‘Tolerant Liberals’ Commit Full-On Assault When Trump Supporter Stands by Her Views
The attackers called her a racist.
Cops are calling it a felony.
A woman in Washington found out first-hand just how tolerant liberals can be during an early morning confrontation outside a small D.C. takeout restaurant last month, and now the hunt is on.
The incident took place about 1 a.m. on March 16, according to WTTG, Fox 5, when a 29-year-old woman identified only by the name “Maricela” became involved in a political conversation with a man and two women who were definitely not supporters of President Donald Trump.
Since violence has been the go-to response of the anti-Trump resistance going back to the riots that greeted Trump’s inauguration in January of 2017, what happened next was predictable.
Conservative Tribune Daily Email
Breaking news updates and daily headlines from a news source you can trust.
Even if it was disturbing.
“I’m a Trump supporter. I stood by my views. And, they called me a racist. And then they started attacking me,” Maricela told Fox 5.
While the incident happened more than two weeks ago, it’s making news now because cops have been unable to find the attackers. Check out the news coverage here.
The two attackers are still being sought on felony assault charges, according to Fox News. A $1,000 reward is being offered.
Here’s the actual video D.C. police released. (There is no audio.)
No two ways about it, the media is going to hate this story.
RELATED: Dinesh D’Souza Just Posted a Brutal Soros Interview on the Holocaust
Since even before Trump won the presidency, the mainstream media has been trying desperately to paint Americans who opposed Hillary Clinton as being violence-prone racists, but the true story is almost the exact opposite.
Does the media downplay violence committed by liberal groups?
Trump’s victory was followed by a rash of hoax, anti-Muslim “crimes” that turned out to be lies so often it was difficult to keep track of them.
Meanwhile, violence against Trump supporters is disturbingly real.
From New York City to the West Coast, liberals have felt at liberty to turn their opposition to the president into violent actions against his supporters.
What sets this D.C. attack apart, though, is the apparent willingness by police to consider it a “suspected hate crime,” according to WTTG.
Naturally, being liberals, the two women who attacked Maricela were the ones caller her a racist.
But the cops are calling it a felony. https://conservativetribune.com/tolerant-liberals-commit-full-assault/
“Since even before Trump won the presidency, the mainstream media has been trying desperately to paint Americans who opposed Hillary Clinton as being violence-prone racists, but the true story is almost the exact opposite.
Trump’s victory was followed by a rash of hoax, anti-Muslim “crimes” that turned out to be lies so often it was difficult to keep track of them.
Meanwhile, violence against Trump supporters is disturbingly real.
From New York City to the West Coast, liberals have felt at liberty to turn their opposition to the president into violent actions against his supporters.”
Get used to it trumpsters.
So violence is your 'go to', huh? Get ready, gather your stones and whatever else, possibly a vagina costume? Your types seem to want a fight. Keep on bringing it and you may find that fight.
I'm speculating that incidents like this one will become more common place when people say inappropriate things in certain places. There's more than one way to overstep the civilized boundaries of freedom of expression.
Really? In your world it’s ok to resort to physical violence when one expresses a differing opinion about the President of the 🇺🇸 USA? Totally unacceptable.
Sickening, isn't it?
Yep watch out everyone, the brown shirts are coming after you. Apparently they prefer ganging up on single, defenseless women.
Classic "pussy" tactics employed by such minded individuals.
Author called Off Topic {SP}
I wish there was a “no value” option in the flag system. The one above ours is a screed that is off topic to the subject of the seed which you returned us to.
That no value option would take out all of your seeds.
That they are of no value to you means they are of great value to Americans.
Examples of Trump's racism:
Examples of Trump supporters' racism:
Racists feel empowered to come out into the open:
They noticed it before he was president:
We can tell what he thinks by the way he talks and acts. He is very quick to go after people who personally slight him, and we've seen it over and over. There are a couple of exceptions to his attacks. Putin and the racists that do back him openly. Nobody needs a translation of what he means and who his targets are. He is currently saying very disparaging things about AMERICANS AND AMERICAN COMPANIES! And republicans don't care! The same people who smashed Dixie Chicks cds because they were embarrassed by Bush and called the singers TRAITORS! They don't get to do that!
If you lie down with dogs and get fleas, don't blame us.
What does that have to do with a person attacked for supporting the President? Oh that's right. It doesn't you are just trying to distract.
That is the bottom line here. Totally a whataboutism.
Thi article is a load of radical right wing rubbish. Itmarching isn't liberals in hate inspired tiki-torch lit fascist parades...
It’s a real news story.
- D.C. police are searching for a pair of suspects who attacked a woman after she said she supported President Donald Trump.
Police say the felony assault took place at around 1 a.m. on March 16 at the Surfside restaurant in the 1800 of N Street near Dupont Circle in Northwest D.C.
According to the police report, the 29-year-old victim named Maricela said she overheard a conversation between the two female suspects and their male friend. She reported to police that she become involved in their conversation and stated, "I support Donald Trump.”
“I’m a Trump supporter. I stood by my views, then they called me a racist and then they started attacking me,” Maricela told FOX 5.
She claimed the two suspects assaulted her despite their male friend trying to step in to stop them. The victim said she took herself to Suburban Hospital in Bethesda, Maryland for treatment of her injuries, the police report said.
“After it happened, I got a bruised right eye," the victim said. "My blood vessels inside my eye burst. I got a fractured finger, a bruised knee and minor bruises all over my body.”
D.C. police released video of the suspects captured on the restaurant’s surveillance cameras.
Anyone with information on the suspects or the assault is asked to call police at 202-727-9099. http://www.fox5dc.com/news/local-news/trump-supporter-attacked-by-2-women-at-dc-restaurant-police-report-says
Maybe she shouldn't have inserted herself into a conversation where she wasn't wanted.
Does this "silence or you'll get your ass kicked" rule only apply to those with whom you disagree?
Yep, she should have minded her own business. At that time of night it was probably alcohol that made her belligerent.
If people would just shut up, they wouldn't be attacked. It is her own fault, huh?
Just like the wife beater says....if she would just shut up I wouldn't have to hit her.
Are you justifying what happened? Assuming what you blame the victim, if two people were in a store talking about not liking Trump and I overheard it and said something to the effect that I like him, would they be justified in doing to me what those two did to that victim?
Or if she wasn’t wearing such provocative clothing....
It is the way it works in liberal land. Antifa and BLM attack conservatives in their bi coastal elite areas whenever they have a mob and a big numerical advantage.
No problem. I just had to say that since there was a blame the victim card played here by some.
No, it applies when people walk up to perfect strangers and insert themselves into a conversation where they aren't wanted. Should they have kicked her ass? No and assault charges are warranted.
But how many times have I heard others on here say something similar? If you don't want to get your ass kicked, mind your own business.
No, of course not, but why are you going to walk up to perfect strangers and insert yourself in their conversation? Just keep walking and come back to NT and voice your displeasure like you always do.
Do you insert yourself into conversations where you're not wanted?
I know I don't, but I have a healthy sense of self-preservation.
So, violence is acceptable? That's your answer? I have to say, I'm a bit surprised that you are willing to accept that.
Nooooo.......they should have just told her to go away and mind her own business, they weren't talking to her.
Violence is rarely the answer, but it seems to be the only thing some people have these days.
Really - like TG said - maybe she shouldn't have stuck her nose in their conversation. I wonder who actually assaulted her before she went to the hospital? Does she have any proof?
She needs to mind her own damned business.
Still looking for an update on if the two felons who assaulted her have been found yet.
Quite correct Sunshine.
Or as the rapist says, "If she hadn't been walking down a dark street dressed like a hooker, she wouldn't have been raped". I've heard that one before on here and considered the answer, "She can go anywhere she wants and doesn't deserve that", to be absolutely correct. Seems the tune has changed around here.
Words, without a credible means of carrying out a threat, NEVER justify violence.
