What's new

Shooting at Congressional Baseball Practice

original small government.

like for example British empire the monarchy!
seems small enough in the jpg below

British_Empire.jpg


British-Empire-1922.png



from that big monarch government, sprung the first successful liberty republic movement!

now they wanna go global again with the UN, NATO and other globalist ********!

no monarch is big government as you can GET!

so please mister.
large

from that big government people started fighting against being taxed. against big government rule. the liberty movement did not start there. but it was succesfull opposing a big government monarchy!

Don't confuse small government with large nation/kingdom. It appears you've done that in spades.
 
Everything. From the nonsense about him being a Sanders supporter, as if it's causal. To that garbage about liberals being supportive of the shooter.

And don't worry about my feelings. I'll be okay. I expect you, on the other hand, to storm out and disappear for a few months.

I think part of the issue with the shooter having been a Sanders supporter is that it runs contrary to the assumption that all progressives are anti-gun

they're not, but that's how they tend to be categorized


I saw a number of Facebook posts from liberal, progressive friends who were Sanders supporters who expressed a degree of shock that someone who they think of as sharing their political leanings would own a gun, yet alone use it in an attack of this nature
 
I think part of the issue with the shooter having been a Sanders supporter is that it runs contrary to the assumption that all progressives are anti-gun

they're not, but that's how they tend to be categorized


I saw a number of Facebook posts from liberal, progressive friends who were Sanders supporters who expressed a degree of shock that someone who they think of as sharing their political leanings would own a gun, yet alone use it in an attack of this nature

I've never really understood when people are shocked by things like that. People don't come in only a few molds. You can pretty much come up with a random set of beliefs and find someone that has those beliefs. The world, and the people in it, are billions of shades of gray.
 
Don't confuse small government with large nation/kingdom. It appears you've done that in spades.

or how about that most monarchs have outright gun bans to protect the monarch and no free speech

i have been brought to trial for saying something about a government
i could go on and on and on and on


not because a monarchy is ruled by 1 person it means small government



monarchs enacted gun bans solely for the purpose to protect the king(government) from the individual.
 
or how about that most monarchs have outright gun bans to protect the monarch and no free speech

i have been brought to trial for saying something about a government
i could go on and on and on and on


not because a monarchy is ruled by 1 person it means small government



monarchs enacted gun bans solely for the purpose to protect the king(government) from the individual.

Yeah. Small Government did that, didn't they?

Let's all move back to Monarchies.
 
Some fact checking (including one of Dutch's favorites for Bernie Sanders):

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/factcheck/fact-check-distortions-and-fake-news-in-virginia-shooting/ar-BBCJLOp?li=BBnb7Kz

Alex Jones knows exactly whom he wants to blame for the Wednesday shooting on a Virginia baseball field: “the left” and its calls to violence. In a five-minute video produced by his conspiracy-laden website, InfoWars, Mr. Jones runs through a list of offenders on “terroristic social media,” distorting and cherry-picking comments, to make a wildly misleading case.

His video is among the most flagrant examples of an emerging trend of partisans repurposing old statements from lawmakers — or simply fabricating quotes — to place blame for the shooting. Here’s an assessment.

Mr. Jones accused the left of “publicly embracing homicide as a political solution.” The video was posted to Mr. Jones’s Facebook page and YouTube channel, and viewed tens of thousands of times.

It is structured like a news report, ticking off the facts of the shooting on Wednesday morning. It correctly lays out details of the attack, identifies the shooter as James T. Hodgkinson, and highlights his social media activity in support of Senator Bernie Sanders’s anger toward Republican policies.

But it veers far from the truth with this sweeping, conspiratorial video presentation:

First, it shows a bright graphic of the words “terrorist social media” framing a handful of tweets praising the attack or verbally assaulting Republicans. These tweets are from random individuals, media personalities or freelance writers who have no affiliation to a political party or organization.

Next, there is a quick cut to a still image of Kathy Griffin from her controversial photo shoot as a voice-over claims that “the left is collectively and publicly embracing homicide as a political solution.” Prominent Democrats like Chelsea Clinton and Senator Al Franken of Minnesota chastised Ms. Griffin for her actions.

