ldsfaqs wrote:Yes, it is the same video, but enlarged and you can enlarge it. And it's a pretty good guess if he was pushed it was for a good reason. Further, you all claimed "Crowder did it", which he clearly didn't.
Where did I claim "Crowder did it?" The only claim I saw was that the FOX video had been heavily edited to the point where it was impossible to ascertain what had actually transpired.
And if you had watched the video, the guy that ended up on the ground was being a problem for a long time, trying to provoke something, and he clearly finally did something which caused his butt to end up on the ground.
Why is not pulling down a tend with women children and old people in it not "assault"?
The video isn't clear enough to show what was happening with the tent, or who was involved in "bumrushing" the tent. Yes, trying to push down the tent could be a form of assault, depending on how the tent was constructed and what reasonable harm could be expected to occur as a result. But the video doesn't show Cummings pulling down the tent - the video isn't clear enough to show any individual doing something to the tent.
And it is clear from Crowders speech and behavior that he was simply talking to people, respectfully asking questions and having discussion. Further, what is wrong with showing who people really are?
The video is not clear enough to show what Crowder was saying to these people.
Clearly you haven't seen the Occupy videos in which people where simply innocent bystandars, as well as other Union videos of similar and people are attacked. Crowder exposing your evil is not a sin. And it's not a "criminal" matter dork. Entrapment is only with the Law, not private citizens doing their duty as citizens.
Dork? My evil? God, you're weird.
The point isn't about law enforcement, but rather the idea of entrapment, which is a person enticing someone to engage in behavior they would not have otherwise engaged in, and then using that behavior to condemn the individual.
And your liberalism keeps making you lie..... We don't live in a fantasy world where one side is all good and the other is all bad either. But, it's a simple fact that one side IS far more evil, and the other side is far more good. Just compare Tea Party no violence, no vandalism, no big messes, etc., compared with liberal demonstrations, constant violence, constant vandalism, big messes etc.
Further, our side does not bully, but they may attack back the bullies, like a Mormon Tongan attacking some anti-mormon for his bigotry. It's not unreasonable for bigots to be attacked. But even then, that's not the rule with us. But violence is the rule for you.
Just look at Crowder, if he wanted to be violent he could have been, but he was avoiding it. Again, a persons existence does not justify your violence. Doesn't matter who's there, Crowder or some old lady, your violence is displayed.
Further, your claim doesn't even get into to the fact that certain "ideologies" are also evil. Thus, people who may be nice like Obama is "nice" doesn't mean his ideology's and actions aren't of evil. Violence isn't what makes evil, evil makes evil. I'm a violent person, but only toward evil and other unjust violence.
Or take Mormonisms founding.... Sure, the rare Mormon could be "violent" back, but who were the ones doing the violence? It was liberals. We didn't rape, burn homes, etc.
What have I lied about?
My god. It's funny talking to you, but also disturbing. It's disturbing because you're demonstrating what is so wrong with our country's governance right now. People with a certain mindset - a mindset that allows them to divide the world neatly into good guys and bad guys, which you obviously do and couldn't even refrain from doing in this reply - have been manipulated into believing that one US political ideology is "evil". Somehow unions have become "evil", despite the fact that, historically, republicans supported unions, and despite the clear evidence that unions were a tremendous force for good in the past, in terms of ameliorating working conditions.
In fact, I'm going to take the space to quote a lengthy statement from Dwight Eisenhower in 1955:
You of organized labor and those who have gone before you in the union movement have helped make a unique contribution to the general welfare of the Republic–the development of the American philosophy of labor. This philosophy, if adopted globally, could bring about a world, prosperous, at peace, sharing the fruits of the earth with justice to all men. It would raise to freedom and prosperity hundreds of millions of men and women–and their children–who toil in slavery behind the Curtain.
One principle of this philosophy is: the ultimate values of mankind are spiritual; these values include liberty, human dignity, opportunity and equal rights and justice.
Workers want recognition as human beings and as individuals-before everything else. They want a job that gives them a feeling of satisfaction and self-expression. Good wages, respectable working conditions, reasonable hours, protection of status and security; these constitute the necessary foundations on which you build to reach your higher aims.
