I thought only the left did this sort of thing...

[sakinago]

Now you’re being purposefully dishonest. “I never mentioned nazis”...If you’re chanting, “Jews will not replace us.” You’re a neo-nazi. Everybody who is in the “alt-right” wants a socialist ethno-state, A.K.A national socialism. They don’t cite hitler, but they wish to emulate the third riech. Spencer Re-branding neo-nazis as “alt right”, was exactly that, a re-branding marketing move. I pay attention to actions, not words, especially when it comes to national socialist.

All of the instantces you cited, are all lone actors. Lone actors that the right has condemned. No one (at least no one prominent) on the right blamed Bernie or his rhetoric for his psycho supporter who almost killed over a dozen GOP legislators. So why is it ok to do that to the right? The left, on the other hand, are not condemning the concerning behavior I cited earlier. They are either ignoring it, excusing it, and even promoting it. This is coming from very prominent figure heads on the left. Do you see the difference in what you cited, and what I cited?

What I see here is not just the incessant red herring of "neo-Nazis" but more fundamentally an addiction to what I'll call a "Collective Fallacy", that being the bizzaro idea that "the left" or "the right" is each some kind of Borg entity that has (presumably) an office in Kansas City with a board of governors and an official position on everything.

There's no such thing. I absolutely guarantee you there's no such thing. "The right" has neither "condemned" anything nor has it failed to; "The left" has neither condemned anything nor has it failed to. Neither of those are possible acts. There are no such entities to do that.

Again, what you have here that was put under the microscope was selective memory. That is, your citation of a various laundry list that "came from the left", citing a -- your term -- "disparity between the sides". That's why I posted another laundry list that dispels that idea of disparity. Again, because you're taking into account what you wish to take into account ... selectively.

So --- sorry, the fact that you may hear a comment here or not hear a comment there, does not somehow create "The Right Inc" or "The Left Inc" to support or refute any act. There's literally no such thing. No collective, left right or center, is responsible for what you choose to notice or not-notice.

And (edit) interestingly BOTH of the two posts that were put up while I was writing this one tried to sell the exact same bullshit. I don't get it. It's as if some people are literally incapable of processing the difference between an individual and a collective.

Well this is an easily solvable disagrement... who on the right (major figure head, pundit, lawmaker, etc.) ever justified or promoted the incidences you cited? NONE, they all condemned it. Vs the other side, Waters, Cuomo, Booker, Hillary, just off the top of my head have justified it.

There’s also a gap in frequency and amount of participation between the instances I cited and the ones you cited, that’s larger than the Grand Canyon. So, no, both sides are not equally as bad, not even close. I don’t ignore Nazis either, they’re assholes, they’re 100% wrong, and evil.

You continue to cherrypick. The entire poinit just sailed blthely over your head.

I am not cherry picking. I am making a very clear distinction. We’re talking about dozens of riots, attended by thousands of people, that have turned violent, have cause property damage, and have aggressively harassed perceived opponents and uninterested bystanders alike. We also see “protests” that are somehow deemed non violent, all because a conservative is coming to town to give a speech, that cost the cities hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep under control. These all have either justified or encouraged by multiple left leaning pundits and lawmakers. This is in contrast to the lone actors that you have cited, who do not even come close to aligning with mainstream conservatism, are NEVER justified by right leaning pundits/lawmakers and are always condemned by the right. Furthermore, when lone acting psychos on the left go out and commit murder, e.g. baseball practice shooter or the Dallas police shooter, you do not hear the right lumping them in as run of the mill democrats, much like you are lumping in the likes of Dylan roof in with republicans. There are pretty big disparities to point out here. That’s not cherry picking. This is pointing out reality. Yet hear I am, being reminded about Dylan roof, and those who hold similar beliefs, which those beliefs do not even come close to aligning with conservative values.

Do I need to look up all the articles and clips characterizing the Tea Party as a dangerous movement, and as rhetoric that is going to lead to violence? Antifa, a group made up of millions, LITERALLY came out of the gate swinging, and you’re giving me some whataboutism with Dylan roof.

There is no "whataboutism" when you started the false comparison via cherrypicking. I simply corrected it.

All I can do is lead you to the water. It's up to you to stare at the water and declare you don't see it.

You're wasting my time. Dismissed.

Where am I cherry picking?

 

[OKTexas]

Christine Blasey Ford Can’t Return Home Due To ‘Unending’ Threats, Lawyers Say

We are told on here daily that only the left engages in such actions...yet here we are.


Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who publicly accused now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, has not been able to return to her home and faces a near-constant stream of threats, her attorneys said in an interview on Sunday.

Their probably lying about that too. They're all commiecrat operatives and propagandist.

.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Maybe she can put another door on the house.

Maybe she can put another door on the house.

That is an excellent post.....I wonder if most know that that is one of the lies Ford told.


1. Teaching someone to take lie detector test

New sworn statement alleges Ford lied under oath about prepping someone for a polygraph New sworn statement alleges Ford lied under oath about prepping someone for a polygraph




2. A separate door in her house

Renovation Records Undercut Ford's Exit-Door AccountFord testified, pushed her to say she wanted the door to alleviate symptoms of “claustrophobia” and “panic attacks" she still suffered from an attempted rape allegedly perpetrated by Kavanaugh in high school during the early 1980s.

"Is that the reason for the second door — front door -- is claustrophobia?” asked Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. “Correct,” Ford replied.

Ford never specified when the renovation took place, leaving a possible impression that it and the therapy session happened around the same time.

But documents reveal the door was installed years before as part of an addition, and has been used by renters and even a marriage counseling business.” https://www.realclearinvestigations...uments_undermine_fords_exit_door_account.html





3.Being afraid to fly, “…it was presented as a terror so overwhelming, so uncontrollable, as to prevent her from traveling by air under any circumstances. No – Professordoktor Ford, we were led to believe, would need to drive from Palo Alto to Washington to testify before the Senate Judicial Committee.

This claim fell apart in short order after it was revealed that Ford had lived for a year in Honolulu, a city effectively unreachable except by air, had vacationed in Tahiti and other areas of the Pacific, and regularly flew from California to the east coast to visit family. In light of all this, the “driving” claim became a running social media joke, with bogus reports of which was the last town she had driven through. “https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/the_three_lies_of_christine_blasey_ford.html



4. Blasey Ford allowed the public and the committee to believe that she was a psychologist in the full meaning of the term. She specifically told the committee that she was a “research psychologist”. She also made the claim on her university web site page, and in several other cases. The legacy media (for instance, theWashington Post and the Atlantic) dropped the “research’ part and repeatedly asserted that she was a licensed psychologist, with no request for a correction from the Blasey Ford camp.

In fact, she is no such thing. While she has done the course work, and was awarded a doctorate in the field, she still lacks certification. To qualify as a “psychologist” in the state of California (and every other state in the union), an individual must serve a one-year residency and pass several rigorous examinations. Blasey Ford has not done so. She is, ipso facto, not a psychologist. https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/the_three_lies_of_christine_blasey_ford.html

 

[S.J.]

Two words: Tough shit.

Sleep with the Democrat dogs, you're going to get a shitload of fleas.

^ there you go.

Amazing how alike the two sides are

When the left starts believing all those women Bill Clinton sexually abused and raped, maybe I'll start believing wackos like Ford.

Once again...Amazing how alike the two sides are.

There are only two sides, the Trump Party and the American Communist Party (Democrats).

Get to one side or the other or else you're going to be steamrolled.

He's already on one side (ACP). Can't you tell?