Michigan Secretary of State say armed protesters gathered outside her home

Here's the problem: @Moolk and his "Welcome to what you started," comment is spot-on here. It's something I even noted elsewhere when the riots began and if I weren't taking a quick break from grading ∞ tons of late assignments before grades are due, I'd even search my own quote for the board. But the bottom line is, we've had protests lately and more pointedly the Floyd protests with Antifa et al where there WERE armed people waving guns about - and the response from said politicians SHOULD have been to quash these protests as terrorism. Instead they were praised when they looted stores as their own versions of reparations, were tolerated, even celebrated when they took over a block in Seattle, and generally coddled as mere people engaging in the right to protest. So now, what we got are the chickens coming home to roost. The generally liberal politicians that didn't stop what became unruly mobs and the absolutely LW press that celebrated this have no real argument when others do what was allowed and encouraged by themselves.

@Pollycy used to have a quote in his sig - "What you tolerate, you will get MORE of ...!" and that is so correct. You see it as a teacher, definitely as a parent - it's true. The left as a whole tolerated this kinda stuff and now here we are.

I mentioned the story in a post HERE Basically, two people in the DMV were arguing that Obama should be given more executive powers. They were practically discussing Obama be given emperor-like powers. I politely said that stuff like giving W such with the Patriot Act was why I quit the GOP because you don't give power to a person - you give it to the office. And I said that hey, perhaps the next prez would be a Republican - would you be happy with someone you disagreed with having the same power you wanted Obama to have. They saw my point. Basically, think about what you cheer on in your side because before you know it the other side will have that power too and then what argument do you have against it's use?

Perhaps an extreme example but what happens in Washington when conservative or RW protestors start appearing? What if one of these groups takes over a block? How's the governor gonna look then? Or if it happens in Seattle, what's the mayor gonna say?

 

We get it.

Bernie supporters shoots up a baseball field full of Republicans and critical injures a Congressman and there is no Bernie Fault. Trump supporters protest and Trump is 100% at fault. Nice Leftist Logic there.

 

Correct, because Bernie doesn't use the same type of rhetoric that Trump uses. Trump's is much worse. If you can't see this, I can understand how you would be flummoxed as to why the entire world doesn't see it your way, outside of team trump.

 

Bernie is an idiot who will be gone soon anyways. He is as hypocritical as they come. And he is one of the worst with rhetoric.

 

The guy that wrote the book I am referencing said "all power comes from the barrel of a gun."

 

Biden is a criminal who took millions from Russia and Ukraine and supported Obama on every bad thing he ever did.

 

Good!

Who's Bernie?

And why should I care?

 

You made the weirdo claim that Trump is responsible for what a follower does. But, somehow, someway that doesn't apply to asshat Democrats like Bernie Sanders who's follower literally opened fire on the Republican Congressional Softball practice and nearly murdered Congressman Scalise. It's amusing to watch you try to be obtuse and not face your inconsistent logic head on.

 

No. I made the claim that Trump is responsible for what Trump does. Which is to provoke his extremist supporters to commit acts of violence. And he is also responsible for what he doesn't do, which is to denounce these acts.

Who's Bernie? Do we have two Presidents? And why do you keep trying to change the subject?

 

Complete hypocritical double standard noted.

Thanks for playing.

 

Yea, but lets not equate months long rioting with not a peep from the left with a single incident....that...would be a joke.

 

You've got Cuomo on CNN saying 'since when did protesting have to be peaceful'....but yea, they didn't promote it at all.

And with this protest, any destruction of property yet? Assaults?...anything of that nature?

You are trying to equate, like others in this thread, months long rioting with a single protest. That simple fact pretty much destroys any 'hypocrisy' you try to point out from the right.

 

You gotta lose this 'armed to intimidate others' mentality. It's just wrong way too often. Being armed is first and foremost about personal safety. If you feel intimidated, that's your problem.

And before you lose your mind, no, I'm not saying nobody ever uses guns to intimidate. I'm simply saying the act of being armed doesn't mean it's for intimidation.

 

So you think we should wait until there are dead people before we demand that the President of the United States, who is the main inspiration for this, convincingly demand that his supporters stand down. Instead Trump told them to "stand by". To be prepared for his call to violence. That is a very flimsy assurance. The situation is clear, and it calls for some "leader" (and Trump is that leader, albeit a negative one) to demand that they do not engage in violence in his name. Any blood shed will be in Trump's hands.

I am doing no such thing. In fact, I am debunking a poster who does do that.

 

Boo-hoo. Some Righties gave Lefties a taste of their own medicine and Lefties don't like it...

 

Trump is not the inspiration. Those at which the protests are directed at are the inspiration because it was their actions, not the presidents.

