Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

** 28-Oct-2020 World View: Right wing violence

(10-28-2020, 03:20 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]> It is typically partisan of you to emphasize leftist violence, and
> ignore that of the right.

No, that's wrong.

Last evening, there was massive looting and gunfire in Philadelphia.
I call that violence, and it's continuing this evening.

You and other leftists call it "peaceful protests," or at worst,
"a little looting," ignoring the gunfire and other deadly attacks.

I could compile a list of dozens of similar incidents in the last
year. These are incidents of left-wing antifa-blm fascist violence,
and the violence is similar to the Nazi's Kristallnacht.

When leftists claim "right-wing violence," they're usually talking
about words on a web site. I don't call that violence, but if you
do, then you also have to say that leftish threats of revolution,
including some threats from prominent Democrats, are also violence.

So if you want me to condemn right-wing violence, how about providing
a list of several specific examples that you'd like me to condemn.

I did a quick check, and couldn't find any stories about actual Proud
Boys violence. I did find the story about the Wolverine Watchman
threatening Gretchen Wilmer, and you can't really call that violence,
although it is a threat of violence, and is therefore illegal. I
condemn it anyway.

The point is that I can point to dozens, perhaps hundreds, of examples
of left-wing violence, that you refuse to condemn, but you can only
point to a couple of examples of right wing violence, which I condemn
without hesitation.

The other difference is that you and other leftists and Democrats
refuse to condemn antifa-blm fascist violence, while I'm willing to
condemn, without hesitation, any examples of right-wing violence.

Therefore, it's perfectly reasonable, and certainly not partisan, to
emphasize left-wing violence, while mostly ignoring right-wing
violence, except to thoroughly condemn it whenever it occurs.

(10-28-2020, 06:32 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-28-2020, 03:20 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]It is typically partisan of you to emphasize leftist violence, and ignore that of the right.

No, that's wrong.

Last evening, there was massive looting and gunfire in Philadelphia. I call that violence, and it's continuing this evening.

You and other leftists call it "peaceful protests," or at worst, "a little looting," ignoring the gunfire and other deadly attacks.

Again, the violence in Philadelphia was initiated by the red racist violent police, shooting without making attempts to deescalate. Again, the Proud Boys moved from rural red areas to Portland with both paint ball guns and real guns with the objective to instigate violence. Again, Trump used violence against protesters exercising their First Amendment rights in order to get a photo op. Red violence exists. The violence will not stop until the red extremists stop instigating it. No amount of ignoring the obvious will make your partisan interpretation of it seem valid to anyone who does not share your extremist ideology.

(10-28-2020, 07:38 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]No amount of ignoring the obvious will make your partisan interpretation of it seem valid to anyone who does not share your extremist ideology.

In a way that is a large part of the problem. These days, one can easily create a web site that attracts followers that are like minded. It encourages them to think their extreme beliefs are valid. Does this hold water in a more diverse site?

(10-28-2020, 06:32 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]** 28-Oct-2020 World View: Right wing violence

(10-28-2020, 03:20 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]>   It is typically partisan of you to emphasize leftist violence, and
>   ignore that of the right.

No, that's wrong.

Last evening, there was massive looting and gunfire in Philadelphia.
I call that violence, and it's continuing this evening.

You and other leftists call it "peaceful protests," or at worst,
"a little looting," ignoring the gunfire and other deadly attacks.

I did see the image of the gutted Family Dollar* store, and I wish that people wouldn't do that sort of thing. Family Dollar is a low-end retailer that gets much of its revenue  from people swiping food-aid cards at the register. Obviously, rioters generally have a poor understanding of economics at any level. Besides, people who work there often are unable to get other work or need a second job to pay the high costs of living if their othyer job pays little.  

Quote:I could compile a list of dozens of similar incidents in the last
year.  These are incidents of left-wing antifa-blm fascist violence,
and the violence is similar to the Nazi's Kristallnacht.

When leftists claim "right-wing violence," they're usually talking
about words on a web site.  I don't call that violence, but if you
do, then you also have to say that leftish threats of revolution,
including some threats from prominent Democrats, are also violence.

Words and images can promote violence. The venomous Nazi rag Der Stürmer exemplified stochastic terrorism (although that phrase had yet to be coined) at its worst. Obviously the situation was far worse for the Jews of Hitlerland who had no means of refuting its content due to the strict censorship of German media that was swiftly put into place. It is easy for Jews to refute this sort of garbage almost anywhere in which there is some semblance of freedom of the press, 

 

(Content is the long-discredited Blood Libel that asserts that Jews kill Christian children for blood and bones to be incorporated into Jewish foods for consumption on High Holy Days. The Blood Libel is so ludicrous in view of Jewish ethical values prohibiting murder and the Kashrut dietary rules that preclude the consumption of blood in food of any kind that only a fool could believe it. Nazi media of course made fools of German gentiles who read this bilge. The highly-visible motto at the bottom translates "The Jews are our misfortune!"

There was nothing wrong with the German people from the bloodletting of the Thirty Years' War to the end of World War II that Judaism would not have solved without doing harm!)

Quote:So if you want me to condemn right-wing violence, how about providing
a list of several specific examples that you'd like me to condemn.

I did a quick check, and couldn't find any stories about actual Proud
Boys violence.  I did find the story about the Wolverine Watchman
threatening Gretchen Wilmer, and you can't really call that violence,
although it is a threat of violence, and is therefore illegal.  I
condemn it anyway.

I live in Michigan, so let me disabuse you of your misconception. It was a conspiracy to kidnap the elected Governor of Michigan for which she was to be taken to a 'safe' location to be lynched. This looks like a dangerous conspiracy because it could have culminated in her death. So suppose that you start a plot with some shady-seeming characters to murder your business partner to collect on an insurance policy on that partner whose survival is essential for the survival of your shared business unless you get a huge payout?

The best thing that can happen is that the shady-looking characters be cops who thwart the crime. The story might go like this: the undercover cops get to your partner and tell him of the plot. They and your partner stage the partner's death (food coloring to imitate blood, and the partner takes a distressed pose simulating death) of which the cops take photos. Now that you are to collect from the insurance company, the cops come back with the fake photos and ask to be paid. You pay an installment, the rest to be paid when the insurance company pays. You cry some crocodile tears, and then the ghostly apparition of the partner you thought had died comes through the door. That apparition is very much alive, and the cops handcuff you. You get a lengthy stay in a penitentiary. 

Conspiracy is itself a felony in the Anglo-American legal tradition. People with the desire to do something lawful do not need to conspire. Good people often face temptation, but cavil at the idea of doing something illegal -- including plotting an illegal act. 

I saw transcripts of the conversations of the plotters. To be sure, the large number of f-words and antifeminist language left me little doubt that the people fingered lacked the discipline necessary for success at such a plot. These people do not resemble the tragic failure of the July 20 plot against Satan Incarnate (would that their plot have succeeded with the saving of several million lives!)    

Quote:The point is that I can point to dozens, perhaps hundreds, of examples
of left-wing violence, that you refuse to condemn, but you can only
point to a couple of examples of right wing violence, which I condemn
without hesitation.

What you call left-wing violence (if you are going to call looting and destruction of property "violence")  is almost entirely spur-of-the-moment deeds by people mostly criminals at other times. It is property crime (or personal violence if someone is assaulted or battered) whose illegality isn't repudiated. People looting a store will be caught on camera and prosecuted. 

This is not Detroit in the 1960's, when few people had video cameras that they could use for documenting police brutality. Protestors who have no intention of riotous acts might use the camera that they carry for catching police going awry may end up taking still or moving images of looting, vandalism, arson, and assaults. A fair warning to anyone who would take advantage of a protest for the commission of a crime: peaceful protesters with limited agendas (like stopping police brutality) are not the friends of someone who takes a cart out of Target with un-bagged merchandise or who torches a car. Note well that at riots, news media were taking video footage of riotous acts, and the news media were forwarding much of the footage to police and prosecutors. 
 

Quote:The other difference is that you and other leftists and Democrats
refuse to condemn antifa-blm fascist violence, while I'm willing to
condemn, without hesitation, any examples of right-wing violence.

Antifa is untrustworthy. Black Lives Matters has no organization, and seemingly anyone can join a protest. I did for a short time, but I left only because I saw too few people wearing masks. Some jerk did bring a Confederate flag, and I shouted "Burn that flag!"... well, the Confederate flag is a flag of disgrace.  

Quote:Therefore, it's perfectly reasonable, and certainly not partisan, to
emphasize left-wing violence, while mostly ignoring right-wing
violence, except to thoroughly condemn it whenever it occurs.

You failed to recognize the Michigan plot for the danger that it posed and the affront that it made toward free elections. 

*Family Dollar is a low-end retailer, in case you have never been in one, that largely sells to people that the American Dream has abandoned.

(10-28-2020, 07:38 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Again, the violence in Philadelphia was initiated by the red racist violent police

The Philadelphia police ultimately report to a Democrat mayor.  If your description of the violence is true, it's left on left violence that has nothing to do with the right:  it's like Hitler getting rid of the Brown Shirts in the Night of the Long Knives.

(10-27-2020, 09:26 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]So many European officials have been shocked this month by a new
surge in virus cases, sometimes to the levels last seen in March.
And the people in Europe are also shocked because they were finally
working again, but are now potentially facing new lockdowns and
unemployment again.

In Italy, by early summer, new virus caseloads had dropped to as low
as 200 per day, and almost all of Italy's lockdowns were lifted.
However, new cases have again increased to tens of thousands per week.

Notably, the cases did not resurge until months after the restrictions were lifted.  Coincidentally - at least I'm sure the authorities in Europe think it's a coincidence - the resurgence occurred just as the temperatures dropped to where they were when covid started receding in the Spring.

(10-29-2020, 11:15 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-28-2020, 07:38 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Again, the violence in Philadelphia was initiated by the red racist violent police

The Philadelphia police ultimately report to a Democrat mayor.  If your description of the violence is true, it's left on left violence that has nothing to do with the right:  it's like Hitler getting rid of the Brown Shirts in the Night of the Long Knives.

There are bad cops in many departments, and a conflict between those who are committing racist violent acts and the Democratic governments that they are supposedly responsible towards. I believe this is the case in Philadelphia, that the mayor would have preferred deescalation before lethal force was engaged. Trump and many other reds favor racist supremacy over minorities and are hostile towards minorities. This has to be resolved, not ignored.

(10-29-2020, 11:15 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-28-2020, 07:38 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Again, the violence in Philadelphia was initiated by the red racist violent police

The Philadelphia police ultimately report to a Democrat mayor.  If your description of the violence is true, it's left on left violence that has nothing to do with the right:  it's like Hitler getting rid of the Brown Shirts in the Night of the Long Knives.

CNN reports Philadelphia City Council passes bill banning use of tear gas, rubber bullets and pepper spray during protests.  This illustrates the conflict in preferred methods between the city government and the police.  The police shot without first trying deescalation, and is obviously using confrontational methods more than the local government would prefer.

Now not all reds are racist.  I wouldn't make a blanket accusation.  Still, there is a strong racist element.  From Trump, to the KKK, to the Proud Boys, to the Wolverine Watchmen, to the racist violent police, the red have become associated with the violence.  Reducing violence and the oppression of minorities has become associated with the the blue.  This doesn't mean there aren't exceptions, people who will swap on this issue.  That is the trend, though.  The red has more than it's share of instigators.

The problem on this site though is the red ideologist who ignore or make excuses for the racism and conflict between the bad cops and the city governments in particular, and the red violence in general. If you don't admit the red violence exists, how are you going to fight it?

** 30-Oct-2020 World View: Philadelphia

(10-28-2020, 07:38 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]> Again, the violence in Philadelphia was initiated by the red
> racist violent police, shooting without making attempts to
> deescalate. Again, the Proud Boys moved from rural red areas to
> Portland with both paint ball guns and real guns with the
> objective to instigate violence. Again, Trump used violence
> against protesters exercising their First Amendment rights in
> order to get a photo op. Red violence exists. The violence will
> not stop until the red extremists stop instigating it. No amount
> of ignoring the obvious will make your partisan interpretation of
> it seem valid to anyone who does not share your extremist
> ideology.

No, that's wrong.

The violence in Philadelphia was initiated by a madman carrying a
sharp knife and attacking two policemen. That's your lie #1.

There's no evidence that the two policemen were "red racist violent
police." Just because you claim something doesn't make it true. You
can't just make up facts willy-nilly to suit your purpose. That's
your lie #2.

The Proud Boys instigating violence is not actual violence (though if
it was violence then I condemn it and I condemn the proud boys
completely), and it certainly does not justify the massive antifa-blm
violence in Portland and other cities run by Democratic mayors. The
massive antifa-blm violence has nothing to do with the Proud Boys.
That's your lie #3.

Your photo op story bears only marginal relationship to reality.
That's your lie #4.

And the violence will not stop under any circumstances, because
antifa-blm is committed to violence. That's your lie #5.

(10-28-2020, 07:38 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]> The violence will not stop until the red extremists stop
> instigating it.

Now that's a very interesting statement, and totally delusional
to the point of insanity, but I finally understand what's going
on.

There has been massive antifa-blm fascist violence in cities across
the country but you refuse to condemn this massive violence or
antifa-blm. Why? Because you have this delusional belief that the
violence was instigated by Proud Boys or Trump or whoever.

In other words, you don't even believe in left-wing violence. And if
there is any fascist violence by left-wingers, then it's not left-wing
violence at all!!!! It's right-wing violence!!! Truly incredible, and
completely delusional to the point of insanity.

As I try to figure out what's going on, my mind turns to what I think
of as the "Democrat culture" or the "Democrat mind."

