And so far you haven't explained anything, and are re-defining words when your mistaken opinions are challenged.

The Left is targeting people on the Right with violence solely for their political beliefs. This is not happening in the other direction, not now, nor when Obama was POTUS. That is the point of this thread.

If you want people to come to your side, lumping them in with murderers and other violent people seems like an odd first step. Maybe a better step would be, "I know we don't agree about much, but you dont agree with these violent people, right?"

Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?

We aren't interested in bringing them to our side, we've seen what happens to their friends as well as their enemies.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I mean the baseball game thing was pretty unprecedented and fortunately hasn't become a trend.
Its not like other violent events.  There was an intent to kill.  The man definitely wanted to kill Republican politicians specifically.  You won't find another event like that.
But then the original poster brings in Whoopi Goldberg being profane with Jeannine Pirro.  This was not violent.  No intent to kill.  Neither is a politician, though one used to be a politician.  There are a lot of "rude, but not violent" political exchanges every day.
To me this invites others to bring up similar events from many other angles, but, apparently not.  Maybe only if they are other examples of "the right" being the victim.

You must be living under a rock. 

Threats to conservative speakers at colleges are going on all over the country. Most just start out as protests ending in shout downs denying a person the chance to speak, but many have turned violent. These are ALL from the Left against the Right.

Likewise, the Right has not kicked out Democrats from businesses for political reasons, and did not do so when Obama was POUTS. That's solely from the Left.

Just a few posts up, B2hibry enclosed a link to a congressman who's children were threatened.

How many examples do you need?

If your point is that no one has been killed yet, well that's a pretty lame rationalization.

If your point is that you support these actions, then you should be ashamed.

If you get to the end of B2hibry's link, it names three Democrats in Congress who recently received death threats. So it's not all from the left against the right.

Threatening the person that your neighbors elected to represent you is totally indefensible.
But, without getting too lost in the weeds, some of the things that some of these members of Congress have done or allowed to be done in their name are also totally indefensible.
Two wrongs don't make a right, and those that threaten should be prosecuted, but the one making their living doing indefensible things should not be surprised as chickens come home to roost.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

This is from 2016 but I saw it for the first time last night and thought it was hilarious. 

---

This is from 2016 but I saw it for the first time last night and thought it was hilarious. 

Just shows how smart conservatives are. You think a democrat could ever come up with something that innovative?

---

This used to happen to liberals all the time while Obama was president. 

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/08/07/ca...iladelphia

---

This used to happen to liberals all the time while Obama was president. 

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/08/07/ca...iladelphia

Candace Owens is an extremely, deliberately provocative entertainer.  It's rich that she acts so surprised and incensed when people are provoked by her.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

This used to happen to liberals all the time while Obama was president. 

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/08/07/ca...iladelphia

Candace Owens is an extremely, deliberately provocative entertainer.  It's rich that she acts so surprised and incensed when people are provoked by her.

Good point. That perfectly excuses the treatment both of these people received in this video. Down with provocateurs!

---

This used to happen to liberals all the time while Obama was president. 

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/08/07/ca...iladelphia

Candace Owens is an extremely, deliberately provocative entertainer.  It's rich that she acts so surprised and incensed when people are provoked by her.

So, now it is Owens fault she was verbally assaulted and has nothing to do with Auntie Maxine telling people they need to harass all Trump supporters?

Charlie Kirk also had a drink thrown at him. That goes beyond verbally assaulted, but I notice like most liberals, you choose to bend the story to what fits your narrative.

---

Candace Owens is an extremely, deliberately provocative entertainer.  It's rich that she acts so surprised and incensed when people are provoked by her.

So, now it is Owens fault she was verbally assaulted and has nothing to do with Auntie Maxine telling people they need to harass all Trump supporters?

Charlie Kirk also had a drink thrown at him. That goes beyond verbally assaulted, but I notice like most liberals, you choose to bend the story to what fits your narrative.

Um, no, he's a Republican (wink, wink).

---

Candace Owens is an extremely, deliberately provocative entertainer.  It's rich that she acts so surprised and incensed when people are provoked by her.

So, now it is Owens fault she was verbally assaulted and has nothing to do with Auntie Maxine telling people they need to harass all Trump supporters?

