Actually they are the scourge of the left. Almost nobody on the left embraces them. This is true because Anarchy is the opposite of big government. They attach themselves to left rallies, but there is almost nobody on the left hat embraces them. Stop making up crap like that.
In theory, sure, Anarchy is the opposite of the left, but Anarchists for the most part are almost completely politically brain dead. They are just out to cause chaos, and right now, that's pretty much what the left is out to do because they didn't get their way in the recent election. It's not just Anarchists who are behind the violent "protests", if they were truly unwanted, the left would do something about them.....or at very least speak out against them any chance they get. Instead they allow it to happen and often even encourage that type of thing.
The left's way in the previous election did not include an establishment Hillary vs. a batshit crazy Trump. So prior to the election the left didn't get their way. You, who aren't left, are unjustifiably speaking for what the left is out to do and what their goals are.
For example, if there was right wing radicals out gearing up in hoods and masks, starting violent riots and lighting things on fire in order to silence a gay immigrant from being allowed to speak.......let's just say it would be covered a LOT differently.
I'm more left than right so I guess I'm left and I think milo is a pile of dog **** but these people are ****ing idiots and milo should be able to speak whatever idiotic things are on his small brain. D&D is starting to become unenjoyable with all this blood and crip "left and right" bullshit. Come on clutchfans...get it together baby
As they say, first time for everything... I'm not really sure what the 'left' is supposed to do about it? I mean it would be easy to demand Schumer or Pelosi or Sanders to make some public apology for every time these guys take to the street but they never pretended to represent these people in the first place. Left and Right are pretty broad. To just lump all liberals into anarchists is pretty unfair, that's like saying that it is the fault of the right that we keep having these white supremacists shoot up places. Who encourages it?
The school encourages it by not expelling every student involved, by not having their police stop them before it got out of control, by not calling in real police to stop it before it got out of control, by doing nothing in the future to prevent this from happening again....and again.....and again. If you want to stop these dipshits, it wouldn't be very hard, but when you see something like the other night and realize that there was only 1 arrest.....yeah, they are encouraging it to happen.
Well, that's something else entirely and has nothing to do with the left. These guys wear black masks for a reason after all. I think everyone is for stopping it before it happens, but that is easier said than done. Just like everyone is for stopping mass shooters before they start shooting. As for only one arrest, sounds like there should be more. You can't exactly spot the person that is trying to turn a protest into a riot though.
The cops stood there and just watched them do it. They could have grabbed them and it would have been over. Instead they allowed it to get out of control....like happens pretty much any time you have this kind of a thing happen in a liberal area. You don't see these incidents in places where you have governments that won't allow it.....or if they try to start it, they don't last long before they are rounded up. Also, it wasn't all people in masks, there's no difference between the "Anarchists" and the other "protesters".
I'm not sure why the cops stood there, but that has nothing to do with anyone on the left. It doesn't happen "Any time" you have this in a liberal area. It's just that every time it happens you have people shouting at the internet that it happened. Well, yeah. But having the government shut down protests is against the very idea of America and Protesting is internationally recognized as a human right. Well yes, there is. The very definition of those two words would tell you there is a huge difference between them. Problem is it is easy for anyone to mix into a crowd already angry at something and throw a rock at a car or whatever it may be.
There have been instances where police applied force during peaceful protests. It's easy to point out the times when law enforcement weren't able to contain a situation though. You paint broad brush strokes Bobby.
you and i have different definitions of peaceful. standing in peoples way and refusing to move isn't peaceful.
This is an absurd insinuation. He's done plenty of speeches at multiple venues. You're typically grounded. This was not one of your best posts...
The interesting thing is that they protested for hours (according to all reports) peacefully until guys with black masks rolled into the protest armed with fireworks and such. I would not mind if Law Enforcement just arrested anyone coming to a protest dressed as if they are going to rob a bank.
You republicans are already on it: https://theintercept.com/2017/01/19...ropose-bills-to-criminalize-peaceful-protest/ Sit-ins have been used in peaceful protests for many years, including protesting for civil rights and against wars. By both "sides" (eg. at and around abortion clinics). And sitting, or standing on sidewalks. Can people still go through and/or enter the place being protested? Are the protesters physically harming people by sitting there? In the video you see policemen stepping through and over the seated protesters multiple times to get better spray angles on them. Seems interesting that folks complaining that a political activist's right to speak is being argued for while at the same time the public's right to peaceably protest the activist is being attacked.
Dude, we all saw it. You got scared and lost the faith and tried to back out of the bet. The only reason you didn't end up welching was because Trump somehow pulled it out in the end. Had he lost, you'd be swearing up and down the bet was illegitimate. You're not an honorable counterparty for betting.
You mean other than town halls when congresspeople were trying to disseminate actual information about the ACA?
Seems like mostly violent agreement on this thread now...most think the protests were out of hand, and most think Milo probably not the best choice for speaker. Haven't seen much discussion on the coverage of the event. Personally, I think it is a given that it would be covered VERY differently if the sides were changed, and it was an alt-left speaker and a bunch of conservatives doing the rioting. I would also agree with those here pointing out that Republicans are already 'on it'. Outlawing protests isn't the solution--it reallly isn't even American. Outlawing criminal actions during said protests is...unnecessary. The actions are already criminal. Simply enforcing laws that are already on the books is supposed to be a conservative position, is it not?
