PC Is Not PA

Flanders

ARCHCONSERVATIVE
Sep 23, 2010
7,628
748
205
First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.​

Media protects and encourages P.C. So when did PC become peaceable assembly (PA) that includes violent demonstrations?

There should be no surprise that former Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, who played a role in launching the political career of Barack Obama, was found among the street demonstrators in Chicago who succeeded in forcefully disrupting and shutting down Republican frontrunner Donald Trump’s campaign rally on March 11, injuring two police officers who were trying to maintain order.

When Trump proceeded to move to his next campaign stops in Ohio the following day, he came before crowds and naturally addressed the previous night’s unfortunate descent into violence, only to experience another attempt at disruption. Four secret service agents raced to surround Trump after something was thrown and someone attempted to rush the stage. What is going on?

With provocative and occasional unrestrained rhetoric, Trump can be polarizing -- sometimes inviting a raucous response. But the real problem that gave rise to Trump is intolerance and the soft tyranny of humorless political correctness that envelopes communication and culture in America.

XXXXX

Slowly, over the last few decades, but with accelerating pace in the Obama years, the soul of America has been silenced by political correctness.

March 19, 2016
P.C. – R.I.P.
By Scott S. Powell

Articles: P.C. – R.I.P.

Violence to intimidate sure as hell is not freedom of speech, and by no stretch of Bill Ayers' vivid imagination can rioting at campaign rallies pass as petitioning the government for a redress of grievances.

NOTE: Flag-burning that harms nobody physically offends many, but it is not a violent demonstration.


Timeline of Flag Desecration Issues

Timeline of Flag Desecration Issues

Parenthetically, PC is designed to silence freedom of speech that offends the listener. Reading Michelle Obama’s lips is a perfect example of how freedom of speech benefits society when it proves what the speaker thinks about anything. Had she not spoken nobody could prove how much she and her lying husband hate this country.

Michelle Obama's "All this for a damn flag" shown at three different speeds​



Violence to intimidate is sure as hell not redressing a grievance, nor is it freedom of speech. If you are looking for a history of villains in all of this start with print press and novels that approved of labor union violence in the earliest day of the American labor movement. Hollywood movies with sound was the next villain to appear.

Television came next when it raced past radio and Hollywood by combining sound and moving pictures. The number of hours the audience watches television made it possible to move violence ahead much further than print and Hollywood could ever go. This is how it works:

Any individual, or group, that fights fire with fire is portrayed as violent troublemakers when they defend themselves or their beliefs against physical attacks. In practical terms print press and television use the same technique that labeled Jews the troublemakers when they fought back against Hitler’s Brown Shirts. Basically, television tells us that a violent Communist is permitted to do whatever they think necessary to advance their cause, while everyone that fights violence with violence is automatically the bad guy.

NOTE: Audience size makes fiction TV shows much worse than news shows. Example: Cop shows sold the idea that every big-city cop carries a back-up piece so they can plant it on an innocent victim after they shoot him. My point: Regardless of the scenario the ones who start the violence are always freedom-loving, warmhearted, citizens who love mankind. Everybody who fights back is always a brutal oppressor of everything good and decent. Put it in perspective by imagining how television would have covered the story had Bill Ayers been hospitalized with serious injuries or even killed.

Question: Did you ever wonder why demonstration organizers seldom shed a drop of their own blood? Answer: They are long-gone by the time sign-carriers get their heads busted. If you do not agree, ask yourself how many demonstration organizers bled in all of the anti-Vietnam War demonstrations. As far as I know not a one of them was shot at Kent State.

Incidentally, how come it is recorded as the Kent State Massacre when four were killed and nine wounded, while more than 80 men, women, and children killed in the Branch Davidian Compound was never reported as a massacre. Even today, you will not hear television refer to it as the Waco Massacre let alone talk about it at all.

Speaking of violence, Hillary Clinton outdid herself on this one. No one on television dared accuse then-First Lady Hillary Clinton of being responsible for the Waco Massacre even though much of the blame belongs to her:


Hillary Clinton– not Bill, not Janet Reno, not Webb Hubbell, not Vince Foster– ordered the assault on Waco that killed 76 Branch Davidians, including 21 children, and two pregnant women– and motivated Timothy McVeigh to participate in the Oklahoma City bombings two years later on April 19, 1995.

In the spring of 1993, Mrs. Clinton had grown increasingly impatient with the Waco standoff, which came to dominate the headlines– preventing the administration from moving forward on health care reform (Hillarycare).

