Rage on the Right

[Mott the Hoople]

So sayeth the libtard liberal left.

When was the last time a liberal political activist killed someone? There's a significant list of right wing conservative nuts doing just exactly that. Now I'm not going to make some sweeping generalization that they represent all conservatives, as that would be silly. They don't. However, I do hold right wing media outlets responsible, in part, for helping to push some of these nut jobs over the edge. They have also created a climate which attracts those on the fringe and gives them a sense of legitimacy, this to can result in violence. The right needs to tone down it's rhetoric or distance themselves publicly from their lunatic fringe.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

When was the last time a liberal political activist killed someone? There's a significant list of right wing conservative nuts doing just exactly that. Now I'm not going to make some sweeping generalization that they represent all conservatives, as that would be silly. They don't. However, I do hold right wing media outlets responsible, in part, for helping to push some of these nut jobs over the edge. They have also created a climate which attracts those on the fringe and gives them a sense of legitimacy, this to can result in violence. The right needs to tone down it's rhetoric or distance themselves publicly from their lunatic fringe.

So your contention is that no Liberal has ever killed anyone, over political or ideology differences; or that no Liberal group has ever promoted the need for someone to "die"??

 

[SmarterthanYou]

When was the last time a liberal political activist killed someone? There's a significant list of right wing conservative nuts doing just exactly that. Now I'm not going to make some sweeping generalization that they represent all conservatives, as that would be silly. They don't. However, I do hold right wing media outlets responsible, in part, for helping to push some of these nut jobs over the edge. They have also created a climate which attracts those on the fringe and gives them a sense of legitimacy, this to can result in violence. The right needs to tone down it's rhetoric or distance themselves publicly from their lunatic fringe.

liberals are non-violent? maybe you could then explain why the The U.S. Department of Education (ED) intends to purchase twenty-seven (27) REMINGTON BRAND MODEL 870 POLICE 12/14P MOD GRWC XS4 KXCS SF. RAMAC #24587 GAUGE: 12 BARREL: 14" - PARKERIZED CHOKE: MODIFIED SIGHTS: GHOST RING REAR WILSON COMBAT; FRONT - XS CONTOUR BEAD SIGHT?

 

[Mott the Hoople]

So your contention is that no Liberal has ever killed anyone, over political or ideology differences; or that no Liberal group has ever promoted the need for someone to "die"??

Nope. I never said that. You did. Don't put words in my mouth.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

liberals are non-violent? maybe you could then explain why the The U.S. Department of Education (ED) intends to purchase twenty-seven (27) REMINGTON BRAND MODEL 870 POLICE 12/14P MOD GRWC XS4 KXCS SF. RAMAC #24587 GAUGE: 12 BARREL: 14" - PARKERIZED CHOKE: MODIFIED SIGHTS: GHOST RING REAR WILSON COMBAT; FRONT - XS CONTOUR BEAD SIGHT?

Prom night in Mississippi?

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Nope. I never said that. You did. Don't put words in my mouth.

Then when you said this:

When was the last time a liberal political activist killed someone? There's a significant list of right wing conservative nuts doing just exactly that. Now I'm not going to make some sweeping generalization that they represent all conservatives, as that would be silly. They don't. However, I do hold right wing media outlets responsible, in part, for helping to push some of these nut jobs over the edge. They have also created a climate which attracts those on the fringe and gives them a sense of legitimacy, this to can result in violence. The right needs to tone down it's rhetoric or distance themselves publicly from their lunatic fringe.

You were just wanting to know the time and date??

What happened, did you lose your day planner??

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Then when you said this:



You were just wanting to know the time and date??

What happened, did you lose your day planner??

No I didn't say Liberals activist have never killed someone. Of course they have. I was asking, rhetorically, when was the last time a liberal extremist group had done so? Last time in this country was in the 70's that I remember.

There has always been more violance in this country from right wing extremist then the left wing variety nor am I advocating extremism of any variety.

But the fact is, most of the acts of political violence in this nation over the last 20 years have been commited by right wing extremist.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

No I didn't say Liberals activist have never killed someone. Of course they have. I was asking, rhetorically, when was the last time a liberal extremist group had done so? Last time in this country was in the 70's that I remember.

There has always been more violance in this country from right wing extremist then the left wing variety nor am I advocating extremism of any variety.

But the fact is, most of the acts of political violence in this nation over the last 20 years have been commited by right wing extremist.

So is "most" 51% or did you have other figures?
I do want to thank you for admitting that the Liberals do the same that you accuse the Right of doing.

 

[Timshel]

No I didn't say Liberals activist have never killed someone. Of course they have. I was asking, rhetorically, when was the last time a liberal extremist group had done so? Last time in this country was in the 70's that I remember.

There has always been more violance in this country from right wing extremist then the left wing variety nor am I advocating extremism of any variety.

But the fact is, most of the acts of political violence in this nation over the last 20 years have been commited by right wing extremist.

I would say the Unabomber was mostly a leftist. But the most important characteristic of these guys is not political identity.

 

[apple0154]

You left out the word "YET", as a close to your last sentence.

People who live in countries that have government medical have as long a life span as US citizens so not to worry.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Outside of your concerns about the Fed and fiat currency (even on that we differ somewhat) just about everything.

Oh yeah, because you're a globalist nincompoop.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

I've always maintained those in their formative years should not watch Soylent Green. It's available here, for free. Perhaps if you watch it now that you're older you'll understand it was fiction. Just a movie. Not true life.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1296155071179146825#

You left out the word "YET", as a close to your last sentence.

People who live in countries that have government medical have as long a life span as US citizens so not to worry.

Which has what to do with your comment, that I've included at the top of this post??

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Sorry to burst your bubble, but when one CAREFULLY analyzes the text and content from which the famous Wright quotes come from, they are NOT advocating murder, anarchy or any such thing...they are condemning the actions of a country and people that parallel stories from the Bible.

The Teabaggers are carrying on about socialist takeovers, death policies replacing insurance companies, etc., etc. That the language is parallel if not similar to what you find in more extreme groups is no one's fault but their own. What pisses you off is that you can't deny the language exists, but you dare not try to justify it to closely. So you just throw out distortions and dodges....remember, YOU stated that the SPLC was a hate organization. To date, you can't rationalize or prove or justify that statement. But that is the basis of your attempt to discredit them....which is pretty pathetic.

Death panels are real. They are the bureacrats who decide who will get what procedures. If they decide the procedure you need is not covered, or you just don't deserve it because you're not valuable to society, you will die. Hence, death panel. It's an accurate label, though you hate it's candor and accuracy.

Actually, what you are describing is what already exists within the health insurance community...just ask Potter or Dr. Peeno. THAT is what is real, a matter of fact and history...NOT what could be found or derived from the original single payer option or public option despite all the neocon rhetoric and distortions.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Damn, just when you display a glimpse of intelligence, you ruin it by regurgitating the failed neocon campaign tactic that won Obama the Presidency.

Look around on the threads, genius....Obama's performance thus far is not winning any points with me....but I won't just give a pass to lies and BS because of it.

you will, and you do.

You're a liar.....because we're not talking about your opinion, we're talking about what I've stated in no uncertain terms. You want to waste time and space diverting from the true topic here to go after me personally, be my guest....of course I'll just ignore you when convenient and respond when you stay on target/topic.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Bottom line: YOU stated the SPLC was a "hate group"...you said that with NO LOGICAL PROOF. You have stated that the SPLC article has no real bearing... I provided evidence from another legit source that contradicts that

As per their own criteria for defining a hate group. I don't actually consider them a hate group.

Then you shouldn't print misleading statements....makes things less confusing and saves time.

Other than your argument that they criticize Obama and did not criticize Bush, which has been shown to be wrong, you have provided absolutely nothing to show that this group, listed 48 times in the SPLC report, is a hate group.

Just so we are clear, which group are you SPECIFICALLY referring to, because (once again) you mis-characterize my argument (whether purposely or ignorantly, it's the second time...get it together man, because beyond your opinion you haven't proved this accusation).

Did the FBI agent talk about this group? If not, it is not relevant.

See above

 

[apple0154]

Which has what to do with your comment, that I've included at the top of this post??

It has to do with the nonsense of death panels.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Sorry to burst your bubble, but when one CAREFULLY analyzes the text and content from which the famous Wright quotes come from, they are NOT advocating murder, anarchy or any such thing...they are condemning the actions of a country and people that parallel stories from the Bible.

And this group has? Cite. Specify, because we've already discussed the group you previously mentioned and it's relationship. Essentially, you're comparing a church congregation to a political activist group or militia...that is flawed in many ways, as you well know, but may not want to admit.

Ayers did not just talk about committing acts of violence. Spare me this lame ass, OLD and LONG debunked neocon talking point. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_weatherman_connection.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
The Teabaggers are carrying on about socialist takeovers, death policies replacing insurance companies, etc., etc. That the language is parallel if not similar to what you find in more extreme groups is no one's fault but their own. What pisses you off is that you can't deny the language exists, but you dare not try to justify it to closely. So you just throw out distortions and dodges....remember, YOU stated that the SPLC was a hate organization. To date, you can't rationalize or prove or justify that statement. But that is the basis of your attempt to discredit them....which is pretty pathetic.

The left talked about fascist takeover, wars for oil, throwing grandma down a flight of stairs, etc., etc. That their language may parallel, if not similar to, what you find in more extreme hate groups is, likely, coincidence and unavoidable.

And how many "tea parties" did the "left" hold...and did they have speakers and participants and radio jocks echoing veiled threats, carrying weapons, making racial epithets and innuendos? Did Obama put out a Patriot Act? Invade Iraq on bogus evidence and lies? I don't know where you got the "grandma down a flight of stairs" quote. Nice try, but your comparison is weak.

For instance, just because nAHZi and I may agree that the Fed sucks does not mean I endorse any of the other ramblings of this lunatic. To pretend that it implies agreement is stupid. The stopped clock adage is appropriate here.

Ahhh, but it's not just Nazi's latching onto generalized grievences....it's teabaggers showing up with guns, carrying placards with racial slurs and innuendos, swearing the President isn't a citizen, he's a muslim terrorist sympathizer, making veiled threats...and this is echoed or excused by the like minded punditry. The parallel in the rhetoric is unmistakeable, and yet you have one group trying to pretend that words don't equal deeds.

Another example, the SPCA often sounds like PETA or even ALF, but they are clearly not the same.

No, the SPCA does NOT advocate criminal acts like ALF does (I don't remember PETA advocating arson)...it does NOT condone or excuse such. But as I pointed out previously, you have violent language and such being condone, excused and expressed by various "militias" and teabaggers and neocon, right wing punditry.

What pisses me off is your complete inconsistency and desire to silence all criticism of Obama and the Dems with ridiculous smears.

Now you're either delusional, lying or just not reading what I am writing. I advocated no such thing, nor did I allude to such. It is YOU who deems any negative publicity of groups you have an affinity for as an act of slander. To date, you cannot prove the SPLC is slandering anyone.

If you want to apply these same standards to the left at least you would be consistent, but I would still criticize that. Again, I think this distracts attention from the REAL hate groups.

Hey, you give me a "left" group that holds similar tea bag parties and such and I'm right there with the critique. Again, the "real" hate group language is being used by the "legitimate" crop of new militias and teabaggers and the like....the latter wanting to talk the talk and then wash their hands of those who walk the walk.

 

[Timshel]

Specify, because we've already discussed the group you previously mentioned and it's relationship. Essentially, you're comparing a church congregation to a political activist group or militia...that is flawed in many ways, as you well know, but may not want to admit.

We The People. How is it flawed to compare the two? Both are just groups coming together in some common cause. Both even deal with ideas and social issues.

Spare me this lame ass, OLD and LONG debunked neocon talking point. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_weatherman_connection.html

Yes, guilt by association is stupid. That is exactly my point. Then you go on with a bunching rambling and irrelevant nonsense in response to other examples of that point.

No, the SPCA does NOT advocate criminal acts like ALF does (I don't remember PETA advocating arson)...it does NOT condone or excuse such. But as I pointed out previously, you have violent language and such being condone, excused and expressed by various "militias" and teabaggers and neocon, right wing punditry.

Again, the point sales safely over your head. The SPCA and ALF often share some of the same interest but that does not mean they are in complete agreement on all issues and certainly not on tactics. That is my point. The same is true with different groups on the right.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

It has to do with the nonsense of death panels.

So you admit that there are plans to put them into place; thanks.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Specify, because we've already discussed the group you previously mentioned and it's relationship. Essentially, you're comparing a church congregation to a political activist group or militia...that is flawed in many ways, as you well know, but may not want to admit.

We The People. How is it flawed to compare the two? Both are just groups coming together in some common cause. Both even deal with ideas and social issues.

You're wrong, and here's why:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-inform...all-issues/2010/spring/midwifing-the-militias

Quote:
Spare me this lame ass, OLD and LONG debunked neocon talking point. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fac...onnection.html

Yes, guilt by association is stupid. That is exactly my point. Then you go on with a bunching rambling and irrelevant nonsense in response to other examples of that point.

You say this because you are unfamiliar with the research that SPLC has done on these groups...I've given you an eye opener above that you can try to justify or deny. The link I provided from the ex-FBI agent is no where near irrelevent or rambling and is quite specific. Couple this with what the SPLC provides, and one would have to TRY to avoid the correlations.

Quote:
No, the SPCA does NOT advocate criminal acts like ALF does (I don't remember PETA advocating arson)...it does NOT condone or excuse such. But as I pointed out previously, you have violent language and such being condone, excused and expressed by various "militias" and teabaggers and neocon, right wing punditry.

Again, the point sales safely over your head. The SPCA and ALF often share some of the same interest but that does not mean they are in complete agreement on all issues and certainly not on tactics. That is my point. The same is true with different groups on the right.

Again, you keep trying to exaggerate some common themes to the point of distortion. The SPLC points out the SIMILAR VIOLENT, ANARCHISTIC, THREATENING language between various "legit" and "criminal" militias. I pointed out that similar language can be found in teabag parties and in the pundit rhetoric (and some politicians, on occasion).

To date YOU CANNOT POINT TO ANY VIOLENT LANGUAGE IN THE SPCA THAT IS REPLICATED OR SIMILAR TO ALF'S. That is the major flaw in your reasoning which you stubbornly try to ignore. Let me repeat for clarification...it is the similarity in violent, anarchistic, threatening language that is the issue, NOT benign agreement in contrary politics.