The Angry Violent Right

[Nebfanatic]

3 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

It comes across as a call to arms against the Right

Not sure where at all you are getting that. I'd be more concerned with the actual threats of violence being made towards these officials. Nothing she said seemed like a call to arms to me. Weird you are making it about what she did wrong. 

 

[Redux]

2 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Not sure where at all you are getting that. I'd be more concerned with the actual threats of violence being made towards these officials. Nothing she said seemed like a call to arms to me. Weird you are making it about what she did wrong. 

 

Guess we're just ignoring the first thing I said and stretching the second?

[Archy1221]

11 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

Guess we're just ignoring the first thing I said and stretching the second?

People tend to do that here. 

[Redux]

1 minute ago, Archy1221 said:

People tend to do that here. 

 

I'm well aware.  Giving a chance to walk it back.

[Redux]

30 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Not sure where at all you are getting that. Nothing she said seemed like a call to arms to me.

 

This is the quote in question she made in response:

 

Quote

“So this is just a warning to you Trumpers,” Johnson said. “Be careful. Walk lightly. We ain’t playing with you. Enough of the shenanigans. Enough is enough. And for those of you who are soldiers, you know how to do it. Do it right. Be in order. Make them pay.”

 

Again, I totally understand she was in a frame of mind where she had been threatened.  This type of thing hits on an emotional level.  Unfortunately she is in a position of power and it's not a good look regardless of context.  I'd ne pissed too.  I'd want retaliation too.  That doesn't make it right to suggest what she implies at the end.  And it cost her.

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/529491-michigan-lawmaker-who-gave-warning-to-trump-supporters-stripped-of-committee-seats

 

None of it is right or justified or even makes any sense.

[Nebfanatic]

1 hour ago, Redux said:

 

Guess we're just ignoring the first thing I said and stretching the second?

The racist death threats are bad BUT part? 

[Redux]

1 hour ago, Nebfanatic said:

The racist death threats are bad BUT part? 

 

Go ahead and point out in that post whete I said BUT.  Actually, I'll do it for you so you can read it and not misinterpret it to fill some stupid narrative you're trying to create.

 

2 hours ago, Redux said:

 

Been arguing about this incident for a couple hours elsewhere.  My stance is that the racist death threats are absolutely unacceptable.  Period.

 

I'm not a fan of her response to it.  To be fair she had every right to be upset and shaken because of it.  The response isn't a great look though.

 

Nowhere do I say BUT and try to justify racist death threats.  That's you, that's you trying to spin my words into something they aren't.  Please, feel free to feel ridiculous.  I admonish the racism in the first paragraph and explain my feelings on her response video.   Simple as that.

[Nebfanatic]

49 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

Go ahead and point out in that post whete I said BUT.  Actually, I'll do it for you so you can read it and not misinterpret it to fill some stupid narrative you're trying to create.

 

 

Nowhere do I say BUT and try to justify racist death threats.  That's you, that's you trying to spin my words into something they aren't.  Please, feel free to feel ridiculous.  I admonish the racism in the first paragraph and explain my feelings on her response video.   Simple as that.

The BUT is implied. The racist death threat is unacceptable but I don't like how she responded to it. I (you) don't like how the victim responded to being victimized. I guess you can make it about that if you want to but again, I'm more concerned about the racist death threats than a flight of flight response to a disgusting threat on your life. But let's go ahead and argue about how the person at the butt end of racist death threats is in the wrong. Its funny how we tell the people recieving threats like this THEY need to be nicer about it. How well has that work over the last few centuries? 

[Redux]

26 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

The BUT is implied. The racist death threat is unacceptable but I don't like how she responded to it. I (you) don't like how the victim responded to being victimized. I guess you can make it about that if you want to but again, I'm more concerned about the racist death threats than a flight of flight response to a disgusting threat on your life. But let's go ahead and argue about how the person at the butt end of racist death threats is in the wrong. Its funny how we tell the people recieving threats like this THEY need to be nicer about it. How well has that work over the last few centuries? 

