Violent extremist lolol

Not a violent bone in my body, dude..

Sure, maybe you'll never kill anyone over politics, but you're certainly ready to offer encouraging words to those who will.

---

Growing up it was always, ALWAYS the DemoRATS that were nasty as they could be, always attacking and the Republicans just sat back and took it, opting to take the “high road”. Well, that got us nowhere, now we fight fire with fire, and that sometimes looks ugly.

But we are way past amicable relationships with the left, there is no debating , no more so called compromising where the Dims get everything and the pubs get nothing. We need to destroy the left or they destroy us. Simple…

Q.E.D.
Growing up, my dad always told me it was the Democrats who always had to compromise while the Republicans got everything they wanted.
He was wrong.
And so are you.

---

Note to self:

When discussing an impending danger from violent extremists, make sure you aren't wasting your time telling the people who actually support the violent extremists.

---

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

Violent extremist lolol

Not a violent bone in my body, dude..

Sure, maybe you'll never kill anyone over politics, but you're certainly ready to offer encouraging words to those who will.

---

Growing up it was always, ALWAYS the DemoRATS that were nasty as they could be, always attacking and the Republicans just sat back and took it, opting to take the “high road”. Well, that got us nowhere, now we fight fire with fire, and that sometimes looks ugly.

But we are way past amicable relationships with the left, there is no debating , no more so called compromising where the Dims get everything and the pubs get nothing. We need to destroy the left or they destroy us. Simple…

Q.E.D.
Growing up, my dad always told me it was the Democrats who always had to compromise while the Republicans got everything they wanted.
He was wrong.
And so are you.

Duder, you can't use "violent extremist" as a dog whistle to support your claims anymore. It's like being called racist now. The word "racist" has lost it's luster after being called racist for enjoying vanilla ice cream over chocolate lol

Just like the term "violent extremist" had lost its luster as well. Now, anyone who doesn't agree or follow a specific agenda, is now the boogeyman and is called "violent extremist" lolol

I don't want chicken for dinner tonight. I wonder if the wife will call me an extremist..

---

Good lord. This may win “worst post of 2023”.

Get over yourself. It’s a Jags message board. Nothing anyone says here is truly going to change the mind of another. 

Congrats on wasting YEARS on this board arguing with people about politics.

So why do you go after Ronster about him wanting to kill all democrats, if it doesn't matter?

Yes. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn’t matter because he’s not going to change either. He will likely always feel that way and he’s free to feel like that. I’m also free to call out that BS when I want to. I don’t expect anyone else to because people can do and post what they want.

However, getting mad at someone because they don’t spend hours in this portion of the board “having your back” makes you seem like a child.

---

Sure, maybe you'll never kill anyone over politics, but you're certainly ready to offer encouraging words to those who will.

---

Q.E.D.
Growing up, my dad always told me it was the Democrats who always had to compromise while the Republicans got everything they wanted.
He was wrong.
And so are you.

Duder, you can't use "violent extremist" as a dog whistle to support your claims anymore. It's like being called racist now. The word "racist" has lost it's luster after being called racist for enjoying vanilla ice cream over chocolate lol

Just like the term "violent extremist" had lost its luster as well. Now, anyone who doesn't agree or follow a specific agenda, is now the boogeyman and is called "violent extremist" lolol

I don't want chicken for dinner tonight. I wonder if the wife will call me an extremist..

I can't take any reposnsibility for other people over using a word.
However
There really are violent extremists attacks out there.
And the people who carry them out are saying a lot of the same things you are saying.

---

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

Duder, you can't use "violent extremist" as a dog whistle to support your claims anymore. It's like being called racist now. The word "racist" has lost it's luster after being called racist for enjoying vanilla ice cream over chocolate lol

Just like the term "violent extremist" had lost its luster as well. Now, anyone who doesn't agree or follow a specific agenda, is now the boogeyman and is called "violent extremist" lolol

I don't want chicken for dinner tonight. I wonder if the wife will call me an extremist..

I can't take any reposnsibility for other people over using a word.
However
There really are violent extremists attacks out there.
And the people who carry them out are saying a lot of the same things you are saying.

What are they saying that I'm also saying?

