Contrary to the opinion of Greg Brush, President Obama is not standing idly by: he is actively pursuing a commonsense policy. That policy is premised on the position he has stated clearly: “
Ray (the real one) Reply
August 28, 2014 at 4:47 pm
If the president would pass or propose "common sense" policies, maybe gridlock would end.
Even liberals can’t be that blind.
John the Baptist Reply
August 28, 2014 at 7:50 pm
Re: Comment #1:
Come on, Ray. The Tea Party House will never propose any commonsense legislation for President Obama to pass: they’re too busy voting to revoke or defund ObamaCare. Neither will they allow any proposed legislation supporting the President’s policies to come up for a vote.
Greg B. Reply
August 29, 2014 at 11:10 am
Refreshing that you took it a step further than just blaming Bush and take it all the way back to one of the greatest, Reagan. GOP could surely use a man like him now. The decline, after 6 years, is owned by Obama because he wants us to decline, plain and simple.
As for blaming Congress, over 300 bills sit on Harry Reid’s desk, most with bipartisan approval. Check it out.
August 29, 2014 at 5:12 pm
Do you know how many (tea party) types are servingin Washington? MSNBC?
For a free America Reply
August 30, 2014 at 9:17 am
I know you will not be reading this in your newspapers, but chew on this story for a look at what the real news is saying about your guy.
Mike W Reply
August 30, 2014 at 2:42 pm
Comment #3 .. It is not a matter of how many bills sit on Reids desk, What’s important is what’s in the bills and who did they really come from, because so many bills are written by corporate lawyers to promote corporate agenda. that’s how so many of the most important regulations that protected us against big banks gambling with our money and making us pay it back when the lose it. They write bills to weaken Social Security and cleverly try to classify it as something it is not so they can later do away with it entirely. If I am not mistaken the Farm Bill the rethuglicans were pushing through congress some time ago had a get out of jail free card slipped in that would have made it illegal to sue Monsanto and any other corporation in the event any future activity by them is found to harm the environment livestock or people, and they had the unmitigated gall to add in past actions as well. Sort of like this one ~ http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/a/af/3A8-Right_to_Farm_Act_Exposed.pdf
Comment #5 ~ Sir or madam, you are being influenced by a far right think tank that spreads Islamophobia .. "Today, a former CIA agent bluntly told the newspaper, World Net Daily, that America has switched sides in the war on terror under President Obama. Clare Lopez was willing to say what a few members of Congress have said in private, but declined to say on-the-record. Hello ? The War On Terror is as bogus as the War on Drugs and all the other War On’s
Clare M. Lopez is the Vice President for Research and Analysis at the Center for Security Policy The Center for Security Policy was founded in 1988 Under Reagan, and states that it operates as a "non-profit, non-partisan organization committed to the time-tested philosophy of promoting international peace through American strength." (American Strength is the operative word here when you see who is on the board of trustees) The Center for American Progress calls CSP part of the "Islamophobia network," particularly under its founder and director Frank Gaffney.
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. has been called one of the "key ideologues who are the nerve center of the Islamophobia network" and is founder and president of the Center for Security Policy, a non-profit think tank "funded mainly by U.S. DEFENSE CONTRACTORS, far-right foundations, and right-wing Zionists" And they call that bunch of war hawks a non profit organazation with arms contractors and manufacturers and
August 30, 2014 at 5:03 pm
Re Comment #5:
Sorry, but the Examiner does not report real news. Neither does World Net Daily. The headline states:
August 30, 2014 at 8:02 pm
Re Comment #3:
You say the GOP could use a man like Reagan today. Well, you have Paul Ryan who is still hawking Reagan/Laffer
Jon Monday Reply
August 31, 2014 at 3:45 pm
Too much to comment on here – but a few notes:
To "For a Free America" – the article is reporting on an interview with disgruntled ex-CIA agent, as report in the right-wing rag World Net Daily – the Faux News of newspapers. Here’s a quote, that shows how off base the article is:
the president and some of his top appointees, such as CIA Director John Brennan, who is believed to be a Muslim convert,
Obama's on vacation again Reply
August 31, 2014 at 5:36 pm
John the B "Seriously, you
August 31, 2014 at 6:15 pm
There are several things happening mostly accelerated by Obama’s decision to blame the west and especially the US for colonialism and imperialism. The conflict created by the division of the world into nation-states at the Treaty of Versailles, the imposition of boundaries that for the most part don’t make any sense and indeed were created by the colonial powers to divide and conquer – the separation of the Kurds into different nations was a classic example of the divide and conquer policy. It was driven mostly by historical awareness of the fear throughout Eurasia of the Kurds.
