An observation on Red & Blue team members…

[anonymoose]

... based on the predictions and reactions of the Rittenhouse and McMichael cases.

Blue team members refused to accept obvious facts of the Rittenhouse case, even refused to acknowledge what was clearly evident on video. Some here still refuse to accept the unanimous verdict of the jurors who took 3 1/2 days to carefully consider the testimony and video.

Red team members who followed the Aubery case unanimously (I don't consider TDAK to be on any team) predicted the McMichael convictions based on the testimony and certainly agreed with the verdict.

Also look at the statement from dim pols. Biden, e.g. He fully implied in a tweet that Rit was a white supremacist before the trial when there has never been any evidence, ever, that he was one. Then he goes on to say he was disappointed in the verdict.
Wisconsin gov. states the verdict has "reopened wounds" . No governor. It has closure.

Which team is the more rational here? Isn't it obvious?

 

[BattleofHodow]

Even if Rittenhouse was a White Supremacist.

Which there's no proof of.

That is protected by the 1st amendment freedom of speech & the right to assembly.

These Stalinists think that Black Live Matters are entitled to be racist rioters.

But, White people are inherently wrong & racist & need to be punished for that.

They are incredibly insecure, illogical & overly emotional.

 

[Concart]

... based on the predictions and reactions of the Rittenhouse and McMichael cases.

Blue team members refused to accept obvious facts of the Rittenhouse case, even refused to acknowledge what was clearly evident on video. Some here still refuse to accept the unanimous verdict of the jurors who took 3 1/2 days to carefully consider the testimony and video.

Red team members who followed the Aubery case unanimously (I don't consider TDAK to be on any team) predicted the McMichael convictions based on the testimony and certainly agreed with the verdict.

Also look at the statement from dim pols. Biden, e.g. He fully implied in a tweet that Rit was a white supremacist before the trial when there has never been any evidence, ever, that he was one. Then he goes on to say he was disappointed in the verdict.
Wisconsin gov. states the verdict has "reopened wounds" . No governor. It has closure.

Which team is the more rational here? Isn't it obvious?

Funniest post of the day. Thanks for the laugh.

 

[The Anonymous]

Funniest post of the day. Thanks for the laugh.

That's right!!!

 

[anonymoose]

Funniest post of the day. Thanks for the laugh.

Why? What's not true about it?

 

[Concart]

Why? What's not true about it?

Dude, you are just trolling. But I had a good laugh over it. I am pleased that some (I wouldn't even say most, but some) Trumptards have decided that hunting down and lynching a black man is probably not the best thing to do, your conclusion that they are therefore more 'rational' might be the funniest thing I've ever seen posted here. Carry on.

 

[anonymoose]

Dude, you are just trolling. But I had a good laugh over it. I am pleased that some (I wouldn't even say most, but some) Trumptards have decided that hunting down and lynching a black man is probably not the best thing to do, your conclusion that they are therefore more 'rational' might be the funniest thing I've ever seen posted here. Carry on.

That didn't address the OP. I'm disappointed in you. You've become more radicalized and irrational lately. Maybe that's a symptom of being "woke"?
" I am pleased that some (I wouldn't even say most, but some) Trumptards have decided that hunting down and lynching a black man is probably not the best thing to do" has zero to do with the OP.

 

[Concart]

That didn't address the OP. I'm disappointed in you. You've become more radicalized and irrational lately. Maybe that's a symptom of being "woke"?
" I am pleased that some (I wouldn't even say most, but some) Trumptards have decided that hunting down and lynching a black man is probably not the best thing to do" has zero to do with the OP.

I should be able to sleep tonight even though you're disappointed in me.

I'm laughing at your conclusion. YOU think that a collective group of people that believe that the election was stolen by Italian satellites, Venezuelan dictators and fake Chinese ballots is more 'rational' than those who don't share that belief. THAT is humorous.

