Ask Me Help Desk - Civil war

Civil war

Hello:

Let me tell you how a civil war can start right here in this great country of ours... I'm a lib. I believe in ONE view of America. Some of you are conservatives. You believe in ANOTHER view of America. But, I DON'T believe you're my enemy.

I'm NOT sure you view ME in that same light. This is how Ted Nugent views me.. “If you can't go home and get everybody in your lives to clean house in this vile, evil, America-hating administration, I don't even know what you're made of.”

Vile? Evil? America-hating? Nugent doesn't just characterize those with different political views as misguided or wrong. He seeks to paint them as alien and anti-American — as enemies of this nation, rather than citizens with whom he disagrees. In a subsequent interview, Nugent called Nancy Pelosi a “sub-human scoundrel” and referred to liberals as cockroaches to “stomp” in November.

This is what distinguishes the flame-throwers of the far right from those of the far left. Nugent and his ilk seek to deny their political opponents the very right to believe in a different philosophy. Agree with me, he says, or be stomped.

Thanks to Eugene Robinson for some of those words...

Now, I'm NOT a nice guy. In fact, I'm a TRAINED killer who swore an oath to this great land. If somebody views ME as their ENEMY, who am I to change their minds?? But, I KNOW what to DO with our enemies, and it AIN'T asking him to be nice.

excon

I'm not big on political discussion but I have to say, I don't view you (or any other liberals) as an enemy. You're simply someone with a different point of view than mine... and I can live with that.

Although I believe in the right to own guns, and have many myself, I am really not a supporter of the NRA. I think that people like Nugent are giving the NRA a bad name. I have thought this about the NRA for years now and let my membership lapse as I didn't really want to associate with such a group. Yes, I want to maintain the right to keep and carry all my guns, but I don't want a group like that to try and help me do it.

I know many others who think the same as I do. Some are NRA members because they believe in the cause, just not the tactics. It doesn't make them dangerous. However, on the other side of the coin, I also know many that are, or could be, dangerous.

I was part of a "club" of gun owners here in PA that were all for gun rights. It was a fun group that consisted of hundreds of active members. As time went by, I started to see that they were using some hard tactics to get noticed and to test the laws legally. I got involved in one such legal incident against town cops. Sure, the cops were wrong for how it was handled and I won a suit but what I realized was this... the situation was set up in such a way that it was bound to happen. I was an unwitting participant as I hadn't caught on at that point. Through the legal proceedings I started to see that this wasn't a group of people that I wanted to associate with. I left them and haven't talked to any of them in years.

I did see that there were many already calling for "revolution" and such and this was 3 years ago. These are people that I am supposed to agree with... but I don't... I can't. Unfortunately, I see some of these people as dangerous, or potentially dangerous if given the chance. Some were just smoke blowers but there were a few that are the people you seem to be talking about, ex.

I'd like to be able to say you're wrong, and I wish I could. Sadly, I don't really think you are. I do have to say, not all of us think this bad way. Most of us just want to live and get along.

Quote:

Originally Posted by odinn7

I'd like to be able to say you're wrong, and I wish I could. Sadly, I don't really think you are. I do have to say, not all of us think this bad way. Most of us just want to live and get along.

Hello odinn:

Thanks. Men of good will CAN change things...

There IS an undercurrent of angry white guys on the right, most of them armed, that is NOT duplicated by ANYBODY on the left. Oh, they point to the 5 New Black Panthers, and the OWS'ers, and I have to laugh..

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello odinn:
There IS an undercurrent of angry white guys on the right, most of them armed,

excon

I know this... I have seen and met some. As I said, I am armed too... I have a few assault rifles even... but I don't place myself in the same category as them. Unfortunately for me, when anyone finds out that I do own, and am licensed to carry a gun, they place me in that category.

Quote:

Originally Posted by odinn7

Unfortunately for me, when anyone finds out that I do own, and am licensed to carry a gun, they place me in that category.

Hello again, odinn:

It's not ALL armed white guys. Personally, I support the Second Amendment with the same vociferousness as I do the rest. I don't think I'm a liberal anomaly, either.

I'm a political animal. I LOVE the back and forth. But, having spilled MY blood on the battlefields of Vietnam, it PISSES me off when I get accused of being ANTI American by a DRAFT dodging SOB like Nugent. If He thinks I'm his enemy, I'll oblige the bigmouthed bastard.

excon

Hello ,I'm a conservative ;and I am concerned that over the top rhetoric from the left can cause a civil war. Here are some examples of what I mean.

