patrick.net

errc says

@Thunderlips. Weak Sauce. Why is it so hard to produce proof that Charlottesville was chocked full of violent leftists?

Unbelievable strong. Compare the violence to previous elections.

You asked me to produce evidence of Left Wing Violence. I provided a ton. Another one; That lady who drove a Congressman off the road, I just remembered.

After several deaths of Dallas Cops (ANOTHER one I forgot to mention - multiple cops assassinated) by a avid BLM Follower, attempted murder of 5 people including a Congressman with the Alt Left Bernie Volunteer perp, people getting beaten for wearing the hat of a major party political candidate, and the constant references to violence from Madonna to the Cast of Hamilton, and the absolute false demonization of Trump as Hitler endorsed by Lady Gagme, Miley Cyrus, Sarah Silverman, etc. - not to mention Academia's War on Unpopular Speech and White Males generally - where DO these people get their violent ideas from?

I'm waiting on the rest of the Board to weigh in.

errc says

You're only link to anything Charlottesville, is Daily Mail click bait of one guy allegedly "punching " some feminist who claims to be Media, AFTER THE NEO NAZI HAD JUST SLAMMED HIS CAR INTO THE CROWD, MURDERING AN INNOCENT AMERICAN GIRL. I thought that the Soros bussed in Antifa people were inciting violence?

If you go by body count, the AltLeft - with multiple perps clearly connected to BLM and AltLeft Thinking - is wayyy more than the right since the last campaign season began

Much like Islamic Attacks, the media writes off the identity and motivation of "Cool, Non-White" Attackers as soon as possible, concentrates instead on any potential missteps "that could have prevented it", and concentrates on potential blowback to innocent Muslims.

Has the media mentioned the potential of blowback on innocent Trump Supporters? I don't even know if it's been mentioned at all, and nowhere near the degree when it's left or Islamic violence.

Very sad.

So that's a lot of words, yet still NOT ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE OF LEFTIST VIOLENCE IN CHARLOTTESVILLE PRIOR TO THE ISIS STYLE ATTACK BY THE TRUMP SUPPORTING NEO NAZI?!?!

This is getting strange.

A thinking person might start wondering, if it even exists.

Just like the taliban who destroyed those Budhha statues in Afghanistan. No wonder lefties love the jihadis-they are of the same mindset.

Another lie.
The founding fathers did not find jack shit.
The indians found this chunk of earth...

Dan8267 says

I agree. It's time we stopped deifying the founding fathers.

Which is why georgies shut down, another sign of Trump MAGA!!

Dan8267 says

America started out sucking and our entire history has been about making America a better place, and that means breaking from past practices.

lostand confused says

Just like the taliban who destroyed those Budhha statues in Afghanistan. No wonder lefties love the jihadis-they are of the same mindset.

Just like the Trump Supporter Nazis that slammed the car into a crowd of innocent Americans. Eerily similar to ISIS in so many ways, they're indistinguishable

errc says

So that's a lot of words, yet still NOT ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE OF LEFTIST VIOLENCE IN CHARLOTTESVILLE PRIOR TO THE ISIS STYLE ATTACK BY THE TRUMP SUPPORTING NEO NAZI?!?!

BONK.

"There was no police presence," Brittany Caine-Conley, a minister in training who locked arms with other clergy members in counter-protest, told The New York Times. "We were watching people punch each other; people were bleeding all the while police were inside of barricades at the park, watching. It was essentially just brawling on the street and community members trying to protect each other."

Princeton professor and activist Cornel West, who was also at the protest, told The Washington Post "the police didn't do anything in terms of protecting the people of the community, the clergy."

The Unite The Right rally's organizer, Jason Kessler, was also critical. "Charlottesville refused to honor permit as ordered by a federal judge. CPD didn't even show up until 1.5 hrs into the permit," he tweeted. "Inside the park was peaceful. Outbreaks of violence occurred where police refused to separate or even pushed the feuding groups together."

