Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7374
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 10 Nov 2016, 11:15 am

What is the viewpoint of the Redscape community regarding the unrest from the election. I don't recall this happening with the election of President Obama. I know the Tea Party came about because of the 2008 election, but they were civil.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/560421/hillary-clinton-voters-riot-donald-trump-us-election-win

Broken windows in Oakland
Shooting in Seattle
Blocking traffic in Chicago and NY

Is this the peaceful and respectful transition and support that was spoken about by Mrs. Clinton and President Obama?
User avatar
Dignitary
 
Posts: 1087
Joined: 13 Feb 2000, 11:18 am

Post 10 Nov 2016, 3:14 pm

bbauska wrote:What is the viewpoint of the Redscape community regarding the unrest from the election. I don't recall this happening with the election of President Obama. I know the Tea Party came about because of the 2008 election, but they were civil.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/560421/hillary-clinton-voters-riot-donald-trump-us-election-win

Broken windows in Oakland
Shooting in Seattle
Blocking traffic in Chicago and NY

Is this the peaceful and respectful transition and support that was spoken about by Mrs. Clinton and President Obama?


Ironic, isn't it? Liberals condemned Trump and his supporters for, among other things, inciting violence through so-called racist and non-PC language. Well, they were correct! Only, it's the "tolerant, non-judgmental, inclusive" liberals who are creating the violence, physically assaulting people for their beliefs, pleading for assassinations, etc. Professors are cancelling tests and classes so their precious snowflakes can grieve and deal with their trauma. At least one college professor and some newspapers have gone so far as to ludicrously compare Trump to Hitler and the Holocaust (http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/comparing-trump-to-hitler-trivializes-the-holocaust/)! I heard another student interviewed on NPR who got upset because he couldn't understand how Trump could win if Hillary won the popular vote. The interviewer told him it was because of the Electoral College. The college kid thought it was wrong and that Hillary, a lawyer, should sue the US government to maker her the president. Nothing like well-educated students, steeped in reality.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 10 Nov 2016, 6:10 pm

Well, how about these incidents

https://www.google.com/amp/www.usnews.c ... ent=safari
User avatar
Dignitary
 
Posts: 1087
Joined: 13 Feb 2000, 11:18 am

Post 10 Nov 2016, 7:57 pm

freeman3 wrote:Well, how about these incidents

https://www.google.com/amp/www.usnews.c ... ent=safari


Sure, I'll grant you those, even when we eliminate those that are "faked" and put up as pranks. But that kind of small-minded hate has existed for a very long time. Neither inclusive Democrats nor Rich Republicans have been able to eradicate this culture-based ignorance. Nor will I buy the argument that Republicans coddle such people or thinking.

Trump is NOT an example of standard Republican Thought, since he ran against the The Republican Party as much as he ran against The Democratic Party.

No. The events I have cited are examples that grew out of this specific election and show a remarkable degree of ignorance and violence equaling what you cited. And these come from Democrats/Liberals who present themselves as morally superior, better educated, inclusive, non-judgmental, and peace-loving.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 10 Nov 2016, 8:21 pm

Trump is saying they are professional protesters who are protesting against him :yes:
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7374
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 10 Nov 2016, 8:35 pm

http://klfy.com/2016/11/10/lafayette-pd-ul-student-made-up-story-about-attack-stolen-hijab/

Or this one...

If someone does something wrong, they are personally responsible. Punish to the fullest extent of the law.
User avatar
Dignitary
 
Posts: 1087
Joined: 13 Feb 2000, 11:18 am

Post 10 Nov 2016, 8:41 pm

freeman3 wrote:Trump is saying they are professional protesters who are protesting against him :yes:


Well, you do recall the recordings of DFL and Clinton Campaign officials soliciting and approving violent protests and actions at Trump rallies, right? (i.e. Project Veritas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBxNG-oeNDw). I'll grant you some of the Veritas commentary by O'keefe is dramatic, but the comments of the campaign and DNC officials and contractors seems pretty damning. On the other hand, I am uncomfortable with the editing, which lends itself to criticisms of cherry-picking and hiding the context. But you can't ignore it all, such as this Zulema Rodriguez activist, who gets paid by various Liberal PACTs and appears in protests in Chicago and Arizona. But this is all different. I would bet this is what Trump refers to.