Yes, with respect to foreign affairs it appears that he (Obama) operates under the belief that the US has not been a force for good in the world. But underlying that is the internationalist world view that we know about. And underlying that it the utopian view that human nature is changeable and can be molded under the guidance of wise leaders so as to approach equal outcomes in all spheres in a world at peace. Government is the agent for doing this, including the determination and awarding of
August 31, 2014 at 11:15 pm
Re Comment #11:
You say it appears that President Obama believes the US has not been a force for good in the world. Why should he believe otherwise? Did the US do good in the Iran Contra affair, in Korea, in Vietnam, in Laos, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, et al? I don
September 1, 2014 at 2:17 pm
Before his two-week trip to Martha
global joke Reply
September 1, 2014 at 7:28 pm
I would like to thank all you Obama supporters for helping him make America the disrespected laughing stock of the world. Why don’t you press rewind on your tape recorders and hear all the bull he spewed during election about how wonderful things have been globally during his tenure. Laughable. The US is in the worst position possible and losing respect every day but you keep believing what you like. If you want to hear some truths, talk to service men and women who have served overseas during his presidency.
September 1, 2014 at 8:55 pm
Re Comment #14:
When did military personnel ever not gripe? If you really want to know what people in other countries think about President Obama and America, you have to let them speak for themselves, not Fox News.
Here’s a sampling of what they think:
From a Gallup poll, 10 April 2014:
September 1, 2014 at 9:21 pm
Take comfort in knowing that for the last five years the country has been run by a guy who thought Joe Biden was smart.
September 2, 2014 at 9:08 am
Yes comment #14, whatever you do, please do not watch FOX News, you must switch to MSNBC and get the real story on the state of our nation. I swear, if it weren’t for FOX News I don’t know how John the B, Jon Monday and Mike W would get through the day. They must watch it 24/7.
"when did military personnel ever not gripe" gosh John that is an extremely prejudicial statement, but I guess it is politically correct to make fun of our men and women in the armed forces, the ones who actually stand on that wall while people like you and I trade quips and barbs from the comfort of our own homes. Considering the VA scandal that is happening right now I would say that the military have a right to complain, wouldn’t you? Oh, and by the way, that happened on President Obama’s watch.
@Jon: "Reagan would never get the nomination today, way too liberal" you may be correct, however, John Kennedy would also never get the nomination today, way too conservative. As for Reagan and the economy, you seem to forget that under the Carter administration the economy was in the toilet…. make that the sewer. Reagan not only brought America out of economic decline, he restored our faith in this great country. Like Teddy Roosevelt, he spoke softly, but carried a big stick. The economy had some bumpy moments through the terms of Bush the first and Bill Clinton, but what ultimately brought it to its knees in 2008 was greed. Hedge fund managers, bankers, and a democrat controlled government that believed that everyone, whether they could afford it or not, deserved to buy a home. Eventually the house of cards came crashing down.
What we have now is another severe crisis brewing in the middle east and a president who hasn’t got a clue what to do about it. He is playing golf while the world burns. He didn’t even have the decency to stop his game long enough to attend the funeral of the first 3 star general killed in Afghanistan. I’m sure that doesn’t bother either Jon, John or Mike, but it bothers me, and anyone else with any sense of decency. For the president not to attend was shameful.
"A mind all logic is like a knife all blade. It makes the hand bleed that uses it." – Tagore
September 2, 2014 at 10:18 am
Re Comment #16:
And thank God it hasn’t been McCain and his thoughts on Palin.
September 2, 2014 at 4:41 pm
Re Comment #17:
September 2, 2014 at 6:15 pm
To Pink – glad to see you’re picking up on Hindu philosophy. Lot’s to learn there. I certainly agree that logic is a very limited resource, when it comes to religion and God. But, here on earth, it’s a rare and valuable resource, when combined with empathy and compassion.
It’s not entirely up to date, but this chart gives a good indication where each president ranks – by historians and academics – not by popular vote:
They divide all the presidents into 4 groups (quintiles), Bush II of course is in the bottom group, while Obama is in the second group. Of course, his 2nd term is not over. But, I’m willing to bet 10 years from now, he will be ranked much higher than Bush II.