White nationalist Richard Spencer, another organizer, said the police had failed to protect the people who had gathered for the rally. "We came here as a demonstration of our movement," Spencer told the Post. "And we were effectively thrown to the wolves."

The ACLU's Hastings also criticized the policing on Saturday, which she said "was not designed to be ... effective in preventing violence."

"I was there and brought concerns directly to the Secretary of Public Safety and the head of the State Police," said Hastings. "They did not respond. In fact, law enforcement was standing passively by, waiting for violence to take place, so that they would have grounds to declare an emergency, declare an 'unlawful assembly' and clear the area."

There you go, reports of people punching each other from a minister who was almost certainly anti-White Supremacist. Also reports from White Supremacists/Nationalists. And then you've got ACLU criticizing the police passivity. So you've got reps of 2 groups indicating there was violence on all sides and 3 groups criticizing Corrupt Crony McAuliffe.

Nothing like a moment of chaos to blame on TRUMPHITLER! After all, the Governor is a top, if not the top, Clinton Crony.

Or Just pre-emptively ban speech

McAuliffe argues officials need help from the courts if governments are to maintain public safety while allowing people to exercise their First Amendment rights.

"We've got to get a better understanding with these judges to understand our job is to keep our community safe," he said. "The judiciary needs to do a better job of working with us."

Keeping in mind Charlottesville and Virginia had weeks to prepare.

More accounts of mutual violence, again before the Psycho crashed the car:

Neo-Nazis, skinheads, Ku Klux Klan members other white supremacists made their way to the park at the same time as counter-protesters, and the two sides clashed. People threw punches, screamed, set off smoke bombs, hurled water bottles and unleashed chemical sprays. Some came prepared for a fight, with body armor and helmets. Others darted around, trying to avoid the chaos.

“I’ve never seen that kind of hatred up front. It was pretty raw, pretty coarse,” scholar and activist Cornel West, one of the most high-profile counter-protesters, told The Associated Press in an interview Sunday.

Here's your chemical sprays. I see a fat guy who seems to fit a white supremacist, and a black guy who I have a feeling isn't a White Supremacist.

And of course, similar AltLeft violence has happened in Berkeley, Portland, and elsewhere.

errc says

Just like the Trump Supporter Nazis that slammed the car into a crowd of innocent Americans. Eerily similar to ISIS in so many ways, they're indistinguishable

Nah, not even Trump supprots thatguy and neither do most Trump supporters. but when a jihadi kills people dems and Obama can't bear to call it radical islam. When leftie goons bloodied and bruised Trump supporters, violently disturbed his rally-where were you lefties condemning such behavior. When antifa burns down Berkley-because a gay person speaks-where were you lefties. When the leftie shot and seriously injured congressmen-where were you lefties> When leftie shoot at pickup trucks with MAGA stickers -where is the outrage??/

That is why the left is far more dangerous. When someone who is perceived on the right does something horrible-condemnation is swift and immediate.

But when lefties terrorize, kill ,maim, shoot-lefties refuse to show the same outrage-that si dangerous-because it means you accept violence against people whose only crime is to express freedom of thought.

Only trump has the courage to publicly point that-he is what this nation needs to fight the terror of the left from imposing their terrifying belief system on us. Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, venezuela, Cuba are all examples of what happens when leftie ideology takes over completely.

lostand confused says

Nah, not even Trump supprots thatguy and neither do most Trump supporters. but when a jihadi kills people dems and Obama can't bear to call it radical islam.

This is a key difference.

Imagine if Trump said "Nazism and White Supremacy is a peaceful ideology, the vast, vast majority of neo-nazis and Klan members/followers never kill anybody. What happened here was a mentally ill individual who was misled about the True Nature of 1488 and the positive nature of White Pride Worlwide."

The Oligarchs and their PR Team, the Legacy Media, wants Americans to believe that all Trump supporters are Neo-Nazis. They may be desperate enough to start a race war.