What's the Democrat culture all about? Well, I look at history.
You're obviously totally imbued in the Democrat culture, so if you had
lived a century ago, you probably would have belonged to the KKK, and
you would have been cheering violence against blacks, because that's
what Democrats did a century ago. I can imagine you saying, "Yaaaa!
Lynch another black boy!! Yaaah! Rape another black girl!
Yaaahhhhh!! Kill another black man!" That's what you would be saying,
because you're a Democrat imbued in the Democrat culture, and that's
what Democrats were saying a century ago.

And here's the kicker: As a Democrat, you wouldn't even consider that
violence against blacks to be violence. In your mind, it would be the
fault of some Civil War general or some Republican politician, because
they had instigated it. So even though, as an obedient Democrat, you
would be cheering lynchings, rapes and murder of blacks, in your
delusional mind, those would be Republican violence, not Democrat
violence, because the Republicans instigated it.

So, for example, if you raped and murdered a girl, it wouldn't be your
fault, because Trump instigated it!!!

So coming back to today, we have massive antifa-blm fascist violence
across the country, targeting 63 million Tea Partiers and
Trump supporters, and it's exactly the same as Democrat violence
targeting blacks a century ago, and the same delusional excuses
are being used -- it's not violence by Democrats, it's violence
by Republicans. That's the Democrat culture. Amazing!

** 30-Oct-2020 World View: Michigan

(10-29-2020, 08:56 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]> I live in Michigan, so let me disabuse you of your
> misconception. It was a conspiracy to kidnap the elected Governor
> of Michigan for which she was to be taken to a 'safe' location to
> be lynched. This looks like a dangerous conspiracy because it
> could have culminated in her death. So suppose that you start a
> plot with some shady-seeming characters to murder your business
> partner to collect on an insurance policy on that partner whose
> survival is essential for the survival of your shared business
> unless you get a huge payout?

Not suprisingly, you're completely missing the point, and probably
doing so purposely.

Fine. The conspiracy was violence. Whether it was violence makes no
difference to the point being made. Violence or no violence, I
condemn it completely, and I condemn the Wolverine Watchman
organization completely (and incidentally so did Trump), and I would
be happy to see the entire Wolverine Watchman organization put into
jail. Go for it!

The point is that you won't say the same thing about antifa-blm
violence. To you, fascist violence by antifa-blm is GOOD violence
because it targets your hated 63 million tea partiers and
Trump supporters. As I described in my previous post, a century
ago, you would think that KKK violence was GOOD violence, because
it would target the hated blacks who had escaped slavery thanks
to the hated Republicans. That's the Democrat culture, and it's
exactly the same today as it was a century ago.

I don't understand why blacks support Democrats, since if the
Democrats had their way, then blacks would still be picking cotton for
their white massas.

And while we're at it, since you keep talking about the Nazis, the
fascist antifa-blm violence going on today is exactly the same as the
Nazi's Kristallnacht violence. And just as you blame the massive
antifa-blm violence on so-called "right-wing extremists" like
Wolverine Watchman, the Nazis blamed Kristallnacht on the Jews.

In fact, it's very hard not to feel that the Nazis have taken over
completely in the United States. You don't know anything about this,
because you're being purposely kept in the dark so that you won't get
confused, but in the last 2-3 weeks there has been a massive flood of
evidence that Hunter Biden and Joe Biden are criminally guilty of
influence peddling, money laundering, extortion, and other crimes, and
people are coming out of the woodwork to confirm it. This is now
fact, but the facts have been completely suppressed by the mainstream
media to make sure that you don't know about it. Twitter has been
obediently cooperating by shutting down any twitter account that dares
to even post links to the truth. Thus, twitter has shut down the
NYPost account, several administration accounts, several twitter
accounts of conservatives, and so forth -- all to make sure that
you're kept complete stupid, happy and obedient, and to preserve
"plausible deniability" by the Bidens.

So you must be in hog heaven. The criminal Biden family is about to
take over the presidency, and the Nazis are controlling the media, and
burning down businesses owned by the hated tea partiers. The
Democrats LOVES that kind of stuff, whether it's the KKK, antifa-blm,
or the NY Times. They're all the same.

By the way, for anyone reading this who'd like to have some idea of
what's actually going on in the world, watch the Fox News evening
lineup, especially Tucker Carlson and Hannity. For the rest of you,
just watch CNN and stay dumb, stupid and happy.

The account I read of the incident had the police initiating violence without trying to escalate.  The problem with various news organizations creating different version of reality may have something to do with it.  At any rate, shooting a black man without an attempt to deescalate is a problem.  These police are definitely violent in that they discharged their weapons.  The racist label is assumed as this has been a persistent nationwide problem, a much wider problem than one incident, and the red attempt to justify a continuation of the policy.

Going from a rural to a urban area with both paint and real guns and attempting to instigate trouble counts as instigation.  The opposite doing similar things as well, but I cannot think of that happening.  The blue do not instigate violence.  If you consider this acceptable, your bias is showing.  I do not consider it acceptable.

