[POLITICS] If Trump is Innocent, he should prove it

[Saelune]

 

[Saelune]

Shit we knew would happen day 1.

I was expecting a lot worse, surprisingly. He's followed through on a few things, but I'm still waiting for the wall and immigration reform. Guess we'll see if that gets done soon enough.

It was a right-wing view of theirs, yes.

So, you're basically saying that wanting to have the means to protect you and your loved ones from tyranny, and the means to fight on equal footing as your oppressors is Right-Wing? I've heard it all now. You're doing a disservice to those on the Left that actually believe in the right to bear arms. It's not a spectrum stance.

Because you care more about guns than human equality.

I believe people being armed enforces that equality, because armed queers/trans/racial minorities don't get bashed. I'd rather have the oppressed have the means to fight their oppressors than have their oppressors have a monopoly on arms. I'm surprised you don't understand that a person could want to be armed to protect themselves from those who would harm them.

Voting is important. Not that Trump understands that.

Tyranny of the Majority, but thankfully we're not a straight Democracy.

Trump's mother and 1st and 3rd wife are immigrants. It doesnt make him pro-immigration. Pointing to your family being immigrants only makes you look worse for not caring.

It means I care that someone comes here legally, hence why I want immigration reform.

If its between a Republican for guns or a Democrat for LGBT rights, which do you pick?

Discounting an option to reject that shit scenario? After a lot of thinking that would be too long to just throw here, I'd probably vote the former, because the latter goes back to the position above and would have people remain defenseless, while having the means to protect yourself ensures you can enforce your innate rights as a human being, and actually protect them. That, and I see the Dems as just using us as pet minorities so we'll vote for them. There's no real care there. I'd sooner believe Dick Cheney on supporting gay rights. (Bit of a history on that last one.)

If you haven't realized, I don't believe something is what they say they are when their actual actions and views conflict with that. Just like how the US isn't actually a Democracy and barely even a Republic at this point.

We're not a straight Democracy, and I don't believe the Democrats to at all be Democratic when their actions speak otherwise to me.

If that is true, it shouldn't have happened.

It did, and you're absolutely right.

But it doesn't justify the whole country putting in a white-supremacist fascist with less votes.

Devaluing the severity of White-Supremacist Fascism by applying it where it does not exist.

And you dont actually care about Bernie Sanders.

Liked him a lot more than Hillary, that's for damn sure. I'd sit down and have a talk with him before I'd even be in the same city as Clinton. Hell, I actually would like to speak with the guy, one on one. I don't agree with the majority of his viewpoints, but I can have a solid conversation with him. Too bad he sold out and backed Hillary, which made me lose a lot of respect for him, because he was backing what he was against.

Its funny, so many gun nuts on the Right who claim to want their guns incase they need to overthrow the government, and yet they hate the idea of people opposing Trump and Republicans.

That, or they're just annoyed that it amounts to a tempter tantrum and crying wolf. The Democrats and the MSM only have themselves to blame for that.

I bet they would sing a different tune if the Left started echoing their previous gun-toting rhetoric.

Who doesn't like everyone being armed? An armed society is a polite society.

Right-wingers like to default to communist as their response to Nazi. It is a poor one though.

I'unno. Both killed a shitload of people, and both are ass and extremes. Sounds about right to me.

Having white supremacists in his cabinet such as Steve Bannon,

Who got the boot two years ago, didn't he?

his actions and stances on Immigrants and blacks,

Explain the actions and stances on Blacks please?

his refusal to condemn all the white supremacists who fucking love him!

Pretty sure he did that.

White Supremacists also consider Trump one of them and Trump doesnt stop that.

And they also consider him a Jew sympathizer and an agent of ZOG and Israel. There is absolutely no true consensus on him among White Nationalists or White Supremacists, just like there is no true consensus on him at all. He's a divisive figure.

Remember, Trump thinks Nazis who murder a woman with their car are 'equal' to people who oppose Nazis.