More AltLeft violence:

The despicable bitch's defense is that opposing fascism is no crime. Well, she's not being charged with opposing fascism. She's being charged with assault. No one has the right to commit assault. She's lucky the cops didn't break her arms while taking her down. Many others aren't so lucky.

Here's another AltLeft Radical, this one a Teacher, and also from California.

A former community college professor has been arrested in connection with using a U-shaped bicycle lock to violently attack several people during an April pro-Trump rally in Berkeley, California.

Eric Clanton, a former adjunct professor of philosophy at Diablo Valley College in Pleasant Hill, was arrested in Oakland on three counts of suspicion of assault with a deadly weapon that isn’t a firearm and assault causing great bodily injury, East Bay Times reported.

Video of one of the attacks during an April 15 demonstration at Civic Center Park in Berkeley, showing a man gushing blood from a strike to the head, went viral in the days following clashes between Trump supporters and so-called anti-fascists. Police said Thursday that the video ultimately helped them in identifying Mr. Clanton, the Times reported.

Berkeley police said Mr. Clanton is suspected of “violent assaults” on three people, who received “significant injuries” in the attacks.

All of these, like most of my other examples, predate Charlottesville by months.

Democratic Leaders and Hollywood Lefties must disavow.

#AltLeftViolence

That is why the left is far more dangerous. When someone who is perceived on the right does something horrible-condemnation is swift and immediate.

But when lefties terrorize, kill ,maim, shoot-lefties refuse to show the same outrage-that si dangerous-because it means you accept violence against people whose only crime is to express freedom of thought.

---------------

I disagree. I've seen right wing lemmings explaining away the atrocities committed by the Nazis in Virginia this weekend...

Yea but Antifa in Cal blah blah

Yea but Alt Leftists (whatever that's supposed to covefe) forced the poor white Neo Nazi victim to speed his car into a crowd of innocent Americans, just like ISIS commands.

Here's what an appropriate response would look like:

"That was terrible and we disavow the Neo Nazis and their hateful acts"

Fin

Instead, y'all are bending over backwards to explain it away, and respond with a plethora of "yea, buts". Grow up and get a clue. You don't have to march lockstep with Trump on everything, all the time. Pause, take a step back, and reflect. Ask yourself, what the hell am I defending here, and why?

This is Dan's thread about the bitch who thinks she has the right to assault people for what she believes is double plus ungoodthink (if the person she attacked is a fascist to begin with, I don't know)
http://patrick.net/1308921/2017-08-12-berkeley-teacher-filmed-punching-man-at-protest-arraigned-in-sacramento
Here's another AltLeft Radical, this one a Teacher, and also from California.

-------------

Wow just wow, yous are right. Feminism has destroyed this country. A man gets punched by some wimpy broad, and he pressed charges. I'm tipping you've never been in a fight. Very beta of the Trumpcucks, but no big surprise

errc says

Pause, take a step back, and reflect. Ask yourself, what the hell am I defending here, and why?

That should be you. Who here is defending that murdering lunatic. All we are saying is he is evil-so is antifa, BLM and the violent thugs who do far worse-like shoot up congressman, shoot at pick truck with MAGA stickers-with driver in said truck.
It is you who absolutely cannot refuse to accept the dangerous violence in the left.

nobody is saying what this fellow did is right, but no one the left is accepting that the left is committing far greater violence-shooting and killing -that you folks absolutely refuse to accept.

Only Trump has the courage to accept it openly-despite the hate the left flings at him-that is courage. The dam will break soem day-the sooner the better-when it becomes ok to have the same level of revulsion at a leftie madman as it is on rightie madman.

TwoScoopsMcGee says

It was not commonplace before that.

The same can be said of slavery. There was a time before it was common.

In any case, commonness does not excuse villainy, and future generations should not ignore such despicableness simply because it was common at the time. A hero, by definition, is not common and being heroic means not doing the common.

