Politically motivated violence thread

[rhino]

There are still people clinging to and repeating the lies that an innocent native man was victimized by evil white Catholics in MAGS hats and some of them even claim to have seen all of the live stream video! It's pathetic and borderline unbelievable, but you almost have to admire that level of commitment to the agenda. Either that or they really believe that other people are as dumb as they want them to be. WOW.

My expectations for the mainstream media are . . . minimal, but . . .

This morning my Hopper was tuned to channel 13 when I opened the TV. I was busy working on something, so I didn't bother to change the channel and then the Saturday edition of the "Today" show started.

Did I mention that my expectations were low?

So they mentioned the evil white Catholic student debacle and they're still pushing that the native guy was a victim somehow! STILL! Holy Crap! They ran brief clips of the Covington Catholic kid saying that he didn't walk away because he didn't want to be disrespectful, but he wishes that he would have, then ran a clip of Phillips saying that HE HAS FORGIVENESS IN HIS HEART. They included nothing about any of the actual facts of the case. They are still pushing the lie of Phillips as a victim! STILL.

 

[Hawkeye]

My expectations for the mainstream media are . . . minimal, but . . .

This morning my Hopper was tuned to channel 13 when I opened the TV. I was busy working on something, so I didn't bother to change the channel and then the Saturday edition of the "Today" show started.

Did I mention that my expectations were low?

So they mentioned the evil white Catholic student debacle and they're still pushing that the native guy was a victim somehow! STILL! Holy Crap! They ran brief clips of the Covington Catholic kid saying that he didn't walk away because he didn't want to be disrespectful, but he wishes that he would have, then ran a clip of Phillips saying that HE HAS FORGIVENESS IN HIS HEART. They included nothing about any of the actual facts of the case. They are still pushing the lie of Phillips as a victim! STILL.

NPR's "On the Media" was much the same this morning. In its defense, the program is taped earlier in the week and aired on Saturday mornings up here. Its "possible" but highly unlikely that they may have changed their tune later in the week. The media are kind of like some of our members here who never, ever, admit that they are wrong, and when faced with evidence, they double down on the correctness of their error...

 

[DoggyDaddy]

My expectations for the mainstream media are . . . minimal, but . . .

This morning my Hopper was tuned to channel 13 when I opened the TV. I was busy working on something, so I didn't bother to change the channel and then the Saturday edition of the "Today" show started.

Did I mention that my expectations were low?

So they mentioned the evil white Catholic student debacle and they're still pushing that the native guy was a victim somehow! STILL! Holy Crap! They ran brief clips of the Covington Catholic kid saying that he didn't walk away because he didn't want to be disrespectful, but he wishes that he would have, then ran a clip of Phillips saying that HE HAS FORGIVENESS IN HIS HEART. They included nothing about any of the actual facts of the case. They are still pushing the lie of Phillips as a victim! STILL.

I'm still waiting for Savannah to interview some of the Black Hebrew Israelites... *crickets*

 

[rhino]

On the bright side, some of the more egregious offenders are making it easy to identify themselves for the imminent lawsuit. I just hope their attempts to get the kids hurt physically are not successful in the meantime.

 

[jamil]

Not true.

I wouldn't classify myself as a Trumper (nor would anyone here), I'm quite upset with Pelosi. My gut is telling me many people would agree.

I’m not a Trumper either. Pelosi is as responsible for the shutdown as Trump. Both could have prevented it. Both could have ended it and chose not to.

 

[printcraft]

Just out of curiosity, have you cared to look at Republican "Nays," when the Democrats wanted a barrier in the past? If it's fair to ask why Democrats changed their minds, then it's fair to ask the same thing of the Republicans.

Here's the 2013 vote:
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00168

Do we retroactively call this ODS?

What else did that bill include?

 

[Cygnus]

I'm still waiting for Savannah to interview some of the Black Hebrew Israelites... *crickets*

Gutfeld's show on Fox tonight. Should be interesting.
(On a side note, I now have a great new vocab word thanks to them. "Dusty Assed Cracker" LOL. Leaves "peckerwwod" in the dust....)

 

[Kutnupe14]

What else did that bill include?

Who cares? Unless you're saying that a peripheral component of the bill determined if Democrats/Republicans supported/not supported the piece of legislation in question. In such a case, one can't talk out of one side of their mouth saying Democrats were for a wall, and are hypocrites for not support them now, while at the same time saying that Republicans didn't support the Democrats wall legislation because there was other stuff they didn't agree with in the bill.
Not that I expect very many to understand what is being said above. I just figured I needed to be on record explaining it.

 

[bwframe]

Wow

 

[Denny347]

My expectations for the mainstream media are . . . minimal, but . . .

This morning my Hopper was tuned to channel 13 when I opened the TV. I was busy working on something, so I didn't bother to change the channel and then the Saturday edition of the "Today" show started.

Did I mention that my expectations were low?

So they mentioned the evil white Catholic student debacle and they're still pushing that the native guy was a victim somehow! STILL! Holy Crap! They ran brief clips of the Covington Catholic kid saying that he didn't walk away because he didn't want to be disrespectful, but he wishes that he would have, then ran a clip of Phillips saying that HE HAS FORGIVENESS IN HIS HEART. They included nothing about any of the actual facts of the case. They are still pushing the lie of Phillips as a victim! STILL.