“Words, without a credible means of carrying out a threat, NEVER justify violence.” Exactly. So true and undeniable except to BLM and Antifa. They hurt people over words expressing a difference of opinion and the woman’s attacker’s in the story acted just like them.
It’s not like you all don’t have your BLM rent a mobs and Antifa thugs to do to us on a larger scale what happened to that poor woman at the restaurant.
Short memory XX....I can post the video of a Trump supporter sucker punching a guy at a Trump rally if your memory isn't working that well.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/08/30/washington-post-antifa-is-violent-will-rest-media-finally-tell-truth-too.amp.html
Wow, one incident where an almost 80 year old man lost his temper. He shouldn’t have done it but is that all you’ve got?
No, I've got a lot more but it's nice to watch hypocrites babble on.
Sucker punches the guy, then states that we may have to kill him the next time...Sounds like a mental case, but seems he fits right in with some of the hypocrites posting on the thread...
Whatever it takes to change the subject.....
Author called Off Topic {SP}
(Removed for context) {SP}
After all it’s my seed and he’s the one who changed the subject away from the Trump supporting woman beat up by others who thought differently.
Wrong, Kav's comments are most certainly within the scope of the same topic.
(Comment Deleted) Completely Off Topic {SP}
Trump is intentionally destroying the environment in the name of more money in his bank account.
Actually I didn't change the subject. That was done long before I commented XX. I did offer a counterpoint to the hypocrisy of your article. Showing that Trump supporters are violent...Sad that you can't see that.
I actually live in the heartland, not like you who claims to live in the heartland....Missouri - heartland, CA - not so much.
Dinesh D'Souza. Well, there it is. There you have it.
Pity those poor-misunderstood Ku Kluxers and Nazis at Charlottesville. My word, the audacity of it all.
Maricela, the Trump supporter gave those 'butt hurt' libs their due? $1000 dollar reward and all. Stock up on the birth control, Maricela.
These are Stalinist tactics designed to shut down free speech. It should be LIBERALS who are the first to condemn it, but as we see here liberals (now progressives) are actually defending it or attempting to explain it away!
Pretty sure that this is just another far right wing scam job.
No doubt. I'm sure if the entire incident was known, we'd all be wondering why she didn't end up in the ER.
You both proved Vic’s point perfectly. Way to expose your far left values.
I had 2 missionaries cited for trespassing in my condo complex last Saturday. No soliciting means no door to door thumping.
Hopefully by next year MAGA will be adopted as a slang term for a huuuuuge welt on a trumpsters head.
A prime example of the “civility” of the political left and its desire for comity and civil discourse.
Stop finding incivility where there isn't any intended.
I took devan's comment to mean that the damn hat raises the welt on the wearer's head because it's too tight
You and yours have proved over the years that civility is not in play. Far right wing fascism revolves around fear and hate of the other.
Guess what, this elderly white Anglo Saxon male is the other.
More like we conservatives and Heartland Americans are the Resist the resistance other that you all fear and hate.
Nice to see the twisted mentality out on the open by our left wing resident key-punchers. I'm sure they would also be that ballsy in fornt of an actual human being. /sarc off
I don't go looking for confrontation, if that's what you are suggesting. If people are having a conversation that I wasn't invited to, I don't crash the party just so I can get my point of view out there.
But if someone starts shit with me...I usually run away. I'm a coward
Naw, referring to the poster that says it was her fault for speaking that caused someone else to commit a felony against her. That kind of thinking is twisted and wrong.
What’s truly sad here is that post #6 has two up votes.
How do you know that he didn't mean the hat is so damn tight that it raises a welt on the wearer's head?
Seems to me you find violence where none was intended
Count me in as one of those up votes!
I saw that and based on your content around here expected nothing else.
That’s the second time you’ve used that. Based on the person in question posting history here, if you really believe that was his intent I have some really nice oceanfront property to sell you in Michigan. Averages 80 degrees, low humidity, never snows, rains only at night on week days, 300+ days of sun a year.
