Both sides are not the same

[Osborne Russell]

Regarding mass shootings:

A group called Ruth Sent Us published justices’ home addresses and even encouraged people to target anger at Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s kids at their school. Yet we were not overwhelmed with left-wing pundits anxiously questioning whether hyperbolic predictions of a coming dystopia risked inspiring assassinations.

There is a reason no one attempts to apply this standard evenly: because if you blame passionate argument for the acts of lunatics, political debate ultimately would become impossible . . .Telling people they are responsible for even the unlikeliest consequences of their speech isn’t a coherent principle; it’s just a euphemism for “shut up.” Which sounds splendid when you’re saying it. But as soon as you see it applied to speech on your own side, you recognize that it is ludicrously unworkable. In a free society, people have to be able to say what they think — and their opponents have to be able to muster counterarguments, rather than accuse them of murder.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...esponsibility/

1. Using USA terminology, "liberals" very rarely advocate violence or even use violent imagery, whereas, "conservatives" do so constantly.

2. A result of actual violence is not at all unlikely, especially given the ceaseless repetition.

3. That people are "free to muster counter-arguments" means free from government punishment of expression, not free from responsibility altogether. When Josh Hawley, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Bobert et al talk their nonsense, it's may not be a reason to prosecute them. But it sure is a reason to vote against them, campaign against them, criticize their proposals and their rhetoric, and generally keep power and influence out of their hands. That isn't persecution, it's self-government. People are free to say lunatic things, and they are responsible -- legally, maybe; morally, certainly -- for the forseeable consequences. To say we must choose between freedom and responsibility is a false dichotomy.

[Peerie Maa]

Regarding mass shootings:



1. Using USA terminology, "liberals" very rarely advocate violence or even use violent imagery, whereas, "conservatives" do so constantly.

2. A result of actual violence is not at all unlikely, especially given the ceaseless repetition.

3. That people are "free to muster counter-arguments" means free from government punishment of expression, not free from responsibility altogether. When Josh Hawley, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Bobert et al talk their nonsense, it's may not be a reason to prosecute them. But it sure is a reason to vote against them, campaign against them, criticize their proposals and their rhetoric, and generally keep power and influence out of their hands. That isn't persecution, it's self-government. People are free to say lunatic things, and they are responsible -- legally, maybe; morally, certainly -- for the forseeable consequences. To say we must choose between freedom and responsibility is a false dichotomy.

Just so.
Fortunately, as has recently been tried and proven, not free from being dragged through the courts and sanctioned with damages until their pips squeak.

[Boatbum]

Regarding mass shootings:



1. Using USA terminology, "liberals" very rarely advocate violence or even use violent imagery, whereas, "conservatives" do so constantly.

A Colorado Christian crisis center for pregnant women was vandalized and set on fire Saturday morning, a day after the US Supreme Court reversed federal protection of abortions.
he Laramie, Wyo. Republican office was set on fire, a case of arson, according to police.

A man arrested on a slew of charges, including attempted arson of the Republican Party of Humboldt headquarters, is back out on the street after spending only a day in jail before posting bail.

In the early morning hours of September 6, 2018, Defendant Kellen Sorber maliciously set a fire inside the building located at 214 East Ivinson Avenue in downtown Laramie – a property used as headquarters for the Albany County Republican Party on the main level and a private residence on the second floor. The Defendant used pieces of concrete cinderblock to smash through a window and set a fire on the floor just inside the GOP headquarters. Sorber then left the area with the fire burning out of control.

“I want to tell you Gorsuch, I want to tell you Kavanaugh - you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions,”

- Chuck Schumer

“We got to stay on the street. And we’ve got to get more active, we’ve got to get more confrontational. We’ve got to make sure that they know that we mean business,”

-Maxine Waters

“Get up in the face of some congresspeople."

-Cory Booker

“Michelle always says, ‘When they go low, we go high.’ No. No. When they go low, we kick them,”

-Eric Holder

Can we at least agree that opposition should not be directed at the families of hated politicians and judges? Can we agree that all protests should be peaceful and non-harassing? Can we agree that when trying to gin-up the base that there is a caution about the types of language to be used.