Dan8267 says

In any case, commonness does not excuse villainy, and future generations should not ignore such despicableness simply because it was common at the time. A hero, by definition, is not common and being heroic means not doing the common.

Look at the Drug War. What if one day 50 years from now, when the war ends, people say "JFK didn't do enough to end the Drug War. In fact, he increased narcotics enforcement. Let's tear down all his memorials. Nevermind all his other stances and accomplishments."

I think people oughta be judged by the standards of their time. If they did some good by the standards of our time, that's extra credit. It was politically impossible for Jefferson and Washington to get rid of slavery. They did leave behind a pretty good system that provided the basis for making things better, economically and in terms of Personal Freedom.

lostand confused says

nobody is saying what this fellow did is right, but no one the left is accepting that the left is committing far greater violence-shooting and killing -that you folks absolutely refuse to accept.

I'd be happy if they admitted that the Alt / Conservative Left is committing political violence against ordinary citizens (not just cops at a G8 meeting like they usually do).

Soros has done a great job redirecting them from opposition to Globaloney to fighting "Fascism" who just happens to be a moderate economic nationalist, what Soros detests the most.

@Rew @Bob

I want to hear their Yes or No answer.

YesYNot says

Wow. Comparing the founding father's to the traitors who fought to keep slavery legal 75 years later . Can't seem to see the difference, huh?

So some slave owners were okay, but others are not?

How about Margaret Sanger -- the Eugenicist who believed Blacks an inferior race? Can we remove any public memorials to her? Rename streets? She was roughly contemporary with Hitler, who also was a eugenicist and racist.

I disagree with Dan about the moral culpability in different times. However, he ponied up an cogent, consistent viewpoint. I'm struggling to see yours.

TwoScoopsMcGee says

Look at the Drug War. What if one day 50 years from now, when the war ends, people say "JFK didn't do enough to end the Drug War. In fact, he increased narcotics enforcement. Let's tear down all his memorials. Nevermind all his other stances and accomplishments."

Considering the effects of the drug war, that may be reasonable. There are things called deal killers. A hundred rights can be outweighed by one atrocity.

Perhaps instead of building monuments to people, we should build monuments to ideas.

TwoScoopsMcGee says

I think people oughta be judged by the standards of their time.

Just because an evil is accepted by the ruling class of a time does not mean the people don't know that it's evil. The victims of the evil would most certainly have had different standards.

Again, should there be monuments to women who falsely accuse men or rape? Maybe some of those women also do other things like protest against an unjust war, but I would still not build a statue of them. The fact that their acts are common does not excuse it.

Slavery and genocides are deal killers no matter how much good those responsible do on the side. As to JFK and the drug war, that's up to history to decide. My understanding is that the drug war as a way of creating political prisoners started with Nixon in the 1970s.

TwoScoopsMcGee says

So some slave owners were okay, but others are not?

...

I disagree with Dan about the moral culpability in different times. However, he ponied up an cogent, consistent viewpoint. I'm struggling to see yours.

You are struggling to see my point, because you are being dishonest about what other people are saying. You are doing the exact thing that you accuse CNN of doing. You are pretending that the Lee statue was taken down, because the guy had slaves, which Jefferson and Washington also had. That's simply not true. It's bullshit. The statue of R.E. Lee was not taken down because the guy had slaves. It was taken down, because it was a revisionist statue erected in 1924 (60 years after the war) in an effort to keep the racist fuckers happy and continue to terrorize blacks. It was put up during a time when blacks were regularly lynched and were in no way equals under the law.