Antifa is an anti fascist organization.  Originally they opposed the KKK and the Neo Nazi.  The violence involving those three are equally the fault of red and blue, somewhat encouraged by Trump who thinks there are fine people on both sides, rejected by a lot of blues.  Recently, we had the one person defending against a knife wielding Proud Boy as well.  I will reject all this as thoroughly as you, but the ability to wield arms in self defense and defense of the community is real in the US.

Various Boogaloo Bois, looters, tourists seeking to camp out and others have been misidentified as Antifa by assorted reds.  If you wish to not pay attention to the stated motives and majority motives, that is your problem.  Antifa is a diverse group.  There are people who use the name without adhering to the original vigilante prime motivation.  That is, the core action is to defend against red fascist violence.  

I would assume this should stop.  For the most part is has.  The KKK and Neo Nazis have faded from the scene lately.  The Proud Boys lost one knife wielder then ceased their provocations.  As long as there is no red instigation, the pure Antifa motivation would compel they watch only.  

I would prefer that it all stop, but a lot of young folk think violence is some sort of sick fun game.  But the red keep assuming actions by other organizations are Antifa acting.  I cannot stop their gung ho assumptions and propaganda.

The teargassing of peaceful protesters so Trump could have a photo op holding up a Bible in front of a church is well documented.  That you could have missed that incident only indicates how much of a bubble you live in.

The violence will continue as long as the red continue to instigate it.  The pure Antifa motivation of vigilante defense against those who use violence is sorta justified.  The red labeling of other organizations Antifa is not justified.  Using the Antifa name when you have another motivation proves nothing.

I am of the urban progressive motivation, the heirs of the roundheads, those that immigrated to New England during the English Civil War rather than the Cavaliers of the rural conservative settling in the South.  See the Cousin’s Wars for details.  The two parties switched affiliation on racial issues with LBJ going after the black vote, and the Republicans going with the southern strategy.  Thus, your characterization of me is entirely wrong.  Hating and oppressing minorities is much more a red thing today.

To the degree that the Trump Access Hollywood tapes encouraged treating women like dirt, he may have encourage others to treat women like dirt.  To some degree he could well have instigated the division and contempt.  It is just his style.  I can’t prove any one incident could be blamed on Trump, or use the fact that one is a rabid Republican in a rape trial, but the policy of treating women and minorities with contempt is a Republican tendency.  Not all of them, but some.  The way you characterize me, you are one of them.

(10-30-2020, 08:25 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]** 30-Oct-2020 World View: Michigan

(10-29-2020, 08:56 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]>   I live in Michigan, so let me disabuse you of your
>   misconception. It was a conspiracy to kidnap the elected Governor
>   of Michigan for which she was to be taken to a 'safe' location to
>   be lynched. This looks like a dangerous conspiracy because it
>   could have culminated in her death. So suppose that you start a
>   plot with some shady-seeming characters to murder your business
>   partner to collect on an insurance policy on that partner whose
>   survival is essential for the survival of your shared business
>   unless you get a huge payout?

Not suprisingly, you're completely missing the point, and probably
doing so purposely.

Fine.  The conspiracy was violence.  Whether it was violence makes no
difference to the point being made.  Violence or no violence, I
condemn it completely, and I condemn the Wolverine Watchman
organization completely (and incidentally so did Trump), and I would
be happy to see the entire Wolverine Watchman organization put into
jail.  Go for it!

I expect federal and state law enforcement to do their jobs. I am not going to predict the results of any legal process; I have been burned too many times with such predictions to do such any more.

Quote:The point is that you won't say the same thing about antifa-blm
violence.  To you, fascist violence by antifa-blm is GOOD violence
because it targets your hated 63 million tea partiers and
Trump supporters.  As I described in my previous post, a century
ago, you would think that KKK violence was GOOD violence, because
it would target the hated blacks who had escaped slavery thanks
to the hated Republicans.  That's the Democrat culture, and it's
exactly the same today as it was a century ago.

As I said, I do not trust Antifa. It has nothing to do with Black Lives Matter. 

Quote:I don't understand why blacks support Democrats, since if the
Democrats had their way, then blacks would still be picking cotton for
their white massas.

The Democratic Party and the Republican Party have shifted completely in affiliation. over about seventy years.

  

Quote:When all is said and done, I think that the Obama and Eisenhower Presidencies are going to look like good analogues. Both Presidents are chilly rationalists. Both are practically scandal-free administrations. Both started with a troublesome war that both found their way out of. Neither did much to 'grow' the strength of their Parties in either House of Congress. To compare ISIS to Fidel Castro is completely unfair to Fidel Castro, a gentleman by contrast to ISIS. 

