Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by carpro, Nov 16, 2014.
New York Times
That could mean, go ahead and protest. Peacefully of course. But follow through with what your heart tells you to do! Very conflicting message, if you ask me! :thumbs:
A responsible president would not encourage protesters that are known to commit violence when their demands are not met.
Always the community organizer, never presidential.
Yes, and what was it that Obama "knew we were advocating"?
A link would be useful.
You won't find it that useful, but here it is:
Actually, quite useful, thank you. It answers the question of what course they are going to try to stay on:
Yet the most important part of the planning may also be the hardest: how to prevent demonstrations from turning violent. Organizers say they want their efforts here to blossom into a lasting, national movement. So they say they hope for the protests to be forceful, loud and unrelenting, but without the looting or arson that could undermine their message. But they also know that some among the ranks may be more volatile and harder to control.
“We’ve come to the conclusion that we really don’t want violence,” said one organizer with Lost Voices, who goes by the name Bud Cuzz. “We want to fix this. We still want to fight to make the laws change. We still want to raise awareness. But we don’t want the city to turn upside down.”
Yes, they do not want violence. That is why the town is boarded up.
Trust me. There will be violence. They know it and the community organizer knows it. But he still encourages them.
That is why I call it Sedition!