"Can You Spell Hypocrisy? H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y"

1. 85

   Sharlee01posted 2 months ago

   Jeffries just declared that Democrats will "fight in the streets" against Trump's agenda.
   
   
   The hypocrisy of Democrats never ceases to amaze me. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries just declared that Democrats will "fight in the streets" against Trump's agenda. Yet, I’m supposed to believe that when a conservative uses the word “fight,” it’s a call for violence, but when a Democrat does it, it’s just “passionate rhetoric”? The double standard is staggering.
   
   We all remember how Trump and other conservatives in Washington were crucified for using the word “fight” in a completely benign context. Trump told supporters at a rally to “fight like hell” for the country—to advocate, to push back politically—and the left twisted it into an incitement to violence. But when Jeffries, the highest-ranking Democrat in the House, openly says they will “fight in the streets,” the media suddenly loses interest in parsing every word.
   
   This isn’t new. Maxine Waters once encouraged mobs to harass Trump officials in public, telling them to push back and make them feel unwelcome. If a Republican had said anything close to that, it would have been front-page news for weeks.
   
   What’s worse is that the new breed of liberals doesn’t even try to hide their hypocrisy anymore. They dismiss it, deflect, and pretend it doesn’t exist. If you call them out, they double down and play the victim. This level of dishonesty is exactly why so many Americans are fed up.
   
   Fighting in the streets? The same people who spent years preaching about “threats to democracy” now embrace the kind of rhetoric they once claimed was dangerous. Either words matter, or they don’t. But if Democrats get a free pass while conservatives are vilified, it’s clear the outrage was never about principle—it was always about power. --- Just my view
   
   Questions--- please don't dance around my questions. Keep the word hypocrisy in mind if you choose to address them.
   
   Would the media and Democrats react the same way if a Republican leader had said, “We will fight in the streets”?
   
   Why is it considered “dangerous rhetoric” when Trump says “fight,” but merely “passionate” when a Democrat does?
   
   Is this just another example of the left ignoring their own extremism while demonizing conservatives?
   
   If words truly matter, why aren’t Democrats held accountable for using language that could be interpreted as incitement?
   
   Are you prepared to take to the streets, as Hakeem Jeffries has urged, to oppose Trump's agenda?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Let us know when Jeffries words lead to police being beaten with flagpoles, bear sprayed, pepper sprayed and crushed in doorways.. Wouldn't be a big deal though because they'd be Patriots who could subsequently be pardoned though, right?

      replyreport
      1. 85

         Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this

         No, this is the left, they burn down cities, KILL police officers and cause billions of dollars in damage.  This is how the left does it.

         replyreport
   2. 79

      wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      "Why is it considered “dangerous rhetoric” when Trump says “fight,” but merely “passionate” when a Democrat does?"
      
      Well, Trump has a secret code book he uses when talking to his followers; a code book known only to leftists with imagination enough to understand it.  In this manner it is only those on the left, imagining what he means, that truly understands the message.  We know this to be factual because the left has explained it all to us - that Trump speaks from his code book -  and we know they would never lie.
      
      That the code book has never been found, that Trumps followers do not know the code and could not read if if it were found - they don't have the necessary imagination to change the meaning to something that will benefit the left - is irrelevant.  The irrefutable FACT remains that the left has a copy and are the only ones that understand what Trump truly means.
      
      So...it is not a matter of hypocrisy, just a matter of how much sarcasm one can put into it.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this

         Dan,   Oh, I almost forgot about the secret code book—once it’s read, it must be burned, and the ashes buried... I still can’t figure out how the left got hold of it. Did Adam Schiff or Brennan somehow get their hands on it? Or maybe Chuck Schumer? They’re the only ones who seem sharp enough to pull it off. Looks like they did get the book, though—the only problem is, they don’t quite understand context, so now it’s being twisted into propaganda. Up is down, black is white, bad is so good-----

         replyreport
   3. 78

      abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Do as Dems say, not as Dems do!
      
      Basic, but true.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this

         Yes, pretty much their playbook for a while now.

         replyreport
   4. 78

      abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Same old, same old Shar, in younger bodies!!

      replyreport
2. 72

   Ken Burgessposted 2 months ago

   Whelp, they already gave the blueprint on what to do if they "fight"...
   
