Leftists Burn Berkeley To Protest Conservative LGBTQ Speaker

[Calvert DeForest]

As an aside, Trump has stated that he does not oppose the SCOTUS ruling on gay marriage.

[audiophile]

It now makes sense why Brietbart (after Andrews death) was such a H*** Trump supporter.

[Calvert DeForest]

It now makes sense why Brietbart (after Andrews death) was such a H*** Trump supporter.

If the justification of this MILO guy was their primary motivation, it's a lot of trouble to go to for the sake of one reporter. He must really be a "star" (I don't normally read Britebart, so I wouldn't know).

I tend to think it has more to do with Bannon lobbying himself into the White House.

[Deleted User 8570]

It now makes sense why Brietbart (after Andrews death) was such a H*** Trump supporter.

If the justification of this MILO guy was their primary motivation, it's a lot of trouble to go to for the sake of one reporter. He must really be a "star" (I don't normally read Britebart, so I wouldn't know).

I tend to think it has more to do with Bannon lobbying himself into the White House.

He's a white supremacist... that scares a lot of people to the point of thinking he must be stopped.. by being a nut he asks for the reaction he gets, especially when he provokes people. You use inflammatory rhetoric and all bets are off... it's human nature and nobody should be one whit surprised...

[Calvert DeForest]

It now makes sense why Brietbart (after Andrews death) was such a H*** Trump supporter.

If the justification of this MILO guy was their primary motivation, it's a lot of trouble to go to for the sake of one reporter. He must really be a "star" (I don't normally read Britebart, so I wouldn't know).

I tend to think it has more to do with Bannon lobbying himself into the White House.

He's a white supremacist... that scares a lot of people to the point of thinking he must be stopped.. by being a nut he asks for the reaction he gets, especially when he provokes people. You use inflammatory rhetoric and all bets are off... it's human nature and nobody should be one whit surprised...

If the intention is indeed to provoke a violent reaction, then any such reaction is playing right into their hands. You push people to that point, they respond accordingly, then you say "see, I told you so". Violent responses are not helping their cause. MLK understood that.

It's like an internet troll. The more you feed them, the longer they'll hang around. Once you cut off their food supply, they'll starve and eventually leave. The food supply for any media organization is money. Britebart does what it does because it translates to profits, pure and simple. If people avoid their site and the advertisers that support it, the profits will dry up. The most effective tool in the civil rights movement was the power of the boycott. A lot of segregated businesses in the south went under because African Americans refused to patronize them any longer.

What amazes me is that sites like Britebart tend to draw more attention from their detractors than they do from their supporters, and don't think that's not part of their overall business strategy. Any time you create controversy, people flock to it like gawkers to a car wreck. That's just human nature. Leaders like MLK understood that the key lies in overcoming our basic instincts and responding in a more thoughtful manner that defies instinct. Hey, if someone was talking smack about me, my first instinct might be to pop 'em....until I realize perhaps that's exactly what they want.

[Deleted User 8570]

It now makes sense why Brietbart (after Andrews death) was such a H*** Trump supporter.

If the justification of this MILO guy was their primary motivation, it's a lot of trouble to go to for the sake of one reporter. He must really be a "star" (I don't normally read Britebart, so I wouldn't know).

I tend to think it has more to do with Bannon lobbying himself into the White House.

He's a white supremacist... that scares a lot of people to the point of thinking he must be stopped.. by being a nut he asks for the reaction he gets, especially when he provokes people. You use inflammatory rhetoric and all bets are off... it's human nature and nobody should be one whit surprised...

If the intention is indeed to provoke a violent reaction, then any such reaction is playing right into their hands. You push people to that point, they respond accordingly, then you say "see, I told you so". Violent responses are not helping their cause. MLK understood that.

It's like an internet troll. The more you feed them, the longer they'll hang around. Once you cut off their food supply, they'll starve and eventually leave. The food supply for any media organization is money. Britebart does what it does because it translates to profits, pure and simple. If people avoid their site and the advertisers that support it, the profits will dry up. The most effective tool in the civil rights movement was the power of the boycott. A lot of segregated businesses in the south went under because African Americans refused to patronize them any longer.

What amazes me is that sites like Britebart tend to draw more attention from their detractors than they do from their supporters, and don't think that's not part of their overall business strategy. Any time you create controversy, people flock to it like gawkers to a car wreck. That's just human nature. Leaders like MLK understood that the key lies in overcoming our basic instincts and responding in a more thoughtful manner that defies instinct. Hey, if someone was talking smack about me, my first instinct might be to pop 'em....until I realize perhaps that's exactly what they want.

I fully agree with you... I think it took a lot of will on MLK's part to not react violently but he had strong convections to that method... I think terrorists work on the "see I told you so" model too... it's very underhanded...

[Calvert DeForest]

I fully agree with you... I think it took a lot of will on MLK's part to not react violently but he had strong convections to that method... I think terrorists work on the "see I told you so" model too... it's very underhanded...

Agreed! A strictly militaristic foreign policy does nothing but serve as a recruiting poster for the very people we're fighting against.