Another mass shooting is underway

[AUDub 11,182]

 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

9 minutes ago, homersapien said:

No, once again you don't seem to understand the point.

What a  random lunatic Democrat might say or do is in no way comparable to the atmosphere of fear, hate and division being deliberately fostered by our president.  It doesn't excuse Trump for his deliberate efforts to divide the country. 

They. Are. Not. The. Same. Thing.  Not comparable. 

Got it?

We’re discussing the problem of rhetoric, and calling it out. Democrat rhetoric is not condemnable, got it.

[homersapien 11,440]

16 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

You are blind if you believe The Guardian and BBC aren't in the exact same vein as Fox, and CNN isn't very far behind. 

No, it's not me who is blind.

 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-biased-is-your-news-source-you-probably-wont-agree-with-this-chart-2018-02-28

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

14 hours ago, channonc said:

This x1000!

I don't understand what's so hard to understand here. Why do people move into their camps of red and blue on this one? (rhetorical question on this forum...🙄) Reality is, gasoline has been poured on the flames of racist nutcases in this country. It was only a matter of time before people were killed. Words from politicians matter. Trump is now a politician, no longer "just a tv entertainer". The only reason he hasn't and won't tone it down is that stoking fear against "the other" helped him win. 

And you don't think it pours gasoline on those same nutcases when left individuals make comments like we should have a white castration lottery? That gives them more justification and incentive to be violent. They are able to go look.... they said that.

Let's take the streets of your own city. Are you going to tell me that none of these groups involved in the video have rhetoric that can lead to violence upon another human being? These are all individuals, doing their own thing, with no influence from anyone else? The video starts out with a man angry that he can't go do harm to people he believes wants to harm others (two wrongs anyone), and the lady in the helmet isn't one of the supremacist they are anti-Antifa protestors (saw a thing on her, apparently they like to go protest them). I don't wanna hear only Trump, cause I'm playing the full board.

 

 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

8 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Once again, three right wing attacks within a week’s span. Not a month. Not a year. Literally within days of each other, individuals took it upon themselves to wage war against the “enemy,” be they Jews, African-American or leftists. 

This is where we are now, and we were well on our way there before Trump, but he is an accelerant. 

There’s simply no equivalent on the left right now. 

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2018/10/28/conservative-conspiracy-propaganda-cannot-help-but-instigate-violence/

 

We’re repeating ourselves. Enjoy your Sunday Dub.

[homersapien 11,440]

1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said:

We’re discussing the problem of rhetoric, and calling it out. Democrat rhetoric is not condemnable, got it.

No exactly. In fact, that's a very sophomoric - not to mention weasely - characterization.

We are discussing the problem/power of rhetoric coming from the POTUS as  compared to any one of thousands of individual liberal or conservative wacko extremists.

Messages of hate and division coming from the POTUS encourage, influence and power individual wackos extremists whoever and wherever they are.

Seems pretty obvious to me.

[johnnyAU 3,645]

LOL. The fact that the Guardian and Washington Post aren't in the hyper partisan column shows the illegitimacy of this chart. The BBC should be heavily in the "Skews Liberal" column as well. 

[johnnyAU 3,645]

2 minutes ago, Texan4Auburn said:

And you don't think it pours gasoline on those same nutcases when left individuals make comments like we should have a white castration lottery? That gives them more justification and incentive to be violent. They are able to go look.... they said that.

Let's take the streets of your own city. Are you going to tell me that none of these groups involved in the video have rhetoric that can lead to violence upon another human being? These are all individuals, doing their own thing, with no influence from anyone else? The video starts out with a man angry that he can't go do harm to people he believes wants to harm others (two wrongs anyone), and the lady in the helmet isn't one of the supremacist they are anti-Antifa protestors (saw a thing on her, apparently they like to go protest them). I don't wanna hear only Trump, cause I'm playing the full board.

 

 

It's the same case as old as time, where those who have migrated to the boundaries of one side or the other cannot see the forests for the trees. It doesn't matter how they arrived at their conclusions of "Us vs Them".  

[homersapien 11,440]

5 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

LOL. The fact that the Guardian and Washington Post aren't in the hyper partisan column shows the illegitimacy of this chart. The BBC should be heavily in the "Skews Liberal" column as well. 

Of course. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

No exactly. In fact, that's a very sophomoric - not to mention weasely - characterization.