The top 10 are as follows:
1. Lincoln (R)
2. FDR (D)
3. Washington (None – he thought political parties would ruin American – I tend to agree)
4. Jefferson (Republican-Democrat)
5. Teddy Roosevelt (R)
6. Woodrow Wilson (D)
7. Harry S. Truman (D)
8. tie – Dwight D. Eisenhower (R)
8. tie – Andrew Jackson (D)
9. James K. Polk (D)
Here are recent presidents:
11. JFK (D)
14. tie – LBJ (D)
32. Richard Nixon (R)
26. Gerald Ford (R)
27. Jimmy Carter (D)
17. Ronald Reagan (R)
22. tie – George H. W. Bush (R)
20. tie – Bill Clinton (D)
34. George W. Bush (R)
14. tie – Barack Obama (D)
The thing that Reagan fans don’t realize is that he got out of the hyper-inflation by a massive increase in military spending. He ran up big deficits and tripled the national debt (neither Bush II or Obama come close to that record). That infusion of capital into the economy (stimulus), did nothing for infrastructure, but did help turn around the sluggish economy and higher interest rates brought down inflation. Historians also know that late in his second term he was just one step ahead of impeachment because of the Iran/Contra deals that he lied about and which were specially and clearly illegal. The only reason he wasn’t impeached was he agreed to fire his senior staff (even though they were following his policies).
Jon Monday Reply
September 2, 2014 at 7:07 pm
Just to clarify, I meant Reagan got the economy out of the dumps by massive spending, he got out of hyper-inflation by increasing interest rates.
In any case, people also forget that what hit our economy in the late 70s was the oil embargo by the Gulf States. Carter’s efforts and empathizes to address the economic effects of the oil embargo was to push conservation, which would have served us well, making us much less reliant on Arab Oil.
Still a good goal – and we’re almost there, except we keep exporting oil, instead of keeping it for ourselves – but International Energy Companies don’t give a darn about the US, only bottom line.
September 3, 2014 at 6:31 am
So far, a diminished U.S. hasn’t panned out into the dawning of the Age of Aquarius as it was supposed to have done huh Hippies. For someone that promoted the Arab spring as a wonderful happening B.O. sure looks foolish now. Not to mention he called ISIS the "JV" Not so much Barry. I guess decapitation is another form of "change".
The bedwetters have been running America rampant for quite some time now. America is a serious country. We have serious issues and we need serious people to deal with them. Americans are waiting, too. Instead of clarity, we get a condescending lecture from Obama about a messy world and social media.
I keep hoping each new speech will be the one where Obama finally breaks down and admits he has no idea what he
jon Monday Reply
September 3, 2014 at 9:07 am
Don’t hold your breath for that breakdown, don’t want you to lose consciousness.
Obama has, in the eyes of historians and presidential experts, been in the top half of best presidents, as opposed to Bush II being in the bottom rank:
Recovered the economy – jobs still lagging from the Bush-created depression, but the economy itself is stronger than before Obama took office. The reason it hasn’t filtered down too the working class is that the House Tea Party refuses to pass meaningful stimulus bills that help ordinary people, and only helped Wall Streeet, banks, and international businesses.
Obamacare will be considered the most effective revision of the US health care system since Medicare. Although it was just a step in the right direction, it helps put insurance companies in an honest position of actually paying for medical services, and not an outrageous cash cow for Wall Street. Too many details to mention all, but the highlights are:
Can’t be refused or dropped because of pre-existing medical conditions.
Kids stay on policy until age 26 (after college and starting a career).
Free checkups and preventative care – will save Americans trillions in the long run.
Helps poor and working class afford insurance.
Limits profits on insurance companies – making sure that at least 80% of premiums go to healthcare. That leave 20% for the insurance company’s profit, overhead, and operations. Medicare does that for 5%, which is why eventually we will have Medicare for all, as an option.
Killed the Cowboy attitude to world events, which dragged the US reputation down to ground level. If you look at Comment #15, you’ll see how Obama is viewed by the world.
As I said above, I’m willing to bet (a good steak dinner at the Valley Fort steak house) that 10 years from now, Obama will be ranked in the top half of best presidents and Bush II will be in the bottom quarter. Anyone?