This is how Rosanne Barr views conservatives views of wealth redistribution .“I first would allow the guilty bankers to pay… back anything over 100 million in personal wealth because I believe in a maximum wage of 100 million dollars and if they're unable to live on that amount then they should go to the reeducation camps, and if that doesn't help, then be beheaded.”And Sandra Bernhard said that Sarah Palin would be gang raped by black men if she visited NY . Alec Baldwin called for the stoning of Henry Hyde ."We would stone him to death! ...Wait! Shut up! Shut up! No shut up! I'm not finished. We would stone Henry Hyde to death and we would go to their homes and we'd kill their wives and their children. We would kill their families."

NPR commentator Andrei Codrescu on his "All Things Considered" segment stated, "The evaporation of four million who believe in this Christian cr@p would leave this world a better place." Howard Dean, former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, stated, "I hate Republicans and everything they stand for." USA Today columnist Julianne Malveaux expressed her opinion of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on PBS: "The man is on the Court. You know, I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early, like many black men do, of heart disease.
I could go on ,it permeates all the way to the Obama Homeland Security Dept that thinks that Tea Partiers are domestic terrorists.Or how about this gem from the Village Voice's Michael Feingold " “Republicans don't believe in the imagination, partly because so few of them have one, but mostly because it gets in the way of their chosen work, which is to destroy the human race and the planet. Human beings, who have imaginations, can see a recipe for disaster in the making; Republicans, whose goal in life is to profit from disaster and who don't give a hoot about human beings, either can't or won't. Which is why I personally think they should be exterminated before they cause any more harm.”
There are countless examples of liberal entertainers and pundits who have said similar things. I could talk about the movie made in the last decade that had it's premise that someone wacked President Bush. I could speak of liberal radio host Randi Rhodes who said on air that Bush should be taken fishing like Fredo in the movie 'Godfather II (Fredo was executed )
I could make a separate posting just on what was said about Sarah Palin.
But Laura Ingraham had the best line for entertainers who speak out and spew their ignorance about politics... :"Shut up and sing" .

What sort of diatribe is that Tom, nothing to do with reality? You talk about strawmen but I see you will always trot out a few of your own

Um did you read the op ? It is consistent with the theme about over the top entertainers spewing ignorance.

In true excon fashion I present a video interlude into this thread ;)

Hate Liberals? This is for you. Video

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

um did you read the op ? It is consistent with the theme about over the top entertainers spewing ignorance.

Over the top and spewing ignorance, I sense a lot of that around here and it isn't only confined to has been entertainers. As I recall Excon was spewing something about an american hating administration. He must have got up with his knickers in a knot.

Way I see it it your politicians, not the administration who hate americans. They spend their time blocking every initiative, what a bunch of noers

Quote:

Originally Posted by califdadof3

Hate Liberals? This is for you. Video

Hello dad:

I liked it. Libs are STILL better than wingers...

excon

Quote:

Way I see it it your politicians, not the administration who hate americans. They spend their time blocking every initiative, what a bunch of noers

Every initiative that advances your utopian dreams .

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

every initiative that advances your utopian dreams .

Tom I don't have utopian dreams, I live in a utopian reality. What I know is it could be like that for your people too if you would realise that the rich can't have it all their own way. What finances our model is a good mixture of capitalistic endeavour, and social responsibility financed by an efficient and fair tax system. Why we even have socialistic governments reducing the public service and talking about budget surpluses. Such things are unknown in your free market haven

You can only dream of what we have because your mean attitudes lock you into outcomes that empoverish a large percentage of your population

Yeah that's what passes for dialogue with you... My mean attitudes ;my ilk .

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

yeah that's what passes for dialogue with you ... My mean attitudes ;my ilk .

Exactly; your fixed minded approach unable to see that there are other ways and they work

Five years ago you were a libertarian. What happened?

Anyway, just exactly how should we respond to being called bitter clingers by our president that vowed "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun?" The guy who told you how to be a good neighbor, "I want you to argue with them, get in their faces." Who wanted Latinos to "punish our enemies." You know, the guy that told Republicans "they gotta sit in back," "I want them just to get out of the way" and "don't do a lot of talking."

Or that Union guy that cheered his goons to "take these son of a es out?" Should I bring a gun to that fight?

Or how about Janeane Garofalo who called Tea Partiers "functionally retarded adults, the racists." How should I respond, "thank you sir may I have another?"

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Five years ago you were a libertarian. What happened?

Anyway, just exactly how should we respond to being called bitter clingers by our president

Hello again, Steve:

Couple things.. I'm no different NOW than I was then. My approach to libertarianism is from the left. I think I said it the linked post, but until we GET to the unfettered marketplace of a libertarians dream, I'm going to come down on the ones who are keeping us from getting there. And, it's NOT the Democrats. It's the RIGHT WING oligarchs who would rather HAVE a politician in their pocket, than HAVE good business sense. With his paid politician, he can tip the so called "even playing field", into one that favors him. The rich have been doing that for 30 years.

