Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You can't simply absolve them and blame the leftists. It was the RIGHTISTS that deliberately aimed a car into a crowd. Not the leftists.
And the violence clearly came from both sides.
No, it was one kook that ran over people in a car. Nobody on the right excused or supported him.
The leftist groups came there for a confrontation and nothing more. If you go to a large group of adversaries with bats and bottles, you aren't there to look for a political dialog.
Without them, more than likely the crowd would have vented, went home, and left without any violence at all. But leftists can't stand to miss an opportunity to cause problems, just like with the Trump rallies.
These Nazis were marching through the streets terrorizing Jews and others with their Nazi chants and racist rhetoric. Their words actions are an affront to everyone who fought in WWII.
They should be violently opposed.
Assault is never the correct response to any speech. My brother called me horrible names, copycatted every word I said for an hour straight. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." We teach this to our children. We do so for a reason. It is flat out wrong to assault someone because of their words.
So what you're all saying is that if ISIS had a permit to march in Charlottesville, they'd have a right to match through the streets and to use their freedom of speech to say hateful things and if anyone started a fight with them it would be on the protesters.
ISIS isn't eligible for a permit as they are foreigners on foreign soil. Just about the worst we have are skinheads (birthed in our prisons). If skinheads get a permit to protest (bearing ugly tattoos, playing loud deathmetal over bullhorns, carrying signs proclaiming, "We hope you all die for diluting our pure blood!"), then yes, assaulting them for being suck is illegal and WRONG. You don't get to punch people you disagree with in America. There is no right to NOT be offended. There is a right to free speech, so govt cannot shut it down. Legally, the one who throws the first blow has committed a crime against another. Mean words are not a crime.
Many a man has smacked his woman for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Many a man has punched an opposing team's fan for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Assaulting someone for what they say is wrong and illegal. Sometimes it's worth it. If someone calls me a disgusting name, hubby would likely shove or hit him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Worth it. I can certainly understand the "worth it" aspect of punching a skinhead, but one doesn't get to cry victim or don a halo for doing so because it is illegal and WRONG.
Speech we like is easy to protect. If you cherish your freedom, you protect it even when it's hard, even swallowing back bile, because that's the only way to keep that freedom.
It's not that we agree with Nazis and it's not that we support them. We aren't interested in protecting them. It's freedom of speech we are protecting. We just want them to go away. We wonder why y'all don't want your extremists to go away.
Feelings are irrelevant. Typical lib...No, it was one kook that ran over people in a car. Nobody on the right excused or supported him.
The leftist groups came there for a confrontation and nothing more. If you go to a large group of adversaries with bats and bottles, you aren't there to look for a political dialog.
Without them, more than likely the crowd would have vented, went home, and left without any violence at all. But leftists can't stand to miss an opportunity to cause problems, just like with the Trump rallies.
These Nazis were marching through the streets terrorizing Jews and others with their Nazi chants and racist rhetoric. Their words actions are an affront to everyone who fought in WWII.
They should be violently opposed.
Assault is never the correct response to any speech. My brother called me horrible names, copycatted every word I said for an hour straight. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." We teach this to our children. We do so for a reason. It is flat out wrong to assault someone because of their words.
So what you're all saying is that if ISIS had a permit to march in Charlottesville, they'd have a right to match through the streets and to use their freedom of speech to say hateful things and if anyone started a fight with them it would be on the protesters.
ISIS isn't eligible for a permit as they are foreigners on foreign soil. Just about the worst we have are skinheads (birthed in our prisons). If skinheads get a permit to protest (bearing ugly tattoos, playing loud deathmetal over bullhorns, carrying signs proclaiming, "We hope you all die for diluting our pure blood!"), then yes, assaulting them for being suck is illegal and WRONG. You don't get to punch people you disagree with in America. There is no right to NOT be offended. There is a right to free speech, so govt cannot shut it down. Legally, the one who throws the first blow has committed a crime against another. Mean words are not a crime.
Many a man has smacked his woman for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Many a man has punched an opposing team's fan for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Assaulting someone for what they say is wrong and illegal. Sometimes it's worth it. If someone calls me a disgusting name, hubby would likely shove or hit him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Worth it. I can certainly understand the "worth it" aspect of punching a skinhead, but one doesn't get to cry victim or don a halo for doing so because it is illegal and WRONG.