We are discussing the problem/power of rhetoric coming from the POTUS as  compared to any one of thousands of individual liberal or conservative wacko extremist.

However, messages of hate and division coming from the POTUS do tend to encourage, influence and power individual wackos extremists.

We’re discussing the problem of rhetoric. You’ve denounced the President’s. Yet violent acts are carried out in the name of the Left weekly, but you aren’t holding accountable your own. That’s very problematic. 

If you think rhetoric is the problem, but don’t address it across the board, you’ll solve nothing. 

[homersapien 11,440]

8 minutes ago, Texan4Auburn said:

And you don't think it pours gasoline on those same nutcases when left individuals make comments like we should have a white castration lottery? That gives them more justification and incentive to be violent. They are able to go look.... they said that.

 

Of course it does.  No one has suggested otherwise.

But when such rhetoric comes from the president, it influences the entire country.  It encourages every single extremist in the country who identifies with the hate, xenophobia and division Trump expouses.

And just to prove my point, I have never heard of these radicals you reference, but I damn well hear everything Trump says.

And I find it telling you equate Trump to these radicals, which is exactly what you are doing by throwing up their example as an excuse the POTUS from his responsibility.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

19 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

LOL. The fact that the Guardian and Washington Post aren't in the hyper partisan column shows the illegitimacy of this chart. The BBC should be heavily in the "Skews Liberal" column as well. 

 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

18 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

We’re repeating ourselves. Enjoy your Sunday Dub.

LMAO. I am having a great Sunday, laying on beautiful Pensacola Beach enjoying you toying with morons. My mind wandered as I laughed........I'm proud to be an uncle living in Auburn, Alabama surround by highly educated uncles who are also Auburn  grads (including a retired Provost. Almost all are vocal Trump supporters. I guess some people just got to be intolerant after leaving Auburn and thinking they are better than others. They have become pitiful hate filled people.

[kevon67 2,368]

2 hours ago, AUDub said:

You too, huh?

You should see some of the clashes with my mother in law, a hardline Catholic, staunch conservative and, shamefully, a Trump supporter. 

My mother R.I.P. was all of the above except Trump supporter.........She was married 54 years before passing........doubt seriously she would have supported President Trump based on his relationship track record.

[homersapien 11,440]

6 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

We’re discussing the problem of rhetoric. You’ve denounced the President’s. Yet violent acts are carried out in the name of the Left weekly, but you aren’t holding accountable your own. That’s very problematic. 

If you think rhetoric is the problem, but don’t address it across the board, you’ll solve nothing. 

Starting with the POTUS is a logical and rational approach.   (duuuuuh )

You are trying to obfuscate the problem of an unfit POTUS by focusing on the effects instead of the cause.

And stop lying about who I do or don't hold accountable.  I hold every single violent radical of any political persuasion accountable, period.  And I hold the POTUS responsible for the hateful, xenophobic and divisive rhetoric that that he has espoused as part of his political strategy. He has served to agitate and inspire radicals from both sides.

Finally, what's "problematic" in this discussion is your continued weaseling by throwing up false representations of my positions. 

If you want to know my position, then ask me.  If you want to present what you already think is my position, then quote me to support it.  This constant tactic of "begging the question" is tiresome and unworthy of a thinking person.

[johnnyAU 3,645]

3 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

LMAO. I am having a great Sunday, laying on beautiful Pensacola Beach enjoying you toying with morons. My mind wandered as I laughed........I'm proud to be an uncle living in Auburn, Alabama surround by highly educated uncles who are also Auburn  grads (including a retired Provost. Almost all are vocal Trump supporters. I guess some people just got to be intolerant after leaving Auburn and thinking they are better than others. They have become pitiful hate filled people.

Lots of folks preaching tolerance but practicing intolerance these days aren't there? I believe we had a recent thread or two about that very subject. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

10 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Starting with the POTUS is a logical and rational approach.   (duuuuuh )

You are trying to obfuscate the problem of an unfit POTUS by focusing on the effects instead of the cause.

And stop lying about who I do or don't hold accountable.  I hold every single violent radical of any political persuasion accountable, period.  And I hold the POTUS responsible for the hateful, xenophobic and divisive rhetoric that that he has espoused as part of his political strategy. He has served to agitate and inspire radicals from both sides.

Finally, what's "problematic" in this discussion is your continued weaseling by throwing up false representations of my positions. 

