|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 04 2017 04:04 RolleMcKnolle wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 03:34 Danglars wrote:On March 04 2017 03:18 Tien wrote:
Fair enough, lets see where this goes.
From an outsider looking in, this looks close to McCarthyism where the word Russia is being replaced with secret list of "communists" and everyone goes absolutely crazy. Don't worry, it looks like McCarthyism from here too. Instead of proven communist spy infiltration, its proven Russian hacking. So now every non-news story is sinister and we'd have hearings everywhere if Dems could manage to win congressional seats again. Dems continue to overplay their hand. Trump's a little chummy with Putin's autocracy and evidence points to Russia having provided Wikileaks with the leaks. That's fertile ground of an investigation and caution/prophylaxis ahead of 2020. Now the way you make all of it worth nothing is witch hunts to the point where your average American rolls his eyes at every new Russian story because chance are it's just Democrats grasping at straws and throwing whatever they can find against walls until something sticks. If we could refrain from saying McCarthyism and just say Benghaziism or even E-Mail-Serverism I might even be fine with that.
Recreating the Red Scare for political purposes is the very heart of McCarthyism. Now tell me if you've had any contact with Russian ambassadors and agents. I've got this atmosphere of suspicion I'd like to throw you in where any chance to defend the interaction just brings up more questions and digs a bigger hole.
|
On March 04 2017 04:09 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 04:03 Silvanel wrote:On March 04 2017 03:55 Plansix wrote:On March 04 2017 03:36 Silvanel wrote:
@Kwark, Plansix
Yeah. Visa free travel to US is one of the long standing goals of Polish foreign policy. One of the most important motivators behind us helping USA in Iraq and Afganistan (shadowed only by strenghteing our military ties in order to mitigate Russia threat). The US has been promising Visa free travel for many years, but it never materlized. Now with help from western europeans perhaps we can acomplish something. I imagine its similiar for Bulgaria and Romania. I am sure there were a number of factors. I was just commenting on the fact that they decided to pull the trigger on it now and the US doesn’t really deserve the benefit of the doubt a second time around. Sure. It's politics. I also wonder if Trump might use this for his advantage - push for this agreement to succed and say "look i am not xenophobic, i let Poles, Bulgarians and Romanians in. I don't mind foreigners as long they are safe" - strenghten his muslim ban that way. The problem is going to be that it will make life more difficult for everyone in the US to travel through the EU. They lose out on things they previously enjoyed. They might blame the EU, but I more than a few are going to blame the current government.
Thats why i am saying Trump might want to GET THINGS DONE and secure free visas for us citizens. In order to score some points on domestic front. But on the other hand i dont think many of his backers travel abroad anyway.
|
On March 04 2017 04:09 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +MIDDLEBURY, Vt. — Hundreds of college students on Thursday protested a lecture by a writer some called a white nationalist, forcing the college to move his talk to an undisclosed campus location from which it was live-streamed to the original venue but couldn’t be heard above protesters’ chants, feet stamping and occasional smoke alarms.
Speaker Charles Murray wrote “The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life” and “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010.” The Southern Poverty Law Center considers him a white nationalist who uses “racist pseudoscience and misleading statistics to argue that social inequality is caused by the genetic inferiority of the black and Latino communities, women and the poor.”
Murray hasn’t responded to an email seeking comment.
Middlebury College students turned their backs on Murray just as he started to speak Thursday and chanted “Who is the enemy? White supremacy!” ‘’Racist, sexist, anti-gay, Charles Murray, go away!” and “Your message is hatred. We cannot tolerate it.”
They continued their chants until the college announced that Murray would speak from another location on campus. Students continued their protests, drowning out the talk. WaPoNow they're trying to give Charles Murray the Milo treatment. He's a controversial AEI scholar, which of course means he shouldn't be allowed to speak when invited to address college students that want to hear him. Administrators at Middlebury, like Berkeley, unable to protect free speech on campus. So very sad.
Shitty speakers get shouted down by students who demand higher quality speakers that are less about the prosperity gospel. Seriously, Murray has is such garbage. Maybe not a full blown racist, but his message is tired. Man tells kids dumping 80K into education to pull themselves up by their boot straps like he did.
|
protesting is also free speech?
|
On March 04 2017 04:21 brian wrote:
protesting is also free speech?
We don’t talk about that part. Or that the political climate has impacted our ability to have civil discussions and debates due to a completely lack of leadership. The colleges do little to foster civil debate, but simply allow whatever speaker. Even ones invited by one political group to antagonize the other side.
We have long left the era where people like James Carville and Mary Matalin could get married and live happily ever after in political opposition.
|
yeah i'm surprised he didn't just out and say 'schools won't silence the free speech i disagree with. sad.'
like what kind of blinders are you wearin rn? something something safe spaces.
|
On March 04 2017 04:14 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 04:04 RolleMcKnolle wrote:On March 04 2017 03:34 Danglars wrote:On March 04 2017 03:18 Tien wrote:
Fair enough, lets see where this goes.
From an outsider looking in, this looks close to McCarthyism where the word Russia is being replaced with secret list of "communists" and everyone goes absolutely crazy. Don't worry, it looks like McCarthyism from here too. Instead of proven communist spy infiltration, its proven Russian hacking. So now every non-news story is sinister and we'd have hearings everywhere if Dems could manage to win congressional seats again. Dems continue to overplay their hand. Trump's a little chummy with Putin's autocracy and evidence points to Russia having provided Wikileaks with the leaks. That's fertile ground of an investigation and caution/prophylaxis ahead of 2020. Now the way you make all of it worth nothing is witch hunts to the point where your average American rolls his eyes at every new Russian story because chance are it's just Democrats grasping at straws and throwing whatever they can find against walls until something sticks. If we could refrain from saying McCarthyism and just say Benghaziism or even E-Mail-Serverism I might even be fine with that. Recreating the Red Scare for political purposes is the very heart of McCarthyism. Now tell me if you've had any contact with Russian ambassadors and agents. I've got this atmosphere of suspicion I'd like to throw you in where any chance to defend the interaction just brings up more questions and digs a bigger hole.
Would you say the suspicions that are raised about these repeating incidents (with for example Manafort, Flynn and Sessions) are less legitimate than the questions asked about Benghazi?
|
On March 04 2017 04:09 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +MIDDLEBURY, Vt. — Hundreds of college students on Thursday protested a lecture by a writer some called a white nationalist, forcing the college to move his talk to an undisclosed campus location from which it was live-streamed to the original venue but couldn’t be heard above protesters’ chants, feet stamping and occasional smoke alarms.
Speaker Charles Murray wrote “The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life” and “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010.” The Southern Poverty Law Center considers him a white nationalist who uses “racist pseudoscience and misleading statistics to argue that social inequality is caused by the genetic inferiority of the black and Latino communities, women and the poor.”
Murray hasn’t responded to an email seeking comment.
Middlebury College students turned their backs on Murray just as he started to speak Thursday and chanted “Who is the enemy? White supremacy!” ‘’Racist, sexist, anti-gay, Charles Murray, go away!” and “Your message is hatred. We cannot tolerate it.”
They continued their chants until the college announced that Murray would speak from another location on campus. Students continued their protests, drowning out the talk. WaPoNow they're trying to give Charles Murray the Milo treatment. He's a controversial AEI scholar, which of course means he shouldn't be allowed to speak when invited to address college students that want to hear him. Administrators at Middlebury, like Berkeley, unable to protect free speech on campus. So very sad.
I dunno, it seems like he brought it on himself by being a turdwaffle. Freedom of speech doesn't mean there isn't consequences for your words.
|
The amusing thing is that safe spaces are what the conservative speakers need and want. Safe spaces are just a term for moderated discussions and being respectful. But rather than do that and maybe discuss the idea of how to have these discussion, they invite people like Milo. Because its funny to watch the liberals freak out.
And now other conservative speakers have been caught up in the fire storm, because they get painted with the same broad brush they use to describe “the left”.
The best part is that he still got to speak, just in a different venue.
|
On March 04 2017 04:39 Plansix wrote:
The amusing thing is that safe spaces are what the conservative speakers need and want. Safe spaces are just a term for moderated discussions and being respectful. But rather than do that and maybe discuss the idea of how to have these discussion, they invite people like Milo. Because its funny to watch the liberals freak out.
And now other conservative speakers have been caught up in the fire storm, because they get painted with the same broad brush they use to describe “the left”.
The best part is that he still got to speak, just in a different venue.
Conservative speakers need and want on liberal campus's because defending unpopular speech is the fundamental test of defending free speech?
They invite people like Milo beacuse all the moderate conservative speakers get univited from liberal pressure or are protested like Milo is. Milo is(was?) combative by default and gave them the ability to rally behind the clear constitutional high ground they had.
On March 04 2017 04:37 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 04:09 Danglars wrote:MIDDLEBURY, Vt. — Hundreds of college students on Thursday protested a lecture by a writer some called a white nationalist, forcing the college to move his talk to an undisclosed campus location from which it was live-streamed to the original venue but couldn’t be heard above protesters’ chants, feet stamping and occasional smoke alarms.
Speaker Charles Murray wrote “The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life” and “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010.” The Southern Poverty Law Center considers him a white nationalist who uses “racist pseudoscience and misleading statistics to argue that social inequality is caused by the genetic inferiority of the black and Latino communities, women and the poor.”
Murray hasn’t responded to an email seeking comment.
Middlebury College students turned their backs on Murray just as he started to speak Thursday and chanted “Who is the enemy? White supremacy!” ‘’Racist, sexist, anti-gay, Charles Murray, go away!” and “Your message is hatred. We cannot tolerate it.”
They continued their chants until the college announced that Murray would speak from another location on campus. Students continued their protests, drowning out the talk. WaPoNow they're trying to give Charles Murray the Milo treatment. He's a controversial AEI scholar, which of course means he shouldn't be allowed to speak when invited to address college students that want to hear him. Administrators at Middlebury, like Berkeley, unable to protect free speech on campus. So very sad. I dunno, it seems like he brought it on himself by being a turdwaffle. Freedom of speech doesn't mean there isn't consequences for your words.
But the point is that the consequences for what you say should come after what you say and your freedom of speech is preserved. What happens after your constitutional right is fulfilled is different from what happens during your constitutional right exercises.
|
Unpopular speech is protected. The speech that we are discussing took place at a different venue. Milo’s speech was canceled due to safety concerns caused by a shooting at this previous event. The shooting was ruled to be self defense, but colleges are free to refuse speakers that bring that level of unrest with them.
Freedom of expression is allowed, but not every venue in the world wants to host a punk band known for hyper aggressive fans to protect free speech.
|
On March 04 2017 04:37 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 04:09 Danglars wrote:MIDDLEBURY, Vt. — Hundreds of college students on Thursday protested a lecture by a writer some called a white nationalist, forcing the college to move his talk to an undisclosed campus location from which it was live-streamed to the original venue but couldn’t be heard above protesters’ chants, feet stamping and occasional smoke alarms.
Speaker Charles Murray wrote “The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life” and “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010.” The Southern Poverty Law Center considers him a white nationalist who uses “racist pseudoscience and misleading statistics to argue that social inequality is caused by the genetic inferiority of the black and Latino communities, women and the poor.”
Murray hasn’t responded to an email seeking comment.
Middlebury College students turned their backs on Murray just as he started to speak Thursday and chanted “Who is the enemy? White supremacy!” ‘’Racist, sexist, anti-gay, Charles Murray, go away!” and “Your message is hatred. We cannot tolerate it.”
They continued their chants until the college announced that Murray would speak from another location on campus. Students continued their protests, drowning out the talk. WaPoNow they're trying to give Charles Murray the Milo treatment. He's a controversial AEI scholar, which of course means he shouldn't be allowed to speak when invited to address college students that want to hear him. Administrators at Middlebury, like Berkeley, unable to protect free speech on campus. So very sad. I dunno, it seems like he brought it on himself by being a turdwaffle. Freedom of speech doesn't mean there isn't consequences for your words.
The consequences for your words is apparently not being allowed to speak them to people who want to hear them on university campuses that receive public funding.
The longer term consequences is people confuse protest with shutting down speech. Protest what they're saying with signs and marches if you want, just let them speak in forums anyways. It's the ground floor of protecting the civil society. Hearing the other side out instead of shouting them down. Back in the day it wasn't controversial.
|
On March 04 2017 04:04 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 03:53 Simberto wrote:On March 04 2017 03:34 Danglars wrote:On March 04 2017 03:18 Tien wrote:
Fair enough, lets see where this goes.
From an outsider looking in, this looks close to McCarthyism where the word Russia is being replaced with secret list of "communists" and everyone goes absolutely crazy. Don't worry, it looks like McCarthyism from here too. Instead of proven communist spy infiltration, its proven Russian hacking. So now every non-news story is sinister and we'd have hearings everywhere if Dems could manage to win congressional seats again. Dems continue to overplay their hand. Trump's a little chummy with Putin's autocracy and evidence points to Russia having provided Wikileaks with the leaks. That's fertile ground of an investigation and caution/prophylaxis ahead of 2020. Now the way you make all of it worth nothing is witch hunts to the point where your average American rolls his eyes at every new Russian story because chance are it's just Democrats grasping at straws and throwing whatever they can find against walls until something sticks. Yeah, where ever did democrats get the idea of constantly having hearings on political opponents for every single thing. Can't imagine how they got the idea in their mind that that is something that helps in the broken US political system. It's not like republicans have done it to them for the last decade. Also, from what we have seen, that "rolling their eyes" point doesn't actually happen. See Benghazi. See Emails. Apparently it is a valid way to win elections. For some reason, americans still elect people even if all they do is block everything and then complain that nothing happens. So, have fun reaping what you sow. Maybe in the end you will eventually figure out a way to fix your broken archaic system. But i think it needs to become even more disfunctional for that to happen. So what you're saying is Benghazi prolonged furor was such a good idea that the Democrats took it to heart and are repeating the exercise through media surrogates and press dispatches. If it was an easy thing to learn, you'd expect them to learn it.
I don't think that it was a good idea (for the country). Apparently the american voters disagree, and thus make it a good idea for the parties. Because your voters don't punish that kind of behaviour, but apparently actually reward it. After all, a few years of that shit combined with complete obstructionism gave republicans total control of the government. You really can't blame democrats for using the same tactics now.
|
On March 04 2017 05:00 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 04:37 Gahlo wrote:On March 04 2017 04:09 Danglars wrote:MIDDLEBURY, Vt. — Hundreds of college students on Thursday protested a lecture by a writer some called a white nationalist, forcing the college to move his talk to an undisclosed campus location from which it was live-streamed to the original venue but couldn’t be heard above protesters’ chants, feet stamping and occasional smoke alarms.
Speaker Charles Murray wrote “The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life” and “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010.” The Southern Poverty Law Center considers him a white nationalist who uses “racist pseudoscience and misleading statistics to argue that social inequality is caused by the genetic inferiority of the black and Latino communities, women and the poor.”
Murray hasn’t responded to an email seeking comment.
Middlebury College students turned their backs on Murray just as he started to speak Thursday and chanted “Who is the enemy? White supremacy!” ‘’Racist, sexist, anti-gay, Charles Murray, go away!” and “Your message is hatred. We cannot tolerate it.”
They continued their chants until the college announced that Murray would speak from another location on campus. Students continued their protests, drowning out the talk. WaPoNow they're trying to give Charles Murray the Milo treatment. He's a controversial AEI scholar, which of course means he shouldn't be allowed to speak when invited to address college students that want to hear him. Administrators at Middlebury, like Berkeley, unable to protect free speech on campus. So very sad. I dunno, it seems like he brought it on himself by being a turdwaffle. Freedom of speech doesn't mean there isn't consequences for your words. The consequences for your words is apparently not being allowed to speak them to people who want to hear them on university campuses that receive public funding. The longer term consequences is people confuse protest with shutting down speech. Protest what they're saying with signs and marches if you want, just let them speak in forums anyways. It's the ground floor of protecting the civil society. Hearing the other side out instead of shouting them down. Back in the day it wasn't controversial.
