"Democrats 'cannot be civil' with Republicans anymore" - Hillary Clinton

[Maj. Bill Martin]

What do you intend to do about us then Skippy??

Put guns to our heads and force us to vote the way you demand?

Nobody said that.  That's ignoring the distinction between Republicans who criticize views with which they don't agree, and Democrats who believe that incivility or even violence is acceptable.  I can talk to someone, call them a Marxist, and still be civil/nonviolent about it.

[Millee]

Yes and Hillary is not averse to a little murder here and there as well.

Had she become President {{{shudder}}} I think the hag would have loved to see us march into ovens.  The left can NEVER have power again.  They are too dangerous & violent.

[INVAR]

I can talk to someone, call them a Marxist, and still be civil/nonviolent about it.

"...if you are not for the GOP you're effectively a commie Marxist."

I remember vividly the direct and subtle death threats being directed at us from morons due to our refusal to vote Trump during the last election cycle.

If you are gonna call us an enemy because we do not vote the way you demand, you are no different and of no distinction than the tyrants on the Left.

[txradioguy]

What do you intend to do about us then Skippy??

Put guns to our heads and force us to vote the way you demand?

Shhhh don't give them any ideas.

[jpsb]

What do you intend to do about us then Skippy??

Put guns to our heads and force us to vote the way you demand?

LOL, you've made yourselves politically irrelevant so I don't have to do a damn thing about you.
Other then to occasionally read your mostly dumb comments about the GOP and president Trump.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

"...if you are not for the GOP you're effectively a commie Marxist."

I remember vividly the direct and subtle death threats being directed at us from morons due to our refusal to vote Trump during the last election cycle.

You're trying to tar a current poster with something somebody else may have said two years ago.  There is nothing in this thread -- zero -- where anyone has threatened with violence anyone else because they don't support Trump.

If you are gonna call us an enemy because we do not vote the way you demand, you are no different and of no distinction than the tyrants on the Left.

C'mon, that's bullshit and you know it.  There is a massive difference between calling someone a political enemy over the internet, and the actual violence and physical intimidation in which the left is now engaging.  If you don't like the former, you can simply ignore the person who said it.  If you don't like the latter...tough noogies because they will use force to obstruct your life so you cannot ignore them. 

When you wrongly equate those two things, you are minimizing what the left is doing and Hillary Clinton is advocating, and giving them the "out" of mischaracterizing their actions as just a little name-calling.

[Hoodat]

If that's not the green light for groups like BLM and Antifa to ramp up the violence I don't know what is.

I seem to remember something like this happening in Germany in Nov 1938.  Unfortunately for the Germans, their socialist government were successful in implementing gun control before 'pogrom night' was played out.  Left-wing efforts to deny the US citizenry the ability to defend themselves have not been as successful.

[austingirl]

If its true the rats consider the other side hopefully anticipating winning the next election 'disrespectful' and a threat it sounds like they're fundamentally incompatible with our system of government.

The left is incompatible with our form of government. They are progressives- progressing to totalitarianism.

[Emjay]

Well then try for a minute to put yourself in the shoes of the Obama voters.  In 2008 Obama got 10 million more votes than McCain.  Perhaps they thought the President and the Senate should work together to fix the problems of a troubled nation.  To some of those voters it sounds like "my number one duty is to thwart the will of the people."

My problem is it is the kind of statement you expect from the head of the RNC, not the Senate MINORITY leader.

From the point of view of some rats it's less than a respectful comment.  I'm not sure why you are being coy about it.  We're talking about respect.  It's not a hard thought experiment...all you Trumpers try along with me.  Imagine your guy won the Presidency, and imagine you controlled the Senate and House, and Minority Leader Schumer says "My life goal is to remove Trump."

Do you feel the respect?

@Once-Ler   I do not understand your position.  And I tend not to be coy.  Not one but ALL of the democrats and ALL of the media have taken the exact same position about Trump.  We ARE divided but it's politically and should entail words and votes but not action.

You do not see Republican women shouting down the Senate or banging on doors or following democrat senators around harassing them.

We have vital stark differences with democrats.  They believe in global warming, over-regulation of business, universal health care, almost universal welfare, catering to sexual fads, taxation,, well, I could go on.

Why should we pretend that all that's okay with us just for the sake of comity. 

I really don't mind the comity as in 'My esteemed colleague'; it does keep the peace in Congress but as long as we're using words against our political opponents and not taking the occasional shot at them, I see no problem.

The problem is that the democrats have decided words are not enough and, like Hillary, have encouraged their followers (with words and money) to physically and verbally harass their opponents.

[INVAR]

You're trying to tar a current poster with something somebody else may have said two years ago.

As opposed to tarring current posters who do not support the GOP with being commie Marxists?

C'mon, that's bullshit and you know it.  There is a massive difference between calling someone a political enemy over the internet, and the actual violence and physical intimidation in which the left is now engaging. 

