Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Political discussion thread
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedPolitical discussion thread

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 5859606162 303>
Author
Message
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 16 2009 at 05:18

Look out cartoon flood!




Edited by Slartibartfast - April 22 2009 at 05:52
Back to Top
horsewithteeth11 View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 09 2008
Location: Kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 24598
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 16 2009 at 13:48
I guess since I'm a fiscal conservative, I'm a terrorist now.LOL

You Might Be a "Radicalized Right-Wing Extremist" If…
Michelle Malkin
Wednesday, April 15, 2009

What and who exactly are President Obama's homeland security officials afraid of these days? If you are a member of an active conservative group that opposes abortion, favors strict immigration enforcement, lobbies to protect Second Amendment rights, protests big government, advocates federalism or represents veterans who believe in any of the above, the answer is: You.

Department of Homeland Security Sec. Janet Napolitano has turned her attention away from acts of Islamic jihad on American soil (which she now refers to as "man-caused disasters"). Instead, her department is sounding the alarm over an unquantified "resurgence" in "right-wing extremism activity." On April 7, DHS sent a nine-page warning memo to law enforcement offices across the country titled "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment."

The report includes a sweeping definition of the threat:

"Right-wing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

You cannot ignore the context or the timing of this DHS report. It's no small coincidence that Napolitano's agency disseminated the assessment just a week before the nationwide April 15 Tax Day Tea Party protests. The grassroots events organized by fiscal conservatives, independents, Libertarians and, yes, even some Blue Dog Democrats were fueled by the "current economic and political climate" of bipartisan profligate spending and endless taxpayer-funded bailouts. The growing success of the loose-knit movement has invited scorn, ridicule and fear-mongering from Obama's supporters. Liberal bloggers have likened the Tea Party movement to neo-Nazis, militias and even Weather Underground terrorists.

These attempts to demonize the Tea Party movement come on the heels of widespread conservative-bashing over the recent shooting sprees in Pittsburgh and Binghamton, N.Y. Taking Hillary Clinton's advice to "never waste a good crisis," left-wing pundits and analysts have blamed the tragedies on everyone from Rush Limbaugh to Fox News to the NRA.

The DHS spokespeople I talked to on Monday insisted that the report was not a politicized document and that DHS had done similar assessments on "left-wing extremism" in the past. But past domestic terrorism reports have always been very specific in identifying security threats -- such as the Animal Liberation Front and the Earth Liberation Front -- and very specific in identifying their methods and targets, including repeated physical harassment, arson and vandalism against pharmaceutical companies, farms, labs and university researchers.

By contrast, the Obama DHS report is an overarching indictment of conservatives. "Right-wing extremist chatter on the Internet continues to focus on the economy, the perceived loss of U.S. jobs in the manufacturing and construction sectors, and home foreclosures," the assessment warns. When I asked DHS spokeswoman Sara Kuban to explain who was responsible for this "extremist chatter," she could not and would not name names.

Moreover, the report relies on the work of the left-leaning Southern Poverty Law Center to stir anxiety over "disgruntled military veterans" -- a citation that gives us valuable insight into how DHS will define "hate-oriented" groups. The SPLC, you see, has designated the venerable American Legion a "hate group" for its stance on immigration enforcement. The report offers zero data, but states with an almost resentful attitude toward protected free speech: "Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policy generally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment, but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent."

"Potential to turn violent"? So did the hysterical fervor whipped up by Capitol Hill over the AIG bonuses, which prompted ugly death threats from across the country. No mention here, though. Not "right wing" enough. Nor will you see Obama DHS warnings to police and sheriff's departments about self-proclaimed bank terrorists such as Bruce Marks of the aggressive Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America or the mob activists of ACORN who have committed burglary, stormed corporate executives' homes and vowed to conduct "civil disobedience" by "any means necessary" in response to the "current economic and political climate."

If you can redefine dissenting opinion as "hate," you can brand your political opponents as "extremists" -- and you can marginalize electoral threats. "Antigovernment"? "Pro-enforcement"? "Disgruntled"? Feeling taxed enough already and "recruiting" and "radicalizing" your friends and neighbors through "chatter on the Internet"?

We are all right-wing extremists now. Welcome to the club.


Back to Top
crimhead View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: October 10 2006
Location: Missouri
Status: Offline
Points: 19236
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 16 2009 at 22:10
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Look out cartoon flood!




Let's just call Limbaugh what he is....a racist. First he cries that Obama wasn't doing enough in regards to the pirates then he says that Obama went to far killing black muslim kids. On top of that he refers to the pirates as 'merchant marines". What a comedian he is.
Back to Top
crimhead View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: October 10 2006
Location: Missouri
Status: Offline
Points: 19236
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 16 2009 at 22:13
Originally posted by birdwithteeth11 birdwithteeth11 wrote:

I guess since I'm a fiscal conservative, I'm a terrorist now.LOL

You Might Be a "Radicalized Right-Wing Extremist" If…
Michelle Malkin
Wednesday, April 15, 2009

What and who exactly are President Obama's homeland security officials afraid of these days? If you are a member of an active conservative group that opposes abortion, favors strict immigration enforcement, lobbies to protect Second Amendment rights, protests big government, advocates federalism or represents veterans who believe in any of the above, the answer is: You.

Department of Homeland Security Sec. Janet Napolitano has turned her attention away from acts of Islamic jihad on American soil (which she now refers to as "man-caused disasters"). Instead, her department is sounding the alarm over an unquantified "resurgence" in "right-wing extremism activity." On April 7, DHS sent a nine-page warning memo to law enforcement offices across the country titled "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment."

The report includes a sweeping definition of the threat:

"Right-wing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

You cannot ignore the context or the timing of this DHS report. It's no small coincidence that Napolitano's agency disseminated the assessment just a week before the nationwide April 15 Tax Day Tea Party protests. The grassroots events organized by fiscal conservatives, independents, Libertarians and, yes, even some Blue Dog Democrats were fueled by the "current economic and political climate" of bipartisan profligate spending and endless taxpayer-funded bailouts. The growing success of the loose-knit movement has invited scorn, ridicule and fear-mongering from Obama's supporters. Liberal bloggers have likened the Tea Party movement to neo-Nazis, militias and even Weather Underground terrorists.

These attempts to demonize the Tea Party movement come on the heels of widespread conservative-bashing over the recent shooting sprees in Pittsburgh and Binghamton, N.Y. Taking Hillary Clinton's advice to "never waste a good crisis," left-wing pundits and analysts have blamed the tragedies on everyone from Rush Limbaugh to Fox News to the NRA.

The DHS spokespeople I talked to on Monday insisted that the report was not a politicized document and that DHS had done similar assessments on "left-wing extremism" in the past. But past domestic terrorism reports have always been very specific in identifying security threats -- such as the Animal Liberation Front and the Earth Liberation Front -- and very specific in identifying their methods and targets, including repeated physical harassment, arson and vandalism against pharmaceutical companies, farms, labs and university researchers.

By contrast, the Obama DHS report is an overarching indictment of conservatives. "Right-wing extremist chatter on the Internet continues to focus on the economy, the perceived loss of U.S. jobs in the manufacturing and construction sectors, and home foreclosures," the assessment warns. When I asked DHS spokeswoman Sara Kuban to explain who was responsible for this "extremist chatter," she could not and would not name names.

Moreover, the report relies on the work of the left-leaning Southern Poverty Law Center to stir anxiety over "disgruntled military veterans" -- a citation that gives us valuable insight into how DHS will define "hate-oriented" groups. The SPLC, you see, has designated the venerable American Legion a "hate group" for its stance on immigration enforcement. The report offers zero data, but states with an almost resentful attitude toward protected free speech: "Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policy generally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment, but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent."

"Potential to turn violent"? So did the hysterical fervor whipped up by Capitol Hill over the AIG bonuses, which prompted ugly death threats from across the country. No mention here, though. Not "right wing" enough. Nor will you see Obama DHS warnings to police and sheriff's departments about self-proclaimed bank terrorists such as Bruce Marks of the aggressive Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America or the mob activists of ACORN who have committed burglary, stormed corporate executives' homes and vowed to conduct "civil disobedience" by "any means necessary" in response to the "current economic and political climate."

If you can redefine dissenting opinion as "hate," you can brand your political opponents as "extremists" -- and you can marginalize electoral threats. "Antigovernment"? "Pro-enforcement"? "Disgruntled"? Feeling taxed enough already and "recruiting" and "radicalizing" your friends and neighbors through "chatter on the Internet"?

We are all right-wing extremists now. Welcome to the club.




Michelle Malkin = Ann Coulter Light

Less calories, less filling.
Back to Top
Neurotarkus View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 18 2009
Location: Negativland
Status: Offline
Points: 2970
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 18 2009 at 22:59
David Gilmour for President 2012
Back to Top
crimhead View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: October 10 2006
Location: Missouri
Status: Offline
Points: 19236
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 20 2009 at 12:37
Originally posted by Neurotarkus Neurotarkus wrote:

David Gilmour for President 2012


of what? Great Britain?
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 20 2009 at 14:51
Originally posted by crimhead crimhead wrote:

Originally posted by birdwithteeth11 birdwithteeth11 wrote:

I guess since I'm a fiscal conservative, I'm a terrorist now.LOL

You Might Be a "Radicalized Right-Wing Extremist" If…
Michelle Malkin



Michelle Malkin = Ann Coulter Light

Less calories, less filling.


Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter light, really? LOL

The Chilling Rise of Right-Wing Hate in America

 Link

 Excerpt:
The radical right wingers that were so prevalent during the Clinton administration went dormant during the Bush years.
Now irresponsible sociopaths like Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck and Rep. Michele Bachmann are recklessly stoking
the fires of paranoid rightwing victimization, I fear we will face countless tragedies like what just went on in PittsburgH.

When right wing radicals get upset, they either shoot lots of people and or pull a Timothy McVeigh.

This is what Glenn Beck’s citizen army looks like. People like Michelle Malkin fantasize about citizens rising up against
the (Democratic) state. They stoke their followers’ paranoia with bullsh*t that, mostly, they know is bullsh*t, for ratings
and a shot at political traction.

How many people have to die before the right-wing media acknowledges their complicity in these kinds of attacks
and voluntarily dials back their inflammatory rhetoric and incitements to violence?  Sadly, I think it's going to take a
long time for that to happen -- and a lot more innocent people are going to die in the interim. I guess this is what
"America First" means for the radical right under an Obama presidency.


By the way, seconds for Gilmore for first president of Great Britain!!!




Edited by Slartibartfast - April 22 2009 at 05:52
Back to Top
horsewithteeth11 View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 09 2008
Location: Kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 24598
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 20 2009 at 15:18
I also enjoyed the comparison Ms. Napolitano made between veterans and Timothy McVeigh.

*Falls out of chair from laughter*

Pfff. Please. How many American veterans go around blowing up buildings? They're the group with the lowest crime rate on average.

And I don't see tea party protesters walking around murdering people in broad daylight either. And both sides stoke the fire their followers roast in for political ratings and face time (part of the reason I can't stand Republicans or Democrats anymore).

Also, I thought you Democrats were supposed to be all about First Amendment rights. I guess when someone disagrees with you, they're just "radical right-wing extremists".

Maybe we should be more worried about people like terrorists. Oh, I'm sorry. I mean "man-made disasters".
Back to Top
crimhead View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: October 10 2006
Location: Missouri
Status: Offline
Points: 19236
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 20 2009 at 17:46
Originally posted by birdwithteeth11 birdwithteeth11 wrote:

I
Also, I thought you Democrats were supposed to be all about First Amendment rights. I guess when someone disagrees with you, they're just "radical right-wing extremists".
 
I don't have any problem whatsoever with someone voicing their views and opinions. I find it ironic when you use those words to disagree and or show their invalidity or falsehoods you are termed a smear merchant or a bomb thrower by those conservatives.
 
I would never call anyone a radical right-wing extremist unless they were tied to a group whose activities are such ie:KKK.
 
 
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 20 2009 at 18:49
Originally posted by birdwithteeth11 birdwithteeth11 wrote:

I also enjoyed the comparison Ms. Napolitano made between veterans and Timothy McVeigh.

*Falls out of chair from laughter*

Pfff. Please. How many American veterans go around blowing up buildings? They're the group with the lowest crime rate on average.

And I don't see tea party protesters walking around murdering people in broad daylight either. And both sides stoke the fire their followers roast in for political ratings and face time (part of the reason I can't stand Republicans or Democrats anymore).

Also, I thought you Democrats were supposed to be all about First Amendment rights. I guess when someone disagrees with you, they're just "radical right-wing extremists".

Maybe we should be more worried about people like terrorists. Oh, I'm sorry. I mean "man-made disasters".

Hey, you know I'm usually good for a laugh, however I totally missed "the comparison Ms. Napolitano made between veterans and Timothy McVeigh", perhaps you'd like to share that with us. 

McVeigh's problem wasn't that he was a veteran but more that he was a right wing wacko no doubt encouraged by other right wing wackos some of whom had radio shows.  Now they have Fox News, Angryaieee!!!!

So, I'm all for free speech, but there is that whole "falsely shouting fire in a theater" thing, which is precisely what many right wing blowhards are doing.  And by the way, McVeigh was a domestic terrorist.  They might just be the most the dangerous because they're already here and often blend in very well with the rest of us.

The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. [...] The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.  Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.


Edited by Slartibartfast - April 22 2009 at 05:53
Back to Top
Failcore View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 27 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 4625
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 21 2009 at 01:18
Georgia (or at least Atlanta) must be more different from Alabama than I imagined. Down here, there are so many off the charts Conservatives, that if even a tenth of a tenth became domestic terrorists, the whole state would already be in flames. Really, I've seen pretty equal paranoia and hate on both sides. In general people think they are right, so they like to get together in big groups and call other people wrong. If you think this is limited to just conservatives you are seriously deluding yourself.  But that's ok, because people are also masters at that. Hell, if we didn't each see the world through our individual kaleidoscopes, but instead saw the truth, we might go insane. Too much knowledge can be ultimately paralyzing. Or maybe it might eventually bring clarity, if you go far enough. Perhaps, that's what it's like to be God: to see things as they are rather than how you think the are.

But I digress, whether or not it's necessary for society, partisan politics still pisses me right the f**k off.


Edited by Deathrabbit - April 21 2009 at 01:22
Back to Top
Henry Plainview View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 21 2009 at 01:28
I always regret reading this thread. ;-)
if you own a sodastream i hate you
Back to Top
Failcore View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 27 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 4625
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 21 2009 at 01:29
I'm sorry if I gave you chagrin.
Back to Top
horsewithteeth11 View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 09 2008
Location: Kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 24598
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 21 2009 at 18:42
Originally posted by Deathrabbit Deathrabbit wrote:



But I digress, whether or not it's necessary for society, partisan politics still pisses me right the f**k off.

That.
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 22 2009 at 05:51
Is there such a thing as non-partisan politics?


This is good:

http://www.apoliticus.com/2009/04/political-pundit-poll-who/

Political Poll: Which Pundit Would Become Emergency Survival Meat First?

Posted by Apoliticus Editors on 4/19/09 • Categorized as Political Polls

Hmm...do I go for the meatiest or the most talkative first?

Hmm...do I go for the meatiest or the most talkative first?

In our last poll, 80% of you said that what you missed the most about George W. was his incident-prone press conferences. You simply never knew when there might be an Inshoegency.

Now the Apoliticus editors have another serious question for you: If you were in a plane crash in the mountains of Argentina with every major political pundit, which one would you choose to be eat first?LOL




Edited by Slartibartfast - April 22 2009 at 06:09
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 22 2009 at 20:10
Mr. Bungle got mentioned tonight in the opening segment on the Rachel Maddow show on MSNBC.  She was doing a segment on disambiguation and was using a search Vanity Fair on Wikipedia as an example.  I just looked up Wiki's entry "Vanity Fair is a Jazz/Rock song by the alternative group Mr. Bungle. The song is about Self-Castration, in the lyrics "Bless the eunuch/And the Skoptsi", the Skoptsi being a religious sect in Russia that practiced self-castration." LOL
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
Failcore View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 27 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 4625
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 22 2009 at 21:45
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Is there such a thing as non-partisan politics?


This is good:

http://www.apoliticus.com/2009/04/political-pundit-poll-who/

Political Poll: Which Pundit Would Become Emergency Survival Meat First?

Posted by Apoliticus Editors on 4/19/09 • Categorized as Political Polls

Hmm...do I go for the meatiest or the most talkative first?

Hmm...do I go for the meatiest or the most talkative first?

In our last poll, 80% of you said that what you missed the most about George W. was his incident-prone press conferences. You simply never knew when there might be an Inshoegency.

Now the Apoliticus editors have another serious question for you: If you were in a plane crash in the mountains of Argentina with every major political pundit, which one would you choose to be eat first?LOL





The US navy one is funny. The rest:
Back to Top
Henry Plainview View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 22 2009 at 21:51
Originally posted by Deathrabbit Deathrabbit wrote:

The US navy one is funny. The rest:
Welcome to Slartibartfast's posts. :P
if you own a sodastream i hate you
Back to Top
Padraic View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 22 2009 at 22:08
http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2009/20090401.jpg
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 23 2009 at 06:32
^^^^^^Good one. LOL
 
I kinda thought the US Navy one would go over well.
 
How about this?:

CIA Also Repeatedly Waterboarded Batman Villain: ‘Pruneface’

By Don Davis

“I ACTUALLY STARTED OUT AS THE ‘RIDDLER,’ BUT THEY WERE BECOMING PRETTY FRUSTRATED WITH THE ANSWERS THEY WERE GETTING FROM ME.”

Story at Emptywheel.



Speaking of Facepalm:



Edited by Slartibartfast - April 23 2009 at 07:15
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 5859606162 303>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.430 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.