Archive

Disgusted with Progressives

  • isadore
    iclfan2;1867214 wrote:By burning down buildings? And trying to stop free speech of non-fascists? You're so out there on this issue it's humorous.
    Peaceful opposition is fine. Criminal and violent opposition should never be tolerated by any side. Not defended by yourself and the other regressives.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Tearing down the statues of racist traitors and opposing fascist storm troopers are two positive acts, whether you see it that way or not.
  • jmog
    isadore;1867212 wrote:LOL, according to you he was an abolitionist.
    An abolitionist who thought we were doing blacks an enormous favor by enslaving them.
    An abolitionist who had slaves beaten
    An abolitionist who fought in court to keep manumitted blacks in slavery.
    An abolitionist who had his army send blacks into slavery.

    and a traitor to boot.
    I am sorry that you have a tough time understanding an educated person's every day English from 170 years ago, there were many big words in there. However, everything you just said was rather idiotic in nature once you read and understand the whole quote I provided.
  • QuakerOats
    jmog;1867162 wrote:Force and coercion to stop speech they don't agree with? Right up there in the communist manifesto.

    No way; the lefties are the champions of diversity and inclusion.
  • isadore
    jmog;1867236 wrote:I am sorry that you have a tough time understanding an educated person's every day English from 170 years ago, there were many big words in there. However, everything you just said was rather idiotic in nature once you read and understand the whole quAote I provided.
    jmog wrote:He actually held abolitionist views,
    And how many more examples of atrocities he committed against blacks do I have to list before you stop giving any value to that claim. Gosh he cheated blacks into slavery, he used his army to enslave them, he had them beaten and all the while claimed they were lucky to be slaves.
  • isadore
    QuakerOats;1867238 wrote:No way; the lefties are the champions of diversity and inclusion.
    and you guys are champions of clearing streets and black churches.
  • QuakerOats
    isadore;1867250 wrote:and you guys are champions of clearing streets and black churches.

    I know you wish to follow the media's lead and lump all republicans and/or Trump voters into the Nazi/supremacist group, and that is your prerogative. Unfortunately it is wrong, ignorant, boneheaded, and leads to greater divisiveness.
  • iclfan2
    isadore;1867220 wrote:Tearing down the statues of racist traitors and opposing fascist storm troopers are two positive acts, whether you see it that way or not.
    This would be a good argument if the left didn't paint the entire right as fascists. Also, do it through legal means. You're off your rocker today.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • isadore
    QuakerOats;1867253 wrote:I know you wish to follow the media's lead and lump all republicans and/or Trump voters into the Nazi/supremacist group, and that is your prerogative. Unfortunately it is wrong, ignorant, boneheaded, and leads to greater divisiveness.
    gosh a ruddies, really, wow we had the right's president giving the fascist justification in their actions after they were attacked by those horrible anti-racists.
  • isadore
    iclfan2;1867258 wrote:This would be a good argument if the left didn't paint the entire right as fascists. Also, do it through legal means. You're off your rocker today.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    use legal means, non violent means, against killers. Now there is a recipe for massacre.
  • Heretic
    QuakerOats;1867253 wrote:I know you wish to follow the media's lead and lump all republicans and/or Trump voters into the Nazi/supremacist group, and that is your prerogative. Unfortunately it is wrong, ignorant, boneheaded, and leads to greater divisiveness.
    Says the guy who has repeatedly claimed that liberals are "the enemy".
  • QuakerOats
    They are the ones who are currently running the end run around the first amendment. If you are not going to follow the constitution and the bill of rights, then I guess you might be the enemy.
  • QuakerOats
    Chicago:

    "Alderman Raymond Lopez took to Facebook Wednesday night to decry a defaced statue of the nation’s 16th president in the Englewood neighborhood. The giant bust appears to have been damaged after someone in the 15th Ward sprayed and ignited a flammable liquid.
    “What an absolute disgraceful act of vandalism. This bust of Abraham Lincoln, erected by Phil Bloomquist on August 31, 1926, was damaged & burned,” Mr. Lopez wrote, a local NBC affiliate reported. “If anyone has any information regarding this act, please contact the police or my office immediately.”
    “F- Abe Lincoln,” responded Quintin Mitchell, whose comment was “liked” or deemed “funny” by 160 others.
    The official’s finding came just one day after President Trump stated opposition to tearing down memorials related to America’s past with slavery.
    “I wonder is it George Washington next week and is it Thomas Jefferson the week after? You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?” Mr. Trump asked "
  • Heretic
    QuakerOats;1867284 wrote:They are the ones who are currently running the end run around the first amendment. If you are not going to follow the constitution and the bill of rights, then I guess you might be the enemy.
    "You can't be divisive; only I can be divisive".

    Got it.
  • jmog
    isadore;1867249 wrote:And how many more examples of atrocities he committed against blacks do I have to list before you stop giving any value to that claim. Gosh he cheated blacks into slavery, he used his army to enslave them, he had them beaten and all the while claimed they were lucky to be slaves.
    I said he held abolitionist views. He said slavery is morally and politically evil, that is the only proof I need for the statement I made.

    You are, quite obviously, wrong here. Do some actual research on Robert E Lee rather than just spout crap you can find on Occupy Democrats FB page.

    The three most interesting eras/wars in US history (at least to me) are The Revolutionary War, The Civil War, and WW2. In all 3 cases "we" were fighting against some form of oppression (King of England, Slavery, and Nazi Germany).

