And the idea that Conservatives would be staging relentless and disruptive demonstrations all across the country is also nonsense. And I say that as just a thought exercise.
For example, [some] conservatives would and will participate in pro-life rallies and/or pickets around abort clinics. But conservatives would not throw bombs into an abortion clinic. Yes, one overzealous “person” (cannot say nor characterize him as “cons”) might take affairs into his own hands and shoot an abortionist.
Conservs would attend the kinds of rallies on Wall St. we saw when the first bank bailouts were going on, back in 2008. And they would attend a Wash DC protest gathering early in the history of the Tea Party. The TP gatherings were permitted, I am sure, and whatever was done on Wall St in those early demonstrations did not prevent anyone from getting to work, AFAIK.
What about “items” like Terry Schiavo....Waco...Ruby Ridge...[I am not putting them into the same category other than to name them as items so-called “conservatives aka “wing nuts” would glom on to]
Yes, some came out to protest those events. One difference is the unwillingness on Conservatives to flaunt “orderly-society” norms and get in the face of law enforcement. The Bundy incident could be a notable exception, and of course the distinction there was that the action occurred out on ranchland, disrupting nobody EXCEPT and ONLY the law enforcement that was applied.
And oh yeah, Conservs typically have jobs and lives they need to attend to.
Exactly, and I would also say that the Bundy situation had an aspect of higher principle (or whatever you want to call it) that is simply not there with Garner. Just like the original Boston tea party, Bundy was about something bigger taxes, even though taxes were technically the issue.