Are Dems on a jihad?

I quoted your post accurately. Perhaps you made a Freudian typo?

 

You seem to have lost sight of the issue raised in the thread. It is about Dem supporters going out of their way to harass Reps and Rep supporters. You then claimed Rep supporters did that for eight years under Obama. You were asked for examples. You never provided any. Instead, you countered with a non sequitur about Reps not supporting Obama’s attempts at shoving Dem objectives through congress. Then you switched to complaining about how uninvited Dem supporters were treated at Trump rallies, and at a Unite the Right rally.

You are very selective in your memory and presentation. You made no mention of the violence and vitriol Dem supporters unleashed at Trump rallies or at that Unite the Right rally. Clearly, the Dem supporters, urged on by the Dems, have been the aggressors every time. They go out of their way to show up wherever those they hate happen to be, whether to speak, to meet, or even just to eat. They then attempt to engage in extreme harassment and often violence. What you really seem upset about is people wanting to defend themselves against aggressors, or at least escape from them unharmed.

The Dems do appear to think they are on some sort of jihad, and you seem to think it's OK. Do you?

 

I dropped this line of argument myself, because I realize FollowTheWay does not accept the consensus regarding Bill's sexual offenses, only the ones that might be categorized as consensual and thus cheating on his wife. I decided it's better to just get back to the original question of a Dem jihad.

 

The Violence of Trump's Words
The Violence of Trump’s Words

How do we assess blame for the consequences of dehumanizing rhetoric?

Trump is not to blame for the shooting, in June, of five newspaper employees in Maryland. But three days earlier, he told his national audience that the press was “the enemy of the people,” a phrase he’s often used. Trump has repeatedly used the presidency to attack the free press and its practitioners. The shooter, Jarrod Ramos, had tweeted in support of Trump in the past. We may never know if Trump’s statements incited Ramos, but what we already know is plenty. Trump has helped to instill in many citizens the view that the press is less than human.

If you strip away parties and ideologies and everything else, the dividing line that matters in politics is pretty simple: Are those in power encouraging more empathy, or less? Our leaders have been members of the latter camp for decades now — it’s a bit like they’ve been tincturing the water with lead. Though Trump represents the current nadir of that political style, all of them are culpable. It will take many years to undo — if, indeed, it can be undone at all.

 

https://nypost.com/2018/09/13/whats-really-behind-the-rise-in-political-violence/

What’s really behind the rise in political violence

What’s deeply wrong is that we now attribute all failings to the government and all successes to the government. Take, for example, The Washington Post, which suggested in an editorial this week that President Trump is “complicit” about Hurricane Florence because he doesn’t support the Post’s preferred climate-change policy. Now, whatever your feelings about Trump’s climate-change policy — or lack thereof — he’s not responsible for a hurricane any more than former President Barack Obama was responsible for Hurricane Sandy.

At best, Trump’s policy may be contributing to future global warming. But that’s not the Post’s suggestion. Instead, the Post editors suggest that Trump is himself a King Triton, stirring the seas into hurricane-friendly territory.

By contrast, those on the right suggest that President Trump is solely responsible for our economic boom. They’re not wrong to attribute some of the economic growth to consumer confidence and business investment in the wake of Trump’s pro-capitalism policies.

But Trump isn’t any more “in charge” of the economy than Obama was. The economy is far too complex and government is far too complicated for executive tinkering to be attributed to success or blamed for failure.

 

1. There are no good healthcare systems in Europe.

2. Removing those things that inhibit the economy can and does have an immediate effect. Things such as excessive taxes, overregulation, global tarrifs on American products by other nations.

Apparently Obama doesnt agree with our resident DNC operative bevause he has made attempts to take credit for the economy he said would never happen.

 

To summarize the essential message of your camp's two-sided coin…

If Bad: It's neither news nor wrong 'til Trump does it.

If Good: It's never news, or never good, if Trump does it.

Read very carefully. I do not like having to step in to defend against outrageous, over-the-top attacks against Trump or Rep supporters, because it can sound like I think he and they do everything right. I don't think that at all. But Dems and their supporters, especially the MSM with their deeply biased, highly charged rhetoric, think they can counter by any means necessary. It is this that I so much oppose. You don't seem to notice, perhaps because you agree with them far too much.

 

Trump is inciting violence in this country. Believe me, there is a resistance in this country against Neo-Fascism.

 

That's just the problem. But you wouldn't know it if you saw it, because you don't recognize it in your own camp, which is instigating it constantly. The tactics of BAMN, BLM, Antifa, are all just the thing you claim to loathe, yet they are yours.

The Dems calling for harassment, the violent protests by their supporters, their demonizations of others, their shutting down of free speech--again, all are just what you claim to dislike so much, and they are yours. They cannot win on ideology. Logic and reason have fled them. Their only hope is to win by intimidation, by fear tactics, by violent suppression, whatever it takes to shut up and shut down the opposition. And all the while, they will claim, and those like you will blindly believe, that it was their opposition doing the dirty deeds

 

Yeah, we know. He's a racist too, are you aware of that? He's so racist he had a couple of black men over to the White House yesterday and do you know what he did? Yep, that's right, he served them up one big plate of hospitality. He's so racist he makes the late white supremacists Governors Lestor Maddox and George Wallace look like a couple of kindergartners.

Not only that, he's also an anti-Semite. Yep, even though his daughter converted to Judaism, his son - in - law is a Jew, as are his grandkids from that that union. Yep, President Donald Trump - he's one big anti-Semite for sure!

 

Jihad is a good description of the current Dem "ideological" methodology. They are bent on violently overcoming and permanently suppressing their opposition. As elitists, they believe their cause justly demands such tactics, as they hold that the masses cannot possibly think for themselves, and in a way they're right.

I see this as a demonstration of how well their biased rhetoric works with certain mindsets, especially with those who mindlessly think themselves elitists, but I for one was already painfully aware of that. After all, I've heard their speeches and witnessed their rallies, and lately observed their brainwashing sessions.

I offer the following for anyone tempted to trust in any political, religious, or other 'gurus':

"…insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." (Matt 24:24c)

 

Do you think Trump and his followers should be allowed to incite violence?

 

I'm against the rich elitists no matter what party they are from. America is in a state of extreme inequality which is destroying our middle class.

 

Did the Nazi's in Charlottsville demonstrate use of their right to free speech. Does that involve terrorizing a town and murdering a woman?

 

You support taking away medical insurance and needed food and shelter from the needy. I suggest this passage:

[Mat 25:41-46 KJV] 41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] not to one of the least of these, ye did [it] not to me. 46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

 

And yet again you respond with non sequiturs. Who is telling you not to use your money to help the needy? Is anyone saying they don't believe in helping the needy? Where in those verses does it say the government is responsible? The worldview you seem to espouse is warped, not biblically shaped.

 

Perhaps in order to form a more complete response, it would be best for me to first read your own strong denunciations…

…of Barack Obama and his "stupidly" anti-police rhetoric,

…of Barack Obama and his Ferguson rioters,

…of Barack Obama and his BLM demonstrators,

…of Charlottesville Dems and their orchestration of violence,

…of Dems and their incitement of violent protests at Trump rallies,

…of Dems and their incitement of stalking and harassment,

…of Dems inciting their already violent supporters,

…of Dems, etc, etc, etc.

Just post those BB links in response and I'll try to read as much of them as I can, then go from there.
Thanks in advance.