IMHO, the Rittenhouse verdict, even though it may technically align with the law, and in fact the entire incident and the 'red teams' reaction to it are indictive of the institutional and partisan racism that still exists in this country. ANYONE who suggests that a 17 year old black protester with an AR-15 walking the streets after curfew wouldn't have been immediately arrested is lying to themselves. The reaction of the Red Team is to bestow sainthood on a punk kid who lied about being an EMT, and ran like a coward instead of treating the people he shot. Rittenhouse is now their hero. That is far more troubling to me than the verdict. But if you consider them 'rational' and 'unemotional' then we clearly don't share a common understanding of what those words mean. Continue.

My statement has everything to do with the OP, because what happened in Brunswick was an old fashioned lynching. Period.

 

[anonymoose]

. I am pleased that some (I wouldn't even say most, but some) Trumptards have decided that hunting down and lynching a black man is probably not the best thing to do,

Which red team members considered hunting down and lynching a black man OK? I don't recall any.

 

[Concart]

Which red team members considered hunting down and lynching a black man OK? I don't recall any.

How many predicted the outcome and said the verdict was just. I can think of one. In general, I've seen them whine that the camera man shouldn't have been convicted, and then there is TDAK and volsrock. But I guess they 'don't count'. Not sure why. What I haven't seen is a single member of the 'red team' call this what it was. They just figured these good old boys went just a little bit too far.

 

[anonymoose]

I should be able to sleep tonight even though you're disappointed in me.

I'm laughing at your conclusion. YOU think that a collective group of people that believe that the election was stolen by Italian satellites, Venezuelan dictators and fake Chinese ballots is more 'rational' than those who don't share that belief. THAT is humorous.

More rational in regards to these cases. I don't consider most on this board to be very rational.

IMHO, the Rittenhouse verdict, even though it may technically align with the law,

At least you admit that.

and in fact the entire incident and the 'red teams' reaction to it are indictive of the institutional and partisan racism that still exists in this country.

I don't see where racism has anything to do w/ Rittenhouse.

ANYONE who suggests that a 17 year old black protester with an AR-15 walking the streets after curfew wouldn't have been immediately arrested is lying to themselves.

Possible, but a hypothetical situation that never happened. Irrelevant to the OP.

The reaction of the Red Team is to bestow sainthood on a punk kid who lied about being an EMT, and ran like a coward instead of treating the people he shot.

He was supposed to treat people he defended himself against when a mob was after him? Irrational.

Rittenhouse is now their hero.

To some, for sure. I saw others, including myself that said he was guilty of incredible stupidity being there. Personally I think he's more a hero to them because he symbolized how the right to self defense was STILL found to be legal and lawful.

That is far more troubling to me than the verdict.

IMO what was on trial here was more the right to self defense. I never could give a shit about the kid.

But if you consider them 'rational' and 'unemotional' then we clearly don't share a common understanding of what those words mean. Continue.

Turns out they were in agreement w/ the jury. And it's highly improbable that all 12 jurors were "trumptards".

My statement has everything to do with the OP, because what happened in Brunswick was an old fashioned lynching. Period.[/QUOTE] Agreed. But what the mob in Kenosha was trying to do was lynch Rittenhouse not knowing that he had just successfully defended himself against Rosenbaum. Chase him down and kill him before knowing the reality of the situation.

 

[anonymoose]

and then there is TDAK and volsrock. But I guess they 'don't count'.

TDAK doesn't count AFAIC. He's on another planet. I didn't see what volsrock posted about the case. If he defended the McMichaels he'd be an exception to the red team's rationality. Virtually all that I saw from the reds agreed w/ the verdict.

 

[Concart]

More rational in regards to these cases. I don't consider most on this board to be very rational.
At least you admit that. I don't see where racism has anything to do w/ Rittenhouse. Possible, but a hypothetical situation that never happened. Irrelevant to the OP. He was supposed to treat people he defended himself against when a mob was after him? Irrational. To some, for sure. I saw others, including myself that said he was guilty of incredible stupidity being there. Personally I think he's more a hero to them because he symbolized how the right to self defense was STILL found to be legal and lawful. IMO what was on trial here was more the right to self defense. I never could give a shit about the kid. Turns out they were in agreement w/ the jury. And it's highly improbable that all 12 jurors were "trumptards".