Speech we like is easy to protect. If you cherish your freedom, you protect it even when it's hard, even swallowing back bile, because that's the only way to keep that freedom.
It's not that we agree with Nazis and it's not that we support them. We aren't interested in protecting them. It's freedom of speech we are protecting. We just want them to go away. We wonder why y'all don't want your extremists to go away.
"Freedom is speech" is an illusion. Harassment and intimidation is illegal.
You should read the piece written by members of the Charlottesville Jewish Synagogue who were at Shabbat on Friday night during the torch light parade. The marchers passed by the Synagogue shouting nastiness at the worshippers. They didn't feel very free hearing that. They were terrorized.
Laws don't have to be specific in order to deny a person's right to vote. All they have to is create the conditions that end up creating substantial enough obstacles.Being a Nazi isn't a "protected class" and it's not a religion, so yes you can fire the racist pigs.
Maybe that's how it works in your country or soon will. But in America, every American is protected by the US Constitution and our laws. It doesn't matter what they believe, protest, or what group they belong to. They are still Americans and are allowed to have those views as long as they don't break any laws.
Protected classes of people don't come from Republicans. Protected classes of people come from Democrats who tirelessly try to separate us into dozens and dozens of groups if they can. Then they decide which groups they hate and which groups they love.
Republicans believe in treating all people equal regardless of their views whether we agree or disagree with them.
I guess that's why Republicans are busy writing laws which deprive minorities and poor people of the right to vote, and raised gerrymandering to an art form to preserve their safe seats.
What laws deprive any one of the right to vote? Be specific.
And as far as gerrymandering goes, I realize you are a complete left wing whacko but you don't have to be a hypocrite as well claiming only R's genrrymander.
So what is one of the worst examples of gerrymandering in the country? What is the example that the national media uses when talking about gerrymandering? Illinois' congressional district 4, including parts of Chicago, represented by congressman Luis Gutierrez. Check out the map below and tell me if you don't think this is the most ridiculous political game ever.
Apparently they had to run the district through the middle of Interstate 294 so that they could maintain a contiguous area of homogenous constituents.
Illinois Congressional District 4: Worst Example Of Gerrymandering
No, it was one kook that ran over people in a car. Nobody on the right excused or supported him.
The leftist groups came there for a confrontation and nothing more. If you go to a large group of adversaries with bats and bottles, you aren't there to look for a political dialog.
Without them, more than likely the crowd would have vented, went home, and left without any violence at all. But leftists can't stand to miss an opportunity to cause problems, just like with the Trump rallies.
These Nazis were marching through the streets terrorizing Jews and others with their Nazi chants and racist rhetoric. Their words actions are an affront to everyone who fought in WWII.
They should be violently opposed.
Assault is never the correct response to any speech. My brother called me horrible names, copycatted every word I said for an hour straight. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." We teach this to our children. We do so for a reason. It is flat out wrong to assault someone because of their words.
So what you're all saying is that if ISIS had a permit to march in Charlottesville, they'd have a right to match through the streets and to use their freedom of speech to say hateful things and if anyone started a fight with them it would be on the protesters.
ISIS isn't eligible for a permit as they are foreigners on foreign soil. Just about the worst we have are skinheads (birthed in our prisons). If skinheads get a permit to protest (bearing ugly tattoos, playing loud deathmetal over bullhorns, carrying signs proclaiming, "We hope you all die for diluting our pure blood!"), then yes, assaulting them for being suck is illegal and WRONG. You don't get to punch people you disagree with in America. There is no right to NOT be offended. There is a right to free speech, so govt cannot shut it down. Legally, the one who throws the first blow has committed a crime against another. Mean words are not a crime.
Many a man has smacked his woman for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Many a man has punched an opposing team's fan for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Assaulting someone for what they say is wrong and illegal. Sometimes it's worth it. If someone calls me a disgusting name, hubby would likely shove or hit him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Worth it. I can certainly understand the "worth it" aspect of punching a skinhead, but one doesn't get to cry victim or don a halo for doing so because it is illegal and WRONG.
Speech we like is easy to protect. If you cherish your freedom, you protect it even when it's hard, even swallowing back bile, because that's the only way to keep that freedom.
