It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Proof of some on the lefts double standard on Trumps condemning both sides comment

page: 4
94
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dudemo5

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Grambler
A leftists shot scalise, and people like Bernie, Pelosi, CNN and many others condemned violence from BOTH SIDES.


Bernie and Pelosi are both rather partisian. Of course they're going to minimize it by using the whole both sides are bad routine. In fact, you can always tell when someone is in the wrong because if they go to that defense it means they're trying to minimize the hate their own ideology produced.


Ok thats totally reasonable.

Then you admit that Bernie and Pelosi are as guilty as Trump on this.

So why is the outrage level for Trump so much higher?


Party because he's Trump, and he has the same antagonistic relationship he's had with the media for the last 35 years, where everything he says and does is news and that's the way he likes it.

Partly because one of the groups involved in the dispute has a long and storied history of racial violence in this country that everyone of us knows by heart, from childhood on, whereas the other is a group most people have probably never even heard of.

Related to the above: partly because most people have an immediate visceral reaction to the KKK and Neo-Nazis.


Best answer yet.

Yes there is truth to this.

And all of these reasons are not based on logic but emotion.

But I do think the biggest reason is just partisan hypocrisy.




posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986


Well, if Trump said it, it must be true! It's not like his actions don't betray his true feelings.

I forget, are we supposed to take him literally or seriously?



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Dudemo5

Nazi slogans and violence at a right-wing march in Charlottesville on Friday night


At one point during Friday night’s rally, a brawl broke out when demonstrators — nearly all white men — surrounded a small group of counterprotesters who were peacefully surrounding a statue of Thomas Jefferson at the center of campus. Counterprotesters reported being hit with pepper spray by marchers; according to the Washington Post, one counterprotester also used a “chemical spray” against marchers. “They completely surrounded us and wouldn’t let us out,” local activist Emily Gorcenski told the Guardian.


Timeline


A group of about 30 U-Va. students — students of color and white students — had locked arms around the base of the statue to face down the hundreds of torchbearers. The marchers circled the statue. Some made monkey noises at the black counterprotesters. Then they began chanting, “White lives matter!”

Within moments, there was chaos. Shoves. Punches. Both groups sprayed chemical irritants. Many marchers threw their torches toward the statue and the students.


This group is lining up to charge into counterprotesters. Incredibly tense here.

Then, of course, the car into the crowd.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
Yep, bernie good, Trump bad.

Got it.


If that's how you want to view that, then sure. Trump doesn't have a strong moral character. Honestly, he's a piece of human garbage. I'm not saying that due to party affiliation either. I didn't agree with much of George W Bush's term but he seemed like a decent person. Mike Pence seems like a decent person as well, even though I disagree with a lot of his stances.

Trump however, can't commit to relationships, likes to sexually abuse people, is a chronic liar, seems to hate one of his kids, and thinks money is everything in life. He's quite simply not a good person.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

First off that was Friday, this in no way explains the violence Saturday.

Yes the nazi group surrounded the people, but even you second quote admits that both started using violence. It doesn't say which one.

But if surrounding is your definition of starting violence, then I am sure you will agree that when there were reports Saturday of protestors being lead into and surrounded by a group of counter protestors, that the police and the surrounding counter protestors were the ones who started the violence.

And none of that excuses the violence that both sides exhibited regardless of who started it.

You have a right to defend your self, bot beat people on the ground with bats as the NYT lady reported the left doing.

And even then, none of this addressess the OP.

At least there is a question of both sides being violent here.

With the scalise shooting its cut and dry that it was just a violent leftist. Yet dems blamed both sides.

Where was you outrage there?



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Grambler
Yep, bernie good, Trump bad.

Got it.


If that's how you want to view that, then sure. Trump doesn't have a strong moral character. Honestly, he's a piece of human garbage. I'm not saying that due to party affiliation either. I didn't agree with much of George W Bush's term but he seemed like a decent person. Mike Pence seems like a decent person as well, even though I disagree with a lot of his stances.

Trump however, can't commit to relationships, likes to sexually abuse people, is a chronic liar, seems to hate one of his kids, and thinks money is everything in life. He's quite simply not a good person.


So you admit that you allow Bernie to get away with the same thing that Trump is being chastised for because you like Bernie and not trump.

Hence you are biased and hypocritical.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Is that a rhetorical question? Because how I perceive Trump is obviously different than how you perceive Trump.

What's even more obvious, is that Trump can't do any good to you anyways. He must be lying, because he's obviously a white supremacists racist Nazi, right? He's an evil asshole with not a single good bone in his body right? He just has to be lying, because he's a liar right?

At the end of the day, real recognize real. So discern at your own will.

/



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
So you admit that you allow Bernie to get away with the same thing that Trump is being chastised for because you like Bernie and not trump.

Hence you are biased and hypocritical.


Where did I ever say I'm not biased. The fact that I have an opinion makes me biased, it makes you biased too. However yes, Bernie isn't perfect but he's a much better human being than Trump is. He actually has integrity.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Grambler
So you admit that you allow Bernie to get away with the same thing that Trump is being chastised for because you like Bernie and not trump.

Hence you are biased and hypocritical.


Where did I ever say I'm not biased. The fact that I have an opinion makes me biased, it makes you biased too. However yes, Bernie isn't perfect but he's a much better human being than Trump is. He actually has integrity.

Yes, Bernie has that special kind of integrity that allows him to attack Hillary Clinton viciously during the campaign. Then when it was proven why he "lost" the nomination, due to her corrupting the process in her favor, he gleefully supported her nomination.

That kind of integrity, as opposed to openly denying to support a corrupt person?

If that is your idea of integrity, you can have it. I say no thanks.

edit on 8/15/2017 by Krakatoa because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Grambler
So you admit that you allow Bernie to get away with the same thing that Trump is being chastised for because you like Bernie and not trump.

Hence you are biased and hypocritical.


Where did I ever say I'm not biased. The fact that I have an opinion makes me biased, it makes you biased too. However yes, Bernie isn't perfect but he's a much better human being than Trump is. He actually has integrity.


Well at least your honest.

Sadly, your mentality is one that is causing much of the problems.

"I hate Trump. So when he does something that I have no problem with people I like doing, I will scream and act like its the biggest deal. And then I will use that incident in the future as further proof that Trump is a horrible person."

Good job!



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

If by integrity, you mean allow his campaign to be stolen from him only to go campaign for his thief the very next day.

Then I totally agree.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 10:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: eNumbra


How is it so many of you read words that aren't there?

Because communication involves both encoding and decoding. Somewhere inbetween those two processes, sometimes intent is lost. That's why communication is so hard, especially with strangers over the internet where there are no non-verbal queues and no mutual histories of understanding.

When you encoded your message "I'm vastly more uncomfortable leaving the violence to the government than I am two groups of private citizens."

I encoded it as "I'd rather the government not intervene to stop the violence." One reason I decoded it that way was because of an assumption on my part that it takes action (sometimes hostile) to stop rioters from rioting.



No, don't let them roam the streets, exactly the opposite, corral them together.


As in, corral the two groups together and then let them fight it out? That's going to produce a far worse outcome than just using teargas and rubber bullets and rounding them up.


edit on 15-8-2017 by Dudemo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: Dudemo5

Nazi slogans and violence at a right-wing march in Charlottesville on Friday night


At one point during Friday night’s rally, a brawl broke out when demonstrators — nearly all white men — surrounded a small group of counterprotesters who were peacefully surrounding a statue of Thomas Jefferson at the center of campus. Counterprotesters reported being hit with pepper spray by marchers; according to the Washington Post, one counterprotester also used a “chemical spray” against marchers. “They completely surrounded us and wouldn’t let us out,” local activist Emily Gorcenski told the Guardian.


Timeline


A group of about 30 U-Va. students — students of color and white students — had locked arms around the base of the statue to face down the hundreds of torchbearers. The marchers circled the statue. Some made monkey noises at the black counterprotesters. Then they began chanting, “White lives matter!”

Within moments, there was chaos. Shoves. Punches. Both groups sprayed chemical irritants. Many marchers threw their torches toward the statue and the students.


This group is lining up to charge into counterprotesters. Incredibly tense here.

Then, of course, the car into the crowd.


The violence Friday night seems to have been instigated by the Nazis, who surrounded people in a very tightly enclosed area so there was no clear avenue of escape (that's how I picture it, anyway), which in and of itself is enough to trigger the sympathetic nervous system into a fight reaction, especially when the people surrounding you are mocking your ethnicity by "making monkey noises."

So did Antifa show up the next day as a result of that Friday incident? Or were they already planning to show up and that just added fuel to the fire?

The protest on Saturday should never have been allowed. A previous article said the authorities declared it unlawful before it even started, and yet they were powerless to stop it.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 10:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krakatoa
Yes, Bernie has that special kind of integrity that allows him to attack Hillary Clinton viciously during the campaign. Then when it was proven why he "lost" the nomination, due to her corrupting the process in her favor, he gleefully supported her nomination.

That kind of integrity, as opposed to openly denying to support a corrupt person?

If that is your idea of integrity, you can have it. I say no thanks.


