How to Protect Yourself From People Who Hate Obamacare

[we vs us]

Looks like it's up to the Capitol Police and the FBI. 

Nothing to see here, folks.  Just your usual death threats, vandalism, and political intimidation from our friends in the Tea Party. 

Oh, and Sarah Palin's got the fighting spirit, too:

[Conan71]

What do you expect? SaraPAC thinks Alaska is an upper plains state. Just look at the logo

[Red Arrow]

Nothing to see here, folks.  Just your usual death threats, vandalism, and political intimidation from our friends in the Tea Party. 

Gee, nothing like this has ever happened before.  Whatever will we do?

Actually, I don't condone such behavior no matter how much someone disagrees with what got passed.  To insinuate this is something new from the right wing must be an indication that it doesn't happen much, if ever.  It's not old hat news.

[Hoss]

Gee, nothing like this has ever happened before.  Whatever will we do?

Actually, I don't condone such behavior no matter how much someone disagrees with what got passed.  To insinuate this is something new from the right wing must be an indication that it doesn't happen much, if ever.  It's not old hat news.

The fact that Republicans usually despise Democrats isn't new.

The kind of vitriol and venom we've seen in the last two years, however, is.

Last time I checked, 40 or 50 incidents that resemble each other in the course of a week aren't usually considered 'isolated'.

[fotd]

The fact that Republicans usually despise Democrats isn't new.

The kind of vitriol and venom we've seen in the last two years, however, is.

Last time I checked, 40 or 50 incidents that resemble each other in the course of a week aren't usually considered 'isolated'.

Correct....it's a pattern. Been going on since Jan. 20th 2009....

[Conan71]

The fact that Republicans usually despise Democrats isn't new.

The kind of vitriol and venom we've seen in the last two years, however, is.

Last time I checked, 40 or 50 incidents that resemble each other in the course of a week aren't usually considered 'isolated'.

Last two years?  "Impeach Bush" ringing a bell?

Honestly Hoss you could trace the roots back to Watergate, Iran-Contra, or more where I saw the modern age of petty partisanship beginning with Newt Gingrich becoming Speaker and the whole White Water/Starr circle-jerk. The shrill partisanship is nothing new. I think what has changed is 24 hour a day coverage of it. People are immersed in it far more than ever and the media makes billions fanning the flames. I think what's going on with these militants is an utter frustration at a sense that there's an elite ruling class which is not listening to what the citzens really want.

[custosnox]

Last two years?  "Impeach Bush" ringing a bell?

Honestly Hoss you could trace the roots back to Watergate, Iran-Contra, or more where I saw the modern age of petty partisanship beginning with Newt Gingrich becoming Speaker and the whole White Water/Starr circle-jerk. The shrill partisanship is nothing new. I think what has changed is 24 hour a day coverage of it. People are immersed in it far more than ever and the media makes billions fanning the flames. I think what's going on with these militants is an utter frustration at a sense that there's an elite ruling class which is not listening to what the citzens really want.

If you really looked back, you could trace the partisanship back to Jefferson.  There has been political infighting since almost the birth of this country with the parties.  Trying to single out the current minority party would be inaccurate.  And of every party there has always been the groups on the far fringes that have pushed everything to the brink. 

[nathanm]

Last two years?  "Impeach Bush" ringing a bell?

It's one thing to express a desire for the executive to be impeached. It's another thing entirely to threaten, harass, and intimidate our elected leaders.

I don't recall any Democrats crashing their airplane into a building because they were pissed off about taxes or a rash of vandalism against Republican Party offices after a contentious vote. I don't recall death threats being received by Republican Congresspeople, either. It's possible I missed something, I don't always follow the news closely.

[Red Arrow]

It's one thing to express a desire for the executive to be impeached. It's another thing entirely to threaten, harass, and intimidate our elected leaders.

