2020 Presidential Thread

Not a big Law and Order fan I take it?

here is the thing, ren. at some point, you have to learn to spell correctly when trying to make a point. it is what we try to do with the english language, especially when it is a name. remember telephone books? there was a reason for them.

please ren, listen and absorb the lessons that others are trying to share with you. it will help you some day.

I feel bad for Mr.Sigs. Turns out one of his favorite bands Iced Earth had one of these whackjobs leading the band:

www.metalsucks.net/2021/01/15/iced-earth-kickstarter-backers-are-pissed-at-jon-schaffer-i-dont-support-nazis/

A lot I think. They are already finding some surprises. Google John Sullivan.

Yes, but remember I only speak English. What's a "ren"?

Did either of you have the opportunity to see/hear or read the transcripts of the President's speech on the Mall that day?  Considering the mood or mindset of some of the crowd, I can certainly see how his words fanned the flames.

I did see that.  Whatever her true intent may have been, she chose her words poorly(and used poor judgement imo). She didn’t outright say “harass”, but to tell people to approach other’s essentially anyplace they’re seen in public and to “create a crowd” pretty much seems to me like she’s giving a blueprint to her supporters and saying “make this happen anyway you see fit”.  It was over the top and I believe unnecessary. Passions already run high and it takes little to set some people off.  

As for different standards, yes, I don’t think that’s been in question, although it used to be much harder to see biases or the overt ones were confined to places like American Spectator or Mother Jones.  For the article linked, it’s no surprise that Ms. Waters didn’t get pushback from her colleagues, as that’s the norm, but I suspect privately she was admonished by higher ups and explained the damage she may have caused the party, the cause, and her own fortunes going forward.  

I do make a distinction between the Water’s incident and the “Stop The Steal” speech, movement, and it’s enablers.  

my reply to your post:

i understand looking at al sides. however, your opinions of the utterings of maxine waters are very naïve. she has certainly and consciously, with complete understanding of what she was doing, incited people to violence, she has done this on a continuous basis. her true intent was to intimidate and harm the sitting president, members of the cabinet, and other congress persons and senators. she made this clear on radio and tv interviews. your position is she chose her words poorly and used poor judgment and what her intent "may have been"? you have a problem identifying her bias, yet she has accused cabinet members, congress persons and senators of being racist and makes a point of repeating these themes to her constituency, to the level of 2 riots incited by her hate speech in her own district. "water's "incident"? that is a strange choice of description for her actions and speeches and you think there has been a question about standards? 

no, it is not the norm to not get push back for such actions. you suspect she was admonished. fine, then when did that happen, because her hate speeches never stopped nor did her call to violence toward other government officials stop. in the past 2 weeks, she made the same demand of the public.

in your reply, i detect a clear bias. this is a national sitting elected official, that advocated violence and enthusiastically supported another certain person that publicly stated having thoughts to blow up the white house, and publicly endorsed another person that publicly stated the president should be assassinated, and endorsed destroying the property of other elected officials and cabinet members. 

i have always taken the position "respect the uniform and not the man". i am neither a republican or a democrat. i am an american.

every american must condemn such actions of an elected congress person or senator or potus or vpotus. 

i ask you....should she not be impeached? what is the distinction, pray tell, because i do not detect any, and find both offensive to the american people.

concerning this violence thing: a sitting elected national congress person, in line to be potus described violence in this manner: "..it was a beautiful thing...". this was to describe the violent and destructive and death caused by the supposed protests that became riots in hong kong.

exactly how does one make a distinction concerning this? maybe it is racial, since it was asians? maybe it was to encourage a riot and a war?

when you can present a logical distinction, please email it to nancy pelosi. while you are doing so, email it to the present chairman of the senate. after all, he condemned the violence in hong kong. then again, his wife is asian. might that be the distinction, or might he have been sending a message to dial things down to avoid war?

why is there even a question that there are different standards, and this should not be accepted on any level by any american.