These post-election protests seem like rank-and-file Liberals, as far as I can see. We'll see how this shakes out.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 10 Nov 2016, 9:00 pm

His tweet actually makes no sense. How could the media incite professional protesters? I mean, if they are professional then no need for the media to incite, right.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.usatoday ... ent=safari

We are in for a wild ride...
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 10 Nov 2016, 9:20 pm

Hmm, I would like to incorporate that on my tombstone:

"Here lies a person who was morally superior, better educated, inclusive, non-judgmental and peace-loving being...and good looking...either that, or he was a narcissist."

"Or, now that I have time to think about it, I would rather be living under a Trump presidency..."
User avatar
Dignitary
 
Posts: 3486
Joined: 02 Oct 2000, 9:01 am

Post 14 Nov 2016, 8:47 am

bbauska wrote:What is the viewpoint of the Redscape community regarding the unrest from the election.


People have a right to express their opinions, and assemble to express their opinions. It's a shame that there has been some damage and violence.

As someone once said, elections have consequences, which means that there is no foundation to the protests. They'll peter out soon.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 14 Nov 2016, 9:02 am

a local professor was just fired for his "Hate speech" on social media.
He simply said something like:

To all those who feel this is not their America, a bus ticket to Canada is $16
I will buy you that ticket if you promise not to return.

Yet any and all who speak out against Trump face no discipline.
The university prides itself on free speech and thinking ...unless its contrary to their position, then it's "hate speech"
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 14 Nov 2016, 9:55 am

Well, I would not defend a liberal professor who got fired because he said that he would buy a ticket for Trump supporters to leave the country. It was hate speech directed against a certain group of people and furthermore I am sure it embarrassed the college or university. He should have known better. Now if he got fired for supporting Trump policies that would be different but telling people to leave the country that's over the line.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4961
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 14 Nov 2016, 11:10 am

freeman3 wrote:Well, I would not defend a liberal professor who got fired because he said that he would buy a ticket for Trump supporters to leave the country. It was hate speech directed against a certain group of people and furthermore I am sure it embarrassed the college or university. He should have known better. Now if he got fired for supporting Trump policies that would be different but telling people to leave the country that's over the line.


What's the legal definition of hate speech?
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 14 Nov 2016, 11:58 am

People are free to say what they want no matter how offensive it is. The government cannot infringe on people exercising that right. Employers need not continue to employ people whose speech they find is offensive, however.

So the professor had every right under the First Amendment to say what he said and the government is not allowed to curb that speech. It gets more complicated when a public employer is involved--there is a balancing test between the rights of an employee to comment on matters of public concern and the right of the public employer to efficiently carry out its public services.

So if he had a private employer there would be no issue firing him for those comments. Even for a public employer an employee who makes comments directed to a largely minority group of people telling them to get out of the country makes it more difficult for the government to carry out its functions because the professor's comments signal that the government will not treat people equally

I think the hate speech stuff arose in college campus code of conduct regulations. I don't know if he got fired for that reason but it need not be justified as being hate speech. Clearly, if he said all Mexicans get out of the country that would be hate speech. There is not one definition of hate speech but some kind of insulting or offensive speech based on race, gender or other cognizable group is in the ballpark. One would have to make an inference that the professor was biased against minorities in making his comments. That could be true but he could argue he was being very patriotic.

Freedom of speech is almost absolute (with regard to government regulation) but people are free to bring social and economic pressure to inhibit speech. So was the economic pressure brought to bear here "right"? I think so. He could have said that he finds the use of the term "not my America" to be offensive but instead of arguing that they are wrong he tells to get out of the country. Not a heck of a lot of content there and a lot of animosity. I see no problem with curbing that type of speech.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 14 Nov 2016, 12:33 pm

"Not our America"
...not hate speech (and doing so on Veterans day at that)

"I'll buy you that ticket to Canada"
...hate speech

Excuse me but I can't see the difference