If the so-called 'alt-left' were going to go after Jefferson, they would have stolen the tiki torches from the Nazis and walked up the hill to torch Monticello. They didn't do that. If you go to Washington, the big monuments that you see on the mall are Lincoln and Washington. Lincoln is famous for keeping the Union together and fighting for what we know see so plainly as the just cause of getting rid of slavery. Washington is famous for fighting the Brittish to earn our freedom and being our first president. If you keep looking on the mall you will find monuments to people who fought and died in Vietnam, Korea, and WWII. If you keep walking around the tidal basin, you will find monuments to MLK, FDR, and Jefferson. MLK is famous for leading a peaceful civil rights movement and having courage and wisdom in the face of adversity. FDR is famous for leading us out of the Depression and to victory in WWII. At this point Jefferson may be most famous for the contradiction of slave ownership and writings about freedom. You can find this and many other quote right in his memorial. "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men." There are many books about this contradiction, and it is a big part of the tours you will find if you visit Monticello. There are literally many books written about Jefferson in this way. He was an embodiment of our country, though, which also has those contradictions written into our founding documents and even affecting our institutions like the electoral college to this day. We make a point of explicitly delineating what was profound and good from the parts of society (and Jefferson's behavior) that were tragically wrong. So, the point of this trip down monument lane in DC is to show that in our capital, we have a range of monuments to the founding fathers (two most famous), to our war heroes who gave us and helped maintain our freedom, and to those who fought for civil rights. There's room for a few more, IMO, but they don't go up easily. Note, that there are no monuments to General Lee or anybody else who fought for the South's right to own slaves in DC. There is a reason for that. It's because the statues of Lee represent something entirely different than the monuments to Jefferson and Washington and others on the mall.

If you truly cannot see the difference here, then we have some sort of fundamental problem. There is a reason that the ex-KKK leader (Duke) and his current-day mentees cannot see the difference. It is because the South's generals were heroes to them just as much as Jefferson and Washington were. But then they wish that slavery were still legal. Trump is pretending to not see the difference, because he wants to scare people into thinking that their whole society is being attacked.

YesYNot says

The statue of R.E. Lee was not taken down because the guy had slaves. It was taken down, because it was a revisionist statue erected in 1924 (60 years after the war) in an effort to keep the racist fuckers happy and continue to terrorize blacks. It was put up during a time when blacks were regularly lynched and were in no way equals under the law.

Oh please. Like you lived in 1924. Now the lefties want Teddy Roosevelt statue to be taken down. Oh they also want Columbus day to be called indigenous day. You guys-LOL!!!
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/08/next-came-teddy-alt-left-demands-new-york-museum-remove-teddy-roosevelt-statue/

lostand confused says

Oh please. Like you lived in 1924.

Now you pretend that one has to be alive to know what happened during an era that was less than 100 years ago. That's an 'interesting' point of view. I'd lolz if it were not so sad.

Is TwoScoopsMcGee Tucker Carlson?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/watch-fox-news-anchor-tucker-091806506.html

Or has he just devolved to the point where he parrots FoxNews like a poor man's 10lbbass passing along all of Breitbart's talking points?

YesYNot says

Now you pretend that one has to be alive to know what happened during an era that was less than 100 years ago. That's an 'interesting' point of view. I'd lolz if it were not so sad

You state with absolute certainity about why the statue was erected, in order to justify why it can be removed now. That is sad and very telling of the absolute certainty of the left-very scary.

"Now you pretend that one has to be alive to know what happened during an era that was less than 100 years ago. That's an 'interesting' point of view. I'd lolz if it were not so sad."

It's another sad consequence of the Trumpkins battle to delegitimize facts and truth. Alternative facts. It's OK to lie.

The Civil War wasn't fought over slavery...

TwoScoopsMcGee says

@Rew @Bob

I want to hear their Yes or No answer.

Of course you do, So did Joe McCarthy. So does every prosecutor that ever lived. Want to try to come up with something slightly more creative than the classic did you stop beating your wife yes or no gambit to avoid facing up to the real issues with your trump demi god? I didn't think so.

lostand confused says

You state with absolute certainity about why the statue was erected, in order to justify why it can be removed now. That is sad and very telling of the absolute certainty of the left-very scary.

