The part of his home that was vandalized was the driveway. One of the protesters spray-painted an ‘A’ on it.
It’s still wrong, but it’s at the Halloween-prank level of vandalism.
If the kid is poor and the piece of shit father isn’t around, how much of a break does society give that kid? I mean, he shouldn’t suffer because of the actions of his parent, right? :dubious:
None of the children were home at the time. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2018/11/08/heres-the-vandalism-that-protesters-left-at-tucker-carlsons-house/
Fight the power, man aka they aren’t saavy. The only thing I can say in the 10-15 demonstrator’s favor is a) they arranged for a legal observer and media, so that Carlson’s false claims could be refuted, and b) two of the demonstrators walked off once one bozo pulled out the can of spray paint. “This isn’t what I signed up for.”
No, he represents state media on Fox News. As for the Tucker owned property The Daily Caller, they routinely look the other way when flagged comments report names and addresses of lefties who draw their ire. That’s far more dangerous to the target than overly dramatic chanting. x.com
Looks like once again, Tucker Carlson lied AGAIN.
In Tucker’s telling, they “cracked” his door and threatened to bomb his house. In actual fact, one protestor knocked on his door, and others justifiably held Tucker accountable for inciting violence and white supremacist terror in the form of pipe bombs that were mailed to several Democrats two weeks ago.
The police laughed off Tucker’s claim that his door had been “cracked”.
Before breathlessly condemning protesters, we expect public and media figures to investigate Tucker’s claims about the protest. They did not. Instead, senior editors and commentators used their platforms to apologize to Tucker and burnish their both-sides credentials. They did this without taking a moment to fact-check Tucker’s claims. They commiserated with Tucker over his fabricated claims, forgetting that a few days prior, Tucker was on national TV, laughing about pipe bombs sent to several Democrats in a mass assassination attempt.
People like Tucker, McConnell and Huckabee have spent their entire careers playing footsie with violent fascists who target the weak.
So fuck him. He’s a no good lying shit stirring piece of shit. Fuck them.
Carlson’s report directly conflicts with the police report: https://twitter.com/DrRJKavanagh/status/1061484728652570624
This is all so fucking childish. Tucker Carlson is bad so I no longer care about the rule of law (foot stamp). Grow the fuck up. Now if someone wants to actually do something, I’m ready to support them: protest and vandalize at some west of the park douche’s house? Big fucking deal, how brave and effective. Wow, you must have got 50 Instagram likes, way to stick it to the man.
More fake news from a fake newsperson on a fake news channel. Sad. He is the enemy of the people. He has a horse face. He has blood coming out of whatever. He asks stupid questions.
This stunt was pointless. It plays in to the right’s hands by portraying the left as a bunch of brats on daddy’s credit card out committing petty vandalism. It trivializes what’s at stake and it does nothing to advance any cause. As far as civil disobedience goes, Rosa Parks it ain’t.
This is an incredibly reductive view of Anarchism. The entire concept of anarchism is voluntary free association and consensus-style democracy (not majoritarian). The idea is that everybody must consent to being ruled over, and when a decision is made, everybody affected must be okay with the solution, even if it’s not their favorite one. That is, things aren’t solved by a simple majority vote – rather, they’re solved by a debate until it’s unanimously agreed that everyone affirms they can live with it. Somewhat similar to how a Jury works in the US. If somebody cannot abide by something, the motion either should be revised, they can leave the group, or any other number of things.
There’s a lot of work that’s gone into leftist systems of rulemaking that are communal and fair, and many of them are in somewhat wide use for Marxist and left-Union organizations. There are also technological advances being made in it, such as Democracy OS, albeit in the nascent stages and not super “production ready” for a very long time.
This doesn’t mean there will never be problems, communes will never be corrupt, areas will never shut down or devolve into tyranical rule, nobody will ever be bullied or treated unjustly, or anything like that. A lot of the work is also highly theoretical and it’s why there are so many competing theories and vehement disagreement between leftists. Left-Anarchism isn’t meant to be a perfect system, or one that can’t fail – it’s meant to be one as equitable, flexible, and local as possible, and hopefully better than what we have. Cells that can survive if a nearby community shuts down, nearby places someone can go if they have a disagreement with their current one. A lot of it also rests on a lack of things like capitalist systems and markets, as well as common ownership of the means of production and communal necessities, which obviously isn’t in the cards in the near future (to put it lightly).