Pedophilia is bad?
This democrat regime is the worst in history?
Dragging in front of children is bad?

And yeah, there are violent extremists out there..

This also could be part of the reason..

https://src.senate.ca.gov/content/califo...ure-minors

---

Why would you say it's astoundingly false? I concede that it's not widely accepted among democrats, but it's also only accepted by democrats. Imo, too many people on the left bury their heads in the sands with regards to their party's worst attributes, which gives a voice to the most radicals. 

You post about the right, but you are oblivious (or at least come across that way), to the damage that is coming from the left. You can't have a healthy examination of right-wing violence without also looking at the violence that is rampant and ignored on the left. One begets the other.

It really doesn't beget anything, and I've made clear reference to the counterpart.

This notion of one begetting the other anytime a misstep by someone on the right is pointed out in this forum is sad. 
Instead of actually addressing the point it's always:
"But her emails!!" 
"But Biden did something similar!!" 
"But, but, but but..... whatever" 

If you are unable to discuss a clearly described issue facing the citizens of our great nation without having to attempt in countering it with something equally despicable - you are immediately disingenuous in your response to the initial topic. 

OP: I think there are some bad things happening. Many of the bad things I see and describe in this post are coming from right wing extremists. We need to consider how we fuel the fire of these extremists.

Response: BUT there are left wing extremists too!!!!!!!!

OP: Right, but can we talk about the ones I'm talking about for a second? 

Response: The left are all pedophiles!!!! 

It's not a [BLEEP] contest. 
It's a problem. 
One that I believe is going to get a lot of people killed sooner or later.
Sorry we apparently can't talk about it.

I will admit I didn't read your whole post. I was just skimming through out of habit (even though I have lost interest in some of the arguments here), picked up the sentiment of your post and Winger's reaction, and threw in my two cents. I apologize. I think it's a conversation worth having. The current climate only focuses on the right because it almost ALWAYS focuses on the right, but I disagree that it's more prevalent... it's just being brought to the forefront more often. The left has the power to do that. 

I particularly agree with the bolded part, which is why I say it begets one another. The radicals on the left cause violence. The left-wing media makes excuses for it, while the right-wing media denounces it. The right sees the left as getting away with violence, which produces radicals, and they reciprocate. The left-wing media denounces it, but the right-wing media turns a blind eye. The radicals on the left see the right as escalating violence, which creates more radicals that reciprocate it. It definitely begets one another. It just frustrates me that we are having this conversation now, even though I have been warning of this for years. 

And, yes, of course this stuff happens from sympathizers supporting both sides of the aisle. The current climate just happens to have if more focused and prevalent from the right wing. I'm sure there are relevant examples of extremists from the left doing all kinds of evil, but the current climate is lopsided the other way. The point being made is that our society and media are not being responsible about the spread of hateful propaganda and it is going to end up fueling more and more violence. 

The civil war talk is also just getting louder and louder, and more and more normalized. There are enough wackos out there building arsenals that this rhetoric will equate to violence soon enough. 

I wish we didn't normalize the hate like we do. It's dangerous, and I see us very near a tipping point.

---

I can't take any reposnsibility for other people over using a word.
However
There really are violent extremists attacks out there.
And the people who carry them out are saying a lot of the same things you are saying.

What are they saying that I'm also saying?

Pedophilia is bad?
This democrat regime is the worst in history?
Dragging in front of children is bad?

And yeah, there are violent extremists out there..

This also could be part of the reason..

https://src.senate.ca.gov/content/califo...ure-minors

Pedophilia is bad, of course.  But you're saying known pedophilia by elite people is going unpunished at an epic scale.  That's false and dangerous to lie about.
This democrat regime is one of the worst in history, certainly, but you're saying they're illegitimate.  That's false and dangerous to lie about.
Drag in front of children is benign if we're just talking about a man portraying a woman in a children's play, but obviously super harmful if the performance is sexually explicit in any way.  That's besides the point though.
The California law change, we've been through this before, was about using the same punishment guidelines for homosexual acts involving minors as heterosexual acts.  It allows for a 10 year age difference, which is too generous for my taste, and it is not at all about protecting the kind of elite grooming behavior you've described.  The stuff you're talking about, the age difference would be much larger.

