TheRPGSite

Greetings!

Senator Rand Paul and his wife were threatened by BLM mobs outside the RNC. Police escorts saved their lives. Rand Paul says that something is going on here, and that some of these rioters are being paid and sponsored by somebody, being flown in, and housed in hotels, and paid to incite riots and mayhem. He says the FBI needs to investigate, and these people need to be arrested.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[video=youtube;OFDx5qTlGjU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFDx5qTlGjU[/youtube]

Is he allergic to combs, or is he trying to virtue-signal with his hair?

From the visual to the overwrought verbiage, this sounds like a deliberately staged bit of political theater. "I don't think we would have survived." "They're trying to kill [me]". "I'm not sure we would have made it." That's just overwrought prose. They were shouting and pushing you, which is a dangerous situation and could escalate, but there's a vast gulf between that, and an active attempt at murder. "The crowd [of 30] doubled to 60, then doubled again to 120." Which are curiously precise numbers, given that crowds are notoriously hard to count. Not to mention the whole bit about how he put his hand on a police officer to support him when he stumbled, and how that means we can't defund police because otherwise who's going to protect us? That just sounds self-serving and completely out of touch, because people who aren't members of Congress don't have a phalanx of cops to form a body shield on their way home. In fact, that kind of elitist hypocrisy has been one of the most telling criticisms of people like Chicago's mayor Lightfoot, for instance when she banned protesters from her block while the rest of the city was allowed to burn.

His father was better.

If I were surrounded by a mob of 100 people shouting at me, especially knowing how these mobs have turned violent and destructive, I'd be pants shittingly scared.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1146898If I were surrounded by a mob of 100 people shouting at me, especially knowing how these mobs have turned violent and destructive, I'd be pants shittingly scared.

Yes.  Moreover, he's already been assaulted by a neighbor and put into the hospital.  He receives threats constantly.  Sure, a hundred shouting strangers belong to an organization known to have attacked people and in a few cases killed them, what could go wrong?

Update from Rand Paul's Wife....

Quote from: Mrs Rand Paul via Chris CookThursday night felt like being in a terrifying dystopian novel. The mob swarmed me and my husband, Sen. Rand Paul, in a tight circle, screaming expletives, threats, and shouting, "Say her name." We rushed up to two police officers, and I believe that is the only thing that kept us from being knocked to the ground. Even pressed against the officers, we were greatly outnumbered.

As the mob grew and became more threatening, we literally could not move, and neither could the two officers for several minutes. The rioters were inches from us, screaming in our faces.

That was the worst part. At first, I attempted to meet the eyes of one of the protesters and tried to explain that Rand authored the Justice for Breonna Taylor Act, but it seemed to just infuriate them more, as they called me a "bitch" and "racist wh---" alongside an endless torrent of "f--- yous."

Mobs are terrifying. They looked at us with no humanity -- just a vicious and righteous zeal. After that, I just kept my eyes down and prayed. All I could think of was the driver who was pulled from his car, viciously kicked in the head and left lying in his own blood in Portland, Oregon, last week.

Now the Associated Press is reporting that Rand used the word "attack" to describe our ordeal "without evidence." This is disgusting and utter proof of their bias.

When you are surrounded by throngs of people screaming in your face and preventing you from getting away, that is an attack.

After several harrowing minutes, additional officers arrived with bikes and surrounded us to create a moving barricade to escort us to safety. The video showing us walking is after the additional police had arrived. Before that, we were pinned in the center of a swirling maelstrom of hatred and threats. Those in the media and in government who have downplayed the last three months of burning, shootings, murder, looting, and destruction have fomented this horrific violence.

Since his election in 2010, Rand has made criminal justice reform a priority and has sponsored dozens of bills to address civil asset forfeiture, overcriminalization of nonviolent drug offenses, and the racial disparities in sentencing caused by the 1994 crime bill. I serve on the board of a bipartisan criminal justice reform group and worked hard to lobby for passage of the First Step Act. I have appeared with Alice Marie Johnson and Matthew Charles at events and on various TV programs to advocate for more reforms.

The mob screaming in our faces seemed ignorant of the fact that Rand had authored the Justice for Breonna Taylor Act, calling for a ban on no-knock raids. Either that or they just didn't care because their hatred of President Trump makes them feel righteous and justified as they terrorize people and burn cities.

Several of our friends were also attacked trying to make it to their hotels last night, including one who had his glasses slapped off his face, another who was pepper-sprayed by a rioter, and a woman who was punched in the back.

In the last three years, my husband was shot at by the Bernie Sanders supporter who nearly killed Rep. Steve Scalise, had six ribs broken and his lung damaged by a vocal internet hater of President Trump, and endured numerous death threats against him and our family. An MSNBC reporter literally said on air, laughing, that Rand's assault was her favorite news story of the week. She was hardly criticized or made to apologize, let alone fired.

People such as Bette Midler and Nancy Pelosi's daughter regularly tweet out encouragement of the man who nearly killed Rand, which is amplified by thousands of their followers. My message to all of them is this: You have become exactly what you say you hate -- violent, close-minded, authoritarian, and utterly lacking in empathy.

Quote from: Pat;1146893Is he allergic to combs, or is he trying to virtue-signal with his hair?

From the visual to the overwrought verbiage, this sounds like a deliberately staged bit of political theater. "I don't think we would have survived." "They're trying to kill [me]". "I'm not sure we would have made it." That's just overwrought prose. They were shouting and pushing you, which is a dangerous situation and could escalate, but there's a vast gulf between that, and an active attempt at murder.

Did you miss the part where they were threatening to kill him? Where they said "we're not going to let you go alive until you say you're for criminal justice reform" and when his wife tried to explain the 22 criminal justice reform bills he has authored, they started getting agitated, called her a racist, and started screaming?

That is not political theater. That is not "a vast gulf." When thugs with a history of violence surround you and threaten to kill you, you have every reason to take them at their word. But you did get one thing right-- we the ordinary people don't have a phalalnx of cops to protect us from these thugs. The cops are minutes away at best, and if BLM gets it's way, they won't be coming at all.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1146898If I were surrounded by a mob of 100 people shouting at me, especially knowing how these mobs have turned violent and destructive, I'd be pants shittingly scared.

only once my ammo was depleted, but scared is the best way to be for a bayonet charge, or in this case, a pocket or belt knife charge.

Quote from: Aglondir;1146943Did you miss the part where they were threatening to kill him? Where they said "we're not going to let you go alive until you say you're for criminal justice reform" and when his wife tried to explain the 22 criminal justice reform bills he has authored, they started getting agitated, called her a racist, and started screaming?

That is not political theater. That is not "a vast gulf." When thugs with a history of violence surround you and threaten to kill you, you have every reason to take them at their word. But you did get one thing right-- we the ordinary people don't have a phalalnx of cops to protect us from these thugs. The cops are minutes away at best, and if BLM gets it's way, they won't be coming at all.