So, do you agree with the statement in general, but just think that I should express myself with less certainty? Do you think that any statement made without qualifiers implies 100% certainty of the author? I ask, because I never stated a certainty, yet you perceived on. If I take a gander at your posts, I don't see a lot of qualifiers. The 5th one down at the moment, actually has the word 'absolutely' twice. Where am I supposed to read into those comments to find your humility and sage wisdom?

TwoScoopsMcGee says

And of course, similar AltLeft violence has happened in Berkeley, Portland, and elsewhere.

There is no such thing as alt-left. Doesn't exist.
You need to learn how this "improvised" flame thrower came int existence, and you need to also understand why that elderly gentleman is off to the right.

YesYNot says

o, do you agree with the statement in general, but just think that I should express myself with less certainty?

Nope. There is no way you know why the statue was installed-yet you say with certainty and propose the removal based on your absolute certainty. That is so leftie philosophy.

YesYNot says

I ask, because I never stated a certainty, yet you perceived on.

Umm here is what you wrote. LOLz..

The statue of R.E. Lee was not taken down because the guy had slaves. It was taken down, because it was a revisionist statue erected in 1924 (60 years after the war) in an effort to keep the racist fuckers happy and continue to terrorize blacks.

lostand confused says

It was taken down, because it was a revisionist statue erected in 1924 (60 years after the war) in an effort to keep the racist fuckers happy and continue to terrorize blacks.

I'd say that I was referring to the memorials in general rather than that particular one. The basis comes from what others have written and the correlation of monument building with historical events.

I cannot possibly know what was in the mind of the guy who commissioned that particular statue. But, if you that I cannot possibly know what was in general going on in this country in 1924, you must really be critical of the religious right who are pretty sure that some supernatural shit happened in year 0.

lostand confused says

and propose the removal based on your absolute certainty.

Plus, I didn't propose the removal of the Lee statues based on my certainty. I contrasted what Lee represents with what Jefferson and Washington represent. Those are two extremely different things.

YesYNot says

You are struggling to see my point, because you are being dishonest about what other people are saying. You are doing the exact thing that you accuse CNN of doing. You are pretending that the Lee statue was taken down, because the guy had slaves, which Jefferson and Washington also had. That's simply not true. It's bullshit. The statue of R.E. Lee was not taken down because the guy had slaves. It was taken down, because it was a revisionist statue erected in 1924 (60 years after the war) in an effort to keep the racist fuckers happy and continue to terrorize blacks. It was put up during a time when blacks were regularly lynched and were in no way equals under the law.

Not at all. Alt-Left Radicals just tore down a statue to Confederate Soldiers, generally. Most of whom did not own any slaves. This took place in Durham, NC. Perhaps they will dig up the graves next? They are already talking about removing the images from Stone Mountain.

The reason given by the protesters themselves was Slavery, not the mere fact they rebelled against the USA.

It would be hypocritical for them to oppose Lee because he fought for independence from the United States, since so many worship people like Assatta Shakur or Rasmeh Odeh, both of whom were anti-American, ultraleft terrorists - and recent actors, people whose deeds were in the current lifetime of many millions of Americans. They also worship many Native American warriors for fighting the USA. They think America is a horrible place, that White Men alive must suffer today to rectify history. They don't want to right a wrong or two, they loathe the whole package. So the "It's because they fought the USA" is dishonest, inconsistent, and just flat out mendacious coming from them.

YesYNot says

If you truly cannot see the difference here, then we have some sort of fundamental problem.

So what you're saying is that because Washington and Jefferson were Founding Fathers who accomplished things considered very positive, it mitigates their Slavery.

I admit that, why can't you - the Yes or No answer, YesYNot, is No.

One more question - do you support the removal of Margaret Sanger statues?

Does her birth control activism mitigate the fact that she was an open racist and eugenicist?

