The Impending Riots

[Boxlicker101]

I see some of the worst scum in the country has arrived in Denver, prepared to disrupt the Dem. convention and anything else they can. They make no secret of the fact that they want a repeat of the riots and destruction in Chicago forty years ago.

Some have blamed the riots in Chicago on the cops. I must concede there was some overraction on their part, but there was a lot of agitation that caused it. Some may intend to demonstrate peacefully, as is their right, but too many others intend to block traffic, trash public parks and destroy as many cars and other property as they can, just as they and their idols did in 1968.

The upshot will probably be the same as in 1968 too: A Republican elected to the White House.

 

[rgraham666]

Plus ca change and all that.

I wonder if America will survive this time around. I'm inclined to think not.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Plus ca change and all that.

I wonder if America will survive this time around. I'm inclined to think not.

Oh, sure. America is certainly resilient enough to survive a riot. There have been dozens of riots, and none of them have ever accomplished what their fomenters wanted.

 

[Recidiva]

America does not negotiate with terrorists.

Instead we sell them air time with 527 funds.

It's sorta like legalized prostitution. Only much dirtier.

 

[rgraham666]

I'm not talking about the riots, Box.

I'm talking about the deep, and widening, divide in America. A divide that one side of the political equation is aggravating for its own ends.

But then again, they are revolutionaries who believe that the old way must be destroyed so a new and better way can be built from the ruins. http://bestsmileys.com/sick/9.gif

I'm not talking about the Left either. Although they're doing a magnificent job of falling into the trap laid for them.

 

[desertslave]

We started out with a deep divide. We had another one 100 years later. We seem to thrive on it.

 

[desertslave]

I see some of the worst scum in the country has arrived in Denver

Would that be the politicians or the press???

 

[Guest]

We started out with a deep divide. We had another one 100 years later. We seem to thrive on it.

I guess we really, really love make-up sex.

 

[TE999]

Crowd control methods are vastly improved from forty years ago when it was billy clubs, tear gas and officers not trained to handle rampaging mobs against total anarchy.

The violence oriented may try to disrupt the convention, but they will be subdued and in jail before they know it.

 

[DesertPirate]

I'm not talking about the riots, Box.

I'm talking about the deep, and widening, divide in America. A divide that one side of the political equation is aggravating for its own ends.

But then again, they are revolutionaries who believe that the old way must be destroyed so a new and better way can be built from the ruins. http://bestsmileys.com/sick/9.gif

I'm not talking about the Left either. Although they're doing a magnificent job of falling into the trap laid for them.

I still say that this is magnafied by the blatant stupidity of a press giving coverage only to the lunatic fringe of both extremes and ignoring the 80% of intelligent people in the middle.

 

[rgraham666]

Actually, I'm going by what I see on all the various political forums I inhabit. Including this one.

On both sides there is a strong sense of "One political philosophy is going to be running out country. And it's not going to be yours." on all of them.

Perhaps because it's on the internet that the divide seems so sharp. I certainly hope so. I like America, and Americans. I'd sure hate to see the place commit suicide.

 

[TE999]

Actually, I'm going by what I see on all the various political forums I inhabit. Including this one.

On both sides there is a strong sense of "One political philosophy is going to be running out country. And it's not going to be yours." on all of them.

Perhaps because it's on the internet that the divide seems so sharp. I certainly hope so. I like America, and Americans. I'd sure hate to see the place commit suicide.

No problemo, Rob. We had a Civil War and bounced back from that.
Moderates, as per usual, will win the day.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Call in Mayor JBJaley.

 

[starrkers]

I still say that this is magnafied by the blatant stupidity of a press giving coverage only to the lunatic fringe of both extremes and ignoring the 80% of intelligent people in the middle.

That's because it's much easier to write a news report about the extremes. The 80% in the middle are boring.

 

[3113]

No problemo, Rob. We had a Civil War and bounced back from that.

Depends on what you mean by "bounced back." Do you mean 100 years of Southern hatred of the north and Jim Crow laws in full force against American citizens with a certain skin color? How about a North that completely ignored the injustice of such laws and the lynchings that went with them because it was too self-absorbed in its own growth to pay any attention to what was going on in the south? Do you mean North and South requiring a Great Depression and World Wars in order to unify them as one country because even though the South had conceded that the U.S. was one union, it still insisted on flying the confederate flag and seeing itself as separate from the North--until, of course, the Great Depression required some migration of people from place to place, erasing some of that tribalism, and/or when the two had to unite to fight a common enemy?

I'm all for "bouncing back" but I'd really rather it didn't take 100 years, a Great Depression and two World Wars this time around.

