You’ve got a fatal case of both siderism. Aside from the shooter, these folks were where they were legally entitled to be, doing what they were legally entitled to do, and not committing any violence. They didn’t beat the crap out of police, physically threaten anyone, vandalize offices or even take a dump on the Capitol rotunda. The two situations aren’t similar at all.
And, no, “my side” isn’t perfect and “their side isn’t evil.” That’s the lie you tell yourself to justify your pox on all houses. Whining about the left won’t save you if you get on the wrong side of Bondi’s DOJ.
Both siderism? Love the new term. Although I'd call it anti-uniparty. The billionaire donors seem to want more and more authoritarianism and less freedom for us. Both parties raise fake issues in order to trample on the first amendment. We can't have those "right wingers" or the "anti semites" or the "progressives" being platformed. Both sides seem to want to shoot and jail the other side and posters here have foolishly raised the specter of home grown terrorists. It's all a control mechanism.
We should get together instead of the idiotic bickering the two party system fosters by design. We've been robbed over the last 50 years or so but the uni party wont reduce the defense budget and definitely wont do anything to cure the failed audits. We are continually at war. Trump gets bullied into launching another stupid war with Iran and the democrats wont do anything because they are controlled by the same people. So, both siderism? No, anti-uniparty.
‘Don’t look at the actual offense being discussed; instead, pretend that someone else will do the same’.
‘Anti-uniparty’ isn’t promoted when your first reaction to the erosion of civil rights is to wave away the incident and point to ‘the other side’, as if that other side was part of the situation being discussed. Especially when you tend to hold your voice when your ‘sides’, as you define them, are reversed.
Both siderism? Love the new term. Although I'd call it anti-uniparty. The billionaire donors seem to want more and more authoritarianism and less freedom for us. Both parties raise fake issues in order to trample on the first amendment. We can't have those "right wingers" or the "anti semites" or the "progressives" being platformed. Both sides seem to want to shoot and jail the other side and posters here have foolishly raised the specter of home grown terrorists. It's all a control mechanism.
We should get together instead of the idiotic bickering the two party system fosters by design. We've been robbed over the last 50 years or so but the uni party wont reduce the defense budget and definitely wont do anything to cure the failed audits. We are continually at war. Trump gets bullied into launching another stupid war with Iran and the democrats wont do anything because they are controlled by the same people. So, both siderism? No, anti-uniparty.
‘Don’t look at the actual offense being discussed; instead, pretend that someone else will do the same’.
‘Anti-uniparty’ isn’t promoted when your first reaction to the erosion of civil rights is to wave away the incident and point to ‘the other side’, as if that other side was part of the situation being discussed. Especially when you tend to hold your voice when your ‘sides’, as you define them, are reversed.
No, I'm not avoiding the incident. Getting arrested and convicted for merely objecting to what government does is clearly against the 1st amendment. I just hope those here that are being duped into believing that their most holy party wouldn't do the same .... and did .... and the blind supported it.
This is part of the problem of creating an us v. them narrative and using government. overreach to further that agenda. The democrats did it during Biden and now the clown Trump is doing the same thing and our rights are being flushed down the toilet. But yes Trump is an idiot and a criminal and I hope he gets impeached and we finally realize that the oligarchs that run the parties are running down a path of more control over us. Time to stop the nonsense.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
‘Anti-uniparty’ isn’t promoted when your first reaction to the erosion of civil rights is to wave away the incident and point to ‘the other side’, as if that other side was part of the situation being discussed. Especially when you tend to hold your voice when your ‘sides’, as you define them, are reversed.
No, I'm not avoiding the incident. Getting arrested and convicted for merely objecting to what government does is clearly against the 1st amendment. I just hope those here that are being duped into believing that their most holy party wouldn't do the same .... and did .... and the blind supported it.
Yes, some similar-looking incidents can be dug up from any Administration in US history. But Res has not indicated that those should be ignored, nor stated in any way that the issue being talked about here couldn’t also present elsewhere.
If your first response to his post is to spend the majority of your message presenting a ‘… but, but, the other side …’ argument, then you’re basically neutralizing and dismissing valid concerns through focus on and equivocation of non-equivalent situations that have nothing to do with the subject.
No, I'm not avoiding the incident. Getting arrested and convicted for merely objecting to what government does is clearly against the 1st amendment. I just hope those here that are being duped into believing that their most holy party wouldn't do the same .... and did .... and the blind supported it.
Yes, some similar-looking incidents can be dug up from any Administration in US history. But Res has not indicated that those should be ignored, nor stated in any way that the issue being talked about here couldn’t also present elsewhere.
If your first response to his post is to spend the majority of your message presenting a ‘… but, but, the other side …’ argument, then you’re basically neutralizing and dismissing valid concerns through focus on and equivocation of non-equivalent situations that have nothing to do with the subject.
No, I'm saying you guys are hypocrites. You say nothing when your side does it and point out when the other side does it. Good for you though for at least seeing that rights are being eroded.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
Yes, some similar-looking incidents can be dug up from any Administration in US history. But Res has not indicated that those should be ignored, nor stated in any way that the issue being talked about here couldn’t also present elsewhere.
If your first response to his post is to spend the majority of your message presenting a ‘… but, but, the other side …’ argument, then you’re basically neutralizing and dismissing valid concerns through focus on and equivocation of non-equivalent situations that have nothing to do with the subject.
No, I'm saying you guys are hypocrites. You say nothing when your side does it and point out when the other side does it. Good for you though for at least seeing that rights are being eroded.
Your last isn't remotely true. There's plenty of "self side" criticism on this board. You're seeing what you're looking for, Dr.
LIGHT HAS A NAME
We only get stronger when we are lifting something that is heavier than what we are used to. ~ KF
Yes, some similar-looking incidents can be dug up from any Administration in US history. But Res has not indicated that those should be ignored, nor stated in any way that the issue being talked about here couldn’t also present elsewhere.
If your first response to his post is to spend the majority of your message presenting a ‘… but, but, the other side …’ argument, then you’re basically neutralizing and dismissing valid concerns through focus on and equivocation of non-equivalent situations that have nothing to do with the subject.
No, I'm saying you guys are hypocrites. You say nothing when your side does it and point out when the other side does it. Good for you though for at least seeing that rights are being eroded.
An example would be helpful.
If the person you’re calling a hypocrite is still making a valid and/or noteworthy point, what is then more important to you? The point being made, or your desire to call them a hypocrite?
How can any subject ever be addressed if you prefer to label the people discussing a subject as opposed to discussing the subject itself?
Yes, in my opinion, billionaires and corporate scofflaws are symptomatic of a system designed by them for them, but it’s the conservatives overtly protecting it. Yes, a lot of Democrats are taking advantage of the system, but they’re also trying to be more egalitarian than their counterparts.
To ‘both sides’ this problem is to be willfully blind to obvious reality, or maybe be complicit in confusing readers with misleading information and statements.
Protest away. But don't be like the assholes who block traffic.
I rather think that the Boston Tea Party must have interfered with the peaceful movements of merchants doing their port business. Next time I meet anybody involved in that regrettable episode I shall scold them severely.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