Notice one thing: Both sides flew flags of foreign entities - Nazi, Soviet, Confederate, Anarchist. Few US Flags in Sight

bob2356 says

Of course you do, So did Joe McCarthy. So does every prosecutor that ever lived. Want to try to come up with something slightly more creative than the classic did you stop beating your wife yes or no gambit to avoid facing up to the real issues with your trump demi god? I didn't think so.

I knew you wouldn't answer.

TwoScoopsMcGee says

They owned slaves!

TwoScoopsMcGee says

We have AltLeft Radicals in government removing General Lee Statues

Lee never owned slaves, even the leftist bastion Snopes refutes this.

"Robert E. Lee, the commander of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia and (from 1865) the general-in-chief of Confederate forces, neither owned slaves nor inherited any, thus it is not correct to assert that he “freed his slaves” (in 1862 or at any other time)."
http://www.snopes.com/confederate-history-slave-ownership/

YesYNot says

Exactly. And the early 20th century was also when the Confederate battle flag started being flown again. It's not southern pride. It's southern racism.

NuttBoxer says

Lee never owned slaves, even the leftist bastion Snopes refutes this.

So the AltLeft, who worships all these insurgents and rebels and terrorists from Che Guevara to Assatta Shakur to Rasmeh Odeh, finally found a Rebel they really don't like.

And SURPRISE! He's a White Male. Even though he owned no slaves but was a rebel.

Amazing.

NuttBoxer says

Lee never owned slaves, even the leftist bastion Snopes refutes this.

That's true, he didn't. He did however kill many Americans in order to let slavers continue to own, beat, murder, and rape slaves including children. So he's every bit as guilty. He's like the Nazi that isn't anti-Semitic, but still fights for the Nazis so they can burn Jews in ovens. He's no hero. He's a traitor.

Teddy Roosevelt on the Chopping Block

Hundreds of activists gathered at the American Museum of Natural History on Monday to take down the “racist” statue of Theodore Roosevelt and an urgent call to rename Columbus Day.

More than 200 people cheered outside the museum as activists covered the statue of Roosevelt on horseback flanked by an African American and Native American on either side and demanded it be ultimately removed.

“A stark embodiment of the white supremacy that Roosevelt himself espoused and promoted,” the group explained in a statement. “The statue is seen as an affront to all who pass it on entering the museum, but especially to African and Native Americans.”

Activists from the groups NYC Stands with Standing Rock and Decolonize This Place organized the protest to draw attention to the museum’s encouragement of racist tropes, and implored New York City to rename Columbus Day to Indigenous People’s Day.

Democratic Leaders and Voters must denounce.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=98&v=mY0mQUWO9_Q

TwoScoopsMcGee says

So what you're saying is that because Washington and Jefferson were Founding Fathers who accomplished things considered very positive, it mitigates their Slavery.

I admit that, why can't you - the Yes or No answer, YesYNot, is No.

It doesn't mitigate the effects of his use of slavery. I differ from Dan in that I don't judge individuals like Jefferson as harshly as I would someone who wanted to have slaves today. There are lots of reasons for that, but it is not relevant to the difference between Jefferson and Lee. Slavery and the fight for it is not what Jefferson represents. Slavery was one negative aspect of his life. Slavery is not what the US and our flag represents. It's one negative aspect of our history. Slavery and the fight for it is what Robert Lee represents. If you accept that slavery is bad, but that there are many great things about our constitution and government, then you should be able to see the difference between memorials of Lee and Jefferson.
TwoScoopsMcGee says

One more question - do you support the removal of Margaret Sanger statues?

No.
TwoScoopsMcGee says

since so many worship people like Assatta Shakur or Rasmeh Odeh, both of whom were anti-American, ultraleft terrorists - and recent actors, people whose deeds were in the current lifetime of many millions of Americans.

Most people don't know who those people are, and I fall into that most people category. I don't really care if they are hypocrites. What percentage of the population do you think worships them? What percentage is happy to remove some confederate statues?