General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMaybe I'm not that smart, but I can't seem to understand...
...how this false equivalency works.
Are the pundits trying to tell me that interrupting an elected official's dinner to voice my displeasure of his or her performance in office is the same as a person who sends a bomb to the elected official's house?
Just asking.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)Thomas Hurt
(13,903 posts)vlyons
(10,252 posts)RW pundits want to confuse us and talk about false flag theories, rather than talk about how Trump's intemperate hate speech is responsible for motivating hatred, violence, and division.
louis c
(8,652 posts)This "both sides bull shit". The right to peaceably protest or to petition your government or speak freely is enshrined in the first amendment. It doesn't matter if you're right or left. Occupy Wall Street, or a Teabagger.
But you can't send bombs to people. That's not protected speech.
happy feet
(871 posts)Even many on MSNBC
The Mouth
(3,164 posts)I have seen the claim that the harassment of McConnell and Pelosi was comparable.
Is there actually any "pundit" claiming that sending a bomb is ethically comparable to interrupting someone's dinner? I haven't seen such, sounds a bit strange, but if you have a link I'll check it out.
Thanks