The more relevant question is whether it’s advisable to accept the assertions of some poster on a MB as gospel simpy because it’s aligned with what you’d prefer to believe.
The “dead cops” chant happened.
The correct left-wing line is not to try to deny it but to claim that it was some small and inconsequential group and not the main group of protestors.
http://www.msnbc.com/the-reid-report/the-truth-about-the-dead-cops-chant
It’s lovely how often truth aligns with “left-wing lines”. Don’t need to make up lines when the truth serves us fine.
Do tell us, F-P, what the “correct” right-wing line is on this particular point.
I do have some ideas, and you seem to exemplify them, but I would prefer to hear it from you.
I have no idea what the correct right-wing line is on this, or even if there is one. Why you think I “seem to exemplify them”?
So you can condescendingly explain the “correct” left wing line, but are at a complete loss regarding the right? That seems odd.
Came across one and not the other. Happens all the time. Why would you think that’s odd? (Now* that’s* odd.)
The more relevant question is, do you actually have a critique of the " correct left-wing line?" Some people are peacefully calling for police reform and holding police legally accountable for abuses. Others are somewhat less peacefully calling for wanton violence against police officers. Why should the former have to answer for the latter?
But why assume it’s just a line? Do you have anything factual to disprove it? Is everything either a right wing or left wing “line”? You didn’t call it an explanation, but a “line” casting aspersions on its credibility and offered nothing to support that POV.
Hell, they all look the same to me.
Is it a “situation” that needs be defused, or an endemic problem that needs to be corrected? You can, at least in theory, defuse a situation without addressing the problem that created it.
I’m not familiar with the dynamics of these demonstrations. (More below.)
It might be correct.
The context was the assertion in this thread that no such demonstration had ever happened, and this assertion being seized on by someone who was apparently eager to grasp onto something with which to deny any link between the demonstrations and the deaths. From that perspective, anything in that direction was a “line”, since the truth of it was of less significance than its import.
[ KEVIN SPACEY as LEX LUTHOR ] WRONG! [/ KSaLL ]
Right. So that chant didn’t happen.
How about the one that I linked a video of right above this post? Was that one also hallucinated by Sean Hannity?
You are confusing different marches and stories.
[You also might be embarassing your fellow left-winger ITD who bragged upthread about how “often truth aligns with “left-wing lines””, but that’s between you and him.]
I’m a her.
I didn’t claim it didn’t happen. The “line” was that the calls for violence represented a small fraction of the protests, with peaceful protests more common. Until I see data that contradicts that, I will believe the information that supports it.
I have nothing to be embarrassed about. In fact being a liberal progressive is something I’m very proud of.
Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough.
I don’t think you need to be embarrassed by your own position, which may well be true (as I’ve noted above).
However, to the extent that Steve MB and people like him continue to push the line that the “dead cops” march and chant never happened at all, it would tend to undercut your assertion about truth aligning with “left-wing lines”, since that is a left-wing line very much out of line with the truth.
No big deal - it was a throwaway line.
It was stupid line apropos of nothing. If you don’t mean it, don’t say it.
Personally I think your line about truth aligning with left-wing lines was pretty stupid. But everyone gets to say what they want, you and me both.