The PC Police should apologize....

[NYcarbineer]

The OP, who opposed the war in Iraq, seems to have forgotten that the pro-war crowd blamed him for everything that went wrong in Iraq, because his opposition undermined our effort.

He's forgotten that those who opposed the war were told that they could not support the troops and oppose the war.

He's forgotten that his opposition to the war was said to be an act of support for terrorism and the slaughter of innocent Americans.

Unless of course he's conceded that those accusations were accurate.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Their blood is on the hands of the race baiters, including BO, Holder, Sharpton, and de Blasio.

Yes, you are correct. They should be ashamed of themselves. But of course they have no shame.

The PC Police create new animosities and exacerbate existing animosities with their non-stop PC, generation after generation, and then issue abject denials when those animosities predictably manifest.

"I didn't cause that specific event", they'll shout, after they have so aggressively and proudly created the environment around that event.

This is what happens when you go through life with just one eye open, refusing to see the damage you're causing because your ego is at stake.

Tragic.

.

Wrong.

There are no 'PC Police,' individuals alone are responsible for their actions; your attempt blame those engaged in lawful demonstrations for the deaths of law enforcement officers is unfounded and reprehensible.

Just because you and others on the right fear diversity and dissent is not justification to seek to silence those with whom you disagree; that you have such unwarranted disdain for citizens engaged in free expression is what's in fact tragic.

 

[Carib Gyal]

Their blood is on the hands of the race baiters, including BO, Holder, Sharpton, and de Blasio.

Yes, you are correct. They should be ashamed of themselves. But of course they have no shame.

The PC Police create new animosities and exacerbate existing animosities with their non-stop PC, generation after generation, and then issue abject denials when those animosities predictably manifest.

"I didn't cause that specific event", they'll shout, after they have so aggressively and proudly created the environment around that event.

This is what happens when you go through life with just one eye open, refusing to see the damage you're causing because your ego is at stake.

Tragic.

.

Wrong.

There are no 'PC Police,' individuals alone are responsible for their actions; your attempt blame those engaged in lawful demonstrations for the deaths of law enforcement officers is unfounded and reprehensible.

Just because you and others on the right fear diversity and dissent is not justification to seek to silence those with whom you disagree; that you have such unwarranted disdain for citizens engaged in free expression is what's in fact tragic.

Blocking streets and highways is unlawful. It is not lawful protest.

 

[JoeB131]

Blocking streets and highways is unlawful. It is not lawful protest.

Perhaps. Would probably still be smarter to address their greivence than worry about traffic, though.

 

[Mac1958]

Their blood is on the hands of the race baiters, including BO, Holder, Sharpton, and de Blasio.

Yes, you are correct. They should be ashamed of themselves. But of course they have no shame.

The PC Police create new animosities and exacerbate existing animosities with their non-stop PC, generation after generation, and then issue abject denials when those animosities predictably manifest.

"I didn't cause that specific event", they'll shout, after they have so aggressively and proudly created the environment around that event.

This is what happens when you go through life with just one eye open, refusing to see the damage you're causing because your ego is at stake.

Tragic.

.

Wrong.

There are no 'PC Police,' individuals alone are responsible for their actions; your attempt blame those engaged in lawful demonstrations for the deaths of law enforcement officers is unfounded and reprehensible.

Just because you and others on the right fear diversity and dissent is not justification to seek to silence those with whom you disagree; that you have such unwarranted disdain for citizens engaged in free expression is what's in fact tragic.

I can understand your deflection.

Own your behavior.

Or don't, I don't care.

.

 

[Mac1958]

.

I must say, the funniest deflection attempt to date was the "24/7 war on women" Hail Mary, which was delightful.

Needless to say, the size of this thread and all the effort put into deflection show me I'm right on target. Which I already knew.

.

 

[LoneLaugher]

.

I must say, the funniest deflection attempt to date was the "24/7 war on women" Hail Mary, which was delightful.

Needless to say, the size of this thread and all the effort put into deflection show me I'm right on target. Which I already knew.

.

For something that is needless to say......you sure are saying it a lot.

 

[paulitician]

Their blood is on the hands of the race baiters, including BO, Holder, Sharpton, and de Blasio.

Yes, you are correct. They should be ashamed of themselves. But of course they have no shame.

The PC Police create new animosities and exacerbate existing animosities with their non-stop PC, generation after generation, and then issue abject denials when those animosities predictably manifest.

"I didn't cause that specific event", they'll shout, after they have so aggressively and proudly created the environment around that event.