[john welsford]

Yes, with the right to "freedom of speech" goes the obligation to use that freedom responsibly.

John Welsford

[CWSmith]

A group called Ruth Sent Us published justices’ home addresses and even encouraged people to target anger at Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s kids at their school.

I don't know who these people are, but they certainly don't speak for me or any liberal or moderate that I know. They need to be locked up just the same as any right-wing extremist.

[Too Little Time]

...

I can find many reasons to consider the parties the same.

A short time ago I posted that the Democrats came out for gun control legislation after they lost control of the House. Rather then when they had complete control of the government. One might argue their tactics are different, but not their goals.

[David G]

No, they're NOT the same. From another thread, but germane here, esp. in response to the 'whataboutism' --



Acton Dictum.

And, while the R's have embraced the corruption whole-heartedly, neither party is immune. And no level of govt. is safe. The longer we allow the Gini coefficient to move the wrong way... the worse it'll get.

"When there is an accumulation of money and power into fewer and fewer hands, people with the mentality of gangsters come to the fore. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" -- Lord Acton

[Jim Bow]

Is the Ruth in “Ruth Sent Us” supposed to be Justice Ginsberg?
She would NEVER have condoned activity of this sort. NEVER!

[Boatbum]

Is the Ruth in “Ruth Sent Us” supposed to be Justice Ginsberg?
She would NEVER have condoned activity of this sort. NEVER!

Yes it is supposed to be Ginsburg and you are right she never would have condoned it. What some people do in her name......

[CWSmith]

Is the Ruth in “Ruth Sent Us” supposed to be Justice Ginsberg?
She would NEVER have condoned activity of this sort. NEVER!

Yes it is supposed to be Ginsburg and you are right she never would have condoned it. What some people do in her name......

That is the 2nd most offensive aspect of this story.

[Durnik]

It would be naive to depend on the Supreme Court to defend the rights of poor people, women, people of color, dissenters of all kinds. Those rights only come alive when citizens organize, protest, demonstrate, strike, boycott, rebel, and violate the law in order to uphold justice. - Howard Zinn

...

[skuthorp]

It is not in the interests of most on the supreme court to support the rights of then poor and marginalised.

[Osborne Russell]

It would be naive to depend on the Supreme Court to defend the rights of poor people, women, people of color, dissenters of all kinds. Those rights only come alive when citizens organize, protest, demonstrate, strike, boycott, rebel, and violate the law in order to uphold justice. - Howard Zinn

Such tripe. These rights only come alive when people in a legal position to give them force, do so. When a prosecutor forgoes prosecution, when a judge dismisses, when a citizen sues and wins. They cannot come alive in the streets, because they are law.

[Osborne Russell]

In the OP, I left out the headline:

No, conservative commentators aren’t responsible for mass shootings

By Megan McArdle
Columnist |
November 29, 2022 at 7:00 a.m. EST

So MAGAnauts are not responsible for mass shootings.

[Peerie Maa]

Such tripe. These rights only come alive when people in a legal position to give them force, do so. When a prosecutor forgoes prosecution, when a judge dismisses, when a citizen sues and wins. They cannot come alive in the streets, because they are law.

You are criticizing something taken out of context.

The right of a woman to an abortion did not depend on the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade. It was won before that decision, all over the country, by grassroots agitation that forced states to recognize the right. If the American people, who by a great majority favor that right, insist on it, act on it, no Supreme Court decision can take it away.

The rights of working people, of women, of black people have not depended on decisions of the courts. Like the other branches of the political system, the courts have recognized these rights only after citizens have engaged in direct action powerful enough to win these rights for themselves.
This is not to say that we should ignore the courts or the electoral campaigns.

Mobilizing opinion and campaigning on the streets makes legislators correct/improve the laws.

[WX]

Freedom of speech does not imply freedom from consequences.

[Osborne Russell]

Freedom of speech does not imply freedom from consequences.

It has to do with freedom from government penalties, which can only be imposed or lifted by the government. At this late date this is still not clear to the Washington Post. Because civics education in this country is for S.

And if one thinks, under the influence of Howard Zinn, or just from ignorance, that legal penalties for speech can be imposed or lifted by the mob in the streets, one has joined company with the insurrectionists.