That doesn't bother me one bit. Aside from the fact that politics has a large dose of the enemy of my enemy is my friend going on, something I look for in a President is the ability to beat a rigged system. A President needs to win when they aren't advantaged, winning with an advantage is easy, it's negotiating from a position of weakness that matters. Bernie couldn't do it, he lost and proved he would make a bad President in doing so.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 10:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Krakatoa
Yes, Bernie has that special kind of integrity that allows him to attack Hillary Clinton viciously during the campaign. Then when it was proven why he "lost" the nomination, due to her corrupting the process in her favor, he gleefully supported her nomination.

That kind of integrity, as opposed to openly denying to support a corrupt person?

If that is your idea of integrity, you can have it. I say no thanks.


That doesn't bother me one bit. Aside from the fact that politics has a large dose of the enemy of my enemy is my friend going on, something I look for in a President is the ability to beat a rigged system. A President needs to win when they aren't advantaged, winning with an advantage is easy, it's negotiating from a position of weakness that matters. Bernie couldn't do it, he lost and proved he would make a bad President in doing so.


Merriam Webster defines integrity as ...

1: firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values : incorruptibility

2: an unimpaired condition : soundness

3: the quality or state of being complete or undivided : completeness

So, it is OK with you that Bernie Sanders, when confronted with corruption, embraces that corruption merely for his own personal gain, as opposed to being incorruptable and refusing to ally himself with one so corrupt as Hillary Clinton and the DNC party.

Hint, that is not integrity, regardless of it being "politics".

And since Donald Trump was at a disadvantage from the day he announced his candidacy, and fought it successfully even against a corrupt opponent and won. You must consider him a good president based upon your own definition of a good president.

The truth is ugly on all sides isn't it?




edit on 8/15/2017 by Krakatoa because: added additional thoughts



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Krakatoa
Yes, Bernie has that special kind of integrity that allows him to attack Hillary Clinton viciously during the campaign. Then when it was proven why he "lost" the nomination, due to her corrupting the process in her favor, he gleefully supported her nomination.

That kind of integrity, as opposed to openly denying to support a corrupt person?

If that is your idea of integrity, you can have it. I say no thanks.


That doesn't bother me one bit. Aside from the fact that politics has a large dose of the enemy of my enemy is my friend going on, something I look for in a President is the ability to beat a rigged system. A President needs to win when they aren't advantaged, winning with an advantage is easy, it's negotiating from a position of weakness that matters. Bernie couldn't do it, he lost and proved he would make a bad President in doing so.


Yet trump was at the ultimate disadvantage and won, and you hate him.

You keep proving to have bizarre double standards.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Hate doesn't need a logical reason to exist. Seems that person hates President Trump because he is told to hate him by those they surround themselves with in the echo chamber of the left. Personal thought and critical thinking has no place there it seems.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 11:05 PM
link   
You know, I didn't even think about some on the lefts (many of the same people calling Trump a nazi defender) reactions to the riots in Ferguson, Baltimore, or the riots against Trump.

In all of those incidents, almost every leftists that I am talking about told us not to judge the rioters to harshly because the had legitimate grievances; rather it be cops are bad, Trump is bad, whiteness is bad, whatever.

Heck, as mentioned even Obama AT A MEMORIAL for slain offers chose to literally defend the protestors.

Just more examples of this hypocrisy;

when someone who is seen as a leftists does something wrong, we must look at violence on both sides.

But if someone perceived as on the right does something bad, then looking at both sides means you are defending the bad person.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 11:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: Aazadan

If by integrity, you mean allow his campaign to be stolen from him only to go campaign for his thief the very next day.

Then I totally agree.




I'm sure the beach house helped.

And hey, how about his wife's integrity, huh?

Don't tell me she didn't try to get that loan on her own without throwing around the "do you know who my husband is" in yo face mofo attitude.

Hope the FBI perp walks both of them on fraud charges.

He should be charged with impersonating a gov official anyway.

Maybe putin can give him asylum, for old times sake.






posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 11:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
You know, I didn't even think about some on the lefts (many of the same people calling Trump a nazi defender) reactions to the riots in Ferguson, Baltimore, or the riots against Trump.

In all of those incidents, almost every leftists that I am talking about told us not to judge the rioters to harshly because the had legitimate grievances; rather it be cops are bad, Trump is bad, whiteness is bad, whatever.

Heck, as mentioned even Obama AT A MEMORIAL for slain offers chose to literally defend the protestors.

Just more examples of this hypocrisy;

when someone who is seen as a leftists does something wrong, we must look at violence on both sides.

But if someone perceived as on the right does something bad, then looking at both sides means you are defending the bad person.


I live and work within close proximity to the Ferguson riots, and I'm the first to call most of them exactly what they were; opportunistic criminals looking to get their kicks destroying and stealing property.

However, people destroying their own neighborhoods isn't quite the same thing as hate groups who target individuals of a particular color or religion, showing up ready for battle.




top topics



 
94
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join