 

At this point you can either just stop responding and slink off, or you can admit you're blatantly taking me out of context, putting words in my mouth and making unnecessary assumptions to paint me in an unflattering light.  I've made my position quite clear and you're essentially trolling at this point.

 

It's possible to be disgusted, disappointed and angry about people's inability to be decent human beings at the same time you're not thrilled with someone's response to it.  Being a victim doesn't give you the right to do whatever you want.  Obviously other highly ranking officials agree with that sentiment because: https://thehill.com/homenews/529491-michigan-lawmaker-who-gave-warning-to-trump-supporters-stripped-of-committee-seats in case you missed it, she was reprimanded for the comments you are choosing to ignore.  The people that made the threats will be dealt with as well, at least one has already been identified.  They deserve punishment, racial threats like this should not be tolerated.  Doesn't change the fact she made a mistake making a couple of the comments she did.

 

Now, can you just admit you're being difficult for the sake of being difficult?  Or do you really want to keep arguing with someone who agrees the threats caused her knee jerk reaction to begin with.

[Nebfanatic]

6 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

At this point you can either just stop responding and slink off, or you can admit you're blatantly taking me out of context, putting words in my mouth and making unnecessary assumptions to paint me in an unflattering light.  I've made my position quite clear and you're essentially trolling at this point.

I'll do none of the above, thanks though. 

It's possible to be disgusted, disappointed and angry about people's inability to be decent human beings at the same time you're not thrilled with someone's response to it.  Being a victim doesn't give you the right to do whatever you want.  Obviously other highly ranking officials agree with that sentiment because: https://thehill.com/homenews/529491-michigan-lawmaker-who-gave-warning-to-trump-supporters-stripped-of-committee-seats in case you missed it, she was reprimanded for the comments you are choosing to ignore.  The people that made the threats will be dealt with as well, at least one has already been identified.  They deserve punishment, racial threats like this should not be tolerated.  Doesn't change the fact she made a mistake making a couple of the comments she did.

I'm not choosing to ignore anything, I just think making this about her response is missing the point. 

Now, can you just admit you're being difficult for the sake of being difficult?  Or do you really want to keep arguing with someone who agrees the threats caused her knee jerk reaction to begin with.

Thats the first time in this interaction that you have acknowledged the cause and issue in this case is the racism and death threats. I'm sorry but I'm tired of people telling others how they should act when they are being discriminated against in this fashion. Play nice doesn't work as evidenced by the rampant racism currently in our nation. So again, if you want to admonish her for her reaction go for it, I just think its in bad taste. Maybe people in positions of privilege shouldn't be telling others how they should be responding to racist death threats. 

 

[Redux]

I'm sorry but being a victim doesn't grant you immunity.  Do you disagree with this statement?  Being a victim gives you special privileges, yes or no?

[ZRod]

Nobody is trying to justify the things that were said against her. She could have chose her words better in response though. I've always said when they go low you go high.

 

She's a weirdo anyways, and this is kind of inline with where she's been all year. Vaguely worded statements that could be confused with threats but are still on the surface inflammatory.

[BigRedBuster]

15 hours ago, Redux said:

I'm not a fan of her response to it.  To be fair she had every right to be upset and shaken because of it.  The response isn't a great look though.

I skimmed the article and don't know what response you're talking about.  Could you explain?

[Redux]

2 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

I skimmed the article and don't know what response you're talking about.  Could you explain?

 

Her quote in the video is as follows, I'll try to find the video.

 

Quote

“So this is just a warning to you Trumpers,” Johnson said. “Be careful. Walk lightly. We ain’t playing with you. Enough of the shenanigans. Enough is enough. And for those of you who are soldiers, you know how to do it. Do it right. Be in order. Make them pay.”

 

It's vague enough to be a threat or a callling but also be deniable.  Unfortunately she was in a pretty vulnerable state when she said these things but it also seems to coincide with some of her previous behavior. 

[DevoHusker]

6 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

And for those of you who are soldiers, you know how to do it. Do it right. Be in order. Make them pay."

 

Sounds very similar to "Stand back and Stand by"