Aclu launches nationwide training on protest, resistance

Teaching someone how to protest? I guess I'm ok with that. My issue? The ones who are being "taught" to protest...probably won't do it correctly anyway. Getting out into traffic, disrupting the lives of people who are not involved, and all of that. There were a few good examples in the last riots...people being clear they wanted to build their community and not tear it down.

But I don't think that is the agenda of the many protesting trump. I think they are protesting because they didn't get their way. And they don't like hearing that others have a different opinion. But me being clear...I don't think that is all of them. Just a lot of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

apdst said:

You're probably got enough sense not to go all snowflake stupid, too.

Click to expand...

Well, I wouldn't go snowflake.

j-mac said:

Really, because I sure don't see them setting up community informational seminars on 2nd amendment action, or Tea Party, or any of the other rights concerns as far as their erosion of rights...

And although you are correct that the NRA, and GOA are indeed seen as right wing, they are also single issue advocacy groups...You don't have to be a conservative to be an NRA member, nor do you have to be a left winger to join the ACLU....I personally don't think that they should be involved in outright subversive activity....

Click to expand...

Why waste all the time and money doing what the NRA already does?

j-mac said:

Really, because I sure don't see them setting up community informational seminars on 2nd amendment action, or Tea Party, or any of the other rights concerns as far as their erosion of rights...

Click to expand...

I'm not getting your point here. They're giving training for protests. Don't think the 2A folks have much to protest with Trump and the GOP in charge, but I'm sure they'd be welcome if they show up.

And although you are correct that the NRA, and GOA are indeed seen as right wing, they are also single issue advocacy groups...You don't have to be a conservative to be an NRA member, nor do you have to be a left winger to join the ACLU....I personally don't think that they should be involved in outright subversive activity....

Click to expand...

It's really puzzling that you see protests as 'outright subversive activity.' I see it as a cherished American right and tradition, even a duty in certain circumstances. You only consider it 'subversive' because you don't generally agree with the protesters politically, but that's not actually the deciding factor.

And people going to an ACLU seminar about the legal issues surrounding public protests just are HIGHLY unlikely to be the anarchists and others you see breaking windows and beating people and otherwise causing havoc and engaging in crimes. Any lowlife asshole can do that crap and that kind of POS isn't going to sit through a seminar led by ACLU legal gearheads - assholes need no training. The ACLU trainees are a lot more likely to be like my cousin and others who went to D.C. the day after inauguration, millions across the country, and who protested peacefully and with almost no need anywhere for the police to get involved. THAT is just American as apple pie and baseball and a great thing about living in a free country. You know this so I'm not sure what your problem is.

BTW, you mention the Tea Party - the original Tea Party was made up of a bunch of radicals and outright subversives of their day. They trashed $1.7 million worth of goods of a private company just going about its business!! But we treat those subversives and radicals as heroes these days. Odd.....

j-mac said:

We've all known for some time now that the ACLU was really little more than a liberal front, taking only a handful of high profile right of center cases over the decades to ward off criticism of their organization....Now, as with so many today, the mask is coming off, and real character revealed...Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Hopefully that training include how not to turn people away from your message. Because idiots rioting, burning down things, burning the American flag, spewing ant-American rhetoric, blocking traffic and other things left wing protesters typically seem to do turns people away from their message. Because average Joe isn't thinking Oh what a great message.Instead average Joe is thinking what a bunch of **** suckers when he sees that stuff on tv or his commute is impacted because of protests.

Did you ever read the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?

If you haven't I suggest that you study it.

:lol:

Hawkeye10 said:

A Question if I may Friend...Cause as you know I value your opinion....

How in hell did we get to Bernie was the one, and now we can't find someone more vital to take up the banner?

WTF Happened...all the big names, like your mayor for instance, fizzled....WHY?

Now some say Clinton Corp did this to keep the competition down....

And my opinion of them is so low that I tend to wonder.

What Say You?

tyvm

:2wave:

Click to expand...

A very good question, and a sad comment on the political vitality of younger members of our rotten political system. Where are the young leaders?

Well, IMO, a hopefully rising star, and definitely a bright star, is Tulsi Gabbard. If she's interested, the dems should promote her. She is courageous and informed, resigning from DNC to promote Bernie and criticize Hillary.

j-mac said:

Really, because I sure don't see them setting up community informational seminars on 2nd amendment action, or Tea Party, or any of the other rights concerns as far as their erosion of rights...

And although you are correct that the NRA, and GOA are indeed seen as right wing, they are also single issue advocacy groups...You don't have to be a conservative to be an NRA member, nor do you have to be a left winger to join the ACLU....I personally don't think that they should be involved in outright subversive activity....

Click to expand...

And there it is, folks. Conservatives who think teaching people their rights is "outright subversive activity."

But only when an (R) is in charge, naturally.

Hawkeye10 said:

A Question if I may Friend...Cause as you know I value your opinion....

How in hell did we get to Bernie was the one, and now we can't find someone more vital to take up the banner?

WTF Happened...all the big names, like your mayor for instance, fizzled....WHY?

Now some say Clinton Corp did this to keep the competition down....

And my opinion of them is so low that I tend to wonder.

What Say You?

tyvm

:2wave:

Click to expand...

Sorry for the long delay on this one, Hawkeye.

Man, your question's a tough one!

I think the Dem Party has morphed away from their universal message of fighting for the middle-class, a message that served them well for decades. And by doing so, they ceded the message to Trump and God knows how they will ever earn it back.

