there is zero chance he will not be confirmed because the GOP will just use the "nuclear" option. I wish the GOP would just go ahead and use the nuclear option to save us all the wasted time and drama.

2) It is never right for anyone - on the right or the left - to initiate violence against others.

3) Dissent and peaceful protests are one thing...but destruction of property and physically attacking those who have opposing views is wrong no matter which side it is coming from.

4) If Trump made those statements (i.e. encouraging violence) then those statements should be called out and condemned. I don't think we should be condoning violence from either side. Nor do I believe we should be basing our personal code of ethics on what the president says. I believe that it is always wrong to initiate violence against another person or group of people.

5) I pointed out the hypocrisy of the left…those who preach tolerance/love while physically assaulting those who disagree with them, and violently suppressing free speech at the “birthplace of the free speech movement.”

6) I pointed out the incompetence of law enforcement at Berkeley.

7) I stated that I am opposed to the pipeline.

8) I stated that self-defense in response to violence is morally justified. Initiating violence is not.

9) I stated this about the Standing Rock incident: Assuming the protestors were peaceful and on their own property, then I would be opposed to any tactics being used against them whether by private security or government agents. If dogs were unleashed upon peaceful protestors, then whoever did it should be held accountable. And like I said, I am opposed to the pipeline and believe that anyone - farmers, Indians, whoever they may be - have a right to their property and the government cannot take it to build a pipeline. Not sure how I can state it any clearer.

My apologies if these positions are not clear enough for you...

[Edited on 2/4/2017 by Redfish7]

God. You are a conservative. Stop acting like you aren't.

Oh, OK....so the fact that you disagree with my beliefs, or can't understand them because they don't fit into your neat little right vs. left compartmental view of the world...I guess that means I don't have any beliefs.

Who said i disagreed with anything? You are all over the place. That makes it hard to agree or disagree. Like I said, you seem to just want to argue. That, to me, seems pretty pointless.If you have a position, state it. If you just want to argue, don't be surprised when people stop engaging with you. But stop the talking in circles without stating anything other than you disagree.

If I have a position, state it?

I have made all these statements (see below) in my posts…but you would already know that if you had bothered to read them. I think these are pretty clear statements of my beliefs, ethics and positions on events being discussed. I’m sorry if you can’t understand them…I don’t know how to make them any clearer to help you. If you don’t want to engage it won’t hurt my feelings.

1) The Dems plan to put the country through probably 2 and 1/2 months of political theater and posturing regarding Gorsuch when they already know there is zero chance he will not be confirmed because the GOP will just use the "nuclear" option. I wish the GOP would just go ahead and use the nuclear option to save us all the wasted time and drama.

2) It is never right for anyone - on the right or the left - to initiate violence against others.

3) Dissent and peaceful protests are one thing...but destruction of property and physically attacking those who have opposing views is wrong no matter which side it is coming from.

4) If Trump made those statements (i.e. encouraging violence) then those statements should be called out and condemned. I don't think we should be condoning violence from either side. Nor do I believe we should be basing our personal code of ethics on what the president says. I believe that it is always wrong to initiate violence against another person or group of people.

5) I pointed out the hypocrisy of the left…those who preach tolerance/love while physically assaulting those who disagree with them, and violently suppressing free speech at the “birthplace of the free speech movement.”

6) I pointed out the incompetence of law enforcement at Berkeley.

7) I stated that I am opposed to the pipeline.

8) I stated that self-defense in response to violence is morally justified. Initiating violence is not.

9) I stated this about the Standing Rock incident: Assuming the protestors were peaceful and on their own property, then I would be opposed to any tactics being used against them whether by private security or government agents. If dogs were unleashed upon peaceful protestors, then whoever did it should be held accountable. And like I said, I am opposed to the pipeline and believe that anyone - farmers, Indians, whoever they may be - have a right to their property and the government cannot take it to build a pipeline. Not sure how I can state it any clearer.

My apologies if these positions are not clear enough for you...

[Edited on 2/4/2017 by Redfish7]

God. You are a conservative. Stop acting like you aren't.

