no one really believes Trump is directing lunatics to act out, nor do I personally believe he derives any pleasure from these atrocities.

climates do change though, they swing back and forth with the leanings and turnover of the parties in charge as we dance around the center politically.

currently, a soft tolerance has been inferred, even if not purposely implied. Europe is seeing an even stronger move in that direction.

frankj1 wrote:

we did get to enjoy your virtual/cell phone company a couple years back at the last MAHole Herf.
Theodore, the c-bidder formally known as Bucky, called you if I recall correctly.

frankj1 wrote:

Also like Madonna said, "Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House"...

opelmanta1900 wrote:

Tail... Don't be an idiot.

I gave a literal factual example of the president of the United States identifying specific groups as literally"enemy of the people".

Just because Joe schmoe in an editorial of the Ballard weekly gazette says something bad about trump doesn't create an equivalency. No matter how badly you want it to.

You would notice that anyone else who has reached that level of influence has a much different demeanor, and isn't calling for violence against anyone.

victor809 wrote:

Tell me about the evils of nationalism vs globalism without the rhetoric of racism and jingoism.

ZRX1200 wrote:

If the "pope" called abortion clinics the enemy of God, and a Catholic tried blowing them up, I would argue he bears responsibility. If whatever pope Islam has called Americans the enemy of Allah, and an Islam tried blowing us up, I would say they bear some responsibility (incidentally they don't have a single head of their religion, so it simply doesn't fit easily).

victor809 wrote: