Why don't we demand the same disavowal of left wing radical groups like Antifa from Democratic politicians. There is countless footage of peaceful right-wing protesters getting beat, fire bombed, etc. at Berkeley and elsewhere.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-ann-coult...
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/elizabeth-warren-to-berkeley-pro...
re: Scalise Shooting: In a statement, Senator Sanders wrote that he had been “informed that the alleged shooter at the Republican baseball practice is someone who apparently volunteered on my presidential campaign.” He went on to say: “I am sickened by this despicable act. Let me be as clear as I can be. Violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society and I condemn this action in the strongest possible terms.” https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/scalise...
edit: and Obama on the BLM shooting in Dallas rightly called it a racist hate crime http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/obama-dallas-police-sh...
That's my 5 minutes of doing your research for you. High ranking Democrat politicians don't tolerate heckler's veto, much less violence. Republicans are so cowed by losing support from their radicals that they can barely bring themselves to speak up against them. Charlottesville is notable in that its pretty much just Trump who failed to speak up.
> We ALL must be united & condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America. Lets come together as one!
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/89642082278044467...
He didn't fail to speak up.
2. Obama did speak up just one day after the events [1], but he did not specifically mention BLM in particular, claiming lack of confirmed info (justifiably so)
Trump immediately spoke up, but did not mention white supremacists, drawing huge criticism.
I am far from a Trump enthusiast, but can you not see double standard applied here?
[1] Full transcript here: http://fortune.com/2016/07/08/transcript-obama-dallas-police...
- BLM
- Antifa
- the 'alt right'
- the Neo Nazis / white supremacy groups
Lumping people into groups often times hides the positives and negatives of individuals.
But, you seem to, at least, acknowledge that BLM has positive aspects. What positive aspects are there to white supremacists?
https://theintercept.com/2017/01/31/the-fbi-has-quietly-inve...
"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."
Especially in today's political and social climate.
1. Poster asks about other poster's position on the groups in question. 2. Other poster says, 'Pure cancer. All of them.' 3. I ask if poster is really equating groups like BLM to white supremacists. 4. You ask which part of the group. 5. I ask you what positive aspects can we attribute to white supremacists - since you seemed to be backing the guy grouping them together. 6. You say you don't compare opposing groups.
So, why did you respond to the 3rd reply listed above with the 4th reply? If you don't want to compare groups, why are you injecting yourself into a conversation comparing groups?
Things like your response is exactly why I stated I don't like playing the game of false equivalence by comparing opposing groups.
edit: let's try it this way, I wasn't doing the comparing, I was asking for clarification of what was being compared