Is it really worth hurting people over?

[Downhome 0]

Here lately on various news networks and radio talk shows and whatever the topic has started to focus more and more on the upcoming Republican National Convention, and for good reason as it stars up pretty soon. Anyway, I've heard interview after interview from various people who are planning on a huge protest in NYC while the convention is going on. We all know that these people are just flat ouf full of hate right now, hate for Bush, the war, and whatever else.

 

Hell, many here share that line of thought, and that's fine.

 

Still, as the conversations with these people go forward they usually get to the topic of just how they plan to protest. They usually say they'll do whatever they can to get the point across. When asked if they are going to do so peacefully and within the boundaries of the law, they simply do not talk about it. Many people, leaders of groups, just flat out refuse to say that they are going to do the right thing and refrain from hurting people, innocent people, the various law enforcement officials who are going to be on hand, and others in such positions.

 

Is this Bush hating deal seriously worth hurting innocent people over?

 

I know little about this, but I heard something where they have been having a hard time getting permits for the protests, but many say that they don't care, and that they'll simply do whatever the hell they want, have it be simply protesting, or being violent and breaking windows, and hurting people.

 

Here we have the Republican National Convention coming up, terror warnings going up every which way for this time period, and having all of these people coming in here, a million or so people, running around acting like morons with no respect for the law or law enforcement officials, it seems to me like this could be a huge ass mess, and could put many of people in danger.

 

Is it really worth hurting people over? Is it really worth putting millions of people at risk just to make a statement? Why in the hell can't they just say what they want to say without getting in such a mindset of lawlessness? Do any of you guys support such bullshit?

 

I just don't understand this.

 

Sincerely,

...Downhome...

[Guest MikeSC]

The concern I have is that the Bush haters REVEL in their hatred of him. They LOVE it. Assassination-based plays and novels are not reviled, but REJOICED. Hell, I listened to Hannity for once today and he had a woman on from Not in Our Name who REFUSED to state that she wants her followers to be non-violent. She REFUSED. This is a MARKED increase in hatred from anything Clinton ever dreamed of facing.

 

Thing is, if they become violent --- it helps Bush IMMENSELY. These people, much as some wish to deny it, ARE the Democratic Party presently. This will be the DNC without smooth production and "nice" speeches. It'll show the populace what the left has become and will kill off any hopes of the Dems to be President for the foreseeable future.

 

NOBODY wants petulant children to run the show.

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

The people who go as far as to hurting people are the extremist anarchist types. They were at the DNC, too.

 

Figures I couldn't get my "hey, these people aren't the majority" post out before Mike could get his "these people are representing the majority" post.

[Downhome 0]

They were at the DNC, too.

Not anywhere near to this extent. The way people are talking right now over this is just down right insane. I can't believe how some of them are going at this, people who are LEADERS of some of the major groups, refusing to straight up say that violence will be a bad thing and that it shouldn't be done.

 

The hatred for John Kerry wasn't there at the DNC as it is for the upcoming RNC, it's not even in the same ball park.

[Downhome 0]

Hell, I listened to Hannity for once today and he had a woman on from Not in Our Name who REFUSED to state that she wants her followers to be non-violent. She REFUSED. This is a MARKED increase in hatred from anything Clinton ever dreamed of facing.

I was listening to that today, and it pushed me over the edge. I couldn't believe the way that bitch was talking. Well, I could believe it, you know what I mean.

 

These people do shout "peace peace peace", but when it comes to this convention many refuse to do the shouting of the same concept.

 

Yes, attacking innocent people, breaking windows, putting the law enforcement officials and possibly millions more in danger is really helping your cause.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

That's because the RNC draws out more than just anarchists, but their favorite neighbor groups, too.

 

Republicans tend to trust corporations, drawing the ANTI-KKKAPITALISM THOSE CROOKED FATCAT THIEVES!~````1 people out of the woodowork. Their environmental policies and foreign aid policies also tend to draw out kooks, assuming the kooks aren't too busy sitting in a tree or playing human shield around a bunch of Palestinians.

[Guest MikeSC]

That's because the RNC draws out more than just anarchists, but their favorite neighbor groups, too.

 

Republicans tend to trust corporations, drawing the ANTI-KKKAPITALISM THOSE CROOKED FATCAT THIEVES!~````1 people out of the woodowork. Their environmental policies and foreign aid policies also tend to draw out kooks, assuming the kooks aren't too busy sitting in a tree or playing human shield around a bunch of Palestinians.

