Apparently now, having a differing opinion is considered “fanning the flames of violence”.

Repeatedly publishing lies, false allegations and unfounded claims that can easily be tied to the motivation of rioters who killed a police officer and vandalized the capitol building is a little more than "having a differing opinion."

We can debate till the cows come home on whether or not Trump actually wanted the radical segment of his supporters to engage in anything so extreme or not, but it's painfully obvious that there are supporters of his out there who are fervent enough to cross into criminality trying to show that support. 

Now that the cross into criminality has taken place on such a large scale and stage, any further false claims that would fuel further criminality are seen as more dangerous than they were before when they were just a daily dose of falsification. It makes sense to censor him in that light.

---

Sad thing is, this isn't going to stop anytime soon.. You have 70+ million people who feel cheated out of an election with no transparency whatsoever.. Trump will be long gone out of the equation and this fight will go on..

Yes. Tell me all about your "feelings."  

That always goes well around here.

Why do you get off on being condescending and pretentious to people around here?

I blame your parents.. They did a piss poor job..

---

From Jonah Goldberg, formerly of the National Review:

Dear Reader (Not including “Via Getty,” the biggest jerk of them all),

They picked a specific, historically significant date to launch their attack. It was organized and coordinated. Officials knew an attack was possible but didn’t prepare. Four people were killed. Almost instantaneously, the attack became a political and ideological football.

I’m talking about the raid on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012. The Obama administration, heading into a presidential election, dissembled, obfuscated, and lied about the nature of the attack. Officials pushed the idea that the attack was really a spontaneous response to an obscure anti-Islamic video. Hillary Clinton, then secretary of state, even told the families of the dead that she wouldn’t rest until they brought the maker of the video to justice. They eventually arrested him on unrelated charges. Democrats and a cooperative media launched a major “national conversation” over the limits of free speech. The idea that mobs of terrorists were somehow or somewhat justified in murdering Americans if they were sufficiently offended was widely debated by Very Serious People.

On Wednesday, we saw a right-wing Benghazi. The analogy isn’t perfect; I don’t think Trump planned a violent attack on the Capitol. He was merely cavalier about the possibility. Though, I could be wrong. Thanks to Trump’s cowardly definition of manliness, he often winks and nods that he wouldn’t mind violence. And when people act violently on his behalf, he has a history of offering his approval. Indeed, if reports are true, he was reluctant to put an end to the siege once it started.

Regardless, it was obvious that violence was possible, even likely, especially after the president tweeted on December 19, “Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!” All of the usual thugs, bro-warriors, and unaffiliated idiots had been flexing for weeks. “If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism,” a barbarian lacking self-awareness declared on the Red-State Secession Group Facebook page.

Most people on the right have condemned the violence. But much like those who wanted to make Benghazi about a rogue offensive video, much of the right-wing media complex is falling into its comfort zone, blaming the attack on the mainstream media, Twitter, and “elites” who don’t like Trump supporters.

It’s not that these people claim the violence was good. The “it was a video!” crowd didn’t actually endorse the attack on Benghazi, either. Rather, the insinuation is that this was inevitable and understandable because—fill in the blank: the elitists, media, Democrats, the establishment, Trump-bashers, or whoever else you can imagine said mean things about Trump supporters.

For others, the real issue is the double standard from the same crowd of elitists and wokesters who didn’t sufficiently condemn the violence from Black Lives Matter protesters. This is the slop they really love to wallow in.

The most cynical and grotesque form of this argument goes something like this: Trump supporters sincerely believe that the election was stolen, therefore mocking the idea that it was stolen is offensive, elitist, bigoted, condescending, or inciteful. The same people who giddily encouraged their viewers, readers, and constituents to believe a lie now argue that this is what you get when you call them liars or dupes. Here’s Pete Hegseth explaining why you need to understand the root causes of right-wing rage.


Brian Stelter
@brianstelter
Pete Hegseth, one of the biggest MAGA guys on Fox, says "this is the result of frustration that a lot of people feel. I frankly wasn't surprised. I am not saying it is okay, I'm not saying all those things, but images didn't shock me." Listen to him channel the rioters...
January 7th 2021

439 Retweets1,162 Likes
Well, calling Mohammed a pervert is offensive to Muslims, but that didn’t justify the Benghazi attacks. And none of the things these people want to talk about, including the left’s very real double standards on violence, make a mob assault on the Capitol more forgivable.