Nope, didn't miss anything. But threats like that are so universal, that "kys"  is almost as common an internet acronym as "lol". Having a crowd of people getting in your face and shouting shit at you is a scary, dangerous situation and they were right to be worried. But nobody even threw a punch, so it's miles away from a gang of people actively trying to murder, as Randbaby repeatedly claimed.

This is an entitled elite who has never dealt a physical confrontation, and who is trying to overdramatize the encounter for political purposes. It's the definition of political theater.

Quote from: Pat;1146986Nope, didn't miss anything. But threats like that are so universal, that "kys"  is almost as common an internet acronym as "lol". Having a crowd of people getting in your face and shouting shit at you is a scary, dangerous situation and they were right to be worried. But nobody even threw a punch, so it's miles away from a gang of people actively trying to murder, as Randbaby repeatedly claimed.

This is an entitled elite who has never dealt a physical confrontation, and who is trying to overdramatize the encounter for political purposes. It's the definition of political theater.

You are lying or stupid.  Which is it?  It's documented and referenced more than once above that he has already been physically attacked.  There was a freaking court case about it already. Are you so damn caught up in your own world view that you can't see contrary evidence at all?  Jesus Christ.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1146989You are lying or stupid.  Which is it?  It's documented and referenced more than once above that he has already been physically attacked.  There was a freaking court case about it already. Are you so damn caught up in your own world view that you can't see contrary evidence at all?  Jesus Christ.

He was attacked by a neighbor, half the country away. That doesn't mean the crowd many months later was sure to kill him. Pull your head out of your ass long enough to take a deep breath and see the facts.

Quote from: Aglondir;1146943Did you miss the part where they were threatening to kill him? Where they said "we're not going to let you go alive until you say you're for criminal justice reform" and when his wife tried to explain the 22 criminal justice reform bills he has authored, they started getting agitated, called her a racist, and started screaming?

That is not political theater. That is not "a vast gulf." When thugs with a history of violence surround you and threaten to kill you, you have every reason to take them at their word. But you did get one thing right-- we the ordinary people don't have a phalalnx of cops to protect us from these thugs. The cops are minutes away at best, and if BLM gets it's way, they won't be coming at all.

And last night BLM/Antifa murdered a man in Portland walking down the street because they believed he supported President Trump. They then cheered about it because "he was a ****ing Nazi!" Mayor Wheeler is having a press conference where he's saying Trump voters deserve violence for what they've done to the country.

Rand Paul was correct to be in fear for his life. The only difference between the kid in Kenosha and the murder victim last night is that the kid was able to kill his attempted murderers before they could murder him.

Also, I've thought about this long and hard. I've counseled that a limited application of law and order could de-escalate this.

But I'm done. I literally could not care less whether they pulled the triggers or are only cheering for the ones who did so. They're rabid animals and their violence is escalating. Its only a matter of time before they start attacking people in their homes for not supporting their insanity.

Invoke the Insurrection Act, Mr. President. Start with Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff (who today blamed the murder on, I kid you not, Russian infiltration of BLM/Antifa to aid President Trump) and every Senator, Concressman, Governor, Mayor, DA, Prosecutor and media figure who's supported this band of Marxist murdering scumbags. I don't care if someone thinks that would make President Trump a dictator either. We either have the rule of law or don't... and if we don't then we have no country anyway and I'd rather have a benevolent King for our next government than malicious murderous despots who want me, my family, my friends and loved ones dead.

Besides, at this point I think President Trump might be the reincarnation of Cincinnatus and wouldn't hold the power past the crisis anyway... if he were going to go autocrat he would have done so a long time ago.

Also no, doing so will not START a civil war. The civil war ALREADY STARTED and the other side is shooting to kill unarmed people they even believe support the other side.

Shoot all the rioters, hang the people funding them and put everyone who's cheered the murderers on into prison for providing material aid to domestic terrorists.

Quote from: Chris24601;1146991Shoot all the rioters, hang the people funding them and put everyone who's cheered the murderers on into prison for providing material aid to domestic terrorists.

Wait...cheering is material support? You really are dumb as fuck.

Quote from: Chris24601;1146991Invoke the Insurrection Act, Mr. President.

That's a terrible precedent. I haven't seen it explored anywhere, but a better approach might be withdrawing federal support. Because this isn't happening all over the country, it's happening in specific areas where the governor, mayor, and DAs are providing cover for the rioters, instead of dealing with them. Make it clear that the federal government will not tolerate this, withdraw all their officials, and cut off every spigot of funding that's available. The withdrawal of officials would be largely symbolic, but the lack of funding should really hurt, because a huge chunk of state funding is pass-backs from the federal government. Then make it clear to the neighboring areas that if there's any spillover, they can either handle it themselves, ask for help, or they'll be cut off, too. I haven't really worked out whether it's feasible, may run into problems with the governors for instance.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1146993Wait...cheering is material support? You really are dumb as fuck.

I figured you'd reply to that and broke my ignore of your posts just to be sure you'd reply as expected. You didn't disappoint and my relegation of you to ignore-land fully justified.

First, at least some among the number cheering knew the identity of the murderer and are refusing to cooperate with the police. They are aiding and abetting first degree murder. You cheer for the murder of those whose only crime is disagreeing with you, then you're a monster and prison is the best you deserve. You certainly don't belong in any form of civilized society.

I don't think you understand how utterly DONE Middle America is at this point. Democrat leadership calls us "enemies of the state" for our voting choice. The Democrat VP candidate has encouraged the riots to continue. BLM and Antifa are shooting people on the street because they think they're Trump supporters and then cheer about it. They have made bones about it that they want us dead.

If you support them... then YOU want us dead (you're just hoping someone else will do the job) and I'm done pretending that people who want me and mine dead have anything useful to contribute to discussions or to society.

If they are not stopped they'll eventually get to you too no matter how Woke you are because they will always purity spiral and the new punishment for failure to comply with Antifa or BLM is two in the chest followed by a celebration that they killed a Nazi.

Now back to ignore land with you you spiteful troll.

As for "horrible precedent"... the more horrible precedent is that you can murder people for their political beliefs and face no punishment for it because you are the favored class and the victim was the unfavored.

I am perfectly willing to live with the precedent that escalating murderous rioters can be shot dead in the street after 90 days of non-stop destruction and currently more than 30 deaths.

Quote from: Pat;1146986This is an entitled elite who has never dealt a physical confrontation, and who is trying to overdramatize the encounter for political purposes. It's the definition of political theater.

Over dramatic or not, it is as funny as hell that the mob is trying to bully the guy who has done the most for them.

IQ really is inverse to the number of people.

Maybe NOW the rest of the SwampRINOs and Congress Critters will realize that pandering to the woke mob with idiot legislation earns you nothing from the savages.

