DescentBB

Foil wrote:Get back on topic, guys, or drop it.

the topic is just dog whistle politics. you might as well shut it down here.

All the topics are dog whistle politics ferno. If you can't contribute then don't post. OP shows the a very scary turn of events we haven't seen since the 1968 democratic convention. Do you want strong arm tactics shaping political outcomes? The liberals certainly don't seem to mind.

now, it looks like it will be going to the July convention. Let the not so subtle threats begin:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... li=BBnb7Kz

Looks like Bernie is not going to sit back and allow Hillary an easy pass either.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-bernie- ... delegates/

And speaking of skinheads and Neo-Nazies, lookie who's supporting Trump?

http://republicanclowncar.blogspot.com/ ... rting.html

And here is link showing Hillary supporters all for repealing the 4th amendment:

http://politistick.com/more-proof-hilla ... iff-video/

woodchip wrote:And here is link showing Hillary supporters all for repealing the 4th amendment:

http://politistick.com/more-proof-hilla ... iff-video/

seriously? You don't think some film editor with an agenda can't find supporters of ANYONE who are ignorant of such facts? I mean, it was just a few weeks back where 65 percent of Trump supporters polled supported bombing a fictitious town. Leno used to find clueless folks in the streets with regularity as a bit on his show. Get over it, we live in a land containing a lot of folks who are far less aware of civics than they should be.

Always finding some excuse to defend your side...as a true party hack would do.

woodchip wrote:Always finding some excuse to defend your side...as a true party hack would do.

ok, Lothar, whatever you say.

woodchip wrote:And here is link showing Hillary supporters all for repealing the 4th amendment:

http://politistick.com/more-proof-hilla ... iff-video/

I don't support Hillary. You, however, support Trump. What's your excuse?

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:Always finding some excuse to defend your side...as a true party hack would do.

ok, Lothar, whatever you say.

Wow, dude. Just wow.

Lothar wrote:

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:Always finding some excuse to defend your side...as a true party hack would do.

ok, Lothar, whatever you say.

Wow, dude. Just wow.

just busting your chain, after the heavy-handed approach to 'teaching' elsewhere. You know I don't equate the two of you. This is why I objected so strenuously to the 'party hack' label.

tunnelcat wrote:

woodchip wrote:And here is link showing Hillary supporters all for repealing the 4th amendment:

http://politistick.com/more-proof-hilla ... iff-video/

I don't support Hillary. You, however, support Trump. What's your excuse?

Because I'm tired of schlock politicians of the Republicrat genre that treat us all as mushrooms. Do like being a mushroom?

woodchip wrote:Because I'm tired of schlock politicians of the Republicrat genre that treat us all as mushrooms. Do like being a mushroom?

you're still behaving like a mushroom, but just choosing a different type of manure to live in. I'll pass. The nation is not 'weak', is not 'losing' and is still great. I have no urge to see anyone mess with that because of blind anger being fed with racist, finger-pointing hatred.

To each his own

callmeslick wrote:you're still behaving like a mushroom, but just choosing a different type of manure to live in.

Good one.

I would go further and say that Trump is keeping you in the dark more than others simply because he's never said anything of substance on any issue. The closest I've heard him come to making a statement was about increasing state-to-state competition for health insurance, but that's as far as it got.

To get back on topic the loony left activist had shut down a major road to the Trump rally. So here's a question, how is blocking the road to prevent Trump supporters from attending his rally any different than the protesters in Oregon taking over the federal wildlife sanctuary? So do you adult supporters of Hillary and Crazy Bernie approve of this childish behavior? Or do you think as long as it is the left doing the public hindrance thing it is OK? Do you like how the left is escalating the threat level towards those who go to Trump rallies as a means to intimidate them? Looking at the vids of the protesters I don't see very many adults among them.

woodchip wrote:To get back on topic the loony left activist had shut down a major road to the Trump rally. So here's a question, how is blocking the road to prevent Trump supporters from attending his rally any different than the protesters in Oregon taking over the federal wildlife sanctuary?

1. they weren't armed
2. they left peaceably when asked,and proceeded to the rally
3. I don't recall anyone suggesting that they'd harm law enforcement if arrested
that said, I was saying on Progressive sites that such protests are more counter-productive than anything. I'm not a big fan of protests which inconvenience the general public.
I saw the videos and saw plenty of adults. Also, I know of a couple of folks in their late 60s who went to protest Trump. Generalization is usually a shaky ground to stand on, Woody.

callmeslick wrote:
1. they weren't armed.

Yeah I figured you'd throw that in. Yet they were in a remote area and as far as I know they didn't prevent anyone from visiting the refuge

callmeslick wrote: 2. they left peaceably when asked,and proceeded to the rally.

Not all of them as arrests were made

callmeslick wrote: I saw the videos and saw plenty of adults. Also, I know of a couple of folks in their late 60s who went to protest Trump. Generalization is usually a shaky ground to stand on, Woody.

