Joe Biden--proud moment on the campaign trail

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Your endorcement of the angonizing deaths of children, whether at the hands of Hussein or as collateral victims of American bombings, is bewildering and something I can't agree with.

I made no such endorsement. Not once. Not ever.

You have taken unrelated bits and pieces of what I said and combined them to create opinions that I do not have and inferred endorsements I did not and would not make.

BTW, as stated clearly, I've been discussing your assertion that US government tolerance of US dissidents and US demonstrations has lessened lately; ie., US tolerance was greater earlier, such as in the 60's and there is less tolerance now.

I said absolutely nothing about the 60's until you made it a part of the discussion and it had nothing to do with the topic at hand.

My position is that there was inadequate US government tolerance towards US dissidents then and there is inadequate US government tolerance towards US dissidents now.

I completely agree with you. But again, that had nothing to do with what we were discussing.

I'd repeat my position again:

- I think we've killed a lot of innocent people in this war. Thats what happens during a war. I dont like it.
- I think we had a lot to do with many of the people Hussein killed as we gave him weapons and allowed him to continue to operate as the leader of Iraq when we could have taken him out 15 years ago. I dont like it.
- I think the sanctions/embargos and the UN malarky around the oil for food program resulted in a lot of deaths and suffering. I dont like that. Unfortunately the US was behind a lot of this or a lot of it was a result of what we did and didnt do. I dont like that.
- I think that at least some of the people he killed asked for it by protesting or attacking his government. I am not saying the reasons why they protested or attacked were good or bad.
- I am less sympathetic to someone who dies as a result of doing something that carries the expectation of death than someone who was just living their miserable life.

And as the side bars you took us down:
- I think almost any protester in the US had very little to fear with regards to physical attack, rape and murder compared to many other countries, specifically Iraq.
- I think that in the last few years protests have been muted by the government by shipping people off to 'protest areas' and by not allowing them to protest at all.
- I think that more people have been killed walking their doggies than killed by the US government for protesting.
- I dont disagree that protesting in the 1960's may have been more dangerous than it is today, but I do disagree that the average joe protester walking around carrying a sign was at any significant risk of life and limb.

 

[youbet]

I know you post a lot and I wouldn't expect you to equally prioritize every detail of everything you say.  It was this statement you made that I picked up on and that caused me to point out that US government curbs on demonstrations are not just a recent thing.  I used the Grant Park Demonstrations during the Democratic National Convention as an example because I was there and have first hand knowledge.  Obviously, the Civil Rights Demonstrations during the 60's would also be an example.  I was not comparing anything to Iraq.  I was commenting on your statement that US curbs on demonstrations are something happening lately or recently.


"In the US, we allow protesting, although lately its only to a degree and where we allow you to protest, preferrably miles away where you'll largely go unnoticed.  And usually you dont have to worry about the consequences of your protesting, except recently..."

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Let me clarify that again.

I'm talking about a 3-5 year time span, not a 50 year one.

Specifically indicative that the current administration is violating our civil rights by putting pressure on protesters.

But I can see how easy it is to take a non specific comment and think it applies to something that happened in the prior century. Especially when nothing else we had talked about involved anything longer than a decade or so, and was primarily about the last handful of years.

 

[youbet]

Let me clarify that again.

Yes! Please do!

 

[Martha]

Let me clarify that again.

I'm talking about a 3-5 year time span, not a 50 year one.

Specifically indicative that the current administration is violating our civil rights by putting pressure on protesters.

But I can see how easy it is to take a non specific comment and think it applies to something that happened in the prior century.   Especially when nothing else we had talked about involved anything longer than a decade or so, and was primarily about the last handful of years.

Hey, I thought that the last century ended only 6 years ago. I read the sentence that Youbet quoted the same way as Youbet: The US has allowed protesting, except for recent restrictions. I wouldn't look back only three to five years to see what the history of protesting was in the US.

Unfortunately, minds were not meeting. But no need for anyone to blow it out of proportion.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Unfortunately, minds were not meeting. But no need for anyone to blow it out of proportion.

Thats easy for you to say. Nobody implied that you endorsed the killing of children...

Okey dokey, well if we're going to pull out a minor comment that wasnt really relevant to the discussion and take it for a walk even after I've tried to clarify it three times, I made that comment in regards to this:

http://www.slate.com/id/2107012

What I didnt understand was how we're talking about current events and then 'recently' turns into '40+ years ago'. Gosh, there are probably all sorts of things that happened around 800AD that we can dig into.

It is my understanding that in the last 3-5 years our rights to assemble and free speech have been infringed upon more frequently and to a greater degree than at any time previously, to the extent that simply trying to protest lawfully and peacefully is considered a crime.

Am I actually suggesting to a couple of liberals that the current administration is going overboard with suppression of our civil rights and they're arguing with me that such is not the case, that it was worse in the 1960's when democrats were in the white house?

Jeez Louise.

I'd really be indignant if not for the fact that absolutely none of this is relevant to the original post/topic...

Oh yeah...read my sig...

 

[Martha]

Whateva.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Ah yes, by uttering "whateva", I presume you are professing love and support for Gluteus Moronius, the 4th century dictator of Moldyarania, who regularly ate small children while uttering the word "whateva"

You rotten, rotten person...