He was allowed to speak, so I fail to see how this is a problem.
|
On March 04 2017 04:57 Plansix wrote:
Unpopular speech is protected. The speech that we are discussing took place at a different venue. Milo’s speech was canceled due to safety concerns caused by a shooting at this previous event. The shooting was ruled to be self defense, but colleges are free to refuse speakers that bring that level of unrest with them.
Freedom of expression is allowed, but not every venue in the world wants to host a punk band known for hyper aggressive fans to protect free speech.
The speech we're talking about was prevented from happening because people where trying to drown out the speakers ability to talk to the event. Milos speech was canceled because the cops at the event didn't think it was safe for him to be there anymore. Or are we talking about one of the many other speeches that were canceled because of "that level of unrest he brought with him". The fact that there is that level of unrest at unpopular speech at a campus should be a red flag. If the roles were reversed to any degree and people were rioting beacuse of a black person at a campus for literally anything you would be freaking out.
The problem isn't the venue being not okay with the punk band but the venues inability for that punk band to even play. as if that they're ability to play was protected by the constitution unironicaly at the venue that was formerly known for leading the free music movement.
|
On March 04 2017 04:36 RolleMcKnolle wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 04:14 Danglars wrote:On March 04 2017 04:04 RolleMcKnolle wrote:On March 04 2017 03:34 Danglars wrote:On March 04 2017 03:18 Tien wrote:
Fair enough, lets see where this goes.
From an outsider looking in, this looks close to McCarthyism where the word Russia is being replaced with secret list of "communists" and everyone goes absolutely crazy. Don't worry, it looks like McCarthyism from here too. Instead of proven communist spy infiltration, its proven Russian hacking. So now every non-news story is sinister and we'd have hearings everywhere if Dems could manage to win congressional seats again. Dems continue to overplay their hand. Trump's a little chummy with Putin's autocracy and evidence points to Russia having provided Wikileaks with the leaks. That's fertile ground of an investigation and caution/prophylaxis ahead of 2020. Now the way you make all of it worth nothing is witch hunts to the point where your average American rolls his eyes at every new Russian story because chance are it's just Democrats grasping at straws and throwing whatever they can find against walls until something sticks. If we could refrain from saying McCarthyism and just say Benghaziism or even E-Mail-Serverism I might even be fine with that. Recreating the Red Scare for political purposes is the very heart of McCarthyism. Now tell me if you've had any contact with Russian ambassadors and agents. I've got this atmosphere of suspicion I'd like to throw you in where any chance to defend the interaction just brings up more questions and digs a bigger hole. Would you say the suspicions that are raised about these repeating incidents (with for example Manafort, Flynn and Sessions) are less legitimate than the questions asked about Benghazi?
Repeating incidents of the kind that they involve the word Russia and figures related to the Trump campaign or administration? You're illustrating what I mean by saying cloud of suspicion ...
Benghazi we had split stories so you'd have to elaborate. The political hearings were stupid. Wondering why the administration peddled stories they knew to be false was a legitimate inquiry. Wondering where the chain of command went on planning a rescue was legitimate. Scoring political zingers for hours in a hearing was grandstanding.
|
On March 04 2017 05:02 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:00 Danglars wrote:On March 04 2017 04:37 Gahlo wrote:On March 04 2017 04:09 Danglars wrote:MIDDLEBURY, Vt. — Hundreds of college students on Thursday protested a lecture by a writer some called a white nationalist, forcing the college to move his talk to an undisclosed campus location from which it was live-streamed to the original venue but couldn’t be heard above protesters’ chants, feet stamping and occasional smoke alarms.
Speaker Charles Murray wrote “The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life” and “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010.” The Southern Poverty Law Center considers him a white nationalist who uses “racist pseudoscience and misleading statistics to argue that social inequality is caused by the genetic inferiority of the black and Latino communities, women and the poor.”
