I can't wait until the news says that this was inappropriate, so we can do a supercut of homeless people shitting on the screet in front of businesses where the news said nothing.
This is what all the whiners in the comments don’t understand. It is only wrong to do IF it was something that the left doesn’t permit and excuse from their degenerates. San Francisco is literally covered in homeless shit—but not in the rich liberal neighborhoods.
Pointing out hypocrisy has value. Even if the methods are not “upstanding.” Do we forget that virtually everything Trump said in 2015-16 was called unprecedented and inappropriate?
This isn't true. For example, it isn't only wrong to torch inner city apartments if other side doesn't permit their rioters to do it. It is objectively wrong regardless.
Of course it is hypocritical for folks like Lori Lightfoot to allow riots but not in her own neighborhood. Pointing it out is fine. However, being the perpetrator isn't. Looting upscale Chicago neighborhoods to protest BLM looting of poor ones is still looting.
This pooper is a nuisance at best. There is no permanent damage done, no destruction of property, no person is being harmed and it is pointing out the hypocrisy of a person like Pelosi who uses draconian and authoritative rules to control the population, rules that she herself doesn't have to live by and isn't affected by in the least.
I share your contempt for dual standards, but I disagree with your reasoning here.
The issue isn't whether no long-term harm is happening. BLM used the same argument when they looted businesses, assuming that insurance would pay for damages. They were of course wrong in this, but what if they had been right? It still doesn't make the looting right.
I agree and disagree. There is a difference between arson and looting compared to taking a dump. No long term harm is done.
I don’t agree people should be allowed to shit in the street. BUT, if they are being allowed to do so, then they should be allowed to shit in ANY street.
I'm still thinking that the two can he compared, though. This comes down to natural law. The state, or one political side of it, doesn't make morality, and we shouldn't act like they do. If it shouldn't be allowed it shouldn't be allowed.
I can't wait until the news says that this was inappropriate, so we can do a supercut of homeless people shitting on the screet in front of businesses where the news said nothing.
I see your use of the word screet & I approve.
Dinner AND a show!
Kek
That wasn't in sleepless in Seattle.
Mr. Hanx was though. Who knows what he was doing off set.
Lol
He must be one of the nicer ones. Usually it's directed aimlessly on a sidewalk.
This is what all the whiners in the comments don’t understand. It is only wrong to do IF it was something that the left doesn’t permit and excuse from their degenerates. San Francisco is literally covered in homeless shit—but not in the rich liberal neighborhoods.
Pointing out hypocrisy has value. Even if the methods are not “upstanding.” Do we forget that virtually everything Trump said in 2015-16 was called unprecedented and inappropriate?
This isn't true. For example, it isn't only wrong to torch inner city apartments if other side doesn't permit their rioters to do it. It is objectively wrong regardless.
Of course it is hypocritical for folks like Lori Lightfoot to allow riots but not in her own neighborhood. Pointing it out is fine. However, being the perpetrator isn't. Looting upscale Chicago neighborhoods to protest BLM looting of poor ones is still looting.
This pooper is a nuisance at best. There is no permanent damage done, no destruction of property, no person is being harmed and it is pointing out the hypocrisy of a person like Pelosi who uses draconian and authoritative rules to control the population, rules that she herself doesn't have to live by and isn't affected by in the least.
It's a low bar, but it can be very effective.
I share your contempt for dual standards, but I disagree with your reasoning here.
The issue isn't whether no long-term harm is happening. BLM used the same argument when they looted businesses, assuming that insurance would pay for damages. They were of course wrong in this, but what if they had been right? It still doesn't make the looting right.
I agree and disagree. There is a difference between arson and looting compared to taking a dump. No long term harm is done.
I don’t agree people should be allowed to shit in the street. BUT, if they are being allowed to do so, then they should be allowed to shit in ANY street.
Thank you for the civil disagreement.
I'm still thinking that the two can he compared, though. This comes down to natural law. The state, or one political side of it, doesn't make morality, and we shouldn't act like they do. If it shouldn't be allowed it shouldn't be allowed.
Pelosi has a wall around her house
That's what I thought too but others say this really is her house. Which makes me wonder why this wasn't done above 9,000 already.
Who says she only has one?
"Deranged far-right white supremacist Qanon nazi Trump supporter commits bioterrorism against Nancy Pelosi at her own home" -- CNN probably