---

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

Why would you say it's astoundingly false? I concede that it's not widely accepted among democrats, but it's also only accepted by democrats. Imo, too many people on the left bury their heads in the sands with regards to their party's worst attributes, which gives a voice to the most radicals. 

You post about the right, but you are oblivious (or at least come across that way), to the damage that is coming from the left. You can't have a healthy examination of right-wing violence without also looking at the violence that is rampant and ignored on the left. One begets the other.

It really doesn't beget anything, and I've made clear reference to the counterpart.

This notion of one begetting the other anytime a misstep by someone on the right is pointed out in this forum is sad. 
Instead of actually addressing the point it's always:
"But her emails!!" 
"But Biden did something similar!!" 
"But, but, but but..... whatever" 

If you are unable to discuss a clearly described issue facing the citizens of our great nation without having to attempt in countering it with something equally despicable - you are immediately disingenuous in your response to the initial topic. 

OP: I think there are some bad things happening. Many of the bad things I see and describe in this post are coming from right wing extremists. We need to consider how we fuel the fire of these extremists.

Response: BUT there are left wing extremists too!!!!!!!!

OP: Right, but can we talk about the ones I'm talking about for a second? 

Response: The left are all pedophiles!!!! 

It's not a [BLEEP] contest. 
It's a problem. 
One that I believe is going to get a lot of people killed sooner or later.
Sorry we apparently can't talk about it.

Your entire premise is disingenuous.  There is a plethora of examples of leftist extremism inciting violence yet you chose to pose the question giving only examples of right wing extremism.  If you truly wanted an honest discussion on the matter you would have offered up the BLM movement burning down the very businesses that support predominantly black neighborhoods as a counter balance.  If you actually wanted an honest conversation you wouldn’t have given the leftist extremism a pass.  Your agenda is dripping from how you posed the question, don’t act like you are surprised with the initial response you received.  Had Winger asked the same question posed from the other side in the exact manner you’d have responded the same way.

---

I wasn't asking for help. 




Note to self:

When discussing an impending danger from violent extremists, make sure you aren't wasting your time telling the people who actually support the violent extremists.

I actually agree with most of what you said in OP, but after how you treat me here, refuse to stick up for me, I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire.  I've been here for *years* pushing back against FSG and Ronster and Winger for their violent extremism.  And we have nice banter too, but mostly me pushing back.  And all you can say is, "nothing that poster has said has ever resonated with me".  Then you come on here like this? Where you been man?  Stabs in the back hurt way more than stabs in the front. Change.  Recognize that you are a bigger part of the problem than them.  People like us need to be united because there are more of us than there are them.  If we unite.
If we dont stab each other in the back.  I hope you change and repent and unite with me. Otherwise, die mad.

14 post in and you had to make it all about you.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

It really doesn't beget anything, and I've made clear reference to the counterpart.

This notion of one begetting the other anytime a misstep by someone on the right is pointed out in this forum is sad. 
Instead of actually addressing the point it's always:
"But her emails!!" 
"But Biden did something similar!!" 
"But, but, but but..... whatever" 

If you are unable to discuss a clearly described issue facing the citizens of our great nation without having to attempt in countering it with something equally despicable - you are immediately disingenuous in your response to the initial topic. 

OP: I think there are some bad things happening. Many of the bad things I see and describe in this post are coming from right wing extremists. We need to consider how we fuel the fire of these extremists.

Response: BUT there are left wing extremists too!!!!!!!!

OP: Right, but can we talk about the ones I'm talking about for a second? 

Response: The left are all pedophiles!!!! 

It's not a [BLEEP] contest. 
It's a problem. 
One that I believe is going to get a lot of people killed sooner or later.
Sorry we apparently can't talk about it.

Your entire premise is disingenuous.  There is a plethora of examples of leftist extremism inciting violence yet you chose to pose the question giving only examples of right wing extremism.  If you truly wanted an honest discussion on the matter you would have offered up the BLM movement burning down the very businesses that support predominantly black neighborhoods as a counter balance.  If you actually wanted an honest conversation you wouldn’t have given the leftist extremism a pass.  Your agenda is dripping from how you posed the question, don’t act like you are surprised with the initial response you received.  Had Winger asked the same question posed from the other side in the exact manner you’d have responded the same way.

