Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
I do remember Bush stealing the 2000 election and we hack-sacked his ass…
It's not totally unheard-of. Somebody will be along with a handful of examples dating back over the last quarter century (including the one who handed himself in before he got to Kavanaugh's place), but as a proportion, it'll be 0%.
Oh please, Lefties are doing this shit all the time. Lee Harvey Oswald, the Unabomber, the list could easily go on.
You're obviously clueless. Lee Harvey Oswald was targeting a "lefty" president. The Unabomber was targeting "lefty" universities.
@DryGermanGuy Read into their motivations for committing those acts of terror; you'll see that I'm not clueless at all. And anyway, do you not think Presidents and university leaders constitute "officials?"
Oh, and Oswald actually made another assassination attempt on a right winger named Edwin Walker
@ProbablyClueless I stand corrected, you didn't have to go back 25 years for examples, you had to go back over forty years for two examples. In the meantime, Justices in Colorado are getting death threats to themselves and their infant children, election workers have to go into hiding because of people acting on lies told by Republican leaders, Republican Senators were scared to vote to convict Trump for his obvious insurrection just day prior to the trial, The FBI were attacked in Cincinnati... This list really can "easily go on".
"Election officials, public health workers, school employees, police, flight attendants, scientists, journalists and food servers are among those being targeted in a proliferation of death threats."
eu.usatoday.com/.../
"Ramaswamy was the target of death threats in New Hampshire that led to FBI arrest"
apnews.com/.../ramaswamy-death-threats-texts-arrest-fbi-b796e91b433b7a4079dbda3385ce6fb1
You can't pursue happiness if you live in fear for your life. You've got to find a better trade-off, like refusing to accept "I was only joking" as an excuse for threatening someone.
@ProbablyClueless The former used "racist and misogynistic" language, and they both had serious mental problems. Neither seem to be particularly politically motivated, not targetting any authorities, for example. Both happened more than six months ago.
"A Black and gay Republican influencer said he could have been killed by a group of white men who heckled him with racist and homophobic slurs at a gathering of MAGA Republicans." www.newsweek.com/black-gay-republican-says-could-killed-maga-hecklers-1854076 (That was last week.)
No, we don't do that. We have respect for our country and our fellow citizens. Instead of making threats, we just vote.
Oh liberals do lots of intimidation of public officials. The Derek Chauvin trial, Kyle Rittenhouse, the Roe v. Wade decision; and that's just in recent memory.
@ProbablyClueless did we threaten any of those fucks? Or just protest against them?
@ProbablyClueless acts of terror. Trying to think back…did we threaten to hang them or cause so much bedlam cops were crushed?
@ProbablyClueless Chauvin and Rittenhouse are both murderers, and all abortionists are by definition murderers.
Abortion is not murder, according to at least one whole religion, probably many more, many or even most Christians, and the secular laws of dozens of countries.
Ask people if they think women or abortion providers should face life in prison for an abortion, and you'll find the small number of people who agree with your position.
Opinion
10Opinion
Left-Liberals see intimidation, violence, murder and destruction as the express route to dispute resolution and to historical events that do not suit their narratives. With the exception of the recent political protest that got out of hand, ostensibly with the collaboration of the FBI and Law Enforcement, conservatives do not do that, except where the Leftist Legacy media parse words or repaint an event to fit that claim.
The Democrat’s online safety expert did threaten justices on Twitter after SCOTUS made decisions she didn’t like. Her she is called out on it in congress
https://www.youtube.com/embed/LwIYGmIbv_c You do understand the meaning of "peace and quiet", right? The opposite of peace can be hearing people telling you off. And that's clearly what she was talking about.
Contrast that with the leader of an armed mob telling them to fight, and that their country's being stolen from them, and go up there and stop them. Nobody thinks a peaceful protest outside the Capitol would have stopped anything.
Either way, threatening that they should never have a peaceful moment in public again, and that they should be accosted in public are threats. And I concede that to the leftists who think Trump telling people to remain pesceful and respect the law are examples of inciting riot, would also for the sake of equality consider the Democrat’s online safety expert’s use of the word peaceful an additional threat.
What time were those tweets posted? How long had the attack been going on while Trump watched? When he tweeted for them to go home, they did; he could have done that at any time. How long does it take to tweet "STOP ATTACKING THE CAPITOL. GO HOME."?
