(07-05-2020 10:40 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-05-2020 08:32 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-05-2020 08:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  lad seems to be putting the cart before the horse again tonite (logically speaking).

I guess when 200 people tear down a statue that is the de facto feeling of the majority of the 120,000 people in a community. Interesting 'after the fact logic' there.

Do you see the problem in that analysis and that statement, lad?

I guess one can justify *any* act of civil unrest, or for that matter *any* crime on the unfelt needs of the mjority of the community.

I guess a majority of the community simply didnt like portions of their city, and that is why 500 million dollars in bunring/looting damage was incurred. This list could get really fun before too long....

That is the main problem with ex post facto leaps of logical faith.

first they tell us the rioters are less than 1% of the left, and then they tell us they represent the will of the majority of the citizenry.

As Ham says, you‘re not this dumb... I don’t think...

There are clearly two populations within the people who protested and support the removal of confederate statues. Those who support the cause and show the support peacefully, and those who support the cause and don’t so peaceful.

Your comment tries to suggest that the rioters and those who support removing the statues are the same populations, but they aren’t. Do you actually think that everyone who supports removing Confederate statues would either riot in the street or be directly involved in pulling down a statue without permission from the local government?

I'm sorry that one of us is math challenged, and the other is logic challenged.

I will speak more plainly for the latter crowd.

When you guys want to minimize something, it is a tiny minority. when you want to maximize it, it becomes we are all in agreement. Whatever number serves your purpose.

I think a lot of people would not give a second thought to those statues, except a tiny minority has made a mountain out of a molehill. But if you guys are right, and think the majority of voters support the removal of the statues, then stand for what's right and call for an election or democratic due process, instead of making excuses about the righteousness of the cause and the slowness of the process.

I wonder what goes after the statues? The books? Tom Sawyer, or Gone with the Wind? Paintings? Songs? All the Stephen Foster songs? the Bible? The movies are already pretty much gone.

I think the statue removers could not win most elections, so what happens then? Do they say, well we made our case but the good citizens of Twain County rejected, let's go home now?

About the fifth time I have asked this question of you.

If there is an election, and the voters vote to keep the statues, then what? has the issue been addressed to the satisfaction of the losing side? Or then do we go the route of protesting the election? Or straight to mobs with paint and ropes. To paraphrase the question the Dems were asking just before the 2016 election, will the result be honored?



You can keep dodging. i will keep asking.

From what you and 93 have said so far, I think the left would ignore the election on the grounds they know better than that bunch of deplorables and just go straight to the mob. It's your way or the highway.