• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

SCOTUS decisions

PhDeac said:
I prefer people use their First Amendment rights to confront people they disagree with. Republicans like BKF seem to prefer fists and Second Amendment Rights.
Click to expand...

Actually, I prefer disagreements to be decided at the ballot box. Unfortunately, that hasn't been working out very well for Democrats lately, so they are taking a more unhinged approach. America is taking notice.
 
SwissChaletDeac said:
When people physically protest in the way people protested at Trump rallies, they invite physical violence against themselves. It is unfortunate if it happens, but it is almost inevitable if they push it far enough.....and there is an excellent chance that the people protesting at Trump rallies actually want violence to happen. Also, they knew they could count on the Liberal Media to distort whatever happened in a way that would make Trump look bad. That's what the Liberal Media did thruout the campaign...and what it is still doing today. Go to Yahoo, for example, and scroll down & read the headlines. They no longer even bother with trying to hide their bias. Or go to any public opinion poll on what the American people think about the credibility of the Media.
Click to expand...

I regret even engaging, but please distinguish between "physical protests" and the exercise of First Amendment rights to free speech and assembly in the form of a protest. Because clearly you are making a distinction that allows you to justify the former being met with physical violence by Trump supporters and the latter which I would assume you're OK with.
 
protest like a gentleman and either donate enormous sums of money to a scumbag politician or find a lawyer and make a strange argument that your behavior or decision is covered by the first amendment
 
SwissChaletDeac said:
When people physically protest in the way people protested at Trump rallies, they invite physical violence against themselves. It is unfortunate if it happens, but it is almost inevitable if they push it far enough.....and there is an excellent chance that the people protesting at Trump rallies actually want violence to happen. Also, they knew they could count on the Liberal Media to distort whatever happened in a way that would make Trump look bad. That's what the Liberal Media did thruout the campaign...and what it is still doing today. Go to Yahoo, for example, and scroll down & read the headlines. They no longer even bother with trying to hide their bias. Or go to any public opinion poll on what the American people think about the credibility of the Media.
Click to expand...

LOL. There was no distortion dude. He said it on live TV. His own words. Conversely, don’t you think there’s be video of the protestors behaving in a way you’re accusing them of by all the Trumper’s at that rally? There atent. So your point is moot, and you do not hold Trump accountable the same way apparently hold Maxine Waters (false equivalence aside). Well done.
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
I regret even engaging, but please distinguish between "physical protests" and the exercise of First Amendment rights to free speech and assembly in the form of a protest. Because clearly you are making a distinction that allows you to justify the former being met with physical violence by Trump supporters and the latter which I would assume you're OK with.
Click to expand...

The exercise of free speech to protest does not include preventing a person or group from exercising their right to free speech. Why do you think one group should have a right to free speech that attempts to preclude another group from having that same right?

The people protesting at Trump rallies were not going there just to exercise their right to free speech. They could have done that in another venue. They were there looking for trouble which they hoped would be made to look bad on Trump by a liberal media....and to prevent Trump supporters from exercising their right to free speech. And if violence should result, that would be all that much better.
 
DDA said:
LOL. There was no distortion dude. He said it on live TV. His own words. Conversely, don’t you think there’s be video of the protestors behaving in a way you’re accusing them of by all the Trumper’s at that rally? There atent. So your point is moot, and you do not hold Trump accountable the same way apparently hold Maxine Waters (false equivalence aside). Well done.
Click to expand...

I've posted a video of protesters involved in verbal & physical confrontations at a Trump rally.

Conversely, Trump supporters didn't have a strategy of physically interfering and/or confronting Clinton supporters at her rallies the way her supporters did at most Trump rallies. Trump never told his supporters to go "anywhere & everywhere" at all publics places to confront Hillary Clinton's supporters.

Bottom line: All you Trump-haters are just full of shit. You couldn't beat him at the ballot box. You never thought he had a chance in hell of even coming close to winning the election. You laughed & made jokes for six months leading up to the election. And you still don't know how to handle your totally unexpected ass-kicking and are becoming more & more unhinged with your outrage & hatred every day. And in so doing, you are ruining your chances at making a comeback in the upcoming election.
 
trump sure has fucked up this country. i wonder how long it will take to fix it?
 
SwissChaletDeac said:
The exercise of free speech to protest does not include preventing a person or group from exercising their right to free speech. Why do you think one group should have a right to free speech that attempts to preclude another group from having that same right?

The people protesting at Trump rallies were not going there just to exercise their right to free speech. They could have done that in another venue. They were there looking for trouble which they hoped would be made to look bad on Trump by a liberal media....and to prevent Trump supporters from exercising their right to free speech. And if violence should result, that would be all that much better.
Click to expand...