The definitive moderate Republican may have been Dwight Eisenhower, and I have heard plenty of Democrats praise the Eisenhower Presidency. He went along with Supreme Court rulings that outlawed segregationist practices, stayed clear of the McCarthy bandwagon, and let McCarthy implode.


 
gray -- did not vote in 1952 or 1956
white -- Eisenhower twice, Obama twice
deep blue -- Republican all four elections
light blue -- Republican all but 2012 (I assume that greater Omaha went for Ike twice)
light green -- Eisenhower once, Stevenson once, Obama never
dark green -- Stevenson twice, Obama never
pink -- Stevenson twice, Obama once 

No state voted Democratic all four times, so no state is in deep red.

This map suggests that partisan affiliations more changed than did the political cultures of the states. Of course there will be some demographic change over 60 years... but note well: Eisenhower and Obama did well with the best-educated people of their times. The states in green are mostly the states among the worst in formal education. 

I expect something similar as the result of the 2020 election. 

Quote:And while we're at it, since you keep talking about the Nazis, the
fascist antifa-blm violence going on today is exactly the same as the
Nazi's Kristallnacht violence.  And just as you blame the massive
antifa-blm violence on so-called "right-wing extremists" like
Wolverine Watchman, the Nazis blamed Kristallnacht on the Jews.

I will not allow people to blame the Other Guy for violent and destructive behavior. BLM is about a narrow issue of trigger-happy cops and not about making life easy for violent offenders. BLM is consistent with "do the crime, do the time".     

Quote:In fact, it's very hard not to feel that the Nazis have taken over
completely in the United States.  You don't know anything about this,
because you're being purposely kept in the dark so that you won't get
confused, but in the last 2-3 weeks there has been a massive flood of
evidence that Hunter Biden and Joe Biden are criminally guilty of
influence peddling, money laundering, extortion, and other crimes, and
people are coming out of the woodwork to confirm it.  This is now
fact, but the facts have been completely suppressed by the mainstream
media to make sure that you don't know about it.  Twitter has been
obediently cooperating by shutting down any twitter account that dares
to even post links to the truth.  Thus, twitter has shut down the
NYPost account, several administration accounts, several twitter
accounts of conservatives, and so forth -- all to make sure that
you're kept complete stupid, happy and obedient, and to preserve
"plausible deniability" by the Bidens.

uhhhh... no.

Trump has done terrible things, and the electoral results on Tuesday will test whether Americans trust Trump more than they trust Biden.

Quote:So you must be in hog heaven.  The criminal Biden family is about to
take over the presidency, and the Nazis are controlling the media, and
burning down businesses owned by the hated tea partiers.  The
Democrats LOVES that kind of stuff, whether it's the KKK, antifa-blm,
or the NY Times.  They're all the same.

Trump is neck deep in corruption. Abuse of power is his norm.

Quote:By the way, for anyone reading this who'd like to have some idea of
what's actually going on in the world, watch the Fox News evening
lineup, especially Tucker Carlson and Hannity.  For the rest of you,
just watch CNN and stay dumb, stupid and happy.

Here's an assessment of the reliability of FoX News. It has a strong right-wing bias and it is not a reliable source.

Quote:According to a Pew Research Center survey “Fox News was the main source for 40% of Trump voters” during the 2016 election. Further, another Pew Survey indicates “When it comes to choosing a media source for political news, conservatives orient strongly around Fox News. Nearly half of consistent conservatives (47%) name it as their main source for government and political news.”  

Fox News typically looks at the issues from a conservative perspective and also has a number of on-air personalities that are strong supporters of Trump, such as Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, and Tomi Lahren. FNC typically skews conservative as there is less criticism of Trump, therefore the majority of stories are pro-Trump.
In review, FNC publishes stories with emotionally loaded headlines such as “’They Wanted It to Blow Up’: Limbaugh Says Success of Trump-Kim Summit Caught Media Off Guard” and “Tucker: 2016 Russia Collusion ‘Witch Hunt’ Now Extends to Jill Stein.” When it comes to sourcing they typically utilize pro-Trump pundits such as Rush Limbaugh who has a very poor record with fact-checkers, as well as credible sources such as the Wall Street Journal. Fox News is also known to publish right-wing conspiracy theories, although after being sued they retracted the story. FNC has also been deemed the least accurate cable news source according to Politifact.

A factual search reveals several failed fact checks by news hosts.