My statement has everything to do with the OP, because what happened in Brunswick was an old fashioned lynching. Period.

Agreed. But what the mob in Kenosha was trying to do was lynch Rittenhouse not knowing that he had just successfully defended himself against Rosenbaum. Chase him down and kill him before knowing the reality of the situation.[/QUOTE]

I see. So before a 'good guy with a gun' can shoot an active shooter, he should sit him down and interview him first. Got it. That's nonsense. All Rittenhouse had to do after he shot Rosenbaum was drop his gun, call 911 (the cops were literally a block away) and surrender. Instead he ran. Leaving a dying man without the benefit of his vast EMT skills. Great hero the red team has there.

Yes, they were in agreement with the jury. And the Lions might beat the Packers. Doesn't make them a better team.

 

[anonymoose]

All Rittenhouse had to do after he shot Rosenbaum was drop his gun, call 911 (the cops were literally a block away) and surrender. Instead he ran. Leaving a dying man without the benefit of his vast EMT skills. Great hero the red team has there.

Sure, in retrospect that's exactly what he should have done. Ever kill someone? I haven't. I have no idea what I would do in that situation but I'm sure I'd be in shock. Only a few seconds earlier he never woulda dreamed he'd have to kill an attacker.
Yeah, he's a stupid punk and he shoulda thought beforehand what might happen. His mother is incredibly stupid too.
BTW, I perused a couple of volsrock's posts on the McMurphy's. He's dead wrong. But that's the only one I could see on the red team that felt that way.
Look at BidenPresident, e.g. He still thinks Rittenhouse is guilty. Althea still thinks Rittenhouse did the pursuing in spite of the verdict, in spite of all the video evidence. Look at domer's posts, gemini's, owl woman's. That's off the top of my head. And they still consider Rittenhouse to be a murderer.
Can you name five from the red team that even thought the McMichaels weren't guilty even before the verdict? Admittedly I didn't follow that as closely. Could be that's why I didn't see the reds defending the McMichaels but I don't recall them loudly proclaiming the McMichaels' innocence. Especially from those that followed the trial.
And that's what this thread and OP is about. It's confined to comparing and contrasting the reds and blues attitudes in these two cases.

 

[Jack]

... based on the predictions and reactions of the Rittenhouse and McMichael cases.

Blue team members refused to accept obvious facts of the Rittenhouse case, even refused to acknowledge what was clearly evident on video. Some here still refuse to accept the unanimous verdict of the jurors who took 3 1/2 days to carefully consider the testimony and video.

Red team members who followed the Aubery case unanimously (I don't consider TDAK to be on any team) predicted the McMichael convictions based on the testimony and certainly agreed with the verdict.

Also look at the statement from dim pols. Biden, e.g. He fully implied in a tweet that Rit was a white supremacist before the trial when there has never been any evidence, ever, that he was one. Then he goes on to say he was disappointed in the verdict.
Wisconsin gov. states the verdict has "reopened wounds" . No governor. It has closure.

Which team is the more rational here? Isn't it obvious?

It's all about 'Team Loyalty'. Each Cheerleading Squad goes with the Talking Points. Reality, comes in a distant second place.

 

[Concart]

Sure, in retrospect that's exactly what he should have done. Ever kill someone? I haven't. I have no idea what I would do in that situation but I'm sure I'd be in shock. Only a few seconds earlier he never woulda dreamed he'd have to kill an attacker.
Yeah, he's a stupid punk and he shoulda thought beforehand what might happen. His mother is incredibly stupid too.
BTW, I perused a couple of volsrock's posts on the McMurphy's. He's dead wrong. But that's the only one I could see on the red team that felt that way.
Look at BidenPresident, e.g. He still thinks Rittenhouse is guilty. Althea still thinks Rittenhouse did the pursuing in spite of the verdict, in spite of all the video evidence. Look at domer's posts, gemini's, owl woman's. That's off the top of my head. And they still consider Rittenhouse to be a murderer.
Can you name five from the red team that even thought the McMichaels weren't guilty even before the verdict? Admittedly I didn't follow that as closely. Could be that's why I didn't see the reds defending the McMichaels but I don't recall them loudly proclaiming the McMichaels' innocence. Especially from those that followed the trial.
And that's what this thread and OP is about. It's confined to comparing and contrasting the reds and blues attitudes in these two cases.

