Political violence

[TimHauck 3,127]

22 minutes ago, Strike said:

Don't tell me what to do.  I am pretty careful with what I post and I stand by my posts 99% of the time.  So if I said it, unless I retract it, it's what I meant.  And you are absolutely OK with these thugs destroying cities.  Do you literally post "YEAH DESTROY THAT CITY" like you mentioned @Horseman doing?  No.  You're more subtle than that.  But you are absolutely OK with the ACTIONS themselves.  

Lol at turning RealTim calling out @Horseman being a POS into an insult against Tim. 

The overwhelming majority of thugs that destroyed cities didn’t do it for political reasons.  They were criminals that have probably never voted in their life capitalizing on an opportunity.

[BunnysBastatrds 2,537]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

Good question. I don’t know. Probably. I certainly think they’re evil. 
 

I should probably bow out of commenting further on this as I am not educated enough on this issue to comment intelligently. 

 That’s easy way out when YOU know YOU are and will lose the argument. I liked your initial post and was very intrigued where it might go. Really interesting. And then you coward out of your own argument. 
 

[listen2me 23 1,924]

1 hour ago, BrahmaBulls said:

Great point, Rusty

 

Self awareness is not one of his strengths 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,708]

19 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Lol at turning RealTim calling out @Horseman being a POS into an insult against Tim. 

The overwhelming majority of thugs that destroyed cities didn’t do it for political reasons.  They were criminals that have probably never voted in their life capitalizing on an opportunity.

How could you possibly know that?

[jonnyutah 436]

It is important for everybody to understand that not all blacks think like Nate Burleson. 

[Meglamaniac 711]

8 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

How could you possibly know that?

He doesn't, just more lies

[SaintsInDome2006 488]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

On the other hand, I reject this attempt I am seeing on the right to paint Charlie Kirk as a martyr or saint. Personally I found many of his views to be not only wrong but morally abhorrent. I won’t comment any more because I have no desire to speak ill of the dead but I don’t and will not regard this man as some sort of hero. 

The martyr thing is a little islamist sounding IMO. I know that sounds odd but objectively to me that’s how it looks. And there’s a sinister ‘wave the bloody flag’ aspect to it which is very consciously driven from the high level Maga Party end. Today Trump vividly tried to link Kirk to the 9/11/01 attacks in terms of equating the murder with terrorism & an attack on the nation. And Trump views terror as a means to generate imperial emergency fiats which he believes (thanks to the USSC) gives him carts blanche to evade & supersede the Constitution.

[SaintsInDome2006 488]

On this day in 1975, Squeaky Fromme, a follower of Charles Manson, attempted to assassinate President Ford. Manson’s whole goal was to gin up a race war. He & they failed. America will turn this corner too.

[Strike 5,839]

1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

On this day in 1975, Squeaky Fromme, a follower of Charles Manson, attempted to assassinate President Ford. Man son’s whole goal was to gin up a race war. He & they failed. America will turn this corner too.

Fortunately, Ford tripped and fell down the stairs right as the assassination was supposed to happen.

[The Real timschochet 7,120]

1 hour ago, BunnysBastatrds said:

 That’s easy way out when YOU know YOU are and will lose the argument. I liked your initial post and was very intrigued where it might go. Really interesting. And then you coward out of your own argument. 
 

I was t trying to be cowardly. The discussion/disagreement between @Strike and @TheNewGirl is one that I think about a lot. I lean toward what Strike thinks (a rarity I know!) but I’m honestly unsure. 
 

One of my main objections in the numerous tranny threads is that I don’t believe the folks declaring transgenders to be mentally ill really know about the science of mental illness. They are arguing, IMO, based on their emotions about trannies, and not what science or medical experts say. It would therefore be entirely hypocritical of me to try and do the same thing here. I am no medical expert therefore I should not comment too strongly on what is and what is not mental illness, I don’t think others who haven’t studied this should either. 

[Horseman 2,683]

3 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

First off please don’t personalize. I never once posted that it is correct to destroy cities. Nor do I know anyone here who has done so. Nor do I know any prominent Democrat, liberal, or leftist who has done so. I challenge you to show me otherwise. 
 

I haven’t seen conservatives do it either. I HAVE seen jerks on both sides sometimes cheer for bad results (like when @Horseman responded to the Los Angeles fires with “Fock yeah! Fock California! Burn it all down!”) but that’s hardly representative. I have also seen both liberals and conservatives attempt to minimize political violence (Jan 6 being the most obvious example) but that’s not the same as cheering it on. So I reject your entire premise here. 

Link?

