Plus --- it's amazing how just changing the perspective of a photo can skew he whole "narrative." From this angle, it looks like Phillips is going to reach up with his drumstick and pop Nick Sandmann in the nose.
Posted on 01/26/2019 9:49:27 AM PST by Mrs. Don-o
He was between 9/11/2001 and the day GWB suggested a constitutional amendment stating that marriage was between and man and a woman (or some similar sop to his conservative base probably recommended by Rove).
OK, I'm not going to say that.
I think there are mental processes that lose their integrity when gross concupiscence is gratified. The fact that he takes any steps in the right direction is a work of grace.
Left-wing zealots have often been prepared to ride roughshod over due process and basic considerations of fairness when they think they can get away with it. For them the ends always seems to justify the means. That is precisely how their predecessors came to create the gulag. - Margaret Thatcher
Well I always felt that my biggest problem with gay people in general is how liberal most of them are.
It is actually much easier for a person to come out as gay to a Conservative, than it is for a gay person to tell another gay person that they are Conservative.
And we’re supposed to be the “intolerant” ones.
Though he mostly gets it (in this one instance) Sullivan can’t resist the “both sides are guilty” pose, both sides are tribal, Trump is destroying democracy, both sides are racist...
If you watch the whole video you see that these are some really good kids. The kid at the center of it, is mature and centered beyond his years.
And there was no confrontation at all, at least from Covington’s point of view. Nick’s friend and Nathan’s friend are seen chatting through the whole thing, while the Covington kids are clapping along. At one point Nick flashes his friend a quick “cool it” gesture... he said later he was concerned things might escalate... Otherwise you see a bunch of good natured kids and the one at the center of it poised and respectful.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
You’re right of course.
Could even Andrew Sullivan have written that and gotten it into New York Magazine?
A big misstep in an otherwise good breakdown of events.
They can wear MAGA hats anywhere they want. And if they were wearing them, they were at the Lincoln Memorial and not the pro-life march at the time.
Social media and increasingly poor, biased journalism are a threat to our republic.
He was turning the other cheek.
Is Mrs. Don-o implying the ny magazine cliché the only truly literate Americans?
Dumbass Sullivan needs to stop lying about Trump and trashing his supporters.
No, Mrs. Don-o is not implying that.
And I gladly concede your whole point that in a free country, you wear what you want. Especially as regards political regalia.
The core reason for our First Amendment rights is to protect political speech, writing, signage, association, and behavior.
Plus --- it's amazing how just changing the perspective of a photo can skew he whole "narrative." From this angle, it looks like Phillips is going to reach up with his drumstick and pop Nick Sandmann in the nose.
Yep. That was the part where the point of the article was lost and the Trump hater fell victim to his own hate, wrecking with what followed what might have been a thoughtful column.
“I think there are mental processes that lose their integrity when gross concupiscence is gratified. The fact that he takes any steps in the right direction is a work of grace.”
Exactly. All those FReepers who secretly want nothing to do with social conservatism go gaga over the sops that gay “conservatives” like Sullivan toss their way (such as included in his NY Mag article). They want to strip the term “conservative” of any moral substance such as the defense of traditional marriage and family, and have it refer only to economic issues.
I really don’t give a crap about Milo’s or Andrew’s sexuality.
If they are honest and intelligent?
I’ll listen.
Milo asks a Female Muslim about her Islamic faith and she knows less about her so-called religion than he does.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7FtjtF4gM0
Social conservatives and fiscal conservatives
are both conservatives. The title does not belong to just you.
The refusal to defend traditional marriage and family, the foundations of Western Civilization, will result in the “fiscal” disintegration of society. You can’t have it both ways: claiming to be preserving society while refusing to affirm the very basis and values that enables our nation to prosper.
Like you I also am ignorant and insensitive. Unlike you I have committed several other egregious acts.
2 years ago I believed that “all lives matter” I didn’t understand this is a racist comment as Bernie Sanders discovered. At least he apologized.
I can’t predict the future. In 2012 when a picture was taken of a Covington HS basketball game, I did not realize that 7 years later a “blackout” would be a racist event.
I violated the Savanna Guthrie rule. I never knew that continuing to stand in the same spot without moving is racist.
In my defense my parents were part of the problem. They were both white and raised me to be a Christian.. How could you do that to me mom and dad?
I confess to not being capable of keeping up with the increasing number of racist rules. That doesn’t absolve me of my responsibilities for these horrendous acts of racism.
My fate as a racist is sealed. My only hope is that all the 5 and 6 year olds out there that are learning to read will see my comments and avoid makiing these and tomorrow’s racist mistakes
Not so Bishop Stowe of Lexington KY, who doubled down against the boys even AFTER the second (two-hour-long) video acame out, and after the boys were exonerated. Stowe is the one who said, hey, it doesn't matter what the boys did or didn't do, just wearing the MAGA hats is offensive right there.
Rubbish.
This is what I wrote to Stowe on the Lexington Diocese contact form:
Dear Bishop Stowe,
From the depths of my heart, I ask that you reconsider your broad-brush insinuations against MAGA-hat wearers. It's unfair to apply generalizations about "racist, bigot" etc. against the Covington boys in the recent controversy--- but it's worse to stretch the insult by implication to the 63 million American who voted for Trump.
What is a MAGA hat? Leave off all the huff-puffery. Is it a swastika? No. Is it a hammer-and-sickle? No. It's a harmless piece of campaign regalia representing the Trump campaign.
Is it out of place for the March for Life? When marchers carry banners saying "Democrats for Life" and "Feminists Against Abortion" and what-have you? I saw the fist-and-rose, Democratic Socialists symbol as well, carried by some big-hearted Socialist pro-lifer. I don't agree with her politics, but I don't mind having her at the march.
No. The MAGA hat is not out of place it all. We welcome all allies. We don't ban Gays for Life. We don't ban anti-abortion Atheists. Why give the back of your hand to wearers of Trump regalia?
It happens that Trump has acted more vigorously to protect the unborn than any of his predecessors. He has struggled to cut off abortion funding, he has removed abortion subsidies from foreign aid, he has supplied the Federal courts with men and women jurists who are not --- we hope ---stubbornly and obtusely blind to the human rights of babies before birth.
And his VP, Pence, addressed the rally!
"THE HAT" does not signal racist, sexist, anti-foreign bigot.
Insinuating that it does, is not fair-minded. In fact, it bolsters the bullying and vilifying attack on these Covington students.
I truly do not believe you meant that.
I hope you will issue an apology for these demeaning insinuations.
With true good will and prayers, I remain your ally and theirs.
[signed]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.