Domestic Right Wing Terrorists!

[FOTD]

Could it have anything to do with the fact that Obama's platform was "share the wealth" and what equals a socialisitic medical plan, which can easily be interpreted as trying to lead the way into a socialistic government?  And the fact that Communism was based on Socialism?  Now don't get me wrong, while I disagree with a lot of our Presidents plans, I don't think he is the equivelant to Hitlar, but that doesn't mean that those that think he is are racist.  After all, Hitler was the penical of White Supremacy, so those who look apon Hitler as a negative thing (yes, I am one of those) would be in effect agaisnt racism.

Your constant race baiting is getting to be a really old schtick.  Claiming everyone that is against someone of a minority is a racist is just idiotic.  So far, you seem to be the most racist member of this board that I have seen.

FOTD thought the discussion thread was about domestic terrorism. You seem to want to take the discussion down a notch to the healthcare issue. That is not a division defined by race.


This fight against hate is not race bait oriented. The rhetoric from the right is definitely idiotic and the big question remains: What are the leaders of the opposition doing to quell the hatred? Nothing. They let their entertainers and their GOPeers fan the flames. Those South Carolina GOPeers are the cream of the crop. Michele Bachman needs to be censored. Why did this hate talk not happen under Bush? Because, the hate was aimed, justifiably, towards the liars who led and their foolishness with regard to the handling of our economy.


FOTD will tell you that the domestic terrorists assemble their ideology through the belief they can get their cuntry back. Back to what? That old time religion? They fear their values have been lost. Guess what? Live with the change.

[custosnox]

Obtuse angle. Good luck with chiseling away at the errant foundations he's laid devil man.

Six months ago I did not believe racism played much of a role in anti-Obamania. At least not overtly. Now I am being converted. E-mails, conversations, bumper stickers, guests on Fox etc. have made me realize that it is a strong undercurrent. Still not mainstream, but certainly an aggravating factor.  Many people make a distinction between racism and discrimination. They may make disparaging, cynical, stereotypical remarks about minorities but strongly deny that they would ever discriminate against them. (Remember Seinfeld talking about gays? "Not that there's anything wrong with that")
But when the crowd thins and they talk openly, you see and hear the long held beliefs start to surface and you wonder just how fair and open minded the criticisms are.

I won't say that there aren't racist on the far right that their basis of opposition aren't those beliefs.  What I am saying is that the racism/discrimination also exists on the left and eveywhere in between. I am also saying that trying to play the race card at every possible opening does nothing more then give a generic answer to any opposition and promotes the vary thing that you are claiming is the problem.

A friend of mine recently confided to me her horror to hear her mom, who has a masters degree in the counseling field, exclaim that Obama was the anti-christ. Her minister in the Church of Christ had informed the congregation. She didn't know how to respond any more than I did when a close worker back in the Nixon years asserted that Kissinger was the anti-christ, followed by a secession of anti-christ figures culminating with "that one". Doesn't take much to be one apparently. These were smart, educated people. The one thing they seem to have in common is religion and southern location.

And this relates to racism how?  I know a guy that thinks every promonant political figure is the anti-christ.  He thought Bush was, now he thinks Obama is.  But then again, I am also of the belief that to be religious you have to step beyond logical thought, so not much can be placed into these arguments.

Notes off hand:

-sp. equivalent, Hitler, upon, against, pinnacle.

Everyone has a weakness, mine is spelling.  I have always been horrible at it, and add in my typo's, and you could come up with a large list of these throughout my posts.

-Share the wealth is not Obama's platform but a recurve of the wealth distribution was and is in order. That doesn't imply a change in economic systems as much as it does a recognition of a system that has been abused.

During his campaign he was quoted making the statement of "Share the wealth".  His opponents jumped on this to push the socialistic outlook of Obama.  I never said that this is what he was trying for, but what it was interpreted as this.

-Whether that medical plan is "socialistic" is arguable considering that it attempts to force everyone to participate rather than just those with good jobs. Sounds pretty fair to me. The single payer element would have given the customer a choice. Sounds pretty free market American to me.

Once again, I said could be interpreted.

-Communism and Socialism are not necessarily intertwined with each other. Denmark is Socialist but not Communist. A lot of countries (including ours) mix the elements.

But, as I said, Communism was based on Socialism.  I'm not trying to say that these people are correct in their assessment, only that it doesn't automatically make them racist because they have different views.

[custosnox]

FOTD thought the discussion thread was about domestic terrorism. You seem to want to take the discussion down a notch to the healthcare issue. That is not a division defined by race.


This fight against hate is not race bait oriented. The rhetoric from the right is definitely idiotic and the big question remains: What are the leaders of the opposition doing to quell the hatred? Nothing. They let their entertainers and their GOPeers fan the flames. Those South Carolina GOPeers are the cream of the crop. Michele Bachman needs to be censored. Why did this hate talk not happen under Bush? Because, the hate was aimed, justifiably, towards the liars who led and their foolishness with regard to the handling of our economy.


FOTD will tell you that the domestic terrorists assemble their ideology through the belief they can get their cuntry back. Back to what? That old time religion? They fear their values have been lost. Guess what? Live with the change.

A fight against hate is not race bait, but to claim that every issue is about race when there is no evidence to support the claims is.  There are those out there that are exactly what you claim, but that does not make all that oppose you or POTUS racist. 

[FOTD]

A fight against hate is not race bait, but to claim that every issue is about race when there is no evidence to support the claims is.  There are those out there that are exactly what you claim, but that does not make all that oppose you or POTUS racist. 

Claim every issue?

Health Care is a fight to keep the Health Care Mafia (Big Pharma and The Insurance Family and greedy Doctors abandoning their ethics) in check....the Economy was about the greed and Banksters....the lack of education is about privatization....church and government should be exclusive...where is race?

FOTD plays the race card when he can use it as back up to the stacked deck.... kinda like a wild card. But it's no joker as it speaks the truth about our history.

[custosnox]

FOTD plays the race card when he can use it as back up to the stacked deck.... kinda like a wild card. But it's no joker as it speaks the truth about our history.

Then how is it that you took an article about a killing over the abortion issue, and immediatly started turning it into a race issue?  First post.  Stop playing innocent, you know that your going to turn every issue you can into a race issue because that is what everything is about with you.  I think you need to start reading a little more Martin Luther King Jr, and a little less Don King.

[FOTD]

Then how is it that you took an article about a killing over the abortion issue, and immediatly started turning it into a race issue?  First post.  Stop playing innocent, you know that your going to turn every issue you can into a race issue because that is what everything is about with you.  I think you need to start reading a little more Martin Luther King Jr, and a little less Don King. I know I am uneducated on the subject and just hate you progressive types..

No. The first post is about inciting murder over the right to free choice. This form of Domestic Terrorism stems from not being able to accept the right of choice guaranteed by the constitution.

You don't understand the discussion difference between racism and race.

[custosnox]

No. The first post is about inciting murder over the right to free choice. This form of Domestic Terrorism stems from not being able to accept the right of choice guaranteed by the constitution.

As I said, a killing over the abortion issue.  That shouldn't even be a discussion of if the pro-choice crowd is right on the issue, or the pro-life crowd is right.  It's about the fact that someone on one side took their views to the point of taking the life of someone on the other (the fact that it was a pro-lifer is just an ironic point).  However, you made sure that before you ended your comments on the issue that you brought up the racists on the right.  Then you bring more race issues into the thread.  As to where this stems from, it comes from an individuals intollerance to others, which exists on both sides of the line. And I'm trying to figure out where in the constitution your guaranteed "choice".

You don't understand the discussion difference between racism and race.

rac⋅ism  /ˈreɪsɪzəm/  [rey-siz-uhm] 
–noun 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Without race, racism does not exist, so you cannot logically separate the two.

[waterboy]

I won't say that there aren't racist on the far right that their basis of opposition aren't those beliefs.  What I am saying is that the racism/discrimination also exists on the left and eveywhere in between. I am also saying that trying to play the race card at every possible opening does nothing more then give a generic answer to any opposition and promotes the vary thing that you are claiming is the problem.

Then we agree. Much of the opposition to Obama is based on racism throughout the political spectrum. I assert it is more religious and regionally based rather than left or right. "Playing the race card" is a useless phrase anymore. It is used as a generic answer to deny real and present racism. The sooner we face the fact that many of these baseless arguments being promoted at town halls and such are merely based on racism, southern stereotypes and manipulation by religious charlatans, the better off we'll be.

And this relates to racism how?  I know a guy that thinks every promonant political figure is the anti-christ.  He thought Bush was, now he thinks Obama is.  But then again, I am also of the belief that to be religious you have to step beyond logical thought, so not much can be placed into these arguments.

My point is that the masses are easily persuaded by this unholy triumvirate I just described and have been for a long time. Even when history is not on their side they keep falling for the same stuff over and over. No one is just going to come out and say, "hey, lets use our distrust of minorities, our basic racist tendencies and combine them with our fundamentalist religion and paint this black man as the anti-christ." It just naturally happens. They don't let their Christianity get in the way at all.

Everyone has a weakness, mine is spelling.  I have always been horrible at it, and add in my typo's, and you could come up with a large list of these throughout my posts.

One of my weaknesses is noting such things. No offense. But words to me are important. Makes it hard to get the nuances of the argument.

During his campaign he was quoted making the statement of "Share the wealth".  His opponents jumped on this to push the socialistic outlook of Obama.  I never said that this is what he was trying for, but what it was interpreted as this.

Americans believe in sharing the wealth. We have lots of other myths we cling to. I don't think there is any disagreement as to why his opponents jumped to the conclusion that his policies are socialism, it serves their needs. But truth is important and they must be held accountable for their wrong conclusions. Is there anything he would propose that they wouldn't link to Socialism? Its their job.

Once again, I said could be interpreted.But, as I said, Communism was based on Socialism. 

Here is a pretty good synopsis of Communism/Socialism I got from Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism. I am not so sure that one is based on the other. They are often confused with each other and the schools of thought evolved during the Industrial Revolution. Marx proposed the concept of lower socialism. Once again, you seem to make excuses for incorrect interpretations made by Obama opponents.

I'm not trying to say that these people are correct in their assessment, only that it doesn't automatically make them racist because they have different views.

A good point. If Obama opponents had more logic, correct history and valid interpretations in their town hall meetings or Fox interviews it would be a strong point. They don't. Which leads to suspicion that its politics, religion or race. However, this whole discussion is probably based on wildly varied definitions of just what constitutes racism and to what degree it is being exhibited.

edit: Let me go farther with that. I think we are combining several different prejudices and calling it racism. There are lots of strong prejudices against race, religion, geographic region and political persuasion at play here.

[Cats Cats Cats]

A good point. If Obama opponents had more logic, correct history and valid interpretations in their town hall meetings or Fox interviews it would be a strong point. They don't. Which leads to suspicion that its politics, religion or race. However, this whole discussion is probably based on wildly varied definitions of just what constitutes racism and to what degree it is being exhibited.

That is what bugs me about the whole thing.  People don't have any clue pancakes they are talking about.  You have republicans claiming they must stop the socialist health care bill to save peoples medicare, etc etc.  Making a living will means they are going to try to kill you.  Nonsensical morons yelling about crap they don't understand.  It is pretty sad that this is what the Republican party has been reduced to as their base.  I guess the educated Republicans who know pancakes is going and have valid arguments just don't yell loud enough.  And No, repeating Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sean Hannity doesn't make you have valid arguments.

[we vs us]

It's the "baffle them with bull****" strategy.  Pepper the debate with misstatements, half-truths, and outright falsehoods that might seem plausible to people who are sympathetic to your cause. Present it all as fact and you'll pick off enough people to destroy a consensus.  It's an inherently undemocratic strategy, and designed more to ensure failure of an initiative than to foster discussion.  But then that's where we are with the Republican rump these days. More interested in making sure Obama meets his Waterloo than trying to join in a productive debate.

[cannon_fodder]

/obligatory

[custosnox]

however, to accuse just one side of these tactics would be inaccurate.  While there are seemingly a large number on the right that are dangerously fanatic, I think it is primarily because the views of the right tend to attract the more aggressive types.  This does not mean that they do not exist on the left, nor that the same tactics are not used.

A quick jaunt to the sidetrack of the subject of racism.  I know that it is a problem in this country, but it is quickly dieing.  I can say this by comparing it to 30 - 40 years ago.  While we still have a large fight left ahead of us, it is a mostly winnable battle. There will be, of course, a few hold outs until the aliens show up.  My point has been that not every prejudice is based on race, and when you try to claim it is, you only add fuel to the fire.  While many of the ones that are claimed to be racist might be just that, unless there is something to justify the claims (a history of showing a prejudice against a minority), constantly saying people are is like pissing in the wind.  Your message gets lost.  

[Red Arrow]

Everyone has a weakness, mine is spelling.  I have always been horrible at it, and add in my typo's, and you could come up with a large list of these throughout my posts.

One of my weaknesses is noting such things. No offense. But words to me are important. Makes it hard to get the nuances of the argument.

Americans believe in sharing the wealth.

I believe most Americans believe in helping the unfortunate and allowing the rest that are able, to accumulate their own wealth.  A little nuance of disagreement.

[FOTD]

FOTD is not going into a long discussion over race and the institutions that have been weaken by the government trying to neutralize race as an issue without the proper follow ups and re calibrations to insure success.

This differs greatly from racism which will change as the WASP's become a minority.

[Red Arrow]

FOTD is not going into a long discussion over race and the institutions that have been weaken by the government trying to neutralize race as an issue without the proper follow ups and re calibrations to insure success.

This differs greatly from racism which will change to be directed towards WASPs as the WASP's become a minority.