You mean people like the asshole with the flamethrower at the Unite The Right rally that was 'fighting Nazis'? Yeah, no. That only one person died was a miracle, and both sides resorted to violence, lynching, and general asshattery. Start shit, get hit, and anyone that engages in those acts can go to hell. Bunch of fucking violent savages.

So are you saying it is ok to respond to oppression with violence in general or just with guns? Is punching Nazis ok to you, or just shooting Nazis?

Being pro-gun clearly means being pro-violence. I hope you realize that. Being pro-gun means you advocate shooting people.

Also citation needed on that flamethrower guy.

 

[Asita]

Also citation needed on that flamethrower guy.

Pretty sure that's referring to this:


To recap, one of the counterprotestors had improvised a torch/flawmethrower with a lighter and a can of aerosol (or something similar) and sprayed it within a few feet of the marching ralliers. Of course, a few moments later one of the ralliers (Richard Preston, who would later identify himself as a KKK imperial wizard) discharged his pistol in their general direction.

Perhaps notably in this regard, there's a bit of a tendency among the Right to characterize the counterprotestor as 'trying to set people on fire', which is...an exaggeration to say the least. The torch is blown in the direction of the ralliers, but as we can see in the video, there's no effort to pursue anyone. It's being used as an almost stationary fixture. Dumb thing to do towards an armed march? Sure. But even so that's not the attempted arson that Preston's supporters try to paint it as.

 

[Schadrach]

Actually that shot was directly at the Democrats and how they're using those exact tactics against everyone they view as enemies. I have my fair share of issues with the Republican party, but I absolutely loathe what the Democratic party stands for now. To me, it's nothing more than a race baiting collective that demonizes their opponents as less than human and pushes identity politics in order to divide us and strip us of our freedom. I'm utterly sick and tired of it. I don't think there is a single true Liberal left in the whole organization.

*cough*'Im not a Republican but...'*cough*

You realize he's a Libertarian, right? And that the core of his opposition to Democrats is their failure to actually be liberal, and the original sense of the word?

It is really fucked up how vilified people who actually care about equal rights are.

Right, care about equal rights, just not the rights of the accused, the right to bear arms, or the rights of anyone who isn't "oppressed" according to the logic of intersectionality.

Remember, Trump thinks Nazis who murder a woman with their car are 'equal' to people who oppose Nazis.

And you think beating protesters you oppose with a bike lock (see Eric Clanton) or other improvised bludgeons (see BAMN and other similar groups) is absolutely fine , even desirable.

Again, I wouldn't mind the "punching Nazis" talk nearly as much if "Nazis" were accurately and narrowly targeted, doubly so if we were talking abut doing it in self defense, and not just going out to assault people you disagree with on the basis that you disagree with them and therefore it's OK to do violence to them. Instead you have people getting attacked for wearing a MAGA hat (we're well into the double digits for these incidents this year), one guy beaten by a group because he didn't know WTF they meant when they asked him if he was proud, that sort of thing. And let's not forget that the number of things that are "white supremacy" keeps expanding at a painful rate and in often bizarre ways - celebrating the 4th of July, Milk, Veganism, even owning a dog - https://twitter.com/thehipsterrebbe/status/1119244807438778368?s=21 .

Personally, I want about half a dozen well known white supremacists to literally attach an emoji to their social media profiles and rotate which one every two weeks, see if we can get "using emojis" itself to become white supremacy. =p

Also citation needed on that flamethrower guy.

As far as the flamethrower guy, https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-charlottesville-corey-long20171014-story.html

You remember the story that went around about the "Nazi" at that rally threatening a black man with a gun before discharging it into the ground? That was the man he was threatening, and he drew the gun and threatened him in response to what he was doing in that photo. The protesters on he stairs in that photo were in the process of egress from Lee Park, several had left quietly before he started with the makeshift flamethrower. If you go hunting there's a longer video online that shows everything.