A "peace" group refused to swear off violence at the RNC.

 

They REFUSED.

 

Tom Hayden is promising something 1000 times worse than Chicago 1968 --- and Mayor Bloomberg, as usual, is too inept and moronic to see what's coming.

 

This isn't the "fringe left" --- it's the left, period.

-=Mike

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

This is just a big disaster waiting to happen. I really hope these morons don't kill anyone with this bullshit. Not that it matters to any of them.

[Guest MikeSC]

This is just a big disaster waiting to happen. I really hope these morons don't kill anyone with this bullshit. Not that it matters to any of them.

They will. They WANT to.

-=Mike

[BX 0]

This isn't the "fringe left" --- it's the left, period.

-=Mike

It's the fringe left Mike. I know you're too deluded to think about this objectively, although I'm not sure who you are trying to convince with your stupid comicesqe portrayal of a liberal.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

A "peace" group refused to swear off violence at the RNC.

Then they aren't really interested in peace and I join you in deriding them.

 

Tom Hayden is promising something 1000 times worse than Chicago 1968 --- and Mayor Bloomberg, as usual, is too inept and moronic to see what's coming.

Well, I doubt he has the numbers to back that kind of claim up, and NY is a town that deals with sports riots from time to time (they have to with that many teams) so I'm sure they're prepared for any political one.

 

This isn't the "fringe left" --- it's the left, period.

False. This is the far-left, starting with the Michael Moores and going up to the anarchist-socialist types.

[Guest MikeSC]

This isn't the "fringe left" --- it's the left, period.

                    -=Mike

It's the fringe left Mike. I know you're too deluded to think about this objectively, although I'm not sure who you are trying to convince with your stupid comicesqe portrayal of a liberal.

Keep believing that. If it makes you feel all warm and cozy to believe that, go ahead.

 

When the RNC gets taken over by miscreants from the left --- continue beliving that they're "fringe".

 

Yeah, ignore that they are no different than, say, Howard Dean (who is NOT in the fringe of the left).

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Keep believing that. If it makes you feel all warm and cozy to believe that, go ahead.

 

When the RNC gets taken over by miscreants from the left --- continue beliving that they're "fringe".

LAROUCHE SUPPORTERS ARE FRINGE. I don't care what you say to counter that because at least 80% of America would think you're wrong.

 

Yeah, ignore that they are no different than, say, Howard Dean (who is NOT in the fringe of the left).

Did I sleep too long and Howard Dean endorsed violence?

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

People are just stupid fuckers who don't realize that not being an asshole will make more people tune in to what you're saying.

[teke184 0]

*Wonders how many false-positives the bomb dogs will get off of these idiots soaking their clothes in explosive-scented material... and how many concussions each of these guys will receive as a result.*

[BX 0]

This isn't the "fringe left" --- it's the left, period.

                     -=Mike

It's the fringe left Mike. I know you're too deluded to think about this objectively, although I'm not sure who you are trying to convince with your stupid comicesqe portrayal of a liberal.

Keep believing that. If it makes you feel all warm and cozy to believe that, go ahead.

 

When the RNC gets taken over by miscreants from the left --- continue beliving that they're "fringe".

 

Yeah, ignore that they are no different than, say, Howard Dean (who is NOT in the fringe of the left).

-=Mike

If it were 1770, you'd make a great Loyalist, Mike.

 

When the RNC gets taken over by miscreants from the left --- continue beliving that they're "fringe".

 

Why would they be relegated from the "fringe" ranks if they somehow took over Madison Square Garden? How would that action prove them out to be card-carrying Democrats? What kind of meth tweeker are you?

[Guest Wildbomb 4:20]

Last time I checked, most people would, you know, not protest violently. The RNC will be protested by all forms of the left.

 

But remember folks, the ones who are the loudest and the most outrageous are perceived as the "majority." The ones who act the dumbest get the most attention for their cause. Whether or not that will be deciphered as positive or negative by the rest of America is yet to be seen.

 

The thing is, though, is that the majority of the people protesting will be peaceful. Because they know it's smarter that way. Least I hope they do...

 

--Ryan

...who once again, isn't surprised by the generalizations by Mike that all members of the left are miscreants...

[Guest MikeSC]

Keep believing that. If it makes you feel all warm and cozy to believe that, go ahead.

 

When the RNC gets taken over by miscreants from the left --- continue beliving that they're "fringe".

LAROUCHE SUPPORTERS ARE FRINGE. I don't care what you say to counter that because at least 80% of America would think you're wrong.