If you want to know my position, then ask me.  If you want to present what you already think is my position, then quote me to support it.  This constant tactic of "begging the question" is tiresome and unworthy of a thinking person.

It’s clear that you think problem doesn’t apply across party lines. The accountability you refer to is only applied on a one way street. That’s why it will be hard to advocate for change. Just looks like another partisan footstool to bash Trump, not an attempt to unite the country. 

[homersapien 11,440]

22 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

It’s clear that you think problem doesn’t apply across party lines. The accountability you refer to is only applied on a one way street. That’s why it will be hard to advocate for change. Just looks like another partisan footstool to bash Trump, not an attempt to unite the country. 

There you go again.  Start with a lie about "what I think".

The problem of domestic and political terrorism is an American problem, not a partisan one.

Having said that,  Trump  - as POTUS - clearly has primary responsibility for attenuating the political divide, instead of deliberately aggravating the problem.  That's just common sense. 

And your last sentence is absurd.  The one person with the primary responsibility of uniting the country is Trump and he is clearly not interested in doing so.  In fact, his modus operandi is to foment division in order to reinforce his base. 

The country will become progressively more divided until he is replaced by someone who isn't a authoritarian, narcissistic psychopath, regardless of their political party.

 

 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

The problem of domestic and political terrorism is an American problem, not a partisan one.

Having said that,  Trump  - as POTUS - clearly has primary responsibility for attenuating the political divide, instead of deliberately aggravating the problem.  That's just common sense. 

Your last sentence is absurd.  The one person with the primary responsibility of uniting the country is Trump and he is clearly not interested in doing so.  In fact, his MO is to foment division in order to reinforce his base. 

The country will become progressively more divided until he is replaced by someone who isn't a authoritarian, narcissistic psychopath, regardless of political party.

 

 

Is it that you will not discuss the rhetoric of the Left either because you think it's contribution to violence is nonexistent, or it makes you uncomfortable to criticize your own party? 

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

25 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Of course it does.  No one has suggested otherwise.

But when such rhetoric comes from the president, it influences the entire country.  It encourages every single extremist in the country who identifies with the hate, xenophobia and division Trump expouses.

And just to prove my point, I have never heard of these radicals you reference, but I damn well hear everything Trump says.

And I find it telling you equate Trump to these radicals, which is exactly what you are doing by throwing up their example as an excuse the POTUS from his responsibility.

Yes they have. Go back and read through some threads. It's either the individual doesn't have influence, or the individual doesn't have an audience, there is multiple excuses.

This is America, think about how many things influence people in this country and how easy it is to reach people in today's society. The President isn't the only person that has influence, audience, followers, etc. This country is flooded 24/7 through TV, social media, etc. with rhetoric and individuals with the ability to influence others.

You've never heard of Sara Jeong? Mentioned multiple times on this board for her rhetoric, NYT even gave her a job and defended her hate speech.

I have not excused Trump on anything. I have mentioned on here more than once that I don't approve. You really think with a Hispanic girlfriend that I approve of his "Hispanic immigrants are just here to murder and rape bit". Seriously you think I'm Ok with that? Didn't vote for the man, don't care for the man, won't vote for him in 2020. I will also not lay everything that is wrong with this country at his feet alone, just like I wouldn't accept people laying everything at Obama's feet.

I find it telling that you accuse me of not having the ability to see political terrorism on either side and now are trying to one side it. You don't like when individuals look across the board at all the pieces.

I also find it telling you call out injustices involving appropriation, race etc etc, yet then turn around and culturally appropriate and offensively use Hispanic culture to attack individuals you don't like (your Three Amigos Gif). That's kinda racist. See, I can bat from the left side of the plate also.

[homersapien 11,440]

34 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Is it that you will not discuss the rhetoric of the Left either because you think it's contribution to violence is nonexistent, or it makes you uncomfortable to criticize your own party? 

Quote something from the left you'd like to discuss.  I am willing to discuss anything you'd like.

But the essence of your argument is there is an equivalence of left wing rhetoric that relieves Trump - as POTUS - of his responsibility for fomenting hate and division for personal political gain.

I say the premise of such an equivalence is absurd on it's face.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

4 minutes ago, Texan4Auburn said:

Yes they have. Go back and read through some threads. It's either the individual doesn't have influence, or the individual doesn't have an audience, there is multiple excuses.