Sorry, I'm not feeling sorry for Ryan. Why was he wandering around on foot without security? I don't go anywhere near the tard turf in LA. A quick social media search tells you where "morons be protesting" that day and smart people head elsewhere.

Breonna Taylor played stupid games and won her stupid prize. If she stayed in her EMT program, stayed away from drug dealing scumbag boyfriends, and lived a life far from crime and criminals, she'd be fine right now.

That's the real lesson of St. Breonna.

Quote from: Shasarak;1147004Over dramatic or not, it is as funny as hell that the mob is trying to bully the guy who has done the most for them.

IQ really is inverse to the number of people.

They're hyperpolarized, and he has the wrong letter (R) next to his name. But I'm not even sure that was a factor -- did they even know who he was? He was probably just a suit or a Congressman to them. I found it entertaining that the Pauls tried to explain the number of bills he sponsored, in an attempt to calm the mob. You can't reason with a mob, and their surprise that the crowd didn't listen to a technical argument just shows how out of water they were. That's now how mobs work. To deal with a mob, you either have to appeal to their emotions, distract them, or make them afraid.

Surprise Surprise the resident SJW (wait no really Conservative) is not only not speaking out about the actions of the mob. Getting triggered that people would want to use the same mob methods against them.

As someone up North from most of the posters here I worry for the health and safety of many of you as if Trump wins I can see either a second civil war happening or just blood running in the streets. Neither is something I want to see happen.

Then again many people following me on FB will virtue signal whenever a non-white person gets shot on FAcebook yet remain silent when I white person is shot especially when it is non-white person committing the crime. I posted this on FB about a week or so ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0O7lLe4SmA . Beyond myself and another Liberal poster who we usually don't see eye to eye on many things agreeing that it is basically Pedo bait. None of the GO GO White Guilt Rangers were anywhere to be seen.

Quote from: sureshot;1147010I posted this on FB about a week or so ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0O7lLe4SmA . Beyond myself and another Liberal poster who we usually don't see eye to eye on many things agreeing that it is basically Pedo bait. None of the GO GO White Guilt Rangers were anywhere to be seen.

Yeah, I'm further south and we had several people posting about that Netflix show, but like you said - none of the Social Justice Mob gave it a modicum of attention.

Quote from: Chris24601;1146991And last night BLM/Antifa murdered a man in Portland walking down the street because they believed he supported President Trump. They then cheered about it because "he was a ****ing Nazi!" Mayor Wheeler is having a press conference where he's saying Trump voters deserve violence for what they've done to the country.

Rand Paul was correct to be in fear for his life. The only difference between the kid in Kenosha and the murder victim last night is that the kid was able to kill his attempted murderers before they could murder him.

Also, I've thought about this long and hard. I've counseled that a limited application of law and order could de-escalate this.

But I'm done. I literally could not care less whether they pulled the triggers or are only cheering for the ones who did so. They're rabid animals and their violence is escalating. Its only a matter of time before they start attacking people in their homes for not supporting their insanity.

Invoke the Insurrection Act, Mr. President. Start with Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff (who today blamed the murder on, I kid you not, Russian infiltration of BLM/Antifa to aid President Trump) and every Senator, Concressman, Governor, Mayor, DA, Prosecutor and media figure who's supported this band of Marxist murdering scumbags. I don't care if someone thinks that would make President Trump a dictator either. We either have the rule of law or don't... and if we don't then we have no country anyway and I'd rather have a benevolent King for our next government than malicious murderous despots who want me, my family, my friends and loved ones dead.

Besides, at this point I think President Trump might be the reincarnation of Cincinnatus and wouldn't hold the power past the crisis anyway... if he were going to go autocrat he would have done so a long time ago.

Also no, doing so will not START a civil war. The civil war ALREADY STARTED and the other side is shooting to kill unarmed people they even believe support the other side.

Shoot all the rioters, hang the people funding them and put everyone who's cheered the murderers on into prison for providing material aid to domestic terrorists.

Greetings!

I agree with you, Chris. I have never had much patience for "protesters" and rioters to begin with.:D

I have zero patience for these traitor scum now. I have zero empathy. They are filthy, diseased fucking rats.

How many innocent, good Americans need to be beaten to death or shot and killed by these scum before enough is enough? How many people must be burned in the flames before we decide these animals must be crushed?

Bring the Insurrection Act on. Bring down the Thunder. I want them all crushed. Let them cry, shriek, and gnash their teeth. Too bad. Guns, boots, tear gas, and fire. Burn them all. Hunt them all down, and put them in chains. I want them all in hard prison for fucking decades. I want their supporters, their benefactors, their bankers. Their "medics", their food people, their media people--every last fucking one of them. The cozy academics gushing about them in papers and editorials. Yeah, send federal agents to them in the middle of the dark night. I want trials, and swinging iron doors. I want them all marched off into oblivion and darkness.

These people are Marxists, Domestic Terrorists, and enemies of our Republic.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: jeff37923;1147012Yeah, I'm further south and we had several people posting about that Netflix show, but like you said - none of the Social Justice Mob gave it a modicum of attention.

I can only assume it is because the produced is not only a woman but also black. You can bet the outrage mob would have been howling for blood if it was white male producer. Since it's not it is perfectly acceptable to show Pedo bait onscreen. With Netflix giving a backhanded apology for allowing such filth to be shown. Hollywood seems to be way to willing to close their eyes to Pedophilia. James Gun posts some truly disturbing stuff online and welcomed back with open arms. Roseanne says something truly stupid and a victim cancel culture. Yeah the Go White Outrage Rangers are very selective with their outrage especially when it goes against the narrative.

Wife cancelled Netflix last week (her money was previously paying) and told them "Cuties" was the reason. Hopefully enough people follow suit.

Quote from: SHARK;1147014Greetings!

I agree with you, Chris. I have never had much patience for "protesters" and rioters to begin with.:D

I have zero patience for these traitor scum now. I have zero empathy. They are filthy, diseased fucking rats.

How many innocent, good Americans need to be beaten to death or shot and killed by these scum before enough is enough? How many people must be burned in the flames before we decide these animals must be crushed?

Bring the Insurrection Act on. Bring down the Thunder. I want them all crushed. Let them cry, shriek, and gnash their teeth. Too bad. Guns, boots, tear gas, and fire. Burn them all. Hunt them all down, and put them in chains. I want them all in hard prison for fucking decades. I want their supporters, their benefactors, their bankers. Their "medics", their food people, their media people--every last fucking one of them. The cozy academics gushing about them in papers and editorials. Yeah, send federal agents to them in the middle of the dark night. I want trials, and swinging iron doors. I want them all marched off into oblivion and darkness.