I watched that video you posted. You are making huge leaps in logic to get to a point where you can definitively claim that they were there "looking for trouble" (which is a dogwhistle phrase if I've ever heard one).

The whole point of a protest is to go to a place where your opposition will be visible. It would be illogical to protest in a place where you cannot be seen or heard. So, for non-Trump supporters, protesting at a Trump rally makes sense, and is perfectly legal. In that video, I saw a Trump supporter grab the sign of a protestor and rip it up before the protestor advanced and shoved the Trump supporter (0:08), I saw a white man with a camo hat and American flag draped around his shoulders (who I am going to go ahead and say is a Trump supporter) and a black man (who I will say is a protestor) fighting, but no inciting incident to be seen (0:12), and I saw a Trump supporter screaming into the fact of a protestor, and when the protestor backed up the Trump supporter advanced and continued screaming in his face before the protestor threw a punch (0:18).

Now, you can make all the leaps in logic you want, but just by watching the video, it shows two instances of a Trump supporter either trying to prevent the opposition's right to free speech (ripping up the sign) or shouting down a protestor to prevent them from exercising free speech (the guy screaming in a protestor's face). The other instance of a scuffle was neutral in the video as you could not see an inciting incident. So, in my eyes, the Trump supporters were the ones trying to prevent the opposition's free speech, not the protestors, and it definitely appeared that the Trump supporters were inviting violence because they could play snowflake and pin it on the protestors.
 
Bob will make any argument to justify violence from white supremacists.
 
SwissChaletDeac said:
The exercise of free speech to protest does not include preventing a person or group from exercising their right to free speech.
Click to expand...

It actually does.

The First Amendment (and through the Fourteenth Amendment) simply provides that the state shall not prevent the exercise of free speech, not that private individuals shall not.
 
Milhouse said:
trump sure has fucked up this country. i wonder how long it will take to fix it?
Click to expand...

Agree to disagree. I think he has been trying to correct some of the things that have been fucked up for a long time before he got there. Agree, though, that it's going to take a long time to fix it. His predecessors had been fucking it up for a very long time. Bush or Clinton? Like Tweedle-Dum & Tweedle-Dee. Trump got rid of both of them, thank God. If he never accomplished anything else he should be put on Mt Rushmore for that alone. Too many people riding in the wagon and not enough people pulling it....and more people jumping onto the wagon every day. Hillary would have taken the country beyond the point of any return.
 
Milhouse said:
trump sure has fucked up this country. i wonder how long it will take to fix it?
Click to expand...

Indeed. My guess is that at least one term of a future president will be spent undoing much of what Trump has done, especially in foreign policy. BTW, I should credit you with seeing what bkf/bob/SwissChalet was up to years ago. A year or two ago bob, while he still posted as bkf, took a thread totally off topic with his usual rants, and you saw what he was up to, and pointed it out. Bob's reply? "It's like shooting fish in a barrel." Rinse, repeat.
 
all the boomers who are doing the fucking are going to be soiling their diapers when the millennials and younger are in charge of the death panels
 
SwissChaletDeac said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=timVG06KX8M

When you go looking for trouble, sometimes you find it.
Click to expand...

Seems like the natural culmination of the anti-PC movement.

19510578_334932460273028_4437980780719315754_n.jpg
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
I watched that video you posted. You are making huge leaps in logic to get to a point where you can definitively claim that they were there "looking for trouble" (which is a dogwhistle phrase if I've ever heard one).

The whole point of a protest is to go to a place where your opposition will be visible. It would be illogical to protest in a place where you cannot be seen or heard. So, for non-Trump supporters, protesting at a Trump rally makes sense, and is perfectly legal. In that video, I saw a Trump supporter grab the sign of a protestor and rip it up before the protestor advanced and shoved the Trump supporter (0:08), I saw a white man with a camo hat and American flag draped around his shoulders (who I am going to go ahead and say is a Trump supporter) and a black man (who I will say is a protestor) fighting, but no inciting incident to be seen (0:12), and I saw a Trump supporter screaming into the fact of a protestor, and when the protestor backed up the Trump supporter advanced and continued screaming in his face before the protestor threw a punch (0:18).

Now, you can make all the leaps in logic you want, but just by watching the video, it shows two instances of a Trump supporter either trying to prevent the opposition's right to free speech (ripping up the sign) or shouting down a protestor to prevent them from exercising free speech (the guy screaming in a protestor's face). The other instance of a scuffle was neutral in the video as you could not see an inciting incident. So, in my eyes, the Trump supporters were the ones trying to prevent the opposition's free speech, not the protestors, and it definitely appeared that the Trump supporters were inviting violence because they could play snowflake and pin it on the protestors.
Click to expand...

BKF plz respond
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top