 

Yeah, ignore that they are no different than, say, Howard Dean (who is NOT in the fringe of the left).

Did I sleep too long and Howard Dean endorsed violence?

These aren't just LaRouche supporters, much as you wish to portray them as such. These are MAINSTREAM "peace" groups --- unless you are NOW going to argue that Not in Our Name is a LaRoucheian fringe group.

 

Howard Dean won't speak out against it.

 

When OKC happened in 1995, Clinton BLAMED conservative talk radio and Republicans had to sit there and respond to this slander. They had to say "We oppose what happened".

 

The Dems are not. Hell, they EMBRACE the most ridiculous conspiracy theories about Bush (McAuliffe DID say he agreed with Moore's inane conspiracy theories). They have created an atmosphere where novels and plays about ASSASSINATING the President are just peachy.

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

Last time I checked, most people would, you know, not protest violently. The RNC will be protested by all forms of the left.

 

But remember folks, the ones who are the loudest and the most outrageous are perceived as the "majority." The ones who act the dumbest get the most attention for their cause. Whether or not that will be deciphered as positive or negative by the rest of America is yet to be seen.

 

The thing is, though, is that the majority of the people protesting will be peaceful. Because they know it's smarter that way. Least I hope they do...

 

--Ryan

...who once again, isn't surprised by the generalizations by Mike that all members of the left are miscreants...

Sure --- the rhetoric from the left hasn't AT ALL possibly inspired violence. No sir.

-=Mike

[bob_barron 0]

NY is a town that deals with sports riots from time to time (they have to with that many teams) so I'm sure they're prepared for any political one.

 

Don't know what you're talking about. I've never heard of any sports riots in NY.

 

I'm worried about the shit they might pull at the RNC. I'm going to try my hardest to stay far away from MSG. I was able to stomach my movie theatre getting Fahrenheit 9/11 two days before anyone else.

 

I still laugh at a lady selling a pin that said:

 

I DIDN'T MOURN FOR REAGAN

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Don't know what you're talking about. I've never heard of any sports riots in NY.

Really? I got the impression that the New Yorkers were pretty riot-happy. Someone on the radio joked that if Selig really wanted to demolish Yankee Stadium, he'd just have to wait for the Giants or Jets to get to the Super Bowl, fuck up and lose, and then point the fans into the general direction of the stadium.

[Downhome 0]

The left is just so classy nowadays.

[Guest Wildbomb 4:20]

But, oh dear, of course not, the Republicans are clean and perfect. Oh no sir.

 

Essentially, you're trying to argue that since the Democrats aren't screaming out "DON"T DO ANYTHING STUPID!", they're all at fault.

 

Right.

 

Not In Our Name...let's do some research here...they look a bit fringe if you look at their own page...supremely anti-military, anti-police, anti-establishment...essentially, they have every reason to be pissed at good ole Kerry too.

 

look for yourself: http://www.notinourname.net/about.html

 

--Ryan

...Once again out of clever insults...

[Jobber of the Week 0]

These aren't just LaRouche supporters, much as you wish to portray them as such. These are MAINSTREAM "peace" groups

Sure.

 

--- unless you are NOW going to argue that Not in Our Name is a LaRoucheian fringe group.

I've never heard of them before, aside from some brief quip regarding O'Reilly and the kid he nuked in the studio.

 

Howard Dean won't speak out against it.

The Dalai Llama hasn't spoken out against it, either. So shall we assume he supports violent protest?

 

Just because Dean hasn't addressed it doesn't mean he approves of it, nor does it mean he's Ghandi either.

 

When OKC happened in 1995, Clinton BLAMED conservative talk radio

Wait.. What?

 

and Republicans had to sit there and respond to this slander.

Either that or not feel the need to defend talk radio. Not all Republicans listen to those guys, just like how hardly any Democrats listen to the so-called "peace" groups.

[BX 0]

Right, because we're all long-haired numbskulls wearing sandals & Che Guevera t-shirts, with detailed plans on how to kill the Republican men and rape the women & children, stuffed into a hemp-made backpack along with a kilo of Yucatan Gold marijuana.

 

Edit: And before I forget, we're all gay~! With each other, except for when we can get our hands on a supple protestant boy.

 

I wish I was so stupid that I saw the world in cartoonish, black-and-white terms. It'd make life so much simpler for me.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

They have created an atmosphere where novels and plays about ASSASSINATING the President are just peachy.