Murray hasn’t responded to an email seeking comment.
Middlebury College students turned their backs on Murray just as he started to speak Thursday and chanted “Who is the enemy? White supremacy!” ‘’Racist, sexist, anti-gay, Charles Murray, go away!” and “Your message is hatred. We cannot tolerate it.”
They continued their chants until the college announced that Murray would speak from another location on campus. Students continued their protests, drowning out the talk. WaPoNow they're trying to give Charles Murray the Milo treatment. He's a controversial AEI scholar, which of course means he shouldn't be allowed to speak when invited to address college students that want to hear him. Administrators at Middlebury, like Berkeley, unable to protect free speech on campus. So very sad. I dunno, it seems like he brought it on himself by being a turdwaffle. Freedom of speech doesn't mean there isn't consequences for your words. The consequences for your words is apparently not being allowed to speak them to people who want to hear them on university campuses that receive public funding. The longer term consequences is people confuse protest with shutting down speech. Protest what they're saying with signs and marches if you want, just let them speak in forums anyways. It's the ground floor of protecting the civil society. Hearing the other side out instead of shouting them down. Back in the day it wasn't controversial. He was allowed to speak, so I fail to see how this is a problem.
When they said "drowning out the talk" they meant the protest's loud ruckus and lack of administration meant even the broadcast from a separate location was unheard. Given that it went unheard by those in attendance, would you admit to a problem on free speech grounds, a problem also with administration/campus police not protecting free expression on campus? Granted I'm not holding my breath on this one.
|
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic.
|
On March 04 2017 05:02 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 04:04 Danglars wrote:On March 04 2017 03:53 Simberto wrote:On March 04 2017 03:34 Danglars wrote:On March 04 2017 03:18 Tien wrote:
Fair enough, lets see where this goes.
From an outsider looking in, this looks close to McCarthyism where the word Russia is being replaced with secret list of "communists" and everyone goes absolutely crazy. Don't worry, it looks like McCarthyism from here too. Instead of proven communist spy infiltration, its proven Russian hacking. So now every non-news story is sinister and we'd have hearings everywhere if Dems could manage to win congressional seats again. Dems continue to overplay their hand. Trump's a little chummy with Putin's autocracy and evidence points to Russia having provided Wikileaks with the leaks. That's fertile ground of an investigation and caution/prophylaxis ahead of 2020. Now the way you make all of it worth nothing is witch hunts to the point where your average American rolls his eyes at every new Russian story because chance are it's just Democrats grasping at straws and throwing whatever they can find against walls until something sticks. Yeah, where ever did democrats get the idea of constantly having hearings on political opponents for every single thing. Can't imagine how they got the idea in their mind that that is something that helps in the broken US political system. It's not like republicans have done it to them for the last decade. Also, from what we have seen, that "rolling their eyes" point doesn't actually happen. See Benghazi. See Emails. Apparently it is a valid way to win elections. For some reason, americans still elect people even if all they do is block everything and then complain that nothing happens. So, have fun reaping what you sow. Maybe in the end you will eventually figure out a way to fix your broken archaic system. But i think it needs to become even more disfunctional for that to happen. So what you're saying is Benghazi prolonged furor was such a good idea that the Democrats took it to heart and are repeating the exercise through media surrogates and press dispatches. If it was an easy thing to learn, you'd expect them to learn it. I don't think that it was a good idea (for the country). Apparently the american voters disagree, and thus make it a good idea for the parties. Because your voters don't punish that kind of behaviour, but apparently actually reward it. After all, a few years of that shit combined with complete obstructionism gave republicans total control of the government. You really can't blame democrats for using the same tactics now.
If all voters had on their plate was the Benghazi hearings, Clinton would be president.
|
On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic.
"Go shout them down" is such a pathetic understanding of the first amendment, I seriously doubt you understand speech that needs protecting. Our framers tried to be clear on this, but activists have twisted free speech to only apply to certain agreeable forms of speech. Sad day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
