Lynch video calling for marching, blood, death in the streets in resistance to Trump

[Aho Old Guy]

If it weren't for false narratives and equivalencies, with outrageous conspiracies and HATE!, RWNJs (i.e., Deplorables) would have nothing to talk about . . . .

except Jesus and NASCAR.

[Ibanez]

Couple this with the fact that many polls of people younger than 30 in this country that largely believe that offensive speech should not be protected. Then juxtapose that with what these people declare as being offensive and ask yourself what that toxic cocktail could lead to in our lifetimes once this plurality starts to take the reins of power.

The final reason it worries me is that there are a sh1tload of people like me - who have decided not to bother or give a single fvck anymore. I'm not interested in engaging these people AT ALL. Life is too short, and I have reached the point where as far as I am concerned, the SJW generation has learned nothing from history and WILL repeat the totalitarian mistakes of the past. At that point if I am still alive I'll be largely safe because I'll be an old curmudgeon not worth reeducation and they'll just wait for me to die off. At least that's what had BETTER happen, because I have guns and I have defensible property and my level of give-a-fvckedness has a very short shelf life.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

1) I think you have to wonder and hope that there are plenty of people on the other sides of that spectrum. I'm in my early 30s and I know way too many people that are just as you described. But I also know way too many people who are life long liberals/democrats who abhor the alt-left and are leaving the party. 1 of whom is going to run as a Republican in the next election just so these..."snowflake crybabies don't screw us."

2) You can't engage them b/c it's futile. You can't beat emotion with logic. The level of apathy is disconcerting and I'm honestly confused about how to best combat them. How do you battle the unreasonable? The illogical?

[CID1990]

Couple this with the fact that many polls of people younger than 30 in this country that largely believe that offensive speech should not be protected. Then juxtapose that with what these people declare as being offensive and ask yourself what that toxic cocktail could lead to in our lifetimes once this plurality starts to take the reins of power.

The final reason it worries me is that there are a sh1tload of people like me - who have decided not to bother or give a single fvck anymore. I'm not interested in engaging these people AT ALL. Life is too short, and I have reached the point where as far as I am concerned, the SJW generation has learned nothing from history and WILL repeat the totalitarian mistakes of the past. At that point if I am still alive I'll be largely safe because I'll be an old curmudgeon not worth reeducation and they'll just wait for me to die off. At least that's what had BETTER happen, because I have guns and I have defensible property and my level of give-a-fvckedness has a very short shelf life.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

1) I think you have to wonder and hope that there are plenty of people on the other sides of that spectrum. I'm in my early 30s and I know way too many people that are just as you described. But I also know way too many people who are life long liberals/democrats who abhor the alt-left and are leaving the party. 1 of whom is going to run as a Republican in the next election just so these..."snowflake crybabies don't screw us."

2) You can't engage them b/c it's futile. You can't beat emotion with logic. The level of apathy is disconcerting and I'm honestly confused about how to best combat them. How do you battle the unreasonable? The illogical?

Break the duopoly of the monied parties. I have no idea how to do it though

I'm also not talking about making it easier to elect third party presidents. I would much prefer to see the various parties with representation in Congress. Houndawg talks about a parliamentarian system (which is also fraught with problems) but the one thing about it is it promotes coalitions and compromise.

Both the Dems and the GOP bases are so broad that they include the most heinous among us, and those parties are rightly painted as hypocrites for it. It is time for the Libertarian minded conservatives and liberals to stop being petty assholes and start cooperating


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Pwns]

Just off the top of my head:

1. Every four years you must renew voter registration taking basically the equivalent of a citizenship test. That seems like a really low bar, but sadly it isn't.

2. Force the debate commission to allow the top 3 or 4 candidates in the polls into the debate. Most debates are not substantive anyways, so why not let the top two share some time with the little guys?

3. Mandatory open primaries. Let's a face it, a lot of the s*** candidates we get are because of the people who are voting in primaries. Trump and Hilldog aren't even that well-liked within their own party, yet they got the nominations.

All are legal and reasonable.

[Grizalltheway]

Just off the top of my head:

1. Every four years you must renew voter registration taking basically the equivalent of a citizenship test. That seems like a really low bar, but sadly it isn't.

2. Force the debate commission to allow the top 3 or 4 candidates in the polls into the debate. Most debates are not substantive anyways, so why not let the top two share some time with the little guys?

3. Mandatory open primaries. Let's a face it, a lot of the s*** candidates we get are because of the people who are voting in primaries. Trump and Hilldog aren't even that well-liked within their own party, yet they got the nominations.

All are legal and reasonable.

Not sure how #1 is legal? If you're a legal US citizen, either through birth or naturalization, and aren't a felon, you have the right to vote.

[93henfan]

Precisely. Democrats would never allow a poll test, because they don't want to lose the black vote.

[YoUDeeMan]

I don't know what TL/DR is.

Is it like RO/FL?

Too Long /Didn't Read

Yeah, so what does the backslash mean...does it have its own secret meaning?

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

I dont know what / is.

[Chizzang]

Too Long /Didn't Read

Yeah, so what does the backslash mean...does it have its own secret meaning?

It means either / or
when placed between two choices

[JohnStOnge]

Can we all agree that Lunch was obviously not calling for blood and death in resistance to Trump? Can we all agree that all she was doing was saying that, in the past, people have marched, bled, and died while trying to stand for their rights?

And can we all agree that people who are posting this video as "evidence" that she was calling for violence are completely full of shit?

I'm pretty sure that I have a lot of deep philosophical disagreements with Ms. Lynch. But this kind of distortion on the part of my "side" of the overall political debate has got to stop. If one wants to disagree with someone disagree with them honestly. Don't come with this kind of crap.

[CID1990]

Yeah, so what does the backslash mean...does it have its own secret meaning?

It means either / or
when placed between two choices

Or at the State Department in reporting cables back to D.C. it is used for emphasis (and to boldly advertise smug prickedness... of which we have legions)

The Ambassador was advised by the Foreign Minister that he will not/not be attending the Embassy function.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[CAA Flagship]

Can we all agree that Lunch was obviously not calling for blood and death in resistance to Trump? Can we all agree that all she was doing was saying that, in the past, people have marched, bled, and died while trying to stand for their rights?

And can we all agree that people who are posting this video as "evidence" that she was calling for violence are completely full of shit?

I'm pretty sure that I have a lot of deep philosophical disagreements with Ms. Lynch. But this kind of distortion on the part of my "side" of the overall political debate has got to stop. If one wants to disagree with someone disagree with them honestly. Don't come with this kind of crap.

No. She is calling for all lefties to revolt.

[houndawg]

Do you guys not think it's obvious that in that video Lynch was talking about stuff like the Civil Rights marches where, yes, people did get beaten up and bloodied as well as in some instances killed?

phpBB [video]

To say that she was calling for some kind of violent revolution is ridiculous. This kind of tin foil hat crap is what gives the "right" a bad name. And you look at the comments below the video on Youtube and you see a bunch of idiots actually buying into the "Loretta Lynch makes a video calling for marching, BLOOD and even DEATH in resistance to Trump" statement made by the looney tune who posted the video.

No, she was not calling for death and blood in the streets. She was referring to what people in the past have sometimes had to go through to gain their rights. Non violent protests that were met with violence.

Once again those of us on the "conservative" side who have at least SOME sense are confronted with the fact that we've got a bunch of paranoid, hateful, totally out of touch with reality people on "our" side that comprise a critical mass of the Republican base. It's a serious problem.

both of them...?

[houndawg]

Can we all agree that Lunch was obviously not calling for blood and death in resistance to Trump? Can we all agree that all she was doing was saying that, in the past, people have marched, bled, and died while trying to stand for their rights?

And can we all agree that people who are posting this video as "evidence" that she was calling for violence are completely full of ****?

I'm pretty sure that I have a lot of deep philosophical disagreements with Ms. Lynch. But this kind of distortion on the part of my "side" of the overall political debate has got to stop. If one wants to disagree with someone disagree with them honestly. Don't come with this kind of crap.

No. She is calling for all lefties to revolt.

Yeah! Off the pigs!


sorry...just a bit of nostalgia creeping in...

[Aho Old Guy]

Can we all agree that Lunch was obviously not calling for blood and death in resistance to Trump? Can we all agree that all she was doing was saying that, in the past, people have marched, bled, and died while trying to stand for their rights? . . .

Unlikely - for The Deplorables, anyway.

The OP, not known for his depth of thinking or accuracy, is parroting World Nut Daily propaganda. He is oblivious to the simple fact of the anniversary of 'Bloody Sunday' yesterday ...

[polsongrizz]

Awesome editing, who put this together, the Banana Splits?

[YoUDeeMan]

Dirty Dozen.