This is America, think about how many things influence people in this country and how easy it is to reach people in today's society. The President isn't the only person that has influence, audience, followers, etc. This country is flooded 24/7 through TV, social media, etc. with rhetoric and individuals with the ability to influence others.

You've never heard of Sara Jeong? Mentioned multiple times on this board for her rhetoric, NYT even gave her a job and defended her hate speech.

I have not excused Trump on anything. I have mentioned on here more than once that I don't approve. You really think with a Hispanic girlfriend that I approve of his "Hispanic immigrants are just here to murder and rape bit". Seriously you think I'm Ok with that? Didn't vote for the man, don't care for the man, won't vote for him in 2020. I will also not lay everything that is wrong with this country at his feet alone, just like I wouldn't accept people laying everything at Obama's feet.

I find it telling that you accuse me of not having the ability to see political terrorism on either side and now are trying to one side it. You don't like when individuals look across the board at all the pieces.

I also find it telling you call out injustices involving appropriation, race etc etc, yet then turn around and culturally appropriate and offensively use Hispanic culture to attack individuals you don't like (your Three Amigos Gif). That's kinda racist. See, I can bat from the left side of the plate also.

 

8 minutes ago, homersapien said:

There you go again.  Start with a lie about "what I think".

The problem of domestic and political terrorism is an American problem, not a partisan one.

Having said that,  Trump  - as POTUS - clearly has primary responsibility for attenuating the political divide, instead of deliberately aggravating the problem.  That's just common sense. 

And your last sentence is absurd.  The one person with the primary responsibility of uniting the country is Trump and he is clearly not interested in doing so.  In fact, his MO is to foment division in order to reinforce his base. 

The country will become progressively more divided until he is replaced by someone who isn't a authoritarian, narcissistic psychopath, regardless of political party.

 

 

I second what Tex4A says. We aren't saying that Trump doesn't need to tone it down. I get pissed when I hear him use divisive rhetoric about the very people I represent in Asylum cases on the mere basis that they're from the Middle East. Trump doesn't have a damn clue what those people have been through and his divisive rhetoric is completely and utterly uncalled for, especially if it creates animus towards them. But this isn't a one way street. The Left's rhetoric should not leave them blameless. It's not good for the country when their leaders are encouraging citizens to go harass republican congressmen at restaurants, comparing republican administration to some of the world's most egregious criminal regimes, and analogizing their policies to arguably the worst humanitarian crisis that ever took place on the planet. 

[homersapien 11,440]

8 minutes ago, Texan4Auburn said:

Yes they have. Go back and read through some threads. It's either the individual doesn't have influence, or the individual doesn't have an audience, there is multiple excuses.

 

BS.  You go back and find some quotes. You made the claim.

No one has suggested such left wing rhetorical calls to violence don't exist or aren't wrong.

The argument is against making such incidents equivalent to Trump's ongoing, multi-year deliberate strategy of fomenting hate and division for personal political gain.  We are now reaping the results of that tactic.

[homersapien 11,440]

12 minutes ago, Texan4Auburn said:

This is America, think about how many things influence people in this country and how easy it is to reach people in today's society. The President isn't the only person that has influence, audience, followers, etc. This country is flooded 24/7 through TV, social media, etc. with rhetoric and individuals with the ability to influence others.

You've never heard of Sara Jeong? Mentioned multiple times on this board for her rhetoric, NYT even gave her a job and defended her hate speech.

 

Seriously?  You think the POTUS is just another random voice in the ocean of voices in the media and internet? 

And no - again proving my point - I've never heard of Sara Jeong.  But why should I care who she is and what she says, when we ******* POTUS spewing hate and division?

[homersapien 11,440]

16 minutes ago, Texan4Auburn said:

I have not excused Trump on anything. I have mentioned on here more than once that I don't approve. You really think with a Hispanic girlfriend that I approve of his "Hispanic immigrants are just here to murder and rape bit". Seriously you think I'm Ok with that? Didn't vote for the man, don't care for the man, won't vote for him in 2020. I will also not lay everything that is wrong with this country at his feet alone, just like I wouldn't accept people laying everything at Obama's feet.

 

Of course not.  Seriously, where did you get that idea to begin with?  Certainly nothing I have said.

(That sounds like a "begging the question" tactic.  Nola has pretty much worn that play out.  Please, don't you start.)