Jump to content

Recommended Posts

trump hates our vets...but the cult still loves trump. 🤡🌎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Smokesdawg said:

Ah yes; the singing of songs equivalence vs a mid-life crisis boat parade.

As opposed to your screeching you should consider it fortunate that at least someone in here can carry a tune.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, lynched1 said:

As opposed to your screeching you should consider it fortunate that at least someone in here can carry a tune.

While we are at it, he just started screeching for his supporters to harass the widow of Steve Jobs.  A totally normal thing to do for someone confident in their position and status in life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has president sh¡t- for -brains tweeted out any more insulting gems about the kids who commit their lives to fight and protect the rights that we all say we love and enjoy having?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Smokesdawg said:

While we are at it, he just started screeching for his supporters to harass the widow of Steve Jobs.  A totally normal thing to do for someone confident in their position and status in life. 

I assume he’s probably golfing now. You’ll have to wait till the round is over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Lloyd said:

Overwhelming violence is what started it. People aren't protesting because the weather's nice. They're protesting police violence. If a leader says "Hey, I'm listening.", no the protests won't magically go away, but they'll slowly cool down. If a leader shouts "LAW AND ORDER"...well not shout, but tweet...the protests ramp up because you just turned it into a pissing contest. And then the dogs, firehoses and riot gear come out, and I see no reason history would look at this differently than we look at videos of that crap in the 1960's - which I'm sure a segment of society also justified and defended.. 

Send in the marines? Sure. And I guess you'll send them in again, the next time this happens. And the next time. Unless you're expecting the results to be complete subjugation. 

I don't know why it so hard for people to see the difference in what's happening out there.  Yes, there were protests.  The protests were in reaction to the George Floyd incident.  Then, opportunists and professional anarchists hijacked the cause and started rioting and creating wanton destruction.  The more the left tries to overlap these two things as if they are the same the more they lose the trust of the country. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Norseman said:

I don't know why it so hard for people to see the difference in what's happening out there.  Yes, there were protests.  The protests we in reaction to the George Floyd incident.  Then, opportunists and professional anarchists hijacked the cause and started rioting and creating wanton destruction.  The more the left tries to overlap these two things as if they are the same the more they lose the trust of the country. 

I think Trump has made it clear he opposes any sort of protest, peaceful or not.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

I think Trump has made it clear he opposes any sort of protest, peaceful or not.

Verifiably false.  In fact he has said exactly the opposite.  The problem is, Democrats believe that tearing down statues, destroying state and federal property and creating armed insurrections in our cities are "peaceful protests".  They are not. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/politics/trump-says-he-is-an-ally-of-all-peaceful-protesters/2020/06/02/b45e77f0-1750-4e6b-aa69-ae0fa42e5f6a_video.html

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

I think Trump has made it clear he opposes any sort of protest, peaceful or not.

Case in point.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

I think Trump has made it clear he opposes any sort of protest, peaceful or not.

Has he made a federal RICO case out of it yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Norseman said:

Verifiably false.  In fact he has said exactly the opposite.  The problem is, Democrats believe that tearing down statues, destroying state and federal property and creating armed insurrections in our cities are "peaceful protests".  They are not. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/politics/trump-says-he-is-an-ally-of-all-peaceful-protesters/2020/06/02/b45e77f0-1750-4e6b-aa69-ae0fa42e5f6a_video.html

Athletes kneeling, having messages on their jerseys, or not playing a game or two all caused him to comment negatively. As did companies changing names or logos that had racist origins. All peaceful acts. So it is verifiable true. He opposes peaceful protests all the time. 

  • Like 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boogyman said:

Athletes kneeling, having messages on their jerseys, or not playing a game or two all caused him to comment negatively. As did companies changing names or logos that had racist origins. All peaceful acts. So it is verifiable true. He opposes peaceful protests all the time. 

Again, mixing up the narrative to fit your rhetoric.  There is a difference between disagreeing with the reason for the protest and/or the way it is conducted and opposing peaceful protest.  For example, ALL the democrats opposed the re-open America protests, but that doesn't mean they don't support peaceful protest in general.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guy who gassed peaceful protestors to stage a photo op is actually very supportive of the right to protest. Makes sense. 
 

Remember guys - he’a not a Trump supporter. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Norseman said:

Again, mixing up the narrative to fit your rhetoric.  There is a difference between disagreeing with the reason for the protest and/or the way it is conducted and opposing peaceful protest.  For example, ALL the democrats opposed the re-open America protests, but that doesn't mean they don't support peaceful protest in general.  

Trump wasn't expressing a disagreement with the principles of the athletes' protest. He absolutely disagreed with their right to protest, and mentioned multiples times that they should be fired for it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lloyd said:

Trump wasn't expressing a disagreement with the principles of the athletes' protest. He absolutely disagreed with their right to protest, and mentioned multiples times that they should be fired for it. 