Not cheap but it’s worth it ....... trust me.
Kicking fascist asses is an American tradition of 80+ years.
And yet they are trying to make a fascist comeback.
skirting the CoC [ph]
Deleted CoC {SP}
Derogatory statements attacking all within a category (e.g. liberals, conservatives, theists, atheists, Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, etc.) are indirect derogatory references.
Removed for context {SP}
There are no conservative or Republican or tea party or Christian fascists. The sooner you get over the name calling and ridiculous insults the sooner you can move on with your lives and contribute to keeping America Great!
Isn't this name calling XX? secular progressives are facists....LMAO....
Too damn funny....
Did you forget about comity and civility.
Born again scum aren't Christians, they're fascists that are wrapped in the flag while carrying a cross.
LOL.
Very serious infraction of the CoC.
Suspension ending April 10 at 11:00 pm edt.
Don’t call any member here a fascist. That’s a clear violation of the coc. If you’re going to post messages on my seeds do it in a civil manner.
And yet you didn't flag the comment. [ph]
I once snatched a pebble from my Kung Fu masters hand.
I’ve been Kung Fu fighting more than once as well ......
You'll go bankrupt misspelling his name repeatedly on the non-refundable one way airfare tickets.
Not worried about that since i’m fast as lightning .....
Sounds like some of the BJJ dipshits i’ve seen dancing around like drunken monkeys. That shit would get expensive in a real street fight for those guys
Dinesh D’Souza
Among other hateful commentary and a history of such …
In February 2018, D'Souza was widely criticized for a series of tweets which mocked the survivors of the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting . [56] [57] In response to a photo of survivors reacting to Florida lawmakers voting down a proposed ban on assault weapons in the aftermath of the shooting, D'Souza tweeted "worst news since their parents told them to get summer jobs". [57] D'Souza's comments were condemned by both liberal and conservative commentators. Jonathan M. Katz wrote "Let it never be said that Dinesh does not actively root for the death of children." [57] Others accused D'Souza of "trolling kids". [57] [58] [59] D'Souza was also denounced by Conservative Political Action Conference , which removed him from the roster of speakers, and called his comments "indefensible". [57]
_________________________________
Beyond that … The seeded article is all HEARSAY and the video shows nothing even close to conclusive.
What's the alleged victim's full name … let's see her "bruises" and/or a hospital report validating her claim … what's the name of the publication that ran the story … the station that also "reported" the alleged incident?
If it's a day that ends in "Y" … it's a day when we can count on several more FALSE, HATE seeds!
Dinesh D’Souza Is not the topic of the seed nor is he the author of it. He’s a great immigrant American. Stay on the topic of the seeded article.
You included this in your article:
It was an embedded ad for a different article that was not seeded here and thus is not the topic of the seed.
You embedded it in your article - A Mac's D’Souza comment was a rebuttal of your implicit endorsement of his positions.
Just because there’s an ad in an article it doesn’t make the ad the topic of the seeded article.
Reply, that is correct. I did not claim the ad or D’Souza is the topic. I noted that you introduced D’Souza so it is not off-topic for anyone to comment on your introduction.
I think you know this though. Discuss it further with the mods.
I didn’t introduce him in any post. So, if there were a Kia motors car ad embedded in the article, it would give you license to talk about some issue as unlikely as that is with a Kia automobile?
It was your choice to include the text here on NT - you chose to not delete the embedded (RELATED) segue. Next time just delete it. Simple. That way people will not have any reason to comment on it and you will not need to complain about off-topic comments.
This is not a situation where a user went to the seeded article source and started commenting on an ad. In this case, in the actual text you published, you kept the related segue:
Gotta end this. Later.
You know, another member regularly derailed seeds by commenting on ads that made it into a cut and paste and was told to knock it off. But since you called it on topic, here it is:
Liberal financier George Soros is one of the most controversial political figures in the world.