It's not that we agree with Nazis and it's not that we support them. We aren't interested in protecting them. It's freedom of speech we are protecting. We just want them to go away. We wonder why y'all don't want your extremists to go away.
"Freedom is speech" is an illusion. Harassment and intimidation is illegal.
You should read the piece written by members of the Charlottesville Jewish Synagogue who were at Shabbat on Friday night during the torch light parade. The marchers passed by the Synagogue shouting nastiness at the worshippers. They didn't feel very free hearing that. They were terrorized.
Laws don't have to be specific in order to deny a person's right to vote. All they have to is create the conditions that end up creating substantial enough obstacles.Being a Nazi isn't a "protected class" and it's not a religion, so yes you can fire the racist pigs.
Maybe that's how it works in your country or soon will. But in America, every American is protected by the US Constitution and our laws. It doesn't matter what they believe, protest, or what group they belong to. They are still Americans and are allowed to have those views as long as they don't break any laws.
Protected classes of people don't come from Republicans. Protected classes of people come from Democrats who tirelessly try to separate us into dozens and dozens of groups if they can. Then they decide which groups they hate and which groups they love.
Republicans believe in treating all people equal regardless of their views whether we agree or disagree with them.
I guess that's why Republicans are busy writing laws which deprive minorities and poor people of the right to vote, and raised gerrymandering to an art form to preserve their safe seats.
What laws deprive any one of the right to vote? Be specific.
And as far as gerrymandering goes, I realize you are a complete left wing whacko but you don't have to be a hypocrite as well claiming only R's genrrymander.
So what is one of the worst examples of gerrymandering in the country? What is the example that the national media uses when talking about gerrymandering? Illinois' congressional district 4, including parts of Chicago, represented by congressman Luis Gutierrez. Check out the map below and tell me if you don't think this is the most ridiculous political game ever.
Apparently they had to run the district through the middle of Interstate 294 so that they could maintain a contiguous area of homogenous constituents.
Illinois Congressional District 4: Worst Example Of Gerrymandering
I smell a lawsuit.
Not if they're in a right to work state.
Feelings are irrelevant. Typical lib...These Nazis were marching through the streets terrorizing Jews and others with their Nazi chants and racist rhetoric. Their words actions are an affront to everyone who fought in WWII.
They should be violently opposed.
Assault is never the correct response to any speech. My brother called me horrible names, copycatted every word I said for an hour straight. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." We teach this to our children. We do so for a reason. It is flat out wrong to assault someone because of their words.
So what you're all saying is that if ISIS had a permit to march in Charlottesville, they'd have a right to match through the streets and to use their freedom of speech to say hateful things and if anyone started a fight with them it would be on the protesters.
ISIS isn't eligible for a permit as they are foreigners on foreign soil. Just about the worst we have are skinheads (birthed in our prisons). If skinheads get a permit to protest (bearing ugly tattoos, playing loud deathmetal over bullhorns, carrying signs proclaiming, "We hope you all die for diluting our pure blood!"), then yes, assaulting them for being suck is illegal and WRONG. You don't get to punch people you disagree with in America. There is no right to NOT be offended. There is a right to free speech, so govt cannot shut it down. Legally, the one who throws the first blow has committed a crime against another. Mean words are not a crime.
Many a man has smacked his woman for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Many a man has punched an opposing team's fan for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Assaulting someone for what they say is wrong and illegal. Sometimes it's worth it. If someone calls me a disgusting name, hubby would likely shove or hit him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Worth it. I can certainly understand the "worth it" aspect of punching a skinhead, but one doesn't get to cry victim or don a halo for doing so because it is illegal and WRONG.
Speech we like is easy to protect. If you cherish your freedom, you protect it even when it's hard, even swallowing back bile, because that's the only way to keep that freedom.
It's not that we agree with Nazis and it's not that we support them. We aren't interested in protecting them. It's freedom of speech we are protecting. We just want them to go away. We wonder why y'all don't want your extremists to go away.
"Freedom is speech" is an illusion. Harassment and intimidation is illegal.
You should read the piece written by members of the Charlottesville Jewish Synagogue who were at Shabbat on Friday night during the torch light parade. The marchers passed by the Synagogue shouting nastiness at the worshippers. They didn't feel very free hearing that. They were terrorized.