Not true.  He just disagrees with the narrative of systemic racism.  There are many ways to protest without trashing our country and its history.  He also questioned why the NFL as their employer allowed it, which I think is a fair argument.  My employer wouldn't allow me to kneel during our CEO's address in protest, would yours?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

The guy who gassed peaceful protestors to stage a photo op is actually very supportive of the right to protest. Makes sense. 
 

Remember guys - he’a not a Trump supporter. 

Thought that was a bad move for him optically, but at the end of the day....They were asked to move.  They were told to move.  They didn't move.  So they got the gas.  If I'm out peacefully protesting and some cop tells me to move or else, I'm moving. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Norseman said:

Not true.  He just disagrees with the narrative of systemic racism. 

No...definitely true. Extremely true. He didn't like them protesting and he wanted to see them fired (or in reality, just turn it into a wedge issue for folks like you).    

Quote

There are many ways to protest without trashing our country and its history. 

They're protesting. They're silent. They're nonviolent.  Trying to grade them on patriotic style points just shows that you also don't respect their right to silent peaceful protest - which we knew already, but still. I don't think there's been a single black protest in the country's history that wasn't labeled as some fashion of "un-American"

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

Again, mixing up the narrative to fit your rhetoric.  There is a difference between disagreeing with the reason for the protest and/or the way it is conducted and opposing peaceful protest.  For example, ALL the democrats opposed the re-open America protests, but that doesn't mean they don't support peaceful protest in general.  

Speaking publicly a negative way against something is opposing it. Even more so if the person doing the speaking has any sort of influence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lloyd said:

No...definitely true. Extremely true. He didn't like them protesting and he wanted to see them fired (or in reality, just turn it into a wedge issue for folks like you).    

They're protesting. They're silent. They're nonviolent.  Trying to grade them on patriotic style points just shows that you also don't respect their right to silent peaceful protest - which we knew already, but still. I don't think there's been a single black protest in the country's history that wasn't labeled as some fashion of "un-American"

 

Look, we can agree that the bible photo up was a blown call.  I don't pretend to know what the hell he was trying to accomplish there, but all he did was create more echos in the chamber. 

That being said, there is a clear difference between criticizing protesters and how they are going about it and being anti peaceful protest.  You can make all the connections you want, but I'll go back to my example of the re-open America protests.  I don't think that Pelosi is anti protest just because she very loudly denounced those back in April.  I don't think the state governors and mayors that worked to break those protests up are against peaceful protest in general.  Do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

Thought that was a bad move for him optically, but at the end of the day....They were asked to move.  They were told to move.  They didn't move.  So they got the gas.  If I'm out peacefully protesting and some cop tells me to move or else, I'm moving. 

So just protest until you’re told not to? Not a very strong protest.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Norseman said:

Look, we can agree that the bible photo up was a blown call.  I don't pretend to know what the hell he was trying to accomplish there, but all he did was create more echos in the chamber. 

That being said, there is a clear difference between criticizing protesters and how they are going about it and being anti peaceful protest.  You can make all the connections you want, but I'll go back to my example of the re-open America protests.  I don't think that Pelosi is anti protest just because she very loudly denounced those back in April.  I don't think the state governors and mayors that worked to break those protests up are against peaceful protest in general.  Do you?

Again - Trump didn't counterpunch them on issues. He counterpunched them on protesting in general. It wasn't "Hey let's sit down and talk about how police are nice, and here to help you." It was "fire them".  

 

You're doing that thing again where you're "totally not a Trump guy" but you're taking his shotgun approach to political messaging and trying to delicately align all the buckshot into a clear and concise message that the rest of the universe didn't see.  "What Trump was saying, guys, is that he respects their right to protest, but he disagrees that there's any form of imbalance in the way minorities are treated by law enforcement. And when he said 'fire them' it was in regards to their roles as employees, you see. If they were regular people on the streets, he'd simply teargas them on the way to church and that would be the end of it!" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jsvand12 said:

So protest until you’re asked not to? Not a very strong protest.

Ya see, here's the thing.  Liberals love to protest, they're always protesting some thing or another and it rarely has much effect.  What they love even more than protesting is the opportunity to make those protests more optically efficient.  So, when cops ask them to move and they don't they KNOW they're going to get the gas.  They WANT the gas.  

Why you ask?  Just so they can find the closest TV camera and scream and whine about how horribly they've been treated after they get the gas.  Then, the media broadcasts their whining all over the place and left gets upset.  When the left gets upset, they get out and vote and Democrats get elected.  

This is the game and it's all theatrics. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...