---

I actually agree with most of what you said in OP, but after how you treat me here, refuse to stick up for me, I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire.  I've been here for *years* pushing back against FSG and Ronster and Winger for their violent extremism.  And we have nice banter too, but mostly me pushing back.  And all you can say is, "nothing that poster has said has ever resonated with me".  Then you come on here like this? Where you been man?  Stabs in the back hurt way more than stabs in the front. Change.  Recognize that you are a bigger part of the problem than them.  People like us need to be united because there are more of us than there are them.  If we unite.
If we dont stab each other in the back.  I hope you change and repent and unite with me. Otherwise, die mad.

14 post in and you had to make it all about you.

I wouldn't have brought up how he treats me except its an example of the overall error in his approach.  
You're honest with yourself and willing to answer points fairly. I'd definitely piss on you if you were on fire.  Might even loan you money.  But NYC, unless he actually engages with this at the level it's at, rather than him above everyone else, is a different case and he needs to know that.

---

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

I wasn't asking for help. 




Note to self:

When discussing an impending danger from violent extremists, make sure you aren't wasting your time telling the people who actually support the violent extremists.

I actually agree with most of what you said in OP, but after how you treat me here, refuse to stick up for me, I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire.  I've been here for *years* pushing back against FSG and Ronster and Winger for their violent extremism.  And we have nice banter too, but mostly me pushing back.  And all you can say is, "nothing that poster has said has ever resonated with me".  Then you come on here like this? Where you been man?  Stabs in the back hurt way more than stabs in the front. Change.  Recognize that you are a bigger part of the problem than them.  People like us need to be united because there are more of us than there are them.  If we unite.
If we dont stab each other in the back.  I hope you change and repent and unite with me. Otherwise, die mad.

Violent extremism? Me? You're a loon. You don't push back, you create nonsense in your head in an attempt to make yourself look smart. You have no principle you won't serve up for the purpose of playing contrarian and it's pathetic.

---

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

I actually agree with most of what you said in OP, but after how you treat me here, refuse to stick up for me, I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire.  I've been here for *years* pushing back against FSG and Ronster and Winger for their violent extremism.  And we have nice banter too, but mostly me pushing back.  And all you can say is, "nothing that poster has said has ever resonated with me".  Then you come on here like this? Where you been man?  Stabs in the back hurt way more than stabs in the front. Change.  Recognize that you are a bigger part of the problem than them.  People like us need to be united because there are more of us than there are them.  If we unite.
If we dont stab each other in the back.  I hope you change and repent and unite with me. Otherwise, die mad.

Violent extremism? Me? You're a loon. You don't push back, you create nonsense in your head in an attempt to make yourself look smart. You have no principle you won't serve up for the purpose of playing contrarian and it's pathetic.

Do you want me to quote your posts back to you?

---

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

I enjoy reading this section but this thread is entertaining. Mike sometimes has a point but 9/10(actually more like 10/10) your posts are contrary to the general consensus of this board. Which sometimes keeps the conversation moving, if for nothing else, just to push the other side of a topic. Sometimes you give a vibe that you think the stuff you are saying is new news to people as if they are too obtuse or stupid to consider your take prior to you saying it. But most of the time it comes across like a guy who was assigned a topic in a debate class in which he doesn’t believe in the stance he was assigned and is being forced into a debate(oddly specific but I took a debate class in college and remember those assignments all too well).

This thread takes the cake, someone presents a reasonable topic that inevitably goes against the grain and consensus of the board(at least the side mike is used to attacking). Should be right up your ally right? Nope. Somehow you managed to isolate your self yet again. I mean you had to stray off topic and resort to direct attacks on the OP, but true to form you achieved the goal of somehow agreeing with absolutely nobody.

Master of your craft my dude. Well played.

---

I enjoy reading this section but this thread is entertaining. Mike sometimes has a point but  9/10(actually more like 10/10) your  posts are contrary to the general consensus of this board. Which sometimes keeps the conversation moving, if for nothing else, just to push the other side of a topic. Sometimes you give a vibe that you think the stuff you are saying is new news to people as if they are too obtuse or stupid to consider your take prior to you saying it. But most of the time it comes across like a guy who was assigned a topic in a debate class in which  he doesn’t believe in the stance he was assigned and is being forced into a debate(oddly specific but I took a debate class in college and remember those assignments all too well).