I don't recall any Democrats crashing their airplane into a building because they were pissed off about taxes or a rash of vandalism against Republican Party offices after a contentious vote. I don't recall death threats being received by Republican Congresspeople, either. It's possible I missed something, I don't always follow the news closely.

It's easy to dismiss news we don't like, on both sides.

[Hoss]

Last two years?  "Impeach Bush" ringing a bell?

Honestly Hoss you could trace the roots back to Watergate, Iran-Contra, or more where I saw the modern age of petty partisanship beginning with Newt Gingrich becoming Speaker and the whole White Water/Starr circle-jerk. The shrill partisanship is nothing new. I think what has changed is 24 hour a day coverage of it. People are immersed in it far more than ever and the media makes billions fanning the flames. I think what's going on with these militants is an utter frustration at a sense that there's an elite ruling class which is not listening to what the citzens really want.

I'd have to 'sort of' agree with you.

I think the militant movement in the mid '90s had a LOT to do with it.  More so than most people would admit.

The 'sort of' part would involve me agreeing about the 24 hour a day news cycle and the interwebs.  Bloggers can indiscriminately write whatever they want mainly without any fear of retribution.  How'd the 'birther' movement get started?  Do you think if bloggers hadn't the same access now that they do that this whole nonsense about our President not being a citizen would have even unfolded?  It's doubtful.

Any nut with a keyboard and access to a Wordpress account considers themselves pundits.  It's skewed mainstream news for the last two election cycles at least.  The problem is, it would seem, most people don't have enough common sense to know what's being spoon-fed to them and what's the nutritious part (the truth).

[nathanm]

It's easy to dismiss news we don't like, on both sides.

Thankfully, Google News is helping to resolve that problem as it continues to catalog back issues of major newspapers and, of course, nearly any current news source or pseudo-news source in existence.

Soon enough we will be able to find out with a simple search exactly what was being reported in the news and what wasn't when looking at historical events.

[Red Arrow]

Thankfully, Google News is helping to resolve that problem as it continues to catalog back issues of major newspapers and, of course, nearly any current news source or pseudo-news source in existence.

Soon enough we will be able to find out with a simple search exactly what was being reported in the news and what wasn't when looking at historical events.

Looks great on paper (pun intended) but some papers are not accepted as legitimate.  Which paper often depends on your politics. I've even seen it on this forum.... "that's not a legitimate source".   Even some of the big names have had credibility issues.

[nathanm]

Looks great on paper (pun intended) but some papers are not accepted as legitimate.  Which paper often depends on your politics. I've even seen it on this forum.... "that's not a legitimate source".   Even some of the big names have had credibility issues.

Most of 'em are capable of getting basic facts right. If not initially, at least after a few months and several corrections. It is opinion and conjecture masquerading as fact that puts a particular news source on my personal "not to be believed without corroboration" list.

[Red Arrow]

Most of 'em are capable of getting basic facts right. If not initially, at least after a few months and several corrections. It is opinion and conjecture masquerading as fact that puts a particular news source on my personal "not to be believed without corroboration" list.

Some people, I believe you are included, will chase down the corrections.  Some are not so diligent.  Some don't have the time to verify the opinion of everyone they read.  It's far too easy to accept a quoted fact from a favorite columnist as true and sometimes difficult to find the original source.

[Conan71]

I'd have to 'sort of' agree with you.

I think the militant movement in the mid '90s had a LOT to do with it.  More so than most people would admit.

The 'sort of' part would involve me agreeing about the 24 hour a day news cycle and the interwebs.  Bloggers can indiscriminately write whatever they want mainly without any fear of retribution.  How'd the 'birther' movement get started?  Do you think if bloggers hadn't the same access now that they do that this whole nonsense about our President not being a citizen would have even unfolded?  It's doubtful.

Any nut with a keyboard and access to a Wordpress account considers themselves pundits.  It's skewed mainstream news for the last two election cycles at least.  The problem is, it would seem, most people don't have enough common sense to know what's being spoon-fed to them and what's the nutritious part (the truth).

+1

Group hug anyone?