These people are Marxists, Domestic Terrorists, and enemies of our Republic.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

No Shark...we do not want the Insurrection Act invoked...The globalists and their little leftist brownshirt useful idiots are showing their true colors.  The little LARPers are acting like this is a 'revolution', but like most people, they have no real concept of what 'war' actually means.  The globalists will use them as bait for that honey-trap, and killing them doesn't do any good unless you break the uniparty as well.

Remember the objective...every person killed or building burnt drives more people towards Trump and away from the globalists.  Now their polls are showing Trump leading because they are trying to rein in their attack dogs.  Notice, that the media is talking up how the violence is helping Trump...and it is...because no sane person will stand with the crazies.

As terrible as allowing a few innocent people to die may be, your CINC knows what he is doing...He is trying to win the 'war' not just kill a few street thugs...and isn't that what makes a good commander?

Quote from: moonsweeper;1147021As terrible as allowing a few innocent people to die may be, your CINC knows what he is doing...He is trying to win the 'war' not just kill a few street thugs...and isn't that what makes a good commander?

Sorry... I don't buy that argument. Politicians playing politics with people's lives for votes is the reason people turned to President Trump in the first place. The ONLY valid reason to hold back for me is because of the potential for more innocent lives to be lost by acting than by inaction. I suspect that and his devotion to the Constitution are the main reasons President Trump hasn't yet done so.

I definitely don't think it's because he thinks waiting at this point will get him more votes. If murdering people on the street for holding different beliefs isn't enough to change your vote permanently away from the Marxist Terror Party then nothing will. At this point the only undecideds left are just people too afraid of the psychopaths to announce who they're voting for.

So since their minds are closed to reason, it's time to put the fear of God into the cowardly pukes playing at war because they know they're shielded from the consequences. Take away the Demonrat's terrorist auxiliary from them. Make the Marxist thugs so afraid that there are consequences of their actions that they don't dare gather to burn, loot and murder when they don't get their way in November.

And I am dead serious that the first people rounded up under the Insurrection Act need to be the politicians protecting and encouraging them. Every last one of them should get the no knock raids at 3am like those they've coordinated against those who've supported President Trump. They too have lived without consequences for their criminal actions for too long.

Quote from: Chris24601;1147025Sorry... I don't buy that argument. Politicians playing politics with people's lives for votes is the reason people turned to President Trump in the first place. The ONLY valid reason to hold back for me is because of the potential for more innocent lives to be lost by acting than by inaction. I suspect that and his devotion to the Constitution are the main reasons President Trump hasn't yet done so.

I definitely don't think it's because he thinks waiting at this point will get him more votes. If murdering people on the street for holding different beliefs isn't enough to change your vote permanently away from the Marxist Terror Party then nothing will. At this point the only undecideds left are just people too afraid of the psychopaths to announce who they're voting for.

So since their minds are closed to reason, it's time to put the fear of God into the cowardly pukes playing at war because they know they're shielded from the consequences. Take away the Demonrat's terrorist auxiliary from them. Make the Marxist thugs so afraid that there are consequences of their actions that they don't dare gather to burn, loot and murder when they don't get their way in November.

And I am dead serious that the first people rounded up under the Insurrection Act need to be the politicians protecting and encouraging them. Every last one of them should get the no knock raids at 3am like those they've coordinated against those who've supported President Trump. They too have lived without consequences for their criminal actions for too long.

You are making the same mistake as Shark...it is not about a few extra electoral votes for 'him'...it is about the local supporting politicians who will be moved into office with him. In 2016 our corrupt 20+ year Sheriff got replaced by the Republican on the ticket and guess what has happened to the crime rate...Imagine how many more places this can happen in with the crazy front and center...Remember, he is campaigning in NY this time.  That means his internal polling is showing it as winnable which means a lot of down ballot wins or at the very least a lot of down ballot wins even if he doesn't get the state.

The President can't just round up politicians.  In some cases, they are protected even if they have violated the law.  As much as it wouldn't bother me to see them strung upside down from a street lamp for allowing and encouraging this, I understand that we are only going to get one shot at this and it absolutely needs to be done right.

Quote from: moonsweeper;1147030You are making the same mistake as Shark...it is not about a few extra electoral votes for 'him'...it is about the local supporting politicians who will be moved into office with him. In 2016 our corrupt 20+ year Sheriff got replaced by the Republican on the ticket and guess what has happened to the crime rate...Imagine how many more places this can happen in with the crazy front and center...Remember, he is campaigning in NY this time.  That means his internal polling is showing it as winnable which means a lot of down ballot wins or at the very least a lot of down ballot wins even if he doesn't get the state.

The President can't just round up politicians.  In some cases, they are protected even if they have violated the law.  As much as it wouldn't bother me to see them strung upside down from a street lamp for allowing and encouraging this, I understand that we are only going to get one shot at this and it absolutely needs to be done right.

Greetings!

I hear you, my friend! I think.:D It's a situation of "losing" a battle in order to win a war. I grasp that there are political nuances and imaging in all of this; propaganda, framing, narrative. There is merit to all of that.

However, what about justice? What about righteousness? What about oaths and duty to preserve and protect? The innocent needing the strong to stand guard over them, and protect everyone from savages? The call of judgment, to pursue the criminal, the traitor, the beast that kills, burns, and terrorizes? The ordinary people and citizens, business people, church goers, people walking in the street--where is the strong hand of the law to bring them security, justice, and to pursue the savage? Tax payers and good folks that deserve peace and tranquility?

Imagine if you had a business burned to the ground, or that you and your wife were encircled at a restaurant and beaten?

When is it time to bring the wrath down against these traitors terrorizing our communities, and burning our country down before our eyes, my friend?

Now you have me chewing. This election is critical for America. Like a good chess game, we have to make sure every move is on target, and maximizes our victory. I need to light up a cigar and pour me some whiskey!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Hawkwing7423;1147019Wife cancelled Netflix last week (her money was previously paying) and told them "Cuties" was the reason. Hopefully enough people follow suit.

I honest to God thought I was being punked when I first heard about that.

What the fuck, Netflix. Creepy.

Quote from: moonsweeper;1147030You are making the same mistake as Shark...it is not about a few extra electoral votes for 'him'...it is about the local supporting politicians who will be moved into office with him. In 2016 our corrupt 20+ year Sheriff got replaced by the Republican on the ticket and guess what has happened to the crime rate...Imagine how many more places this can happen in with the crazy front and center...Remember, he is campaigning in NY this time.  That means his internal polling is showing it as winnable which means a lot of down ballot wins or at the very least a lot of down ballot wins even if he doesn't get the state.

The President can't just round up politicians.  In some cases, they are protected even if they have violated the law.  As much as it wouldn't bother me to see them strung upside down from a street lamp for allowing and encouraging this, I understand that we are only going to get one shot at this and it absolutely needs to be done right.

