kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
From my perspective, if it's a direct, personal attack, it's even more reason to chuckle and ignore it.
Let Them Play CA
- Thread starter dean
- Start date
Nonsense
texanincali
SILVER ELITE
Debates are much easier when the other side inadvertently proves your point. Thanks.
Two nights ago between 3:30am and 4:30am Mahomes found the way to find 10 more touchdowns giving an amazing victory to the Chiefs. No one knows where and how this happened as there's not even one proof of happening but a win is a win. Who cares? TB defense was at their homes sleeping when this happened thinking they had won this easy but they're so wrong.
Anyone who questions this in any way will be called racist, bigot, conspiracy theorist, domestic terrorists and a traitor.
Anyone saying anything about it on social media will be censored and their profiles will be deleted. Crazy stuff, but don't you dare dispute it
Best come back ever. Congrats.
PS. Brady is still the GOAT regardless
Anyone who questions this in any way will be called racist, bigot, conspiracy theorist, domestic terrorists and a traitor.
Anyone saying anything about it on social media will be censored and their profiles will be deleted. Crazy stuff, but don't you dare dispute it
Best come back ever. Congrats.
PS. Brady is still the GOAT regardless
@EOTL - Just wanted to educate you on your favorite word. Please read below, but first make sure to gather your feeling about Christians or Trump Supporter before doing so. Please report back with your findings after reading. I'm sure many here would like to know!
Definition of bigot
Noun
1. a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.
2. a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group with hatred and intolerance
Definition of bigot
Noun
1. a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.
2. a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group with hatred and intolerance
MicPaPa
GOLD
With all do respect, I felt my question was clear and this does not answer the question...but, as for Bush/Trump the response from @Grace T. above is solid, so I'll defer to that. As for the rest, it was gibberish and I have no response.
Back to my original question...you raised principled conservatism and I was sincerely interested in your ideas of what it is. So I'll ask again: Specifically, which Trump actions, policies and nominations weren't conservative?
I have no intention of going deep into the weeds with someone who can't tell the difference between "the shining city on the hill" and "find 12,000 votes".
Two core principles of conservatism are responsibility for your own actions and a respect for the rule of law. Trump's actions on Jan 06 violated both of those.
It is not a conservative act to assemble a mob, tell them to fight, and pretend to be surprised when your violent mob beats a man to death. That is what mobs do; there is no reason to be surprised.
And, if you are still pretending that Trump's speech played no role in the murder, I really can't help you.
texanincali
SILVER ELITE
Not sure if it was intentional or not, but you bring up a really good point. There was a time when bigot, racist, homophobe, etc all carried legitimate meaning and were reserved for those that truly held those views. These words have basically lost all their meaning and significance because they have become part of the everyday vernacular and are thrown out without any thought. This has done nothing but put the real bigots and racists into a much larger group that ultimately diminishes their terrible beliefs. If we can get back to calling out true bigots, racists, etc, we might start making some headway again.
]
I'd be o.k. with this if you hold Kamala Harris and some of the Ds responsible for the mob violence and murder which took places in the April-June riots. If the standard is you can't work up and encourage a crowd which may become a mob, the same standard has to apply across parties.
p.s. populism (as opposed to conservativism) is not necessarily big on responsibility for your own actions. It actually builds into the politics of resentment which the left pioneered, only in this case against the elites, the moneyed, and the powerful.
I'd be o.k. with this if you hold Kamala Harris and some of the Ds responsible for the mob violence and murder which took places in the April-June riots. If the standard is you can't work up and encourage a crowd which may become a mob, the same standard has to apply across parties.
p.s. populism (as opposed to conservativism) is not necessarily big on responsibility for your own actions. It actually builds into the politics of resentment which the left pioneered, only in this case against the elites, the moneyed, and the powerful.
Kamala Harris incited a mob in an effort to overthrow democracy?
I thought I was pretty clear in my opposition to last summer’s mob violence. Anyone who attends a riot is partly responsible for the violence inherent in the riot. That goes ten or a hundred fold if you are a public figure and allow your image to be used to promote the riot.
