n0m,
I will try to respond to your comments/statements.
Dear Two,
“A politician does not have to condemn every act of violence.”
When something as significant and has the effect that these riots and lootings had on the general public, politicians should step up and at minimum voice their opposition to this, otherwise, it seems as if they are for it, not against it.
“1. When it happens on their watch.”
Yet a lot of Democratic politicians not only refused to condemn this, but they also backed these ‘peaceful protests’, But you can also add major politicians that are running for the highest political office in the country into the category that should have come out against it.
“2. When it comes from their demographic.”
Black violence, what’s that?
“Now, why does every political group have to come out and condemn all the violent unrest? Solving today’s conflicts, is a long and complex process. Why make it harder with endless condemnations that do not solve anything?”
Because rioting and hurting innocent citizens on such a grand scale should be condemned, protesting and hurting police officers should be condemned.
What is so hard to understand?