President Trump officially quit the Paris Agreement on climate change and invoked American business interests as his main reason. But Exxon Mobil urged the President to stay in the deal, as did nearly 1100 companies that signed onto a statement to the president.

So, for fact's sake, here's why corporate America isn't on board with the president's decision.
So whos' side is the far right on.

Sorry Stale,

Yes, I may be confused, I do differentiate, perhaps wrongly, between a kid at a school throwing a sandwich, and a couple of hooded strangers seeming to assault a man in a street. Of course, he should have known immediately that they meant no harm, that what they were shoving in his face was harmless, and so he shouldn't have reacted as he did.

Is that what you are saying ? Have you tested these differences in anything like a 'pub test' ?

Nope, still can't see it. I still think you're an idiot :)

What to do ? You're perhaps too young or simple (or more likely, too biased) to understand the differences. Not much I can do about that. In the olden days, they would put a half-witted child out on a barren mountain-side. Perhaps your parents should have tried that. Bit late now.

So, end of.

Joe

runner,

Yes the left violence is growing, but it was always present. Earlier there was the example of the Hilton Hotel bomber who was left and a union member, and like some leftists here, couldn't bear the thought that others might be permitted to have a differing opinion.

As for the leftist who shot Republicans, the leftists would say that the gun did it. But the leftists would be chortling over the violence committed against their de-personalised adversaries as they see them.

The leftists spend a lot of their time trying to 'dirty up' their perceived adversaries and in conducting vengeful hate campaigns against anyone who disagrees with them. Many on OLO, myself included, are daily the subject/s of personal attack for having the temerity to check facts. The leftists are the sworn enemies of science.

OLO's leftist bots could never imagine Andrew Bolt and his family as being human too. They imagine him and unfortunately his family too by association with him, as political effigies to stick pins into, to abuse, smash and disfigure.

leoj

what you say is so true. The conservatives have a little of blame in that they have continued to fund organisations like the abc whose hatred and rhetoric towards anything decent has been plain to see for decades. From Islamic terrorist to every violent leftie organisation we have seen the abc/sbs as champions of. The conservatives have turned a blind eye. I have been very impressed by Malcolm Roberts lately.

SR,

I see that you are really struggling with the concept of assault.

1, There has to be actually be contact with the victim, from what I recall the sandwich didn't actually hit Juliar,
2, there has to be intent, and from what I recall it was never clarified as to whether Juliar was even the actual target. Secondly children have limited responsibility for their actions for obvious reasons, and this clearly wasn't premeditated.
3 Finally, the severity of the assault is determined by the damage or injury.

With the violent assault on Bolt the two thugs were masked as they clearly knew that what they were doing was criminal, they attacked him spraying in the face and body, and then swung a few punches at him. Not only was Bolt partially blinded at the time, but his expensive suit was ruined.

Only an imbecile couldn't tell the difference. If a man came up to Juliar and smashed a sandwich in her face, I would react the same way as when the pie was smashed in to Joyce's face. The outrage from the left when a junior school child lobbed a sarmi vaguely in Juliar's direction is a vast over reaction and should be mocked.

I also notice that police have now released a photo of one of the thugs, and it is only a matter of time before he is charged.

Dear Loudmouth,

There, there young fella. No need to get the knickers in a knot, you might do yourself a mischief.

Name calling is usually an excellent sign that you find yourself bereft of valid argument. That is fine, maturity will perhaps bring wisdom.

Perhaps if we approach this from a different angle you might not feel as threatened.

If the chap who sprayed the right-wing blowhard with shaving cream had instead chucked a sammo at him would you still regard that as assault? Conversely if the student had attempted to spray shaving cream on Ms Gillard would you still regard it as a harmless prank?

If you find this also to be too difficult I do have another way of assisting you.