Trump spent more than a decade casting doubt on the electoral process. He refused to accept the results of the election he lost. He took part in a conspiracy to illegally pressure state election officials to lie for him, and getting people to fraudulently claim to be electors for states he lost. He tried to appoint an AG who was willing to lie about there being something to investigate about the election. He pressured Pence to cheat ("you're too honest") for him and help him steal the election. He called the mob to DC on Jan 6 and, knowing they were armed, told them they were being robbed and sent them to attack the Capitol to stop "the steal". Tell me how a peaceful protest outside the Capitol would have stopped the count.
That's inciting an insurrection.
FYI: the rioters had already breached the building. eu.usatoday.com/.../
@goaded I don’t know the exact time they were posted, point was, those tweets included that word peacefully. And I concede that word did not stop people from considering those tweets bad. And even if he did incite the riot, he did not do it in those tweets.
Anyway, my original answer answered Odds question that yes, a liberal has threatened justices when they made a decision she did not like.
If you don’t think Carabollo’s tweet in my original answer contains any threats, I will make a mental note that Goaded those not consider her wording threats, and you shall not consider them threats either if someone Right leaning were to use them against a leftist.
2:38PM, it's at the link. Half an hour after the rioters were scaling the walls, a quarter hour after tweeting “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands the truth!”, and five minutes after rioters were crossing Statuary Hall, heading for the chambers from which Pence had already had to be evacuated.
The point is that those tweets did nothing to stop the attack and the others that were actually removed in your image were doing quite the opposite and encouraging the lawlessness.
No-one on the right will use her words, except as a way of covering their asses. What do you think of people talking about "second amendment remedies" or "second amendment people", or “knock the crap out of” protesters, or telling a violent group to “stand back and stand by”? No threats there, right?
@goaded knock the crap out of could be considered a threat. Odd asked about liberals threatening justices, so I provided evidence of one threatening them.
@BCRanger10 also provided an excellent example in replie to their own answer.
I'm sure you don't think @OddBeMe was talking about threats to shout at someone for taking away a right women had held for two generations and whose foundation argument also conferred the right to contraception, gay sexual relationships and same-sex marriage., but yes, that has happened.
There have also been credible death threats to people like Raffensperger and Pence, who simply refused to lie for Donald Trump, election workers defamed by Giuliani, Representatives for voting against Jim Jordan for Speaker, for doing their job as a Colorado Justice, for being targeted by liars while doing your best to deal with a pandemic (Fauci, and Whitmer, who was the target of a kidnapping plot), for approving a search warrent (that turned up exactly what it was looking for)...
Do you think those things are equal?
@goaded A threat is a threat, he didn’t specify. Anyway, even if you don’t consider my example a threat, @BCRanger10 still came up with a great example anyway.
Unless your credible examples of death threats came from libs, they are not rellevant to the question. The question is not about threats made by Right wing people unless they identify as libs. So unless those who made the threats identify as libs, those examples are not relevant.
And I agreed. I simply added the caveat that it's not really comparable to the threats from the right which are more numerous, more deadly (shoot, rather than shout) more likely to be acted on.
"Over the past decade [to 2022], the Anti-Defamation League has counted about 450 U. S. murders committed by political extremists.
Of these 450 killings, right-wing extremists committed about 75 percent. Islamic extremists were responsible for about 20 percent, and left-wing extremists were responsible for 4 percent.
Nearly half of the murders were specifically tied to white supremacists"
www.nytimes.com/.../right-wing-mass-shootings.html
@goaded yes. Some were armed. One attempted murder
www.washingtontimes.com/.../
"Some were armed" outside the steakhouse? In DC? I doubt it.
Yes, one guy thought about trying to kill Kavanaugh, then turned himself in before even seeing the Justice.
That's an interesting article: "“We’re protesting peacefully at his home again tonight,”" (Note the lack of fighting talk), also: "A state law in Virginia makes it a misdemeanor to protest outside of residences... Justice Kavanaugh, though, resides in Maryland." Is that what they mean by "burying the lede"?
I thought a single use of the word peacefully exonerates one from any accusations of incitement (even if you do say "fight", like, a dozen times or more).
@Dargil You need a gun to fight? To be armed? No-one who came close to Kavanaugh, and multiple people on Jan 6.
" Facts First: While it’s impossible to know precisely how many firearms were brought to the Capitol on January 6, it’s already clear that at least some of the people present were carrying guns that day. And as the police officers who testified at the committee on Tuesday made clear, rioters also used numerous other objects as weapons such as knives and bats. "
edition.cnn.com/.../index.html
yes, and not just with physical harm. There is nothing "liberal" about today's leftists- they are all totalitarian thugs.