Much is made of the fact that Soros, whose dollars help fund many left-wing foundations from Media Matters for America to Planned Parenthood, survived the Nazi occupation of his native Hungary even though, as an individual of Jewish background, he was potentially subject to the atrocities of the Holocaust.
Much is also made of Soros’ conduct during World War II, however, in which he admits to having helped his protector seize Jewish property.
One time that he spoke on the subject was during an interview with “60 Minutes” journalist Steve Kroft. In it, he was asked about that experience.
That interview resurfaced this past week after conservative commentator Dinesh D’Souza retweeted a video of its most damning part.
Conservative Tribune Daily Email
Breaking news updates and daily headlines from a news source you can trust.
George Soros Interview on the Holocaust
In the interview, Soros explained how he “was 14 years old” when he managed to evade the Nazis.
“And I would say that that’s when my character was made … That one should think ahead. One should understand that, and anticipate events and when, when one is threatened. It was a tremendous threat of evil. I mean, it was a — a very personal experience of evil.”
However, Kroft wanted to question him about what he did with the man who convinced authorities Soros was his godson.
“My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson,” Kroft said.
“Yes, yes,” Soros answered.
“Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews,” Kroft continued.
Did this video change your opinion of Soros?
“That’s right. Yes,” Soros responded.
RELATED: Fox News Devastates Hogg With Official Statement On Ingraham’s Future
“I mean, that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?” Kroft asked.
“Not, not at all. Not at all,” a smiling Soros said. https://conservativetribune.com/dinesh-dsouza-brutal-soros-holocaust/ Readers will have to follow the link to see the rest of this now on topic issue per SP.
Seeding another article within your own seeded article, again.
First of all, it’s not the entire article. You have to go to the site to see how it ends. Second, the moderator ruled it on topic to discuss it since the source embedded an ad for one or more of their articles in the body of the seeded article. It’s hard to discuss an article as on topic unless one knows what it said. So, since moderation ruled it on topic it is only reasonable for the reader to see what exactly that on topic is. Lastly the moderator made an attack on the author of a separate article on topic for this article when an attack on the author of the actual seeded article would never have been allowed as on topic. Where’s the consistency in that?
Boo hoo hoo. Let the hilarity ensue after midnight. Tick, tock, tick, tock, no more sucking Koch.
After midnight you won’t be able to say what you did above.
I probably won't need to after the tea stained alt-right media seeds on NT take a swan dive into the shitter. Hopefully you didn't go through too much trouble reporting my comment prematurely. Thumper seeds got a new landing strip and partisan projection seeds will have a short life.
It’s after midnight except on the west coast. Are things different for you yet?
So you think it’s all about censoring an opinion you don’t agree with?
No, it's about putting my size 12EEEE Nike metaphorically in the face of every POS domestic terrorist.
So everyone who has religious beliefs and or political opinions that are different from yours are domestic terrorists?
skirting the CoC [ph]
All of what you describe is combined about 1% of the country outside of the tea party which is a legitimate political ideal. The tea party and evangelical Christians are separate mainstream groups of American citizens.
All those I named make up the majority of trump's base. Most likely the mainstream of a sewer for the groups you named.
There are no dominionists, xenophobes, homophobes, christo-fascists, anti-choicers, neo-nazis, white supremacists here on this site for you to talk to or make threats against. Your mislabeling attempt to the contrary notwithstanding.
LOL
Well it would be against the coc to name names, so that’s all you’ve got. Opposing calling gay unions being called marriage while otherwise supporting civil unions and all the rest of the rights of gays as citizens doesn’t make one a homophobe. Pro life people choose life and support the choice of being able to use progesterone to reverse an initiated Rx abortion.
It definitely makes you an opponent of equal rights and someone who wants special rights and privileged status. It sounds exactly like what the white supremacists were after when they opposed mixed-race marriage.
Seems like conservatives haven't changed much at all since then - they still think some Americans should be treated as 2nd-class citizens and denied full and equal rights.
