Trump vs Hitler

[billvon 2,466]

1 hour ago, richravizza said:

I 'll agree with your premise . .  .

So you want the Constitution "terminated."   Sorry, my friend, gonna fight you on that one.  You may not give a rat's ass, but some of us are rather fond of it.  Heck, my father fought for it; I bet even you know a veteran or two who put their lives on the line for it.

[wmw999 2,166]

3 hours ago, richravizza said:

I 'll agree with your premise,removing the First and Second Amendments seems to be right up your ally, relax it just might workout for the totalitarian Left.

Freedom of religion doesn’t mean you don’t have to be aware of people you disagree with. Gays, transgender, intersex, satanists, people who cuss, people who wear long skirts — the constitution says they all get the same rights. So if you don’t want to be aware of feminists, that’s your problem, not mine. If you think homosexuality is wrong, that’s your problem. The fact that it’s called out in the Old Testament of the a Christian Bible is no more relevant to secular law than the fact that the wearing of linen and wool together is called out.

The Amish can separate themselves, so can others. You don’t like the real world, don’t make it conform to your beliefs. That’s no more American than requiring women to wear long skirts and head scarves because men might be tempted. It’s up to men to control themselves.

It’s also up to religious people to control themselves. They don’t want to be offended by something, stay away  

Wendy P. 

[richravizza 25]

7 hours ago, billvon said:

So you want the Constitution "terminated."   Sorry, my friend, gonna fight you on that one.  You may not give a rat's ass, but some of us are rather fond of it.  Heck, my father fought for it; I bet even you know a veteran or two who put their lives on the line for it.

 Dude your like dry white toast. IT WAS A JOKE, a snark premise,but your so wrapped up in virtue and moral panic..

 Poe's Law could smack you in the back of the head,  eyes now crossed,Godwins could smack you again and the only good that would come out from such an experience is...your eyes will be right back where you started..LOL

Reread my post is it not correct in assuming the left would like to abolish both.

Edited May 6 by richravizza

[wolfriverjoe 1,366]

5 hours ago, billvon said:

So you want the Constitution "terminated."   Sorry, my friend, gonna fight you on that one.  You may not give a rat's ass, but some of us are rather fond of it.  Heck, my father fought for it; I bet even you know a veteran or two who put their lives on the line for it.

Yeah, there's a bit over 2 million soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines who swore an oath to protect and defend that Constitution.

That's one thing that Trumpty Dumpty never really seemed to comprehend.

The oath was to the Constitution.

Not to him.

[Phil1111 934]

1 hour ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Yeah, there's a bit over 2 million soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines who swore an oath to protect and defend that Constitution.

That's one thing that Trumpty Dumpty never really seemed to comprehend.

The oath was to the Constitution.

Not to him.

Oh he understands it. Micheal Flynn, our own SC Brent understand it. But it doesn't seem to make any difference. Republicans in the house and senate also have to swear an oath to the constitution.

Beyond that is the deafening silence that republicans have when trump states that he won't honor the next vote.

[billvon 2,466]

1 hour ago, richravizza said:

Reread my post is it not correct in assuming the left would like to abolish both.

Nope, it's not correct.  Simple.

"The left" does not want to abolish free speech or freedom of religion.  Indeed, they are fighting back against republicans who are trying to ban books, courses of study and topics in schools.  They are fighting back against people like Trump, who wants to arrest and jail journalists who criticize him.  They want to stop conservative cancel culture that seeks to cancel anything or anyone they disagree with, from Colin Kaepernick to The View to CNN to "woke" media.

"The left" does not want to abolish gun ownership.  But they do want to do a better job keeping guns out of the hands of homicidal maniacs.

Again pretty simple.

[tkhayes 145]

On 5/4/2024 at 4:54 PM, richravizza said:

Let's Go! Genocide Joe.

calling out genocide when it is nothing even remotely close to genocide is just another example of the 'Nazi' dog whistles that are being discussed.

[jakee 1,271]

6 hours ago, richravizza said:

 Dude your like dry white toast. IT WAS A JOKE, 

Is it though?

6 hours ago, richravizza said:

 Reread my post is it not correct in assuming the left would like to abolish both.

So no, it wasn’t a joke.

[normiss 640]

On 5/3/2024 at 4:43 PM, jakee said:

What exactly are you agreeing with though?

Nothing about this thread involved calling anyone a Nazi.

Comparing someone to Hitler, one would expect this to be a requirement.

 

[SkyDekker 1,150]

On 5/3/2024 at 2:19 PM, wmw999 said:

Just using the term, even if descriptive of how power was gained rather than as descriptive of the actual policies, heightens the emotion. People conflate them; it’s kind of like saying “oh, you have a terrible combover, just like Trump.” People (well, liberals at least) will take that as being far more pejorative than the words say.

Even if the techniques are, in fact, similar, or the combover is, in fact, awful  

Wendy P. 

I love how in this thread conservatives unironically are complaining about the feelings conjured up by words.

[jakee 1,271]

7 hours ago, normiss said:

Comparing someone to Hitler, one would expect this to be a requirement.

Not really. You could put him in a list of famous vegetarians without implying all vegetarians are nazis.

[normiss 640]

14 minutes ago, jakee said:

Not really. You could put him in a list of famous vegetarians without implying all vegetarians are nazis.