 

[rgraham666]

There will only be one more World War.

 

[TE999]

Depends on what you mean by "bounced back." Do you mean 100 years of Southern hatred of the north and Jim Crow laws in full force against American citizens with a certain skin color? How about a North that completely ignored the injustice of such laws and the lynchings that went with them because it was too self-absorbed in its own growth to pay any attention to what was going on in the south? Do you mean North and South requiring a Great Depression and World Wars in order to unify them as one country because even though the South had conceded that the U.S. was one union, it still insisted on flying the confederate flag and seeing itself as separate from the North--until, of course, the Great Depression required some migration of people from place to place, erasing some of that tribalism, and/or when the two had to unite to fight a common enemy?

I'm all for "bouncing back" but I'd really rather it didn't take 100 years, a Great Depression and two World Wars this time around.

I didn't say it was easy, just bouncy.

 

[3113]

The upshot will probably be the same as in 1968 too: A Republican elected to the White House.

I rather think that was more do to the assassination of Robert Kennedy than to the riots. If Kennedy had not been killed, but nominated, he might well have won, riots or not.

Let's try to keep history in perspective. One event can have such consequences, but in this instance, it was not that one event (the riots) alone that perpetrated that particular consequence (Nixon's election). The loss of Kennedy from the ticket had, I think, a far more powerful effect.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I rather think that was more do to the assassination of Robert Kennedy than to the riots. If Kennedy had not been killed, but nominated, he might well have won, riots or not.

Let's try to keep history in perspective. One event can have such consequences, but in this instance, it was not that one event (the riots) alone that perpetrated that particular consequence (Nixon's election). The loss of Kennedy from the ticket had, I think, a far more powerful effect.

I fully agree about RFK. Had he not been murdered, he would have been nominated, and probably would have done better against Nixon than HHH did. The election that year was also distorted somewhat by the third party candidacy of George Wallace, so it's hard telling forty years later what would have happened.

All the same, the nation was so turned off by the rioters that it took its disgust out on the party that seemed to more closely reflect the mores of them.

 

[desertslave]

At the risk of sounding sappy, I think it's important to acknowledge a piece of recent history. We had a rather hotly contested election not long ago, complete with hanging chads, arguing state and federal supreme courts, and plenty of crankiness on both sides. With all of that, not a single shot was fired, not a single drop of blood was shed (probably several tears though). In MANY other countries around the world, such a disagreement could/would have resulted in chaos, insurrection and misery.

Obviously there were (and continue to be) plenty of disgruntled souls, but we tend to have disgruntled souls with almost everything we do. I think the whole thing was proof of our resilience as a nation, no matter how obstreperous we might be as individuals.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Actually, I'm going by what I see on all the various political forums I inhabit. Including this one.

On both sides there is a strong sense of "One political philosophy is going to be running out country. And it's not going to be yours." on all of them.

Perhaps because it's on the internet that the divide seems so sharp. I certainly hope so. I like America, and Americans. I'd sure hate to see the place commit suicide.

Except for this one, people who write to pliitical forums are frequently the lunatic fringes. That would include those to the right of Limbaugh and those to the left of Ward Churchill and the Phelpses and Christian fundies and Islamic fundies and crazies in general. These are relatively small groups, with little following, and they generally are forced to content themselves with blowing off steam by writing letters.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Would that be the politicians or the press???

Although I have little good to say about the press, and even less to say about politicians, I don't usually go so far as to refer to either group as "scum."

 

[desertslave]

You're obviously nicer than I am.

 

[TE999]

Although I have little good to say about the press, and even less to say about politicians, I don't usually go so far as to refer to either group as "scum."

Thereby not impugning the integrity of innocent scum.

 

[The_Trouvere]

I see some of the worst scum in the country has arrived in Denver, prepared to disrupt the Dem. convention and anything else they can. They make no secret of the fact that they want a repeat of the riots and destruction in Chicago forty years ago.

Some have blamed the riots in Chicago on the cops. I must concede there was some overraction on their part, but there was a lot of agitation that caused it. Some may intend to demonstrate peacefully, as is their right, but too many others intend to block traffic, trash public parks and destroy as many cars and other property as they can, just as they and their idols did in 1968.

The upshot will probably be the same as in 1968 too: A Republican elected to the White House.

There is no current issue as devisive as the War in Vietnam. That war divided families and destroyed friendships. One's stand on the war determined one's stand on many other issues. You could tell a person's politics by how that person dressed, and how long the person's hair was. There is nothing like that now.

Also, there is little to blame the Democrats for. In 1968 the left blamed the Democrats for the War in Vietnam. The right blamed the Democrats for not winning the war, and for the black ghetto riots.