This is what happens when you go through life with just one eye open, refusing to see the damage you're causing because your ego is at stake.

Tragic.

.

Why aren't you taking paulitician to task for his constant attacks on law enforcement?

I'm not a Communist Race-Baiter asshole like you. I have serious problems with this expanding Police State, but i don't make it solely about race. This Police State effects all of us. It's not about race.

Only you and your Democrat comrades make it all about race and incite racial division. These brutal murders are on you guys. Period, end of story.

lol, so you demonize the Police in a non-racial manner, so that's okay??

lol good one.

Whatever, Race-Baiter asshole.

 

[paulitician]

Communist Race-Baiters like Obama, Sharpton, and De Blasio, exploit and divide. It's what they do. They see profit in it. They absolutely love this stuff. They could care less about these murders. They probably even hope there'e more to come. That's the sad ugly reality. It's about the 'Divide & Conquer.' It's all in Saul Alinsky's 'Rules for Radicals.' All Communists follow his rules dutifully.

 

[Carib Gyal]

Blocking streets and highways is unlawful. It is not lawful protest.

Perhaps. Would probably still be smarter to address their greivence than worry about traffic, though.

And more lawful

 

[JoeB131]

Blocking streets and highways is unlawful. It is not lawful protest.

Perhaps. Would probably still be smarter to address their greivence than worry about traffic, though.

And more lawful

actually, lawful would be not having cops kill people for petty offenses.

 

[Skylar]

.

... to the families of the two dead NY cops.

You fan the flames, you are responsible for the consequences.

.

And what would you consider 'fanning the flames'? Would merely mentioning the death of Michael Brown or Eric Garner constitute 'fanning the flames'? Would opposing police brutality be 'fanning the flames'? Would insisting that those who killed Eric Garner be punished under the law be 'fanning the flames'?

As that would cover the overwhelming majority of the response to the deaths of both men.

 

[Mac1958]

.

... to the families of the two dead NY cops.

You fan the flames, you are responsible for the consequences.

.

And what would you consider 'fanning the flames'? Would merely mentioning the death of Michael Brown or Eric Garner constitute 'fanning the flames'? Would opposing police brutality be 'fanning the flames'? Would insisting that those who killed Eric Garner be punished under the law be 'fanning the flames'?

As that would cover the overwhelming majority of the response to the deaths of both men.

This is what I consider "fanning the flames", and it has been going for decades before the Brown and Garner cases:

• Hyphenated Americans, dividing Americans at every opportunity
  
• Identity Politics, further dividing Americans
  
• Political Correctness
• Screaming "you're a racist" whenever a Black American is criticized
• Screaming "you're a racist" even when race is not part of the conversation
• Ignoring/deflecting/spinning wrongdoings by Black Americans, enabling further wrongdoings
  
• The soft bigotry of reduced expectations
• Doing nothing to promote the healing of wounds while increasing animosities

Thanks for asking.

.

 

[Skylar]

Hyphenated Americans, dividing Americans at every opportunity

So anyone who calls themselves an 'Asian American' or 'Latino' should apologize to the families the two cops in NY?

I'm not sure your 'cause' has much to do with your 'effect'.

Identity Politics, further dividing Americans

So someone that say, belonged to the Asian Jade Society should apologize to the family of those two dead officers for being divisive?

• Political Correctness

So give me an example. If someone referred to a 'Member of the House' rather than a 'congressman', they should apologize to the families of the two cops in NY?

Seems to be another stretch in terms of rational causation.

• Screaming "you're a racist" whenever a Black American is criticized
• Screaming "you're a racist" even when race is not part of the conversation
• Ignoring/deflecting/spinning wrongdoings by Black Americans, enabling further wrongdoings
  
• The soft bigotry of reduced expectations
• Doing nothing to promote the healing of wounds while increasing animosities

So none of the examples I cited earlier.....criticizing police brutality, mentioning the deaths of Brown and Garner or believing that those who killed Garner should be punished under the law would constitute 'fanning the flames'?

 

[Mac1958]

Hyphenated Americans, dividing Americans at every opportunity

So anyone who calls themselves an 'Asian American' or 'Latino' should apologize to the families the two cops in NY?

I'm not sure your 'cause' has much to do with your 'effect'.

Identity Politics, further dividing Americans

So someone that say, belonged to the Asian Jade Society should apologize to the family of those two dead officers for being divisive?