    I have read as much as I can on these 3 eras and the Civil War era being the one I have spent the most time reading (mainly because it almost ripped this country apart). In my studies I would definitely say that while most of the southern generals/politicians were most undoubtedly racist men (Jefferson Davis was quite the racist, he wanted to just annex most of Mexico so they had more slave states), Robert E Lee was a good man who definitely held abolitionist views.

    I mean he was almost the leader of the Union Army, President Lincoln had Lee as his first choice and gave him the offer first. Lee was a much better strategic battle minded General than Grant was. If Lee had gone with country over state, the Civil War probably would have ended MUCH faster than it did.

    Some of the Lincoln letters to Lee before the war and to his own generals during the war were very interesting and telling stories from that era.

    One of my favorites was a guy (going off memory on which battle) that fought for the US in the War of 1812 and in the Mexican-American War, who was very old come the Civil War. He lived in Pennsylvania and Gettysburg was his back yard. He found for the Union with literally his musket from the war of 1812, as a 70 year old man.
  • O-Trap
    QuakerOats;1867284 wrote:They are the ones who are currently running the end run around the first amendment.
    You support the use of effigies and the burning of the US flag as a legal activity?
  • jmog
    O-Trap;1867304 wrote:You support the use of effigies and the burning of the US flag as a legal activity?
    Burning the flag disgusts me, but it is perfectly legal under the 1st Amendment.
  • CenterBHSFan
    BoatShoes;1867142 wrote:So the point is that we can parse words about BLM being a race-based advocacy organization and while I don't think many of their proposals or tactics are very effective - they don't want to subjugate whites. They want equality with whites in what they perceive based on various experiences to be a society that is discriminatory toward people of color e.g. a popular example I've seen them use are people of color who are petty criminals and even licensed concealed carry holders being shot by police vs. Dylan Roof who murdered multiple people of color being arrested and given Burger King (that is just an example I recall a BLM activist speaking about on NPR one day).
    BoatShoes;1867151 wrote:Here is a link to BLM's guiding principles.

    http://blacklivesmatter.com/guiding-principles/

    Much of it is too identitarian and kind of clouded in the language of modern liberal arts education that I find to be a bit annoying but I don't really see anything that might be interpreted as advocating for the subjugation of whites. Which ones of these principles do you think might be p.c. cover for desiring the subjugation of whites?
    BS, they've already started doing it? If you don't believe me, ask Bernie Sanders. After all, they de-platformed him. Twice. Milo isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed but he has been deplatformed by the left, including BLM also.

    These two are politically polar opposites. What do they have in common? Maybe some whiteness going on? lol
    Oh and Martin O'Malley was deplatformed by BLM too.

    [video=youtube;aoRleNh_EEw][/video]


    And when you have even TYT calling them out on it you've GOT to start understanding the nuances of denying speech is a part of subjugation, right??
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElcJy5yZfvk

    It's interesting to note that Bernie Sanders fought within the vicinity in one way or another for 50 solid years. I personally think he's a whacko but I can't discredit that kind of sustained dedication. But BLM didn't think twice about shutting down his speech and one activist within BLM even said that he had to "go home and do some homework"... wut

    Obviously what BLM has in written word is going to be much different than their actions. I do find it suspect that you continued pointing out the creed of BLM when the news on the above incidents where published EVERYWHERE that absolutely disclaim what BLM has written down.
  • O-Trap
    jmog;1867305 wrote:Burning the flag disgusts me, but it is perfectly legal under the 1st Amendment.
    I assumed you'd think so, as I'd imagine most people do. I'm curious if QO does, though.
  • QuakerOats
    O-Trap;1867304 wrote:You support the use of effigies and the burning of the US flag as a legal activity?

    It may be repugnant to most of us, but have at it. And if idiots in the NFL want to sit for the anthem, go for it. And if neo-Nazis want to parade around like jackasses, so be it. And if a conservative speaker is engaged to speak at a university, by God they better be allowed to speak.
  • isadore
    QuakerOats;1867314 wrote:It may be repugnant to most of us, but have at it. And if idiots in the NFL want to sit for the anthem, go for it. And if neo-Nazis want to parade around like jackasses, so be it. And if a conservative speaker is engaged to speak at a university, by God they better be allowed to speak.
    or you will drive a car through the demonstrators.
  • CenterBHSFan
    QuakerOats;1867314 wrote:It may be repugnant to most of us, but have at it. And if idiots in the NFL want to sit for the anthem, go for it. And if neo-Nazis want to parade around like jackasses, so be it. And if a conservative speaker is engaged to speak at a university, by God they better be allowed to speak.
    This is where I'm at with the whole damn thing.
  • gut
    jmog;1867305 wrote:Burning the flag disgusts me, but it is perfectly legal under the 1st Amendment.
    The lack of originality should disgust anyone, at this point. Nothing trivializes a belief faster than resorting to the flag burning trope.

    If the govt does what you want, or undoes what you didn't want, can you unburn the flag?
  • O-Trap
    QuakerOats;1867314 wrote:It may be repugnant to most of us, but have at it. And if idiots in the NFL want to sit for the anthem, go for it. And if neo-Nazis want to parade around like jackasses, so be it. And if a conservative speaker is engaged to speak at a university, by God they better be allowed to speak.
    Just making sure.
  • QuakerOats
    No problem; just wanted to be 2 for 2 in passing OC litmus tests this week.
  • O-Trap
    QuakerOats;1867337 wrote:No problem; just wanted to be 2 for 2 in passing OC litmus tests this week.
    "... just wanted to be 2 for 2 in passing ..."