Next is the palpable DIFFERENCE in the language of the right, from the language of the left.. You CAN'T see it. You SAY it's the same. It isn't. It's not even close. Who does odinn know that you don't?

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

Couple things.. I'm no different NOW than I was then. My approach to libertarianism is from the left. I think I said it the linked post, but until we GET to the unfettered marketplace of a libertarians dream, I'm going to come down on the ones who are keeping us from getting there. And, it's NOT the Democrats. It's the RIGHT WING oligarchs who would rather HAVE a politician in their pocket, than HAVE good business sense. With his paid politician, he can tip the so called "even playing field", into one that favors him. The rich have been doing that for 30 years.

Need I remind you that union bosses have been shilling for Democrats while padding their pockets for years, too? Oh, and why does Obama publicly go for Wall Street's throat while holding his hand out for their money? How many Democrats are the richest in Congress? Don't play that card, ex, the left is no better than the right and additionally want to take from one and give it to another just so they can assuage their guilty conscience, pat themselves on the back and say "now wasn't that fair?"

Give me a break. I'll take my chances of succeeding on my own rather than submit to codified thievery.

Quote:

Next is the palpable DIFFERENCE in the language of the right, from the language of the left.. You CAN'T see it. You SAY it's the same. It isn't. It's not even close. Who does odinn know that you don't?

What? Was I supposed to say you aren't my enemy? I figured that went without saying. Or am I supposed to cop to knowing all those friends of mine that want a revolution? What? Do you forget the 8 plus years of Bush Derangement Syndrome followed by Palin Derangement Syndrome? I have not seen likes of those unhinged masses before or since, surely you didn't miss that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Do you forget the 8 plus years of Bush Derangement Syndrome followed by Palin Derangement Syndrome? I have not seen likes of those unhinged masses before or since, surely you didn't miss that.

Hello again, Steve:

The DIFFERENCE is, Palin derangement syndrome is perpetrated by HIPPIES. Right wing derangement syndrome is perpetrated by WELL ARMED angry white guys.

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

The DIFFERENCE is, Palin derangement syndrome is perpetrated by HIPPIES. Right wing derangement syndrome is perpetrated by WELL ARMED angry white guys.

Unlike the harmless, completely unarmed union thugs being told to "take these son of b*tches out?" I agree the right is probably more armed than the hippies but you wouldn't want a bunch of stoned geezers running around packing would you?

P.S. Marion Barry doesn't like Asians in his neighborhood.

Quote:

“We got to do something about these Asians coming in and opening up businesses and dirty shops," he said at an April 3rd campaign event. "They ought to go. I’m going to say that right now."

Oh wait, he explained that wasn't racism, it's "culturism." That must be what you mean by the "palpable difference" in the left's rhetoric and the right's. Them Asians "ought to go" is "culturism" while criticizing Obama's policies is "racism." Am I right?

And Marion Barry is the spokeman for who again? LOL, he is one big screw-up... that gets re-elected!

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

And Marion Barry is the spokeman for who again? LOL, he is one big screw-up...that gets re-elected!

Oh, so unless one is a "spokeman" (that would be "spokesman" I think) they're irrelevant. Thanks for pointing out the irrelevance of Ted Nugent's remarks.

I agree that Ted Nugent is irrelevant, he's trying hard to be though. There are no lack of screwy people in the US - I know you'll find the ones that make your point :-) And I guess they become representative of the US in a way.

I also agree that my typing sucks LOL.

Marion Barry was mayor of DC for 16 years and is currently a city council member in our nation's capitol, so he IS an elected representative.

Pretty sure he doesn't represent the left or the right, he's in his own little screwed world.

True he is, but the guy I mentioned first represents this country. Should he get a pass?

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Thanks for pointing out the irrelevance of Ted Nugent's remarks.

Hello again, Steve:

Let me see. He was speaking an an NRA event. He had a microphone and an audience. Given the above, it LOOKS like he's a spokesman for the NRA. They wouldn't give ME a microphone, or you either..

excon

Hello ex,

Let me see, Teamsters president Jimmy Hoffa said this at a Labor Day rally to warm up the crowd prior the address by the President of the United States:

Quote:

“We are going to hear from President Obama in a few minutes, and I am so glad that he has come to Michigan because this is where he sees the real America. He looks out on this army of people and you know what I say? President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. President Obama, we want one thing: Jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs…

That’s what we are going to tell America….. When he sees what we are doing here, he will be inspired, but he needs help. And you know what? Everybody here has got a vote. If we go back, we keep the eye on the prize, lets take these sons-of-b*tches out and give America back to America where we belong."

I believe the left would call that "militaristic" and "threatening" to say the least had it been Nugent warming up a crowd for the last president. But a Teamster president rallying the troops for President Obama, with a microphone and an audience? That's just some of that speech that will be exempted under the newly amended first amendment, right?

