Where are the Skinheads

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sat Mar 12, 2016 11:43 am

Funny how I don't see the skinheads and neonazis closing down the Hillary or Sanders rallies. Yet the foaming aberrant leftist don't have any problem at a Trump rally. Is this the norm by the left to intimidate instead of discussion? Then we have the secret service having to get surround Trumps in Ohio to protect him. Of course the leftist media is painting this as all Trumps fault. But is it? I suspect the left planned all this in hopes of denigrating Trump to slow his momentum. This kind of reminds me of the Missouri professor calling for muscle to remove a reporter (she has since been fired). Can't wait for the RNC national convention. Wonder if it will be like the DNC convention back in 68.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Mar 12, 2016 11:51 am

woodchip wrote:Funny how I don't see the skinheads and neonazis closing down the Hillary or Sanders rallies.

Good golly, man, how much of their beer drinking time do they have to give up. Between all the Trump rallies, they don't have the time.

Yet the foaming aberrant leftist don't have any problem at a Trump rally

hmmm, people exercising Constitutional rights are now 'aberrant'?

.

Is this the norm by the left to intimidate instead of discussion?

who is intimidated? Surely, not Trump, the wannabe tough guy, who runs back to his NYC apartment when things don't go right.

But is it? I suspect the left planned all this in hopes of denigrating Trump to slow his momentum.

why would they do that? The left largely is rooting for Trump to get the nomination, so they can hammer his and his idiot supporters into oblivion in November. No, this is an issue of the Donald's making. He spent much of late February calling for protestors to be attacked, carried out on stretchers, etc, so no one should be shocked that the morons following him actually bought into it.

This kind of reminds me of the Missouri professor calling for muscle to remove a reporter (she has since been fired). Can't wait for the RNC national convention. Wonder if it will be like the DNC convention back in 68.

no, at this one, half the violent, dangerous people will be INSIDE the building.

vision · Post by **vision** » Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:25 pm

callmeslick wrote:
woodchip wrote:But is it? I suspect the left planned all this in hopes of denigrating Trump to slow his momentum.
why would they do that? The left largely is rooting for Trump to get the nomination... No, this is an issue of the Donald's making.

Exactly. A Trump nomination is a Democratic win. And what momentum? Trump has a mere 99 more delegates than Cruz, and both of them have about a third the number needed to get the nomination.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Sat Mar 12, 2016 3:14 pm

woodchip wrote:Funny how I don't see the skinheads and neonazis closing down the Hillary or Sanders rallies. Yet the foaming aberrant leftist don't have any problem at a Trump rally. Is this the norm by the left to intimidate instead of discussion? Then we have the secret service having to get surround Trumps in Ohio to protect him. Of course the leftist media is painting this as all Trumps fault. But is it? I suspect the left planned all this in hopes of denigrating Trump to slow his momentum. This kind of reminds me of the Missouri professor calling for muscle to remove a reporter (she has since been fired). Can't wait for the RNC national convention. Wonder if it will be like the DNC convention back in 68.

That's because Sanders hasn't been calling for his supporters to punch and kick every dissenter or reporter in the audience. Sanders has remained upbeat and on message, which doesn't include derogatory and inflammatory speech. Sanders hasn't said anything to inflame the skinheads or neo-nazis. Now, I could see a few Wall Street types taking exception to Sanders' message though.....

But wait woody, you might just get your wish and have a few protesters get very vocal at a few of Hillary's events. She's managed to tick off every gay person in the country by spouting revisionist Reagan AIDS/HIV history at Nancy's funeral. She's the one who needs a few protestors, not Sanders, and personally, I'd like to see how she handles it.

http://gawker.com/hillary-clintons-reag ... 1764346878

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Mar 12, 2016 5:11 pm

actually, the first campaign I recall having an event disrupted by protesters was the Sanders campaign, and BLM protesters. He didn't, as I remember, call for anyone to be beaten up, or even taken out. He stepped back and let them rant.

vision · Post by **vision** » Sat Mar 12, 2016 5:31 pm

callmeslick wrote:He stepped back and let them rant.

What a guy! Sanders for Prez!

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 6:26 am

Oh great, lets have another President who'll let the world walk all over us while he stands back...

