It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I remember a time on ATS when threatening and demeaning your fellow members wasn't tolerated, but it's becoming the pathetic norm now. If you can't criticise actions without threats and insults then you're no better than your perceived enemies.
originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: FissionSurplus
The time of tribulation is coming. Way to go, Marxist dummies. You pissed off the people who can put a bullet between your eyes from quite a ways away. Enjoy your revolution
Who we gonna shoot FissionSurplus?
originally posted by: Tekaran
I was thinking the other day about - What if we righties just walk away from all this garbage and let them tear down all they want to without saying a word. Then I realized that, the lefties would just cry and complain - "The Right hates America and no longer cares!" You can't win arguments against weak minded children.
originally posted by: kaylaluv
Your argument is interesting. In that same vein, we should erect new monuments to continue America's legacy of violence. Statues of Adam Lanza, Ted Bundy, Jeffery Dahmer, John Wayne Gacy. They can be works of art we can revere forever and ever. After all, most of us weren't affected by them personally, so it's okay.
originally posted by: FissionSurplus
In 2017, we should be BEYOND DNA.....beyond what color we are......we should be all Americans. .
originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: FissionSurplus
This is what you get when outside influences like George Soros divides our nation. The next move is to come in amid the chaos and buy things for penny on the dollar.
This isn't an alt-right vs alt-left thing. This is an elite deep state taking us over thing.
originally posted by: Box of Rain
a reply to: Fools
Well, I have no major argument with the Republican Party in general, as their actual platform (taken in total) is really sort of moderate. It may right of center, but not really that much. As is the official platform of the Democratic party (taken in total) just a little left of center.
That's not to say there are not radical ideas or radically far-left and far-right personalities on both sides.
Or in the case of the President, just whacked-out personalities. His antics would be entertaining if he wasn't the President. I can appreciate his message about changing the established ways of doing things in Washington, but he is his own worst enemy when it comes to conveying that message coherently to the world. His conveyance of any valid message he may have (and I think he has one somewhere) is decidedly incoherent.
Having said that, you are right that whomever the 2020 Republican nominee will be (and I bet it won't be President Trump) will most likely NOT have ever applauded a white nationalist group, but at the same time they may have never overtly disavowed them, either. That's something that needs to be done. If Mitt Romney is the nominee (really, I think he is angling toward another go at it) or Paul Ryan, I think either of them are moderate enough, and can attract enough moderate voters, that they would speak out strongly against "white power" groups.
Similarly, I wouldn't say that Kamala Harris has ever applauded any violent actions taken by BLM or Antifa...BUT ALSO SIMILARLY, I bet she hasn't overtly disavowed BLM or Antifa in regards to any violent actions they incited. She may have spoken out against those groups committing violence, but you are right in saying she hasn't gone as far as to publicly criticize the core of those groups (especially BLM) for incubating an environment for any violence that is committed in their name.
You may ask "why is it that the Republican nominee needs to 100% disavow white supremacy groups, but a Democratic nominee merely needs to disavow the violence enacted by BLM, and not the group itself?". That's because of moral equivalency.
While both white supremacists and BLM members have the equal constitutional rights to believe in the different ideologies that they both believe, and be a part of any legal group they want to be a part of, that's not the same as saying that there is a moral equivalency between the ideology of each group.
That's the important distinction that the President's Charlottesville message seemed to miss. And I think a distinction that either the President is oblivious to, or does not have the ability to articulate.
His racially charged rhetoric