Speaking of the Civil War and unions, an Indiana union is invoking a violation of the Thirteenth Amendment in its lawsuit against Gov. Daniels over the Right to Work law. From Page 27 of the complaint:

Quote:

“In this case, the Defendants have exacted compulsory service and/or involuntary servitude from the Union through the combination of the passage of the Right to Work law and the existing federal requirement of the duty of fair representation. Through these laws, the Union is compelled to furnish services to all persons in bargaining units that it represents, but it may not require payment for those services because of the Right to Work law. The statute also requires dues-paying union members to work alongside non-union personnel, and that is compulsory service and-or involuntary servitude within the meaning of the Thirteenth Amendment.”

Apparently not only is working side-by-side with a non-union member slavery, the union is now a slave because it is forced to represent non-union members. But of course, compulsory membership and coerced union dues are the definition of freedom I'm sure.

And isn't this precious? Occupy Portland protesters wish they had guns (content warning).

Quote:

If I had a f–king AK right now…

I have a solution dude, let’s go get guns.

Meanwhile, OccupyMay1st.org has a nice image on its website file-named “rainbowunicorncopkillwsa," of a unicorn with a cop's head in its mouth and blood spewing from the headless body.

More of that "palpable difference" in rhetoric for you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

More of that "palpable difference" in rhetoric for you.

Hello again, Steve:

I know I am, but what are you?

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

I know I am, but what are you?

excon

You know you're what? I'm a peaceful conservative. I don't threaten to "take these sons of b*tches out" at the President's rally, consider working next to a non-union member "slavery," wish I had an effing AK or proudly display bloody images of headless cops.

California Highway Gunman Byron Williams Aimed for "Revolution," Say Cops - Crimesider - CBS News

Quote:

targeted workers at the American Civil Liberties Union and the Tides Foundation, said Oakland police Sgt. Michael Weisenberg in court documents.

Officer Jeff Thomason, an Oakland police spokesman, claimed Williams targeted the two nonprofit organizations because of their political ideologies. The Tides Foundation works to advance progressive social change, according to its Web site.

I-580 shootout suspect mad at left-wing politics

Quote:

A 45-year-old parolee, described by his mother as angry at left-wing politicians, opened fire on California Highway Patrol officers on an Oakland freeway early Sunday and was hit by return fire while wearing body armor, authorities said.

Shooter Wearing Bulletproof Vest Guns Down 3 Pittsburgh Officers, Upset Over Losing Job | Fox News

Quote:

A gunman wearing a bulletproof vest and "lying in wait" opened fire on officers responding to a domestic disturbance call Saturday, killing three of them and turning a quiet Pittsburgh street into a battlefield, police said.

Poplawski feared "the Obama gun ban that's on the way" and "didn't like our rights being infringed upon," said Edward Perkovic, his best friend.

Also: http://www.harikari.com/politics/rig...democrats.html

Let's see, a lone wacko from 2010, a guy in 2009 that lost his job under Obama's economy whose "motive for the shooting isn't clear" and a link to a blog entry from 2010 titled "Right Wing Wackos Want to Kill Democrats?" This proves what exactly? Which of these like Hoffa, Obama and the self-proclaimed guardians of "the 99 percent" represent someone?

It obviously shows that republicans want to kill their foes... c'mon.

Hello again,

I give up. If the only answer you got is to point out a$$hole left wingers, then we might as well stop here. You think it's tit for tat. It isn't. Here's a secret. You have LOOK for nuances, Steve.. They don't jump out and bonk you on the head... But, nuances AIN'T a right wing thing.

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

It obviously shows that republicans want to kill their foes...c'mon.

I know a LOT of Republicans and not a one of them wants to kill liberals. C'mon. I want to beat the living daylights out of excon and Tal in fantasy baseball, but after that we can go have a beer and chill. Sound good?

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again,

I give up. If the only answer you got is to point out a$$hole left wingers, then we might as well stop here. You think it's tit for tat. It isn't. Here's a secret. You have LOOK for nuances, Steve.. They don't jump out and bonk you on the head... But, nuances AIN'T a right wing thing.

Excon

Ex, I'm a musician. I know nuance.

Dude, it's never been about tit for tat. But while you're busy trying to convince me about 'nuances' on the right you're brushing off in your face hatred on the left. To you guys the same thing is defined differently depending on how it affects you. Jonah Goldberg explained it:

Quote:

My complaint isn’t about distractions, it’s about the press’s tendency to treat controversies that help Republicans as “distractions” and ones that hurt Republicans as Very Serious Issues.

Nugent is a distraction, not a "Very Serious Issue." Just like the manufactured "war on women."

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I know a LOT of Republicans and not a one of them wants to kill liberals.

Same goes with liberals versus conservatives, so stop digging up the wackos, it serves no purpose.