Members of Congress Demand Answers
Printable View
It wasn't a study. It was a poll, by the fucking SPLC. And you have the gall to criticize PJ Media.
Who burned Seattle and Minneapolis? Simple question. How many cities has the Far Right burned in the past 100 years?Quote:
Since you only seem capable in discussing things as "left" or "right" we will keep the terms simple so you can understand. That study does not paint the "right" in a particularly great light as "your" side appears to promote more violence the most. That does not mean to say the your "opposing side/perceived enemy" doesn't currently have a problem with this as well. Part of what was being discussed in that study was that the country is heavily politically divided and appears to be heading towards some type of civil war. This is problematic for the country and your rhetoric only fans the flames for civil war.
What exactly did Trump say?Quote:
In regards to Chuck Schumer, I never saw him endorse any assassination attempts of Brett Kavanaugh. Yes, his language was stupid and sloppy. But if you are going to hold him accountable for those words, then you should also be holding Trump accountable to his words as well regarding the January 6th debacle. We should expect more from our leaders on both sides of the aisle.
There are at least 400 million guns in private hands in this country. What does "controlling" them look like?Quote:
Personally I didn't pay that close attention to the Kavanaugh thing, so I don't know the details. However, given that we have such a large number of young men in this country (regardless of political affiliation) who are angry and ready to take up violence against their opposing side, wouldn't now be a good time to discuss gun control? Or should we wait for the blood to flow more freely than it already is. We have young men purchasing weapons and shooting up schools and supermarkets already. Maybe you are you just so certain that your side will win this war and this is the price you are willing to pay. For fucks sake, stating that you blame the left for whatever the "new rules" are and stating that it is time you to start playing shows that you fall directly in line with the folks who support political violence.
Roe will not be overturned because it's about abortion. It will be overturned because it is blatantly unconstitutional. Have you ever noticed that there are no federal laws against rape, robbery, arson, or murder? Read the 10th amendment. Or get somebody to read it to you. Then realize that if Roe is overturned, your girlfriend can -- and probably should -- still get an abortion in California, NY, NJ, MD, IL, WA, etc.Quote:
Also, what is with the sudden desire to "finally summon the courage to overturn Roe"? I remember posting something about the asinine Texas abortion wall a while back and you started deleting posts left and right. Since you are now supporting these laws the questions I have would be 1) what punishment would you recommend for a victim of rape who has an abortion, 2) would you be willing to pay more taxes to provide support for these children?, 3) should stricter laws be enforced against the father to care for these children and what punishment should they receive if they don't pay?, 4) would you be willing to support a living wage so these children can be cared for financially without burdening the average taxpayer?
Sorry, you are correct. It was a poll. I guess you got me there. How humiliated I am.
Who attacked the capitol and is still justifying it.
Odd that you ask what Trump said. There is a televised hearing on right this minute outlining this. At best he is guilty of sloppy speech, like Schumer. At worst, he directed the entire thing.
Are you suggesting there are too many guns? Perhaps you should personally be denied your weapons given that you seem to be actively promoting violence against politicians you disagree with.
OK, so answer the questions regarding the the remaining states who are banning abortions. If specific states make abortion illegal, I support forcing those states to help financially support those children. I would also expect them to define what punishment they would give a woman who has an abortion after she was raped. Being that you are a resident of such a state perhaps you should be able to answer such questions as well.
Nice to see someone has managed to grow and learn. But her interpretation of 2A gives me an even more interesting idea. What if it is in fact the armed populace that "well regulates" the militia or any other military or paramilitary organization formed by the state?
I think they are missing what's really causing this generational disparity. It has less to do with how younger people are taught and more a knowledge of how desperate the average young person's situation is. They all know the current status quo has them fucked. They may not be able to correctly identify how they are fucked, or what has caused them to become fucked, but they know full well they are fucked. In that position, killing people you believe fucked you in some desperate attempt to stop being fucked becomes really attractive. I'm not even that young anymore, and my situation is not so desperate fortunately, but I definitely feel like killing some political opponents a lot of the time, because I still feel like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are being utterly denied to me, or at least powerful forces are working to make it so.Quote:
Perhaps the most striking aspect of the poll is the generational difference. Older men and women of either party are significantly less likely to approve of the assassination of political opponents than their younger counterparts.
Party identification aside, it is clear that the younger generations are not being taught to respect the lives of others, particularly of their political opponents.
This survey does not paint either side in a great light. "The mood, overall, is pessimistic: 44% of Americans agree that the “U.S. seems headed toward a civil war in the near future,” including 53% of Republicans and 39% of Democrats." Even the lower result from democrats is a shockingly high number.
There is pretty strong support for violence on both sides, particularly in the under 50s men with their responses shown below.:
Approval for participating in a political revolution even it is violent in its ends D 42%, R 45%
Approval for assassinating a politician who is harming the country or our democracy D 44% R 34%
Both sides blame the other sides agenda and rhetoric. The positions are strongly entrenched and some of the major debates are so binary in outcome that there does not appear to be much scope for compromise.
100 trimesters? I'm not certain if you are worse at math or biology, but you suck at both.
I guess we agree and that is why I decided to write all of those words. The only thing that I added was it was obvious Mark did not read the actual "poll" (thank fucking Jesus he corrected me and showed me the error of my ways), and then he basically fell in line with the violent revolutionist camp that he was accusing his sworn enemy, "the left", of being. I don't think he should be allowed to own a firearm if this is what he is propagating.
Also:
Autopsy Shows FBI Agents Executed ‘Domestic Terrorist’ in Michigan Days Before Fake Whitmer Kidnapping Plot was Rolled Out
The news from Michigan just keeps getting crazier.
Don't forget the rioting literally right in front of the White House, when they set the church across the street on fire, and left wing Twitter was gloating about Trump "hiding in his bunker". I think "#BunkerBoy" was even a trending hashtag at the time.
The way the public has been gaslit over all this is simply incredible. A complete inversion of reality.