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 7:11 am

woodchip wrote:Oh great, lets have another President who'll let the world walk all over us while he stands back...

what does acceptance of the right of free speech have to do with that?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:20 am

Lets see, the protesters are not accepting the free speech of Trump, why should the reverse hold true?

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:29 am

Yea, there is a legitimate point to be made when someone comes to a rally and disrupts “your” right to free speech, then complains about theirs.

Woody makes a perfectly good point…have your own rally, where you have the soapbox.

Good point dude, sometimes these “subtleties” go over some peoples heads.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:38 am

woodchip wrote:Lets see, the protesters are not accepting the free speech of Trump, why should the reverse hold true?

do you grasp the whole public soapbox heritage from which that right grew? It wasn't the right to take turns, it wasn't the right to be polite, it was a right to freely express yourself. That right has been carried forward, even to include political mass advertising by corporations and large entities(unions and PACS), which I don't agree with, but accept because the court has ruled. That right is ONLY restricted when the exercise DIRECTLY threatens the well being of others(the FIRE in a crowded theater argument). Period. Nowhere is there a right of anyone to assault, or even arrest anyone for exercise of Free Speech.

I ask again, why do you hate America and our system of government? I mean, you could move, although that would require you getting 'free' health care.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:54 am

“Public soapbox” does not apply to organized events taking place in rented venues.

Try exorcising your first amendment rights by running out on the field at a football game.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:57 am

So slick, it is apparently OK in your book for anarchy to break out at political rallies. See my reply in the other thread about how the DNC controlled "free speech" at their 2004 convention. Then tell us how free speech should be unconditional, even if it leads to a riot.

And Spidey brings up a perfectly valid point.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:24 am

Spidey wrote:“Public soapbox” does not apply to organized events taking place in rented venues.

please find me where that is accepted law. Sure, if they got every participant to agree to terms before entering, or some such. Hell, people hold up protest banners at large concerts and stuff, happens pretty often.

Try exorcising your first amendment rights by running out on the field at a football game.

ticketed event

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:43 am

Control of rented space.

Holding up banners does not prevent the event from taking place.

If you rent a space to give a speech, or play music, the law provides that you have a right to do exactly that.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:46 am

not sure where someone holding up a banner or shouting something different than other shouting people in such a venue comes close to the standard needed, Spidey. As I said elsewhere, all Trump seems to be doing is renting these halls, but not ticketing the events, not posting codes of conduct at the entrances, nothing. It's almost as if he is inviting disruptions.......hmmmmm.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 10:00 am

Even so, if you are invited into a place, and you decide to disrupt the event, the host can ask you to be quiet or leave.

If you don't be quiet or leave, you can be legally removed, as you have no legal right to remain on the premises.

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:15 am

So how does that apply to the protestors being perfectly silent and wearing T-shirts with contrary messages? Were they being "disruptive" too?

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:39 am

First question…only if there is a dress code.

Second question…absolutely not.

vision · Post by **vision** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 1:30 pm

The thing that is especially weird about Trump's rallies is that he isn't even saying anything. He has no ideology. He simply works on the crowd's fear and says hollow phrases like "we're going to do good thing and get rid of bad people" and "we're going to make America great again." At least with Sanders you know what he stands for. How are Trump supporters getting worked up without a binding ideology? It's "us vs them" in the purest form, but they don't even know who "us" is.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 2:05 pm

Spidey wrote:Yea, there is a legitimate point to be made when someone comes to a rally and disrupts “your” right to free speech, then complains about theirs.

Woody makes a perfectly good point…have your own rally, where you have the soapbox.

Good point dude, sometimes these “subtleties” go over some peoples heads.

You know what these protesters should do instead of being disruptive jerks? They need to hold huge counter rallies right outside Trump's venues in public space and not interfere or engage physically in any way, so that as people who come and go to Trump's little speeches have to go by a noise gauntlet. They don't engage Trump's supporters at all. Just stand there voicing their opinions and let all those Trump supporters know the a large chunk of the voting public is NOT in agreement with Trump or his ideals. Don't get in fights, don't throw punches or flip the bird and Trump won't get to play the victim role. But I'll have to admit, it would damn hard to resist the urge to flip off Trump.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 2:43 pm

vision wrote:The thing that is especially weird about Trump's rallies is that he isn't even saying anything. He has no ideology. He simply works on the crowd's fear and says hollow phrases like "we're going to do good thing and get rid of bad people" and "we're going to make America great again." At least with Sanders you know what he stands for. How are Trump supporters getting worked up without a binding ideology? It's "us vs them" in the purest form, but they don't even know who "us" is.