I think that is a large part of it.  I also think that Trump sees that we are already into the part where innocent people are going to die no matter what he does.  The biggest problem right not is not the politicians, as horrible as they are, but our completely corrupt media.  In Kenosha, support for BLM went down 30% overnight.  Gee, I guess some people that weren't paying attention before changed their focus.  

We've got a large swath of the country that is in denial about how bad it currently is and how bad it is going to get (haven't hit bottom yet) because they can't face the truth.  Sure, there are a few of them denying it in public because up until a few days ago they thought the violence was working for them (e.g. Pelosi) that know better.  But most of the ones saying it isn't happening can't handle what the fact that it is happening is doing to their world view.

The difference between leftist and normal people:  The left wanted the violence to escalate as long as they thought it was helping them, then they didn't.  Normal people never wanted the violence even though they knew it was helping their cause, and still don't.  Trump has to thread the line while the remaining "liberals" decide if they are leftist or normal.

Quote from: Ghostmaker;1147049I honest to God thought I was being punked when I first heard about that.

What the fuck, Netflix. Creepy.

Seconded

Somehow Netflix thought no one and I mean no one would notice how disturbing the subject matter was. Then tried to feign ignorance at the backlash. I said it before and I will say it again Hollywood likes to come to the defense of Pedophilia they welcomed James Gunn back with open arms.

Quote from: sureshot;1147056Seconded

Somehow Netflix thought no one and I mean no one would notice how disturbing the subject matter was. Then tried to feign ignorance at the backlash. I said it before and I will say it again Hollywood likes to come to the defense of Pedophilia they welcomed James Gunn back with open arms.

Now ask yourself - why would Hollywood defend known pedophiles?

As much as I would enjoy sniping at a communist mob, now is not the time. Trump is WINNING this civil war right now, these riots are just a sign of desperation. The left would like nothing more than a bunch of armed patriots roaming the streets and getting rid of all the cockroaches, but the MSM would spin this to their advantage and we lose. Look what they're doing to the Kenosha kid...extensive video evidence of him defending his own life, the MSM paints him as a psychopathic murderer.

IDGAF what the lefties on here will say, I am not posting this for them; they can fuck off. But for all my fellow patriots, stay your hand. Stock up on ammo, sharpen your sabers, and stockpile food, medicine, water, etc. If the tipping point it reached, we'll be ready to respond with more force than any of these communist scumbags can imagine because at that point there will be nothing left to lose. The man willing to give up everything he has to fight tyranny is impossible to defeat. The streets will flow with their blood, not ours.

I hope the Rubicon moment isn't reached, I'd like to live a nice, peaceful life and go camping with my kids...but if it is alea iacta est and let the fuckers burn in the streets.

I suspect the insurrection act will be invoked after the election.  Not because it's "safe" to do so then, but because what's planned afterwards will go out of local strongholds where there's DA cover, into middle America.  And these plans are already known.

As cold as it may sound, if you're going to go against an insurrection, that group needs to be as unsympathetic as possible.  Right now the rhetoric it uses still holds sway as an "if but for" in the minds of many people instinctively sympathetic to the center-left who've only read/watched MSM.

John Brown's raid didn't turn the country into one ready for the first CW; that took Sumpter.

I suspect what is planned after the election will be much more directly experienced by more people, crushing the rhetorical hold.  But without that, it still wouldn't be an overwhelming majority of people supporting what will be required to grasp the nettle fully.

Quote from: Pat;1146986Nope, didn't miss anything. But threats like that are so universal, that "kys"  is almost as common an internet acronym as "lol". Having a crowd of people getting in your face and shouting shit at you is a scary, dangerous situation and they were right to be worried. But nobody even threw a punch, so it's miles away from a gang of people actively trying to murder, as Randbaby repeatedly claimed.

This is an entitled elite who has never dealt a physical confrontation, and who is trying to overdramatize the encounter for political purposes. It's the definition of political theater.

Oh look, it's the 'useful idiot', conflating meaningless online smack talk like "kys" with a violent leftist mob screaming threats of violence they are capable of carrying out.

You and yours are the best opposition I could hope for.  Populist civnats are going to pull away more of the african and hispanic votes than they ever have before, slowing down the progress of the globalist filth for years.  Meanwhile my people are getting their ignorant equalitarian programming slapped right the fuck out of them.  Nobody wants burn-loot-murderers in their neighborhood, and no amount of lying press will convince them otherwise.

Quote from: Alathon on September 01, 2020, 01:00:14 AM
Oh look, it's the 'useful idiot', conflating meaningless online smack talk like "kys" with a violent leftist mob screaming threats of violence they are capable of carrying out.

You and yours are the best opposition I could hope for.  Populist civnats are going to pull away more of the african and hispanic votes than they ever have before, slowing down the progress of the globalist filth for years.  Meanwhile my people are getting their ignorant equalitarian programming slapped right the fuck out of them.  Nobody wants burn-loot-murderers in their neighborhood, and no amount of lying press will convince them otherwise.

Oh look, it's a genuine idiot, conflating direct murderous intent and a mob that didn't even throw a single punch. The big drama was some shouting, and a cop who stumbled, while carrying a bike.

The rest of your post is a mix of complete gibberish and allusions to positions I don't hold.

Quote from: Pat on September 01, 2020, 06:10:39 PM
Oh look, it's a genuine idiot, conflating direct murderous intent and a mob that didn't even throw a single punch. The big drama was some shouting, and a cop who stumbled, while carrying a bike.

The rest of your post is a mix of complete gibberish and allusions to positions I don't hold.

Pat, you are making a classic error: you're judging this in retrospect. Hindsight is ALWAYS 20/20.


Demanding people make a judgement call, in a situation where a mob is screaming, hollering, possibly pushing and shoving? No thanks. I'll just default to 'you're violent and dangerous and I need to go away NOW'. Because I'm not a telepath and I don't have a good track record of reading people's intentions when they're mobbed up.

Quote from: Ghostmaker on September 02, 2020, 11:25:20 AMPat, you are making a classic error: you're judging this in retrospect. Hindsight is ALWAYS 20/20.


Demanding people make a judgement call, in a situation where a mob is screaming, hollering, possibly pushing and shoving? No thanks. I'll just default to 'you're violent and dangerous and I need to go away NOW'. Because I'm not a telepath and I don't have a good track record of reading people's intentions when they're mobbed up.

I don't where that's coming from. I've said repeatedly it was a scary situation, and haven't criticized their response in the moment. I'm criticizing Rand Paul's interview, which is clearly much later because the background appears to be a bright day and the scene with the protesters has lit street lights. In that interview, he makes repeated false claims portraying the situation not as a risk to his life, which would have been accurate if a bit overstated, because the risk was small and there was no sign it was escalating to a more violent confrontation, but as certain death if the police hadn't intervened. I quoted several examples of him doing that in my first post, and it's worth noting he also admitted that wasn't true -- in the middle of the interview he several times makes more moderate statements about the risk, before reverting back to the hyperbole. The hyperbole and the mussed hair (in contrast, his suit and tie seem perfectly coiffed; compare that to his tieless casualness in the clips from what was may have been the night before) make it clear this is a piece of political theater. All the responses I've gotten seem to be knee-jerk reactions based purely on assumed tribalism, not on looking at any of the actual facts.