You thought wrong. We do not share that trait in common with the left. If you were hoping to build bridges by finding common ground. You failed.Feelings are irrelevant. Typical lib...Assault is never the correct response to any speech. My brother called me horrible names, copycatted every word I said for an hour straight. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." We teach this to our children. We do so for a reason. It is flat out wrong to assault someone because of their words.
So what you're all saying is that if ISIS had a permit to march in Charlottesville, they'd have a right to match through the streets and to use their freedom of speech to say hateful things and if anyone started a fight with them it would be on the protesters.
ISIS isn't eligible for a permit as they are foreigners on foreign soil. Just about the worst we have are skinheads (birthed in our prisons). If skinheads get a permit to protest (bearing ugly tattoos, playing loud deathmetal over bullhorns, carrying signs proclaiming, "We hope you all die for diluting our pure blood!"), then yes, assaulting them for being suck is illegal and WRONG. You don't get to punch people you disagree with in America. There is no right to NOT be offended. There is a right to free speech, so govt cannot shut it down. Legally, the one who throws the first blow has committed a crime against another. Mean words are not a crime.
Many a man has smacked his woman for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Many a man has punched an opposing team's fan for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Assaulting someone for what they say is wrong and illegal. Sometimes it's worth it. If someone calls me a disgusting name, hubby would likely shove or hit him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Worth it. I can certainly understand the "worth it" aspect of punching a skinhead, but one doesn't get to cry victim or don a halo for doing so because it is illegal and WRONG.
Speech we like is easy to protect. If you cherish your freedom, you protect it even when it's hard, even swallowing back bile, because that's the only way to keep that freedom.
It's not that we agree with Nazis and it's not that we support them. We aren't interested in protecting them. It's freedom of speech we are protecting. We just want them to go away. We wonder why y'all don't want your extremists to go away.
"Freedom is speech" is an illusion. Harassment and intimidation is illegal.
You should read the piece written by members of the Charlottesville Jewish Synagogue who were at Shabbat on Friday night during the torch light parade. The marchers passed by the Synagogue shouting nastiness at the worshippers. They didn't feel very free hearing that. They were terrorized.
I thought conservatives decide reality and truth based on their feelings. If it feels true, facts be damned. That's what Donnie tells them.
Love those covers.I smell a lawsuit.
For what?
Never mind, we know you don't need a legitimate reason to file a suit.
How about the guy sees this as a wake-up call.
Can you keep a rifle?Laws don't have to be specific in order to deny a person's right to vote. All they have to is create the conditions that end up creating substantial enough obstacles.Being a Nazi isn't a "protected class" and it's not a religion, so yes you can fire the racist pigs.
Maybe that's how it works in your country or soon will. But in America, every American is protected by the US Constitution and our laws. It doesn't matter what they believe, protest, or what group they belong to. They are still Americans and are allowed to have those views as long as they don't break any laws.
Protected classes of people don't come from Republicans. Protected classes of people come from Democrats who tirelessly try to separate us into dozens and dozens of groups if they can. Then they decide which groups they hate and which groups they love.
Republicans believe in treating all people equal regardless of their views whether we agree or disagree with them.
I guess that's why Republicans are busy writing laws which deprive minorities and poor people of the right to vote, and raised gerrymandering to an art form to preserve their safe seats.
What laws deprive any one of the right to vote? Be specific.
And as far as gerrymandering goes, I realize you are a complete left wing whacko but you don't have to be a hypocrite as well claiming only R's genrrymander.
So what is one of the worst examples of gerrymandering in the country? What is the example that the national media uses when talking about gerrymandering? Illinois' congressional district 4, including parts of Chicago, represented by congressman Luis Gutierrez. Check out the map below and tell me if you don't think this is the most ridiculous political game ever.
Apparently they had to run the district through the middle of Interstate 294 so that they could maintain a contiguous area of homogenous constituents.
Illinois Congressional District 4: Worst Example Of Gerrymandering
Like NYC's handgun permit process?
There it takes 3-6 months and $600 or so in fees just to keep revolver legally in your own home.
You thought wrong. We do not share that trait in common with the left. If you were hoping to build bridges by finding common ground. You failed.Feelings are irrelevant. Typical lib...So what you're all saying is that if ISIS had a permit to march in Charlottesville, they'd have a right to match through the streets and to use their freedom of speech to say hateful things and if anyone started a fight with them it would be on the protesters.
ISIS isn't eligible for a permit as they are foreigners on foreign soil. Just about the worst we have are skinheads (birthed in our prisons). If skinheads get a permit to protest (bearing ugly tattoos, playing loud deathmetal over bullhorns, carrying signs proclaiming, "We hope you all die for diluting our pure blood!"), then yes, assaulting them for being suck is illegal and WRONG. You don't get to punch people you disagree with in America. There is no right to NOT be offended. There is a right to free speech, so govt cannot shut it down. Legally, the one who throws the first blow has committed a crime against another. Mean words are not a crime.
Many a man has smacked his woman for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Many a man has punched an opposing team's fan for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Assaulting someone for what they say is wrong and illegal. Sometimes it's worth it. If someone calls me a disgusting name, hubby would likely shove or hit him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Worth it. I can certainly understand the "worth it" aspect of punching a skinhead, but one doesn't get to cry victim or don a halo for doing so because it is illegal and WRONG.
Speech we like is easy to protect. If you cherish your freedom, you protect it even when it's hard, even swallowing back bile, because that's the only way to keep that freedom.
It's not that we agree with Nazis and it's not that we support them. We aren't interested in protecting them. It's freedom of speech we are protecting. We just want them to go away. We wonder why y'all don't want your extremists to go away.
"Freedom is speech" is an illusion. Harassment and intimidation is illegal.
You should read the piece written by members of the Charlottesville Jewish Synagogue who were at Shabbat on Friday night during the torch light parade. The marchers passed by the Synagogue shouting nastiness at the worshippers. They didn't feel very free hearing that. They were terrorized.
I thought conservatives decide reality and truth based on their feelings. If it feels true, facts be damned. That's what Donnie tells them.
Can you keep a rifle?Laws don't have to be specific in order to deny a person's right to vote. All they have to is create the conditions that end up creating substantial enough obstacles.Maybe that's how it works in your country or soon will. But in America, every American is protected by the US Constitution and our laws. It doesn't matter what they believe, protest, or what group they belong to. They are still Americans and are allowed to have those views as long as they don't break any laws.
Protected classes of people don't come from Republicans. Protected classes of people come from Democrats who tirelessly try to separate us into dozens and dozens of groups if they can. Then they decide which groups they hate and which groups they love.
Republicans believe in treating all people equal regardless of their views whether we agree or disagree with them.
I guess that's why Republicans are busy writing laws which deprive minorities and poor people of the right to vote, and raised gerrymandering to an art form to preserve their safe seats.
What laws deprive any one of the right to vote? Be specific.
And as far as gerrymandering goes, I realize you are a complete left wing whacko but you don't have to be a hypocrite as well claiming only R's genrrymander.
So what is one of the worst examples of gerrymandering in the country? What is the example that the national media uses when talking about gerrymandering? Illinois' congressional district 4, including parts of Chicago, represented by congressman Luis Gutierrez. Check out the map below and tell me if you don't think this is the most ridiculous political game ever.
Apparently they had to run the district through the middle of Interstate 294 so that they could maintain a contiguous area of homogenous constituents.
Illinois Congressional District 4: Worst Example Of Gerrymandering
Like NYC's handgun permit process?
There it takes 3-6 months and $600 or so in fees just to keep revolver legally in your own home.
"Whole lot of you"? Could you specify?You thought wrong. We do not share that trait in common with the left. If you were hoping to build bridges by finding common ground. You failed.Feelings are irrelevant. Typical lib...ISIS isn't eligible for a permit as they are foreigners on foreign soil. Just about the worst we have are skinheads (birthed in our prisons). If skinheads get a permit to protest (bearing ugly tattoos, playing loud deathmetal over bullhorns, carrying signs proclaiming, "We hope you all die for diluting our pure blood!"), then yes, assaulting them for being suck is illegal and WRONG. You don't get to punch people you disagree with in America. There is no right to NOT be offended. There is a right to free speech, so govt cannot shut it down. Legally, the one who throws the first blow has committed a crime against another. Mean words are not a crime.
Many a man has smacked his woman for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Many a man has punched an opposing team's fan for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Assaulting someone for what they say is wrong and illegal. Sometimes it's worth it. If someone calls me a disgusting name, hubby would likely shove or hit him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Worth it. I can certainly understand the "worth it" aspect of punching a skinhead, but one doesn't get to cry victim or don a halo for doing so because it is illegal and WRONG.
Speech we like is easy to protect. If you cherish your freedom, you protect it even when it's hard, even swallowing back bile, because that's the only way to keep that freedom.
It's not that we agree with Nazis and it's not that we support them. We aren't interested in protecting them. It's freedom of speech we are protecting. We just want them to go away. We wonder why y'all don't want your extremists to go away.
"Freedom is speech" is an illusion. Harassment and intimidation is illegal.
You should read the piece written by members of the Charlottesville Jewish Synagogue who were at Shabbat on Friday night during the torch light parade. The marchers passed by the Synagogue shouting nastiness at the worshippers. They didn't feel very free hearing that. They were terrorized.
I thought conservatives decide reality and truth based on their feelings. If it feels true, facts be damned. That's what Donnie tells them.
I have no interest in building bridges with racists, bigots and Nazis. I would wish a nice case of incurable flesh eating microsis on the whole lot of you.
Feelings are irrelevant. Typical lib...Assault is never the correct response to any speech. My brother called me horrible names, copycatted every word I said for an hour straight. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." We teach this to our children. We do so for a reason. It is flat out wrong to assault someone because of their words.
So what you're all saying is that if ISIS had a permit to march in Charlottesville, they'd have a right to match through the streets and to use their freedom of speech to say hateful things and if anyone started a fight with them it would be on the protesters.
ISIS isn't eligible for a permit as they are foreigners on foreign soil. Just about the worst we have are skinheads (birthed in our prisons). If skinheads get a permit to protest (bearing ugly tattoos, playing loud deathmetal over bullhorns, carrying signs proclaiming, "We hope you all die for diluting our pure blood!"), then yes, assaulting them for being suck is illegal and WRONG. You don't get to punch people you disagree with in America. There is no right to NOT be offended. There is a right to free speech, so govt cannot shut it down. Legally, the one who throws the first blow has committed a crime against another. Mean words are not a crime.
Many a man has smacked his woman for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Many a man has punched an opposing team's fan for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Assaulting someone for what they say is wrong and illegal. Sometimes it's worth it. If someone calls me a disgusting name, hubby would likely shove or hit him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Worth it. I can certainly understand the "worth it" aspect of punching a skinhead, but one doesn't get to cry victim or don a halo for doing so because it is illegal and WRONG.
Speech we like is easy to protect. If you cherish your freedom, you protect it even when it's hard, even swallowing back bile, because that's the only way to keep that freedom.
It's not that we agree with Nazis and it's not that we support them. We aren't interested in protecting them. It's freedom of speech we are protecting. We just want them to go away. We wonder why y'all don't want your extremists to go away.
"Freedom is speech" is an illusion. Harassment and intimidation is illegal.
You should read the piece written by members of the Charlottesville Jewish Synagogue who were at Shabbat on Friday night during the torch light parade. The marchers passed by the Synagogue shouting nastiness at the worshippers. They didn't feel very free hearing that. They were terrorized.
I thought conservatives decide reality and truth based on their feelings. If it feels true, facts be damned. That's what Donnie tells them.
Frangible ammo...Can you keep a rifle?Laws don't have to be specific in order to deny a person's right to vote. All they have to is create the conditions that end up creating substantial enough obstacles.I guess that's why Republicans are busy writing laws which deprive minorities and poor people of the right to vote, and raised gerrymandering to an art form to preserve their safe seats.
What laws deprive any one of the right to vote? Be specific.
And as far as gerrymandering goes, I realize you are a complete left wing whacko but you don't have to be a hypocrite as well claiming only R's genrrymander.
So what is one of the worst examples of gerrymandering in the country? What is the example that the national media uses when talking about gerrymandering? Illinois' congressional district 4, including parts of Chicago, represented by congressman Luis Gutierrez. Check out the map below and tell me if you don't think this is the most ridiculous political game ever.
Apparently they had to run the district through the middle of Interstate 294 so that they could maintain a contiguous area of homogenous constituents.
Illinois Congressional District 4: Worst Example Of Gerrymandering
Like NYC's handgun permit process?
There it takes 3-6 months and $600 or so in fees just to keep revolver legally in your own home.