Well Trump sees how the dumbed down masses bought "Hope and change" hook line and sinker so I guess he thought doing the same would work.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:12 pm

Spidey wrote:Even so, if you are invited into a place, and you decide to disrupt the event, the host can ask you to be quiet or leave.

If you don't be quiet or leave, you can be legally removed, as you have no legal right to remain on the premises.

except, as I've pointed out to you repeatedly, no one is running these as invitation-only closed events.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:23 pm

callmeslick wrote:
Spidey wrote:Even so, if you are invited into a place, and you decide to disrupt the event, the host can ask you to be quiet or leave.

If you don't be quiet or leave, you can be legally removed, as you have no legal right to remain on the premises.
except, as I've pointed out to you repeatedly, no one is running these as invitation-only closed events.

An event doesn't need to be marketed as "invitation-only" or "closed" or "ticketed" for the person hosting it to be able to remove people.

vision · Post by **vision** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 4:14 pm

woodchip wrote:
vision wrote:How are Trump supporters getting worked up without a binding ideology?
Well Trump sees how the dumbed down masses bought "Hope and change" hook line and sinker so I guess he thought doing the same would work.

As a Trump supporter is this the best you have? This is the justification for your support of this man?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 5:03 pm

Lothar wrote:An event doesn't need to be marketed as "invitation-only" or "closed" or "ticketed" for the person hosting it to be able to remove people.

true, but it would seem easier to remove them on the way in, if you don't wish to have protesters be the focus of the gathering, huh? Therein lies the key issue, aside from calling for the INJURY(note, not removal) of protesters, which Trump clearly has: Am I the only one wondering if Trump is allowing this sort of disruption for theatrical effect to further whip up the faithful?

vision · Post by **vision** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 5:36 pm

Ugh. So reading about these rallies made me think of a scene from Pink Floyd's "The Wall" named "In The Flesh" and, naturally, someone else had the same idea and made a Trump mash-up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnp5NShWyO8

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:37 pm

callmeslick wrote:Am I the only one wondering if Trump is allowing this sort of disruption for theatrical effect to further whip up the faithful?

oh, I think it's obvious he is, and lots of Useful Idiots are playing into his hands.

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:51 pm

As I saw someone note the other day, the truly depressing thing about Trump isn't the sort of ★■◆● he's spewing...it's just how many people are lapping it up. That's the true problem that needs solving, and damned if anyone out there knows how to do it.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 10:22 am

Top Gun wrote:As I saw someone note the other day, the truly depressing thing about Trump isn't the sort of ★■◆● he's spewing...it's just how many people are lapping it up. That's the true problem that needs solving, and damned if anyone out there knows how to do it.

Here's what I said about this a few days back, in a theology discussion:

It's definitely not about Trump.

It's about the rise of, and acceptance of, dehumanizing rhetoric. About the way we get offended when someone criticizes our "tribe" even if the criticism is completely true, but we give a free pass to people who criticize "tribes" we dislike, even if their criticism is unfair, false, or hateful. If we voted for Obama, we smile when people call people who voted for Bush "dumb", and vice versa. We play along when people call the poor "leeches", or when people talk about starting an uprising against the wealthy. We have all sorts of bad names for people who support policies or politicians we don't like. 99% of the time we can't have a conversation about racial privilege because it's phrased in demeaning terms from the start. We get offended when people's criticism of our religion is accurate and based on substance, but we tolerate criticism of other religions when it's inaccurate and vapid. We celebrate comedians and commentators who set up straw men and then toss insults at them. Instead of having productive disagreements over substance, we as a society have decided that it's better to write off the other side as less-than-human and not deserving of respect or dignity.

