I’m “off on” highlighting the absurdity of madmonk28 blaming “the right wing” collectively for the actions of a handful of extremists.
No it doesn’t.
But seriously, no, there will never be an end to the retribution cycle because people are too weak to end it. An overwhelming number of people feel like they are “owed” the opportunity to strike back, that revenge is a good thing, and that punishment is a meaningful deterrent of future bad behavior. As a society, people lack the strength of character to put their own egos aside and just let shit go.
Tapping into that natural tendency in order to maintain social chaos is a different thing altogether. That’s just politics.
I will agree that discourse is rougher than would be best in a civil society, but I entirely disagree that there is anything on the left that compares to limbaugh or hannity or coulter in sheer hatred. Did you condemn limbaugh when he went after clinton? and by clinton, I mean Chelsea, when she was a kid, and not connected to the administration in any way other than being their kid?
You are quick to call out a comedian for talking about an employee of the administration, are you as quick to go after your side when they go after children?
Even your vernacular, “dribbling out” shows contempt and hatred. And yes, I have, I heard her say that when administration officials are in public, you should make a scene.
I don’t really agree with that, but it is not the same as the claim that trump has made that she is advocating violence. That is a lie. She is asking people to exercise their first amendment rights, that is all. Do you support trump’s lies in reaction to her calling for protest against his policies?
She is a single congressperson. I don’t agree with the actions that she is advocating, but the actions that she is advocating are far less heinous than many right wing congressmen have called for. What she is calling for is actually legal and a constitutional right.
Finally, there is not an equivalence of actions. The trump admin is causing real harm to real people, and calling that out is not an equivalent action. Even protesting against admin officials in public is not the same as taking people’s kids away in a fashion in which, many will never be reunited with their families.
So, yeah, unless you feel that having your dinner ruined is worse than having your children kidnapped, and held without any knowledge as to what will come to them, then no, both sides are not the same, and attempts to paint it that way are simply the failure of a party that tries to justify causing harm to others for the simple sake of causing harm to others.
No, I don’t see it stopping in the foreseeable future. Something awful will happen, most likely bloodshed, people will forget, it will start up again, something awful will happen, etc.
I genuinely have no idea what you’re referring to here. What are these heinous / illegal / unconstitutional things “many right wing congressmen have called for”?
The right wing never stops congratulating itself on the fantasy of hanging government officials from lampposts if they overstep their authority.
I guess being asked to leave a restaurant is pretty much the same thing.
This is a classic Prisoner’s Dilemma. It’s like nuclear disarmament: The only way you get disarmament is if both do so, preferably simultaneously. Yet, each side fears being the one to lay down arms while the other side doesn’t (and thereby retains an arms advantage.) So neither side can or will.
Nobody wants to be the “civil” side and take potshots while letting the other side do the potshotting.
Potshooting?
Given your inability to notice that I did not say anything about illegal or unconstitutional in my post, I can see why you would have such difficulties with what really is a pretty simple issue.
Heinous, yes, unconstitutional, maybe, illegal, well no, they are congress people, they want to make the heinous legal, or keep it legal if it is already so.
Since it appears as though you have never heard a right wing congressperson say anything at all racist or otherwise heinous, I’ll start you off easy.
Here’s Steve King. Defend his statements if you like.
If Steve King isn’t a true Scotsman republican, it’s not that hard to find congresspeople and other prominent republicans being hateful.
I’m cheered by this thread. Whenever conservatives feel secure in their power, they behave like rabid wolves and openly mock those they are abusing. The only time conservatives talk about courtesy and restraint is when they’re out of power or expect to lose it in the near future. So I see the OP as an admission that the Republicans expect to do poorly in the November elections.
I think you’ve misunderstood. I have little doubt some Republicans have said things you consider hurtful or mean. Your claim was a bit more specific than that though. You said: “the actions that she is advocating are far less heinous than many right wing congressmen have called for.” What heinous ACTIONS (please take note of this word) have “many right wing congressmen” “called for”?
-
“Not a single radicalized Islamic suspect should be granted any measure of quarter. Their intended entry to the American homeland should be summarily denied. Every conceivable measure should be engaged to hunt them down. Hunt them, identify them, and kill them. Kill them all. For the sake of all that is good and righteous. Kill them all.” ~Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.)
-
“If a woman has [the right to an abortion], why shouldn’t a man be free to use his superior strength to force himself on a woman? At least the rapist’s pursuit of sexual freedom doesn’t [in most cases] result in anyone’s death.” ~Rep. Lawrence Lockman (R-Maine House of Representatives)
-
*“Personally I’d like to make a law that mandates a woman watch an abortion being performed prior to having a ‘surgical procedure.’ If it’s not a life it shouldn’t matter, if it doesn’t harm a woman then she shouldn’t care, and don’t we want more transparency and education in the medical profession anyway?” *~Rep. Terri Proud (R-Ariz.)
Well, if it’s going to happen anyway, at least the conservatives could save effort by no longer pretending they’re shocked by it. Pretending to be shocked by something justifies any number of stupid ideas and religious practices, as well as stupid religious practices.
Trey Gowdy and other Republicans have generously offered to stop the retribution cycle. Recall the Inquisition against Hillary’s crimes in Benghazi that lasted almost three years and resulted in zero indictments. This Inquisition, led by Gowdy himself, involved only [pardon the expression] trumped-up charges, and Gowdy generously stopped his Inquisition after less than three years when the political threat of Clinton was finally ended.
In contrast to the Benghazi scandal which resulted in zero indictments(), the Mueller investigation, in less than half the time of Gowdy’s Inquisition, has “issued more than 100 criminal counts against 20 people and three companies; of the 20 people, five — including three Trump associates — have pleaded guilty. Fourteen are Russians accused of meddling in the 2016 presidential election.” ( - The actual terrorist-in-chief was brought to justice, but through the actions of Democratic appointees, not Gowdy’s heroism.)
@Supporters of the GOP — is this how we stop the “retribution cycle”? Listen to Trey Gowdy the Peacemaker, and let Republicans continue criminal activities without consequence?
Why are you lumping the Westboro Baptist Church in with Republicans, or at least right wingers, they are registered Democrats, and have also opposed Donald Trump? Not that I consider them true Democrats but your smearing them as Republicans doesn’t really hold water.
In a country of 320 million, there will always be enough bad apples on the “other side” that one can say, “We can’t stop the retribution cycle - the other side hasn’t stopped first yet!”
The situation isn’t symmetrical. The president brags about assaulting people because they were born women, whereas people protest the president because he does assault. The Republicans block people from voting because they were born black, whereas people take a knee because Republicans encourage differential police treatment against blacks. People drive Trump administration members from restaurants because they lie and use the machinery of government to hurt the innocent, whereas Republicans gerrymander districts to prevent people from voting because they’re residents in blue areas.
Republicans attack people for being what they are. Democrats attack people for doing what they do to others.
Read the thread. I’d say the answer is: Nope. Because it’s always someone else’s fault, and someone else’s responsibility.
Sounds like you are trying to pass off personal agency, and blame your actions on someone else.
I wasn’t talking about myself. :smack: