RADICAL RIGHT The Very Real Threat Of Extremism

[WillowTree]

This is how it begins, the collectivists in charge are setting the stage to justify the oppression of those that don't willingly want to get with their utopian program. First shot across the bow is to attempt to build a connection between those with conservative or libertarian philosphies and extremist nutjobs like white supremist groups and armed militias, they already tried to actively implement such notions in the state of Missouri.

Of course the faithful left wing robots happily spread the message, since they don't really care about the suppression of ideas unless it's their ideas that are the ones being suppressed.

Same is true of the rightwings ... not difference here.

Uh NO... The same is NOT TRUE of the right... and as such there is a VAST DISTINCTION.

Just smile and nod at the wise Judge Stradler.. she know not!

 

[WillowTree]

As I posted in another thread yesterday and in all sincerety the word "liberal" has about as much meaning to todays Democratic party as the ABA does to the NBA. The very definition of a liberal is to wish a lack of "controls" so who then are the real conservatives? The facts are "extremists" are going to be found in all walks of life. Anyone who would judge an entire group of people based on the actions of someone who happens to act out in a irrational manner are themselves irrational.

And again I point out we have for our examples the BOARD members from here that are left of center AND are Democrats all rushing to DEFEND Letterman. We know from this selection that, as far as I can tell, only Ravi chose not to find some way to defend the actions and the words of Letterman and almost universally the excuse is cause it just doesn't matter or cause palin is fair game.

Now ask those SAME leftoids if attacking Obama's children is fair game?

that was the first day, the second day Ravi did in fact reverse herself and came out swinging in defense of devilish dave!

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Same is true of the rightwings ... not difference here.

Uh NO... The same is NOT TRUE of the right... and as such there is a VAST DISTINCTION.

Just smile and nod at the wise Judge Stradler.. she know not!

Ahhh... yes; we must recognize the inherent wisdom in those sufficiently enlightened to be half right and half wrong in all things...

You are wise beyond all measure Master...

 

[Navy1960]

As I posted in another thread yesterday and in all sincerety the word "liberal" has about as much meaning to todays Democratic party as the ABA does to the NBA. The very definition of a liberal is to wish a lack of "controls" so who then are the real conservatives? The facts are "extremists" are going to be found in all walks of life. Anyone who would judge an entire group of people based on the actions of someone who happens to act out in a irrational manner are themselves irrational.

words matter,, word associations matter.. reading what liberals write today, the things they tolerate, the tactics they use for attack? I associate Liberal with hate and with radical, and with fear mongering!

Do you know Willow my daughter is a quote "liberal" and I don't consider her hate filled or for that matter someone who promotes fear,confused yes !! *laughs*. I love the little brat to death, and I feel she like many other so called "liberals" in their zeal for change sometimes don't understand the change they seek has been tried many times and has failed many times, so is not change at all. I for one am not willing to condemn an entire group of people simply for their beliefs based on the actions of some worthless pile of human slime. I do however, see your point Willow, and sometimes see that other people would make that leap simply based on his actions and condemn me for mine. Doesn't matter much because the funny thing is I actually have seen first hand the end result the systems of Govt. that some of these so called liberals tout here daily and just say to myself "be careful what you wish for, you may just get it"

 

[STAND4LIBERTY]

This is how it begins, the collectivists in charge are setting the stage to justify the oppression of those that don't willingly want to get with their utopian program. First shot across the bow is to attempt to build a connection between those with conservative or libertarian philosphies and extremist nutjobs like white supremist groups and armed militias, they already tried to actively implement such notions in the state of Missouri.

Of course the faithful left wing robots happily spread the message, since they don't really care about the suppression of ideas unless it's their ideas that are the ones being suppressed.

Same is true of the rightwings ... not difference here.

Not in my experience, I can't think of any real conservatives that advocate the suppression of ideas, even ones they don't happen to agree with, although there are many self styled, faux conservatives that adopt the tactics of the left, most of them are about as conservative as the left is liberal, meaning not at all.

 

[L.K.Eder]

This is how it begins, the collectivists in charge are setting the stage to justify the oppression of those that don't willingly want to get with their utopian program. First shot across the bow is to attempt to build a connection between those with conservative or libertarian philosphies and extremist nutjobs like white supremist groups and armed militias, they already tried to actively implement such notions in the state of Missouri.

Of course the faithful left wing robots happily spread the message, since they don't really care about the suppression of ideas unless it's their ideas that are the ones being suppressed.

Same is true of the rightwings ... not difference here.

Not in my experience, I can't think of any real conservatives that advocate the suppression of ideas, even ones they don't happen to agree with, although there are many self styled, faux conservatives that adopt the tactics of the left, most of them are about as conservative as the left is liberal, meaning not at all.

guess what, i never met a TRUE scotsman either.

 

[Oddball]

This is how it begins, the collectivists in charge are setting the stage to justify the oppression of those that don't willingly want to get with their utopian program. First shot across the bow is to attempt to build a connection between those with conservative or libertarian philosphies and extremist nutjobs like white supremist groups and armed militias, they already tried to actively implement such notions in the state of Missouri.

Of course the faithful left wing robots happily spread the message, since they don't really care about the suppression of ideas unless it's their ideas that are the ones being suppressed.

Same is true of the rightwings ... not difference here.

Not in my experience, I can't think of any real conservatives that advocate the suppression of ideas, even ones they don't happen to agree with, although there are many self styled, faux conservatives that adopt the tactics of the left, most of them are about as conservative as the left is liberal, meaning not at all.

Have we forgotten about those who have questioned military interventionism and nation building being disparaged as "blame America firsters", or those who believe things like the USAPATRIOT act to be a gross overreach as being "terrorist enablers"??

"You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists"

Same shit...Different bull.

 

[eots]

Yesterday's tragic shooting at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC, by an "88-year-old white supremacist," is the latest in a string of right-wing extremist attacks. The number of hate groups such as the "Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, racist skinheads and Black separatists" operating in the United States is at an all-time high, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). Moreover, gun purchases since President Obama's election surged. However, when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) declassified a report "detailing potential increases in right-wing extremism" in April, right-wing commentators and Republican politicians decried the report as a politically motivated attack on all conservatives. They claimed that "the Obama administration is targeting conservatives and others simply because they disagree with administration policies and proposals." Ignoring that the report -- like a similar one describing the threat of left-wing extremists -- was commissioned by the Bush administration, conservatives called for the resignation of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano. Media Matters Action Fund's Matt Finkelstein asks, "Will Republicans admit that their partisan 'outrage' was misplaced?"

A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE: The declassified DHS report warned, "Rightwing 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." The report further warned, "The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment." This description reflected recent extremist violence, including the July 2008 shooting spree in a Knoxville church "because of its liberal teachings," a thwarted attempt to assassinate Obama in October by two neo-Nazi skinheads, and "a racially motivated rape and murder spree in Brockton, MA" by a 22-year-old white supremacist the "day after Barack Obama was inaugurated." Since the report was issued last April, the trail of death has continued. "We have seen not only the murder of an abortion physician by a member of the radical right, but the murders of five law enforcement officers -- three police officers in Pittsburgh, two sheriff's deputies in Florida by radical right-wing extremists," SPLC's Mark Potok told CNN. "It's really been quite an extraordinary period." The Pittsburgh shooter "feared the Obama administration was poised to ban guns," and the Florida killer was "severely disturbed that Barack Obama had been elected President." In an incident earlier this month, a "lone wolf" American Muslim extremist "shot and killed Army Pvt. William Long" outside a Little Rock, AR, mall in anger over the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

CONSERVATIVES VS. EXTREMISTS: Conservative politicians led the attack on the DHS report. Both House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) called it "offensive." Others went further: Gun advocate Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) claimed "the report has no intelligence value and only serves to blur our constitutional protections, such as the Second Amendment," and Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) argued that "it looks like the extremists are those running the DHS." "What is the Department of Homeland Security calling us now?" Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) asked at an April 15 tea party protest. "Extremists? Well, give me a button." "Now if you disagree with that liberal path that President Obama's taken the country down," Fox News' Sean Hannity claimed, "you may soon catch the attention of the Department of Homeland Security." Texas Rep. John Carter (R-TX), after demanding Napolitano's firing on the House floor, told Politico, "Singling out political opponents for working against the ruling party is precisely the tactic of every tyrannical government from Red China to Venezuela." As Mother Jones's James Ridgeway observed, "Conservatives haven't been branded dangerous extremists by DHS or the Obama administration; they've branded themselves."
http://zed.techprogress.org:8080/mysite/pr/2009/06/pr20090611/index.html

a couple of goofs shoot..... a couple of people...it happens ....EVERYDAY !!!
mostly with young drug dealers...selling drugs for PROFIT...so i guess that makes them right wing....or they would just share their drugs for FREE !

 

[Navy1960]

As I posted in another thread yesterday and in all sincerety the word "liberal" has about as much meaning to todays Democratic party as the ABA does to the NBA. The very definition of a liberal is to wish a lack of "controls" so who then are the real conservatives? The facts are "extremists" are going to be found in all walks of life. Anyone who would judge an entire group of people based on the actions of someone who happens to act out in a irrational manner are themselves irrational.

And again I point out we have for our examples the BOARD members from here that are left of center AND are Democrats all rushing to DEFEND Letterman. We know from this selection that, as far as I can tell, only Ravi chose not to find some way to defend the actions and the words of Letterman and almost universally the excuse is cause it just doesn't matter or cause palin is fair game.

Now ask those SAME leftoids if attacking Obama's children is fair game?

Gunny, I don't think my post is in disagreement with you at all. I was pointing out though that when someone , anyone condemns a group of people and labels them "extremists" based on the actions of some shi*bag then then it's being a little shortsighted. One of the reasons I posted the word "liberal" up there is because, I think that most of todays liberals are sort of confused as to what that actually means. At least in terms of wanting the Govt. to run things and this "group think" mentality. so I don't think we are too far apart on this one.

 

[KittenKoder]

This is how it begins, the collectivists in charge are setting the stage to justify the oppression of those that don't willingly want to get with their utopian program. First shot across the bow is to attempt to build a connection between those with conservative or libertarian philosphies and extremist nutjobs like white supremist groups and armed militias, they already tried to actively implement such notions in the state of Missouri.

Of course the faithful left wing robots happily spread the message, since they don't really care about the suppression of ideas unless it's their ideas that are the ones being suppressed.

Same is true of the rightwings ... not difference here.

Uh NO... The same is NOT TRUE of the right... and as such there is a VAST DISTINCTION.

Really? Your posts don't look any different from left wingnuts, just different names is all.

 

[WillowTree]

As I posted in another thread yesterday and in all sincerety the word "liberal" has about as much meaning to todays Democratic party as the ABA does to the NBA. The very definition of a liberal is to wish a lack of "controls" so who then are the real conservatives? The facts are "extremists" are going to be found in all walks of life. Anyone who would judge an entire group of people based on the actions of someone who happens to act out in a irrational manner are themselves irrational.

words matter,, word associations matter.. reading what liberals write today, the things they tolerate, the tactics they use for attack? I associate Liberal with hate and with radical, and with fear mongering!

Do you know Willow my daughter is a quote "liberal" and I don't consider her hate filled or for that matter someone who promotes fear,confused yes !! *laughs*. I love the little brat to death, and I feel she like many other so called "liberals" in their zeal for change sometimes don't understand the change they seek has been tried many times and has failed many times, so is not change at all. I for one am not willing to condemn an entire group of people simply for their beliefs based on the actions of some worthless pile of human slime. I do however, see your point Willow, and sometimes see that other people would make that leap simply based on his actions and condemn me for mine. Doesn't matter much because the funny thing is I actually have seen first hand the end result the systems of Govt. that some of these so called liberals tout here daily and just say to myself "be careful what you wish for, you may just get it"

Hello? Are you listening??? I said based on! Now if there are any that don't fit the description I gave,, they don't frequent this board..

 

[STAND4LIBERTY]

Same is true of the rightwings ... not difference here.

Not in my experience, I can't think of any real conservatives that advocate the suppression of ideas, even ones they don't happen to agree with, although there are many self styled, faux conservatives that adopt the tactics of the left, most of them are about as conservative as the left is liberal, meaning not at all.

Have we forgotten about those who have questioned military interventionism and nation building being disparaged as "blame America firsters", or those who believe things like the USAPATRIOT act to be a gross overreach as being "terrorist enablers"??

"You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists"

Same shit...Different bull.

I distinctly remember a true ("paleo") conservative that was highly critical of all that nonsense.. namely Pat Buchannan (read: "Where the right Went Wrong" or his many op-eds in "The American Conservative" Magazine). Personally I don't consider the various mutations of statism that find it poltically expediate to label themselves as "conservative" (neocons, "compassionate conservatives", "social conservatives") as conservative .. for the most part they only differ from the collectivists on the left in their rheotric, their methods and core beliefs (power at any cost) are essentially the same. Would Ronald Reagan have bought into this nonsense, how about Taft or Buckley? I would throw Goldwater on that list but he was in reality a classical liberal not a "paleo" conservative.

It's relative of course and realize that the bulk of Americans will not make such distinctions, however I don't buy into the bastardization of what the words conservative and liberal actually mean just because some that find them politically expediant want to do it. Think about some of those considered "leading" "conservative" voices in America today (Bush, Limbaugh, Colter, Cheney, McCain, Hannity, etc..,etc..,) and ask yourself what's really "conservative" about these folks.......

 

[Oddball]

I distinctly remember a true ("paleo") conservative that was highly critical of all that nonsense.. namely Pat Buchannan (read: "Where the right Went Wrong" or his many op-eds in "The American Conservative" Magazine). Personally I don't consider the various mutations of statism that find it poltically expediate to label themselves as "conservative" (neocons, "compassionate conservatives", "social conservatives") as conservative .. for the most part they only differ from the collectivists on the left in their rheotric, their methods and core beliefs (power at any cost) are essentially the same. Would Ronald Reagan have bought into this nonsense, how about Taft or Buckley? I would throw Goldwater on that list but he was in reality a classical liberal not a "paleo" conservative.

True...However most of today's "conservatives" (read: quasi-progressive Wilsonian neoconnies) also marginalize voices like Buchanan, when he doesn't toe the party line. Also remember that Buchanan is a fierce economic populist and trade isolationist.

It's relative of course and realize that the bulk of Americans will not make such distinctions, however I don't buy into the bastardization of what the words conservative and liberal actually mean just because some that find them politically expediant want to do it. Think about some of those considering "leading" "conservative" voices in America today (Bush, Limbaugh, Colter, Cheney, McCain, Hannity, etc..,etc..,) and ask yourself what's really "conservative" about these folks.......

I don't either....Yet those perceived to be on the "right" by so many engage in exactly the same tactics to squelch dissent.

Like George Wallace said, not a dime's worth of difference......

 

[Navy1960]

words matter,, word associations matter.. reading what liberals write today, the things they tolerate, the tactics they use for attack? I associate Liberal with hate and with radical, and with fear mongering!

Do you know Willow my daughter is a quote "liberal" and I don't consider her hate filled or for that matter someone who promotes fear,confused yes !! *laughs*. I love the little brat to death, and I feel she like many other so called "liberals" in their zeal for change sometimes don't understand the change they seek has been tried many times and has failed many times, so is not change at all. I for one am not willing to condemn an entire group of people simply for their beliefs based on the actions of some worthless pile of human slime. I do however, see your point Willow, and sometimes see that other people would make that leap simply based on his actions and condemn me for mine. Doesn't matter much because the funny thing is I actually have seen first hand the end result the systems of Govt. that some of these so called liberals tout here daily and just say to myself "be careful what you wish for, you may just get it"

Hello? Are you listening??? I said based on! Now if there are any that don't fit the description I gave,, they don't frequent this board..

Yes Willow I am, and I suggest you read my postings again, as they are directed and not intended to excuse anyone that would point a finger at another group and then label them as "extremists" because some nutjob happens to act out understand? It's one of the reasons my most used the words "based on"

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Same is true of the rightwings ... not difference here.

Not in my experience, I can't think of any real conservatives that advocate the suppression of ideas, even ones they don't happen to agree with, although there are many self styled, faux conservatives that adopt the tactics of the left, most of them are about as conservative as the left is liberal, meaning not at all.

Have we forgotten about those who have questioned military interventionism and nation building being disparaged as "blame America firsters", or those who believe things like the USAPATRIOT act to be a gross overreach as being "terrorist enablers"??

"You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists"

Same shit...Different bull.

No I haven't forgetten it... nor do I excuse them for NOT BEING WITH US.

"Nation Building?"

I suspect we're discussing Iraq...

Are ys suggesting we should not have invaded Iraq and Removed Hussein? (The former Iraqi President, not the new US President...)

Are ya suggesting that the US would be better off if we had just let Hussein continue to fester and promote international Islamic Terrorism? (Again, the former Iraqi President, not the new US President... who in an ironic turn of events, is tending towards doing the same thing...)