Charlie Kirk also had a drink thrown at him. That goes beyond verbally assaulted, but I notice like most liberals, you choose to bend the story to what fits your narrative.

I'm not excusing the people who yell outside restaurants and throw drinks.  I wouldn't behave that way and neither would you.
I'm just asking you to see that these are the desired outcomes for the "Turning Point USA" organization.  More strife gives more visibility, more clicks, and more money. They are an entertainment organization that has no more connection to real news or real political philosophy than WWE has to competitive sports.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

So, now it is Owens fault she was verbally assaulted and has nothing to do with Auntie Maxine telling people they need to harass all Trump supporters?

Charlie Kirk also had a drink thrown at him. That goes beyond verbally assaulted, but I notice like most liberals, you choose to bend the story to what fits your narrative.

I'm not excusing the people who yell outside restaurants and throw drinks.  I wouldn't behave that way and neither would you.
I'm just asking you to see that these are the desired outcomes for the "Turning Point USA" organization.  More strife gives more visibility, more clicks, and more money. They are an entertainment organization that has no more connection to real news or real political philosophy than WWE has to competitive sports.

We're entering the first turn of the circle. Hang on!

---

So, now it is Owens fault she was verbally assaulted and has nothing to do with Auntie Maxine telling people they need to harass all Trump supporters?

Charlie Kirk also had a drink thrown at him. That goes beyond verbally assaulted, but I notice like most liberals, you choose to bend the story to what fits your narrative.

Um, no, he's a Republican (wink, wink).

No winking needed.  I intend to vote early in our Republican primary next week.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

So, now it is Owens fault she was verbally assaulted and has nothing to do with Auntie Maxine telling people they need to harass all Trump supporters?

Charlie Kirk also had a drink thrown at him. That goes beyond verbally assaulted, but I notice like most liberals, you choose to bend the story to what fits your narrative.

I'm not excusing the people who yell outside restaurants and throw drinks.  I wouldn't behave that way and neither would you.
I'm just asking you to see that these are the desired outcomes for the "Turning Point USA" organization.  More strife gives more visibility, more clicks, and more money. They are an entertainment organization that has no more connection to real news or real political philosophy than WWE has to competitive sports.

And yet this doesn't happen to leftist "provacative entertainers" with nearly the same magnitude or severity. How many times have Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, or Whoopi Goldberg (to name just three) been attacked? 

Sure, there are scum on both sides who attack others, but the attacks are overwhelmingly against the Right, and the mainstream media seems to support them (as do you with your "they asked for it" rationalizations).

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

I'm not excusing the people who yell outside restaurants and throw drinks.  I wouldn't behave that way and neither would you.
I'm just asking you to see that these are the desired outcomes for the "Turning Point USA" organization.  More strife gives more visibility, more clicks, and more money. They are an entertainment organization that has no more connection to real news or real political philosophy than WWE has to competitive sports.

And yet this doesn't happen to leftist "provacative entertainers" with nearly the same magnitude or severity. How many times have Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, or Whoopi Goldberg (to name just three) been attacked? 

Sure, there are scum on both sides who attack others, but the attacks are overwhelmingly against the Right, and the mainstream media seems to support them (as do you with your "they asked for it" rationalizations).

Standby. He needs to do more Google searches in order to present a contrarian and enlightened view of the matter so that he may appear more open-minded than the rest of us.

---

(cue burlesque music)

When the antifa masks come off.

---

I'm not excusing the people who yell outside restaurants and throw drinks.  I wouldn't behave that way and neither would you.
I'm just asking you to see that these are the desired outcomes for the "Turning Point USA" organization.  More strife gives more visibility, more clicks, and more money. They are an entertainment organization that has no more connection to real news or real political philosophy than WWE has to competitive sports.

And yet this doesn't happen to leftist "provacative entertainers" with nearly the same magnitude or severity. How many times have Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, or Whoopi Goldberg (to name just three) been attacked? 

Sure, there are scum on both sides who attack others, but the attacks are overwhelmingly against the Right, and the mainstream media seems to support them (as do you with your "they asked for it" rationalizations).