Clinton pressured Deputy White House Counsel Vince Foster and Webb Hubbell to expedite a forceful resolution to the standoff.

XXXXX

“Give me a reason not to do this,” Janet Reno is said to have begged aides shortly before orders were issued in the final assault– during which 85 Branch Davidians were burned alive.

XXXXX

Foster himself was found dead, from a gun-shot wound to the head, in a Virginia park three months later. Could he have known too much about Waco?​

It Takes a Clinton to Murder a Village: Hillary Clinton Ordered Waco Massacre
Jan. 27, 2014
Robert Morrow

It Takes a Clinton to Murder a Village: Hillary Clinton Ordered Waco Massacre - MFP

Now listen to her doing her Saint Hillary act in the video:

Is Trump Responsible for Violence at His Campaign Rallies?

Hillary Clinton thinks Donald Trump is responsible for violence at his campaign rallies, saying at a town hall event Sunday night that the Republican presidential front-runner incites that violence with his fiery rhetoric.

On "Varney & Co." today, Judge Andrew Napolitano said it depends on whether Trump is actually inciting protesters at his events or if those protesters attend with the sole purpose of shutting him down.

Is Trump Responsible for Violence at His Campaign Rallies?​

Every voter should be scared to death when a man or woman soaked in blood throughout their public career stands a good chance of winning the presidency thanks to media mouths. Any American who votes for Hillary must have a death wish. I can only think of it in one way. I would have to believe that Charles Mansion would govern without violence if he became president before I would trust President Hillary Clinton to relinquish violence.

Finally, regardless of how many ways you can find to interpret the First Amendment there is no justification for violence in the name of a political cause. The entire Constitution provides all of the non-violent remedies anyone needs.
 
Last edited:
I note there are no responses to the IP's points of discussion. Not even JakeStarkey has entered the fray. You have achieved the impossible Flanders, the Progs are speechless. Congratulations, good lick!
 
Every voter should be scared to death when a man or woman soaked in blood throughout their public career stands a good chance of winning the presidency thanks to media mouths.
Refusing to kill one known enemy when they had the opportunity ended in the deaths of 3,000 Americans. So you can credit the Clintons with the blood spilled on 9-11-2001.

th
https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.Mfa9a191348b9ebf49392d780f8a8c5cao0&pid=Api&w=239&h=239

As far as I know, preventing a movie’s release is not a crime that can be punished with jail time. Of all of the criminal acts Bill & Hillary Clinton got/get away with, suppressing The Path to 9/11 was a crime against freedom of speech:

Hillary Clinton’s presidential aspirations may be threatened by a possible indictment over her email server, the loss of American lives in Benghazi and other scandals. But the Clintons still wield enough power to suppress a movie that reflects poorly on her husband’s administration 10 years after the only time it was allowed to be seen.

XXXXX

“The Path to 9/11” dramatizes the events leading to the 9/11 terror attacks, beginning with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. It derived many of its scenes from the 9/11 Commission Report.

However, it was “never seen again,” Nowrasteh said.

XXXXX

The movie, however, showed the “failures of two administrations, the Clinton and Bush administrations.”​

Think again if you believe that television has First Amendment protection:

He described the censorship as exemplary of the Clintons’ “pattern” of suppressing “all opposition.”

XXXXX

He recalled that “at least three of Bill Clinton’s attorneys, as well as allies and advisers to Hillary’s 2008 president campaign in the Senate, the House, the media, and the blogosphere went into an overdrive campaign of public denunciations, back-channel maneuvers and direct threats to Disney and ABC’s broadcast license.”

Revoking a television broadcast license may not be a crime against our so-called free press, but it is a crime against free speech. Basically, violence-prone people like Hillary Clinton fear exposure in front of a large audience more than they fear getting caught violating First Amendment principles.

Click on the link and scroll down to watch a scene where the team in position to kill or capture Osama bin BEFORE 9-11-2001 was not given permission to go forward. Listen closely to the dialogue in the control room and you will hear a reference to the Waco Massacre. That scene tells us that the Clintons had no problem ordering the murder of more than 80 American men, women, and children, but they never blinked an eye when it came to sparing bin Laden’s life:


Clintons fiercely suppressing movie putting them in bad light
Posted By Bob Unruh On 03/20/2016 @ 2:56 pm

Clintons fiercely suppressing movie putting them in bad light

Knowing Hillary Clinton’s track record with limited authority do you really want her making presidential decisions affecting American lives?
 

Forum List

Back
Top