Marriage is strictly a union of a man and a woman. Other arrangements will be made and have the same legal effect as marriage but doesn’t need to be called marriage. If Christians came up with another term to replace the word marriage with that applied exclusively to the man and woman union, the homosexuals and lesbians would drop the word marriage and demand that there union be called by that new term whatever it might be.
Rightwing religious radicals keep forgetting that their bible doesn't mean shit compared to the Constitution.
Why did he leave tea party fucktard off that list???
Because like evangelical Christians, the Tea Party and it’s members are part of the mainstream of American life and nothing is going to change that. Personally I am both an evangelical Christian and a member of the Tea Party. They are not the same since there are some atheists in the Tea Party and liberals in some evangelical churches. Your broad brush and name calling are just plain silly 😜 .
Actually while they are primarily in separate realms The Bible means even more. The constitution is our governing structure in this world in this life and us the best such governing document mankind has ever devised with divine providence. The Bible is the key to eternal life and a Heaven where no earthly power will exist. There is a reason why when people say “for God and country” that God comes first.
Teabags are a cult within the GOP and teavangelicals are a cult within Christianity. 10 million Koch-suckers and bible thumpers isn't mainstream.
The bible is subservient to the Constitution in America. The Constitution allows the bible to exist.
If Christians came up with another term to replace the word marriage with that applied exclusively to the man and woman union, the homosexuals and lesbians would drop the word marriage and demand that there union be called by that new term whatever it might be.
Lol. No, but that is exactly what ‘Christians’ like yourself expect from the gay community - as if “marriage” is an exclusively Christian construct. Christians like to insinuate all kinds of things are uniquely products of their religion, like the Golden Rule, celebrations of summer and winter solstice, morals, etc. In truth you are just trying (and failing) to usurp social mores and traditions that have been around since long before your religion, and claim them as your own. Yet you also espouse a unique set of “commandments” which include thou shalt not lie and thou shalt not steal. It is naked hypocrisy.
Really? The fastest growth of the Church happened when government banned it and killed people for being believers. It doesn’t matter what the constitution says about Bibles. Communist countries had constitutions demanding state atheism and yet the Christian Church grew in all of them and we smuggled Bibles and other religious materials into all of them and we even exists in secret in North Korea. There are Christians in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. The constitution doesn’t allow the Bible to exist. It would exist if the constitution explicitly banned it and we would be practicing Christians even if the government outlawed it and used capital punishment to try to be rid of us. We would passively go underground and deliberately defy the government of the United States of America by continuing in our belief. So, no, there is nothing on this earth in this life above the Bible. God tells us to obey the government of the country we live in. He also says that if a government created laws in conflict with God’s law that we are to obey God’s law and deal with the legal consequences of the jurisdiction imposing such a law just as the apostles did. Of course I don’t expect that outlawing of the Bible or the Church ⛪ to happen in the near term future here.
That might be true in your particular cult but it's not true under US law or the laws of most western countries. And it sounds like you've confused marriage with the irrelevant and legally unrecognized rituals of your cult. Marriage is a legal contract not a silly superstition.
.
Sorry but only equal is actual equal and no "other arrangement" has the same legal effect as marriage or even is recognized between states or between countries. Plus the special rights and privileged status you seek are blatantly unconstitutional anyway..... as the CA courts noted recently: "The idea that marriage-like rights without marriage is adequate smacks of a concept long rejected by the courts: separate but equal." No wonder SCOTUS cited Loving v Virginia as direct precedent when they struck down your sharia law which the bigoted states had erroneously been enforcing.
.
What "Christians" or any other family of cults do on this issue is irrelevant since their sharia laws can't be enforced by our government, but it should be noted that your particular cult is in a rapidly shrinking group of right-wing anti-LGBT Christian cults which don't have marriage equality and which preach hatred of LGBT folks. Most of the more enlightened Christian cults already have marriage equality.
That's why your sharia laws keep getting struck down by our courts, because the 1st Amendment trumps and contradicts not just your 1st "commandment" but all of your cult's sharia laws. It's one of the main reasons the state and federal bans on marriage equality were struck down.....because those bans were based on superstition and had no rational basis whatsoever.
There are no Christian cults.
Your own comment at # 8.1.26 disproves that claim.
Yes there are.
Such as?
SBC, LDS, RCC, etc.....they're all Christian cults of one variety or the other. Some Christian cults just have more members than others.
The born again cult that hides behind all of Christianity when it's convenient, yet by their own admission consider all other forms of Christianity defective compared to their twisted version.
Didn’t we have a vote in the coc discussion about not referring to others religious beliefs as a cult due to the negative connotations of that word and didn’t that measure get a majority? Or am I wrong about that?
I wouldn't know. I don't belong to a religious cult that believes they deserve special accommodations to promote wilful ignorance. You forgot to vote up your comment and defend that ridiculous cult.
I remember that as well
OK so we are still in a transitioning into the new CoC. You can't call a whole faith a cult. That is in the new CoC. You can be specific about a denomination, but not a whole array of denominations that fall under a bigger category i.e. Christian.
It's unfortunate that so many folks read a negative connotation into the term "cult" even when it's used generically and not in a derogatory manner. Even more unfortunate that a majority here voted to protect the sensibilities of religious folks with touchy egos.
The fact is that you wouldn’t call our religion or any of its denominations cults if it didn’t have a negative connotation. You call us that because it does and thus makes it an outright attack upon what we believe in.
There is no use of the word cult that isn’t a derogatory term toward those the term is directed at.
Ok everyone. Let’s remeber that this seed is about a woman who voiced a political opinion different from two or three others and that two of them committed felonious assault on her over disagreements of political opinion and speech. That can never be acceptable anywhere in our country by anyone.
I use the term cult to describe all superstitious groups because that's exactly what they are, a superstitious group with a common ideology. You're the one who's choosing to read a particular negative connotation into that while ignoring most of the primary definitions of the term:
More special accommodations for the religiously challenged.
Why is it that you being restrained from making such a deliberate attack on a religious group is some sort of accommodation for us rather than you just engaging in polite civil dialogue within a spirit of comity. What’s sad is that you all can’t just do it on your own rather than be compelled by the coc to avoid uncivil attacks on others beliefs.
Thumper beliefs = any belief = no belief. Welcome to America.
And the NSA reads everything you type. (I told them to look into you).
No, you're supposed to edit out all the extraneous crap before you publish the seed or at least immediately after. That way people won't "go off topic" when they comment on text THAT IS IN YOUR SEED !!!
He won't edit anything out that attempts to redirect NT members to another teabag media ass licking marathon.
I tend to agree with this statement.
This is correct. If it shows up in the original post, then it is open season as a topic. An author who can't take a minute to clean up a copy/paste affair really has no room to complain when people comment off of the things the author seemingly refused or forgot to remove from their article.
it seems that many need some kind of accommodation to protect their fragile sensibilities including restricting free speech because they feel "attacked" or "persecuted" and don't like to hear/read certain words.
Well, people are stupid. Personally I have better things to do than get into political discussions with complete strangers at 1 in the morning.
So if you heard a group of people promoting Trump and dissing on obama and Hillary you’d just quietly walk away? Would you do that if you saw a seed here where a group we’re doing that too?
I would roll my eyes and walk away mocking them. The last thing I would want to do is get into a conversation that would obviously go nowhere.
Skirting {SP}
Skirting {SP}
removed for context
Mock- adjective: not authentic or real, but without the intention to deceive.
Conservatives "mock" themselves, pretending to be outraged by behavior they regularly inflict on those they hate, heaping derision on liberals and progressives while faking injury. To them, not being able to criticize and demean LGTBQ Americans or other minorities is supposedly discriminating against their right to discriminate. The hypocrisy of conservative Republicans truly knows no bounds.
Author called Off Topic {SP}
Yeah, cuz I wouldn't give a fuck. I am not Hillary or Obama nor am I related to them, thus I don't care what some random person on the street says about them.
And yet here we are at the oddest hours.