The video then transitions to a misleadingly edited clip of former Attorney General Loretta Lynch saying, “They’ve bled and yes, some of them died. This is hard. Every good thing is.”

This statement is taken wildly out of context.

It comes from a video Ms. Lynch made for the Senate Democrats in February in which she talks not about violence incited by protesters but about past violence against them, like the deaths and beatings of civil rights activists.

The full quote: “It has been people, individuals who have banded together, ordinary people who simply saw what needed to be done and came together and supported those ideals who have made the difference. They’ve marched, they’ve bled and yes, some of them died. This is hard. Every good thing is. We have done this before. We can do this again.”

Other inflammatory sites like WND.com, the American Mirror and the Gateway Pundit have repeated the distortion of Ms. Lynch’s quote as a call to violence. A Google search for the phrases “Loretta Lynch” and “some of them died” finds over 13,000 pages that are a mix of reports of the original video, distortions of the statements and fact checks.

Additionally, the video includes older InfoWars clip that misleadingly suggests a Guardian columnist called for President Trump’s assassination “just last week.”

The person in question, Monisha Rajesh, did tweet “it’s about time for a presidential assassination,” but in November, several months before the Virginia shooting occurred. Ms. Rajesh, a freelancer who last wrote for The Guardian in March 2016, also deleted the post.

The Young Turks characterized Representative Steve Scalise as a white supremacist.

A video posted by the Young Turks, viewed about 441,000 times, impugns the political right for the heightened political and violence. It accurately portrays Mr. Scalise, the House majority whip from Louisiana, as a supporter of gun rights before highlighting a comment the Republican lawmaker made some 20 years ago.

Stephanie Grace, a political reporter in Louisiana, told The New York Times in late 2014 that Mr. Scalise once said he was “like David Duke without the baggage,” referring to the white supremacist and former Klansman. The Times also reported that Mr. Scalise accepted a speaking engagement to a group founded by Mr. Duke in 2002.

But the Young Turks video leaves out Mr. Scalise’s response to the controversy. He apologized in 2014 and has repeatedly disavowed Mr. Duke.

“One of the many groups that I spoke to regarding this critical legislation was a group whose views I wholeheartedly condemn,” Mr. Scalise said. “It was a mistake I regret, and I emphatically oppose the divisive racial and religious views groups like these hold.”

Ms. Grace also wrote a column placing Mr. Scalise’s comments to her in context, speculating that the then-new state lawmaker had meant he shared Mr. Duke’s “actual governmental philosophy” but not his racist views. (Mr. Scalise suggested as much to Roll Call in 1999.)

Claims of Mr. Scalise’s ties to white supremacy were starting to bubble up in liberal circles on the internet the day after the shooting. Prominent Facebook accounts like those of D.L. Hughley, a comedian and political commentator, and advocacy groups spread these claims to tens of thousands of additional Facebook users as well.

Activists are falsely suggesting Senator Bernie Sanders, Independent of Vermont, “ordered his followers” to “take down” President Trump.

After it was revealed that Mr. Hodgkinson, the shooting suspect, supported Mr. Sanders’s bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, some distorted Mr. Sanders’s speech at a gathering of progressives in Chicago on Saturday night to impugn him for the shooting.

In a widely shared tweet that was echoed elsewhere online, the conservative activist Jack Posobiec claimed that Sanders “ordered his followers to ‘take down’ Trump.” But those words refer to a CNN headline that summarized his remarks.

“During his campaign, Trump posed as a friend of the working class,” Mr. Sanders said. “Do not tell us that you are a friend of the working class when you throw 23 million Americans off of health care, and make devastating cuts to education, senior needs, nutrition, housing, and environmental protection.”

At no point did Mr. Sanders call for violence against Mr. Trump or Republican lawmakers. And on Wednesday, Mr. Sanders condemned the shooting, which he called a despicable act, and emphasized that “real change can only come about through nonviolent action.”

Others are distorting remarks from Senator Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia, to suggest he “wanted” the shooting.

Similarly, the insinuation that Mr. Kaine endorsed violence against Republicans hinges upon four words — “fight them in the streets” — taken out of context by activists from a lengthy explanation about how the party could recover from its electoral loss.

