"Thats right - the out of power party is dangerous. Don't look at us liberals - we just talk about abolishing your gun rights, ignoring the constitution on issues such as states rights, freedom of speech, forcing stuff like gay marriage down the citizen's throats whether they like it or not, all while we take more and more of your taxes to pay for things like health care for the poor, or the "undocumented worker" and his or her family. Oh - and when we are doing things like reintroducing the "fairness doctrine" and bringing in 12 million new citizens who are going to vote for us because we give them what they want, thus securing our own power, don't worry. Don't fret at all when we write the laws - like the report discusses - defining anyone who disagrees with the federal governments range and scope of powers - in other words - OUR scope and powers over your insignificant lives - must be a threat to society. Just because we are in power and are moving to actually have these laws in place - along with the power to enforce them as we see fit - you don't lose one wink of sleep, ok? After all - we are liberals - we won't really hurt you - we just want whats best for you - and its our job to give it to you even if you don't want it."

Is that what you mean Max?

Just look the other way while the liberals do what they have wanted for decades?

Know why its all about those that lean right? And note that if you are any type of "one button" issue - like abortion or immigraton or states rights or simply a constitutionalist - your a threat. Why? Because how dare you question - how dare you use this "free speech" nonsense to backsass your betters. Its dangerous - you having the ability to think and speak your mind. Heck - these tea parties are dangerous - people thinking the government is taking to much money? HMMPH! Remember - the vice president said it was patriotic to pay your taxes. In fact - you should pay more - unless your an undocumented worker of course, then you should take your money and send it to Mexico. You should be thrilled to be paying to hand out condoms to teenagers - and when they don't work as needed - you should be rushing to pay for the abortion - or STD treatments needed.

And guess what - if the government decides that dairy products are one day harming the environment, or making people too fat, or anything else - and you happen to be a dairy farmer, don't be complaining when your shut down and your livelyhood stripped. Same goes for whatever other job you have... sooner or later it becomes the government AGAINST the people. And that is why this is so dangerous - to BOTH sides of political ideology.

And people wonder why I am going to run for PotUS.....

I didn't even know about this and it popped up today...had to cover a town hall with Senator Coburn, and one of the ladies in the audience asked about this.

I've only seen excerpts of 'a' report, and it mentioned that disgruntled servicemen might be vulnerable to recruitment by right-wing terrorist groups, which is a hell of a lot different than saying Ex-GI's are terrorists.

That particular point is probably valid. Extremist organizations of all stripes target the angry and disillusioned, and probably love being able to get their hands on honest-to-God military training. Like it or not, security organizations have to think about crap like that.

The rest of it...well...like I said, I only saw an excerpt, and that was in an AP story, so I won't comment on the rest. It does, on the surface and without examination, seem a little scary.

Especially since I have real issues with the entire concept of the Department of Homeland Security. And the name. Sounds very Third Reich.

First off the words of Thomas Jefferson are not a "terrorist motto" just because one solitary nut had it printed on the back of his t-shirt.

The same issue? McVeigh did what he did because he hated the government. That standard could be applied to everyone at one time or the other. The people that protest at these tea parties are no more ideologically similar to McVeigh than you are.

Again, the words of Thomas Jefferson are NOT an "anti-American rant" and stop making racist associations. This ain't about the Muslims.

The right wing also prides themselves on their loyalty and service to their country. I'd say that makes them far less likely to take violent action against it. Also the extreme left has indeed done a lot more than just talked about it. Sea Shepards, ALF, ELF, PFOC, Black Panthers, M-19 to mention a just a few US based leftist organizations that have done so.

http://video1.washingtontimes.com/vi...mismreport.pdf

Every paper has the story, that's how. See the above link. It is for the Washington Times and it is the 'unclassified' version.

-S

Doubtful. There are right-wing nutcases just like there are left-wing nutcases, and all it takes to drive these kind of folks to violence is something offending their vision of how 'the country should be'.

For example, you and me likely have more than a couple of political differences, and I wouldn't even characterize myself as 'left wing'. Neither one of us, however, seems to be the type to seriously consider the other one to be deliberately turning the good ol' US of A into a communist workers paradise or a goosestepping fascist dictatorship.

But you have people on both sides...not very many thankfully...who would, and who would feel entirely justified in killing either one of us to further whatever vision of America they possess. They don't see it as betraying their country. Few people perceive themselves as the 'bad guy' after all.

Seems people are a little ticked off about this report:

-S

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

Well people can convince themselves of anything. For example there was a woman who shot her own son and herself the other day because she thought she was the anti-Christ.

But you're right. both sides have their violent radicals.

Here is the thing. According to many of the criteria listed - I would be extremely high risk. However - I would be the first in line to act violently to STOP someone else from violently attacking my government. I don't care for our President's current policies, but he is the President. I don't like the taxes and overreaching of the government, but I would be one of the first to end a threat - with violence if necessary.

Thats what makes it so offensive - I'm apparently one of those "nutjobs" they worry about - when its the true NUTCASES they should worry about. You can't say "well anyone that is a single issue person" or that wants to reign in federal power is a whack job - but thats the problem - THEY BASICALLY JUST DID!

Instead of respecting my right to dissent - they are more worried about ANYONE that dissents. THAT is what makes it a threat to our freedoms. Things like this report MAKE more wacko's..... It alienates the people from the government.

Janet Nopalitano is a whacko. We were blessed with her absolute liberal policy's in Arizona because she was our governer before becoming DHS leader. She was absolute in her open boarder policy. Now she's running DHS! Just to think that 15 years ago something like DHS would be laughed at. Guess what we have all been duped by the Repubs and the Dems. Freedoms are eroded daily under the flag of our own well being.

Let me quote a "terrorist" Thomas Jefforson. "Those who sacrafice freedom for security, deserve neither.":hmmm:

Uh oh I just quoted a founding father, Somebody stop me before I cause others to think for themselves.:o

A loose version of the quote, and it was from Benjamin Franklin.
http://books.google.com/books?id=W2M...270t#PPA270,M1

Conservatives are so incensed by the suggestion of the threat of right wing radicalism that they're considering overthrowing the federal government. :har:

As much as I disagree with you on these issues, that was actually kind of funny.

I don't think you'd be laughing if it happens...

Well this is due in part because the current Democrat led government is labeling average people with legitimate political concerns as "risks". Including Democrats who are not happy with unreasonable taxation and government largesse. And they apparently also believe military veterans who have served the country abroad should be considered as possible "extremists". It's a whole lot more complicated than just the phrase "right wing radicals".

Bush was actually using the apparatus to search for real domestic and foreign threats against the country such as Islamic radicals. So far, this new administration appears to be using it as a political weapon against average Americans who disagree with their domestic politics. I knew Democrats wouldn't be responsible enough to run these government agencies. It appears you have no idea what kind of threats actually exist, if you agree with the Obama administration that people who revere the 2nd amendment, people who want secure borders, and people who believe that taxation should be reasonable are extremists.

I think what you guys are missing is the one biggest angle on this whole article:

It is Profiling.

From what I read above, I guess liberals simply think that profiling is OK if they get to make the rules. Of course they are the first to speak up about profiling if it is about anyone other than someone from the right.

Once again, hypocrisy at its finest.

-S