Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Trump explicitly floats idea of delaying the election ...

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

  • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    Without condoning the actions themselves, I would blame that on a response to the escalations associated with bringing in the federal troops and their own overly aggressive attacks on the protesters in general.....
    JimL already tried that... he said the federal officers (not troops) arrived on 4 July, and I showed him an article where the local police said rioting had already been happening prior to that. The federal officers came in response to the repeated attempts to burn down the federal building, and, YEAH, it doesn't take a genius to think that the rioting would only get worse when the feds tried to stop the arson and rioting. Prior to that, the Portland police had pretty much let them have free reign.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

    Comment


    • Originally posted by little_monkey View Post
      Psst, I haven't shown any hate but you do, over and over.
      Nope, must be in your heart, cause you sure are obsessed with it.

      I guess your mommy didn't give you enough love.
      Out of 9 kids, I was her most favorite. (Don't tell Rogue)

      So Trans/Drag Queen beware, Cow Poke is on the move, gunning for you.
      AND, another fresh load of cow plop hits the ground with a splatter!
      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
        It's a realization that it doesn't matter what I say to you. You have, on more than a few occasions, mischaracterized my comments, or attributed to me positions I do not hold.
        I have had to tell you things multiple times, and each time you seem to be hearing it for the first time.



        I think PS&T are very much hyper-partisan, Barr is not.
        It is true I have made a few mistakes over the years in terms of who said what - never is it intentional. But this most recent example is not that. You supported the gassing of the protesters under the pretense they were violent, even though you opposed the use of the Bible on the church steps. I was not differentiating between the two in the list you replied to.
        He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

        "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          JimL already tried that... he said the federal officers (not troops) arrived on 4 July, and I showed him an article where the local police said rioting had already been happening prior to that. The federal officers came in response to the repeated attempts to burn down the federal building, and, YEAH, it doesn't take a genius to think that the rioting would only get worse when the feds tried to stop the arson and rioting. Prior to that, the Portland police had pretty much let them have free reign.
          I'm not saying the violence was not there. I am saying it was made significantly worse, and that the overly aggressive actions by the federal forces intensified and enlarged the overall community involvement. And once again, you do not quote my entire comment where I made that clear. Perhaps you could be less deceptive in your replies?

          I also provided yet another example of the sort of overly aggressive response to black people that has fostered all of this:

          https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...them-separated
          Last edited by oxmixmudd; 08-04-2020, 03:53 PM.
          He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

          "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

          Comment


          • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
            It is true I have made a few mistakes over the years in terms of who said what - never is it intentional.
            But FAR too frequent.

            But this most recent example is not that. You supported the gassing of the protesters
            Hold it right there --- this "gassing of protesters" is the kind of crap language you use that is incredibly deceptive.

            under the pretense they were violent,
            Absolutely false. I do not oppose use of lawfully permitted chemical agents against rioters.

            even though you opposed the use of the Bible on the church steps.
            WOW!!!! He got something RIGHT!!!

            I was not differentiating between the two in the list you replied to.
            The very language you use is so bitterly biased - you can't refer to the actual events without weaponizing the language. Nobody was "gassed".
            "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post



              Out of 9 kids, I was her most favorite. (Don't tell Rogue)


              Actually, she said he was "special" which he took to mean he was her favorite.

              The rest of us knew that she meant special as in "special needs."

              I'm always still in trouble again

              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

              Comment


              • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                I'm not saying the violence was not there.
                Not just violence. Rioting, arson, looting...

                I am saying it was made significantly worse,
                Well, gee, let's see... a bunch of anarchists trying to burn down a federal building, and local police holding off...... then the feds show up and these anarchists are gonna do, what, "OH, we're so sorry officers, we'll behave now"?

                and that the overly aggressive actions by the federal forces
                A couple of instances were cited, and I clearly condemned them. "If it bleeds, it leads".

                intensified and enlarged the overall community involvement.
                "the overall community involvement"? What you're NOT seeing is the videos of local shop owners and residents who HATE this stuff, but don't want to be seen complaining because they are in fear of their lives from your "peaceful protester" buddies?

                Did you watch the video Rogue posted where the "peaceful protester" was whining about the mean "federal troops" who shot him with bean bags? He SWORE he was just standing there peacefully, and the cops shot him 6 times --- then they show the video of this same dude on the OTHER side of the protective trying to burn down the federal building just prior to that.

                And once again, you do not quote my entire comment where I made that clear. Perhaps you could be less deceptive in your replies?
                AH, here we go again.....
                "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                  Actually, she said he was "special" which he took to mean he was her favorite.

                  The rest of us knew that she meant special as in "special needs."
                  This is about me, isn't it?
                  "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    But FAR too frequent.
                    Not all that frequent, and they are mistakes, never intentional.