For a guy who claims he does marketing for companies, you're a really poor communicator. And you have a long track record of making nonsensical claims that don't stand up under the barest scrutiny.
Here's what you said:
"Funny that a few years ago you fucks were doing that. Now it’s reversed, with libs arguing for state rights and you’re for centralized govt. lol"
So what are you trying to say, Odd? It certainly isn't clear from anything you posted here.
Sigh…. that the Roe bullshit switched us 180, making liberals move on states rights and Republicans trying to nationalize anti-abortion. Which is making their centralized-govt hating fathers turn in the graves.
Simple enough now dipshit? You are really are a dumb fucking moron. I mean I really hate going off on people but your idiocy takes the cake. I feel like so many hours are wasted talking to you.
Happy Fuckng new year. Jesus Christ…
Odd, you just further cemented your reputation as an absolute idiot.
The reason why the Supreme Court had to rule last year on the Mississippi case is because:
1) Roe was terrible jurisprudence
2) Democrats never even tried to pass any legislation codifying Roe
3) The Casey decision in 1992 didn't solve anything
After last year's ruling, leftists had no choice but to pursue their agenda at the state level. But at least they had the option of doing that. Leftists are still believers in abusing the Supremacy Clause to use the federal government to pursue their agenda even as they are happy to use their majorities in states like California to do the same (something they have done for a long time).
The reason why conservatives distrust the federal government is because it has repeatedly overstepped the powers delegated to it by the Constitution and has been used as a vehicle for some awful policies. It's also a financial sinkhole.
By your bizarre reasoning, no conservative can ever attempt pass legislation in Congress or bring any case to SCOTUS or argue one in front of SCOTUS.
Nobody said a word when they demonstrated in front of Justice Cavanaugh's house. They all should have been arrested and tried. Instead nobody was held accountable.
@Snakeyes7 Was it still an attempt, then?
@Snakeyes7 Fair enough. I think the changing his mind part should play a large part in his sentencing.
Two dozen, including 9 protesters and at least three police killed by a right-winger.
www.theguardian.com/.../americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled
There were more than 9,000 protests, involving three times the number of people as live in New York City and lasting for several months.
There weren't over 1 million people in DC, it lasted three or four hours, before Trump finally called it off, and the woman was climbing through a smashed window over a barricade at the head of a mob into a room of VIPs with armed security. Of course she got shot.
I very much doubt that there were more than a million, and I know there were more than a "few hundred", since "More than 1,237 defendants have been charged in nearly all 50 states and the District of Columbia. (This includes those charged in both District and Superior Court).", and people who stayed back weren't charged.
www.justice.gov/.../33-months-jan-6-attack-capitol-0
It has also become clear that the march was planned in advance and the protesters who got permits lied about it.
www.washingtonpost.com/.../
@goaded The FBI was able to identify and investigate a little more than a million. Anyone that made a credit card purchase was fair game. They poured through hours of video and interviewed hundreds of people. I would not be surprised that they collected DNA evidence from the people thay shot rubber bullets at.
You're just pulling numbers out of your hat. There weren't a million people there.
A million people is getting on for twice the population of the city. It's nearly as many international visitors as the city gets in a year. It's enough people to cover the 58 acres of Capitol grounds with a dense crowd twice over.
This is a picture of fewer than a million people (but in the high hundreds of thousands) on the National Mall.
Yes. When Roe vs Wade was overturned, there were rioters at the homes of justices. That's a federal crime, but oddly enough, Merrick Garland didn't do shit about it.
u I seem to remember that happening before the overturning of Roe vs. Wade.
According to the DHS, death threats...
www.newsweek.com/supreme-court-justices-threatened-murder-roe-v-wade-overturned-1707869
Yes, you're right. There do appear to have been death threats in response to taking away a right women had held for two generations and whose foundation argument also conferred the right to contraception, gay sexual relationships and same-sex marriage.
There have also been credible death threats to people like Raffensperger and Pence, who simply refused to lie for Donald Trump, election workers defamed by Giuliani, for voting against Representative Jim Jordan for Speaker, for doing their job as a Colorado Justice, for being targeted by liars while doing your best to deal with a pandemic (Fauci, and Whitmer, who was the target of a kidnapping plot)...
So, the correct answer is really "occasionally, for genuine reasons, but not nearly as often as the right for fake ones, and far less likely to be acted on".
Did you seriously forget the Roe v Wade fiasco?