[Horseman 2,683]

3 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

I would argue that Tony loved his son and daughter. That wasn’t fake. So how do you square that with your beliefs? 

Easy, POS can care about their offspring and still be garbage humans.  Just look in the mirror.  

[Mike Hunt 296]

4 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I guess we are supposed to forget what happened in 2020 with violent political riots all over the country and the democrats cheering it on. I choose not to. 

Tim said they were not riots but "peaceful protests"  Squid claimed all the protesters went home and did not participate in the rioting every night.

But every night on the news it showed otherwise.

[BunnysBastatrds 2,537]

54 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I was t trying to be cowardly. The discussion/disagreement between @Strike and @TheNewGirl is one that I think about a lot. I lean toward what Strike thinks (a rarity I know!) but I’m honestly unsure. 
 

One of my main objections in the numerous tranny threads is that I don’t believe the folks declaring transgenders to be mentally ill really know about the science of mental illness. They are arguing, IMO, based on their emotions about trannies, and not what science or medical experts say. It would therefore be entirely hypocritical of me to try and do the same thing here. I am no medical expert therefore I should not comment too strongly on what is and what is not mental illness, I don’t think others who haven’t studied this should either. 

 I have studied mental issues and disorders. I read Freuds book on the changes we go through becoming a woman and a man. I was in fifth grade detention and was really tight with the hippie librarian as that’s where I was sent instead of the principals office almost everyday. So I kept reading about it and I would go home and then read Penthouse letters and play street games. 

 Example: If a person believes they can turn themselves invisible, on and off, would you consider that mental illness? I tested it at a grocery store. Would walk down an aisle and bump purposely into the badest looking woman or man. They would be like a”WTF man!”  I would snap my fingers and say Im invisible.  Dykee Debbie: Invisible? No you’re not! Me: Yes I am.  Dykee Debbie: Yous fawking crazy man!!!
 

 Would you think I have mental issues if what I did was real? No different than a male believing he is a female and vice versa. I want to become invisible when I want to, but I can’t.

[BunnysBastatrds 2,537]

 I was a get back to your original first thread post. Continue on it, not trans.

[Horseman 2,683]

5 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Thank you. In response: 

1. There is a tendency among both conservatives and liberals to point out problems with the other team and avoid pointing out problems with their own team. I don’t think I’m particularly guilty of this but I’m sure you can find instances where I am. 

2. During Trump’s first term, I was quick to criticize the use of “Nazi” rhetoric. If you recall I was really bothered by AOC calling detention camps “concentration camps” and said so at the time. I still bridle at anyone who calls Trump evil or Hitler. But I personally have compared ICE to the Gestapo. And I have accused Trump of authoritarianism and consider him a threat to our democracy. Again this is because I honestly believe it to be so. Should I hide these beliefs because saying them out loud might lead to an act of political violence? I don’t think so. If I was being dishonest, and simply out to provoke, then your argument would have more merit IMO. But I am not. 

Guys I really really believe they are a threat to democracy!!!!!

I don't participle in the rhetoric. 

Trump isn't a threat to democracy, full stop, this type of hysterical TDS thought is EXACTLY what got Kirk murdered.  

[MDC 7,652]

Just now, Horseman said:

Guys I really really believe they are a threat to democracy!!!!!

I don't participle in the rhetoric. 

Trump isn't a thread to democracy, full stop, this type of hysterical TDS thought is EXACTLY what got Kirk murdered.  

The pearl clutching and crocodile tears.  

[Horseman 2,683]

1 minute ago, MDC said:

The pearl clutching and crocodile tears.  

You're a threat to democracy guy too?  Figures.

[HellToupee 2,006]

5 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Guys I really really believe they are a threat to democracy!!!!!

I don't participle in the rhetoric. 

Trump isn't a thread to democracy, full stop, this type of hysterical TDS thought is EXACTLY what got Kirk murdered.  

This is very true and no amount of gaslighting will change that. The TDSers and TDS adjacent fail to see it

[jerryskids 6,960]

4 hours ago, Fnord said:

Don't be casting stones here, mate. You're not wrong about Tim (and me) sharing in some responsibility for the rhetoric. But let's not pretend you are not equally culpable. You say as much, (or probably more) degrading, mean-spirited things about libs/dems than either of us do about conservatives. 

We're owning our roles in this. You should do the same.

 

5 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

What I WILL say is that, while I can’t speak for others, whenever I have used extremist language to describe aspects of the MAGA movement it was not done out of provocation but because I believe it to be true. My defense, therefore, is essentially integrity in my arguments. No doubt this will either not be believed or will not be acceptable to many here. But there it is. 
 