• Political Correctness

So give me an example. If someone referred to a 'Member of the House' rather than a 'congressman', they should apologize to the families of the two cops in NY?

Seems to be another stretch in terms of rational causation.

• Screaming "you're a racist" whenever a Black American is criticized
• Screaming "you're a racist" even when race is not part of the conversation
• Ignoring/deflecting/spinning wrongdoings by Black Americans, enabling further wrongdoings
  
• The soft bigotry of reduced expectations
• Doing nothing to promote the healing of wounds while increasing animosities

So none of the examples I cited earlier.....criticizing police brutality, mentioning the deaths of Brown and Garner or believing that those who killed Garner should be punished under the law would constitute 'fanning the flames'?

This is where trying to communicate with partisans becomes difficult for me. I never know if you're being completely obtuse or if you really don't understand a thing I'm saying.

So I'm presented with a conundrum: Should I (a) put forth the effort to try to help you understand the obvious, or (b) should I just not bother, suspecting that there is absolutely nothing I can say that is going to make a difference here, since you're not really interested in anything other than disagreeing with me?

I used to try (a) but found it was almost invariably a waste of time with partisan ideologues, so I think I'll go with (b).

We'll just have to disagree.

.

 

[Skylar]

Hyphenated Americans, dividing Americans at every opportunity

So anyone who calls themselves an 'Asian American' or 'Latino' should apologize to the families the two cops in NY?

I'm not sure your 'cause' has much to do with your 'effect'.

Identity Politics, further dividing Americans

So someone that say, belonged to the Asian Jade Society should apologize to the family of those two dead officers for being divisive?

• Political Correctness

So give me an example. If someone referred to a 'Member of the House' rather than a 'congressman', they should apologize to the families of the two cops in NY?

Seems to be another stretch in terms of rational causation.

• Screaming "you're a racist" whenever a Black American is criticized
• Screaming "you're a racist" even when race is not part of the conversation
• Ignoring/deflecting/spinning wrongdoings by Black Americans, enabling further wrongdoings
  
• The soft bigotry of reduced expectations
• Doing nothing to promote the healing of wounds while increasing animosities

So none of the examples I cited earlier.....criticizing police brutality, mentioning the deaths of Brown and Garner or believing that those who killed Garner should be punished under the law would constitute 'fanning the flames'?

This is where trying to communicate with partisans becomes difficult for me. I never know if you're being completely obtuse or if you really don't understand a thing I'm saying.

So I'm presented with a conundrum: Should I (a) put forth the effort to try to help you understand the obvious, or (b) should I just not bother, suspecting that there is absolutely nothing I can say that is going to make a difference here, since you're not really interested in anything other than disagreeing with me?

I used to try (a) but found it was almost invariably a waste of time with partisan ideologues, so I think I'll go with (b).

We'll just have to disagree.

.

You could just answer my questions. That would have required far less time than awkward insults.

Try again.

 

[Mac1958]

Hyphenated Americans, dividing Americans at every opportunity

So anyone who calls themselves an 'Asian American' or 'Latino' should apologize to the families the two cops in NY?

I'm not sure your 'cause' has much to do with your 'effect'.

Identity Politics, further dividing Americans

So someone that say, belonged to the Asian Jade Society should apologize to the family of those two dead officers for being divisive?

• Political Correctness

So give me an example. If someone referred to a 'Member of the House' rather than a 'congressman', they should apologize to the families of the two cops in NY?

Seems to be another stretch in terms of rational causation.

• Screaming "you're a racist" whenever a Black American is criticized
• Screaming "you're a racist" even when race is not part of the conversation
• Ignoring/deflecting/spinning wrongdoings by Black Americans, enabling further wrongdoings
  
• The soft bigotry of reduced expectations
• Doing nothing to promote the healing of wounds while increasing animosities

So none of the examples I cited earlier.....criticizing police brutality, mentioning the deaths of Brown and Garner or believing that those who killed Garner should be punished under the law would constitute 'fanning the flames'?

This is where trying to communicate with partisans becomes difficult for me. I never know if you're being completely obtuse or if you really don't understand a thing I'm saying.

So I'm presented with a conundrum: Should I (a) put forth the effort to try to help you understand the obvious, or (b) should I just not bother, suspecting that there is absolutely nothing I can say that is going to make a difference here, since you're not really interested in anything other than disagreeing with me?

I used to try (a) but found it was almost invariably a waste of time with partisan ideologues, so I think I'll go with (b).

We'll just have to disagree.

.