Rifles need to registered and take less time to get, but I know where your going here and that isn't a valid reason. the whole "well you can get A gun" doesn't float because for home defense I would prefer a handgun with hollow points so I don't have a rifle FMJ round blast through 3-4 apartment walls in my building.
I'm sure my fellow tenants would as well.
Charlottesville white nationalist demonstrator loses job at libertarian hot dog shop
After being “inundated with inquiries,” his former employer, Top Dog, in downtown Berkeley, posted a sign on its door that reads: “Effective Saturday 12th August, Cole White no longer works at Top Dog. The actions of those in Charlottesville are not supported by Top Dog. We believe in individual freedom and voluntary association for everyone,” multiple news outlets reported. The shop has a political bent of its own, as it’s well-known in Berkeley for the libertarian stickers and articles posted on its walls, and website.
Sign on the door of Top Dog on Durant Ave confirms Cole White is no longer employed by the chain pic.twitter.com/ROwAed2NOl
I have mixed feelings about this. I believe public shaming is an effective way to deal with hate-mongers and those associated with Alt-right and white pride/nationalists.
However, I also see them like sick alcoholics. These people need help--intervention and treatment. They are sick-minded deluded people, members of a cult which teaches hate, fuels resentment. Cult members often need some form of deprogramming to get them healthy.
Charlottesville white nationalist demonstrator loses job at libertarian hot dog shop
After being “inundated with inquiries,” his former employer, Top Dog, in downtown Berkeley, posted a sign on its door that reads: “Effective Saturday 12th August, Cole White no longer works at Top Dog. The actions of those in Charlottesville are not supported by Top Dog. We believe in individual freedom and voluntary association for everyone,” multiple news outlets reported. The shop has a political bent of its own, as it’s well-known in Berkeley for the libertarian stickers and articles posted on its walls, and website.
Sign on the door of Top Dog on Durant Ave confirms Cole White is no longer employed by the chain pic.twitter.com/ROwAed2NOl
I have mixed feelings about this. I believe public shaming is an effective way to deal with hate-mongers and those associated with Alt-right and white pride/nationalists.
However, I also see them like sick alcoholics. These people need help--intervention and treatment. They are sick-minded deluded people, members of a cult which teaches hate, fuels resentment. Cult members often need some form of deprogramming to get them healthy.
You have "mixed feelings."
You leftist thugs are all about intimidation and bullying against anyone you don't like.
These white supremacists came looking for trouble and agitating for it. There intent, with jackboots, TORCHES and assault was to intimidate. They DID NOT follow the proscribed route either entering instead into areas that were likely to incite violence. They are responsible for their violence. The counter demonstrators are for theirs.
BUT they do have right to peacefully protest and we have an obligation to protect that right if we value our own free speech.
Imo we need to rethink how we handle countering them. What if no one came to watch?
So what if employers during the Bush years fired people who marched against war with our enemies? You would have been okay with that? How about occupy wall street?So what if employers during the Bush years fired people who marched against war with our enemies? You would have been okay with that? How about occupy wall street?
You are comparing people who protested against a war and people who protested to achieve equality to Nazi, racist, white supremist? You are as clueless as your, so called, president.
The people who drove to Charlottesville from Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, and other states did so to bring violence to that City.
They did? Then why no violence until the leftists showed up (as always)?
They came there to protest a removal of history. What did ANTIFA and BLM come there for if not trouble?
You see, they could have applied for a permit to have their won protest just like the supremacists, but they didn't. Then they could have held their own protest ten miles away, five miles away, a half mile away to avoid trouble, but they didn't.
They only came there for one reason with bats and bottles. And it wasn't to play baseball and make sure they didn't get dehydrated.
You can't simply absolve them and blame the leftists. It was the RIGHTISTS that deliberately aimed a car into a crowd. Not the leftists.
And the violence clearly came from both sides.
No, it was one kook that ran over people in a car. Nobody on the right excused or supported him.
The leftist groups came there for a confrontation and nothing more. If you go to a large group of adversaries with bats and bottles, you aren't there to look for a political dialog.
Without them, more than likely the crowd would have vented, went home, and left without any violence at all. But leftists can't stand to miss an opportunity to cause problems, just like with the Trump rallies.
"Nobody on the right excused or supported him. "
North Carolina KKK leader: 'I'm sorta glad' people got hit, woman died in Charlottesville