One of the central tenets of conservatism is that there’s a difference between an explanation and an excuse. I’m happy to concede that many in the mainstream media shamed themselves waving away violence during the BLM protests. I’m happy to concede that progressive elites have contempt for lots of regular Americans and Christians; I’ve probably written 100,000 words on this point over the last 20 years. All of these things can be true, it still doesn’t shave an onion skin from the layers of outrage we should feel about a mob beating a cop to death with a fire extinguisher. It doesn’t subtract a feather’s weight of opprobrium from a president orchestrating an effort to steal an election by peddling lies and conspiracy theories, never mind from his willful incitement of a crowd to act on that lie.

Condemning the media or Democrats for their inconsistency when it comes to violence is fine by me, but only if in the same breath you condemn the president for the same inconsistency. The president celebrated an attack on a reporter, pardoned war criminals, cheered militias intent on “liberating” Michigan, and the vice president had to cut him out of the chain of command to get the National Guard deployed to put down an insurrectionist mob that, again, murdered a cop and scrawled “Murder the Media” on a door inside the Capitol. If you don’t acknowledge these things, you’re just providing cover.

Also, let’s not overlook the profound category error that has run wild among Trump apologists for four years. Everything they say about the New York Times—or CNN, or the Washington Post, or the Kroger Coupon Sampler—could be 100 percent true. You know what still wouldn’t be true? The New York Times isn’t the president of the United States of America. You can look it up. The Times doesn’t take an oath to uphold the Constitution. It doesn’t have the power to deploy troops.

If President Biden were to say in his inaugural address, “Republicans are evil,” and Rachel Maddow replied in his defense, “What about what OANN said about Democrats,” the same Trump apologists who’ve been spraying pro-Trump flak into the airwaves for the last four years would scoff at such absurd whatabouttery—and they’d be right.

I understand that Trump has spent his entire presidency as an “outsider” media critic and Twitter troll, but that doesn’t mean the standards we apply to other media platforms is the standard we’re supposed to apply to the president. “What the orange did isn’t so bad, because the apple broke the rules” is a childish argument.

---

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

Yes. Tell me all about your "feelings."  

That always goes well around here.

Why do you get off on being condescending and pretentious to people around here?

I blame your parents.. They did a piss poor job..

Meh.

I get pounced on for using the terminology in this particular, so I pointed it out. Didn't mean to attack you personally or anything. 

My parents tried diligently. Didn't work.  I'm a jerk sometimes.

---

Why do you get off on being condescending and pretentious to people around here?

I blame your parents.. They did a piss poor job..

Meh.

I get pounced on for using the terminology in this particular, so I pointed it out. Didn't mean to attack you personally or anything. 

My parents tried diligently. Didn't work.  I'm a jerk sometimes.

No worries, we all can be..

---

Apparently now, having a differing opinion is considered “fanning the flames of violence”.

Repeatedly publishing lies, false allegations and unfounded claims that can easily be tied to the motivation of rioters who killed a police officer and vandalized the capitol building is a little more than "having a differing opinion."

We can debate till the cows come home on whether or not Trump actually wanted the radical segment of his supporters to engage in anything so extreme or not, but it's painfully obvious that there are supporters of his out there who are fervent enough to cross into criminality trying to show that support. 

Now that the cross into criminality has taken place on such a large scale and stage, any further false claims that would fuel further criminality are seen as more dangerous than they were before when they were just a daily dose of falsification. It makes sense to censor him in that light.

 
Agreed.

Video shows shooting of 2 deputies in Compton - YouTube

https://youtu.be/YhHbkMHsjW0

---

Yes. Tell me all about your "feelings."  

That always goes well around here.

Why do you get off on being condescending and pretentious to people around here?

I blame your parents.. They did a piss poor job..

He's from NY. He was born a prick.

---

Why do you get off on being condescending and pretentious to people around here?

I blame your parents.. They did a piss poor job..

He's from NY. He was born a prick.

Haha.

I've probably told your dumb [BLEEP] 10 times that I'm from Jacksonville.

---

That's one thing I would change about this message board.  I would stop the name calling.  I don't think it contributes to the discussion or argument in any sort of positive way.

I think maybe the moderators could step in occasionally and do something about it.  Calling liberals "the scum of the earth," or saying someone was "born a prick," if I was moderating the message board, I would delete those posts and issue some warnings.

---

He's from NY. He was born a prick.

Haha.

I've probably told your dumb [BLEEP] 10 times that I'm from Jacksonville.