Moreover, we cannot be satisfied with welfare in the aggregate; if any group or section of citizens is denied its fair place in the common prosperity, all others among us are thereby endangered.
The second principle of this American labor philosophy is this: the economic interest of employer and employee is a mutual prosperity.
Their economic future is inseparable. Together they must advance in mutual respect, in mutual understanding, toward mutual prosperity. Of course, there will be contest over the sharing of the benefits of production; and so we have the right to strike and to argue all night, when necessary, in collective bargaining sessions. But in a deeper sense, this surface struggle is subordinate to the overwhelming common interest in greater production and a better life for all to share.
The American worker strives for betterment not by destroying his employer and his employer’s business, but by understanding his employer’s problems of competition, prices, markets. And the American employer can never forget that, since mass production assumes a mass market, good wages and progressive employment practices for his employee are good business.
The Class Struggle Doctrine of Marx was the invention of a lonely refugee scribbling in a dark recess of the British Museum. He abhorred and detested the middle class. He did not foresee that, in America, labor, respected and prosperous, would constitute–with the farmer and businessman–his hated middle class. But our second principle–that mutual interest of employer and employee–is the natural outgrowth of teamwork for progress, characteristic of the American economy where the barriers of class do not exist.
The third principle is this: labor relations will be managed best when worked out in honest negotiation between employers and unions, without Government’s unwarranted interference.
This principle requires maturity in the private handling of labor matters within a framework of law, for the protection of the public interest and the rights of both labor and management. The splendid record of labor peace and unparalleled prosperity during the last 3 years demonstrates our industrial maturity.
Some of the most difficult and unprecedented negotiations in the history of collective bargaining took place during this period, against the backdrop of non-interference by Government except only to protect the public interest, in the rare cases of genuine national emergency. This third principle, relying as it does on collective bargaining, assumes that labor organizations and management will both observe the highest standards of integrity, responsibility, and concern for the national welfare.
You are more than union members bound together by a common goal of better wages, better working conditions, and protection of your security. You are American citizens.
The roads you travel, the schools your children attend, the taxes you pay, the standards of integrity in Government, the conduct of the public business is your business as Americans. And while all of you, as to the public business, have a common goal–a stronger and better America–your views as to the best means of reaching that goal vary widely, just as they do in any other group of American citizens.
So in your new national organization, as well as in your many constituent organizations, you have a great opportunity of making your meetings the world’s most effective exhibit of democratic processes. In those meetings the rights of minorities holding differing social, economic, and political views must be scrupulously protected and their views accurately reflected. In this way, as American citizens you will help the Republic correct the faulty, fortify the good, build stoutly for the future, and reinforce the most cherished freedoms of each individual citizen.
This country has long understood that by helping other peoples to a better understanding and practice of representative government, we strengthen both them and ourselves. The same truth applies to the economic field. We strengthen other peoples and ourselves when we help them to understand the workings of a free economy, to improve their own standards of living, and to join with us in world trade that serves to unite us all.
In the world struggle, some of the finest weapons for all Americans are these simple tenets of free labor. They are again: mart is created in the Divine image and has spiritual aspirations that transcend the material; second, the real interests of employers and employees are mutual; third, unions and employers can and should work out their own destinies. As we preach and practice that message without cease, we will wage a triumphant crusade for prosperity, freedom, and peace among men.
To close, it is fitting that we let our hearts be filled with the earnest prayer that, with the help of a kind Providence, the world may be led out of bitterness and materialism and force into a new era of harmony and spiritual growth and self-realization for all men. Thank you very much.
http://blogs.geniocity.com/friedman/201 ... on-unions/Yet somehow people like you have been convinced that unions are "evil".
The sad truth is that you've been manipulated by people like the Koch brothers, who funded and guided the tea party movement in the first place.
Most delicious of all is this comment of yours:
Or take Mormonisms founding.... Sure, the rare Mormon could be "violent" back, but who were the ones doing the violence? It was liberals. We didn't rape, burn homes, etc.
Wow. I mean, just, wow. This statement is so ridiculous on so many fronts that it deserves its own thread in the terrestrial kingdom. I invited you to participate to further impress us.
