The concept of civility shouldn’t be so difficult for so many people. And yet, here we are.
Way, way, way too many people can't seem to grasp that there is a middle ground between "roll over and don't actually fight back" and "be abusive, harassing, dishonest, and incite violence."
— Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) June 25, 2018
This tweeter seems to think nasty rhetoric like that of Maxine Waters is acceptable because it’s not explicitly calling for violence, just collective public harassment and intimidation. Oh, and because Waters is a Democrat:
Because people on the right are lying about what constitutes violence. Waters did not ask for violence, but the right collectively lied about it. #GOPLies #TrumpLies #LiarsNotWelcome
— Fava Bean (@Fava) June 25, 2018
Amazing how that works, no? Jonah Goldberg couldn’t help but notice how the rules change depending on who’s breaking them:
I like the new hotness from liberals that totally non-violent language can be violent if “triggering.” But speech that sure as hell sounds like encouraging violence isn’t violent at all, because Trump. https://t.co/WPEoQdboHY
— Jonah Goldberg (@JonahNRO) June 25, 2018
Nailed it.
This is an excellent point. You can be wounded by words, but if words lead to actual violence they're fine as long as they're spoken on your side. https://t.co/7oLAPAyRdO
— John Podhoretz (@jpodhoretz) June 25, 2018