This thread takes the cake, someone presents a reasonable topic that inevitably goes against the grain and consensus of the board(at least the side mike is used to attacking). Should be right up your ally right? Nope. Somehow you managed to isolate your self yet again. I mean you had to stray off topic and resort to direct attacks on the OP, but true to form you achieved the goal of somehow agreeing with absolutely nobody.

Master of your craft my dude. Well played.

I appreciate your post.
One, I do need to do a better job of speaking up when I agree. It's not fun or interesting to me to just reply with "I agree" but I should do so more. I don't like that people think I'm just being contrary.

I never took a debate class.  Maybe I should have.  We had to write a lot of essays, but only about the side of the story we wanted.  They never made us practice writing things we didn't believe.  I don't do that here.  I just have a unique set of beliefs. 

But yeah your post is more of what we need here, more of what I should be doing.  Just reply with, good point, didn't think of that, wait I don't understand, I understand but I don't agree, instead of "you're a loon for thinking that" or worse.

---

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

Violent extremism? Me? You're a loon. You don't push back, you create nonsense in your head in an attempt to make yourself look smart. You have no principle you won't serve up for the purpose of playing contrarian and it's pathetic.

Do you want me to quote your posts back to you?

Sure thing buttercup, I'm sure for you mean words are enough to keep you awake a night in terror.

---

I enjoy reading this section but this thread is entertaining. Mike sometimes has a point but  9/10(actually more like 10/10) your  posts are contrary to the general consensus of this board. Which sometimes keeps the conversation moving, if for nothing else, just to push the other side of a topic. Sometimes you give a vibe that you think the stuff you are saying is new news to people as if they are too obtuse or stupid to consider your take prior to you saying it. But most of the time it comes across like a guy who was assigned a topic in a debate class in which  he doesn’t believe in the stance he was assigned and is being forced into a debate(oddly specific but I took a debate class in college and remember those assignments all too well).

This thread takes the cake, someone presents a reasonable topic that inevitably goes against the grain and consensus of the board(at least the side mike is used to attacking). Should be right up your ally right? Nope. Somehow you managed to isolate your self yet again. I mean you had to stray off topic and resort to direct attacks on the OP, but true to form you achieved the goal of somehow agreeing with absolutely nobody.

Master of your craft my dude. Well played.

I appreciate your post.
One, I do need to do a better job of speaking up when I agree. It's not fun or interesting to me to just reply with "I agree" but I should do so more.  I don't like that people think I'm just being contrary.

I never took a debate class.  Maybe I should have.  We had to write a lot of essays, but only about the side of the story we wanted.  They never made us practice writing things we didn't believe.  I don't do that here.  I just have a unique set of beliefs. 

But yeah your post is more of what we need here, more of what I should be doing.  Just reply with, good point, didn't think of that, wait I don't understand, I understand but I don't agree, instead of "you're a loon for thinking that" or worse.

Lol, damn...I didn't even need to read that post to know you'd be crying about it.

---

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

It really doesn't beget anything, and I've made clear reference to the counterpart.

This notion of one begetting the other anytime a misstep by someone on the right is pointed out in this forum is sad. 
Instead of actually addressing the point it's always:
"But her emails!!" 
"But Biden did something similar!!" 
"But, but, but but..... whatever" 

If you are unable to discuss a clearly described issue facing the citizens of our great nation without having to attempt in countering it with something equally despicable - you are immediately disingenuous in your response to the initial topic. 

OP: I think there are some bad things happening. Many of the bad things I see and describe in this post are coming from right wing extremists. We need to consider how we fuel the fire of these extremists.

Response: BUT there are left wing extremists too!!!!!!!!

OP: Right, but can we talk about the ones I'm talking about for a second? 

Response: The left are all pedophiles!!!! 

It's not a [BLEEP] contest. 
It's a problem. 
One that I believe is going to get a lot of people killed sooner or later.
Sorry we apparently can't talk about it.

