Which brings us to the actual question. Which is why you value political alliances over prosecuting criminals?"Promoting"?
I'm simply pointing out that you're full of shit if you believe the right has conducted more political violence in this country.
Ah, you finally admit defeat and cravenly now ask for the other factors. It didn't take long for you to abandon your fruitless approach. Good, there may be hope for you yet, it all depends on how you answer this burning question:
How about I list a whole bunch of political murders by the right?
Which means you still won't answer my question. Try again. What socioeconomic factors did you fall prey to that resulted in you becoming a conservative?
I'm asking specifically about rioting. You said rioting belongs to the right, so here's your opportunity to list the hundreds of riots, the dozens of people killed in those riots and the billions of dollars in damage done in those riots. Instead, you meekly attempt to say, "I didn't really mean it, I was talking about political violence, which I insist is done by the police".
Hmmm, you're more intractable than before. I can only assume that the other 5-year-olds are egging you on and you don't want to lose face with them. I've told you many times and it's not my problem that you don't know how to deal with reality, but I've answered your question more completely than you wanted me to because I didn't give you an attack vector. That was on purpose, BTW.
You are specifically asking about rioting because it fits your talking points the best. Whereas, in reality, the overall amount of violence and political violence is done by republicans and conservatives.
anti defamation league? Haha haha
Also not an answer. Try again. What socioeconomic conditions did you fall prey to that resulted in you becoming a conservative?
No.
There was one up ahead that did exactly this. Can you read?
Except I can. Easily.
And you claimed rioting was owned by the right, so you fell for it. Now you're stuck because you can't prove or even show that statement to be true. All you can do is hope to change the subject.
That COULD possibly be true had I refused to answer. I did not so refuse. I simply pointed out that your question was meaningless because it ignored all factors beyond socioeconomic ones for embracing conservatism.
And I claimed violence was owned by the right. Unlike you, I didn't narrow my argument to riots only.
Just one? Do you know what the plural form is for?
Its not....Black on black crime or white on white crime
Which means you didn't answer. Try again. What socioeconomic conditions did you fall prey to that resulted in you becoming a conservative?