Once you live there, it infects you. I have seen it with several college buddies who moved there and became liberal elitists overnight.  Same thing that happened to you.

---

That's one thing I would change about this message board.  I would stop the name calling.  I don't think it contributes to the discussion or argument in any sort of positive way.

Quit being a stupid head

---

At least I have the self-confidence to defend my political positions without calling people names.

---

At least I have the self-confidence to defend my political positions without calling people names.

Your loss..

---

At least I have the self-confidence to defend my political positions without calling people names.

At least you aren't denying that NYC changes and corrupts your soul. Progress.

---

That's one thing I would change about this message board.  I would stop the name calling.  I don't think it contributes to the discussion or argument in any sort of positive way.

I think maybe the moderators could step in occasionally and do something about it.  Calling liberals "the scum of the earth," or saying someone was "born a prick," if I was moderating the message board, I would delete those posts and issue some warnings.

There's no rule that says discussion or argument must be positive.

---

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

Haha.

I've probably told your dumb [BLEEP] 10 times that I'm from Jacksonville.

Once you live there, it infects you. I have seen it with several college buddies who moved there and became liberal elitists overnight.  Same thing that happened to you.

The fact that you actually believe what you typed there is very telling of how impressionable you are. 

I'm not as impressionable. 

I grew up in Jax.  It's a VERY 50/50 environment politically.  I was raised in an extremely conservative Christian home and spent countless hours at church or related activities. I registered and voted republican and voted mostly for republicans when I was a young man. 

I didn't move to NYC until I was 28 years old. By then I had traveled to 30 states and 14 countries, read my share of literature and nonfiction, spent 6 years in and out of two colleges, and I had seen humans treat other humans poorly firsthand in a number of different environments. My turn toward more compassionate policy happened before I moved to NYC and was dictated by the empathy I had toward others that I witnessed being treated unjustly. 

Thinking you are an idiot doesn't make me an elitist. I don't feel that way about conservatives in general or even "everyone who voted for Trump."  Just anyone that puts their stupidity on display to the point it can't be denied. 

Sidenote on the NYC topic, it's interesting that I lived in Jax which was 50/50, NYC which was 90/10 liberal, and now I live in an extremely conservative town in SWFL.  There are Trump flags all over my neighborhood. I don't have a problem working with and working for the people of this community. In fact I find myself empathetic to some of my friends here who are downtrodden over the election result. I've had a number of convos trying to explain how "it won't be as bad as you think" to several of them.

---

There's some really, really, REALLY sensitive people around here haha

---

That's one thing I would change about this message board.  I would stop the name calling.  I don't think it contributes to the discussion or argument in any sort of positive way.

I think maybe the moderators could step in occasionally and do something about it.  Calling liberals "the scum of the earth," or saying someone was "born a prick," if I was moderating the message board, I would delete those posts and issue some warnings.

You dont need to keep advertising you are an advocate of shutting down free speech. The forum has ignore features if you or anyone else are so inclined.

It is my personal feeling that the modern day liberal is pond scum, and that is sugar coating it. Sorry.

Oh, and for the record, a moderator just called me an idiot. Rules for thee but not for me.

---

I agree with Marty. Name calling is an expression of frustration. Take a minute to organize your thoughts and then return with a rebuttal. Making it personal is exactly what translates to the violence we see on TV.
We're fortunate to have this forum to discuss politics. There's no sense in having it if it devolves into personal attacks. Then nothing constructive is being achieved. Technology has created a whole generation of keyboard commandos who feel they are not accountable for their words. My tact has always been to not post things online I wouldn't say to someone's face. Political discourse before the advent of the internet was more polite because that's exactly what people had to do. Treat your written words as such.

---

That's one thing I would change about this message board.  I would stop the name calling.  I don't think it contributes to the discussion or argument in any sort of positive way.

I think maybe the moderators could step in occasionally and do something about it.  Calling liberals "the scum of the earth," or saying someone was "born a prick," if I was moderating the message board, I would delete those posts and issue some warnings.

You dont need to keep advertising you are an advocate of shutting down free speech. The forum has ignore features if you or anyone else are so inclined.

It is my personal feeling that the modern day liberal is pond scum, and that is sugar coating it. Sorry.

Oh, and for the record, a moderator just called me an idiot. Rules for thee but not for me.

The issue remains the same, scum absconded with the term Liberal much as they have so many other words. Claiming the language is part of their strategy to claim the culture and we permit it when we allow it. They are illiberals and it's past time we reclaimed the true meaning of the words.

---

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