In an MSNBC appearance in January, Mr. Kaine said he was “excited” by the energy from the public. “Fight in the streets” referred to peaceful protests, a spokeswoman for Mr. Kaine said. And the full text of the statement backs her up.

During the televised segment, Mr. Kaine pointed to peaceful demonstrations against the Trump administration like the Women’s March before he said, “What we’ve got to do is fight in Congress, fight in the courts, fight in the streets, fight online, fight at the ballot box, and now there’s the momentum to be able to do this.”

Not that it will likely change the minds of anyone who believes this stuff, but knowledge is power.
 
I think part of the issue with the shooter having been a Sanders supporter is that it runs contrary to the assumption that all progressives are anti-gun

they're not, but that's how they tend to be categorized


I saw a number of Facebook posts from liberal, progressive friends who were Sanders supporters who expressed a degree of shock that someone who they think of as sharing their political leanings would own a gun, yet alone use it in an attack of this nature

Can you define "liberal progressives"? Under current terms, I don't consider any liberal ideologue a progressive. I don't consider any conservative a progressive (by far) either. However, I do consider republican "conservatives" under the Reagan Era progressive. I don't consider many of the progressive posters here as liberal either. You're all too wise to realize there are two sides to every coin (and yes, that was you included in the progressive but not liberal grouping).

So what exactly is a progressive liberal? When I hear this I feel like the liberal left has co-opted the term progressive in attempt to outdo a right that clearly thinks progress means making people more accountable for themselves.

I'm thinking out loud but I'd like to hear thoughts on what exactly is a "progressive liberal" because I think liberals and conservatives are both irrational people and incapable of creating progress.
 
btw America needs gun control 93 million people die each year of gun violence/s


I knew the left is manipulating gun stats for example suicides being incorporated in gun violence. like seriously? let's be honest suicide is a turrible thing but guns are not the cause


and the famous lack of knowledge Joe Biden showed:

“If you want to protect yourself, get a double-barrel shotgun,” Biden said in an interview with Parents Magazine back in February. “You don’t need an AR-15. It’s harder to aim, it’s harder to use, and in fact, you don’t need 30 rounds to protect yourself. Buy a shotgun. Buy a shotgun.

REALLY Joe bIDFen? you don't know **** about guns. so don't make legislation about it. claiming people can handle a shotgun better than ar15.


now a moment of silence for the 93 million people dying per year in the us of a for gun violence. by this rate US of a will become a barren wasteland in about 4 years

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZzjGYyI3Dg


at 55 seconds he said 93 million a day.

at the end he says 93 a day.

hahahahahahhaahha
 
Last edited:
Can you define "liberal progressives"? Under current terms, I don't consider any liberal ideologue a progressive. I don't consider any conservative a progressive (by far) either. However, I do consider republican "conservatives" under the Reagan Era progressive. I don't consider many of the progressive posters here as liberal either. You're all too wise to realize there are two sides to every coin (and yes, that was you included in the progressive but not liberal grouping).

So what exactly is a progressive liberal? When I hear this I feel like the liberal left has co-opted the term progressive in attempt to outdo a right that clearly thinks progress means making people more accountable for themselves.

I'm thinking out loud but I'd like to hear thoughts on what exactly is a "progressive liberal" because I think liberals and conservatives are both irrational people and incapable of creating progress.

No I can't, but at any rate, it wouldn't matter - these are folks who use that terminology to define themselves. And I doubt many of them would even agree on a definition since we all generally tend to cherry-pick to fit our own personal narratives.

I tend to have a difficult time with labels anyhow, I much prefer sort of a 4-quadrant scatter graph
(remember, we've had a few threads with links to surveys along those lines)
 
Since, obviously, Siro was unable to provide you with my opinion about simple facts I posted, I'll go ahead and do so.
I feel you are a fool if you think B. Sanders (or any US politician) is directly responsible for the crazed actions of a few of their supporters/followers. I also think you are a bigger fool if you don't think politicians and the media are somewhat responsible for adding fuel directly to the division and polarization of America fire. By doing so, they paint a narrative and encourage their followers to act out in violent ways. We've seen it with the alt-right and we've seen it with the progressive left. Am I wrong?