Fuck tribalism, BTW. Idiots and grandstanders deserve to be criticized, regardless of their colors.

Whatever.  It's clear that your blind spot on this or your animosity towards Paul or something else unclear from your posts is making it difficult for you to engage with the real world on this particular issue. 

That's not anything we are going to fix here.

See? Perfect example of tribalism.

Anyone else notice how everyone that disagrees with Pat on anything is doing so for invalid reasons that he assigns despite not knowing us personally, but in his heroic view of himself, this never happens to him?

So if someone is called out for not being objective the new defence is now being called Tribalism. Might as well simply say one wants an echo chamber on the matter. Just more honest as opposed to be pretending to want to hear from both sides on the matter. Rather than just pushing the carefully constructed personal narrative.

No, tribalism is when your reactions are based on team colors, not logic. Which is what appears to be the case, because nobody's addressed my central thesis: That Rand Paul falsely claimed he would have died, without police intervention. The situation was dangerous, but being jostled and shouted at is a long, long, long, long, long way from guaranteed death. He's exaggerating for political purposes, making this a clear case of political theater. If any of you really valued objectivity, you would have addressed this point.

Instead, what you (collective) have done is make assumptions about my personality, my emotional state, and a broad spectrum of my beliefs and political leanings, and then attacked me based on that caricature. Correction: Not a caricature, because caricatures are based on real things, just amplified. Completely imaginary and unrelated is more accurate. You're so far off, you're not even in the right galaxy.

Alathon reply to me ranted about globalism, equalitarian programming, and whatever the hell civnauts are. None of which had anything to do with Rand Paul's little dramatism, or my personal beliefs. Steven Mitchell did bring up a point, but a nonsense one: Paul being physically attacked by a neighbor in an unrelated incident doesn't mean the crowd in the latest event was really trying to kill him. Sureshot just made a post ostensibly against echo chambers and in favor of hearing from both sides (though thinking there are just 2 sides is a sign of tribalism), but used those to defend the dogpile against the one person expressing a dissenting view -- which requires a rather extreme level of cognitive dissonance. Note that the first two laced their very first replies to my posts with personal attacks directed at me, and the last questioned my motives instead of addressing anything I've said. While I respond in kind, I never initiated those kind of attacks.

What I hate most about tribalism is it shuts down any conversations. When people make stuff up about me instead of reacting to what I actually say, that's it. There's no way to get beyond that to discuss the issues, and it just turns into tiresome sniping and back and forth. I try to avoid this by always reframing my central point in my replies, as I did in the first paragraph of this post, but it never works. None of you have addressed it.

Shame that TheRPGSite seems to have taken a hard turn toward tribalism in the last couple months.

How is it false?  I mean what if the cops were not there and the mob did killed the couple? 

Quote from: Pat on September 02, 2020, 12:17:26 PMmake it clear this is a piece of political theater

100%. Those were actually all Russian actors hired by Putin pretending to be ANTIFA/BLM agitators in an effort to paint those peaceful groups as violent and help Trump get reelected. Just shut up.

Quote from: Snowman0147 on September 02, 2020, 03:26:28 PM
How is it false?  I mean what if the cops were not there and the mob did killed the couple?

Why because Pat said so! Rand Paul CLEARLY was not actually fearing for his life, he was just playing politics!

Quote from: Snowman0147 on September 02, 2020, 03:26:28 PM
How is it false?  I mean what if the cops were not there and the mob did killed the couple?

It's false because he's making a very strong statement about something that was unlikely to happen. It's equivalent to saying "The ball would have landed on 00, if the roulette table wasn't jostled." The accurate statement would have been "there's a chance I could have won", or in Paul's case, something like "it was a dangerous situation" or "I feared for my life", not "I don't think we would have survived."

Quote from: Brad on September 02, 2020, 03:28:02 PMWhy because Pat said so! Rand Paul CLEARLY was not actually fearing for his life, he was just playing politics!

I think he clearly was afraid. I've stated that several times. I also think he was playing politics.

30 people have died so far this summer, and the mob is not an unemotional roulette wheel picking its victims dispassionately at random.  It is an irrational, emotional tribe acting tribally against those it determines are of another tribe.

The reason libertarianism is a late-comer on the political theory scene is because individualists who didn't form tribes died in a violent world. It is a should-be philosophy

Quote from: EOTB on September 02, 2020, 04:34:30 PM
The reason libertarianism is a late-comer on the political theory scene is because individualists who didn't form tribes died in a violent world. It is a should-be philosophy

I don't entirely agree, but I think that's an interesting argument. How do you rationalize it with classical liberalism? Classical liberalism is more less equivalent with modern libertarianism, but emerged in the 17th century, and became the prevailing philosophy in the West in the 19th century. It was rooted in the individualist thinking of the Enlightenment, and can be construed as the framework that enabled the vast growth in personal wealth and modern technological progress over the last few centuries. But if you buy into the rationale of Haidt in The Righteous Mind, that's a very new and alien way of thinking. Which is why so many social experiments using college students seem to apply so poorly to the rest of the world, or history.

Quote from: Pat on September 02, 2020, 03:13:11 PM
No, tribalism is when your reactions are based on team colors, not logic. Which is what appears to be the case, because nobody's addressed my central thesis: That Rand Paul falsely claimed he would have died, without police intervention.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/30/us/portland-shooting-protests.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/30/us/portland-shooting-protests.html)

I don't blame Rand Paul for being afraid and thinking the mob were going to escalate to deadly force.

Quote from: Pat on September 02, 2020, 03:43:23 PMIt's false because he's making a very strong statement about something that was unlikely to happen. It's equivalent to saying "The ball would have landed on 00, if the roulette table wasn't jostled." The accurate statement would have been "there's a chance I could have won", or in Paul's case, something like "it was a dangerous situation" or "I feared for my life", not "I don't think we would have survived.

Nobody expects to be assaulted in their own yard either...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sen-rand-paul-assaulted-his-kentucky-home-suspect-arrested-n817591 (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sen-rand-paul-assaulted-his-kentucky-home-suspect-arrested-n817591)


In his case I think previous experience allows him some license to exaggerate. Especially since his wife was there and considering the violent escalations in the days prior.