You got me there. Damn, that's making me laugh more than it should.

[winsor 189]

1 hour ago, normiss said:

You got me there. Damn, that's making me laugh more than it should.

He was also a teetotaler, while FDR had his requisite couple of stiff martinis a day, Churchill lived on brandy, and Stalin didn't mind vodka.

Having said that, throwing in references to der Further or the NSDAP put one equally afoul of Godwin's law.

[richravizza 25]

Hi Bill,

 My lived experience could help if you would have ask...but I'll bet words from MLK just might help more. The commentary of who and what Conservatives think may help you even more.

"All tyrants past present and future are powerless to bury the Truths in these Declarations. No matter how extensive their legions,how vast their power and how malignant their Evil."

 

Edited May 8 by richravizza
paraphrase that

[richravizza 25]

On 5/6/2024 at 12:47 AM, jakee said:

Is it though?

So no, it wasn’t a joke.

Thank you,I stand corrected, it was simply a snark Premise. A mirror of Bills book banning comment.Did you ever find something you disagree with the left about?  We could go over to the woke thread to discuss doublethink,speak and tone deafness and how they're connected. I've even got a video of Ronnie doing an example if your interested.

[JoeWeber 2,341]

On 5/5/2024 at 10:59 PM, tkhayes said:

calling out genocide when it is nothing even remotely close to genocide is just another example of the 'Nazi' dog whistles that are being discussed.

When you get your news from the back of a zigzag pack you are susceptible, and entitled, to a certain degree of confusion.

[richravizza 25]

On 5/5/2024 at 2:17 PM, wmw999 said:

Freedom of religion doesn’t mean you don’t have to be aware of people you disagree with. Gays, transgender, intersex, satanists, people who cuss, people who wear long skirts — the constitution says they all get the same rights. So if you don’t want to be aware of feminists, that’s your problem, not mine. If you think homosexuality is wrong, that’s your problem. The fact that it’s called out in the Old Testament of the a Christian Bible is no more relevant to secular law than the fact that the wearing of linen and wool together is called out.

The Amish can separate themselves, so can others. You don’t like the real world, don’t make it conform to your beliefs. That’s no more American than requiring women to wear long skirts and head scarves because men might be tempted. It’s up to men to control themselves.

It’s also up to religious people to control themselves. They don’t want to be offended by something, stay away  

Wendy P. 

You. huh...You use the word very liberally.Your projections of me are interesting,dark and simple,and Damn I have only have one opinion on a subject.Too bad, but you don't know me.I think your going to be pleasantly surprised,if you do. I just read it aloud to my wife and you made her day, she said something passing, I won't repeat LOL 

1A 

 If We call someone Clueless, is it grounds to warn, then ban them,and would that have repercussions to Our community reputation.Perhaps we can continue with the conversation on the 1A thing, on the 2A thread,doubt Brent would mind.

 

 

[richravizza 25]

10 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

When you get your news from the back of a zigzag pack you are susceptible, and entitled, to a certain degree of confusion.

OK...I admire your input, you're consistent.

sorta like..

"The Pot calling the kettle black."

[jakee 1,271]

6 hours ago, richravizza said:

Thank you,I stand corrected, it was simply a snark Premise.

What’s the difference between a snark premise that you think is true and anything else you say because you think it’s true?

6 hours ago, richravizza said:

We could go over to the woke thread to discuss doublethink,speak and tone deafness and how they're connected.

Feel free to try. Though last time didn’t you stop responding when it turned out you don’t know what the phrase tone deaf means?

6 hours ago, richravizza said:

I've even got a video of Ronnie doing an example if your interested.

Reagan?

[jakee 1,271]

6 hours ago, richravizza said:

If We call someone Clueless, is it grounds to warn, then ban them,and would that have repercussions to Our community reputation.

It certainly would. Luckily though, if you call someone clueless it might be grounds to ban you, but it is definitely not grounds to ban them.

[wmw999 2,166]

6 hours ago, richravizza said:

You. huh...You use the word very liberally.

I guess I could have used the word “one.” Then, of course, I’d be pedantic. That’s the conservative way — no one is perfect, so there’s always something to pick at.

And to your (you, specifically) question to many of the more liberal if there is something we disagree with — I do think the pendulum of speech acceptance has swung too hard in one direction. But, since for so long it was pegged in the “it’s OK to say whatever you want about minorities and women” direction, I’m OK with that. It’ll swing back to a new normal; one that tolerates mistakes, and pays attention to context. 

Wendy P. 

[nigel99 151]

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/4Biee3txq8ZPwQQ8/?mibextid=xCPwDs
 

It struck me that Stewie is dressed like Trump. The clip suddenly took on a whole new meaning!

[wmw999 2,166]

I was thinking about this thread, and decided that even though Hitler was undoubtedly in better shape than Trump, Trump would probably win an arm-wrestling match. For one thing, he’s significantly taller. Also, Hitler is dead.

Wendy P. 

[Phil1111 934]

The Lincoln Project has finally turned its attention to the Hitler/ Trump debate. From 7 hours ago

Pretty much nailed it.

Edited May 16 by Phil1111

[ryoder 1,406]

When Trump starts comparing himself to Hitler, we can stop pretending it may not be valid comparison:

Trump posts video referencing ‘unified Reich’ if reelected