• Says John Bolton “fundamentally was a man of the left.” – PANTS OF FIRE
  
  
• “The president said he’s going to bring in 250,000 (Syrian and Iraqi) refugees into this country.” – PANTS ON FIRE
  
  
• “Far more children died last year drowning in their bathtubs than were killed accidentally by guns.” – PANTS ON FIRE
  
  
• “NASA scientists fudged the numbers to make 1998 the hottest year to overstate the extent of global warming.” – PANTS ON FIRE
  
  
• Obamacare is “one big fat VA system.” – PANTS ON FIRE
  
  
• Says Marie Yovanovitch was “dishonest” when she claimed under oath that she never personally responded to an email from a Democratic staffer. But “in fact, it turns out that she did respond.” – FALSE
  
  
  

Overall, we rate Fox News strongly Right-Biased due to editorial positions and story selection that favors the right. We also rate them Mixed factually and borderline Questionable based on poor sourcing and the spreading of conspiracy theories that later must be retracted after being widely shared. Further, Fox News would be rated a Questionable source based on numerous failed fact checks by hosts and pundits, however, straight news reporting is generally reliable, therefore we rate them Mixed for factual reporting. (7/19/2016) Updated (M. Huitsing 9/19/2020)

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news/

Media Bias Fact Check does not have a flattering view of CNN, by the way. 

Quote: In review, CNN presents straight news coverage with a left-leaning bias in story selection that is often critical of the right. For example, during the 2016 Presidential Election Pew Research concluded that the majority of CNN stories covering President Donald Trump were negative. While less dramatic, Pew also determined that more stories were negative toward Presidential candidate Mitt Romney in 2012.


Editorially, CNN’s programming almost exclusively favors the left. For example, a typical panel discussion will feature 4 to 8 guest commentators with one being a Republican, such as Rick Santorum. This creates a situation where left-leaning voices drown out the right. 

CNN typically utilizes loaded emotional words in sensational headlines such as this: Trump pounces on Justice Department report findings. They usually source their news properly through credible reporters/journalists and through hyperlinking to credible media sources. However, CNN has failed several fact checks from Politifact. It should be noted that these fact checks were almost exclusively from guests on their numerous talk shows and not from the reporting of actual news, which tends to be factual. TV hosts have also failed fact checks by IFCN fact-checkers. Further, CNN has retracted published stories that have been deemed as lacking evidence. Finally, CNN has published misleading information regarding GMOs that utilize loaded fear-based headlines such as this: FDA allows genetically engineered ‘Frankenfish’ salmon to be imported to US. CNN has also utilized known purveyors of pseudoscience as experts on discussion panels such as the Food Babe.

A 2014 Pew Research Survey found that 44% of CNN’s audience is consistently or mostly liberal, 40% Mixed and 20% consistently or mostly conservative. This indicates that CNN is preferred by a more liberal audience.

Failed Fact Checks

• “I was able to go and buy an automatic weapon … Most people can go out and buy an automatic weapon.” – FALSE
  
  
• “1 percent of candidates that (the National Rifle Association) endorsed in 2012 won.” – FALSE
  
  
• “ISIS lures women with kittens, nutella.” – MOSTLY FALSE
  
  
• “Trump’s claim that there are 13 Democrats on Mueller’s team is also false,” – FALSE
  
  
• Coronavirus: Facial Hair Recommendations Not Shared By The CDC – FALSE
  
  
• If President Trump decides to deploy the U.S. military domestically, he would be “mobilizing U.S. military troops on American soil for the first time since 1807.” – False (Corrected)
  
  
•  “Greenland’s ice sheet has melted to a point of no return, according to new study” – Low Scientific Credibility
  

Overall, we rate CNN left biased based on editorial positions that consistently favors the left, while straight news reporting falls left-center through bias by omission. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to several failed fact checks by TV hosts. However, news reporting on the website tends to be properly sourced with minimal failed fact checks. (5/16/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 09/22/2020)

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

CNN and FoX are similarly good on breaking news; it is in news analysis that breaks down their credibility. I heavily rely upon the AP wires that, due to blitz reporting, offer news without fluff. There might not be enough stories to entertain one, but if you want entertainment go rent a video.  (It helps that I am priced out of pay-cable at any level and rely upon broadcast TV or the Internet.

Regrettably one of the TV channels that I get is owned by Sinclair Media Holdings, which I smear with the sobriquet "Stinking Liar".

** 30-Oct-2020 World View: Antifa-blm fascist violence

I vaguely remember that when I first heard about antifa it was about
protests, mostly peaceful but with threats of violence, targeting
conservative speakers on college campuses. Antifa calls itself
"anti-fascist," but conservative speakers on college campuses are not
fascists. It was antifa that was fascist because they were shutting
down free speech, which is one of the main things that fascists do.

It was clear to me that antifa was calling itself anti-fascist in
order to fool people into ignoring the fact that they were the
fascists. That's when I decided to call antifa a fascist
organization.

This became more and more apparent as they became more and more
violent.