Quote from: Pat on September 02, 2020, 04:48:39 PM

Quote from: EOTB on September 02, 2020, 04:34:30 PM
The reason libertarianism is a late-comer on the political theory scene is because individualists who didn't form tribes died in a violent world. It is a should-be philosophy

I don't entirely agree, but I think that's an interesting argument. How do you rationalize it with classical liberalism? Classical liberalism is more less equivalent with modern libertarianism, but emerged in the 17th century, and became the prevailing philosophy in the West in the 19th century. It was rooted in the individualist thinking of the Enlightenment, and can be construed as the framework that enabled the vast growth in personal wealth and modern technological progress over the last few centuries. But if you buy into the rationale of Haidt in The Righteous Mind, that's a very new and alien way of thinking. Which is why so many social experiments using college students seem to apply so poorly to the rest of the world, or history.

I made a post in the "now they're coming for your books" thread that is my opinion on this.  What you call "classical liberalism", I call "scissors"

Quote from: EOTB on September 02, 2020, 05:32:36 PM
What you call "classical liberalism", I call "scissors"

So when the other guy runs with classic liberalism, you keep watching and waiting for him to fall?

Quote from: Ratman_tf on September 02, 2020, 05:08:48 PM
I don't blame Rand Paul for being afraid and thinking the mob were going to escalate to deadly force.

Quote from: Melichor on September 02, 2020, 05:09:55 PMIn his case I think previous experience allows him some license to exaggerate. Especially since his wife was there and considering the violent escalations in the days prior.

I've never blamed him for his actions during the event, just his interview after. Though I also think it's pretty clear from his reaction that he's never been in a situation like that, and has no real priors to put it in context. If the greatest physical danger he's faced in his life is a 60 year old neighbor tackling him over a lawn dispute, that could explain why he tried to turn shouting and shoving into a zombie apocalypse.

Also, lest we forget (and I had forgotten), Rand Paul was at the baseball game in 2016 where a nut opened fire on members of Congress and almost killed Steve Scalise. 

Quote from: Pat on September 02, 2020, 06:21:19 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on September 02, 2020, 05:08:48 PM
I don't blame Rand Paul for being afraid and thinking the mob were going to escalate to deadly force.

Quote from: Melichor on September 02, 2020, 05:09:55 PMIn his case I think previous experience allows him some license to exaggerate. Especially since his wife was there and considering the violent escalations in the days prior.

I've never blamed him for his actions during the event, just his interview after. Though I also think it's pretty clear from his reaction that he's never been in a situation like that, and has no real priors to put it in context. If the greatest physical danger he's faced in his life is a 60 year old neighbor tackling him over a lawn dispute, that could explain why he tried to turn shouting and shoving into a zombie apocalypse.

Nice hyperbole. If you want to criticize Rand Paul for it, you might want to lay off it yourself.

Quote from: EOTB on September 02, 2020, 06:57:06 PM
Also, lest we forget (and I had forgotten), Rand Paul was at the baseball game in 2016 where a nut opened fire on members of Congress and almost killed Steve Scalise.

That is one of the previous events I was referring to.  Not only was there, he possibly saved Scalise's life.  He is a physician.  I think it is safe to say his experience with violence and injury is a little more extensive than Ivory Tower Pat credits. 

He also gets death threats often, and has more than one celebrity complains about his neighbor not finishing the job. 

Pat, you have some interesting things to say.  Your analysis of other people's motive and nature sucks.  Maybe you should focus on telling us what you think and leave the psychoanalysis to people with more skill and insight.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on September 02, 2020, 07:10:29 PMNice hyperbole. If you want to criticize Rand Paul for it, you might want to lay off it yourself.

Why? They're not comparable. He was seriously stating that he would have died, without the cops, in a political appearance. I'm on an antiswinegame forum, comparing rioters to brain-eating zombies.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on September 02, 2020, 07:16:43 PM

Quote from: EOTB on September 02, 2020, 06:57:06 PM
Also, lest we forget (and I had forgotten), Rand Paul was at the baseball game in 2016 where a nut opened fire on members of Congress and almost killed Steve Scalise.

That is one of the previous events I was referring to.  Not only was there, he possibly saved Scalise's life.  He is a physician.  I think it is safe to say his experience with violence and injury is a little more extensive than Ivory Tower Pat credits. 

He also gets death threats often, and has more than one celebrity complains about his neighbor not finishing the job. 

Pat, you have some interesting things to say.  Your analysis of other people's motive and nature sucks.  Maybe you should focus on telling us what you think and leave the psychoanalysis to people with more skill and insight.

You might want to look in the mirror. With two exceptions, I'm not the one analyzing other people's motives and natures. That's what you and the other posters have been doing about me, and you've been doing a staggeringly bad job at it.

Exception 1 is my assumption that most of the replies are based on tribalism. Which I made clear was an assumption, laid out my reasons, and only posted after a series of irrational replies. That's a courtesy the peanut gallery never gave me.

Exception 2 is my claim that Paul's statement was political theater. Which nobody contested with an argument, just personal attacks against me, or attacks against things I never said nor do I believe. (Likely tribalism; see exception 1.) The only person who provided a response that addressed my point didn't even defend the accuracy of what Paul said, but just said that Paul was justified in overreacting because of two prior incidents where he was attacked or witnessed violence. I agree that may have been why he overreacted. In fact, if you go back, and look at my original post, I made the point that Paul seemed completely out of his element, which sets the stage for that interpreation. But that doesn't fundamentally address my criticism. It's still a sensational, overwrought, misleading piece. The question is just whether it's deliberately staged, or whether Paul is just irrational because he's led a sheltered existence. I suspect it's in the middle, because he is a politician after all, and he had time to reflect before the interview. This wasn't a man-in-the-moment type of statement.

Quote from: Pat on September 02, 2020, 07:17:29 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on September 02, 2020, 07:10:29 PMNice hyperbole. If you want to criticize Rand Paul for it, you might want to lay off it yourself.

Why? They're not comparable. He was seriously stating that he would have died, without the cops, in a political appearance. I'm on an antiswinegame forum, comparing rioters to brain-eating zombies.

Just for consistency's sake.


Regardless I think Rand Paul's comments were warranted, considering the escalation of violence and outright killings that have happened in these riots.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on September 02, 2020, 08:06:49 PM
Regardless I think Rand Paul's comments were warranted, considering the escalation of violence and outright killings that have happened in these riots.

I think they're not, for the reasons I listed. But I appreciate you and the couple other posters who managed to disagree without making personal attacks or making up things I never said.

Quote from: Pat on September 02, 2020, 07:36:34 PM
You might want to look in the mirror. With two exceptions, I'm not the one analyzing other people's motives and natures. That's what you and the other posters have been doing about me, and you've been doing a staggeringly bad job at it.

Go back and read it again.  The closest I came to analyzing your motives was to make a couple of speculations then say it was something like that or clearly something else that wasn't clear. 

You insist everyone else follow a standard you don't live up to.  Your words should be read in the most charitable light possible.  Everyone else's words get your pedantic parsing.  Grow up.

