JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2024 3:15 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2024 11:08 am
youthathletics wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2024 9:35 am
Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2024 9:30 am
It is pushback against:
the intensifying efforts to whitewash the assault on the Capitol and disruption of the certification as some garden variety expression of First Amendment rights;
the Horst Wessell-ization of the incident and the then-President's part in it;
the depiction of the people assaulting the Capitol and invading Congressional and Senate offices as political prisoners and hostages; and
the Right's effort to transform this into a Reichstag burning.
Look at the comments:
Your friend #bubblebathgirl: "J6 was a hoax orchestrated by the Democrats."
Others:
"Make no mistake, this is an orchestrated WITCH HUNT against President Trump and the ENTIRE America First movement."
The post by the Biden campaign is correct; there is nothing more sacred than our democracy. The effort to rinse and sanitize the assault on January 6 is a disgrace. But you keep dutifully pushing this stuff for them.
You are proving my point, this is not what Leadership looks like.
This is always your response -- that people are somehow "proving your point." Absolute bullsh*t. I don't even know what your point is, YA, except to show how brain-smothered and mentally shaped you are by the anti-democratic claptrap you read and traffic on social media platforms.
We are in the middle of a presidential campaign. Party nominating conventions are imminent. There is less than five months to election day. The GOP candidate is campaigning on, in part, a promise to "free the political prisoners of J6," and to "pardon the hostages." Biden and his campaign have every right and likely a meaningful need to counterpoint these talking points of the opposition's campaign. But you pathetically suggest this isn't "leadership" enough for the likes of you, and that Biden must accept some mythic highroad to his opponent's relentless campaign of misinformation and proto-authoritarianism, and not meet the GOP's campaign of bullsh*t head on. It'd be funny if you weren't coopted into being a little clerk/assistant in the effort to transmogrify criminals into heroes.
Here's my question to you? What exactly is YOUR point? To "correct" him because he posts something as a part of the discussion that runs contrary to to your preferred narrative? Just because it goes contrary to your political values, does not mean that YA is "brain-smothered and shaped by anti-democratic claptrap" I mean YA is attempting the further the discussion, you don't like what he has to say, so the automatic retort is to trivialize a poster's attempt to further the discussion. I seriously doubt the these posts are in attempt to put one over on you and other posters on this site. It runs contrary to the preferred narrative, so therefore it must be marginalized. I just don't understand, but you know what maybe I don't want to understand. Because what I'm seeing is not a "discussion", it's an attack on an opposing viewpoint. It's consistent, and I should know better than to hope for that to change. SMH.
Joe
My point is simple and right there before you. There is nothing wrong with the Biden campaign pointing out that Trump's and his acolytes' efforts to sanitize the assault on the Capitol and the disruption of the certification of the Presidential electoral vote tally on January 6 is wrong. This is Beer Hall Putsch stuff, plain and simple -- an effort to disguise seditious and unlawful activity and conduct under a banner of routine political expression. It is not an absence of "leadership" for the leader of the world's foremost self-governing society to call out those sanitizing efforts for what they are.
I am not -- and do me a favor and read this -- "correcting" YA. I am disagreeing with the stuff he posts because I believe it is misinformation, and I believe it is literally malignant to foist on us the notion that the J6 criminals are "political prisoners" and "hostages." I am doubtful he is trying to further the discussion; he is trying to make his point, a point with which I disagree. Argument among adults is discussion -- sometimes withering, sometimes heated, but discussion all the same.
Assume that the discussion is about -- and I don't think YA would ever say that sort of stuff -- a need to round up gay folks and concentrate them in camps and remove them from polite society. Is is then OK for me to "attack an opposing viewpoint? I think it is.
And so it is that I think it is OK to for me to push back on, or diminish or disparage an effort to recast history and make criminals out to be honest foot soldiers merely expressing their views by entering the Capitol, destroying property, spreading feces in the halls and offices, and disrupting the certification of an election the outcome of which they disagree with. And I think it is OK for someone running for a second term for the Presidency to do the same.