trump

[Kutnupe14]

I mean I know Trump likes them young too, but I think the scales are a wee bit different.

She looks old to me.

 

[indiucky]

Maybe I missed some posts. I haven't seen anything here that should get people banned. I'd rather the mods leave it open and deal with people who make trouble than to close it so that no one can participate.

Why????? Everybody gets a day to calm down and we can open another Trump sucks and his supporters are racist Nazis thread tomorrow????

Everybody wins...

 

[indiucky]

She looks old to me.

I have heard a Biden touch can age someone 10 years in an instant...It may just be an internet rumor...

 

[Tombs]

I have heard a Biden touch can age someone 10 years in an instant...It may just be an internet rumor...

No, just that they'll lose 10 years of their life to mental therapy.

 

[BugI02]

I guess that's a smart move on the part of the Clinton campaign? She might not get those votes but anywhere she can hit trump helps her.

If she stores their votes on her private server ... no worries!

 

[printcraft]

She looks old to me.

Here you go........

Fresh asian smell.....

 

[Ericpwp]

I believe they are "Orientals"

 

[BugI02]

One point of clarification: I don't think he limits it to liberals. In fact, I think conservatives who attempt to justify violence against Trump supporters would also be included.

So, I do respect that consistency of principle.

Can we go with something prettier than brown? Perhaps a nice ochre or wheat, or maybe even limon

 

[jamil]

Why????? Everybody gets a day to calm down and we can open another Trump sucks and his supporters are racist Nazis thread tomorrow????

Everybody wins...

Ah. Yes. I didn't think about the benefits of getting to start another Trump thread. Carry on then.

Here you go........

Fresh asian smell.....

Apparently the parents approve.

I believe they are "Orientals"

Last I knew "Asian" is preferred over "Oriental". Oriental refers to objects. At least that's what I was told by an Asian-American a few years ago. These days the hyphenated names are out of style too. I guess everyone is offended by everything so I don't know what to call anyone. I was told very recently by a black friend that he prefers being called Black over African-American. Kut has also indicated that he doesn't like that term either.

 

[chipbennett]

I can understand how Trump's supporters' rhetoric would make someone want to beat the snot out of them.

So what should happen to me?

Nothing. I also can understand that some people are special snowflakes, and have been raised to believe that they have the right to live in safe spaces where they cannot ever take offense at anything - and some such people have been raised to believe that violence is an appropriate response to being offended.

Ok. I think racist Trump supporters who say racist things deserve to get the snot beat out of them.

What would you do with me?

Or have I not justified it enough.

My uber-conservative 18 year old daughter thinks Trump supporters are idiots and should be beaten up. You going to go after her?

If that is true, then your daughter is an idiot, and dangerous. She needs to grow up, and learn the difference between liberty and tyranny - and just how close she aligns with the latter.

But merely holding a belief is not a reason for someone to take action. Now, should she act on that belief, either to engage in said beating-up, or to encourage others to engage in said beating-up, then a response is warranted. If, in acting on that belief to engage in said beating-up, she puts someone in reasonable fear of mortal harm, then she will deserve whatever happens when her victim righteously uses deadly force in self-defense.

 

[chipbennett]

I'm just exploring what Tombs is advocating for. Getting rid of people for justifying or attempting to justify violence against Trump supporters is a purge. I didn't see any party-affiliation involved. Purely belief-based judgment and punishment.

But, its kinda like nailing jello to a wall.


Yeah, but I'm just dad. I have no credibility. She has a low tolerance for people who don't make sense.

Good for her.I have low tolerance for people who condone violence as a response to mere difference of beliefs.

 

[indiucky]

Ah. Yes. I didn't think about the benefits of getting to start another Trump thread. Carry on then. I was told very recently by a black friend that he prefers being called Black over African-American. Kut has also indicated that he doesn't like that term either.

If you removed your helmet every now and again Darth you might be able to see the big picture...

I am with James Brown and Kut....."Say it loud...I'm black and I'm proud..."

 

[chipbennett]

And if these liberals resist your attempted forcible deportation, due to a non-violent act?

To many people, flag burning is reasonably an act of inciting violence - and as such, is not a "non-violent act".

 

[Expat]

Huffington Post Calls For Violence Against Trump Supporters | Politics

We must have some HuffPo readers in the family...

 

[T.Lex]

Nothing. I also can understand that some people are special snowflakes, and have been raised to believe that they have the right to live in safe spaces where they cannot ever take offense at anything - and some such people have been raised to believe that violence is an appropriate response to being offended.