With regard to the USAPA... which provisions would you scrap? Be specific...

All of it?

Where if such were the case, we just pretend that islamic terrorists aren't REALLY a threat to the US... that they don't REALLY mean any harm and even if they do... they can't really do MUCH DAMAGE... after all, due to the superior engineering fo the WTC, which prevented ten times the death; the Muslims only managed to killed 3000 people in two hours on 9-11 and cost the US GDP a trillion bucks... 'That's NOTHING! Obama spent, or committed to spending 5 times that much in 4 MONTHS!

Let's discuss it...

 

[Oddball]

Thanx for proving my point.

 

[Yurt]

thats it, i'm locking my doors, barricading all windows, shutting myself in my safe cacoon called home and never coming out...

 

[Avatar4321]

Yesterday's tragic shooting at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC, by an "88-year-old white supremacist," is the latest in a string of right-wing extremist attacks. The number of hate groups such as the "Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, racist skinheads and Black separatists" operating in the United States is at an all-time high, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). Moreover, gun purchases since President Obama's election surged. However, when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) declassified a report "detailing potential increases in right-wing extremism" in April, right-wing commentators and Republican politicians decried the report as a politically motivated attack on all conservatives. They claimed that "the Obama administration is targeting conservatives and others simply because they disagree with administration policies and proposals." Ignoring that the report -- like a similar one describing the threat of left-wing extremists -- was commissioned by the Bush administration, conservatives called for the resignation of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano. Media Matters Action Fund's Matt Finkelstein asks, "Will Republicans admit that their partisan 'outrage' was misplaced?"

A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE: The declassified DHS report warned, "Rightwing 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." The report further warned, "The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment." This description reflected recent extremist violence, including the July 2008 shooting spree in a Knoxville church "because of its liberal teachings," a thwarted attempt to assassinate Obama in October by two neo-Nazi skinheads, and "a racially motivated rape and murder spree in Brockton, MA" by a 22-year-old white supremacist the "day after Barack Obama was inaugurated." Since the report was issued last April, the trail of death has continued. "We have seen not only the murder of an abortion physician by a member of the radical right, but the murders of five law enforcement officers -- three police officers in Pittsburgh, two sheriff's deputies in Florida by radical right-wing extremists," SPLC's Mark Potok told CNN. "It's really been quite an extraordinary period." The Pittsburgh shooter "feared the Obama administration was poised to ban guns," and the Florida killer was "severely disturbed that Barack Obama had been elected President." In an incident earlier this month, a "lone wolf" American Muslim extremist "shot and killed Army Pvt. William Long" outside a Little Rock, AR, mall in anger over the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

CONSERVATIVES VS. EXTREMISTS: Conservative politicians led the attack on the DHS report. Both House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) called it "offensive." Others went further: Gun advocate Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) claimed "the report has no intelligence value and only serves to blur our constitutional protections, such as the Second Amendment," and Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) argued that "it looks like the extremists are those running the DHS." "What is the Department of Homeland Security calling us now?" Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) asked at an April 15 tea party protest. "Extremists? Well, give me a button." "Now if you disagree with that liberal path that President Obama's taken the country down," Fox News' Sean Hannity claimed, "you may soon catch the attention of the Department of Homeland Security." Texas Rep. John Carter (R-TX), after demanding Napolitano's firing on the House floor, told Politico, "Singling out political opponents for working against the ruling party is precisely the tactic of every tyrannical government from Red China to Venezuela." As Mother Jones's James Ridgeway observed, "Conservatives haven't been branded dangerous extremists by DHS or the Obama administration; they've branded themselves."
http://zed.techprogress.org:8080/mysite/pr/2009/06/pr20090611/index.html

Major problem is the guy wasnt a right winger.

Next time you try to use murder for your political purposes, do some research. Then you wont look stupid.

 

[STAND4LIBERTY]

I don't either....Yet those perceived to be on the "right" by so many engage in exactly the same tactics to squelch dissent.

Like George Wallace said, not a dime's worth of difference......

You're right Dude, I guess we should divide the world into those whose only real principles consist of "GIVE IT TO ME IT'S MINE! AND IF YOU DON'T THINK SO YOU'RE EVIL" and the rest of us....

 

[Oddball]

Pretty much!!