September 3, 2014 at 1:23 pm
I didn’t have to wait long for your Savior….Obmama
Jon Mobday Reply
September 3, 2014 at 4:10 pm
Take the bet? I’m willing to put my money where my mouth is. A good steak dinner – 10 years from now (if we’re both still alive).
September 3, 2014 at 4:50 pm
Re Comment #24:
The Mid-East is the 3-body problem of foreign relations — except with more bodies. There is no simple solution. There may be no complex solution.
Also my favorite H. L.Mencken quote is applicable here: "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
September 4, 2014 at 1:30 pm
Maybe this is just me, but if I were the President of the United States and there was a rampaging horde of maniacs cutting people
September 4, 2014 at 3:36 pm
Here’s part of why it’s so complex, and why Obama is right to take time to gather an international coalition, that includes major European countries, Arab States (like Gulf War I, unlike Gulf War II), and others. The US should never get involved in a ground war in the middle east without the participation of those who live in the region – otherwise, we are seen as just taking sides in a sectarian war, specifically supporting Sunnis against the Shias.
Bush II went into Iraq unprepared and ignorant of what would happen (against all advise from those who knew what would happen, including his own State Department and the 1994 version of Dick Cheney – see above). Bush mindlessly uncorked sectarian hatred that had been bottled up for 100s of years, especially since Western Powers divided up the Middle East after WWI for their own benefit, ignoring natural and historic sectarian boundaries.
Before Gulf War II, there was a dynamic tension between Iraq, Iran, and Syria. To understand this, let’s break down who is who:
Syria – a Shia dictator ruling a mostly Sunni population.
Iraq – a Sunni dictator (Saddam) ruling a mostly Shia popluation
Iran – Almost entirely Shia government and population ruled by a religious leader, supporting a government who follows his orders. It was leaning toward electing a more friendly president, until Bush label them as part of the "Axis of Evil", together with their bitter enemy Iraq. It made no sense to provoke them, and the only result was the election of a hard-liner, setting back normal relations for decades.
Gulf States – Considered moderate Sunnis, but actually were funding the radical Sunnis in Shia countries – who became ISIS.
Then Cowboy Bush II went into Iraq, the china shop, and started breaking things. He took out Saddam, but left in place a Shia government who wanted revenge on the Sunnis who had been repressing them.
Bush II signed the agreement to pull out when we did. Some conservatives said Obama should have stayed in there – but the government that Bush II installed was overtly Shia and allied with Iran, inviting simmering violence from Sunni insurgents.
After the Bush II War, Iran became much more of a hardliner, the US installed a Shia dictator, who systematically purged Sunnis from positions of power in the government and military, and rebel groups started forming – groups being funded by mostly Gulf States.
Here’s where it gets complicated. We liked the Sunni insurgents when they fought against Iran and the ruling government in Syria. But, when Sunni ISIS went into Iraq and fought against Iraq’s army, the army melted away, because they didn’t want to be taking sides in the sectarian war. We cannot and should not fight other people’s wars. Should have learned that in Vietnam.
Here’s the overall point – it’s not our fight. We should have never stepped foot in Iraq – and let Iraq, Iran, and Syria fight it out. If anyone should step in, it should be people in the region – mainly the well-armed Gulf States.
But, the Gulf States are Sunnis, and are reluctant to attack the rebels they’ve been supporting.
Rather than take on the sole responsibility for facing ISIS, Obama is gathering a true coalition to attack them.
I hope the Gulf States recognize what they’ve been funding – and finally stop funding terrorists. They really should be leading the fight.
September 4, 2014 at 5:34 pm
Re Comment #27:
President Obama is doing the right thing in taking the time necessary to develop a rational strategy for America’s involvement in the Mid-East.
He realizes that working smarter, rather than harder, is the only viable approach to develop the strategy to address the complex problem that the Mid-East presents.
Or do you really want him to use the Bush strategy of "Ready, Fire, Aim!"?
Neil () Reply
September 5, 2014 at 3:41 am
If we want to fight religious crazies why go half way around the world? Don’t we have enough already here at home? Just look at our local Republican office holders. S-C-A-R-Y!!
September 5, 2014 at 9:49 am
uhh..OK Neil. I get all of that. I bet that sounded smart, while it was rattling around your skull.
On another note, I see that the Obama Bobble head choir is in full attendance.