You could just answer my questions. That would have required far less time than awkward insults.

Try again.

Where are the insults? I don't think it's possible to have honest conversations with partisan ideologues, so I no longer try.

I've wasted more than enough effort on that.

Just fact.

.

 

[Carib Gyal]

Blocking streets and highways is unlawful. It is not lawful protest.

Perhaps. Would probably still be smarter to address their greivence than worry about traffic, though.

And more lawful

actually, lawful would be not having cops kill people for petty offenses.

Or killing minority cops for sitting in their cars.

Still unlawful for protestors to block streets and highways, too.

 

[Skylar]

Hyphenated Americans, dividing Americans at every opportunity

So anyone who calls themselves an 'Asian American' or 'Latino' should apologize to the families the two cops in NY?

I'm not sure your 'cause' has much to do with your 'effect'.

Identity Politics, further dividing Americans

So someone that say, belonged to the Asian Jade Society should apologize to the family of those two dead officers for being divisive?

• Political Correctness

So give me an example. If someone referred to a 'Member of the House' rather than a 'congressman', they should apologize to the families of the two cops in NY?

Seems to be another stretch in terms of rational causation.

• Screaming "you're a racist" whenever a Black American is criticized
• Screaming "you're a racist" even when race is not part of the conversation
• Ignoring/deflecting/spinning wrongdoings by Black Americans, enabling further wrongdoings
  
• The soft bigotry of reduced expectations
• Doing nothing to promote the healing of wounds while increasing animosities

So none of the examples I cited earlier.....criticizing police brutality, mentioning the deaths of Brown and Garner or believing that those who killed Garner should be punished under the law would constitute 'fanning the flames'?

This is where trying to communicate with partisans becomes difficult for me. I never know if you're being completely obtuse or if you really don't understand a thing I'm saying.

So I'm presented with a conundrum: Should I (a) put forth the effort to try to help you understand the obvious, or (b) should I just not bother, suspecting that there is absolutely nothing I can say that is going to make a difference here, since you're not really interested in anything other than disagreeing with me?

I used to try (a) but found it was almost invariably a waste of time with partisan ideologues, so I think I'll go with (b).

We'll just have to disagree.

.

You could just answer my questions. That would have required far less time than awkward insults.

Try again.

Where are the insults? I don't think it's possible to have honest conversations with partisan ideologues, so I no longer try.

And who says I'm a 'partisan ideologue'? You've arbitrarily labeled me so you can ignore me. Worse, you've insinuated I'm 'obtuse' after I asked you a few questions about your position.

If your argument is valid, it works specifically and generally. But from my perspective, when I start applying your argument specifically, it collapses. For example, when I asked ' If someone belonged to the Asian Jade Society should apologize to the family of those two dead officers for being divisive?', you weren't able to provide an answer, despite it being immediately relevant to your general claims.

Which you seem to recognize as well.....as your abrupt shift to reasons to ignore me rather than address the germane questions I asked.

You're insinuating a rather high degree of causation for acts that don't seem to have much relevance to your supposed effect. I've seen stronger connections in a game of 7 degrees of Kevin Bacon.

But perhaps you have some information I don't. So I ask. And you insult in reply. If your argument only works when mirrored back to you by people that already agree......perhaps you need a better argument.

 

[candycorn]

.

... to the families of the two dead NY cops.

You fan the flames, you are responsible for the consequences.

.

And what would you consider 'fanning the flames'? Would merely mentioning the death of Michael Brown or Eric Garner constitute 'fanning the flames'? Would opposing police brutality be 'fanning the flames'? Would insisting that those who killed Eric Garner be punished under the law be 'fanning the flames'?

As that would cover the overwhelming majority of the response to the deaths of both men.

This is what I consider "fanning the flames", and it has been going for decades before the Brown and Garner cases:

• Hyphenated Americans, dividing Americans at every opportunity
  
• Identity Politics, further dividing Americans
  
• Political Correctness
• Screaming "you're a racist" whenever a Black American is criticized
• Screaming "you're a racist" even when race is not part of the conversation
• Ignoring/deflecting/spinning wrongdoings by Black Americans, enabling further wrongdoings
  
• The soft bigotry of reduced expectations
• Doing nothing to promote the healing of wounds while increasing animosities

Thanks for asking.

.

Yet in our country (the USA), blacks make up something like 18 percent of the population as a whole. Until you enter a prison...they make up more than half of that population usually.

If this is a "politically correct" nation...one wouldn't know it from how juries sentence folks.