Moderator: Community Team
Snorri1234 wrote:Because republicans are fascists?
thegreekdog wrote:Why is it that when liberals protest, it's okay, but when conservatives protest it's fascist?
Woodruff wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Why is it that when liberals protest, it's okay, but when conservatives protest it's fascist?
Everyone's for free speech, but only THEIR version. <smile>
F1fth wrote:Everything these days is either going to save America or destroy America; there's no shades of gray, no neutrality, nothing but extremes. That's what bullshit if you ask me.
thegreekdog wrote:Why is it that when liberals protest, it's okay, but when conservatives protest it's fascist?
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... tikas.html
Talk about repression of free speech... jeez. God forbid anyone gets into a debate on this issue.
Mr_Adams wrote:You, sir, are an idiot.
Timminz wrote:By that logic, you eat babies.
spurgistan wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Why is it that when liberals protest, it's okay, but when conservatives protest it's fascist?
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... tikas.html
Talk about repression of free speech... jeez. God forbid anyone gets into a debate on this issue.
There are protests, and then there's going to meetings with the intentions of not letting the speaker speak. AFAIK, the Tea-Baggers are going to yell and disrupt politicians speaking to constituents.
And yes, I think the same way when my ilk pies Thomas Friedman and Ann Coulter, and such (youtube them) Doesn't mean I can't find it funny, but it definitely doesn't contribute to an atmosphere of mutual enlightenment.
Woodruff wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Why is it that when liberals protest, it's okay, but when conservatives protest it's fascist?
Everyone's for free speech, but only THEIR version. <smile>
jsholty4690 wrote:spurgistan wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Why is it that when liberals protest, it's okay, but when conservatives protest it's fascist?
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... tikas.html
Talk about repression of free speech... jeez. God forbid anyone gets into a debate on this issue.
There are protests, and then there's going to meetings with the intentions of not letting the speaker speak. AFAIK, the Tea-Baggers are going to yell and disrupt politicians speaking to constituents.
And yes, I think the same way when my ilk pies Thomas Friedman and Ann Coulter, and such (youtube them) Doesn't mean I can't find it funny, but it definitely doesn't contribute to an atmosphere of mutual enlightenment.
Yeah, and left winged protesters never do that.
Mr_Adams wrote:You, sir, are an idiot.
Timminz wrote:By that logic, you eat babies.
got tonkaed wrote:Having said that, I have never been to a protest where there werent people from the other side heckling you, flipping you off, slighting your intelligence and attacking your character for protesting. Politics, even when following the rules is a bit of a contact sport.
Cindy Sheehan was called "unpatriotic" when she publicly expressed her disapproval of Bush and his choice to go to war. A war that had more protestors voice their opinion against it by marching in the streets than any event ever before... and it happened anyways.Night Strike wrote:When Sheehan protested the war, they were patriotic dissenters.
Is this because subsidizing the uninsured, regulating insurance companies and attempting to hold down medical expenses is a bad thing? But bailing out big business to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars wasn't worth raising a stink about, since both parties had a hand in it I suppose. I expect any revamped health plan to take a bipartisan effort to get off the ground and compromises will have to made with all doubters anyways.Breitbart.com wrote:Energized conservative activists said they'll keep up their fight against Obama's effort. The president wants to use the government's clout to subsidize coverage for millions now uninsured, regulate insurance companies more closely and attempt to slow the rise of medical costs. The protesters' shouts and chants, captured on amateur video, went viral on the Internet.
Where were you during Bush's eight years in office? Every political party thinks government is the solution even as they say "we need less government." The ongoing experiment that is The Department of Homeland Security has attempted to reinvent the wheel while rendering FEMA and other entities placed under it's jurisdiction ineffective. The actions of government say more is better, not less.Night Strike wrote:They're not the ones promoting government as the answer to all our problems.
oVo wrote:Actually being labelled a protestor or dissenter has negative connotations regardless of which side you are on. That's pretty much just the way it is presented in nearly all media.
oVo wrote:Cindy Sheehan was called "unpatriotic" when she publicly expressed her disapproval of Bush and his choice to go to war. A war that had more protestors voice their opinion against it by marching in the streets than any event ever before... and it happened anyways.
oVo wrote:Is this because subsidizing the uninsured, regulating insurance companies and attempting to hold down medical expenses is a bad thing? But bailing out big business to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars wasn't worth raising a stink about, since both parties had a hand in it I suppose. I expect any revamped health plan to take a bipartisan effort to get off the ground and compromises will have to made with all doubters anyways.
oVo wrote:Where were you during Bush's eight years in office? Every political party thinks government is the solution even as they say "we need less government." The ongoing experiment that is The Department of Homeland Security has attempted to reinvent the wheel while rendering FEMA and other entities placed under it's jurisdiction ineffective. The actions of government say more is better, not less.
thegreekdog wrote:I also recall that President Bush did not put out a memo asking his supporters to fight back.
Nobunaga wrote:... And now ACORN gets a message from the White House, from the President himself, asking members to attend these town halls to show their support for the bill, and to "Punch back twice as hard".
... From the freakin' White House". President issuing marching orders to his organized thugs... He has also summoned the union bosses to get involved in beating down these protests ... Talk about fascist and brown-shirt. ... freakin' lovely, shades of Europe, 1930's.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/0 ... 52720.html
... The link to the story on the brawl in Tampa over this issue is so busy it won't download (Drudge headline). I wonder if there was a clash there bewteen the two groups?
...
Timminz wrote:F1fth wrote:Everything these days is either going to save America or destroy America; there's no shades of gray, no neutrality, nothing but extremes. That's what bullshit if you ask me.
This is especially true in the context of protests. Unfortunately, there aren't enough people with the motivation to march in the streets shouting, "BE REASONABLE!"
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
Nobunaga wrote:... And here we have somebody allowing entry into the St. Louis Town Hall - but only Union members, denying entry to all the regular folks who wish to attend.
http://www.breitbart.tv/st-louis-town-h ... s-entered/