Then why demonize those who are not supporting the feckless GOP with being enemies of the country and Communists?

But to be fair, I see little difference in mindset between the Left and moronic imbeciles calling us Communists.  One is simply more dedicated to acting on their rage than the other... for now.

If you don't like the former, you can simply ignore the person who said it.  If you don't like the latter...tough noogies because they will use force to obstruct your life so you cannot ignore them.

I don't ignore thugs and bullies, regardless which side of the aisle they self-identify as.  Because given the chance - BOTH of them will use force or empower the state to do it for them.

Human nature.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

As opposed to tarring current posters who do not support the GOP with being commie Marxists?

Then why demonize those who are not supporting the feckless GOP with being enemies of the country and Communists?

I'm not defending those who toss around those kind of labels.  I think it's stupid, counterproductive, and untrue.  And I know you've seen me on here calling those people out. if you remember, I caught a lot of crap from some of them last week

But as dumb as I think that is, that kind of internet name-calling still pales in comparison to what the Democrats and progressives are doing/advocating in the streets.  The beating down of doors, obstructing free movement, trying to shout down elected representatives to prevent them from doing the jobs the rest of us elected them to do....  I think you'd agree that while the name-calling is dumb/counterproductive/inaccurate, it is part of constitutionally-protected free speech and should be legal.

What the Democrats are doing and advocating is not constitutionally protected.  And I think when you claim there is "no difference" between what the internet name-callers are doing, and what the progressives are doing, you are minimizing the unprecedented nature of what they are doing.

Political name-calling has been around since the dawn of the Republic, and a republican form of government can survive that.  It can't survive what the Democrats are now doing.

[mountaineer]

Wednesday, October 10, 2018
The Beatings Will Continue Till Morale Improves
MOTUS Mirror

    “So when you’re dealing with an ideological party that is driven by the lust for power, that is funded by corporate interests who want a government that does its bidding…”

At first I thought this was just the standard Democratic tactic of accusing their enemies of their own sins, as I can think of no party that lusts after power more than the Dems do, or is supported by more corporations (e.g. Google, Facebook) dedicated to getting the government to do their bidding. But when I watched it again:

    “You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about.That’s why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again. But until then, the only thing that the Republicans seem to recognize and respect is strength.”

I realized that in her attempt to be relevant again it’s something more this time; Hillary is actually jumping on the “get in their face” bandwagon. “Listen up America! There will be no civility until you give the Democrats some power back. I’ll wait until 2020 to take the presidency but by God we better get either the house and/or the Senate this fall or there will be hell to pay!” This is clearly a bribe: if you want an end to the mayhem, put an end to the Republican control of government.  ...

[Emjay]

I'm not defending those who toss around those kind of labels.  I think it's stupid, counterproductive, and untrue.  And I know you've seen me on here calling those people out. if you remember, I caught a lot of crap from some of them last week

But as dumb as I think that is, that kind of internet name-calling still pales in comparison to what the Democrats and progressives are doing/advocating in the streets.  The beating down of doors, obstructing free movement, trying to shout down elected representatives to prevent them from doing the jobs the rest of us elected them to do....  I think you'd agree that while the name-calling is dumb/counterproductive/inaccurate, it is part of constitutionally-protected free speech and should be legal.

What the Democrats are doing and advocating is not constitutionally protected.  And I think when you claim there is "no difference" between what the internet name-callers are doing, and what the progressives are doing, you are minimizing the unprecedented nature of what they are doing.

Political name-calling has been around since the dawn of the Republic, and a republican form of government can survive that.  It can't survive what the Democrats are now doing.

@Maj. Bill Martin   I had to respond because I am so glad you made the comment about the age-old tradition of name-calling.  It's been around forever.  People who think it's something new need to check in on a little history.

[Emjay]

@Maj. Bill Martin   I had to respond because I am so glad you made the comment about the age-old tradition of name-calling.  It's been around forever.  People who think it's something new need to check in on a little history.

But @Maj. Bill Martin  I have to throw a little loving shade at you.  I don't believe the democrats deserve the term 'progressive' or the term 'liberal.'  They are neither progressive in the sense I think of it, which is moving forward in a productive manner nor liberal, which kinda implies acceptance of all viewpoints and actions.  We need a new term.

[INVAR]

I think when you claim there is "no difference" between what the internet name-callers are doing, and what the progressives are doing, you are minimizing the unprecedented nature of what they are doing.

It leads to the same exact place, just different targets.

And in the current atmosphere and zeitgeist of where we have arrived - it will take NOTHING for a virulent pushback to become an avalanche that will bury anyone and everyone not perceived to be on 'their side'.  That is where this is going to go.

Notwithstanding the abject hypocrisy that a people who laud themselves as protectors of 'liberty' openly demonstrate their hostility to it.