-=Mike

So? They're fucking books, man. If you honestly give a shit about what one hack fiction writer puts on a page, you're way too sensitive.

 

You'd also be, once again, over-generalizing a large group of people with anyone who's supporting something like Checkpoint - which, ultimately, doesn't even advocate assassination. Its would-be assassin is portrayed as a loopy nutcase, and it's a shallow, lousy piece of writing to boot.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

And hey, something else. 51 million people voted for Gore in 2000 - call them supporters of the left, if you like. If 500,000 people engage in violent protest, they still represent *less than 1%* of "the left."

 

Fringe. Don't pretend they speak for me, or the other 50 million.

[Guest MikeSC]

These aren't just LaRouche supporters, much as you wish to portray them as such. These are MAINSTREAM "peace" groups

Sure.

 

 

Learn to love it.

Howard Dean won't speak out against it.

The Dalai Llama hasn't spoken out against it, either. So shall we assume he supports violent protest?

The moment his supporters start advocating violent action, he likely would be willing to speak up.

Just because Dean hasn't addressed it doesn't mean he approves of it, nor does it mean he's Ghandi either.

They're his supporters, plain and simple. They were the idiots who voted for that abomination of a candidate.

When OKC happened in 1995, Clinton BLAMED conservative talk radio

Wait.. What?

Go read Clinton's comments.

and Republicans had to sit there and respond to this slander.

Either that or not feel the need to defend talk radio. Not all Republicans listen to those guys, just like how hardly any Democrats listen to the so-called "peace" groups.

They don't respond, they're "Hate-mongers". Hell, if the right didn't speak out against Falwell immediately following his idiotic comments following 9/11, they'd have never heard the end of it.

Right, because we're all long-haired numbskulls wearing sandals & Che Guevera t-shirts, with detailed plans on how to kill the Republican men and rape the women & children, stuffed into a hemp-made backpack along with a kilo of Yucatan Gold marijuana.

 

Edit: And before I forget, we're all gay~! With each other, except for when we can get our hands on a supple protestant boy.

 

I wish I was so stupid that I saw the world in cartoonish, black-and-white terms. It'd make life so much simpler for me.

Keep your issues to yourself.

 

And, don't worry --- you are a fucking moron. Hate for you to mistake your posting for wit.

And hey, something else. 51 million people voted for Gore in 2000 - call them supporters of the left, if you like. If 500,000 people engage in violent protest, they still represent *less than 1%* of "the left."

 

Fringe. Don't pretend they speak for me, or the other 50 million.

And you seem oblivious to a pattern.

 

Let's say Kerry wins. Do you think HE won't get the same? Do you think books WON'T be written advocating HIS assassination? Of course there will be. And they'll be even MORE explicit in their description of killing him.

 

You break that taboo once and further violations of it become increasingly simple.

 

But, hey, don't feel bad --- people felt that the warnings about Hitler were a little overblown, too.

 

Problems often get ignored.

-=Mike

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

And hey, something else. 51 million people voted for Gore in 2000 - call them supporters of the left, if you like. If 500,000 people engage in violent protest, they still represent *less than 1%* of "the left."

 

Fringe. Don't pretend they speak for me, or the other 50 million.

And you seem oblivious to a pattern.

 

Let's say Kerry wins. Do you think HE won't get the same? Do you think books WON'T be written advocating HIS assassination? Of course there will be. And they'll be even MORE explicit in their description of killing him.

 

You break that taboo once and further violations of it become increasingly simple.

 

But, hey, don't feel bad --- people felt that the warnings about Hitler were a little overblown, too.

 

Problems often get ignored.

-=Mike

I think this is a non-sequitur, Mike, and even if it's not, it's an odd slippery-slope argument. Where are you going with the Hitler thing? It's out of proportion and I'm not sure what analogy you're trying to draw.

 

Also, I don't care if someone writes lousy fiction about killing an authority figure. Not all fiction writers believe what their characters believe, and even they do, it's no problem. The good ones aren't nearly that simplistic. If someone writes a 29-point instructional screed on the best way to assassinate the president and get away with it, sure, take a look. If someone writes a lousy, cheesy book, don't buy it, and don't confuse it with a manifesto.

 

On my other point, I'll be surprised if 500,000 people show up in New York, and quite shocked if a tenth of that achieve the sort of violence Downhome mentions in his opening post. Fractions of a whole.

[jesse_ewiak 0]

Easy, the left = Hitler in Mike's view. But, he mentioned Hitler, so let's close up the thread. Godwin's Law and all.