 

[Saelune]

Actually that shot was directly at the Democrats and how they're using those exact tactics against everyone they view as enemies. I have my fair share of issues with the Republican party, but I absolutely loathe what the Democratic party stands for now. To me, it's nothing more than a race baiting collective that demonizes their opponents as less than human and pushes identity politics in order to divide us and strip us of our freedom. I'm utterly sick and tired of it. I don't think there is a single true Liberal left in the whole organization.

*cough*'Im not a Republican but...'*cough*

You realize he's a Libertarian, right? And that the core of his opposition to Democrats is their failure to actually be liberal, and the original sense of the word?

It is really fucked up how vilified people who actually care about equal rights are.

Right, care about equal rights, just not the rights of the accused, the right to bear arms, or the rights of anyone who isn't "oppressed" according to the logic of intersectionality.

Remember, Trump thinks Nazis who murder a woman with their car are 'equal' to people who oppose Nazis.

And you think beating protesters you oppose with a bike lock (see Eric Clanton) or other improvised bludgeons (see BAMN and other similar groups) is absolutely fine , even desirable.

Again, I wouldn't mind the "punching Nazis" talk nearly as much if "Nazis" were accurately and narrowly targeted, doubly so if we were talking abut doing it in self defense, and not just going out to assault people you disagree with on the basis that you disagree with them and therefore it's OK to do violence to them. Instead you have people getting attacked for wearing a MAGA hat (we're well into the double digits for these incidents this year), one guy beaten by a group because he didn't know WTF they meant when they asked him if he was proud, that sort of thing. And let's not forget that the number of things that are "white supremacy" keeps expanding at a painful rate and in often bizarre ways - celebrating the 4th of July, Milk, Veganism, even owning a dog - https://twitter.com/thehipsterrebbe/status/1119244807438778368?s=21 .

Personally, I want about half a dozen well known white supremacists to literally attach an emoji to their social media profiles and rotate which one every two weeks, see if we can get "using emojis" itself to become white supremacy. =p

Also citation needed on that flamethrower guy.

As far as the flamethrower guy, https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-charlottesville-corey-long20171014-story.html

You remember the story that went around about the "Nazi" at that rally threatening a black man with a gun before discharging it into the ground? That was the man he was threatening, and he drew the gun and threatened him in response to what he was doing in that photo. The protesters on he stairs in that photo were in the process of egress from Lee Park, several had left quietly before he started with the makeshift flamethrower. If you go hunting there's a longer video online that shows everything.

You realize a major point I often have to make is how a lot of people claim to be 'Not a Republican' but then say a bunch of Right-Wing Republican stuff? That's my whole point here too. Libertarians are just Republicans who don't want to admit it. Leg End is super Right-Wing, even more than you are.


I think people should have equal rights, as in people are treated equal based on their actions. A black person and a white person who do the same thing should be treated the same for it. I dont limit my opposition to gun rights to just the white gun nuts. I think gun restriction needs to be equally and thuroughly enforced.


You dont even like it when I call people who call themselves Nazis a Nazi. It is you who applies the label so liberally. I use it to refer to White Supremacists. Unless you know a bunch of KKK members who thought Hitler went too far that I am unaware of.

If you do all the White Supremacist things, dont be surprised when people think you're a White Supremacist.

So you're fine with that guy shooting his gun then.

 

[Schadrach]

Dumb thing to do towards an armed march? Sure.

Dumb thing to do towards a march that was in the process of leaving the park they were marching at and dispersing, doing so at the exit from the park? Even more so.

 

[Saelune]

Dumb thing to do towards an armed march? Sure.

Dumb thing to do towards a march that was in the process of leaving the park they were marching at and dispersing, doing so at the exit from the park? Even more so.

Joining a White Supremacist Rally is dumb. You're defending these literal White Supremacists. I didn't call them that, they called themselves that.

 

[Abomination]

Dumb thing to do towards an armed march? Sure.

Dumb thing to do towards a march that was in the process of leaving the park they were marching at and dispersing, doing so at the exit from the park? Even more so.