As for blm, I can no longer distinguish them from antifa. Maybe
there's a difference, but they all look the same to me, looting,
burning down cities, shooting policemen, and so forth. So, for the
time being, I've simplified my life by referring to antifa-blm as an
organization involved in fascist violence. Maybe I'll see a
difference later, but right now, they're the same.

And right now, stores are being boarded up in cities across the
country. There are a lot of people predicting that there will be a
lot more antifa-blm fascist violence next week after the election, no
matter who wins.

Antifa was strong - and violent - in Europe, especially in violent protests against G10 meetings, before they made any appearance at all in the US.

To be fair, they do have roots in organizations that were against fascism - the Communist international movement of the 1930s.

(10-31-2020, 12:38 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]Antifa was strong - and violent - in Europe, especially in violent protests against G10 meetings, before they made any appearance at all in the US.

To be fair, they do have roots in organizations that were against fascism - the Communist international movement of the 1930s.

Yes. Europe is not America, and the 1930s is not today. Some people do not adequately tell the difference.

Counter protest is common enough on both sides.  For example, the Proud Boys in Portland were counter protesting Black Lives Matter.  I can regret that this often involves impeding free speech and instigating violence, but both sides counter protest.

You have your ideological delusions, will attribute to Antifa what others are doing.  I cannot fix your ideological delusions.  I can only correct your false claims as you do.

Right now the violence and protest seems to be fading as the election nears.  I suspect they will continue to fade as the people’s voice is heard, but we will see how badly Trump ignores that voice.  If he does, the voice could get rather loud.  The exception was the red Wolverine Watchman plot against the Michigan governor.  A lot of business are in trouble, but more from the bug than the violence.  Trump’s declining to fight the bug, and the red resistance to protecting the community is at fault.

** 31-Oct-2020 World View: Trump rallies

(10-31-2020, 05:42 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]> Right now the violence and protest seems to be fading as the
> election nears. I suspect they will continue to fade as the
> people’s voice is heard, but we will see how badly Trump ignores
> that voice. If he does, the voice could get rather loud. The
> exception was the red Wolverine Watchman plot against the Michigan
> governor. A lot of business are in trouble, but more from the bug
> than the violence. Trump’s declining to fight the bug, and the red
> resistance to protecting the community is at fault.

Are you kidding? Have you not watched even a single Trump rally?
Every single rally gets tens of thousands of cheering supporters, and
this enthusiasm has been growing each day. I've never seen anything
like it in my lifetime.

By contrast, a Biden rally generally gets only about 5-10 people.
It's really pathetic. Who wants to watch Biden? He's a bitter, angry
old man with growing dementia. Biden voters couldn't care less about
Biden, who's a cheap crook, but are voting for Biden because they hate
the 63 million tea partiers and Trump supporters.

But you wouldn't know about any of this because CNN, MSNBC, and the
mainstream media think that you're stupid and they're blocking
anything that they think might confuse you. So they block news about
Trump rallies, antifa-blm fascist violence, and Biden family criminal
activities. You know absolutely nothing about these things, because
you're an obedient submissive Democrat who always says and does as
you're told.

Here's a fun fact: I often switch back and forth between FNC and CNN,
since they're adjacent channels. FNC is carrying BOTH the Trump and
Biden rallies live, as part of their "fair and balanced" coverage.
CNN, as far as I can tell, is not carrying either of them live, in
order to protect you from knowing what's going on. I suppose that
keeping CNN viewers dumb, stupid and happy is another form of "fair
and balanced" coverage.

Once again, for anyone reading this, if you want to have a clue about
what's actually going on, the only source today is Fox News.

The Trump rallies?  You mean his super spreader events?  The celebrations of lies?  I’ve seen glimpses.  I will not deny he can and has gathered fairly big crowds of fanatic supporters, though somewhat smaller of late since a few events have failed to come close to previous levels.  It shows his collapse, exposes some prudence even among his fanatics.  His campaign is choosing smaller venues as a result, often airport parking lots.  The shrinking size is less obvious.  It also exposes these people to the open air, resulting in extra trips to the hospital, due to the weather, and later due to COVID.

The difference is the Democrats are following the science, avoiding large no mask crowded gatherings.  By setting an example Biden is striving for leadership and showing concern for his people.  You wouldn’t understand.

But I was speaking of a lack of violence lately.  So far as I have heard, neither party’s presidential rallies have been violent beyond a few hecklers?  Trump does encourage violence then, but that is fairly small short term.  You contend otherwise?

Fox spends a bit too much time covering Earth Two.  If I paid attention to that, I might get as off on my understanding as Generational Dynamics.

Lol! Lol!

A typical response. I have come to expect it when you have no logical answer. The bravado of ideological gridlock.