Fareed (CNN): Threat to Democracy from the left

[fskimospy]

So nothing that shows 10's of thousands protesting with thousands of those rioting? You found one case, which I agree isn't good and am glad justice was served. Now can you find anything on the scale of the left's tantrum when Trump won? Anything that shows the violence as wide spread over Obama winning? Not just some generic and likely untrustworthy generic graph of all terror?

Sure sounds like conservatives came a lot closer to burning a neighborhood down than liberals did, huh.

 

[Vic]

So nothing that shows 10's of thousands protesting with thousands of those rioting? You found one case, which I agree isn't good and am glad justice was served. Now can you find anything on the scale of the left's tantrum when Trump won? Anything that shows the violence as wide spread over Obama winning? Not just some generic and likely untrustworthy generic graph of all terror?

There were never thousands rioting. Not when Obama won, and not when Trump won.
You're just playing the usual right wing game where you make up lies to justify framing other people as threats and so shouldn't be allowed freedom.

 

[Moonbeam]

So nothing that shows 10's of thousands protesting with thousands of those rioting? You found one case, which I agree isn't good and am glad justice was served. Now can you find anything on the scale of the left's tantrum when Trump won? Anything that shows the violence as wide spread over Obama winning? Not just some generic and likely untrustworthy generic graph of all terror?

Them damn graphs.....................

 

[SlowSpyder]

Sure sounds like conservatives came a lot closer to burning a neighborhood down than liberals did, huh.

No, you found a single isolated incidence of violence. I posted a link showing tens of thousands of tantrum throwers took to the streets with hundreds of arrests and incidents of violence and vandalism all directly related to America soundly rejecting the left's candidates in 2016. You posted a generic weak "the right commits more terror!" response. You're moving the goal posts everywhere you want. When Obama won, the right did nothing near the scale of the left when Trump won.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Them damn graphs.....................

You can be VP of my fan club.

 

[Jhhnn]

So nothing that shows 10's of thousands protesting with thousands of those rioting? You found one case, which I agree isn't good and am glad justice was served. Now can you find anything on the scale of the left's tantrum when Trump won? Anything that shows the violence as wide spread over Obama winning? Not just some generic and likely untrustworthy generic graph of all terror?

Trump winning was an even bigger temper tantrum.

 

[Vic]

No, you found a single isolated incidence of violence. I posted a link showing tens of thousands of tantrum throwers took to the streets with hundreds of arrests and incidents of violence and vandalism all directly related to America soundly rejecting the left's candidates in 2016. You posted a generic weak "the right commits more terror!" response. You're moving the goal posts everywhere you want. When Obama won, the right did nothing near the scale of the left when Trump won.

Now it's ten of thousands? lol
The link you posted said nothing of the kind. There were like 100 arrests in total, almost all of them not dispersing/clearing the street.

But this is how the right suppresses freedom, through fear and lies. Just like when McCarthy started making up numbers about communists. Or when Trump claimed that Mexicans are rapists. Through lies and fear, the right finds all the justification it needs.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Now it's ten of thousands? lol
The link you posted said nothing of the kind. There were like 100 arrests in total, almost all of them not dispersing/clearing the street.

But this is how the right suppresses freedom, through fear and lies. Just like when McCarthy started making up numbers about communists. Or when Trump claimed that Mexicans are rapists. Through lies and fear, the right finds all the justification it needs.

This is the headline from the link I posted. FFS...

"Tens of Thousands Protest Trump Election Victory, 124 Arrested"

McCarthy? In the 50's I would have been on your side, but it isn't the 50's any more. The left is the McCarthyism of today.

 

[Moonbeam]

Now it's ten of thousands? lol
The link you posted said nothing of the kind. There were like 100 arrests in total, almost all of them not dispersing/clearing the street.

But this is how the right suppresses freedom, through fear and lies. Just like when McCarthy started making up numbers about communists. Or when Trump claimed that Mexicans are rapists. Through lies and fear, the right finds all the justification it needs.