Joining a White Supremacist Rally is dumb. You're defending these literal White Supremacists. I didn't call them that, they called themselves that.

See, officer, normally it'd be bad to key someone's car but that was a Mercedes and we all know the Nazis drove Mercedes so that makes it okay.

 

[Saelune]

Dumb thing to do towards an armed march? Sure.

Dumb thing to do towards a march that was in the process of leaving the park they were marching at and dispersing, doing so at the exit from the park? Even more so.

Joining a White Supremacist Rally is dumb. You're defending these literal White Supremacists. I didn't call them that, they called themselves that.

See, officer, normally it'd be bad to key someone's car but that was a Mercedes and we all know the Nazis drove Mercedes so that makes it okay.

That analogy doesn't work and you know it. But thanks for proving that even when I call self-admitted White Supremacists a White Supremacist, you will take issue with it.

 

[Marik2]

lol

 

[CaitSeith]

lol

Spoiler

What are we supposed to laugh at here?

 

[Schadrach]

Joining a White Supremacist Rally is dumb. You're defending these literal White Supremacists. I didn't call them that, they called themselves that.

Oh, no, I'm not supporting the Unite the Right protesters (though I do support them having the same right to protest with the same limitations as literally everyone else, with most of the lines for that having been drawn by the ACLU defending the KKK's 1st Amendment rights, interestingly enough), I'm just saying that pointing a makeshift flamethrower at them when they're trying to leave their event and disperse is...not a good plan in general.

Libertarians are just Republicans who don't want to admit it.

They actually diverge from Republicans on a whole lot of issues, but tend to end up voting Republican more often than not. Usually because the Democrat candidate is even further from what they want and if it's a choice between bad and worse...

Imagine I said that anyone who didn't express a specific sexual preference for senior citizens was just a pedophile who doesn't want to admit it. That's kinda what you're doing there. I'm just being more absurd in my example of a false dichotomy.

A black person and a white person who do the same thing should be treated the same for it.

What about a man and a woman? If we're talking criminal justice, does that mean you believe men should be treated more softly by the justice system or that women should be treated more harshly?

So you're fine with that guy shooting his gun then.

No, I'm not. But then I'm not the one promoting political violence.

On the upside, both of them were arrested for what they did there - the guy with the improvised flamethrower was charged with disorderly conduct for the flamethrower (and assault and battery for another incident during the protest) and the guy with the gun with discharging a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school. That article I linked mentioned the charges if you read it.

 

[Saelune]

Joining a White Supremacist Rally is dumb. You're defending these literal White Supremacists. I didn't call them that, they called themselves that.

Oh, no, I'm not supporting the Unite the Right protesters (though I do support them having the same right to protest with the same limitations as literally everyone else, with most of the lines for that having been drawn by the ACLU defending the KKK's 1st Amendment rights, interestingly enough), I'm just saying that pointing a makeshift flamethrower at them when they're trying to leave their event and disperse is...not a good plan in general.

Libertarians are just Republicans who don't want to admit it.

They actually diverge from Republicans on a whole lot of issues, but tend to end up voting Republican more often than not. Usually because the Democrat candidate is even further from what they want and if it's a choice between bad and worse...

Imagine I said that anyone who didn't express a specific sexual preference for senior citizens was just a pedophile who doesn't want to admit it. That's kinda what you're doing there. I'm just being more absurd in my example of a false dichotomy.

A black person and a white person who do the same thing should be treated the same for it.

What about a man and a woman? If we're talking criminal justice, does that mean you believe men should be treated more softly by the justice system or that women should be treated more harshly?

So you're fine with that guy shooting his gun then.

No, I'm not. But then I'm not the one promoting political violence.

On the upside, both of them were arrested for what they did there - the guy with the improvised flamethrower was charged with disorderly conduct for the flamethrower (and assault and battery for another incident during the protest) and the guy with the gun with discharging a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school. That article I linked mentioned the charges if you read it.