Donald Trump is our fault. Not mine, not yours, not a political party's. Ours, all together. It won't go away until we choose, as a society (and as a whole world), to see the face of Christ in everyone. In the poor and the wealthy, in Democrats and Republicans, in heterosexuals and LGBTQIAetc, in Americans and Mexicans and Russians and Indians and Chinese and Rwandans, in Christians and Muslims and Jews and Atheists and Buddhists, and even in that jerk who lives down the street with the really awful opinions about the world. Donald Trump is the wake-up call that we've let dehumanization take root and grow for far too long.

even people who see Trump for the evil that he is... talk just like him about other groups! You'll hear people decrying the rise of Trump, but then in the next breath they talk about how worthless all Republicans are, or how dumb liberals are, or how all Christians are bigots, or how atheists hate the constitution. And it's like... what's wrong with you people? Do you not ever listen to yourselves? When did it become OK to spew hate and be judgmental of entire groups of people, but only the groups of people you deem it OK to hate and judge?

it's not that we're insulated from opposing views, exactly. It's that we don't treat them thoughtfully and seriously. We don't treat them like they're held by good, thoughtful, reasonable people who have different priorities. Instead, we dehumanize the people who hold those views, and then view their reprimands as a badge of honor. People *want* to get hate-mail from those "bigots" or "faggots" or "libtards" or "fascists" or "lazy immigrants" or whatever group they've dehumanized; it makes them feel justified.

In a sense, by making ridicule and derision our tools of choice, by choosing provocative approaches, and by overreacting to pushback, we become impervious to opposing views. We can't really listen to that person on the other side, because somebody else from that side once said something mean about my side, which just proves they're blind and stupid and not worth our time to reason with, and therefore justifies the choice of ridicule. It's a vicious cycle. There are no winners, only losers.

Of course, everyone has an excuse for why their tribe isn't really at fault and the other tribe is. Because we're all so deeply dedicated to our own tribalism that we don't even realize it's happening.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 2:02 pm

So what does that say about the popularity of a religious demagogue like Ted Cruz? He's supposedly an Evangelical, one who worships Jesus, but most of what he claims when he's campaigning are lies 56% of the time.

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/ted-cruz/

Cruz is a poser who only wants power. He only follows his beliefs when it suits him. Why Christians would vote for him stumps me. Why ANY Christians would vote for Trump really astounds me.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/benjamin- ... vangelical

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 2:25 pm

hmmmm, under NC law, the Orange-haired Baboon might have some issues, they are considering charging Trump with Incitement to Riot:

meanwhile, here we have a classy politician, defusing, disarming and NOT TOSSING OUT a heckler:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66R5UhnDlj8&app=desktop

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 3:00 pm

tunnelcat wrote:Why ANY Christians would vote for Trump really astounds me.

From the data I've looked at, Trump pulls a lot of support from Evangelicals who don't go to church.

"Evangelicals who don't go to church" are an odd demographic -- they have the highest divorce rate in the nation (whereas Evangelicals who actually go to church have a well-below-average divorce rate) and are otherwise generally speaking nowhere close to the teachings of Jesus.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 4:20 pm

callmeslick wrote:hmmmm, under NC law, the Orange-haired Baboon might have some issues, they are considering charging Trump with Incitement to Riot:

If the orange pant suit wearing senile, disturbingly haggard looking idiot the Dems are promoting...might skate with much worse problems, I don't any charges will be brought against Trumps

callmeslick wrote:meanwhile, here we have a classy politician, defusing, disarming and NOT TOSSING OUT a heckler:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66R5UhnDlj8&app=desktop

Yeah, so classy a follower of his has charged Trumps podium causing a reaction from the secret service. Has the classy Crazy Bernie said anything against the incident? Nope.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 5:29 am

didn't even watch the video again,huh, Woodchip?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 7:13 am

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz ... ving-nazis

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 8:25 am

You do know that your new tag line is about Hillary as the "Orange is the new Black" is a netflix series on women in prison. You finally came up with something truly humorous and you didn't even realize it.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 11:17 am

can't read for comprehension can you, Woody? Oh, and at the rate he's going, Trump will be in an orange jumpsuit(matching hair and skin tone) before Hillary is elected.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 11:40 am

Evidently you are having a hard time understanding my comment.

Foil · Post by **Foil** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 12:01 pm

Get back on topic, guys, or drop it.