And the hypocrisy of demanding that the right condemn this single act while the left stood by and did nothing for months while their supporters destroyed cities and peoples lives would be laughable if it weren't so sad and pathetic.

You clearly have no principles that you'll stand for, you'll go with whatever narrative benefits your political party.

What absolute nonsense. Him saying 'stand by' was absolutely not 'to be prepared for his call to violence'. You're beyond desperate now.

Yet again demanding the right condemn a single protest while the left ignored months of rioting. You have no leg to stand on here.

Also, I thought protesting was perfectly legal? Didn't the left vehemently defend their right to protest (despite all the violence from them)?

The hypocrisy here is astounding. The right can't even peacefully protest without the left becoming unhinged while leftists can burn cities and destroy businesses and the left does nothing until polls tell them to.

I seriously can't believe you're even attempting to make this argument.

Keep saying you aren't....maybe you'll believe it eventually.

 

Definitely the inspiration.



And at no point have we seen him say anything to dissuade these nuts. His only message: "Stand by".

So there you have it, folks. If they finally succeed in kidnapping the Governor of Michigan... or any other act of violence.... according to this poster: she asked for it!

Nope! People who respect the constitutional right to protest vehemently defend their right to protest. There is no provision in the constitution that says that peaceful protesters lose that right if there are non-peaceful protesters somewhere else.

You might want to read the Constitution

In that I completely agree....

 

They mad about actual peaceful protesting , where nobody was hurt and damage wasn’t taking place . Guns or not if nothing happened then what you complaining about ?

Why don’t they complain about the constant left wing looting and rioting and violence ?

 

While I do not believe the election was stolen in any way, I thought the left liked the idea of crowds going to people’s homes and protesting. They sure seemed ok with it when a crowd trespassed into a walled neighborhood in Saint Louis to get to the mayor.

 

I am not a fan of whataboutisms in fact some people, not I, would say that is a cowardly way to debate. Ok so this is my point, I do not care who is doing the wrongfull act be it RW , LW, gooey middle, Proud Boys, Bad Girls, BLM, ALTIFALITES, or Trump loving Russian, wrong is wrong.

Just because one group does it are you saying others should? I say no!

 

If they were legally obeying the carry laws and were not trespassing, they have the same right to be there as the yelling, screaming, burning and looting leftwingers that have destroyed Portland.

 

That is not the issue. True that they have the right to protest but they are protesting at the home of a Sec of State that did her job according to law.
Just. Ecause we may have the right to do something stupid or obnoxious that does not mean that we should do it.

 

So, the word liberate triggers you....good to know.

I didn't say that. I didn't hint at that. I didn't say anything that could be interpreted as such.

You literally have no argument. You have been reduced to pretending I said something just to make a point. You are awesome.

I never implied otherwise. I never said otherwise.

It's as if you read whatever you want to read regardless of what I type. Of course, this is no longer a surprise given your previous comments.

I have. I also apply it to everybody, not just when it suits me as you and the left clearly do.

And yet you fail miserably to point it out while I'm shining a spotlight on yours and the lefts.

If you respond, make sure it's to what I actually say and not some gross misinterpretation of it.

 

It doesn't matter if it triggers me or not because I don't own a gun. Those nuts do.

You said: "Those at which the protests are directed at are the inspiration because it was their actions"

You said exactly that. That the inspiration for nuts threatening their life is due to those at which the protests are directed. In this case, the governor of Michigan.

If you want to retract, do it. There is no shame in retracting. There is shame in denying you said something you did say.

Bingo! I will not respond to your strawman arguments. No matter what you say I will "pretend" that you are staying on topic and not trying to wiggle out of the hole you dug for yourself by changing the subject. Which is what you and I both know that you are doing.

You said: "Didn't the left vehemently defend their right to protest (despite all the violence from them)"

The left defended the protester's right to peaceful protests. There is no violence from peaceful protesters, but there is violence from rioters. The left did not defend those. And the fact that they exist does not mean that peaceful protesters lose their constitutional right. You equate the two. My interpretation is correct. And my response was appropriate.

Great! So you admit that you attacked me instead of responding to that fact that I stated. But the discussion was not about me. It's about Trump exacerbating his thugs to the point in which they threaten violence and doing nothing to dissuade them. For which I presented evidence in the form of Trump tweets.

So looks like that's a concession. I couldn't care less what "spotlight" on the left or on me you pretend to "shine". Because I'm not what this discussion is about. Whatever I am or fail to be doesn't remove the fact that you had no response to the above. The topic of this thread.

Thanks for playing...

 

What is that supposed to mean? Don't like LA's open carry laws? Don't live in LA. Simple. Free speech is irrelevant.