The ACLU fucked up and are a major reason why things are as bad as they are now. Terrorists like the KKK do not deserve the right to spread their terrorism.

Letting terrorists hold rallies is not a good plan.

You are what you vote for. And Libertarians vote for Republicans. Your analogy here does not work.

I think both should be treated FAIRLY by the justice system. I don't think either actually are treated fair enough.

You are defending the violence of the Right by never actually condemning them and putting all your work into condemning the left for far lesser issues. By the way, a makeshift flamethrower is makeshift. That other guy wasn't using a makeshift gun.

You keep doing two things, defending Trump and defending White Supremacists. You claim to not support either, but you never do anything to actually prove that.

 

[Kwak]

Letting terrorists hold rallies is not a good plan.

But that's Trump's favourite way to get his ego fix.

 

[Leg End]

So are you saying it is ok to respond to oppression with violence in general or just with guns? Is punching Nazis ok to you, or just shooting Nazis?

Are there actual Krauts at your door, looking to raid your home and take you or your loved ones? Guns, explosives, melee weapons, whatever works.

Being pro-gun clearly means being pro-violence. I hope you realize that. Being pro-gun means you advocate shooting people.

Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum. Being anti-gun means you're for minorities being defenseless at the hands of their oppressor, by that same leap. Wishing to protect yourself and having sufficient means to do so does not mean you are pro-violence. "Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but never hit soft."

You realize a major point I often have to make is how a lot of people claim to be 'Not a Republican' but then say a bunch of Right-Wing Republican stuff?

You realize a major point I'm making is that a lot of what you say is incredibly Authoritarian, and has very creepy Fascist overtones? In your battle against your enemy, you are becoming that enemy.

That's my whole point here too. Libertarians are just Republicans who don't want to admit it.

Except for, you know, pretty much everything we disagree on, but at least we don't strawman each other. Except when it's funny.

Leg End is super Right-Wing, even more than you are.

Do you even read my posts?

I think people should have equal rights, as in people are treated equal based on their actions. A black person and a white person who do the same thing should be treated the same for it. I dont limit my opposition to gun rights to just the white gun nuts. I think gun restriction needs to be equally and thuroughly enforced.

Because only the Government having guns has worked out perfectly in the past, right? And people that the Government thinks it is cool to have guns. I still don't understand how you don't see that as a problem, considering your worldview. What are you going to fight Nazis with? Rocks?

 

[Silvanus]

Because only the Government having guns has worked out perfectly in the past, right?

Well, it's sometimes gone wrong, sure... but it's difficult to think of an example of a real-world scenario worse than the current status quo in the USA, with extreme ease-of-access to munitions and extraordinarily frequent school shootings.

 

[Leg End]

Well, it's sometimes gone wrong, sure... but it's difficult to think of an example of a real-world scenario worse than the current status quo in the USA, with extreme ease-of-access to munitions and extraordinarily frequent school shootings.

Considering our population total and the amount of them that are more or less standard incidents that happen to take place on school grounds? It's about right for the amount of nutcases that exist. The vast majority of them are run of the mill violent incidents that simply feature a school as a backdrop, or being related by being on legal school property, and in those same cases it's about on-par with the amount that would happen with other weapons one would perform these acts with. Gun control isn't going to stop the serious nuts from killing people. At best, you may change the tool. We should be glad that nobody has decided to take the time to make explosives and start bombing schools, which would probably be followed by many, many copycats that want the fame and attention that the media gives these scumbags.

In short, it is assigning blame to inanimate objects and thinking that attempting restriction on them is going to somehow change the behavior of psychopaths. UK effectively banned guns, and now everyone loves knives and assorted pointy items. If you want to actually have a change, you must address humanity. Spread some love, parent your kids, teach them the value of human life. You'll still have nutcases, but we'll at least be sure we're not making any.

On the note of government and gun control, I'm essentially pointing out that wanting only the government to have guns, yet saying that the same government is run by a tyrannical cheeto that hates everyone that isn't white, is absolutely insane.