I saw mostly young adults who looked like they had a buzz going. Were there adults there? Yeah but few and far between.

'looked like they had a buzz on'
project much?
Also, see my edit. No one threatened officers of the law, whatsoever.

I suggest you review the DNC convention of 68 to see where we are headed.

woodchip wrote:I suggest you review the DNC convention of 68 to see where we are headed.

I don't know.......I'm quite sure more than a few view it that way, but '68 was about a huge issue, the war. Unless something changes, I see neither the scale nor the gravitas around any Trump uprising.

callmeslick wrote:I'm quite sure more than a few view it that way, but '68 was about a huge issue, the war.

That was a big part of it, but there was even more going on. Lot's of unprecedented cultural change in the 60s, not just in the US, but around the world. I agree there is nothing today that matches that climate.

Unrelated: Last night a friend of mine sat me down to watch this video of a family who supports Trump. It made me kinda sad.

I saw that video, was one of the things that made me comment on the fact that Trump is getting more support than just the usual rabble.

And, father God, we just thank you that you’re going to use Donald Trump for your glory in your kingdom, oh, father God.

God: *vomits*

no no, tg, it's more like...

God: LOL. ...... oh wait you're serious. okayyou'reonyourown

Spidey wrote:I saw that video, was one of the things that made me comment on the fact that Trump is getting more support than just the usual rabble.

yes, he's clearly crossed over into the truly unusual.

Watched that video.

and honestly... I kind of wish I hadn't.

the only thing that could express my bewilderment (among other things) would be the fryface.

Is that vid any more disturbing than these:

http://thetruthwins.com/archives/6-vide ... rack-obama

And how about Jamie Foxx doing the Hallelujahs for Obama:

Actor Jamie Foxx is stirring some controversy in the conservative blogosphere this morning after saying that we should give honor to God and our lord and savior Barack Obama during an awards show on Sunday.

wow, what a stretch, woody. Singing praises to the first African American President at a black awards show is wrong, somehow(note that Foxx never used your goofy Lord and Savior language)?

I don’t see where woody said it was “wrong” seems more like an example of a cult of personality, sort of like the video in question.

But you go right on twisting words…I find it quite entertaining at this point.

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:I suggest you review the DNC convention of 68 to see where we are headed.

I don't know.......I'm quite sure more than a few view it that way, but '68 was about a huge issue, the war. Unless something changes, I see neither the scale nor the gravitas around any Trump uprising.

Well I'm not the only one who sees trouble:

Republican national conventions are often protested by activists in large numbers. But this year, the forces converging on the convention threaten to make for an explosive mix: a city scarred by controversial police shootings and simmering with racial tension; a candidate who has threatened that his supporters will riot if he comes with the most delegates but leaves without the nomination; and a police force with a reputation for brutality.

And:

“I’m really concerned all hell is going to break loose,” said James L. Hardiman, a vice president of the Cleveland NAACP, who noted community members are expressing concerns about the convention “every other day.”

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-republ ... story.html

And before you think black folk are anti-Trump take a look at the Trump supporter in the story pic. Clean cut black man decking long haired hippy white boy.

woodchip wrote:...And before you think black folk are anti-Trump take a look at the Trump supporter in the story pic. Clean cut black man decking long haired hippy white boy.

I wondered about that. I'd love to hear why that black man supports an a$$wipe like Trump. On the plus side, the black guy decks a hippy white guy who was being escorted out of the arena by security and guess who gets arrested for assault? The black guy of course.

And then we have a Trump protester arrested for hitting a police horse. The dumb broad first thought yelling in the horses face (ala a certain MO prof) would get the horse to back up. When that didn't work she thought hitting the poor dumb animal would be a better idea. That the horse remained under the officers control is a testimony to the training of the horse. The woman is a testament to the cruelty of leftist protesters.

http://fox4kc.com/2016/03/19/woman-char ... p-protest/

So, now a woman slapping a full grown horse in the face is worse than a heavyset man decking another person with their fist? Violence is violence. I don't condone the violence of one lone idiot protestor just as you shouldn't be defending the violence of your idiot Trump supporters.

The horse had no choice to be where he was...the rally protester did.

Police horses are trained to deal with nastiness on the job, which is anything the police have to deal with, including protestors. So the horse was only doing what was required of it and it's too bad some idiot woman saw fit to strike it in the face. She was arrested and charged. However, sometimes, those very horses are used as heavy weapons against people. Is that fair also?

https://www.rt.com/news/182376-sweden-police-neo-nazi/

Oh nooss, I thought Sweden was a freakin paradise.

Spidey wrote:Oh nooss, I thought Sweden was a freakin paradise.

Not a paradise for the ultra right neo-Nazis apparently.

But to be fair, police horses are equal opportunity. Even lefties get stomped on.

[youtube]ktuV_PKtJgw[/youtube]

But when it comes to dogs....

[youtube]5ceJAPRH1Bs[/youtube]