Update: According to Lane County Jail records, the counter-protester who was arrested has been identified as Jonathan James Wisbey. Wisbey, age 51, was charged with 1st Degree Menacing, 2nd Degree …
Not even the overtly biased author of the article was willing to make that claim. You’ll need a primary source before you can reasonably make such a claim.
As I said, I observed considerable bias in the article. I further observed libelous claims in the comments, far exceeding the bias in the article.
Frankly, I don’t give a shit about him. I’m more interested in this site, this author, and you. The inherent bias in the article tells me I should be cautious in trusting them. I should not believe them simply because I like what they have to say.
Do you form opinions on the basis of logic and rationality, or on emotion? Do you trust stereotypes over evidence? Do you subscribe to principles like Hanlon’s Razor and Presumption of Innocence, or do you assume malice and guilt?
Your statements here tell me that your opinion is not formed on a rational basis, but from your hatred and disgust of this driver’s political position. You have demonstrated to me that your arguments cannot be trusted.
No, fascists are the right wing populists who appeal to violent authority to subjugate marginalized persons in attempts to reacquire a fictitious idealized past they have rationalized as stolen from them by these already disempowered groups.
If you’re asking me to prove fascism is bad, you’re doing to work of fascists.
If you’re asking me to prove fascism is bad, you’re doing to work of fascists.
I’m asking you to respect the 4th, 5th, 6th amendments, which require proof of guilt before condemnation. If you can’t even recognize the meaning and necessity of “presumption of innocence” and “rights of the accused”, you don’t get to lecture me on “fascism”.
Hint: the subject of this article is “the accused”.
Not even the overtly biased author of the article was willing to make that claim. You’ll need a primary source before you can reasonably make such a claim.
That fascists murder people with their cars?
Why stop there? He’s got a dick, so by your personal evidentiary standard, he must have been raping the protesters as well.
If he had been getting his dick out I’d certainly condone kicking it before he could.
…not that you have any proof he does have a dick.
Why are you defending a guy who shot at protesters and refers to himself as “a domestic terrorist” on his own youttube channel though?
As I said, I observed considerable bias in the article. I further observed libelous claims in the comments, far exceeding the bias in the article.
Frankly, I don’t give a shit about him. I’m more interested in this site, this author, and you. The inherent bias in the article tells me I should be cautious in trusting them. I should not believe them simply because I like what they have to say.
Do you form opinions on the basis of logic and rationality, or on emotion? Do you trust stereotypes over evidence? Do you subscribe to principles like Hanlon’s Razor and Presumption of Innocence, or do you assume malice and guilt?
Your statements here tell me that your opinion is not formed on a rational basis, but from your hatred and disgust of this driver’s political position. You have demonstrated to me that your arguments cannot be trusted.
You can “Logical, captain” all you want. You’re still going to bat for a right wing populist who surrounds himself in white nationalist imagery.
I don’t have to argue that fascist are bad.
Fascists are the only ones who get to assume their position is true without ever bothering to prove it.
No, fascists are the right wing populists who appeal to violent authority to subjugate marginalized persons in attempts to reacquire a fictitious idealized past they have rationalized as stolen from them by these already disempowered groups.
If you’re asking me to prove fascism is bad, you’re doing to work of fascists.
I’m asking you to respect the 4th, 5th, 6th amendments, which require proof of guilt before condemnation. If you can’t even recognize the meaning and necessity of “presumption of innocence” and “rights of the accused”, you don’t get to lecture me on “fascism”.
Hint: the subject of this article is “the accused”.