 

[tstorm823]

Anyone who becomes racist cause people called them racist were always racist and are looking for an excuse.

I didn't say anyone became racist because they were called racists. I said some racists became Republicans because Republicans were called racist. Because when the Democratic Party gave up on Jim Crow, rather than say there's no party for racists in America, they played TV ads telling everyone that racists are Republican instead. It was a sleazy political tactic that hasn't stopped hurting people to this day.

It is really fucked up how vilified people who actually care about equal rights are.

It's not being vilified for caring about equal rights, it's being vilified for being either dishonest or misguided. You could just as easily say "it's messed up how vilified people who actually care about preventing kids from having autism are" but we know what anti-vaxxers are vilified, don't we? Good intentions without truth leads to villainous results.

It isn't that they "weren't real democrats" it is that The people switched parties and platforms. The southern Democrats switched to being Republicans and changed the platform is the issue. The 1950's Republican Platform was pro immigrant, Pro welfare,Higher minimum wage, Pro Union, and equal pay. That is currently the Democrat platform, while republicans now oppose all of those things. It is now the Republicans passing the bills to re segregate schools, not Democrats. The reality is that even though the parties switched, the same geographical regions that promoted racism in the past are still much of the ones doing so today, and they used to be Democrat and are now Republican. It isn't about the "party name" as it is about the people and local custom.

This goes in to more detail about when and how this happened:
https://www.history.com/news/how-the-party-of-lincoln-won-over-the-once-democratic-south

This still isn't true. The party switch myth is just a myth, and you're welcome to move beyond the historical fiction propogated in articles like this. The official party platforms of every election are available for the entire 20th century. Take a day off from your database of news articles and read some primary sources. The Republican Party is not anti-immigrant now, nor is it anti-welfare now. Higher minimum wage is entirely relative to circumstance and both the laws and the economy are very different now, Republicans weren't pro-Union in the 50s (the unions were basically Democrat machines), and if by equal pay you mean between men and women, the reason that changed is because it's already illegal to pay women less than men for the same work and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying.

No, Republicans have destroyed their public image by their own hands because of their extreme religious beliefs and a selfish want to be the one calling the shots. America should be a United Country were we work out our differences together and not destroy each other in a us vs them scenario.

Years and years of RWing hate radio with hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Alex Jones, Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity constantly spreading lies against socialism, diversity, environment, activists, Feminism, Soros and the Democratic party have divided us as a country greatly. Even when the Democratic party tries to work with the other side the Repubs do everything in their power to impede any bill or idea that has to do with anything above. The Dems do have some blame in dividing the Country sure, but if you look past the propaganda and lies they generally want to improve the general wellbeing of everyone in the Country. They want to give a voice to the people who never really had a chance to speak before, but Rwingers and some Libertarians want to blow it out of proportion and say "Omg, Forced Diversity" "Oh Great more Feminism" etc

Political division in America didn't begin with 90s talk radio. The Democratic Party had a couple centuries of sowing division for political expedience before Rush Limbaugh hit the radio. To this day, the Democrat M.O. is always to put forth terrible bills that would hurt millions or deny people basic rights in order to make headlines about Republicans voting against women or the environment. My personal favorite scam was the "no fly, no buy" bill, a hypothetical effort to keep people on the terrorist watch list from buying guns; the Republicans voted it down because it a) denied people a constitutional right without due process, b) was unenforceable without disseminating the FBI watch list to gun purchase background checks, and thus c)could be abused by terrorists to check if they're on the FBI watch list just be casually going to a gun store, and finally d) would have been struck down by the courts with the very first lawsuit from someone denied a gun with no criminal history. Of course, that correct perspective didn't stop the headlines of "GOP blocks bill to stop terrorists from buying guns" and the claim that congress is hostage to the gun lobby. Environmental bills are the same thing, they don't care about the problem, they just care about the people who will vote for them, so they write deliberately insane bills with titles that claim to be good for the environment so that they can demonize the GOP for voting them down. Ask yourself, of the Democratic Presidential Primary candidates, how many would allow increased nuclear energy deployment to fight climate change? The answer, to my knowledge, is 3. Because it's more important to make it look like Republicans hate the environment than it is to actually solve problems.

