I’ve really got to get with the program. Every time I see one of these threads, I think, “why are we supposed to be pissed off at the Bureau of Land Management this time?”
But seriously, although I don’t hold with violent tactics to shut down Trump’s speech, that doesn’t make him any less of a bad person with bad ideas. Perhaps there are people who would essentially change their vote on a such a whim, but I’m not one of them.
Incorrect. In the 90s there were “safe zones” to cordon off anti-abortion protesters…they were called “buffer zones”, but same thing.
So they were invented by Democrats at a state level. Unless someone can find Bush I or Reagan using them. Which wouldn’t surprise me even a little.
Also, I can’t get used to the “BLM” initials. I keep wondering why the Bureau of Land Management is so pissed off. 
It’s not the poster it’s the behavior of leftist tyrants. The shouting down of free speech at a private event while paid for security sits on their thumbs at the order of the administration is infuriating.
Ironically, one of the people being shouted down wants to use the full power of the federal government to investigate and prosecute any individuals and media outlets who say anything negative about him.
So you might want to recalibrate your definition of “tyrant” there.
I pretty much take it as an axiom that extremists on one side benefit from the actions of extremist on the other, and vice versa.
The American right benefits from terrorism, terrorists benefit from the “War on Terror”.
How, perzackly, does protesting someone’s opinions equate to preventing them from speaking said opinions? Has anyone noticed reluctance on the part of Mr. Trump when it comes to expressing such opinions? His actual opinions are even worse, but the liberal tyrants won’t let him say it?
There’s a weird echo in here.
Another person who was wondering what the Bureau of Land Management had done this time…
Why were they disrupting Milo Yiannopoulos? What the hell does he have to do with Donald Trump or with racism in America?
I gather from all the insane /r/all threads I ignore on Reddit that Milo is a Trump supporter and is seen as a key voice for Trump among the sort of people who use and deplore the acronym SJW.
I suppose you didn’t take the 2 minutes to watch the video? It’s not hard to click the little link and see. It’s a private event and the guy’s stage is stormed, some woman threatens to hit him, some man threatens to hit him, and the retarded protesters can’t stop blowing a whistle into a mic. This all happens while the security the speaker was forced to hire is prevented from acting by the emasculated college administrators. All this leading to a half-assed apology from the president of the college.
But if you don’t see how this is preventing someone from freely speaking at a private event you choose to be blind.
Note to Gyrate: Trump wasn’t there. They weren’t shouting down Trump. Furthermore, and really off topic does Trump want UK style libel laws? If so it seems to work in the UK just like democratic socialism (Dezism?). works in the Nordic nations. Why not copy Europe with regards to press as well?
It was legitimately confusing when people were comparing the protest movement to the Malheur occupation, since I legitimately always thought they were comparing the Malheur occupiers with the Bureau of Land Management (even though Malheur is administered by the FWS).
Yeah I think of the bureau as well, but since they are just about as equally despised by many elements of the right it almost doesn’t much matter. Whichever BLM is being criticized in the thread title, I can pretty much guess the OP is coming from a more conservative POV :).
Excuse given to post the sentiments of Aaron Mcgruder via his old boondocks show I just discovered in a couple of clips.
Alternate History MLK survives from stasis speech:
And of course some random thoughts / depictions of BET :
Hey OP, to me and many others, BLM means **“Bureau of Land Management”. **Just sayin.
Who or what is BLM? Who decides if they are, or are not, BLM? These people, were they acting on the authority from the BLM Central Committee? If a bunch of rowdy people decided to get out of hand, and someone said “They’re BLM!”, how would you know?
You could say the same thing for any member of any organization that doesn’t require formal approval for membership or action.
Your point being?
I’m no conservative. I voted for Kerry/mccain/obama.
So mostly democrat, McCain was mainly because I was worried Obama would pull out of Iraq too quickly due to his more Bernie esque rhetoric at the time of running for office and I thought that would cause issues. I bought into the notion of you break it you bought it, and the left coming out and saying, yeah… sorry about that, not our problem anymore, It was BUSH who caused this issue, so even though we are the leaders of the same nation we’re just going to wash our hands of any responsibility of a better ending.
What I’ve always been though is EXTREMELY Hostile to belligerence, of shouting people down. There is a bit of a basic decency and law and order streak in me. I am not hostile to the police, most of the time when someone gets shot and is rushing the officers I blame the ones rushing. I’m mixed black but feel ZERO racial solidarity with people on the receiving end of violence that they took part in encouraging just because we have a similar skin color.
This even extends to things like debate rules, I listened to a podcast called radio lab with a topic about debate
Where some black participants changed the topic of the debate and went on their own rant and got accolades and **spoilers won the effing championship. It absolutely infuriated me that this was allowed to stand, that these mealy mouthed judges/administrators were so flippant about any standards and rules. It’s close to anarchy in my view.
Not to say that all the standards were worth keeping, I never knew national debate devolved into spitting out as many points as possible in a sort of fast talking hotwheels guy way so the measure of success was less about the quality of argument, but the quantity of arguments tossed out, and how many were rebutted. An arms race over quantity of arguments is a TRASH system of debate and deserves to be burned to a cinder, but what they did to win was ridiculous.
… anyway, there it is. Not a conservative, but there are some conservative impulses against anarchy and anything goes when it comes to standards and debates and how you challenge people. If it were up to me, I’d have had officers drag them away and locked out of the event, and if they tried to break in, drag them to jail for their belligerence.
Single Jewish Women?
Several Japanese Weevils?
Soviet Jumpsuit Workers?
and why do they use the acronym if they deplore it so badly?