The Left Does not Reason

[clubgop]

Usually, when people say operatives turned a protest into a riot, it is the protesting side claiming it was done to subvert them and maybe open the door for police violence.

But, again, supposing hillary and soros did this, what does that have to do woth either the left or reason? It would seem to exonerate them of wrongdoing, if anything. It would all be the work of elite globalist scum.

@clubby, i have, in fact, impotently raged against the authoritarian and anti intellectual left both here and more publicly many times. Probably more than is healthy. And refused to vote climton.

Listen for my part, I dont know about StA, but Soros passes alot of money around is his aim violence in particular? No, but if it occurs he can make it to his advantage and the left will defend it. That is already been proven correct.

[clubgop]

Jesus Clubgop... take a pharmaceutical dude... or blow into a paperbag or something...

I'm interested in this Soros funding angle.
I heard about in on No Agenda... in regards to the "women's march" but I haven't heard much about what this guys motives are.
I don't trust the Democratic Party's agenda... I have no doubt they would manipulate the mainstream towards their own ends.
I'm looking to understand this... not to create smokescreens...

I'm not really buying the "right wing conspiracy" angle on the Soros thing...
at least not yet.

Listen shrink you said you like to steer clear of me. Thats sound advise, bitch.
As for Soros, listen if you believe anything you and your ilk say about the Kochs, Soros does that shit and then some. We got the tax records and public documents to prove it.

[clubgop]

Well, in this case, it was an employee of the Clinton campaign. Nice try at obfuscation (again).

ij

I am not obfuscating or creating a smokescreen.

I'm skeptical of your story but i guess I'd prefer it to be true.

Either hillary and soros, rich globalist elites who have little to do with the left, paid people to be violent. OR the violence happened because there is a problem with authoritarianism on the left.

Can't be both. If it was all hillary and soros I'd be relieved. The real protestors were peaceful and only the hired goons were violent.

Why cant it be both? Or a little bit of each? Why in one post do you put SJW identity politics in league with globalist dems against true progs but in another you deny that connection? How can this be?

[Okeefenokee]

Im 23 years old stuck in between Uzbekistan and Afghanistan with a lot of down time on my hands

I feel like so much was explained right here. You make a whole lot more sense now.

Yes I was serving my country in a 3rd world country while you were taking your dirty uncircumcised, cause you hate religion, dick inside of some poor girl causing her to get a UTI which is treated with a broad spectrum antibiotic which in turn counters the hormone based oral contraceptive she was taking. Because you kidnapped this gril in a basement, because that kind of thing is just what you do in Cleaveland, she had to have sex woth your 3rd world dick again but this time she got pregnant. So you could raise another generation of people that hate American veterans. But Im the bad guy. Sure go with that if it makes you feel better.

It's like Van Gogh painted a Norman Rockwell.

[Okeefenokee]

I have heard this on this board and on DCF. It's basically a right-winged conspiracy theory that tries to explain why so many people are protesting Trump- other than that a lot of people fear/hate the guy.

Bitch I posted the article. It is public knowledge it is on tax forms. I know it requires research and reading beyond your bubble media world but it is there. Yes everyone fears Trump but your candidate was beloved we are all just misgyonist. Keep on losing bitches.

It's one thing to call me "bitch", but Penner is a female, in case you missed it. Don't cross that line, dickhead.

Point out for us whatever evidence Faux Noise told you about, or shut the fuck up already.

Dozens and dozens of buses of people bused in to dozens and dozens of riots, accounted for on tax records. We know you want to throw cover for them, but you have to start by admitting it.

[TheReal_ND]

Jesus Clubgop... take a pharmaceutical dude... or blow into a paperbag or something...

I'm interested in this Soros funding angle.
I heard about in on No Agenda... in regards to the "women's march" but I haven't heard much about what this guys motives are.
I don't trust the Democratic Party's agenda... I have no doubt they would manipulate the mainstream towards their own ends.
I'm looking to understand this... not to create smokescreens...

I'm not really buying the "right wing conspiracy" angle on the Soros thing...
at least not yet.

Listen shrink you said you like to steer clear of me. Thats sound advise, bitch.
As for Soros, listen if you believe anything you and your ilk say about the Kochs, Soros does that shit and then some. We got the tax records and public documents to prove it.

Here. I've posted it before. Due diligence.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/view ... sp?id=1237

Actually I can't find Antifa on that page but google is helpful if you want to look it up.

[Okeefenokee]

Well, in this case, it was an employee of the Clinton campaign. Nice try at obfuscation (again).

ij

I am not obfuscating or creating a smokescreen.

I'm skeptical of your story but i guess I'd prefer it to be true.

Either hillary and soros, rich globalist elites who have little to do with the left, paid people to be violent. OR the violence happened because there is a problem with authoritarianism on the left.

Can't be both. If it was all hillary and soros I'd be relieved. The real protestors were peaceful and only the hired goons were violent.

The "real protesters" were standing by doing nothing when Antifa began beating on people. Witnesses claim the "protesters" seemed to approve and enjoyed it.

I no longer believe you can be on the side of the democratic party and not condone this violence. You all damned well know this is political violence perpetrated by the democratic party itself. You pretend like you don't approve, but you do nothing, and as we have seen in numerous such riots, you do nothing.