Republicans don't want to destroy the environment, don't hate women, aren't white supremacists, etc. But it's politically expedient for Democrats if you think they are. The tiny bit of division sown by people like Sean Hannity pales in comparison to the machine of the Democratic Party.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Gun control isn't going to stop the serious nuts from killing people.

It is going to make killing harder however, and a lot of shootings aren't by serious people, they are by angry boys who've got a very convenient way to attack multiple people sitting in their parent's closet. In Western nations that restrict guns, you do not see a proportional amount of other murders committed without them. Yes, you might see more knife crime, not always to the same extent, and not with the same (yearly, proportional) amount of deaths and injuries.

 

[Saelune]

So are you saying it is ok to respond to oppression with violence in general or just with guns? Is punching Nazis ok to you, or just shooting Nazis?

Are there actual Krauts at your door, looking to raid your home and take you or your loved ones? Guns, explosives, melee weapons, whatever works.

Being pro-gun clearly means being pro-violence. I hope you realize that. Being pro-gun means you advocate shooting people.

Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum. Being anti-gun means you're for minorities being defenseless at the hands of their oppressor, by that same leap. Wishing to protect yourself and having sufficient means to do so does not mean you are pro-violence. "Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but never hit soft."

You realize a major point I often have to make is how a lot of people claim to be 'Not a Republican' but then say a bunch of Right-Wing Republican stuff?

You realize a major point I'm making is that a lot of what you say is incredibly Authoritarian, and has very creepy Fascist overtones? In your battle against your enemy, you are becoming that enemy.

That's my whole point here too. Libertarians are just Republicans who don't want to admit it.

Except for, you know, pretty much everything we disagree on, but at least we don't strawman each other. Except when it's funny.

Leg End is super Right-Wing, even more than you are.

Do you even read my posts?

I think people should have equal rights, as in people are treated equal based on their actions. A black person and a white person who do the same thing should be treated the same for it. I dont limit my opposition to gun rights to just the white gun nuts. I think gun restriction needs to be equally and thuroughly enforced.

Because only the Government having guns has worked out perfectly in the past, right? And people that the Government thinks it is cool to have guns. I still don't understand how you don't see that as a problem, considering your worldview. What are you going to fight Nazis with? Rocks?

Im white. But immigrants do have ICE to deal with, and they are absolutely equivocal to Nazis at their door.

You are the one promoting violence and division here. That is your talk of guns and 2nd amendments. You talk of supporting the freedom to shoot the police, to shoot the government. That is what YOU are advocating. And you call me violent. I don't see you putting your guns where your mouth is.


To people with privilage, equality feels like oppression. Trump is authoritarian. He claims any criticism of him is equal to treason. Giving a fuck about other people is not fascist. Donald Trump is a fascist, Mitch McConnel is a fascist. Neo Nazis are fascist. If you think I am a fascist, you dont know what a fascist is. But then the Right also thinks being opposed to fascism means you're a communist, so I am not surprised you dont know what a fascist is.

Not enough for you to ever oppose them.

You are super Right-Wing. You are one of the leading Right-Wingers on this site. Behind perhaps CM156, but not by much, but he atleast is honest about being pro-Trump.

The rest of the world proves gun-nuts are wrong. Bombs are illegal, and it works out. Whats nice is when someone uses a bomb in their evil, no one doubts they are evil...unless they are pro-Trump anyways.

I want to take the guns out of the hands of Nazis. You dont. I want people who own guns to be trustable with that responsibility. Gun nuts objectively oppose measures to keep guns out of bad people's hands. I actually do not oppose people owning guns, I just oppose most of the people who worship guns to own them, because they are often far too fanatical. Anyone who joins a crown-wearing gun cult is not someone who deserves a gun.