Hey now, don't be so hard on Tombs, there's already been an in-thread warning.

After all, he's the one that is advocating for thought police.

If that is true, then your daughter is an idiot, and dangerous. She needs to grow up, and learn the difference between liberty and tyranny - and just how close she aligns with the latter.

Well, she's very smart, and only dangerous to trees when she's driving. She probably does need to grow up, but who didn't when they were 18?

As for the difference between liberty and tyranny, she is quite conservative. She understands the difference better than most on here. She doesn't think the gov't is justified in beating the snot out of Trump supporters. Rather, that those offended are.

But merely holding a belief is not a reason for someone to take action.

Tell that to Tombs. And Trump.

Now, should she act on that belief, either to engage in said beating-up, or to encourage others to engage in said beating-up, then a response is warranted. If, in acting on that belief to engage in said beating-up, she puts someone in reasonable fear of mortal harm, then she will deserve whatever happens when her victim righteously uses deadly force in self-defense.

Just so we're clear - saying Trump supporters are idiots and should be beaten up by those that they **** off, does that warrant the use of deadly force on her?

Good for her.I have low tolerance for people who condone violence as a response to mere difference of beliefs.

And yet, you support Trump? Apparently, that principle is not as important to you as others.

 

[Ericpwp]

Last I knew "Asian" is preferred over "Oriental". Oriental refers to objects. At least that's what I was told by an Asian-American a few years ago. These days the hyphenated names are out of style too. I guess everyone is offended by everything so I don't know what to call anyone. I was told very recently by a black friend that he prefers being called Black over African-American. Kut has also indicated that he doesn't like that term either.

Joe Biden Refers to Asia as 'The Orient' - ABC News

 

[T.Lex]

To many people, flag burning is reasonably an act of inciting violence - and as such, is not a "non-violent act".

Wait. Now I'm really confused. I thought people were supposed to be pacifist until the threat of personal injury or actual injury.

Now there's room for "inciting violence"? What's next - "fighting words" as a justification for violence?

 

[Kutnupe14]

To many people, flag burning is reasonably an act of inciting violence - and as such, is not a "non-violent act".

If I was inclined to buy a flag, and then wished to burn said flag (again one that I purchased with fruits of my labor), how could one possibility see that as a violent act? We both know it is not. It may make people very upset, but as is repeated ad naseum, here, nobody have the right to not be offended.

 

[chipbennett]

As for the difference between liberty and tyranny, she is quite conservative. She understands the difference better than most on here. She doesn't think the gov't is justified in beating the snot out of Trump supporters. Rather, that those offended are.

As if that makes a difference? To believe that mere difference or belief - or mere taking of offense - justifies the use of physical violence is stupid, juvenile, and dangerous. If she holds such a belief, she is not intelligent.

Just so we're clear - saying Trump supporters are idiots and should be beaten up by those that they **** off, does that warrant the use of deadly force on her?

I believe my statement was perfectly clear the first time:

Now, should she act on that belief, either to engage in said beating-up, or to encourage others to engage in said beating-up, then a response is warranted. If, in acting on that belief to engage in said beating-up, she puts someone in reasonable fear of mortal harm, then she will deserve whatever happens when her victim righteously uses deadly force in self-defense.

And yet, you support Trump? Apparently, that principle is not as important to you as others.

Except that Trump supporters aren't the ones acting violently, and Trump isn't the one encouraging acting violently. You seem to be confusing Trump for George Soros.

 

[jamil]

Nothing. I also can understand that some people are special snowflakes, and have been raised to believe that they have the right to live in safe spaces where they cannot ever take offense at anything - and some such people have been raised to believe that violence is an appropriate response to being offended.



If that is true, then your daughter is an idiot, and dangerous. She needs to grow up, and learn the difference between liberty and tyranny - and just how close she aligns with the latter.

But merely holding a belief is not a reason for someone to take action. Now, should she act on that belief, either to engage in said beating-up, or to encourage others to engage in said beating-up, then a response is warranted. If, in acting on that belief to engage in said beating-up, she puts someone in reasonable fear of mortal harm, then she will deserve whatever happens when her victim righteously uses deadly force in self-defense.

As if that makes a difference? To believe that mere difference or belief - or mere taking of offense - justifies the use of physical violence is stupid, juvenile, and dangerous. If she holds such a belief, she is not intelligent.

Don't you think that's a bit harsh? She's 18. That kind of thinking is immature, yes, but it doesn't mean she's stupid. At 18 she's just mimicking what her peers say.