For example, by putting yourself at the front of the march during the peaceful phase- then somehow being invisible when it’s time to ask everyone to go home instead of looting Target.
“a crowd which may become a mob”? Don’t kid yourself. It’s a mob as soon as it has been gathered. If you don’t have sufficient security in place to disband your mob, don’t host the event.
It was pretty common for left wing leaders to join the BLM marches. They like to get out in front so the base knows they were there for the struggle.
I don’t remember many of them out there with bull horns at 5PM asking people to disperse and go home. Kudos to those that did.
I think most showed up for the photo op, then made sure to get out before the looting started. Did you think Trump was clever enough to think of that trick on his own?
You guys getting in some games?
At least you are consistent. I respect that. Under the definition you just made, even the peaceful BLM protests would constitute a mob because they had no means of controlling it if it went out of control and they were significantly large enough that a few bad elements could make the thing go out of control quickly. Not sure I agree, because I think the right to protest is a fundamental American right that should be exercised responsibly, but I appreciate the consistency.
Apparently espola believes mobs are only bad if they try to overthrow democracy, never mind the body and injury count of the spring-summer riots is higher than the riot at the Capitol. Apparently, whether a mob is bad or good, depends on the motives of a mob (which BTW, is a recipe for mob rule).
Desert Hound
DA
Well he also believes like many what happened was an insurrection. It wasn't close to one. But it is something dutifully repeated on the news and by D leaders, so the followers follow along with that thought process.
You didn't answer the question.
The sitting President sent a mob to the Capitol to disrupt the process of replacing him, thus overturning a Constitutional process as practiced since George Washington was first elected. How is that not an insurrection?
MicPaPa
GOLD
I cannot say I blame you for not wanting to get into the weeds when holding a weak hand. Unless you have been in a coma for over 30 years, you would understand the days of taking the high road, political civility, and “The Shining City on the Hill”, are long gone. Actually, the ones in need of help are the weak-kneed and spineless (R)’s like; Bush, McCain, Romney, Cheney’s Daughter and those who support and yearn for them and their...continue to lose, BUT with grace, approach to election, all while seeking...the never to be had acceptance...by the left and their acolytes.
Let me add to the @Grace T. comment below...So, if I follow your point, I guess because “Bush lied people died” it makes him a murderer? (not to mention all the dark evilness of his VP Darth Cheney)…and thus, all those who voted for him support a murderer, do I have it right? I do acknowledge that you and I have common ground…as we have been told at every turn for many years Bush, McCain, Romney et al., are racist, sexist, homophobic etc., along with anyone who supports them. Although, the left has added the following to Trump and 74+ million citizens: nazi, white supremacist, insurrectionist, and domestic terrorist worth of reeducation camps and drone strikes…to which you appear to shrug shoulders at, if not tacitly agree with.
Since you continue to avoid providing any nominations or policies that are not solidly conservative and continue playing small ball…I’ll assume your main issue with Trump is probably something like: “the bad orange man says and texts mean things”…which is the same mental derangement the left and never-trumpers continue to have failed to come to grips with even to this day. Aside from maybe grade school, popularity & personality contests have no place in presidential elections …especially not for battling in the current savage political environment. You see, it is you and your type of Republican who gave rise to the election of Trump…and continue to prove you are no match for the brand of politics the leftist and their media puppets play…which in turn will be utterly useless in stopping the damage they have already done, and will continue to do, to this Great Country.
I am seriously interested in your thoughts on all of Trump's nominations and policies...but will admit, I am not be holding my breath.
BTW, if I am to understand your shallow "*little* party" comment correctly, I'd say the below NBC poll from January 13, 2021 would clearly support your point... although, with the only exception being, you would be the one hosting a “*little* party.”
MicPaPa
GOLD
...and then there is this:
Mitt Romney marches with Black Lives Matter protesters, becoming first GOP senator to join them - CBS News
Maybe Mitt should be on the hook for all BLM's atrocities, eh? Funny to watch so-called "principled conservatives" and ilk pretzel themselves.