Which of my 9 statements do you disagree with?

10) I voted for a candidate that urged violence and said "they can go F themselves" during a campaign speech.

[Edited on 2/4/2017 by BoytonBrother]

10) I voted for a candidate that urged violence and said "they can go F themselves" during a campaign speech.

[Edited on 2/4/2017 by BoytonBrother]

Wrong. I didn't vote for Trump. Get your facts straight before you post nonsense.

yeah, sure.

10) I voted for a candidate that urged violence and said "they can go F themselves" during a campaign speech.

[Edited on 2/4/2017 by BoytonBrother]

Wrong. I didn't vote for Trump. Get your facts straight before you post nonsense.

You agree with just about everything Trump wants, but you didn't vote for him.

That is funny. Stop trying to play both sides. You aren't good at it. 😛 😛

10) I voted for a candidate that urged violence and said "they can go F themselves" during a campaign speech.

[Edited on 2/4/2017 by BoytonBrother]

Wrong. I didn't vote for Trump. Get your facts straight before you post nonsense.

You agree with just about everything Trump wants, but you didn't vote for him.

That is funny. Stop trying to play both sides. You aren't good at it. 😛 😛

Again...which of my 9 statements do you disagree with? Which of them do you think proves that I am a conservative? Do progressives not agree that violence is wrong?

You asked me to state my positions. I did. Not a single one of those positions indicates that I am conservative. And, no, I didn't vote for Trump. And in fact I stated that Trump should be called out and condemned if he encouraged violence, and I oppose his views on the pipeline. So none of my positions/statements specifically link me to conservatism, and some of my statements are in fact opposed to Trump. And yet you still want to label me a conservative and a Trump supporter. And you have yet to name a single one of my positions that you disagree with.

Conclude whatever you want...

What a world we live in when a white, gay, jewish man is labeled a nazi.

Hitler was of Jewish descent and was a homosexual. The Nazi phenomenon was and is a homoerotic death cult.

Would Hitler have been allowed to speak at Berkeley?

And where were the "corporate-military jackboot thugs" and "strong arm tactics" that you are so paranoid about? Where were they the other night at Berkeley? Apparently the police were mostly huddling inside one of the buildings watching the rioters set fires, attack innocent people, break windows, loot a Starbucks, etc. Were they ordered to stand down and allow the riot to happen in order to send a message to all other speakers who might be invited to speak in the future by the UC Berkeley College Republicans. Odd that not one single arrest was made.

And then when cops do try to do their job (at NYU)...they get berated by a hysterical left wing NYU professor who claims that instead of protecting college students they should instead attack the dissenters. Apparently free speech (or even the safety of students) no longer applies at College Republican events. Add this professor to the long list of liberals - like Ashley Judd - who are boldly going where no sane people have gone before.

[Edited on 2/4/2017 by Redfish7]

Would Hitler have been allowed to speak at Berkeley? And where were the "corporate-military jackboot thugs" and "strong arm tactics" that you are so paranoid about? Where were they the other night at Berkeley?

No, Hitler would have been shot, by me. Haha, got you going with that corporate military jackboot thug thing, huh?

No...didn't get me going. I don't think anyone likes it when the government uses jackboot thugs or strong arm tactics. But I'm just wondering why you seem to be so concerned about it when this administration is not currently using those types of tactics. Where is the evidence of these tactics being used? And neither is law enforcement. In fact, its just the opposite. They seem to just be standing around watching while thugs commit crimes.

alloak, I mean Redfish, the bottom line is that you voted for a guy that urged violence, etc. don't deny it, it's obvious you did. You can complain about the common American behaving badly, but you elected one of them to lead the country.

alloak, I mean Redfish, the bottom line is that you voted for a guy that urged violence, etc. don't deny it, it's obvious you did. You can complain about the common American behaving badly, but you elected one of them to lead the country.

I didn't vote for Trump. Didn't vote for Hillary either. Those are the facts. Believe what you want.

So...the bottom line, and what is really obvious...is that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

i doubt you're selling anyone with that