Political name-calling has been around since the dawn of the Republic, and a republican form of government can survive that.  It can't survive what the Democrats are now doing.

It cannot survive what both parties are spending us into either, and the trend towards advocating statism from within the Trumplican party is becoming a regular feature.

[edpc]

Hillary only gets away with saying these things, because she is so hot.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

But @Maj. Bill Martin  I have to throw a little loving shade at you.  I don't believe the democrats deserve the term 'progressive' or the term 'liberal.'  They are neither progressive in the sense I think of it, which is moving forward in a productive manner nor liberal, which kinda implies acceptance of all viewpoints and actions.  We need a new term.

They're actually left-wing fascists.

The left loves to point at the very few instances during Trump rallies when people tossed out protestors, sometimes at Trump's urging, and scream "fascism".  The thing is, what made the Brownshirts fascists wasn't tossing deliberate disruptors from their own rallies - it was them actively disrupting the peaceful rallies of other political parties and groups.  It was trying to ensure that dissenting voices in society at large are suppressed.  And the only ones doing that nowadays are those on the left.

[Hoodat]

Always nice to hear from our local Marxists. At this point if you are not for the GOP you're
effectively a commie Marxist.

See:  Logical Fallacies  -  False Dilemma

[Hoodat]

They're actually left-wing fascists.

@Maj. Bill Martin

That term is redundant.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

@Maj. Bill Martin

That term is redundant.

Nah.

There are some left-wingers who are not fascists.  People who have liberal/progressive views but are not on board with silencing those who oppose it.  I know some people like that.   You can see it in some people like Alan Dershowitz, or Jonathan Turley.  They're both on the left, but they abhor what some others are doing.

The problem is that the leftist fringe has become such a dominant force within the Democrat Party that few are willing to stand up to them.  They're in the ascendance, and the civilized opposition from people like Dershowitz and Turley is getting drowned out.

[Free Vulcan]

Fine with me. You want to start violence, you get violence. We should have been cracking heads and busting kneecaps 20 years ago.

The reality is most of this will be in the uber radical lefty places like Portland, Seatle, NYC, etc, and the college towns. They know not to venture out of the city centers or off campus.

Let them foul their own nests.

[Emjay]

They're actually left-wing fascists.

The left loves to point at the very few instances during Trump rallies when people tossed out protestors, sometimes at Trump's urging, and scream "fascism".  The thing is, what made the Brownshirts fascists wasn't tossing deliberate disruptors from their own rallies - it was them actively disrupting the peaceful rallies of other political parties and groups.  It was trying to ensure that dissenting voices in society at large are suppressed.  And the only ones doing that nowadays are those on the left.

I think you found the term I was looking for!!!!

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Fine with me. You want to start violence, you get violence. We should have been cracking heads and busting kneecaps 20 years ago.

The reality is most of this will be in the uber radical lefty places like Portland, Seatle, NYC, etc, and the college towns. They know not to venture out of the city centers or off campus.

Let them foul their own nests.

That sounds great, except it basically abandons law-abiding citizens who have built their lives, careers, and homes in those areas.  They shouldn't have to get beaten up just to go to work.  And the solution shouldn't be "then just move", it should be "enforce the law everywhere".  It's easy enough for those of us who live in mostly GOP/conservative areas (I refuse to call us the "reds"), to be tough guys where we are in the majority.  It's not so easy for those who are a minority.

[Free Vulcan]

That sounds great, except it basically abandons law-abiding citizens who have built their lives, careers, and homes in those areas.  They shouldn't have to get beaten up just to go to work.  And the solution shouldn't be "then just move", it should be "enforce the law everywhere".  It's easy enough for those of us who live in mostly GOP/conservative areas (I refuse to call us the "reds"), to be tough guys where we are in the majority.  It's not so easy for those who are a minority.

Unfortunately Bill it's not going to happen. Leftists will vote in leftists that will let leftist violence occur, mostly to other leftists, till it's complete anarchy. Wherein the leftists will vote the leftists in again.

I can't fathom the logic myself. Even sadder most of these are in liberal states, so no hope of the national guard. Except for military troops I know of no solution other than to leave.

This is what it has become.

[Cyber Liberty]

That sounds great, except it basically abandons law-abiding citizens who have built their lives, careers, and homes in those areas.  They shouldn't have to get beaten up just to go to work.  And the solution shouldn't be "then just move", it should be "enforce the law everywhere".  It's easy enough for those of us who live in mostly GOP/conservative areas (I refuse to call us the "reds"), to be tough guys where we are in the majority.  It's not so easy for those who are a minority.

This is the problem with popularly elected Mayors.  If the normals are in the minority, they get dragged to Hell along with everybody else.  When the normals give up, that's when they just leave, which means the remaining normals are an even smaller minority.

This is why Deetroit Mayor Coleman Young happily applauded the white flight of the 70's.