The Dems embraced the culture wars, and identity politics. Perhaps the cultural wars indeed deserved fighting - or perhaps not. But those wars affected a relatively small sliver of society. The same with identity politics, even though that has a bit broader appeal, but still a minority one by definition.

These minority appeals, whether just or not, are not sufficiently broad enough to carry the day across the entire body politic. More is needed. But besides the older generations, no younger Dems of rank have been fighting for a broader vision besides that of the narrow slivers they represent. Fighting for those slivers got them rank within the Dem Party, but they aren't as important in the political consciousness of the larger country.

And all the while the last several decades the Dems ignore the growing unrest in the middle and working class. Why, who knows? Even worse, the leaders and party candidates have come to be associated with the very elites and empowered that are seen as enemies by the working-class that they came to ignore.

Thanks much for the compliments above.

I wish I had more incite to share, but I too am blown-away by the lack of a bench for the Dems.

Chomsky said:

Sorry for the long delay on this one, Hawkeye.

Man, your question's a tough one!

I think the Dem Party has morphed away from their universal message of fighting for the middle-class, a message that served them well for decades. And by doing so, they ceded the message to Trump and God knows how they will ever earn it back.

The Dems embraced the culture wars, and identity politics. Perhaps the cultural wars indeed deserved fighting - or perhaps not. But those wars affected a relatively small sliver of society. The same with identity politics, even though that has a bit broader appeal, but still a minority one by definition.

These minority appeals, whether just or not, are not sufficiently broad enough to carry the day across the entire body politic. More is needed. But besides the older generations, no younger Dems of rank have been fighting for a broader vision besides that of the narrow slivers they represent. Fighting for those slivers got them rank within the Dem Party, but they aren't as important in the political consciousness of the larger country.

And all the while the last several decades the Dems ignore the growing unrest in the middle and working class. Why, who knows? Even worse, the leaders and party candidates have come to be associated with the very elites and empowered that are seen as enemies by the working-class that they came to ignore.

Thanks much for the compliments above.

I wish I had more incite to share, but I too am blown-away by the lack of a bench for the Dems.

Click to expand...

+
Maybe some combination of people left the game to do something more profitable once they started to identify as elites they felt that doing good work was not enough that they need to get theirs too.......that plus maybe they discredited themselves in the eyes of the people so they cant get elected? For the first part I am thinking how it tends to go when the military downsizes and gives people money to go away, it always tends to be the best who leave, because they are good enough to make a go of it someplace else. The not so good stick around and get what they can get, feeling grateful for that because they know that they are not very good. Plus we have talked about how we the people have tended to by turn abuse and ignore politicians, there is no glory in it anymore so why stick around right?

I do think that this is something that we need to figure out....my fear of course is that we are nowhere nears a fix, that things are still getting worse, maybe the rot is even accelerating.

How many people besides you and me are talking about the broken system, and in my case the responsibility of We The People to fix it?

Depressingly few.





And you are welcome of course.

Hawkeye10 said:

+
Maybe some combination of people left the game to do something more profitable once they started to identify as elites they felt that doing good work was not enough that they need to get theirs too.......that plus maybe they discredited themselves in the eyes of the people so they cant get elected? For the first part I am thinking how it tends to go when the military downsizes and gives people money to go away, it always tends to be the best who leave, because they are good enough to make a go of it someplace else. The not so good stick around and get what they can get, feeling grateful for that because they know that they are not very good. Plus we have talked about how we the people have tended to by turn abuse and ignore politicians, there is no glory in it anymore so why stick around right?

I do think that this is something that we need to figure out....my fear of course is that we are nowhere nears a fix, that things are still getting worse, maybe the rot is even accelerating.

How many people besides you and me are talking about the broken system, and in my case the responsibility of We The People to fix it?

Depressingly few.





And you are welcome of course.

Click to expand...

Well, you know I can't stand Trump. I completely dislike the guy.

But I can see the rationale to vote for him. Absolutely. It was a complete roll of the dice. A feeling that things are so effed up, that tearing it all down is a reasonable alternative to letting it continue to get more omnipotently oppressive. I get that. And I support it in some facets.

But the need for change doesn't mean the change from Trump will be good. Not all change is good - there's bad change as well.

And with Trump I don't see much of what his supporters see, but rather see him loading-up the gov power positions with billionaire corporate types, while he and they deregulate themselves while consolidating the power of government within the White House!

I swear it's dangerous. Absolutely dangerous. Too dangerous for my tastes. Many knock the Dems, Bernie, Warren, etc, with wanting to try to provide a liberal utopia. But the flipside of the Billionaire class running the country for their own benefit through the power now being consolidated within the billionaires in the White House, having removed the checks balances and regulatory shackles of the gov departments & agencies - is even worse!

If the country's billionaires could be trusted to forsake their own self-interest to lead the country out of it's current malaise, they would've already done it. But they don't. And they won't. They serve themselves firstly. And they've been given the keys to the White House!

Consider this article: Politico: Why Steve Bannon Wants You to Believe in the Deep State

j-mac said:

We've all known for some time now that the ACLU was really little more than a liberal front, taking only a handful of high profile right of center cases over the decades to ward off criticism of their organization....Now, as with so many today, the mask is coming off, and real character revealed...Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Who is funding this nationwide protest training through the ACLU? I could not get your link to work.