                    OTOH, never (except perhaps as an intentional and obvious joke) do I purposefully distort your posts or leave out critical content when which you do routinely.


                    Hold it right there --- this "gassing of protesters" is the kind of crap language you use that is incredibly deceptive.
                    It isn't deceptive at all. They used gas against them to disperse them. By some reports, both tear gas and pepper balls. Either way that they were gassed is simply a matter of public record.


                    Absolutely false. I do not oppose use of lawfully permitted chemical agents against rioters.
                    Really? Rioting -> violence. I said you used the PRETENSE they were violent to justify the use of the gas. Nothing inaccurate there.

                    rioting
                    /ˈrīədiNG/
                    noun
                    the violent disturbance of the peace by a crowd.


                    WOW!!!! He got something RIGHT!!!
                    I in fact, get most things right CP. But to a fellow that thinks 2+2=5, most math looks 'wrong'.


                    The very language you use is so bitterly biased - you can't refer to the actual events without weaponizing the language. Nobody was "gassed".
                    Yes they were. Gas was used to disperse the crowd to make a way for trump over to the church so he could pretend his presidency and actions are somehow tied to the Bible. They were gassed to facilitate the photo op. There is nothing nice or non-violent or 'harmless' about tear gas and pepper gas. They just don't happen to be lethal. They were gassed.
                    Last edited by oxmixmudd; 08-04-2020, 04:10 PM.
                    He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                    "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      Yeah, but Barr is a pathological liar and eats baby seals for lunch after clubbing them with his gas-guzzling SUV while not wearing a mask.
                      Not sure if it's pathological. I'm pretty sure he knows when he's lying, it just doesn't matter to him.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        This is about me, isn't it?
                        Um... Er...

                        BACON


                        And with that I declare this thread officially won in accordance with Jed's Law.

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                          They were held at gunpoint, they were never mirandized, this happened in front of their small children, and the cars were searched without probable cause. There was nothing here except two women out to let their kids play in the fountain on the mall.
                          This is only one side of the story. Remember the words of wise King Solomon: "One man's story will appear true, until someone else challenges it." Hard to tell what really happened when we don't have all the facts.

                          Also, not being read Miranda rights at the time of arrest is not illegal or improper. The whole, "I'm placing you under arrest for such and such. You have the right to remain silent..." is pure Hollywood. It doesn't go down that way in the real world. You're given the waiver at the time you're questioned, not when you're arrested (and as a side note, most people don't realize that when you sign on the dotted line, you are not affirming your rights; rather, you are agreeing to voluntarily relinquish them).
                          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                          Than a fool in the eyes of God


                          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                            This is only one side of the story. Remember the words of wise King Solomon: "One man's story will appear true, until someone else challenges it." Hard to tell what really happened when we don't have all the facts.

                            Also, not being read Miranda rights at the time of arrest is not illegal or improper. The whole, "I'm placing you under arrest for such and such. You have the right to remain silent..." is pure Hollywood. It doesn't go down that way in the real world. You're given the waiver at the time you're questioned, not when you're arrested (and as a side note, most people don't realize that when you sign on the dotted line, you are not affirming your rights; rather, you are agreeing to voluntarily relinquish them).
                            So you support police pointing guns at innocent civilians out taking their children to play in a fountain? You support the police being able to at gunpoint detain anyone, anywhere, without cause or reason?

                            The were handcuffed, therefore - at least according to this website:

                            https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/police-questioning-miranda-warnings-29930.html#:~:text=It%20doesn't%20matter%20whether ,ask%20questions%20and%20use%20the

                            Source: above

                            When the Miranda Warning Is Required
                            It doesn't matter whether an interrogation occurs in a jail, at the scene of a crime, on a busy downtown street, or the middle of an open field: If a person is in custody (deprived of his or her freedom of action in any significant way), the police must read the Miranda rights if they want to ask questions and use the answers as evidence at trial.

                            © Copyright Original Source



                            There were handcuffed and held at the scene.

                            Now, if the police have no intention of asking any question because they know the people the are searching and detaining have done nothing wrong ...

                            but that would be UNLAWFUL search and seizure.
                            Last edited by oxmixmudd; 08-04-2020, 04:47 PM.
                            He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                            "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                              So you support police pointing guns at innocent civilians out taking their children to play in a fountain? You support the police being able to at gunpoint detain anyone, anywhere, without cause or reason?
                              I support waiting for all the facts before reaching a conclusion. This is only one side of the story. Remember the words of wise King Solomon: "One man's story will appear true, until someone else challenges it."
                              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                              Than a fool in the eyes of God


                              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                                Not sure if it's pathological. I'm pretty sure he knows when he's lying, it just doesn't matter to him.
                                But you probably totally believe the "innocent protester" who was shot by police with bean bag bullets.
                                "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X