Texas man explodes with rage at Confederate monument protestors

[SmarterthanYou]

You require serious intervention.

Society won't do what YOU tell it, so you should murder as many people as you have ammunition for.

Let me guess .. white male.

its funny how you think i'm all locked in and super intelligent when I agree with you, but i need serious intervention when I don't.

and yes, when you want to trash the country and constitution because you believe it does things it shouldn't, but doesn't, i'm all for absolutely violent restoration and extermination of the anti american idiots like you.

[blackascoal]

its funny how you think i'm all locked in and super intelligent when I agree with you, but i need serious intervention when I don't.

and yes, when you want to trash the country and constitution because you believe it does things it shouldn't, but doesn't, i'm all for absolutely violent restoration and extermination of the anti american idiots like you.

We occasionally agree, but I've never thought you to be 'locked in' nor super-intelligent.

Any man-baby who thinks of violent attacks on innocent people they don't agree with needs SERIOUS intervention. That includes you.

You pretend to stand up for a country you don't even understand.

Who told you that this nation or its society belongs to you?

[SmarterthanYou]

We occasionally agree, but I've never thought you to be 'locked in' nor super-intelligent.

Any man-baby who thinks of violent attacks on innocent people they don't agree with needs SERIOUS intervention. That includes you.

let me channel the idiot trump haters/trump lovers on here for a second. 'You're either for my freedom, or against it. there's no in fucking between'. so you're either for my freedom, just like I am for yours, or you are against it and are a collaborator. that's not innocent.

You pretend to stand up for a country you don't even understand.

Who told you that this nation or its society belongs to you?

who told you that it belongs to YOU, that you can decide what freedoms I can have and what I can't?

[blackascoal]

let me channel the idiot trump haters/trump lovers on here for a second. 'You're either for my freedom, or against it. there's no in fucking between'. so you're either for my freedom, just like I am for yours, or you are against it and are a collaborator. that's not innocent.

It's called politics.

Opinion is innocent and you are the judge of no one.

who told you that it belongs to YOU, that you can decide what freedoms I can have and what I can't?

I've never claimed this nation belongs to me, never assumed that I should murder anyone I don't agree with.

Murder is not freedom.

That's stupid.

[anatta]

awesome. our very own Cultural Revolution and these idiots support the revisionism

[blackascoal]

awesome. our very own Cultural Revolution and these idiots support the revisionism

Talk to society. Maybe you can convince it that you know better than everyone else.

Or, maybe you're the idiot you're looking for.

[Fentoine Lum]

awesome. our very own Cultural Revolution and these idiots support the revisionism

No hon, some of us just won't let you get away with revisionism, that's all.

[Fentoine Lum]

its funny how you think i'm all locked in and super intelligent when I agree with you, but i need serious intervention when I don't.

and yes, when you want to trash the country and constitution because you believe it does things it shouldn't, but doesn't, i'm all for absolutely violent restoration and extermination of the anti american idiots like you.

The nation trashed itself, and we've already seen the violence you incite along with Don. And what is obvious to even the most casual of observers is that fuckwits like you and Don will not do shit but tweet and post and incite, you will not be part of anything but sniveling from your safe space.

[Phantasmal]

The nation trashed itself, and we've already seen the violence you incite along with Don. And what is obvious to even the most casual of observers is that fuckwits like you and Don will not do shit but tweet and post and incite, you will not be part of anything but sniveling from your safe space.

You weren’t even here when he stayed home from the Bundy rebellion, how did you know?

[anatta]

No hon, some of us just won't let you get away with revisionism, that's all.

you obviously don't understand historical revisionism, or destroying one's own history for satisfaction now

[Flash]

I am so with that. That is one truly admirable quality. People need to think more about judging the action, not so much the actor, and always having empathy for everyone, even if they are guilty of serious social violations. That's wisdom and maturity talking. This makes sense, logically; and it's no surprise that Christianity attempts to teach it. It is unfortunate that so many so-called 'Christians' haven't gotten the message.

I agree. Feeling you must speak out against something to the people involved is poor judgment. If you are involved in a discussion and you want to express your opinion about the monument that is one thing. But yelling and screaming at the person you disagree with is more about being self-righteous than accomplishing anything positive.

If that is the correct action to take, that would mean those who believe homosexuality, bi-racial dating, being Jewish, Muslim, or Hindu are wrong it is ok for them to picket the homes of those people or yell and scream at them in public. Those people believe they are speaking out for what is right.

When it comes to someone telling a racist joke, I think you have to play that by ear to do what is most constructive. For example, I retired in 2013 and about 3 days a week sit around in the morning with other old men at the donut shop. They are all union guys (pipefitters) and die-hard Democrats. But they are also fairly racist by their language. One said "I said I would always vote Democratic even if they ran a n.....r for president, and sure enough they did"; although these same guys go out of their way to help others regardless of race. These guys also attend church regularly.