Light protests? They were protesting in front of a SC justice's house which is illegal, there was an attempt on Cavanaugh's life, there has been arsons happening to anti-abortion centers by a group called Jane's Revenge.
www.theguardian.com/.../abortion-arson-attack-wisconsin-pro-choice-janes-revenge
There has been plenty of injury.
Liberals have actually done a ton of that.
Here's a academic source. extremism.gwu.edu/.../...remism%20in%20America.pdf
Why do you support a party that hates you?
*do more
@goaded Don't speak in a rhetorical manner with me.
I'm not removing your comment either. Just for good measure:
"Most of the Democratic party is white, and half of those are male. This whole "you must hate yourselves" is even more stupid than "Democrats hate white men". They hate bigots and hypocrites. If you want to pretend all white men are bigots and hypocrites, knock yourself out."
@love_conquers_lust Say what I mean? I’ve been saying right wingers are more dangerous and stupid than liberals for a long time.
@OddBeMe You’re a disgrace. I told you to keep your bull shit confined to your threads. Stop projecting your anger onto girls on here, especially if it’s because you’re too pussy too confront me. Be a man and keep it directed at me.
You got a problem with me talking about your wife? What would she think if she knew I was defending her on here while you’re on here passive aggressively bitching about her?
Dangerous is absolutely right. You think it wise to antagonize?
@goaded Cut the foreplay and make your accusation.
You absolutely should have left it alone.
You're funny. Come back when you're willing to answer a single direct question.
The reason I didn't answer if I was born "ethnically German", in Germany is because it's utterly irrelevant to the conversation, and if I said yes, you'd probably say something stupid about how I must hate myself because of the Nazis.
@goaded They support and in fact expanded upon Affirmative Action based on race. In fact the was one of Biden’s first executive orders. White males are still not a protected class under AA and it violates the CRA punishing people who had nothing to do with past discrimination of long dead generations.
You are a fool, and a blind bigot. Women and minorities will cheer that on all day long watching you destroy yourself until the party collapses and the economy tanks because Marxist policies violated the natural order of competition. Then they’ll abandon you.
I don’t even care about your counter argument. It’s like I said, you have no balls.
Keep calling me names, it only makes your arguments look stronger. "White males are still not a protected class" much like cows aren't on the endangered species list. Affirmative action was to ensure that women and non-white people got the same chances white men always had. What's your opinion on legacy admissions?
You don't have to hate anyone to see injustices and want them corrected. It's the right that feeds on hate.
Keep calling me names, it only makes your arguments look stronger. The Nazis favoured white people and called other people vermin. I'm sure I've heard that recently. Oh, yes: you wanting "White males [to be] a protected class", and defendant Trump talking about "vermin" "poisoning the blood".
@goaded "Keep calling me names..."
If you could control me or the conversation, you would be able to stop me from calling you names, dipshit. Issue orders to yourself.
Whites can be racist towards whites. The law on the books in the US says you can't discriminate based on race. There is NO mention of a loophole for the perpetrator being the same race as the victim.
If your argument is valid and sound, it should stand on its own merit, regardless of demographic disclosure. If race does in fact not matter, you're ironically making it matter by hiding yours.
@OddBeMe You talked about justices. Their recent ruling revolved around race. You frequently bring up race. The day after your leader was sworn into office, front and center, first and foremost, that’s what he talks about.
www.whitehouse.gov/.../
Your party pushes DEI.
This is why you piss people off. You’re like that annoying cousin who gets clocked and backhanded for annoying everyone begging for attention. You talked shit about your wife. Who knows what else you’re doing on here.
@OddBeMe Oh, you retard. Race is an arbitrarily defined and it doesn’t exist? Then the CRA can’t be enforced. You want people discriminating against each other based on race?
There’s no reason to not throw you into a lion pit because if race doesn’t exist, neither do species as those are arbitrations as well.
"If your argument is valid and sound, it should stand on its own merit,"
It does. I could say that same about your inability to be respectful and your insistence that people must hate themselves for sharing immutable characteristics with assholes, which is clearly ridiculous.
My ethnicity and nationality have absolutely nothing to do with anything. Assholery is a choice.
@love_conquers_lust Well yeah, species are scientific compartmentalizations. But with actual evidence behind it. Two species can’t inter breed.
Race has no good definitions or even objectively agreed upon points. Talk to a million people and you’ll get a million different answers on race.
Be the first girl to share an opinion
and earn 3 more Xper points!
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions