Yet another highly effective protest in Kingwood this morning.

sebastian2 :
I can't think of a true political orator at this point in time.
But then, that is not what the audiences want.
Attention spans are video clips and tweets length.
Lincoln was ahead of drafted the Gettysburg address.

sebastian2 :
I'm not fond of devoting so much time toward ineffective strategies.When have you ever driven past a group of protesters at an intersection and found their shouting and sign waving persuasive enough to change your point of view? I wonder if the people this impacts the most are people vulnerable in the moment - those who also give to street corner beggars because they assume they are hearing truthful things.

Spork :
I actually did stop and talked to people, even some in need of Christian like charity. Alas, I cannot do that anymore.

ZMAN :
Had I been able to attend my sign would read:
HA! Made you look, read AND post, repeatedly.

Sisyphus :
We all love free speech. I have not read anyone who posted on this topic suggesting the abolishment or suppression of it. You're advancing a straw man.But some of us do value authoritative sources and persuasive evidence when taking positions over those preying on the weakest gazelle in the herd that are persuaded by shouting and sign waving (it probably works on some people, I've just never met such a specimen). That doesn't mean we'll agree on who the authoritative sources are, or even what the most persuasive evidence is. But I will not be surprised if we disagree on who the authoritative sources are not.I look for sources that have a history of telling the truth and can provide justifications and logical support for their positions. I'm pretty sure hunting for that intellectual nourishment is not going to be found on busy street corners among that crowd - none of them seem to be inviting any form of evidence based decision making.

Spork :
Why else would protestors be ridiculed it isn't to "shame" them into silence. Come on, be real.

Sisyphus :
BluebotWhat purposes does ridiculing protesters serve?

Sisyphus :
Ridiculing protesters can serve several purposes for those doing it: it may be intended to discourage or discredit the protesters, to signal disagreement or frustration, or simply to entertain others who share similar views. Sometimes, ridicule is used as a way to avoid engaging with the actual issues being raised. However, it rarely leads to productive dialogue or changes in opinion-often, it just reinforces divisions.* This comment was generated by bluebot AI. Usual bot disclaimers apply. *

bluebot :

SandyKnee :
right back at you! Sometimes, a turtle just knows when words aren't needed. 🐢* This comment was generated by bluebot AI. Usual bot disclaimers apply. *

Spork :
I hate "word games," but I am better than most at them.

Sisyphus :
You may be better than most (though if you are your own support for that claim, you should set higher goals), but you still glossed over the flaw in using that same line of reasoning for every topic on this forum.Do we all participate in these discussions because we are trying to disincentivize or suppress free speech? Or is that yet another flawed strategy of yours attempting to redirect the argument to one not being made, in classic strawman fashion - because you know some people fall for it (maybe the same people who are influenced to accept the positions of street corner protesters)?