Scary stuff on the right

[LoBlo]

Originally Posted by August

You have any kind of proof at all to back up this outrageous statement?

Common observation, life experience, and the professional opinion of the The United States Department of Homeland Security. http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by LoBlo

Common observation, life experience, and the professional opinion of the The United States Department of Homeland Security. http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf

Did you read the document before you posted it? That's not proof, that's a HIGHLY contested opinion.

Currently, the far right holds the most bigoted sections of our population. So when presented with the image of an individual with a different ancestry than their own it fuels the core of their fears.

In order to prove this statement, you have to show that the far left holds a less bigotted segment of the population.

Frankly, through "common observation" and "life experience" I've always found the left to be THE most bigotted segment when related to matters OTHER than race.

I don't think it's that outrageous. He's not saying that everybody on the right is bigoted, just that most of the bigoted people (at least those racist against non-whites) are on the right.

There are bigoted people on the left too, although they tend to be minorities bigoted against whites or other minorities. But I think it's pretty safe to say that the majority of people who find Obama offensive solely because of his race/ethnicity/name/background are on the right.

I think you mischaracterized what he said. All he said was that the far right has the most bigotted section of the population. The qualifications you added are not present in that statement, which is why it is outrageous.

However, the type of racist who would be offended by Obama solely because of his race/ethnicity/name/background is more likely to be on the right. There are some of them on the left too for sure, but numbers-wise they are more prevalent on the right.

I agree with this statement. But this isn't what the poster who outraged several of us wrote.

[August]

Originally Posted by LoBlo

Common observation, life experience, and the professional opinion of the The United States Department of Homeland Security. http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf

Except that report, which was politically motivated and extremely controversial as I recall, doesn't actually say that the right wing is any more bigoted than the left wing, so we're pretty much down to your life experience I think.

[LoBlo]

Originally Posted by August

Except that report, which was politically motivated and extremely controversial as I recall, doesn't actually say that the right wing is any more bigoted than the left wing

Its understood:

(U//LES) The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing

* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment.

(U//LES) Threats from white supremacist and violent antigovernment groups during 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry out violent acts. Nevertheless, the consequences of a prolonged economic downturn—including real estate foreclosures, unemployment, and an inability to obtain credit—could create a fertile recruiting environment for rightwing

extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and government authorities similar to those in the past.
(U//LES) Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.

The far right having more openly bigoted groups than the left is just common knowledge.

Is all this a revelation? Some things are just common knowledge, like the fact that Israel has nuclear weapons (no "proof", but everyone knows it), or that Iran's current regime suppresses women. (What! You mean that some Iranian women don't enjoy being garbed in mummy outfits in the middle of the desert! Prove it!). Some things are just understood.

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

What did not happen with the last three democratic presidents?

' Acts of violence against abortion clinics and their employees have been carried out across the United States throughout the 1980s and 1990s.
There were 1,700 acts of violence against abortion providers between 1977 and 1994, with four people killed in 1994 and one in 1993, according to statistics from the National Abortion Federation. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has logged 167 attacks against abortion clinics over the past 15 years.
In 1984, there were 18 bombings against abortion clinics. In 1993, there were 78 death threats aimed at clinic employees. And, in 1996, bombings, threats and harassment affected about one-third of U.S. abortion clinics.'

The OK City Fed Bldg was bombed during the Clinton Administration. This has nothing to do with Obama and being black. Nothing new here. The only difference is these media folks are now accessible by email such as Shepard Smith. So, of course it seems more than normal when it really has not changed at all over the years.

I didn't say that right wing extremism didn't exist during previous democratic presidencies. Just that some of the increased rancor that Sheppard Smith is noting is the result of a core of far right bigotry responding to an African American president. Those groups can't handle seeing a president that doesn't look like they do, so there's a increased amount of visible/open hate coming from that sect.

[August]

Originally Posted by LoBlo

Its understood:

No it's not. One politically motivated report that uses terms like "may be" and "could create" is only "understood" by those who hope it to be so.

No offense but your common knowledge sounds more to me like left wing propaganda than anything else.

[Aramike]

Is all this a revelation? Some things are just common knowledge, like the fact that Israel has nuclear weapons (no "proof", but everyone knows it), or that Iran's current regime suppresses women. (What! You mean that some Iranian women don't enjoy being garbed in mummy outfits in the middle of the desert! Prove it!). Some things are just understood.

So you're saying that there's no proof the Israel has nuclear weapons, or that Iran suppresses woman?

Are you insane?

What do you consider proof? It seems as far as you're concerned, by your logic NOTHING has proof.

[Buddahaid]

Just a thought. As I see it, the biggest difference between current radical (left and right) events and past events, is the communications revolution. News and hype travel so much faster, and from so many smallvilles now, it appears to have grown exponentially. Try reading some newspapers from 1924. All the stories are very familiar regarding corrupt politicians, revolutions in banana republics, crimes of violence, bombings, etc.

Buddahaid

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Just a thought. As I see it, the biggest difference between current radical (left and right) events and past events, is the communications revolution. News and hype travel so much faster, and from so many smallvilles now, it appears to have grown exponentially. Try reading some newspapers from 1924. All the stories are very familiar regarding corrupt politicians, revolutions in banana republics, crimes of violence, bombings, etc.

Buddahaid

Good thought and I'm will to buy this idea that we certainly know more now from the electronic revolution than the old tin can and string method.