What happened SlowSpider? You see the boogieman and walk away? You got liberals under your bed?

 

[Vic]

This is the headline from the link I posted. FFS...

"Tens of Thousands Protest Trump Election Victory, 124 Arrested"

McCarthy? In the 50's I would have been on your side, but it isn't the 50's any more. The left is the McCarthyism of today.

So now you're saying it's wrong merely to exercise one's free speech right to protest?

And no, you would have sided with McCarthy. For the exact same reasons too. "Them commies are going to take away our freedoms so we gotta take theirs away first." Nothing, literally nothing, has changed about right wing ideology since the 50s.

 

[realibrad]

What's to disagree with? The right's argument in many of those campus incidents has been that not giving some radical righty a microphone is the same as silencing them. Which is, of course, ridiculous, which can be evidenced by the fact that they would not want every radical lefty to have a microphone.

See, this is why I asked you and gave you the context.

There are many times when a club wants to have a speaker come. They reserve the room, and let people know that the speaker is coming. Those who do not want to listen are free not to go. Those who want to listen are free to go. Yet, we have seen many times where people on the Left have tried to get the event shut down. The argument is that people with a bad set of beliefs should not be allowed a microphone to spread those beliefs.

So, no straw man. Are you saying you disagree or agree with that? I get that you are not for violence and censoring everything everywhere. Above is what I believe was the point of Fareed.

 

[Moonbeam]

So now you're saying it's wrong merely to exercise one's free speech right to protest?

And no, you would have sided with McCarthy. For the exact same reasons too. "Them commies are going to take away our freedoms so we gotta take theirs away first." Nothing, literally nothing, has changed about right wing ideology since the 50s.

In 50 years conservatives will be saying they would never have bought into this leftist fascism thingi. It will be all about the sexual violence of women.

 

[Jhhnn]

McCarthy? In the 50's I would have been on your side, but it isn't the 50's any more. The left is the McCarthyism of today.

Amusing you'd put it in such terms-

 

[Moonbeam]

See, this is why I asked you and gave you the context.

There are many times when a club wants to have a speaker come. They reserve the room, and let people know that the speaker is coming. Those who do not want to listen are free not to go. Those who want to listen are free to go. Yet, we have seen many times where people on the Left have tried to get the event shut down. The argument is that people with a bad set of beliefs should not be allowed a microphone to spread those beliefs.

So, no straw man. Are you saying you disagree or agree with that? I get that you are not for violence and censoring everything everywhere. Above is what I believe was the point of Fareed.

Curious as to how you would address the fact that our Western notions of free speech are being used as tools of warfare against us by Putin's Russia?

 

[realibrad]

Curious as to how you would address the fact that our Western notions of free speech are being used as tools of warfare against us by Putin's Russia?

Those "weapons" are only an issue when they are spread and not countered. Russia is a massive threat to our country. The problem is that ideas can be spread through so many methods that are not in the public eye. Creating the incentive for underground communities where wrong things are spread is almost impossible to stop. What is better is to let people speak about it and show how those ideas are wrong.

 

[Thebobo]

Going to take a break and watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-Ydoh_5EjU

 

[SlowSpyder]

So now you're saying it's wrong merely to exercise one's free speech right to protest?

And no, you would have sided with McCarthy. For the exact same reasons too. "Them commies are going to take away our freedoms so we gotta take theirs away first." Nothing, literally nothing, has changed about right wing ideology since the 50s.

No, I argue for freedoms and liberties, to not have to succumb to group think, for equality and against racism. These are all traits the left is opposite of today. Like I said, my values haven't changed from when I felt I was a lot more Dem than Repub, but the party that represents them have. Today the Dems are the oppressors.

 

[mect]

No, you found a single isolated incidence of violence. I posted a link showing tens of thousands of tantrum throwers took to the streets with hundreds of arrests and incidents of violence and vandalism all directly related to America soundly rejecting the left's candidates in 2016.