NPR's "On the Media" was much the same this morning. In its defense, the program is taped earlier in the week and aired on Saturday mornings up here. Its "possible" but highly unlikely that they may have changed their tune later in the week. The media are kind of like some of our members here who never, ever, admit that they are wrong, and when faced with evidence, they double down on the correctness of their error...

On a side note, reading "Theodore Rex", about Teddy Roosevelt, and his complaints in 1901 about the media are the exact same as we see now. It's quite remarkable really. He also controlled what the press assigned to the White House wrote about him. His views of immigration were also similar to the debate here. It is so important to study history. Fascinating book.

 

[printcraft]

Who cares? Unless you're saying that a peripheral component of the bill determined if Democrats/Republicans supported/not supported the piece of legislation in question. In such a case, one can't talk out of one side of their mouth saying Democrats were for a wall, and are hypocrites for not support them now, while at the same time saying that Republicans didn't support the Democrats wall legislation because there was other stuff they didn't agree with in the bill.
Not that I expect very many to understand what is being said above. I just figured I needed to be on record explaining it.

Sure you can, and it's not the same thing.

Dems are typically on the side of weakening our border protections and enhancing rights for those who would illegally enter this country. This isn't news or new.

You had a "few" Republicans go against the obama era bill while you have ALL of the dems going against Trump. =/=

I don't expect some to understand the difference.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Sure you can, and it's not the same thing.

Dems are typically on the side of weakening our border protections and enhancing rights for those who would illegally enter this country. This isn't news or new.

You had a "few" Republicans go against the obama era bill while you have ALL of the dems going against Trump. =/=

I don't expect some to understand the difference.

32 R's in the Senate is considered "a few?"

 

[BugI02]

On a side note, reading "Theodore Rex", about Teddy Roosevelt, and his complaints in 1901 about the media are the exact same as we see now. It's quite remarkable really. He also controlled what the press assigned to the White House wrote about him. His views of immigration were also similar to the debate here. It is so important to study history. Fascinating book.

He served two terms, didn't he? Conroversial in his day, revered (rightfully) today. Noted trust-buster (lookin' at you Facebook, Google and Amazon). Groomed his chosen successor, who was also elected

Is there room for another head on Mt. Rushmore?

 

[BugI02]

Who cares? Unless you're saying that a peripheral component of the bill determined if Democrats/Republicans supported/not supported the piece of legislation in question. In such a case, one can't talk out of one side of their mouth saying Democrats were for a wall, and are hypocrites for not support them now, while at the same time saying that Republicans didn't support the Democrats wall legislation because there was other stuff they didn't agree with in the bill.
Not that I expect very many to understand what is being said above. I just figured I needed to be on record explaining it.

I would hope you would expand that slightly, to encompass not voting for a bill because something one considers necessary is not in it

Edit: Assuming, of course, that one didn't need to vote for the bill in order to even see what was in it (SMH)

 

[Hawkeye]

Who cares? Unless you're saying that a peripheral component of the bill determined if Democrats/Republicans supported/not supported the piece of legislation in question. In such a case, one can't talk out of one side of their mouth saying Democrats were for a wall, and are hypocrites for not support them now, while at the same time saying that Republicans didn't support the Democrats wall legislation because there was other stuff they didn't agree with in the bill.
Not that I expect very many to understand what is being said above. I just figured I needed to be on record explaining it.

Some people reading this might think the author is either being very condescending to the "very many" or is pretty much elitist and operates on a higher plane than the "very many". But I'm sure that the "very many" probably don't understand what the author is really saying here.

Aren't we, the "very many" lucky to have the author around to tell them what they don't understand!

 

[NKBJ]

 

[ArcadiaGP]

This just reeks of fake... but what do I know

'Empire' Star Jussie Smollett Beaten in Homophobic Attack By MAGA Supporters

"Empire" star Jussie Smollett was brutally attacked by 2 men who beat him up, put his head in a noose and screamed, "This is MAGA country."

Sources directly connected to Jussie tell TMZ, the actor arrived in Chicago from New York late Monday, and at around 2 AM he was hungry and went to a Subway. We're told when he walked out, someone yelled, "Aren't you that f***ot 'Empire' n*****?"

The 2 men -- both white and wearing ski masks -- viciously attacked Jussie as he fought back, but they beat him badly and fractured a rib. They put a rope around his neck, poured bleach on him and as they left they yelled, "This is MAGA country."

 

[printcraft]

BULL****!

[FONT=&quot]So two white, Empire watching, Trump supporting, ski mask wearing rednecks just so happened to be outside a Subway at 2am in Chicago, of all places, with a noose and bleach?[/FONT]

Pretty much this. ^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[jamil]

This just reeks of fake... but what do I know

'Empire' Star Jussie Smollett Beaten in Homophobic Attack By MAGA Supporters

I dunno. I kinda suspect a hoax hate. I concede that it could possibly happen exactly as reported. But...some stuff doesn't seem all that likely. This smells fake.

 

[T.Lex]

How many white rednecks:
A) watch Empire;
B) could name any actor on it;
C) would know which ones are gay.

That's even more implausible when you consider the folks who WOULD watch Empire are unlikely to an extreme to then undertake that kind of action.