That's the last I have to say about Pat in this topic.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on September 02, 2020, 08:53:13 PM
Go back and read it again.  The closest I came to analyzing your motives was to make a couple of speculations then say it was something like that or clearly something else that wasn't clear. 

You insist everyone else follow a standard you don't live up to.  Your words should be read in the most charitable light possible.  Everyone else's words get your pedantic parsing.  Grow up.

"It's clear that your blind spot on this or your animosity towards Paul".

That's your words, speculating on my motives. It's not hard to avoid that, all you have to do is address what I said, not wrap a narrative around it and tell me what I think or feel. The rest of your post is also a lie. I hold everyone to the same standards, and I stand by what I say, not the imaginary things you accuse of me of.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on September 02, 2020, 01:03:47 PM
Whatever.  It's clear that your blind spot on this or your animosity towards Paul or something else unclear from your posts is making it difficult for you to engage with the real world on this particular issue. 

That's not anything we are going to fix here.

Well, I guess I can't let a direct lie about me pass while accusing me of lying at the same time.  Congratulations, you got me to post again.  To save me and everyone else the bother later, if Pat has anything else to say about me, my stock answer is to go back and read the whole thread rather than take his word for it.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on September 02, 2020, 10:11:01 PM
Well, I guess I can't let a direct lie about me pass while accusing me of lying at the same time.  Congratulations, you got me to post again.  To save me and everyone else the bother later, if Pat has anything else to say about me, my stock answer is to go back and read the whole thread rather than take his word for it.

Of course I didn't lie. The post I quoted, and which you kindly quoted again, proves it. You just added in the rest of the post, which includes a personal attack directed at me. I didn't include it, because I was trying to address the content of what you said, and let the attacks pass. I don't think you realize how nasty your posts have been. You've very rarely addressed what I've said. Instead, your posts have been littered with cases where you just stating your personal, highly negative, opinions of me, my capabilities, and how I think. You probably think you're posting some objective truth, but you're not. Those are personal attacks, and particularly insidious ones, because you don't seem to realize it.

I agree we should drop this. I like discussions, and insults and strong words don't bother me. But when that's all there is, there's really no point.

Quote from: Pat on September 02, 2020, 12:17:26 PM
I don't where that's coming from. I've said repeatedly it was a scary situation, and haven't criticized their response in the moment. I'm criticizing Rand Paul's interview, which is clearly much later because the background appears to be a bright day and the scene with the protesters has lit street lights. In that interview, he makes repeated false claims portraying the situation not as a risk to his life, which would have been accurate if a bit overstated, because the risk was small and there was no sign it was escalating to a more violent confrontation, but as certain death if the police hadn't intervened. I quoted several examples of him doing that in my first post, and it's worth noting he also admitted that wasn't true -- in the middle of the interview he several times makes more moderate statements about the risk, before reverting back to the hyperbole. The hyperbole and the mussed hair (in contrast, his suit and tie seem perfectly coiffed; compare that to his tieless casualness in the clips from what was may have been the night before) make it clear this is a piece of political theater. All the responses I've gotten seem to be knee-jerk reactions based purely on assumed tribalism, not on looking at any of the actual facts.

Fuck tribalism, BTW. Idiots and grandstanders deserve to be criticized, regardless of their colors.

Tribalism has nothing to do with this, Pat.


Let me draw you a hypothetical scenario. You live in the United States. A man breaks into your house, screeching and frothing at the mouth. Before you can do anything he is flailing, attacking your significant other or child. You grab a chair and club him over the head, knocking him unconscious. He dies a short time later from a fractured skull.


Very, very few (if any) municipalities will attempt to prosecute you, even if it turns out the man was blameless for his condition, because the laws do not require you to 'mindread' a person's intentions. Only that you and your loved ones are in danger. The 'imminent peril' aspect is very important -- you can't trap a person, nor can you shoot them as they flee.


Yes, this has led to tragedies, but the alternative is worse. In the UK, you can be criminally charged with bodily harm/assault for defending yourself from attack if a prosecutor deems it 'excessive'. Such determinations are usually made well after the fact, not in the heat of the moment with adrenaline fizzing and fight/flight reactions giving you tunnel vision. Hence, hindsight being used to judge people.


See what I'm getting at now?

-Political theater
-Literally getting shot at
Pick one

Quote from: Brad on September 03, 2020, 11:28:29 AM
-Political theater
-Literally getting shot at
Pick one

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Itispat.jpg)

Quote from: Ghostmaker on September 03, 2020, 08:33:21 AM
See what I'm getting at now?

What does lethal self defense against a home invader have to do with an ex post facto exaggeration of a event that happened outside, and where nobody threw a punch?

Quote from: Brad on September 03, 2020, 11:28:29 AM
-Political theater
-Literally getting shot at
Pick one

I pick political theater, because nobody shot at anyone.

Quote from: Pat on September 03, 2020, 02:55:58 PM
I pick political theater, because nobody shot at anyone.

Fact: Rand Paul was shot at by some maniac at a baseball game
Fact: Steve Scalise was actually hit at said baseball game and suffered some serious, life-threatening injuries
Fact: Rand Paul was assaulted and beat up by his neighbor because, you know he doesn't like his politics or some nonsense
Fact: ANTIFA/BLM has performed acts of violence and someone was straight up murdered in cold blood in Portland a few days ago for having the audacity to not support their groups
Fact: Rand Paul was surrounded by an angry mob of ANTIFA/BLM that threatened to kill him

Pat's assessment: Rand Paul was being melodramatic about fearing for his life.

Dude, you're being a fucking retard. Just stop.

Quote from: Brad on September 03, 2020, 03:12:52 PM
Fact: Rand Paul was shot at by some maniac at a baseball game

Fact: That's not the event we're talking about.

Stop being a fucking moron.

Quote from: Pat on September 03, 2020, 03:15:53 PM
Fact: That's not the event we're talking about.

Stop being a fucking moron.

My name is Pat, I just want to ignore a long sequence of events that would lead someone to legitimately fear for their lives after a violent mob was saying they wanted to kill me.

If a mob says they want to kill you, you should probably believe them.

Quote from: Brad on September 03, 2020, 03:18:24 PM
My name is Pat, I just want to ignore a long sequence of events that would lead someone to legitimately fear for their lives after a violent mob was saying they wanted to kill me.

I said repeatedly, including in my very first post in the thread, that it was a dangerous situation. That it could be life threatening, and that there was a possibility, albeit remote, that it could have led to violence or even death. And I've also repeatedly said that I don't fault Rand Paul, at all, for fearing for his life and his wife's life, while the event was happening. The only thing I've criticized is the blatant lie in an interview, which was clearly well after the fact.

So literally nothing you wrote about what I said is true.

Your name is Brad, and you can't read.