RE: Rally Question

RE: Rally Question (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Phydeaux -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 2:31:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: a way of limiting, controlling, or stopping something Nope, sorry, otherwise the Trump campaign is equally guilty because they limited, controlled, and stopped the protesters from getting into the rally. All the protesters did was delay people for a while. Supreme Court ruling says you have the right to free speech - you do not have the right to free speech wherever you want it, whenever you want it. The trump campaign have no obligation to allow protesters into the the rally.

KenDckey -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 2:39:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: KenDckey ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick Yet no one was arrested for restraining Trump supporters, and possibly residents, from going about their lawful business. That's because nobody was restrained. Delay is not restraint. depends on your reading of the definition http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/restraint a way of limiting, controlling, or stopping something Wow...just like the senate and the nomination for the supreme court.[8\|] exactly. The POTUS nominates then under the advise and consent provision of the constitution, they can limit the manner in whatever way they choose, control it and evven stop it.

KenDckey -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 2:49:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: a way of limiting, controlling, or stopping something Nope, sorry, otherwise the Trump campaign is equally guilty because they limited, controlled, and stopped the protesters from getting into the rally. All the protesters did was delay people for a while. Supreme Court ruling says you have the right to free speech - you do not have the right to free speech wherever you want it, whenever you want it. The trump campaign have no obligation to allow protesters into the the rally. like yelling fire in the theater

Aylee -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 3:47:07 PM)
A black off duty cop at the Tuscan NM rally was surprised at how people behaved. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/03/video-black-tucson-cop-shocked-by-evil-behavior-of-trump-protesters-praises-restraint-of-trump-supporters/

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 3:55:27 PM)
quote: The trump campaign have no obligation to allow protesters into the the rally. Aaaaand you, to nobody's surprise, also completely missed the point. Try brushing up on your reading skills.

thompsonx -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 4:46:13 PM)
ORIGINAL: KenDckey ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: KenDckey ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick Yet no one was arrested for restraining Trump supporters, and possibly residents, from going about their lawful business. That's because nobody was restrained. Delay is not restraint. depends on your reading of the definition http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/restraint a way of limiting, controlling, or stopping something Wow...just like the senate and the nomination for the supreme court.[8\|] exactly. The POTUS nominates then under the advise and consent provision of the constitution, they can limit the manner in whatever way they choose, control it and evven stop it. If, as you say, they are exactly equal why are you sniviling about the protesters ? Are you also against the senate passing on this nomination?

thompsonx -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 4:50:28 PM)
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Supreme Court ruling says you have the right to free speech Cite please. The trump campaign have no obligation to allow protesters into the the rally. Unless it is "invitation only" anyone can come. Any dumbass would know that but then you are not just any dumbass.

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 5:03:26 PM)
quote: Wow...just like the senate and the nomination for the supreme court. Maybe I am just to dizzy, but damned if I can see the connection.

KenDckey -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 5:22:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: KenDckey ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: KenDckey ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick Yet no one was arrested for restraining Trump supporters, and possibly residents, from going about their lawful business. That's because nobody was restrained. Delay is not restraint. depends on your reading of the definition http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/restraint a way of limiting, controlling, or stopping something Wow...just like the senate and the nomination for the supreme court.[8\|] exactly. The POTUS nominates then under the advise and consent provision of the constitution, they can limit the manner in whatever way they choose, control it and evven stop it. If, as you say, they are exactly equal why are you sniviling about the protesters ? Are you also against the senate passing on this nomination? By definition yes, however the people don't have that right as I assume you wish they did. Police, courts, etc have the right as it comes to ordinary citizens for restraining individuals but not the citizenry. Did you even bother reading the code cite?

thompsonx -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 5:33:08 PM)
By definition yes, however the people don't have that right as I assume you wish they did. Police, courts, etc have the right as it comes to ordinary citizens for restraining individuals but not the citizenry. Did you even bother reading the code cite? They have the same rights to civil disobedience as any other amerikan. The obstructionism is the same. That knife cuts in both directions. That is unless you feel it was right to beat and club those blacks who challanged segregation or those whites led by a black man at the boston massacre being murdered by the solders?

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 5:34:44 PM)
That's just stupid

thompsonx -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 5:37:37 PM)
ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick That's just stupid Could you be just a little more specific?

Wayward5oul -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 6:11:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick That's just stupid Could you be just a little more specific? Please, because there is so much stupid in this place.

Phydeaux -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 9:21:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: a way of limiting, controlling, or stopping something Nope, sorry, otherwise the Trump campaign is equally guilty because they limited, controlled, and stopped the protesters from getting into the rally. All the protesters did was delay people for a while. Supreme Court ruling says you have the right to free speech - you do not have the right to free speech wherever you want it, whenever you want it. The trump campaign have no obligation to allow protesters into the the rally. How about I explain it to you. You claimed the otherwise the Trump campaign was equally guilty because they stopped the protesters from getting into the rally. I said - not so - because the Trump organizers are legally entitled to do so. You set up a false equivalency. I pointed out it was false. Whether or not the original premise (limiting controlling whatever) is true or not - your analysis is independently wrong.

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 9:46:41 PM)
quote: How about I explain it to you. Well thanks for explaining what you don't understand about what you are arguing with, but really you don't have to, see, I really don't give a fuck where you went wrong.

KenDckey -> RE: Rally Question (3/20/2016 10:46:55 PM)
seems tolerance is at work

Phydeaux -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 12:31:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: How about I explain it to you. Well thanks for explaining what you don't understand about what you are arguing with, but really you don't have to, see, I really don't give a fuck where you went wrong. Vitriol doesn't make you right. It just makes you ugly. Your analysis is still wrong. Try using logic to defend your position (that would be interesting) or concede you were wrong.

thompsonx -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 7:00:42 AM)
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Vitriol doesn't make you right. Ignorance and stupidity doesn't make you right either. It just makes you ugly. Your analysis is still wrong. Try using logic to defend your position (that would be interesting) or concede you were wrong. Unless it is an invitation only event then anyone is allowed to come. Why is that so difficult for your adolescent mind to comprehend?

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 8:52:46 AM)
quote: Try using logic to defend your position I did, when I originally posted it. It's not my fault you didn't understand what I said.

BamaD -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 12:13:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: Try using logic to defend your position I did, when I originally posted it. It's not my fault you didn't understand what I said. If the Trump people let people determined to cause trouble into their rallies they would be guilty of neglegence by knowingly allowing a potentially violent situation to exist.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.054688E-02