Imagine for a moment if this were the other way around. Imagine if a BLM speaker were holding an event at a university lecture hall, and you saw thousands of republicans protesting outside saying that those people should not be allowed to even speak their views. Then an armed and hooded militia funded by the republican party marched onto the scene in military formation and proceeded to beat the people who attended to the BLM lecture with metal poles. While this happens, the republican mayor orders the police to stand down, allowing the militia to beat several people unconscious break bones, beat several women in their faces and then pepper spray them as they collapsed to the ground, and all the while the republican "protesters" just stood there, enjoying the spectacle.

That's exactly what the left has done in America. If it were the other way around, we would still be hearing about it nonstop in the MSM. We would be talking about America under siege. You guys would be going crazy with outrage and condemnation.

But when you do it, you just write these long-winded posts excusing it. Enough. I have literally had enough of this. You have to either reject this and move on or just admit you support it at this point.

I am telling you right now, If I see some woman getting beaten in the face with a club and then maced for wearing the wrong hat, I am engaged in the fight to try to stop it. I don't care who she is, whether I agree with her, or who is doing the beating. Apparently, that's an important distinction dividing us right now, and it makes me sick.

And this is why we why know they condone it. The left condones political terrorism against Americans. If there was a sliver of the left that opposed it, it would have faced some opposition, but it has faced none. Not once in two years has a member of the left definitively opposed the terroristic behavior of the left. Not once. Every exhibition of terrorism from the left has prompted no more than leftist excuses like, 'they were asking for it', or, 'it was their fault.'

These people are terrorists no differently than those who blow themselves up in the middle east. The precedent has been set. Terrorists die.

[C-Mag]

I agree that it is far from simple. From what I can tell there was no "magical switch moment." That's a red herring.

OK, hey look at us in agreement. There is no switch moment, but ebbs and flows over time.

For aid in our discussion, every POTUS election map http://www.270towin.com/historical-pres ... elections/

If you deny the switch theory, you can either claim that Democrats were always progressive, which doesn't bear out well in history, or you can say they were never progressive, which is a denial of the present moment. So you have all the work ahead of you to explain the "true" story and how the "myth" has become so pervasive as to be widely accepted by historians and common people alike.

I see Progressivism very differently than you present it here. IMO, Progressivism may be semantically tied to the Democrats and what we call the Left, however Progressivism is the primary ideology of the Washington Establishment and our political elites in both parties.

Progressives do not believe in inalienable human rights, government decides who has rights
Progressives believe it is governments role to create individuals rather than protect individuals
Progressives believe a strong executive with a wide government network and accessible funds are required to shape individuals and improve humans

And during the last 100 years both partys have advanced the cause of Progressivism.

[Montegriffo]

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-president ... rotesters/

President Barack Obama condemned violent protesters who were recorded spitting and throwing punches at supporters after a rally in San Jose and pelting them with eggs, food, and water bottles.

“We saw in San Jose these protesters starting to pelt stuff on Trump supporters,” Obama said. “That’s not what our democracy is about. That’s not what you do. There’s no room for violence. There’s no place for shouting.”

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/22/politics/ ... tte-tulsa/

Washington (CNN)Protesters angry over the police killings of unarmed black men won't prompt change through violence, President Barack Obama said during an interview Thursday.
Speaking a day after riots erupted in Charlotte over the killing of Keith Lamont Scott, Obama said anger should instead be redirected toward pushing needed reforms.

"The way we change the system requires us to be able to reach out and engage the broader American community. And that requires being peaceful," Obama said during an interview with ABC News. "The overwhelming majority of people who have been concerned about police community relations doing it the right way. Every once in awhile, you see folks doing it the wrong way."

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/p ... -discredit

Obama’s election in 2008 was preceded and followed by violent attacks and property destruction targeted against minorities.

Kaylon Johnson, an African American campaign worker for Obama, was physically assaulted for wearing an Obama T-shirt in Louisiana following the 2008 election. The three white male attackers shouted “Fuck Obama!” and “Nigger president!” as they broke Johnson’s nose and fractured his eye-socket, requiring surgery.

And while anti-Trump protesters have engaged in mostly peaceful demonstrations against the president-elect, pro-Trump supporters have been responsible for a wave of attacks against Muslims, Latinos, blacks, and the LGBT community.According to Mark Potok, senior fellow at the Southern Poverty Law Center civil rights group, there haven’t been “such a rash of hate crimes in the United States since Barack Obama was elected America’s first black president in 2008.” Muslim women are reporting having their hijabs ripped from their heads, while immigrant children are being bullied. Trump’s name and slogan, “Make America Great Again,” are being found alongside swastikas and anti-minority messages in graffiti around the nation.

Ultimately, demonstrators are not protesting Trump because he is Republican. They aren’t protesting him because he is a white male. These protests are because of the bigotry his campaign has emboldened and the fear of discrimination his presidency has the capacity to perpetuate.

http://www.inquisitr.com/3706125/donald ... ts-unfair/

Every president-elect has to endure some sort of a backlash, and Donald Trump’s overwhelming unpopularity certainly meant that he would have to endure a slew of these protests. But calling them unfair lays bare his hypocrisy in more ways than one. Ironically, he is the same man who refused to guarantee a peaceful transition of power if he had lost the election. Trump had repeatedly called the election “rigged,” and his behavior had surely insinuated that he would not go down without a fight, even if that meant resorting to unconstitutional methods of registering a protest. He had once even remarked that his supporters must be armed for any eventuality.

But now that he has won the election, he has termed widespread protests against him as unfair. Remember, he is also the same man who had called for a revolution on the streets of America after Barack Obama was re-elected to the White House in 2012.

“He lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!”

We can't let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 7, 2012

[TheReal_ND]

K