I will admit I didn't read your whole post. I was just skimming through out of habit (even though I have lost interest in some of the arguments here), picked up the sentiment of your post and Winger's reaction, and threw in my two cents. I apologize. I think it's a conversation worth having. The current climate only focuses on the right because it almost ALWAYS focuses on the right, but I disagree that it's more prevalent... it's just being brought to the forefront more often. The left has the power to do that. 

I particularly agree with the bolded part, which is why I say it begets one another. The radicals on the left cause violence. The left-wing media makes excuses for it, while the right-wing media denounces it. The right sees the left as getting away with violence, which produces radicals, and they reciprocate. The left-wing media denounces it, but the right-wing media turns a blind eye. The radicals on the left see the right as escalating violence, which creates more radicals that reciprocate it. It definitely begets one another. It just frustrates me that we are having this conversation now, even though I have been warning of this for years. 

And, yes, of course this stuff happens from sympathizers supporting both sides of the aisle. The current climate just happens to have if more focused and prevalent from the right wing. I'm sure there are relevant examples of extremists from the left doing all kinds of evil, but the current climate is lopsided the other way. The point being made is that our society and media are not being responsible about the spread of hateful propaganda and it is going to end up fueling more and more violence. 

The civil war talk is also just getting louder and louder, and more and more normalized. There are enough wackos out there building arsenals that this rhetoric will equate to violence soon enough. 

I wish we didn't normalize the hate like we do. It's dangerous, and I see us very near a tipping point.

It really doesn't beget anything, and I've made clear reference to the counterpart.

This notion of one begetting the other anytime a misstep by someone on the right is pointed out in this forum is sad. 
Instead of actually addressing the point it's always:
"But her emails!!" 
"But Biden did something similar!!" 
"But, but, but but..... whatever" 

If you are unable to discuss a clearly described issue facing the citizens of our great nation without having to attempt in countering it with something equally despicable - you are immediately disingenuous in your response to the initial topic. 

OP: I think there are some bad things happening. Many of the bad things I see and describe in this post are coming from right wing extremists. We need to consider how we fuel the fire of these extremists.

Response: BUT there are left wing extremists too!!!!!!!!

OP: Right, but can we talk about the ones I'm talking about for a second? 

Response: The left are all pedophiles!!!! 

It's not a [BLEEP] contest. 
It's a problem. 
One that I believe is going to get a lot of people killed sooner or later.
Sorry we apparently can't talk about it.

Your entire premise is disingenuous.  There is a plethora of examples of leftist extremism inciting violence yet you chose to pose the question giving only examples of right wing extremism.  If you truly wanted an honest discussion on the matter you would have offered up the BLM movement burning down the very businesses that support predominantly black neighborhoods as a counter balance.  If you actually wanted an honest conversation you wouldn’t have given the leftist extremism a pass.  Your agenda is dripping from how you posed the question, don’t act like you are surprised with the initial response you received.  Had Winger asked the same question posed from the other side in the exact manner you’d have responded the same way.

---

Thanks to both of you for thoughtful responses.

I did make note of the left wing extremists and attempted simply to focus on the current threat from those on the right as these things tend to ebb and flow with election cycles - and right now - the extremists on the right believe they have more to be mad about. 

Here is a non-partisan brief that outlines some of the ebb and flow of right vs left extremists acting out in response to elections, policy and current events. There is a lot of good unbiased info there. 

https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating...ted-states

Again - the point I'm making is about how we have normalized outrageous propaganda that foments violence and I feel this trend will boil over with dire consequence in a way we haven't experienced in modern American history.

---

I will admit I didn't read your whole post. I was just skimming through out of habit (even though I have lost interest in some of the arguments here), picked up the sentiment of your post and Winger's reaction, and threw in my two cents. I apologize. I think it's a conversation worth having. The current climate only focuses on the right because it almost ALWAYS focuses on the right, but I disagree that it's more prevalent... it's just being brought to the forefront more often. The left has the power to do that. 

I particularly agree with the bolded part, which is why I say it begets one another. The radicals on the left cause violence. The left-wing media makes excuses for it, while the right-wing media denounces it. The right sees the left as getting away with violence, which produces radicals, and they reciprocate. The left-wing media denounces it, but the right-wing media turns a blind eye. The radicals on the left see the right as escalating violence, which creates more radicals that reciprocate it. It definitely begets one another. It just frustrates me that we are having this conversation now, even though I have been warning of this for years. 

