Posted on 03/11/2016 10:25:59 PM PST by WilliamIII
| ...I also have to question a commander in chief who lacks patriotic courage. Yes, Chicago was the perfect opportunity to rise above the political give-and-take and defend the country against these thugs who would take away our free speech! But neither Cruz, nor Rubio, nor Kasich defended us. Trump did. And Ronald Reagan certainly would have. Cruz certainly wears the clothes of a patriot. He has himself photographed on the firing range. He raises his voice loud at the debates. His dormitory room at Harvard had a big Texas flag. But how much of a love of country and the land of the Alamo is really felt in his heart? We don't know. The only clues we have are his actions at critical moments. As a young person, your love of country is ill-formed, I think. When children hear the boom of fireworks in the sky, they think of thunder. When a veteran hears that sound, he thinks of cannons, rifle fire, and naval guns. For most people, the patriotic spirit probably starts with competitive sports in high school. It grows further as we hold a job, build our careers, and begin to see the connection of things. Then, when we've created a certain value in the marketplace, we gain an even deeper understanding of what freedom means. Eventually we feel it in our hearts, and tears will sometimes come to the eyes when we hear the phrase "Land of free, home of brave." But I think you miss key things when you leap into politics after a law degree. Theory and law and philosophy are on a different plane than life itself. And when you lack work experience, you can only fall back on book knowledge. Yesterday, Cruz made reference to the Chicago riots of 1968. But living and experiencing the time of those riots is not a first hand experience for a guy born in 1970. So is Cruz trying too hard to appear Reaganesque? A man or woman of true power and grace tells us what he or she personally experienced in life. Carson and Trump have gracefully aged and acquired that fine vintage gravitas. I'm sure Kasich has some of that too, if we just had the patience to listen to his ramblings. LOL. So these are my thoughts. |
Encouraging people to riot. Why don’t you explain how that works?
Always follow the money.
Straight to Soros.
When Trump stated that he would pay legal fees for supporters who punch protesters in the face, he opened the door for continued violent protests that will end in race riots in Cleveland this summer. No doubt about it.
You’re being sarcastic, right?
No, I sincerely think that the Democrats plan race riots for Cleveland and that they will use Trump’s promise of support for violence as an excuse.
I know that wasn’t the intention when Trump made the statement, but he said it. Now, he has gone on tv and said that he meant it. It was very dumb.
So if you promise to kick any burglars in the groin, you’re encouraging break ins to your house, and violence? That’s the logic of gun-grabbers. Im not surprise the networks are pushing it. I thought Cruz was more principled than to parrot them. He has turned off a LOT of people
Trump was suggesting that disrupters would get pay-back. How does that encourage rioting? If it’s wrong to warn trespassers and disrupters that they could pay a price, we should all put signs in our windows: “in order not to encourage burglars, we promise not to be violent towArd them”. That’ll make our homes safe!
The protesters were not doing much when the guy sucker punched him. They weren’t breaking the law, they were just typical leftist whiners.
You know that what Trump,said was stupid. He was getting carried away and it was thoughtless, but he has not walked it back.
These disrupters are trespassing. If a burglar enters your house, would you promise not to punch him?
If they’re trespassing they’re breaking the law. If they’re grabbing signs they’re breaking the law
Trump was talking about violent protestors. And noisy abusive ones
What makes them a trespasser?
Oh, it still does not justify a sucker punch. A candidate for President cannot openly encourage that. It is just wrong.
No, he was talking about the small group of protesters where the man got punched.
Regardless, encouraging violence (unless for self-defense) will just create more problems.
Obviously all of this has been in defense. Trump has said it only when demonstrators have been violent to start with. I take it you have a “violence free zone”, “welcome burglars and robbers” sign in your window.
you sound like a very sweet lady. I’m sure you don’t carry mace or any other protection, because you don’t want to encourage violence. How civilized of you
So if you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. Okay? Just knock the hell— I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise.
Was the North Carolina supporter acting in self-defense when he blind-sided the protestor being escorted out with an elbow to the face?
That guys a jerk criminal obviously But Trump didn’t tell him to do that. As your quote shows, trump was talking about intercepting disrupters who are actively trying to cause harm
I admire your principled pacifism. Just hope it doesn’t get you killed by a no pacifist perp before you’re able to die a natural death
Not making idiotic statements encouraging violence at your rallies is just common sense (especially for a leader). It’s not pacifism.
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.