Then what Rittenhouse did was reckless. Which, well, duh. And he should have been convicted for that. He didn't know the difference between a full metal jacket and hollow point. He bought the gun because he thought it looked cool. He had NO BUSINESS being on the streets with that weapon. You want me to FEEL SORRY FOR HIM because he didn't know what to do after he shot the weapon he displayed so much joy in brandishing? I don't. He was reckless, irresponsible, ignorant, and trying to be a big shot. Three people are dead, and you think he should have NO accountability for that, even though it was his gun that killed them. Sorry, not buying. The idea that he is then turned into a right wing hero is sickening.

And my Packers/Lions point was confined to that one potential upset. I have yet to see a single 'rational' post from any of the 'Red Team'. They simply went to their corner. Should I give some of them credit because they think lynching is a bridge too far. Okay, congrats.

 

[Whythink]

Plenty of Red Team members claiming the guilty verdict is a result media intimidating the jury.

Plenty of Blue Team members acknowledging the verdict being correct while also being disgusted by the actions.

All should be disgusted by the attemp to declare Rittenhouse a hero, provide him with a National Holiday, a job within our legislature, and a meeting with the former president.

Legal or not, he deserves no credit for his behavior. The country will benefit from less, not more, Americans following his lead.

 

[Legion]

Trump

.

 

[anonymoose]

Plenty of Red Team members claiming the guilty verdict is a result media intimidating the jury.

Plenty? Name one besides volrock. TDAK is not red team. Even if he claimed he was he’s been disavowed by them.

Plenty of Blue Team members acknowledging the verdict being correct while also being disgusted by the actions.

Plenty of Red Team members acknowledging the verdict being correct while also being disgusted by the actions.

All should be disgusted by the attemp to declare Rittenhouse a hero, provide him with a National Holiday, a job within our legislature, and a meeting with the former president.

Legal or not, he deserves no credit for his behavior. The country will benefit from less, not more, Americans following his lead.

He successfully defended himself against an attacker and successfully defended himself against a lynch mob, then was persecuted by leftist media , politicians and prosecuted by a woke D.A. for doing so.
YOU created the hero they celebrate .
Same as a rogue cop who created a hero out of a Georgia Floyd who otherwise had a useless and destructive life.

 

[Whythink]

Plenty? Name one besides volrock. TDAK is not red team. Even if he claimed he was he’s been disavowed by them.



Plenty of Red Team members acknowledging the verdict being correct while also being disgusted by the actions.



He successfully defended himself against an attacker and successfully defended himself against a lynch mob, then was persecuted by leftist media , politicians and prosecuted by a woke D.A. for doing so.
YOU created the hero they celebrate .
Same as a rogue cop who created a hero out of a Georgia Floyd who otherwise had a useless and destructive life.

So, Red Team can pick and choose who represents them while you generalize Blue Team, including me, creating a hero. Lol, the hypocrisy is never disappointing.

Rittenhouse successfully chose to enter an area with curfew with advice from authorities to avoid the area. Shockingly, he found trouble in the area and killed 2 people.

He isn't a hero of anyone's creation but the extreme right wing.

George Floyd, regardless of his past, was a victim.

I am disappointed in the outcome because I assumed the law discouraged ignoring authority, finding trouble, and claiming self-defense after. The verdict was correct based on my novice understanding of the law. I will never understand how a 17 year old kid from another state was able to enter this area armed with a curfew in place and plenty of law enforcement. Something should have prevented that... parents, police, logic, common sense, etc...

I wonder, if he was black, would he have been stopped? Honest curiosity not trying to be off-base.

Fyi, i am a progressive but you are ignorant to generalize the Blue Team the way you did.

The majority of Blue Team and Red Team are good people who love this country. We need more team USA and less blue v Red BS.