I found it much more effective to earn their respect and not say anything to most of their comments. But then, when appropriate, make a statement without anger or raising my voice, to point out such attitudes do not seem consistent with their religion or Bible. That seems to make them stop and think more than if I started yelling "racist" to their comments because they would not care and only disregard my opinions in the future.



That is very astute point.

Thanks for voicing it.

Although I do believe there are exceptions. There are altruistic people on both sides; more on the left, I do believe.

It seems so simple to me. It's unfortunate it is so elusive to so many.

If we are here to debate politics; then we are here to talk about issues, events, how we perceive those things, what should be done as a nation, etc. So why do so many on a chat site get so hung up with the other posters? That's just foaming with immaturity. And it is bothersome to those who come to actually talk about just plain politics - to have to wade through all the flame wars, looking for the higher quality discussions.

[Flash]

Flash, your approach is what led to so many monuments, schools, cities, roads, counties, etc, being named after rebels who became the enemy of the United States, and sought to destroy it. People saying, 'Oh, just don't draw attention to it,' because "It only created conflict if people attacked it giving it publicity it would have never had otherwise." That is totally giving in!

No, those are very different issues. A governmental body creating those monuments is our business as citizens, but a person putting a monument on private property is not our business.

Most of those monuments were put up many years ago before these were sensitive issues. New Orleans renamed George Washington Elementary school because he was a slave owner. Should we make the same complaints about Washington an Jefferson as we do Confederate monuments? Weren't slave owners as bad or worse than Confederate soldiers who did not own slaves and were probably drafted to fight?
That might seem like it is going too far, but so was taking down monuments a few years ago.

And, again, it depends on how that objection is raised. The couple with signs protesting the monument (and the digital billboard next door) were bringing attention to an issue. But yelling at a person in a restaurant or in public is not acceptable. We should not be teaching the young that if we find something offensive we can shout it down or stop it.

I think expressing our opinions (letters to the editor, etc.) is one thing because it might influence others. But "shaming" a person for what he chooses to believe, especially loudly and in public, is crude and accomplishes nothing. Those people who attacked Sarah Sanders just ended up on Facebook, Youtube, and news programs and seemed obnoxious and gave ammunition to her supporters.

For the example of the monument citizens appeared at city council meetings and businessmen expressed fear it would give the community a negative image and hinder businesses or citizens moving to the area. The black community was upset but had to be told there was nothing the city could do because it is free speech and private property--a good teaching moment in itself.

Shouting down someone because they work for the Trump administration (Sanders or Cruz*) is no different than shouting down someone from the Clinton administration in practice. People who think it is morally ok to shout down one but not the other are not the kind of people who should be making decisions for others and is the worst kind of intolerance.

[Minister of Truth]

No, those are very different issues. A governmental body creating those monuments is our business as citizens, but a person putting a monument on private property is not our business.

Most of those monuments were put up many years ago before these were sensitive issues. New Orleans renamed George Washington Elementary school because he was a slave owner. Should we make the same complaints about Washington an Jefferson as we do Confederate monuments? Weren't slave owners as bad or worse than Confederate soldiers who did not own slaves and were probably drafted to fight?
That might seem like it is going too far, but so was taking down monuments a few years ago.

And, again, it depends on how that objection is raised. The couple with signs protesting the monument (and the digital billboard next door) were bringing attention to an issue. But yelling at a person in a restaurant or in public is not acceptable. We should not be teaching the young that if we find something offensive we can shout it down or stop it.

I think expressing our opinions (letters to the editor, etc.) is one thing because it might influence others. But "shaming" a person for what he chooses to believe, especially loudly and in public, is crude and accomplishes nothing. Those people who attacked Sarah Sanders just ended up on Facebook, Youtube, and news programs and seemed obnoxious and gave ammunition to her supporters.

For the example of the monument citizens appeared at city council meetings and businessmen expressed fear it would give the community a negative image and hinder businesses or citizens moving to the area. The black community was upset but had to be told there was nothing the city could do because it is free speech and private property--a good teaching moment in itself.

Shouting down someone because they work for the Trump administration (Sanders or Cruz*) is no different than shouting down someone from the Clinton administration in practice. People who think it is morally ok to shout down one but not the other are not the kind of people who should be making decisions for others and is the worst kind of intolerance.

Confederate soldiers who did not own slaves were worse than American founders that did, because they were fighting for the institution, as well as against America.

[Fentoine Lum]

You weren’t even here when he stayed home from the Bundy rebellion, how did you know?

They tell on themselves, that kind, and they never even know.

[Flash]

Confederate soldiers who did not own slaves were worse than American founders that did, because they were fighting for the institution, as well as against America.

Even when they were drafted and did not have a choice? Today we view Vietnam as a big mistake and even "immoral" by some. Were soldiers drafted to go to Vietnam bad because they were fighting for a country that invaded another one?

I think most soldiers, Union or Confederate, were fighting for their "side" and their fellow soldiers regardless of the cause. What institution are soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting for?