   Go door to door, rounding them up, putting them in jail cells, and leaving them there to rot until their party wins back the WH. Do unto others as they have already done to you...
   
   Think of the thousands rounded up for J6... many of whom never even entered the Capitol Building.
   
   I think it is more than fair that those same guidelines are used to round up anyone who 'fights' in the streets against our elected government today, don't you?
   
   Think of the FBI raids on Trump supporters, on Trump himself, time to weaponize the DOJ, FBI, IRS to do the biddings of the Trump Administration... flushing out of government anyone who opposes such actions, but were happy to allow them against Trump and his supporters.

   replyreport
3. 81

   Credence2posted 2 months ago

   I would introduce a variety of methods to "neutralize" Trump and render his governance as ineffectual, not resorting to such crude approaches as fighting in streets.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      The problem you have is that President Donald Trump is very popular right now.  What he is doing is also popular. 
      
      "CBS News poll — Trump has positive approval amid "energetic" opening weeks; seen as doing what he promised"
      
      https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-appr … -2025-2-9/

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this

         For now, until he reaches that line in the sand.....

         replyreport
4. 60

   Willowarborposted 2 months ago

   Hypocrisy?
   
   https://x.com/resist_vanessa/status/1889522774856622330
   
   These people are hilarious

   replyreport
   1. 81

      Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Great!! Spot on, thanks….
      
      So what has changed from “then” and “now”?

      replyreport
5. 81

   Credence2posted 2 months ago

   Now just how stupid is this?
   
   The White House informed AP on Tuesday that if the news agency did not start referring to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, they would be banned from accessing an event in the Oval Office. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
   
   https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-t … 04f1e2b7fc

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      "conform or be cast out"  is the mantra.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this

         I don't know, Willow, I would have thought that trump's bluster and bravado regarding a resurgence of the American empire was just a joke.
         
         The assaults against Canada, Greenland and Panama were not to be taken seriously. But when he actually wants to rename a body of water that has held its original name since the 16th Century and have the nerve to threaten the press for questioning what gives him the exclusive right to rename it, you realize this man is for real and is quite dangerous and I have no reason to believe that he would not actually attempt to do the other absurd things as well.

         replyreport
         1. 85

            Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            Cred,
            
            Well, as far as Panama goes, the country will no longer participate in programs designed by China and has started significantly decreasing the influence of China in the canal area.  I think this is a win.
            
            Mexico has agreed to send thousands of its troops to the boarder to help prevent illegal crossings. Canada has done the same and has created new agencies within its government to deal with decreasing the flow of illegal drugs from Canada into the United States.  I consider this another win.
            
            Renaming a body of water the Gulf of America I think is an excellent idea.  More of the water touches the United States than any other country.  It is something that is long over due.
            
            Why are the left so afraid of our country actually winning against other countries?  It baffles me.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this

               "Mexico has agreed to send thousands of its troops to the boarder to help prevent illegal crossings. Canada has done the same and has created new agencies within its government to deal with decreasing the flow of illegal drugs from Canada into the United States.  I consider this another win."
               
               Canada announced this plan BEFORE Trump announced his tariffs,
               
               And...Mexico also sent troops to border during Biden administration. 
               
               I don't think they are the big"wins" Trump made them out to be.

               replyreport
               1. 85

                  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                  "Canada announced this plan BEFORE Trump announced his tariffs,"
                  
                  No they didn't.
                  
                  "Mexico also sent troops to border during Biden administration"
                  
                  IF Mexico did this it was probably to help the tens of millions of illegals come into the United States illegally.  You know that did happen under biden?
                  
                  As of right now, the border IS secure.  Something that never happened under biden.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                     "Canada announced this plan BEFORE Trump announced his tariffs," no they didn't "
                     
                     Nope.
                     
                     https://x.com/Acyn/status/1886602262916817083

                     replyreport
                     1. 85

                        Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                        THIS was not in place before the tariffs. 
                        