 

I dunno Fnord, Tim's excuse err... explanation sounds more like one of those apologies your kid gives that you have to explain isn't really an apology.  It's different when he uses rhetoric because he really believes it?  That applies to most people, no?   

[MDC 7,652]

5 minutes ago, Horseman said:

You're a threat to democracy guy too?  Figures.

Muh rhetoric!  

[seafoam1 3,248]

4 hours ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Hate.  Where does hate come from?  Usually from some sort of terrible experience or trauma.  Terrible experiences or trauma usually cause mental health issues.  To me, evil and mental health go together.

Killing someone does not indicate mental illness. And hate? No, it is not from trauma necessarily. 

If you took out the fear of incarceration, or some other major penalty against a person for murder, it would be a lot more common than it is now.

There are people out there that have no morals. And if they think they can get away with murder, and that murder benefits them in any way, they will kill if the need/desire arises. 

There are a lot of things that point to Bill Clinton having personal enemies that he made disappear. I personally think many people in high positions in the past have had people who knew too much to get disappeared. 

[jerryskids 6,960]

Good discussion on mental health.  I've historically said that other than defense of something, any proactive murder falls somewhere on the mental health spectrum. You brain isn't working correctly if it does that. 

It's basically my same argument of why transgenderism is a mental health issue.  With trans, the question then is what do we do about it?  Treat, council, medically change?

But with murder, we've recognized that that is a particular behavior that we can't live with (pardon the pun) in society.  Rightfully so.  Same with pedophilia.

So to me, the discussion of whether or not it is a mental health issue is not as important if we recognize that all mental health issues are not the same, nor do they have the same impact on society.

Also, I'm not talking about serial killers or similar people that we would clearly call crazy.  

[Hawkeye21 2,445]

2 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

There are people out there that have no morals. And if they think they can get away with murder, and that murder benefits them in any way, they will kill if the need/desire arises. 

I would consider this a mental illness.

[Horseman 2,683]

3 minutes ago, MDC said:

Muh rhetoric!  

It was a yes or no question.  But I get it. 

You answer no that proves my point. 

If you answer yes you look like a TDS infected wackadoodle. 

[seafoam1 3,248]

Liberals are very violent to the core. 

[Horseman 2,683]

18 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Good discussion on mental health.  I've historically said that other than defense of something, any proactive murder falls somewhere on the mental health spectrum. You brain isn't working correctly if it does that. 

It's basically my same argument of why transgenderism is a mental health issue.  With trans, the question then is what do we do about it?  Treat, council, medically change?

But with murder, we've recognized that that is a particular behavior that we can't live with (pardon the pun) in society.  Rightfully so.  Same with pedophilia.

So to me, the discussion of whether or not it is a mental health issue is not as important if we recognize that all mental health issues are not the same, nor do they have the same impact on society.

Also, I'm not talking about serial killers or similar people that we would clearly call crazy.  

Except most serial killers aren't found insane.  Dahmer and Gacy for example who failed at using an insanity defense. 

 

[Gepetto 1,416]

4 hours ago, TheNewGirl said:

That's why I am curious. 

Mental illness doesn't need to exist WITH evil; plenty of people have a mental illness (depression, anxiety, BPD, bi-polar), but where does the evil come from? 

From their pain, fear, failures, major life changing moment, desperation. 

[Hawkeye21 2,445]

31 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Except most serial killers aren't found insane.  Dahmer and Gacy for example who failed at using an insanity defense. 

 

Not insane but clearly mentally ill.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,708]

1 hour ago, Mike Hunt said:

Tim said they were not riots but "peaceful protests"  Squid claimed all the protesters went home and did not participate in the rioting every night.

But every night on the news it showed otherwise.

Tom thinks criminals rape and murder because they’re poor. He is a naive man child in his 60’s. Possesses no wisdom. 

[MDC 7,652]

40 minutes ago, Horseman said:

It was a yes or no question.  But I get it. 

You answer no that proves my point. 

If you answer yes you look like a TDS infected wackadoodle. 

If your point was that you’re as much of a bed wetter as the most deranged lefty, mission accomplished!  

[The Real timschochet 7,120]

1 hour ago, Mike Hunt said:

Tim said they were not riots but "peaceful protests"  Squid claimed all the protesters went home and did not participate in the rioting every night.

But every night on the news it showed otherwise.

This is not correct. What I wrote at the time, and still firmly believe, was that it was wrong to conflate the peaceful protests with the riots and that in most cases they had nothing whatsoever to do with each other. 

