Duke of Bullshit: "The" Donald

[Dave]

Yes, there has been a general increase in "the right", bith in public movements and politucal shifts (Turkey, Venezuela...) in recent years. It could be argued that China and Korea and other "peoples' republics" could be also seen as "right winged" in their policies - little difference in the bittom line analysis.

Human nature could demand a backlash against both, further "political"  divisions in humanity to add to race and religion, nationslism, tribalism and so forth. It is almost certainly present, just not so coherent and cohesive in its manifestation as it was in the days of Stalin and McCarthy and their likes. But, this time, it will be more likely generated via an almost anonymous, insidious Internet campaign rather than by charismatic personalities.

[Asmodean]

It all starts with a meme... And then before you know it, we all drown in an ocean of diarrhea. That's how the globalized bits of today's world work.

[Davin]

I'll need to watch the thing, but his initial "on many sides" comment was (probably unintentionally) accurate. The left-leaning media were all like "Ooh! Them's be nazis in need of condemning" and the right were like "Fuckin' commies 'n shit!" but me, I thought that ideologies and buzzwords and orange intentions aside, well...

How many sides were driving cars into crowds of other sides?

[Asmodean]

I don't know. One, judging by the number of perps. Which faction(s) did the perp identify with? Which faction did those who assaulted the shit out of that other guy as he was about to speak on camera? Which faction withheld riot shields and truncheons from the scene? By which faction's order? Who broke the damned helicopter?

[Davin]

Yeah, one drove his car into a crowd of people. He was aligned with the Nazis. This "both sides" bullshit is the new focus. While it's not new, it's the one of the attack strategies for the Russian pawns. While there are extremes on "both sides" that do similar things, one being logical will look at the aggregate instead of individual matches. It's like when Trump chumps were saying they couldn't rust Hillary because she lied a few times, but they support a guy who lies almost all the time because "both sides do it." It's mental.

[Arturo]

Which faction(s) did the perp identify with?

Derek Weimer, 45, told The Cincinnati Enquirer that Mr. Fields was one of his students when he taught history at Randall K. Cooper High School. He described Mr. Fields as "a very bright kid but very misguided and disillusioned."

When Mr. Fields was a freshman, he wrote a report for another class that was "very much along the party lines of the neo-Nazi movement," Mr. Weimer said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/13/us/james-alex-fields-charlottesville-driver-.html

[Arturo]

Yeah, one drove his car into a crowd of people. He was aligned with the Nazis. This "both sides" bullshit is the new focus. While it's not new, it's the one of the attack strategies for the Russian pawns. While there are extremes on "both sides" that do similar things, one being logical will look at the aggregate instead of individual matches. It's like when Trump chumps were saying they couldn't rust Hillary because she lied a few times, but they support a guy who lies almost all the time because "both sides do it." It's mental.

Yes when one tips the scales a bit, you should give that one a different judgment. Or a harsher judgment in those specific cases. And what I don't like is these white supremacists in the comment sections of YouTube are talking about how black people do more crime or muslims do more terror attacks. When clearly they are doing it. And provoking it by the looks of it by gearing up for another "rally"

[Asmodean]

@Arturo Thanks for the citation. I have modified my labeling accordingly.

Yeah, one drove his car into a crowd of people. He was aligned with the Nazis. This "both sides" bullshit is the new focus. While it's not new, it's the one of the attack strategies for the Russian pawns. While there are extremes on "both sides" that do similar things, one being logical will look at the aggregate instead of individual matches. It's like when Trump chumps were saying they couldn't rust Hillary because she lied a few times, but they support a guy who lies almost all the time because "both sides do it." It's mental.

But both (Well, "all" is a better word here, actually, complete with quotation marks) sides do do it if you indeed aggregate the data, if with varying frequency and to varying degrees, depending on the singular instance you examine.

Don't get me wrong, I do see what you are saying - I'm just willing to blame more people for it, the president not excluded.

To put it this way, as I see it at this time, the murder there seems to have been an assault with deadly vehicle, resulting in death. It may be shown down the line that the guy planned to run some counter-protesters over Muzzietruck-style, which would make him a terrorist. It may also be shown that he's a fucking nutcase, barely aware of the consequences of his action, which would make him a nutcase. However, only if it's shown that his attack was coordinated with some party to the rally is that party complicit.

Perhaps he meant to kill a few people, perhaps he did not think that far. It's a moot point for now. However, Nazis riot and fuck people up. SJWs riot and fuck people up. Fucking Antifa riot and fuck people up. Confederates riot and fuck people up. They also did an armed rebellion, historically speaking. Pro-Trump crowds riot and fuck people up. Anti-Trump crowds riot and fuck people up. Sometimes, people get fucked up to death. My proposal is; is there not enough blame among rioters to go the fuck around?

[Arturo]

Intention to incite fear doesn't mean it was premeditated.

Anyways. Does anyone even have a reference to the "aggregate data" in question?

[Asmodean]

Certainly. For my side of the issue, there is plenty. Davin's being a subset of mine in that regard, same story there. It's not uncommon for protests to get violent, nor is it unprecedented for people to die as a result.

I'll provide a few citations when on a PC. Has me some bookmarks there.

[Davin]

Yeah, one drove his car into a crowd of people. He was aligned with the Nazis. This "both sides" bullshit is the new focus. While it's not new, it's the one of the attack strategies for the Russian pawns. While there are extremes on "both sides" that do similar things, one being logical will look at the aggregate instead of individual matches. It's like when Trump chumps were saying they couldn't rust Hillary because she lied a few times, but they support a guy who lies almost all the time because "both sides do it." It's mental.

But both (Well, "all" is a better word here, actually, complete with quotation marks) sides do do it if you indeed aggregate the data, if with varying frequency and to varying degrees, depending on the singular instance you examine.

Don't get me wrong, I do see what you are saying - I'm just willing to blame more people for it, the president not excluded.

Well, it's the implications of how it is said. It's akin to saying that there is nothing unhealthy with the water in Flynnt, MI because all drinking water has lead in it.

[Dave]

"You don't argue with a toddler if you want to win; don't amplify the toddler's voice, because you'll just get trapped in the toddler's world. Rather, just keep asking the toddler to elaborate, because logic is the downfall of every toddler." –Daily Show host Trevor Noah on handling Donald Trump

[Pasta Chick]

There is a massive fucking difference in being violent because you hate other races, sexual orientations, genders, and other religions and reacting violently because you are a targeted race, sexual orientation, gender or religion and these assholes are trying to strip your rights and literally kill you.

[Dave]

They interviewed a black woman who said she was carrying her baseball bat for defence. OK, no problem having your defence, though its form might be in question. And there is a distinct difference in form between a baseball bat and an AR47, but both could be viewed as "potential offensive weapons" out of their normal environment.

Unfortunately "open carry" is perfectly legal in some states whereas walking around with a baseball bat in the area of a demo might attract the attention of the police. If the anti-facist protesters want to defend themselves perhaps they should carry shields - with a suitable slogans on them.

[Arturo]

If the anti-facist protesters want to defend themselves perhaps they should carry shields - with a suitable slogans on them.

Because, you know, we just sell shields everywhere. There are other things I don't like with the idea of shields but I don't have time to elaborate right now.