Both-Sidesism has seriously got to go.

Bernie is about as Gandhi-like as any politician going back 40 years of American political history.

Trump meanwhile insinuated that Hillary might get shot down by his supporters.

The left wants healthcare, the right wants fascism. This notion of "both sides!!" Alt-Centrism is a joke.
 
Both-Sidesism has seriously got to go.

Bernie is about as Gandhi-like as any politician going back 40 years of American political history.

Trump meanwhile insinuated that Hillary might get shot down by his supporters.

The left wants healthcare, the right wants fascism. This notion of "both sides!!" Alt-Centrism is a joke.

I see the left being fascist way more than the right. The antifa, sjws, and the far left are pathetic. Let's fight fascism by being fascists. Smh.
 
I see the left being fascist way more than the right. The antifa, sjws, and the far left are pathetic. Let's fight fascism by being fascists. Smh.

What does antifa and sjws even mean?

I don't think you know what fascism is. You could really benefit from learning what fascism actually is before commenting further. Enter the links below:

http://www.politicalresearch.org/2016/12/12/what-is-fascism-2/#sthash.JNKsQTJt.dpbs

https://www.livescience.com/57622-fascism.html

You're welcome
 
Both-Sidesism has seriously got to go.

Bernie is about as Gandhi-like as any politician going back 40 years of American political history.

Trump meanwhile insinuated that Hillary might get shot down by his supporters.

The left wants healthcare, the right wants fascism. This notion of "both sides!!" Alt-Centrism is a joke.

According to the right, Bernie Sanders wants to turn America into Venezuela or North Korea. They have no concept of Democratic Socialism found in most of Western Europe or Scandinavia.

Again, you need to know your audience Dala. At least 30 percent of this country simply ignores facts and thinks that Canada's health care system sucks. I recently had a conversation with an obvious Trump supporter who sincerely asked, "What's wrong with treating health care as a commodity? Those who work for it can get it." He further added, "In Canada, everyone is supposed to get health care whether you work or don't and that results in higher taxes and long wait times so no one ends up getting health care."

At some point we just need to admit that inbreeding and Fox News have taken a toll on a large portion of America (mostly in the rural parts of the country or racist Confederate south). No amount of education or debating facts will convince stupid closed-minded people of their ignorant opinions.
 
What does antifa and sjws even mean?

I don't think you know what fascism is. You could really benefit from learning what fascism actually is before commenting further. Enter the links below:

http://www.politicalresearch.org/2016/12/12/what-is-fascism-2/#sthash.JNKsQTJt.dpbs

https://www.livescience.com/57622-fascism.html

You're welcome
How did what I say translate to I don't know what fascism is? The assumptions and conclusions posters have made in this thread are mind-boggling.
 
How did what I say translate to I don't know what fascism is? The assumptions and conclusions posters have made in this thread are mind-boggling.

Reread post 94. It truly doesn't sound like you know what fascism is. Maybe you could better explain your views in your posts to eliminate confusion? Thanks bud
 
According to the right, Bernie Sanders wants to turn America into Venezuela or North Korea. They have no concept of Democratic Socialism found in most of Western Europe or Scandinavia.

Again, you need to know your audience Dala. At least 30 percent of this country simply ignores facts and thinks that Canada's health care system sucks. I recently had a conversation with an obvious Trump supporter who sincerely asked, "What's wrong with treating health care as a commodity? Those who work for it can get it." He further added, "In Canada, everyone is supposed to get health care whether you work or don't and that results in higher taxes and long wait times so no one ends up getting health care."

At some point we just need to admit that inbreeding and Fox News have taken a toll on a large portion of America (mostly in the rural parts of the country or racist Confederate south). No amount of education or debating facts will convince stupid closed-minded people of their ignorant opinions.

You and Bernie need to stop with that nonsense. He is not a democratic socialist! Socialism is an economic system. The word means something quite specific. It does not mean the implementation of social programs. It doesn't. At most you could call Bernie a social democrat but certainly never a socialist of any kind.

Check out this link. It's not a perfect explanation but it is a short read

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2011/1/28/939592/-
 
Back
Top