Your entire premise is disingenuous.  There is a plethora of examples of leftist extremism inciting violence yet you chose to pose the question giving only examples of right wing extremism.  If you truly wanted an honest discussion on the matter you would have offered up the BLM movement burning down the very businesses that support predominantly black neighborhoods as a counter balance.  If you actually wanted an honest conversation you wouldn’t have given the leftist extremism a pass.  Your agenda is dripping from how you posed the question, don’t act like you are surprised with the initial response you received.  Had Winger asked the same question posed from the other side in the exact manner you’d have responded the same way.

---

Thanks to both of you for thoughtful responses.

I did make note of the left wing extremists and attempted simply to focus on the current threat from those on the right as these things tend to ebb and flow with election cycles  - and right now - the extremists on the right believe they have more to be mad about. 

Here is a non-partisan brief that outlines some of the ebb and flow of right vs left extremists acting out in response to elections, policy and current events. There is a lot of good unbiased info there. 

https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating...ted-states

Again - the point I'm making is about how we have normalized outrageous propaganda that foments violence and I feel this trend will boil over with dire consequence in a way we haven't experienced in modern American history.

So, as politely as possible, you're the mod here, not L2L, not copycat, not me.

If you want this to be a place where the only thing the nonviolent normies can do is make ridicuous sexual insults against the violent extremists, that's what you've got.

If you want this place to be better, the power is yours.

---

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

Your entire premise is disingenuous.  There is a plethora of examples of leftist extremism inciting violence yet you chose to pose the question giving only examples of right wing extremism.  If you truly wanted an honest discussion on the matter you would have offered up the BLM movement burning down the very businesses that support predominantly black neighborhoods as a counter balance.  If you actually wanted an honest conversation you wouldn’t have given the leftist extremism a pass.  Your agenda is dripping from how you posed the question, don’t act like you are surprised with the initial response you received.  Had Winger asked the same question posed from the other side in the exact manner you’d have responded the same way.

---

14 post in and you had to make it all about you.

I wouldn't have brought up how he treats me except its an example of the overall error in his approach.  
You're honest with yourself and willing to answer points fairly. I'd definitely piss on you if you were on fire.  Might even loan you money.  But NYC, unless he actually engages with this at the level it's at, rather than him above everyone else, is a different case and he needs to know that.

Lol.  At least I got that going for me.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Thanks to both of you for thoughtful responses.

I did make note of the left wing extremists and attempted simply to focus on the current threat from those on the right as these things tend to ebb and flow with election cycles  - and right now - the extremists on the right believe they have more to be mad about. 

Here is a non-partisan brief that outlines some of the ebb and flow of right vs left extremists acting out in response to elections, policy and current events. There is a lot of good unbiased info there. 

https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating...ted-states

Again - the point I'm making is about how we have normalized outrageous propaganda that foments violence and I feel this trend will boil over with dire consequence in a way we haven't experienced in modern American history.

So, as politely as possible, you're the mod here, not L2L, not copycat, not me.

If you want this to be a place where the only thing the nonviolent normies can do is make ridicuous sexual insults against the violent extremists, that's what you've got.

If you want this place to be better, the power is yours.

Being a mod has zero to do with anything being discussed here. 

The political forum didn't exist here for a long time because mods knew it would be divisive and combative. 

We eventually relented due to more and more folks asking for the space to talk politics. 
I voted against it FWIW but agreed to support the majority - as is our standard method of decision making as a mod team. 

I'm sorry I've clearly upset you by being crass about not agreeing with you on occasion. 

In case you missed the context, I'll refresh your memory. 
The first time - "almost nothing he says resonates with me" I was countering a post that haphazardly threw my whole line of principle in with yours. 
I hate braod-sweeping-generalizations in debate because they are lazy, inaccurate and counter productive to discourse so I disagreed in the manner you took offense to. 

Next: YOU made a broad-sweeping-generalization about how the left feel on a topic that was wildly inaccurate - so I pointed that out as ruining your entire ensuing post. It did. 

