Scary stuff on the right

[August]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

So what.

Making up a headline proves nothing Tribesman, and even if it were true the conclusions that were drawn are pure unadulterated politics.

Making up a headline proves nothing Tribesman

Blame the journalists that wrote it then.
So if you want to prove the headline wrong why not try and prove that the report into extremism was not commisioned under Bush and it didn't start getting compiled on January 23 2007

[mookiemookie]

Don;t you know? If you go down to your local Klan meeting, they're all dyed in the wool liberals! :rotfl:

[SUBMAN1]

This thread is still going on? Is the leftist Communist scared of the right Conservatives? I guess not much changes in this world. Different day, same crap.

I will say however that the left should damn well be scared of the right if the right thinks his 'rights' are being tromped on. The right probably has good reason to get upset as well. The left - looks to pass laws to limit the rights freedoms so that the left can have ultimate control, under the guise of course that what is good for one, is good for all!!! They feel good doing things like this too! The right however seeks to keep freedoms for all and is willing to do what is necessary to open back up those freedoms if that is what it takes.

So take your pick what side you want to be on - robotic controlled dogs on the left who give up their freedom for security, or free loving love your neighbor types that would rather have death if they can't have liberty? Take your pick.

The wealthiest, most prosperous countries the world has ever known follow only one model. I'll let you figure out which one that is.

History buffs will know that Patrick Henry once said, "Give me freedom or give me death". There is no greater power for ones country that to give a man freedom to make his own destiny. Many men with freedom to make their own destiny creates a power so strong that none can resist it. I give you America as an example. Anything else is suppression and a pathetic excuse for existence.

The real question is - Can America fail to fall into the trap of control that seems to be growing ever greater by the day? I have my doubts I tell you. Lets see if America is up to the challenge.

-S

[August]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Don;t you know? If you go down to your local Klan meeting, they're all dyed in the wool liberals! :rotfl:

Well racial hatred is a pretty liberal concept in this country whereas conservatives tend to favor equal rights and treatment under the law.

[Max2147]

Originally Posted by August

Well racial hatred is a pretty liberal concept in this country whereas conservatives tend to favor equal rights and treatment under the law.

Sure, traditional conservatism advocates equal rights and equal treatment under the law, but so does liberalism. Neither advocates racial hatred, although as we've already established there are racists on both sides of the spectrum.

SUBMAN - What if the right things he's having his rights trampled on, but he's wrong? What if he's feeling oppression that isn't there?

Generally when a radical - be they on the left or right - gets scared, they're not scared of something that's actually happening, they're scared of something that one of their fellow extremists says is happening. It becomes a sort of conspiracy theory circle jerk.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by Max2147

Sure, traditional conservatism advocates equal rights and equal treatment under the law, but so does liberalism. Neither advocates racial hatred, although as we've already established there are racists on both sides of the spectrum.

In a general sense, I also look at policies advanced by both and see liberal policy destroying concepts of personal responsibility in minority circles, promoting a sense of entitlement which creates an unrealistic expectation and government co-dependancy with the liberal minority voter. While I agree that there are racists on both sides, conservatives traditionally put the primacy on equal treatment under the law, while liberals are concerned about "leveling the playing field". More often than not...on racial terms. In these wys, the liberal truly benefits nobody. I'm not saying that's the intent, but intentions suck when you get down to it as applied politically. Racial hatred.???.You be the judge.

Anybody see something similar?

I'm hard pressed to make changes because a few are afraid. Life will never be about compassion, as defined by one group of people, but individualism which will always be about everyone. Laying the actions one or two people, Heller's murderer, and this Von Brunn fellow, is like laying the assasinations of JFK, RFK and the Manson murders at the feet of the left, none is true and all should be rejected out of hand.

It is like saying the Columbine shooters killed because they were picked on. Crazy. It is impossible to predict and or make assumptions based on political affiliation, regardless of what a politically motivated homeland security department says.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

robotic controlled dogs on the left who give up their freedom for security, or free loving love your neighbor types that would rather have death if they can't have liberty?

lol wut:

[August]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

lol wut:

Funny cartoon but in spite of all the bashing the Patriot act has recieved at the hands of the liberals they haven't repealed it yet even though they have been in power for almost three years now.

[Max2147]

Originally Posted by August

Funny cartoon but in spite of all the bashing the Patriot act has recieved at the hands of the liberals they haven't repealed it yet even though they have been in power for almost three years now.

Most of the controversial parts of it expired, didn't they?

Either way, the Patriot Act alone wasn't that bad. It had channels in it for complains about civil liberties violations, and as far as I'm aware they were never used. Unfortunately it wasn't the only intrusion on our liberties (wiretapping springs to mind).

But that stuff's not really relevant for this thread. Neither major political party is about to quash Americans' liberties.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Max2147

Most of the controversial parts of it expired, didn't they?

Either way, the Patriot Act alone wasn't that bad. It had channels in it for complains about civil liberties violations, and as far as I'm aware they were never used. Unfortunately it wasn't the only intrusion on our liberties (wiretapping springs to mind).

But that stuff's not really relevant for this thread. Neither major political party is about to quash Americans' liberties.

I agree with this assessment.

But the thing I find funny (and ironic) about the left is the complete about face the party has taken as soon as it achieved power. The left is heavily comprised of "anti-establishment" types - even Obama, in his earlier years, somewhat subscribed to this philosophy.

Now that they've been put in power, can anyone here HONESTLY remember ANY political movement that has been MORE pro-establishment than the Democratic Party? This administration and congress has unashamedly moved in on the banks, the auto-industry, and now Obama doesn't "think" he'll have to raise taxes on the middle-class (quite different from a promise, I think).

[Max2147]

The 'dirty little secret' about Obama is that his pragmatic streak is a lot stronger than a lot of people think. It comes across very strongly when you read his books and listen to his more substantive speeches.

It's one of the main reasons I supported him, but they had to hide it during the election to keep the left-wing ideologues onboard. Now that he's in power, they don't have to keep it under wraps anymore. I have a feeling that a lot of the left wing dreamers are going to be pretty disappointed in 4 years.

The real irony is that the left is always stereotypically wrapped up in ideology, with its head in the clouds, while the right is supposed to be more practical. But Bush was one of the most ideological presidents we've ever had, and I think Obama will end up being very pragmatic by comparison.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Max2147

Most of the controversial parts of it expired, didn't they?...

No they didn't. The Democrats expanded on it and renewed it. Obama expanded the wire tapping too. EFF is in my Inbox daily because of it. Weird having a liberal political organization bashing heads with liberals. Anyway, here is the latest on the wiretapping:

In Warrantless Wiretapping Case, Obama DOJ's New Arguments Are Worse Than Bush's

Commentary by Tim Jones
We had hoped this would go differently.
Friday evening, in a motion to dismiss Jewel v. NSA, EFF's litigation against the National Security Agency for the warrantless wiretapping of countless Americans, the Obama Administration's made two deeply troubling arguments.

First, they argued, exactly as the Bush Administration did on countless occasions, that the state secrets privilege requires the court to dismiss the issue out of hand. They argue that simply allowing the case to continue "would cause exceptionally grave harm to national security." As in the past, this is a blatant ploy to dismiss the litigation without allowing the courts to consider the evidence.

It's an especially disappointing argument to hear from the Obama Administration. As a candidate, Senator Obama lamented that the Bush Administration "invoked a legal tool known as the 'state secrets' privilege more than any other previous administration to get cases thrown out of civil court." He was right then, and we're dismayed that he and his team seem to have forgotten.

Sad as that is, it's the Department Of Justice's second argument that is the most pernicious. The DOJ claims that the U.S. Government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying — that the Government can never be sued for surveillance that violates federal privacy statutes.

This is a radical assertion that is utterly unprecedented. No one — not the White House, not the Justice Department, not any member of Congress, and not the Bush Administration — has ever interpreted the law this way.

Previously, the Bush Administration has argued that the U.S. possesses "sovereign immunity" from suit for conducting electronic surveillance that violates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). However, FISA is only one of several laws that restrict the government's ability to wiretap. The Obama Administration goes two steps further than Bush did, and claims that the US PATRIOT Act also renders the U.S. immune from suit under the two remaining key federal surveillance laws: the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications Act. Essentially, the Obama Adminstration has claimed that the government cannot be held accountable for illegal surveillance under any federal statutes.

Again, the gulf between Candidate Obama and President Obama is striking. As a candidate, Obama ran promising a new era of government transparency and accountability, an end to the Bush DOJ's radical theories of executive power, and reform of the PATRIOT Act. But, this week, Obama's own Department Of Justice has argued that, under the PATRIOT Act, the government shall be entirely unaccountable for surveilling Americans in violation of its own laws.

This isn't change we can believe in. This is change for the worse.
For further reading, we suggest Salon.com's Glenn Greenwald and The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder.

American intelligence agencies have been accused of spying on the emails of millions of Americans, including those of former president Bill Clinton...

"Ordinary Americans' most private emails have been and still are being intercepted in bulk and then stored in secret NSA databases, without probable cause," said Kevin Bankston, a lawyer with the campaign group Electronic Frontier Foundation.

How many you want? EFF is full of this crap lately.

That is change we can believe in! Oh... Maybe another Obama said that? This Obama isn't doing any of it.

-S

[sunvalleyslim]

My take has always been.........If you ain't doing anything wrong, you never have to worry.........