[The Real timschochet 7,120]

1 hour ago, jerryskids said:

 

I dunno Fnord, Tim's excuse err... explanation sounds more like one of those apologies your kid gives that you have to explain isn't really an apology.  It's different when he uses rhetoric because he really believes it?  That applies to most people, no?   

What I wrote was neither an excuse nor an explanation. It was, for me, the truth. And no I don’t believe it applies to everyone. IMO there are people on both sides who deliberately use terrible and hateful language to describe the other side, KNOWING that it isn’t so. The most obvious example being, of course, Donald Trump. But that’s not what I was doing. Ever. 

[TimHauck 3,127]

1 hour ago, Mike Hunt said:

Squid claimed all the protesters went home and did not participate in the rioting every night.

But every night on the news it showed otherwise.

Yes, this is largely what happened.  Or are you saying you watched coverage of both the protests and riots and could pick out people that were at both?

[The Real timschochet 7,120]

22 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Tim thinks criminals rape and murder because they’re poor. 

I never said this either. I said that crime occurs most often when poverty exists, which is an obvious truth. Even so, if you go to the most poverty ridden areas of this country, the majority of people there are still law abiding and don’t commit crimes. So there are other elements involved. 

[Horseman 2,683]

There is Tim's truth and then there is reality. 

If you want to talk about mentally ill start with him.  

[Maximum Overkill 2,274]

6 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Good morning. I’ve avoided posting in the Charlie Kirk thread out of respect and because I remembered the reaction to the first attempt to assassinate Donald Trump- I knew that emotions would run high and I had no desire to contribute to what would inevitably be a very ugly back and forth. I would however, like to engage in a larger discussion about political violence in this country. There are three essential points I would like to make, keeping in mind that these are my opinions only: 

First, we are kidding ourselves by trying to pretend that political violence and assassinations are not normal in this country. Unfortunately the opposite is true: from Alexander Hamilton to Abraham Lincoln to JFK to the present day, this is who we are as a nation. We are a violent country and we more often than not settle our differences with violence. All those of goodwill would like it to be otherwise, but that’s not who we’ve been. What happened to Charlie Kirk is exactly who we’ve been. 

Second, political violence is not mostly caused by conservatives and is not mostly caused by liberals. Nor is it necessarily caused by extremists from either side (though this might be more often than not.) It is caused by people from all sides who are passionate about their beliefs and have decided that violence is the best means to achieve their goals. I would argue further that most of these people are not mentally ill; they made conscious, rational decisions to get to this point, even if (hopefully) most of us would disagree with that decision. 
 

Third: reading the Charlie Kirk thread, if one is able to put aside the threats and insults, the main argument being made by conservatives is that those of us on the left are culpable because our rhetoric against conservatives has, in recent times, been extremist, which invites violence against prominent conservatives. There is merit to this argument. I’m not going to pretend otherwise. Nor am I going to engage in whataboutisms though I could, because they’re irrelevant to the charge. (If I do something wrong my guilt is not lessened by the fact that others committed the same wrong, even if those others are the ones charging me with the crime.) What I WILL say is that, while I can’t speak for others, whenever I have used extremist language to describe aspects of the MAGA movement it was not done out of provocation but because I believe it to be true. My defense, therefore, is essentially integrity in my arguments. No doubt this will either not be believed or will not be acceptable to many here. But there it is. 
 

 

 You believe this Fuking Guy? 

[Mark Davis 415]

IMO there's a difference is the old school liberalism and the Marxist leftist fringe that exists today.  It's taken hold, specifically amongst younger folks on the left.  Their views are anti capitalist much more so than for instance the posters here that are viewed on the left.  Marxism is much more violent, it's not about coexisting or accepting a difference of opinion.  I'm afraid that's what we are seeing on college campuses today.  It's not exclusively a young person issue but it's much more prevalent in polling. 

I had a friend who posted some really vile stuff on social media today about this.  I knew he and I disagreed on many political things, but he was out there justifying it, talking about how bad of a person Kirk was.  The man is nearing 60 if he isn't there already, I've known him for over 30 years.  All joking aside, I think he's let this political rhetoric impact his mental health.  I think some of these things are in that realm as well.

[Meglamaniac 711]

33 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Yes, this is largely what happened.  Or are you saying you watched coverage of both the protests and riots and could pick out people that were at both?

Isn't that what you are saying a$$hat

[jerryskids 6,960]

1 hour ago, Horseman said:

Except most serial killers aren't found insane.  Dahmer and Gacy for example who failed at using an insanity defense. 

 

That's part of my point.  "Insanity" in a legal sense is a much higher (lower?) bar than "mentally ill."  We as a society have decided that if they understood what they did, it doesn't matter if their behavior was whackjob crazy.