re: Seriously, If you were Trump, how much of this nonesense could you take?

quote:

---

antifa is almost assuredly going to frick something up, sooner rather than later

---

Where have you been? They prevent their fellow Americans from exercising their First Amendment rights to peacefully assemble and speak!

The difference between Antifa and Nazis is really nothing! They both are despicable! However, they both have ALL Constitutional rights. But neither have the right to interfere with others rights. They cannot block roads, buildings, public or private property. They don't have the right of violence.

quote:

---

be honest... is antifa even there if there's no ws? i'd bet the farm that they wouldn't

---

Well you already lost that one! They were getting all violent in Phoenix trying to deny Trump's rights to assemble and speak!

quote:

---

BOTH these groups on hate crimes lists

---

Horrible idea! Remember "unamerican" lists of 50s!? Who gets to put someone on this list? You? Me? Obama? Trump?
Here's the list: legal and illegal. Do something illegally like driving a Dodge into a crowd, you are prosecuted to the full extent of the law! Justice demands that that arsehole driver be give capital punishment if found guilty!

There should never be safe spaces from disagreement. All peaceful speech is to not only be tolerated but protected! Yours, mine, everyone's.

Trump condemned all racist and fascist groups who violently protested and counter protested! Not only was that good enough, it was the best!

quote:

---

It says a lot about you. You are pretty much no better than they are. Sub-human trash.

---

again, for ben this time....



about your opinion of me...

quote:

---

You're sitting making excuses for those sorry motherfrickers

---

quite the opposite, actually... but you do have that problem with reading comprehension, we discussed last time, so i'll give you the benefit of the doubt...

quote:

---

he could at least trying being nice to those around him that are expected to work with or for him. Maybe his own AG, or any one of the hundreds of Republicans in congress.

---

The AG better start doing what he was brought in to do and frick congress. A bunch of donuffin POS. I hope Flake keeps dropping in the mid-term polls so they all wake the frick up and start working for the citizens that put them there and not special interest groups.

quote:

---

All peaceful speech is to not only be tolerated but protected!

---

totally agree!

i do, however, think hate speech should not be....

quote:

---

Trump condemned all racist and fascist groups who violently protested and counter protested! Not only was that good enough, it was the best!

---

agree to disagree, on it being the best....

there was a more definitive, better way.... i already posted it here, or in another thread... i'm so tired i can't remember where it is....

quote:

---

Please define.

---

i'll let Merriam-Webster do that:
to feel extreme enmity toward : to regard with active hostility

that last part is key, though, for me... if a group, or any other group in any way affiliated with, has previously instigated or incited violence, their speech should be restricted.... like i've stated before:
Words which would likely make the person whom they are addressed commit an act of violence. Fighting words are a category of speech that is unprotected by the First Amendment. Chaplinsky v New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568

Chaplinsky still remains viable for the principle that ''the States are free to ban the simple use, without a demonstration of additional justifying circumstances, of so-called 'fighting words,' those personally abusive epithets which, when addressed to the ordinary citizen, are, as a matter of common knowledge, inherently likely to provoke violent reaction.'

-In Beauharnais v. Illinois, 104 relying on dicta in past cases, 105 the Court upheld a state group libel law which made it unlawful to defame a race or class of people.

in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. 109 In R. A. V. v. City of St. Paul, the Court, in an opinion by Justice Scalia, explained and qualified the categorical exclusions for defamation, obscenity, and fighting words. These categories of speech are not ''entirely invisible to the Constitution,'' but instead ''can, consistently with the First Amendment, be regulated because of their constitutionally proscribable content.'' 110 Content discrimination unrelated to that ''distinctively proscribable content'' runs afoul of the First Amendment. Therefore, the city's bias-motivated crime ordinance, interpreted as banning the use of fighting words known to offend on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, or gender, but not on such other possible bases as political affiliation, union membership, or homosexuality, was invalidated for its content discrimination. ''The First Amendment does not permit [the city] to impose special prohibitions on those speakers who express views on disfavored subjects.''

quote:

---

Seriously, If you were Trump, how much of this nonesense could you take?

---

Seriously, if I were President of the United States of America in 2017, I'd be so Goddamn busy I wouldn't have time to read or hear the nonsense, much less have the time to respond to it.

The fact that this is how our President chooses to spend his time should be concerning, and yet it isn't.

quote:

---

i do, however, think hate speech should not be

---

While I love finding common ground with my fellow Americans on the opposite political spectrum, I'm going to disagree with this.

The definition of hate speech will change every election. Your free speech today will be hate speech tomorrow!

When BLM chanted, "Pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon." Some will define that as hate speech, and if in power will ban and jail them. I find that speech reprehensible, but it cannot be banned! The first Amendment protects "hate speech"!

Now, when BLM chanted," What do we want? ... Dead cops! ... When do we want them? ... Now!" They should have been arrested and prosecuted for incitement of violence! I don't care if they loved or hated the police! They can chant: who do we hate? The police! How much do we hate them? Completely! That is protected!

Other than that, agree even if only to disagree.

Getting tired myself.
Goodnight chRxis.

quote:

---

If I was Trump, I would have enough money to put in a tube in the Oval Office, like the one you see outside a bank. Except mine would be big enough to transport a person. I would use it to send in a Chinese hooker to suck my dick and drop back down whenever I get stressed

---

Well you would be really dumb for ordering Chinese takeout when you would have Melania, one of the worlds all-time dick suckers, right there. Seriously think about the level of dick sucking skills a bitch must have to get any billionaire to marry them, then think what it would take to land a pimp playboy billionaire like Trump who can frick any broad. Melania has to be one special kinda of slut to make The Donald say I do and suck her way from Eastern Europe to the Oval Office. God Bless Her!

quote:

---

Not only dumb but a shitstain on this country as all leftists are

---

i agree... and the right aren't exactly mental giants and a bunch of saints either....

i'm an independent, btw...

I would have had most of the media arrested for sedition by now