Its just like the question, why does Colbert get to make fun of O'Reilly but O'Reilly doesn't get to make fun of Colbert?
Both are nothing more than entertainment with tiny chunks of real news, presented out of context and without rebuttal, in the gruel.
But one has openly presented himself as a satirical entertainer.
The other has presented himself as a serious source of news and opinions.
If you think what Candace Owens does is fun or entertaining, more power to you.  Like what you like.  lf you think she sees her video persona as a fair judge, and if you think she'd actually continue to stand up for whatever she's squaking about today when the Piper changes his tune, or if the subpoenas start coming in, joke's on you.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

And yet this doesn't happen to leftist "provacative entertainers" with nearly the same magnitude or severity. How many times have Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, or Whoopi Goldberg (to name just three) been attacked? 

Sure, there are scum on both sides who attack others, but the attacks are overwhelmingly against the Right, and the mainstream media seems to support them (as do you with your "they asked for it" rationalizations).

Its just like the question, why does Colbert get to make fun of O'Reilly but O'Reilly doesn't get to make fun of Colbert?
Both are nothing more than entertainment with tiny chunks of real news, presented out of context and without rebuttal, in the gruel.
But one has openly presented himself as a satirical entertainer.
The other has presented himself as a serious source of news and opinions.
If you think what Candace Owens does is fun or entertaining, more power to you.  Like what you like.  lf you think she sees her video persona as a fair judge, and if you think she'd actually continue to stand up for whatever she's squaking about today when the Piper changes his tune, or if the subpoenas start coming in, joke's on you.

No matter what your opinion of Candice Owens is, it doesn't give anyone a right to harass her. Did you see republicans doing this at any time during the Obama regime?

---

Its just like the question, why does Colbert get to make fun of O'Reilly but O'Reilly doesn't get to make fun of Colbert?
Both are nothing more than entertainment with tiny chunks of real news, presented out of context and without rebuttal, in the gruel.
But one has openly presented himself as a satirical entertainer.
The other has presented himself as a serious source of news and opinions.
If you think what Candace Owens does is fun or entertaining, more power to you.  Like what you like.  lf you think she sees her video persona as a fair judge, and if you think she'd actually continue to stand up for whatever she's squaking about today when the Piper changes his tune, or if the subpoenas start coming in, joke's on you.

No matter what your opinion of Candice Owens is, it doesn't give anyone a right to harass her. Did you see republicans doing this at any time during the Obama regime?

I agree that no one has a right to harass her.
You're saying that people on the right never went out and harassed whatever the left wing version of Candace Owens is.  But who is the left wing version of Candace Owens?  Jon Stewart and Bill Maher are both clearly going for humor, and Maher attacks the left as well as the right at times.  Goldberg isn't usually trying to be funny, but The View is not a monologue the way what Owens or Tomi Lahren do is a monologue.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

This used to happen to liberals all the time while Obama was president. 

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/08/07/ca...iladelphia

Candace Owens is an extremely, deliberately provocative entertainer.  It's rich that she acts so surprised and incensed when people are provoked by her.

Examples, please.

Saying things you don't like wont make her "extremely, deliberately provocative".

---

No matter what your opinion of Candice Owens is, it doesn't give anyone a right to harass her. Did you see republicans doing this at any time during the Obama regime?

I agree that no one has a right to harass her.
You're saying that people on the right never went out and harassed whatever the left wing version of Candace Owens is.  But who is the left wing version of Candace Owens?  Jon Stewart and Bill Maher are both clearly going for humor, and Maher attacks the left as well as the right at times.  Goldberg isn't usually trying to be funny, but The View is not a monologue the way what Owens or Tomi Lahren do is a monologue.

So what you are claiming is that Jon Stewart isn't a left wing ideologue because he hides behind a claim of "humor?"  Jon Stewart is immune from attacks because he hides behind that claim? They are exactly the same and you really are clueless. Just because you fail to recognize a left wing version of Candice Owens doesn't even address the point that the attacks are almost universally from the Left.

And based on your previous "she asked for it" defense of the attack on Candice Owens, you must be on board with the stoning of rape victims because they "asked for it" and thus the rapist is not the one at fault. Do you ever read what you post before you post it?

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"