There is a lot you can argue about with regard to HOW things were, or should be done in Iraq, but that is far outside the scope of anything you "Armchair Clausewitz
September 5, 2014 at 2:01 pm
Right Neil, these scary Republicans believe in freedom of speech, freedom of religion, human rights and less government involvement in our lives, and they won’t chop your head off or have you shot for disagreeing with them. I guess that would be pretty crazy to someone like you.
To 32 Reply
September 6, 2014 at 8:59 am
Republicans don’t believe in freedom of speech (unless speech = the ability to buy elections). Republicans don’t believe in freedom of religion (unless you’re a fundamentalist Christian). Republicans don’t believe in human rights (unless human rights are measured by how much $$$ you have in your pocket). Republicans don’t believe in less government in our lives (ask any woman trying to access reproductive choice or any gay couple trying to get married).
September 6, 2014 at 12:37 pm
@Comment #33: Right, sure, of course…. and ALL Democrats are Communists, athiests and ISIS supporters. Someday, when you grow up, maybe, just maybe you will understand that not everyone can be put into a box. I’m a Republican woman, who believes in birth control, I am a member of a committee on human rights, specifically we target the trafficing of women and children across borders for the sex trade. I can assure you, none of those we help have any $$$. I also have gay friends who attend a Baptist Church, where they are welcomed and loved, and I, myself am not considered a so called fundamentalist, I am a Catholic…. go figure.
September 6, 2014 at 2:37 pm
The so-called Republican Party consists of four main parts:
1 – Wall Street – types, Bankers, and the ultra wealthy.
2 – Tea Party Crazies – funded by above, but have gotten out of hand.
3 – Christian religious Fundamentalists.
4 – Old-line conservatives (like Goldwater – almost extinct now).
The problem for them is that there is very little common interest in the groups, but they pretend to tolerate each other’s concerns to try and elect people who will do their bidding.
The #1 group just wants to suck as much money out of the government (through contracts and tax deductions), and have no interest in building infrastructure or helping out the middle class. They want to elect people like Romney to lower their already very low taxes (tax as a percentage of gross income). They push deregulation, for the sole purpose of not being held accountable for their actions.
#2 group doesn’t really know what it wants. They pretend to want things as it was in the late 18th Century. But, the reality back then was that the upper class ruled even more than today. In order to vote, according to our original Constitution, you had to be a white, male, land-owner. The founders felt that unless you met all three qualifications, you didn’t have a stake in the country. The Tea Party also want to repeal Obamacare (a Republican plan), but don’t want to give up any of the major benefits (cognitive dissonance).
#3 group has always wanted to enforce a very tiny minority of Christian views (compared to the world), on the rest of us – no thank you. I think most Christian Fundamentalists who get involved with politics have very little to do with the words and teachings of Christ.
#4 group is almost dead – Goldwater didn’t want a small government, he wanted an efficient government. He was for personal freedom, like gay rights, legal pot, and if the American people voted for socialist national healthcare, his job was to implement it in the most efficient way. We are, after all, a democracy.
September 7, 2014 at 8:25 pm
What are your fingers babbling about Monday?
Once again, you have no idea what you’re talking about. But hey, at least you’re consistent. Your Smug derision and mindless bile about Republicans masquerading as "intellect" on display.
On the night of November 2nd, I would suggest you get a collection of your favorite condiments nearby, and not eat breakfast or lunch.
You’re going to need both the appetite and the spices to help deal with the ample portions of crow the American Republican electorate is going to serve you.
You continually give me the impression of someone who just landed on planet Earth five minutes ago.
September 8, 2014 at 10:17 am
There are not 4 different types of Republicans. There’s only 1 type. Hateful!
September 8, 2014 at 1:26 pm
Having a difficult time dealing with reality vs. Fantasy Neil?
Disagreement=hate? That sounds pretty liberal to me.
September 8, 2014 at 1:54 pm
I was hoping for some intellectual discourse on the composition of the Republican Party – what major sub-groups wind up pushing the agenda, and what that agenda actually is. More specifically, I wanted to point out the diversity within the groups, which make the party less than united, and unable to field an electable candidate for president.
Is there a group I left out, or do you dispute the descriptions of the groups I included?
While short-term gains may be realized in November, in the long run, the Republican Party will have to remake itself (like it proposed after the 2012 election), or become a third party.
I am not that concerned about the long run – as the demographics will take care of things naturally, to bring our country into the realm of all other industrialized nations.
Got any comments besides criticism? Facts, perhaps?
Still no takers about my bet. Where is the faith in your beliefs?
September 8, 2014 at 2:12 pm
The only person commenting here who is "hateful" is Neil. The pablum of extreme liberalism, first brainwash the young.
September 8, 2014 at 2:54 pm
There’s no need for anyone, left or right, to be unpleasant here. It’s just a good forum for exchanging views (actually I have little hope for that, but it does help me to do research and hone my arguments).
Extremeism is the enemy of the good, left or right (and I believe there are many times more extreme conservatives than liberals, otherwise we would have a left-leaning Tea Party-type movement.
Good to hear from you.
September 8, 2014 at 4:50 pm
Hi Neil, Now you see what happens when folks speak their mind, especially if what they say is true, you get Drill Sergeant Really in your face telling you you’re ignorant and only he (Mr Ego) knows the truth "unless you were there, or were a combat seasoned veteran."
Drill sergeant Really blames Obama for "losing the war" He, being (having been) a career warrior, has no idea that those kinds of wars are not meant to be won because it was not a war.
But hey, every cloud has a silver lining, at least Sgt Really is starting to admit that it was, and is, all about regime change, which is not the same as war. Regime change is when you make up or manufacture excuses, using Hegel’s dialectic and the media as a tool used to manipulate us into a frenzied circular pattern of thought and action. (they are coming for us, they hate us for our freedoms)
The only way to completely stop the privacy invasions, expanding domestic police powers, land grabs, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty, is to step outside the dialectic. This releases us from the limitations of controlled and guided thought used to invade a country for purely commercial reasons and forcefully remove a leader and replace him with one of our own puppets, willing to bend to our own economic and strategic interests rather than its own people. Why? Because you can do anything you want when you have the support of most powerful military and
September 8, 2014 at 4:56 pm
September 8, 2014 at 5:07 pm
I said "extreme" liberalism Jon, not every liberal. If a right wing person were to make the same comment about all Democrats that Neil made about all Republicans, I as a thinking Republican woman, would have the guts to call him on it, why don’t those of you to the left of center do the same? I do not know how old Neil is, but he is speaking like a ten year old (no offense).
By the way Jon, I beg to differ with you about conservatives being more extreme than liberals. What do you call the Occupy movement? At least Tea Party members do not urinate and deficate in public, or hurl obscenities and threats at passersby. I’d say that we both have our crosses to bear.
September 9, 2014 at 8:21 am
Mikey: Nobody (with the possible exception of Jon) is going to read past the first line (the content of which, is of course ludicrous) of your latest rant. You never fail to amaze and amuse me. You are truly the 1% of liberals that I was referring to in comment 34. Thanks for the laugh.
Terry Leather Reply
September 9, 2014 at 10:09 am
September 9, 2014 at 10:22 am
I didn’t say "conservatives [are] more extreme than liberals", I said that I believe there are more extreme conservatives than extreme liberals, in the US.
Not since the Weather Underground has there been a violent extreme liberal movement (and that was less than a dozen people).
But, look at all the "militia" groups, white supremacists, anti-government military groups, who arm themselves for the "coming war" against [name your cause here]. No such thing on the left.
The cause could be against the "one-world government", race wars, the immigration invasion, or other imagined threats against them or our country.
Again, the number of extremists on the right, I believe, far outnumber the extremists on the left. If you want to pick on the tiny number of people who "urinate and deficate in public", I can point to the Westboro Baptist Church.
So far as "hurl obscenities and threats at passersb[ies]". Really?
You don’t think that happens on the right?
At any rate – this forum works best when people keep a civil tone, present FACT based OPINION (and know the difference), present references (links to articles, polls, or other verifiable sources), and keep respect for people taking the time to post something that has a point of view, and is not just name calling and sarcasam.
To those who object to my analysis of the four types of Republicans, any intelligent push back? How do you see the party? What groups and what objectives do each group push?
September 9, 2014 at 2:20 pm
I think you watch too many made for TV movies Jon. While there are certainly little pockets of people, who have moved to say, Idaho or Montana, for instance, I don’t actually believe that any of them pose any serious threat to our government. That movement was pretty firmly contained at Ruby Ridge. If you want to talk about wacko fringe groups, how about the left leaning tree huggers who commit arson and plant devices in our wooded areas to kill and maim people. Then of course there is also the infamous "unibomber" he was a bit left of center as I recall. We could play this game all day, but you get my drift.
As for the fools in the Westboro Baptist Church, they are not conservatives, and they most certainly are not Christians. They picket the funerals of many members of our military who were killed in the line of duty. I don’t believe that they take any political stand, either right or left, they are just a bunch of idiots following the wrong path. In fact it is conservatives who have stood in front of them at demonstrations in order to protect the families of the dead. God does not condone their antics, and neither do I.
September 9, 2014 at 5:18 pm
All anybody has to do is ask themselves who offers alternative views brings information (no matter how wacko) with websites and links to this venue, and who just stands on the sidelines making cleaver derogatory remarks about those who take the time to offer their views. Hmmm
"Free inquiry requires that we tolerate diversity of opinion and that we respect the right of individuals to express their beliefs, however unpopular they may be, without social or legal prohibition or fear of success." — Paul Kurtz : "A Secular Humanist Declaration," in On The Barricades, 1989
"This is, in theory, still a free country, but our politically correct, censorious times are such that many of us tremble to give vent to perfectly acceptable views for fear of condemnation. Freedom of speech is thereby imperiled, big questions go undebated, and great lies become accepted, unequivocally as great truths." — Simon Heffer Daily Mail, 7 June 2000
Don’t worry about the haters… they’re just angry because the truth you speak contradicts the lie they live. Dr Steve Maraboli
PS.. "I think you watch too many made for TV movies" ??? What does that mean?
September 9, 2014 at 7:48 pm
Regarding comment #48. Pink, you’re leaving out a critical point. Westboro Baptist Church pickets the funerals of US servicemen (both gay and straight) based on their belief that God has abandoned the United States because of its growing acceptance of gay men and women. This is the crux of their philosophy and core purpose of their movement. At the top of each page of their website there appears in big bold letters "God Hates Fags". Even their web address (http://www.godhatesfags.com) makes this perfectly clear. Westboro Baptist Church is an anti-gay hate group. Anti-gay hate and animus is the basis of their existence.
Unfortunately this is not a point of view confined to just extremist groups on the fringe of society. This opinion is echoed by numerous so-called mainstream religious leaders and politicians throughout this country, particularly those associated with the GOP.
September 10, 2014 at 8:34 am
@BGG: Westboro Baptist Church (although I use the term church loosely) is an equal opportunity hate group. While I believe that the term "hater" has been way overused in our society, it is obvious that when applied to this group of evil doers, it fits like a glove. I love seeing the sign that was recently erected in their hometown in Kansas that says "GOD LOVES GAYS". While the sign may have been meant to be tongue in cheek, it is still quite true. God loves all of us, it is up to each individual person however to make his or her own peace with God. His arms are wide open. It is interesting to note that while all the world’s major religions have a taboo against being homosexual, only one religious group uses death as a punishment, and that is radical Islam.
I believe that we have digressed from the original topic, which had something to do with radical fringe groups. It is my opinion that both the right and the left are guilty of having them, I just admit it. A good example of the radical left is comment #49.
I’m guessing you do not have a TV Mikey. I don’t like them much either, but there are a few cable channels who love to show what they term "made for tv movies" they are usually about serial killers, stalkers, young love, and radical fringe groups who move to the hills in order to form right wing terrorist cells.
It’s hot out there. Stay cool.
September 10, 2014 at 3:55 pm
I’m afraid I have to call you on this. There is no comparison between left and right militant numbers or groups.
Yes, there are radicals on both sides, but in terms of armed, militant, and actually murders, the radical right takes the prize.
If you want, I can list both the number of people in these hate groups, left and right, but I hope you will concede that it’s not even close. Just think:
Violent anti-abortion groups
Violent anti-gay groups
Has there been any equivalent on the left to compare to the OK City bombing, etc.
If you disagree, I’ll do the research to post the actual numbers – this has been seriously studied.
Let me know – and if you disagree, please post how many radical left groups openly advocate violence and how many deaths they have caused. OK?
September 10, 2014 at 4:34 pm
I don’t doubt for a minute that you would love to do the math Jon, and collecting facts and figures, seems to be pretty much your favorite pastime, but lets start with the infamous KKK. Yes they are creepy crawly individuals, but at their prime, the 1920s through the 1960s, they considered themselves to be members of the Democratic party. Fortunately for all of us they have pretty much died out. Same for the idiot "white supremacists" they also considered themselves Democrats. These groups were NEVER endorsed by the Republican party. One of the main reasons I chose to become a Republican was an uncle of mine by marriage, thank God not actually a relative, was a member of the KKK, a white supremacist, and the chairman of the Biloxi Mississippi Democratic caucus. That particular group also did not allow women. I despised the ground he walked on. So did my parents.
I believe that we have already covered militia groups. Ruby Ridge took place during the presidential term of Bush I. Again, never endorsed by the Republican party. As for OK City, that was two guys, disgruntled ex military, with an axe to grind. Not exactly a huge group.
Violent anti abortion groups: While most abortion protestors were peaceful, the ones who bombed clinics were sick individuals, and I will certainly concede that they were extreme right wing. Same with anti gay groups. The things they did were indeed a shameful part of American history.
Equivalent groups of the left: The Weathermen, the Black Panthers (who murdered people simply because they were white) all the underground splinter groups of the late 60s and early 70s. Remember the Patty Hurst debacle? The groups most certainly advocated violence and caused deaths.
Once again, the Uni-bomber, and of course the tree huggers, who burn down buildings and set traps. Rather cowardly wouldn’t you say?
If you want to argue semantics Jon, that is fine with me. My point is that there are crazies on both sides of the line. I do find it interesting, how when you are questioned about a premise that you make, you tend to bristle and get testy. I have no intention of playing show me yours and I’ll show you mine. The facts speak for themselves.
September 10, 2014 at 6:38 pm
Pink – you’re right about the WBC – they’re just crazy, and I found that most of the members are extended family of the founder. Right and left wing groups have denounced them.
September 11, 2014 at 10:55 am
You bring up violent groups on the left from the 60s and 70s – but they have died out and were very tiny to begin with. They hated Dems as much as Reps. In a sense, they were apolitical, like many of today’s right wing hate groups, as they don’t want to create change within the US political system, they want to overthrow it – of course, making them traitors.
But, today, the number of right wing violent groups and the number people in those groups far outnumber the equivalent on the left. I do have some personal insight, as my step-brother is one of them in Montana.
Like many on the far right, who have dropped out of society, it doesn’t keep him from applying for food stamps and other assistance from the government. Just pure hypocrisy.
My guess is that the numbers would turn out to be at least 100 to 1, if not 1,000 to 1.
September 11, 2014 at 11:58 am
If it wasn’t for a rather large portion of our society, especially the overly religious, and or patriotic who think it is a sin to change their established beliefs about their country, its history, and the rest of the world, no matter how factual the evidence to the contrary because they are instinctually aware that if they do, it could cause a cascading effect on many if not all their other long held erroneous beliefs.
A change in ones perspective, in most cases, should be celebrated not feared yet some will fight tooth and nail to protect their own ignorance.
Now because of a handful of ideologues in Washington we
September 11, 2014 at 1:56 pm
September 11, 2014 at 2:47 pm
PS Sure wish some here had it together half as much as this young man and his art.
" The world is coming to an end and the path to a new beginning starts within YOU"
September 11, 2014 at 9:02 pm
You’ve listed a few individual, whose acts of violence had nothing to do with politics – just crazy people.
One right-wing nut killed many more people than those you listed: Timothy McVeigh
He was part of a movement – as are thousands of other right-wing hate groups, with thousands of members, who have killed or advocate killing: [insert your choice here: Jews, Hispanics, blacks, law enforcement officers, etc.]
September 12, 2014 at 8:14 am
This looks like a job for
September 12, 2014 at 11:06 am
I will be happy to engage you when you decide to actually say something about the issues instead of trying to be cute. Although I do understand that in today’s world of cutthroat economics and the wars they use to gain funds and take over countries and enslave their people through debt, these childish attempts to put down those who actually care by those who can’t, won’t or don’t know how, is completely understandable.
Though I truly believe compassion, empathy and the ability to care for others is hardwired into every one of us at birth, through the help of well meaning parents, our peers, the media and various institutions, these attributes, like muscles, will soon atrophy and become useless through non use. As a result, all these great attributes must be remembered or relearned, remembering is much preferable to relearning because the latter requires the written word and various, often confusing, religious interpretations…
September 12, 2014 at 12:59 pm
Thousands spared by war in the middle east as aging hippies post reminders to "stay safe during these scary times." #ISISBeNice
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
760-723-7319 | 1588 S. Mission Rd. Suite 200, Fallbrook CA 92028
Village News | Copyright © 2015 Village News, Inc. | All Rights Reserved.