                        "Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau posted Monday afternoon on X that the pause would occur “while we work together,” saying that his government would name a fentanyl czar, list Mexican cartels as terrorist groups and launch a “Canada-U.S. Joint Strike Force to combat organized crime, fentanyl and money laundering.”
                        
                        https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariff … 7e65356ae9

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                           Your link doesn't back up your statement at all...
                           
                           
                           Actually .
                           Canada already had a border plan that included nearly 10,000 frontline workers and more resources to halt the flow of fentanyl before the tariff pause. The plan also included new Black Hawk helicopters and drones to monitor the boundary. The Canadian Prime Minister appointed a new fentanyl tsar as part of the country's efforts to address border concerns.
                           
                           Canada's parliament had already passed a border security and drug interdiction bill in December...
                           
                           Even the Trump folks were careful to use the phrase that Canada will "implement" a plan...yeah, a plan that was already in process.
                           
                           https://www.canada.ca/en/public-safety- … ystem.html

                           replyreport
                           1. 85

                              Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                              "Your link doesn't back up your statement at all..."
                              
                              Oh, yes it does.  All of those things mentioned in the AP news story were NOT being done until the President Donald Trump threatened tariffs on Canada.
                              
                              A fentanyl czar, listing  Mexican cartels as terrorist groups, launching a “Canada-U.S. Joint Strike Force to combat organized crime, fentanyl and money laundering.”
                              
                              ALL of these things are a result of the tariffs.

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                                 "ALL of these things are a result of the tariffs."
                                 
                                 Check the date..
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 https://www.canada.ca/en/public-safety- … ystem.html

                                 replyreport
            2. 81

               Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this

               Renaming a body of water the Gulf of America I think is an excellent idea.  More of the water touches the United States than any other country.  It is something that is long over due.
               --------
               Dunno Mike, seems kind of petty and silly to me. So, of what significance is it really, so who cares what it is named?
               
               I have yet to really fathom the conservative mindset with so much focus on relative minutia considering the issues we face.

               replyreport
               1. 72

                  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                  nice ....
                  
                  but the buffoonery of some of this aside, this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the malfeasance and corruption about to be uncovered, exposed for every American to see and judge for themselves.

                  replyreport
               2. 85

                  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                  "so who cares what it is named?"
                  
                  Exactly, so why not name it the Gulf of America?

                  replyreport
                  1. 81

                     Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this

                     So, you would as President ban a journalist from a presidential press conference just because he or she doesn't choose to go along with Trump's charades as to naming things? Mexico it self has a great deal of the Gulf's coastline. This is just a stupid thing consider and argue about.
                     
                     I am determined to whack off this man's political head, whatever it takes.

                     replyreport
                     1. 79

                        wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                        "I am determined to whack off this man's political head, whatever it takes."
                        
                        I think you have made that exceedingly clear.  For good reason or bad, for truth or lie, regardless of the results...you will end his political career.  A bad, bad case of TDS.
                        
                        Fortunately a lot of people, far more experienced and capable than you, have been trying for a decade to do that, with the result that Trump is again in the White House.

                        replyreport
                        1. 85

                           Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this

                           The hysteria from some is palpable—so much hate. But they’ve been carrying this hate for nearly a decade now. For some, there’s simply no cure.

                           replyreport
                        2. 81

                           Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this

                           Trump has already revealed himself to be a tyrannosaurus and it is meant to be CLEAR.
                           
                           I don’t pretend to know it all but I will continue to use my modest chipping tool to whittle down the edifice one day at a time until I create the fissure.
                           
                           When he crosses the line and he will, it will be a defining moment as to whether this society will remain democratic or choose the road leading into Trump tyranny and despotism.

                           replyreport
                        3. 60

                           Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                           Calling any effort to draw attention to the legitimate failings of trump and those in his administration "tds" is a cop out.   It often seems that maga followers resort to simply slapping on the tds label rather than taking on a difficult argument.  The label is also used when they seem to understand they have no reasonable support for Trump's actions..   folks resort to yelling "tds" or they ignore the topic....lol such as the manner in which Bondi is weaponizing the DOJ
                           
                           "TDS"is a diversion, a deflection

                           replyreport