As was pointed out, there is nothing wrong with tens of thousands of people protesting.
I would hardly call losing the popular vote as America soundly rejecting the left's candidate.

You posted a generic weak "the right commits more terror!" response. You're moving the goal posts everywhere you want. When Obama won, the right did nothing near the scale of the left when Trump won.

It depends on what you mean my scale. Scale in terms of protests? You're right. But then, democrats elected an relatively popular president overall, whereas republicans elected the least popular president in modern history.

The problem is you are conflating protests and destructive violence into one, when they are clearly not. If you look only at violence, I think you'll be much harder pressed to make the case.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/34...lection-spurs-race-crimes-around-the-USA.html
https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-b...publicans-employ-double-standard-to-discredit
https://www.theguardian.com/comment.../oct/25/barack-obama-vandalism-north-carolina

 

[SlowSpyder]

Going to take a break and watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-Ydoh_5EjU

You should click the link in my sig for the penultimate stupidity by an elected official.

 

[Vic]

See, this is why I asked you and gave you the context.

There are many times when a club wants to have a speaker come. They reserve the room, and let people know that the speaker is coming. Those who do not want to listen are free not to go. Those who want to listen are free to go. Yet, we have seen many times where people on the Left have tried to get the event shut down. The argument is that people with a bad set of beliefs should not be allowed a microphone to spread those beliefs.

So, no straw man. Are you saying you disagree or agree with that? I get that you are not for violence and censoring everything everywhere. Above is what I believe was the point of Fareed.

If they paid for the room, or if the venue owner gave them permission, then they should be allowed to use it and speak. However, their opponents still have the right to peacefully dissuade the owner from providing the room, or to advise people not to go. I disagree with that, but as long as no violence occurs, that's free speech too.

 

[Thebobo]

No, I argue for freedoms and liberties, to not have to succumb to group think, for equality and against racism. These are all traits the left is opposite of today. Like I said, my values haven't changed from when I felt I was a lot more Dem than Repub, but the party that represents them have. Today the Dems are the oppressors.

I thought I knew whos alts you were because when I pointed out to you while back you disappeared until now, nevertheless I will figure it out, again, we all will.

 

[realibrad]

If they paid for the room, or if the venue owner gave them permission, then they should be allowed to use it and speak. However, their opponents still have the right to peacefully dissuade the owner from providing the room, or to advise people not to go. I disagree with that, but as long as no violence occurs, that's free speech too.

So long as you mean argue for/against when you say "peacefully dissuade" then I agree. Violence should not be the only bar though. I'm sure you mean the threat or act of violence, but, I think that bar is still too high.

That said, do you still feel like I built a strawman from my original post? Seems there was something to clear up on my end and would validate asking the question no?

 

[Jhhnn]

Those "weapons" are only an issue when they are spread and not countered. Russia is a massive threat to our country. The problem is that ideas can be spread through so many methods that are not in the public eye. Creating the incentive for underground communities where wrong things are spread is almost impossible to stop. What is better is to let people speak about it and show how those ideas are wrong.

Heh. The Russians just amplified the Trump/GOP line. Their command of social media was masterful but their message certainly wasn't original.

 

[soundforbjt]

I thought I knew whos alts you were because when I pointed out to you while back you disappeared until now, nevertheless I will figure it out, again, we all will.

Think of it in the reverse, who haven't we seen since Slow started posting again? I can think of one...

 

[Vic]

No, I argue for freedoms and liberties, to not have to succumb to group think, for equality and against racism. These are all traits the left is opposite of today. Like I said, my values haven't changed from when I felt I was a lot more Dem than Repub, but the party that represents them have. Today the Dems are the oppressors.

So you lump large groups of people together, but you don't succumb to group think?
You claim to be for equality and against racism, but align yourself with the political side that is opposed to diversity, calls the KKK and Nazis very fine people, and claims that women can't be believed?
And finally, you want us to believe that the political party with almost no political power are the oppressors..
How very interesting..