![]() |
Riots at the Inauguration - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: Riots at the Inauguration (/Thread-Riots-at-the-Inauguration) |
RE: Riots at the Inauguration - GMDino - 01-27-2017 (01-27-2017, 05:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I was unaware Trump was running for POTUS when he made such comments. I too enjoy grabbing a VJ from time to time and I have kissed a girl or two without asking first. I'll be sure to bring that up if you want to be POTUS. ![]() RE: Riots at the Inauguration - bfine32 - 01-27-2017 (01-27-2017, 05:15 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: So because of that Obama = Trump? Im not following the logic. Not sure what you are trrying to say here, but I have seen Trump disavow any support he has gotten from hate groups. Are you saying folks should be critical of that? I would be curious as to what you considered an extreme outlier at the Woman's March. Most like one that was pro-life as it was made known that those types of women were not welcome. RE: Riots at the Inauguration - Belsnickel - 01-27-2017 (01-27-2017, 05:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Not sure what you are trrying to say here, but I have seen Trump disavow any support he has gotten from hate groups. Are you saying folks should be critical of that? That is a false narrative. A pro-life group was removed from the sponsors, but there were many pro-life marchers and there were no issues with them. http://stlouisreview.com/article/2017-01-26/pro-life-groups-felt Doesn't fit the narrative, though. And truthfully, I don't like that they removed them from the sponsorship and have yet to hear a good reason why other than they had other sponsors threaten to pull out. Which may or may not be true, but that was a rumor. RE: Riots at the Inauguration - bfine32 - 01-27-2017 (01-27-2017, 05:34 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: That is a false narrative. A pro-life group was removed from the sponsors, but there were many pro-life marchers and there were no issues with them. http://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/27/march-for-life-womens-march-anti-abortion-left-out/97145694/ We can trade links all night long and I'll bet you run out of them long before I do. You can say that making it known that folks that supported Pro Life were unwelcomed at the march to be a "false narrative" and I will say it is spot on. Guess we'll have to let folks to draw their own conclusion. Hopefully they can do so without bias. RE: Riots at the Inauguration - Belsnickel - 01-27-2017 (01-27-2017, 08:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: http://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/27/march-for-life-womens-march-anti-abortion-left-out/97145694/ Pro-life group sharing a positive experience being welcomed marching in an event your article claims they weren't welcome at. Just an interesting paradox. |