Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Killing Trump; the 1st try

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Killing Trump; the 1st try

    Since watching is easier than reading-


    The massive encouragement the Left is giving to the loonies out there is really over the top. No decency, no shame, no interest in anything except winning elections and getting "revenge" on everyone they don't like.
    Its as if they are deliberately driving themselves totally insane.

    I especially like John Cleese at the end.

    And the response;
    "Why is the Rum gone?"

    -Captain Jack

  • #2
    One thing John Cleese left out was how extremists on the Right and Left operate.

    On the Right, these are people who are, for the most part, true anarchists. That is they want to be left alone, and act alone. Sure, they can be violent as with abortion clinic shooters, or Timothy McVey and bombings. But, they act alone or in very small numbers. The Hillsborough Baptists, or the recent protest by neo-Nazis in Sacramento are examples of them getting in groups. There just are rarely, if ever, large numbers of them in one place acting together. They can be very dangerous for their numbers however, as they aren't stupid and often are very knowledgeable about things like bomb making or using firearms. Those Nazis in Sacramento were outnumbered what 4 to 6 to 1 and they gave a lot better than they got when both sides got violent...

    On the Left, extremists network. They all get together. They don't act out individually except in very stealthy ways like the Unibomber. And, even when they do it's infrequent and not terribly effective. Otherwise, they turn out in mass in a violent mob and riot. In small numbers or individually, extremists on the Left aren't very dangerous. Put mildly, they're clueless idiots. In a big mob they throw bricks or use whatever's at hand to do damage. Not much thought or planning goes into their violence. They do show up however and sometimes numbers have a quality all their own. Look at any G8 riot. Lots of broken glass. A few smashed up police cars, lots of protesters in jail or hospitals. Not a good return on their violence.

    Thankfully, neither group can combine their methodology with that of the other. If that happened, you'd have a huge riotous mob armed to the teeth and it would take the Army to put it down...

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
      One thing John Cleese left out was how extremists on the Right and Left operate.

      On the Right, these are people who are, for the most part, true anarchists. That is they want to be left alone, and act alone. Sure, they can be violent as with abortion clinic shooters, or Timothy McVey and bombings. But, they act alone or in very small numbers. The Hillsborough Baptists, or the recent protest by neo-Nazis in Sacramento are examples of them getting in groups. There just are rarely, if ever, large numbers of them in one place acting together. They can be very dangerous for their numbers however, as they aren't stupid and often are very knowledgeable about things like bomb making or using firearms. Those Nazis in Sacramento were outnumbered what 4 to 6 to 1 and they gave a lot better than they got when both sides got violent...

      On the Left, extremists network. They all get together. They don't act out individually except in very stealthy ways like the Unibomber. And, even when they do it's infrequent and not terribly effective. Otherwise, they turn out in mass in a violent mob and riot. In small numbers or individually, extremists on the Left aren't very dangerous. Put mildly, they're clueless idiots. In a big mob they throw bricks or use whatever's at hand to do damage. Not much thought or planning goes into their violence. They do show up however and sometimes numbers have a quality all their own. Look at any G8 riot. Lots of broken glass. A few smashed up police cars, lots of protesters in jail or hospitals. Not a good return on their violence.

      Thankfully, neither group can combine their methodology with that of the other. If that happened, you'd have a huge riotous mob armed to the teeth and it would take the Army to put it down...
      I dunno if you're really aware of this, but even when trying to provide examples of both sides' worst elements you still can't help but praise the right and belittle the left.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
        One thing John Cleese left out was how extremists on the Right and Left operate.

        On the Right, these are people who are, for the most part, true anarchists. That is they want to be left alone, and act alone. Sure, they can be violent as with abortion clinic shooters, or Timothy McVey and bombings. But, they act alone or in very small numbers. The Hillsborough Baptists, or the recent protest by neo-Nazis in Sacramento are examples of them getting in groups. There just are rarely, if ever, large numbers of them in one place acting together. They can be very dangerous for their numbers however, as they aren't stupid and often are very knowledgeable about things like bomb making or using firearms. Those Nazis in Sacramento were outnumbered what 4 to 6 to 1 and they gave a lot better than they got when both sides got violent...

        On the Left, extremists network. They all get together. They don't act out individually except in very stealthy ways like the Unibomber. And, even when they do it's infrequent and not terribly effective. Otherwise, they turn out in mass in a violent mob and riot. In small numbers or individually, extremists on the Left aren't very dangerous. Put mildly, they're clueless idiots. In a big mob they throw bricks or use whatever's at hand to do damage. Not much thought or planning goes into their violence. They do show up however and sometimes numbers have a quality all their own. Look at any G8 riot. Lots of broken glass. A few smashed up police cars, lots of protesters in jail or hospitals. Not a good return on their violence.

        Thankfully, neither group can combine their methodology with that of the other. If that happened, you'd have a huge riotous mob armed to the teeth and it would take the Army to put it down...
        Pretty accurate. Right-wingers are hard to infiltrate but someone in the group always flips. The lefties talk to anyone all the time, too stupid and self-centered to imagine that everyone isn't down deep just like them. Easy to infiltrate, easier to get a confession out of-the hard part is getting them to shut up long enough to read the boilerplate.
        Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

        Comment


        • #5
          On a related note, anyone remember that one environmentalist ad a few years ago where the children who expressed doubt in Man-Made Global Warming blew up in large, bloody splashes?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
            I dunno if you're really aware of this, but even when trying to provide examples of both sides' worst elements you still can't help but praise the right and belittle the left.
            I'm praising neither. I'm making observations based on historical precedent. I know you meant that as sarcasm, but I was trying to do nothing more than provide examples from history.

            On the ad, wasn't it in a classroom setting. A student questions Gorebal Warming and his head detonates... Something like that.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
              I'm praising neither. I'm making observations based on historical precedent. I know you meant that as sarcasm, but I was trying to do nothing more than provide examples from history.
              You may not have intended it, but you'll note an abundance of more positive terms and some inbuilt excuses for the right ("Sure, they can be violent..." "...as they aren't stupid and often are very knowledgeable..." "...they gave a lot better than they got...") than the left, where there were no positive examples given (and plenty more negative terms used).

              It's just something to think about if trying to compare and contrast in an objective manner.

              On the ad, wasn't it in a classroom setting. A student questions Gorebal Warming and his head detonates... Something like that.
              That's the one. It was Liberals depicting the murder of children (tongue in cheek) for disagreeing with their beliefs. It was a very enjoyable blunder, and I knew more than one environmentalist who even tried to defend it at the time.

              It was quite amusing all around.

              Comment


              • #8
                The perfect example of liberals where the sum of the group is greater than its parts are teachers unions. They are one of the loudest, most outspoken unions out there, but individually, most are a bunch of p*ssies. Just go back over a mental rollcall of the teachers you had growing up and classify them and you'll see that I'm (generally) right...except for nuns--now there's some real life badazzes!

                Comment

                Latest Topics

                Collapse

                Working...
                X