I'm fine with both of those instances, and as far as I remember those are the only times I've posted anything that might offend you. Apologies offered for the harshness, but I don't feel I did anything wrong besides expressing myself with minimal filter. 

I wouldn't post in this forum AT ALL if I needed people to agree with me. 
You might consider a similar approach.

The most I hope for is to occasionally broaden someones perspective and have my own perspective augmented by others viewpoints.

---

So, as politely as possible, you're the mod here, not L2L, not copycat, not me.

If you want this to be a place where the only thing the nonviolent normies can do is make ridicuous sexual insults against the violent extremists, that's what you've got.

If you want this place to be better, the power is yours.

Being a mod has zero to do with anything being discussed here. 

The political forum didn't exist here for a long time because mods knew it would be divisive and combative. 

We eventually relented due to more and more folks asking for the space to talk politics. 
I voted against it FWIW but agreed to support the majority - as is our standard method of decision making as a mod team. 

I'm sorry I've clearly upset you by being crass about not agreeing with you on occasion. 

In case you missed the context, I'll refresh your memory. 
The first time - "almost nothing he says resonates with me" I was countering a post that haphazardly threw my whole line of principle in with yours. 
I hate braod-sweeping-generalizations in debate because they are lazy, inaccurate and counter productive to discourse so I disagreed in the manner you took offense to. 

Next: YOU made a broad-sweeping-generalization about how the left feel on a topic that was wildly inaccurate - so I pointed that out as ruining your entire ensuing post. It did. 

I'm fine with both of those instances, and as far as I remember those are the only times I've posted anything that might offend you. Apologies offered for the harshness, but I don't feel I did anything wrong besides expressing myself with minimal filter. 

I wouldn't post in this forum AT ALL if I needed people to agree with me. 
You might consider a similar approach.

The most I hope for is to occasionally broaden someones perspective and have my own perspective augmented by others viewpoints.

I appreciate your reply and your apology.
But I really don't understand why you took such umbrage at my generalization. 
You don't mind being identified with the left,
You said reform priority #1 is getting corporate money out of politics
I said all lefties feel that way,
So what is the problem?
If you weren't a lefty, or if you didn't care about corporate money in politics, I could see why my statement would upset you. No one likes to be mischaracterized. But I was just reflecting your own positions back to you.  Why is that not OK?
Why do you let actual violent extremism pass with no comment, and then drop bombs on my stuff?

---

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

Being a mod has zero to do with anything being discussed here. 

The political forum didn't exist here for a long time because mods knew it would be divisive and combative. 

We eventually relented due to more and more folks asking for the space to talk politics. 
I voted against it FWIW but agreed to support the majority - as is our standard method of decision making as a mod team. 

I'm sorry I've clearly upset you by being crass about not agreeing with you on occasion. 

In case you missed the context, I'll refresh your memory. 
The first time - "almost nothing he says resonates with me" I was countering a post that haphazardly threw my whole line of principle in with yours. 
I hate braod-sweeping-generalizations in debate because they are lazy, inaccurate and counter productive to discourse so I disagreed in the manner you took offense to. 

Next: YOU made a broad-sweeping-generalization about how the left feel on a topic that was wildly inaccurate - so I pointed that out as ruining your entire ensuing post. It did. 

I'm fine with both of those instances, and as far as I remember those are the only times I've posted anything that might offend you. Apologies offered for the harshness, but I don't feel I did anything wrong besides expressing myself with minimal filter. 

I wouldn't post in this forum AT ALL if I needed people to agree with me. 
You might consider a similar approach.

The most I hope for is to occasionally broaden someones perspective and have my own perspective augmented by others viewpoints.

I appreciate your reply and your apology.
But I really don't understand why you took such umbrage at my generalization. 
You don't mind being identified with the left,
You said reform priority #1 is getting corporate money out of politics
I said all lefties feel that way,
So what is the problem?
If you weren't a lefty, or if you didn't care about corporate money in politics, I could see why my statement would upset you. No one likes to be mischaracterized. But I was just reflecting your own positions back to you.  Why is that not OK?
Why do you let actual violent extremism pass with no comment, and then drop bombs on my stuff?

Lol, because you come off as a smarmy sap that no one wants on their side. Your attempts at coalition building are funny to watch though.

---

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