There are a lot of stupid, incendiary Anarchists, especially revolutionary ones, but a lot of these views of Anarchism come from decades long misunderstandings and ignorance of the actual body of theory and practice (in the form of real left organizations governing themselves on Anarchist principles) around it. It’s much, much more complex and thought about than “wouldn’t it be, like, great if we just killed all the leaders and had a majority vote on everything, man?”
Oh PLEASE.
The right portrays the left any way they want to regardless of how the left actually behaves. They lie ALL THE TIME about what the left does. So playing by the rules is meaningless. It doesn’t matter if we do things that “play into the rights hands”.
Female mobs! Antifa attacks! The new Black Panthers! Invasion! MS-13!
I don’t think the left should be playing by the rules until the right stops lying and cheating their way through everything.
Color me unimpressed. If They had gone down to Georgia and carried out real action against those responsible for voter suppression of black Americans, I would say that it was worth unlawful acts, but taking a Lyft from the dorms to take on Tucker Carlson’s wife accomplishes nothing.
Antifas prefers Uber, or at least all the ones I know. MS-13 usually just steals whatever car is handy. That’s just speculation on my part, I don’t pretend to compare it with your exhaustive and informed research.
What did it accomplish? What is different now that Tucker Carlson’s driveway has been vandalized? What’s the next step for these heroes?
There are so many things wrong with this I can hardly believe anyone would seriously advocate for it, so I’ll start with this one:
Your system not only presumes goodwill, it fails in its absence. It fails hard, and it fails unrecoverably. What do you do when some group decides “I won’t agree and I won’t leave!”? Talk it out? That presumes they’re going to listen to you, as opposed to… you know… trying to kill you for presuming to stand on their land, or, in a less extreme scenario, just standing there in the council meeting, smiling benignly, and, when you’ve stopped making the mouth-noises out of your hole, saying “You’re wrong.” and not changing a single iota of their ideology.
It’s one thing when the debate is over what color the bikeshed should be. It’s something else when someone or some group decides that, no, the farmland is theirs by right, and you need to fuck off now.
Besides, you didn’t address the point I brought up: Despised minorities. How do they live? And if you say “they leave”, well, there’s a name for that solution: Refugee crisis.
Madmonk in 1774: “I mean, the British are just going to bring in more tea. And now the prices are going to go up! And the King - he’s gonna be mad at us! What now, brave Tea Partiers? What’s your next step?”
So, the 15 protesters spray painting Tucker Carlson’s driveway while Tucker is at work are the Boston Tea party? Remember when I said this whole thing was fucking childish? Yeah, it’s because if posts like this.
Color me unconvinced. In Re the underlined scenario above, dollars to donuts you would be decrying those that had carried out such “real action.”
“Why were they going after those guys? Dey Ver Only Vollowink Orderz!!”
Your indignation would be a lot more convincing if it weren’t so covered in crap.
Nope, I have stated here that I think that if ever there is a case for the second amendment to be used in America to “defend democracy” it is in Georgia. I think that Georgia is not a democracy and has little better than third world show elections. I also think that violence is justified to secure rights and that includes in Georgia.
I also think that making Tucker Carlson’s wife uncomfortable is a pointless act designed to make people feel like they’re doing something when they are doing less than nothing.
I’d never heard of Tucker Carlson a few weeks ago. Then I watched one Fox episode and concluded that he is one of the most despicable excuses for a human being around.
But I don’t endorse crimes or despicable behavior. Right-wingers like Carlson, Trump, Magellan are the subhumans; not us. (Right-wing nutcases outnumber left-wing nuts by such a large margin that this incident is as likely to be a “false flag” as not.)
It is Trump who has encouraged violence, even suggesting that killing news reporters has merit. Republiopathic Congressmen have committed battery … with Trump applauding. Reread for comprehension please: These are the President and top GOP politicians who endorse or commit criminal battery, not random nuts.
Beating up reporters is fair game. Gloating about fellow strongmen who murder reporters is fine too. Putting innocent children in cages is applauded. But if one (left-wing?) nut harasses a despicable shit-bag like Tucker Carlson, the right-wing jumps out of the woodwork trying to pretend that they are not despicable:
Both of you really are as stupid as they say, aren’t you?
Just to be clear, you agree that beating up and harassing reporters is bad? Even when that reporter is as repugnant as Tucker Carlson, yes?
When in doubt remember what Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote: “if there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other, it is the principle of free thought—not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.”