The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[scaeagles]

I love how it is necessary to refer to them as teabaggers. I don't think they refer to themselves as teabaggers.

[Stan4dSteph]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I love how it is necessary to refer to them as teabaggers. I don't think they refer to themselves as teabaggers.

Not anymore, but they certainly did at one time.

[innerSpaceman]

Yes, let's not feign surprise when "anarchists" take to violence. Do "Teabaggers" want the same connections applied to them? (Sorry, TeaPartiers).

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Yes, let's not feign surprise when "anarchists" take to violence. Do "Teabaggers" want the same connections applied to them? (Sorry, TeaPartiers).

Hey - Anarchists aren't necessarily violent, it's just the violent one's get all the press - and being anarchist, there is no organized response to denounce.

On the other hand, I think people resort to violence when the feel they have been marginalized which is why you see it arise from the fringes.

The competitive model has done us some good, but it's ashame we really don't have many cooperative models for bringing people together for a common goal unless its a common enemy.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

The competitive model has done us some good, but it's ashame we really don't have many cooperative models for bringing people together for a common goal unless its a common enemy.

Fvcking Socialist.

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Fvcking Socialist.

I think I'm leaning situationist lately

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

I think I'm leaning situationist lately

Fvcking moral relativist.

[innerSpaceman]

My last post was written before I saw scaeagles'. Yes, it's a habit I'm finding hard to shake. Among us gays, it's pretty universal and, yes, derisive. My apologies.

[mousepod]

I apologize for calling the Tea Party Patriots "Teabaggers". I know that that's a derogatory label and it was a cheap shot.

Let's let them expose their own hypocrisy.

Tea Party activists, who are becoming a force in U.S. politics, want the federal government out of their lives except when it comes to creating jobs.
More than 90 percent of Tea Party backers interviewed in a new Bloomberg National Poll say the U.S. is verging more toward socialism than capitalism, the federal government is trying to control too many aspects of private life and more decisions should be made at the state level.
At the same time, 70 percent of those who sympathize with the Tea Party, which organized protests this week against President Barack Obama’s health-care overhaul, want a federal government that fosters job creation.

[Alex]

Anybody remember when a left-wing anarchist killed McKinley? And in 1721 a blue-dog Democrat kicked a puppy. But that was ok because in 1621 at the Battle of Cornwall a Southern Republican crossed the street angrily.


All threats (A) are worrisome (C), and a generally increasing hostile and inappropriate tone (B) of discourse is worrisome (C). I just wish people would be more careful that in this case because A=C and B=C that B does not equal A.

The other other night Rachel Maddow played audio of three "threatening" phone messages left for Bart Stupak. They were all vile in their sentiment but so far as I could tell not one of them contained an actual threat (maybe they were hidden in the bleeps, one did contain a several second long bleep; but then playing the audio was not informative of threats).

To label everything that is really rude as a threat makes it easier for people to dismiss the actual threats. Something about crying wolf and all that.

The calls played on Maddow:

Originally Posted by Call #1

Congressman Stupak, you baby-killing mother<bleep>, um, you turn coat sun of a <bleep>, I hope you bleed out of your <bleep> got cancer and die you <bleep>. You do not, you do not, um say that you're pro-life and then for a few bucks um, go turncoat and hurt the country you <multi-second-long bleep>. I hope you die.

Vile, yes. Inappropriate, yes. Incredibly rude, yes. But not a threat.

Originally Posted by Call #2

You are a bastard and a baby killer, you will rue the day you did this Mr. Stupak. You are a disgusting man and I hope you're haunted the rest of yor living days. Because, you won't be a congressman much longer so you are a dirtbag and the country loathes you and god - bastard that you are - we think you're a devil and you will go the grave with this on your conscience. Was it worth it worth your soul?

"Baby killer" is inappropriate but I hear worse than this call from people on either said of issues all the time. And I fail to see a threat.

Originally Posted by Call #3

<unintelligble> low-life baby-murdering scumbag pile of steaming crap. You and your family are scum. You ought to fill your pockets with lead and jump in the Potomac, punk. That's what you are Stupak, you're a piece of crap. We despise you and every punk just like you Stupak.

Encouraging someone to killthelves, preferably with family along for the right is again vile and way over the line of anything resembling reasonable discourse. But again, no threat is in there.

Maddow said 50 "threatening calls like these" had been forwarded to the police. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there actually were threats in some of them, but if they are all like this then I wonder what exactly the police are expected to do but wait for actual threats to come in.


Yes, there are loons and overreacters on both sides and yes the right side will probably be more prominent because being completely out of power tends to exacerbate the feelings of oppression.

As always, "that's awful but you're side did it too" is a sentiment weakened by the caveat. But then so is "that's awful and it is somehow peculiarly unique to your side."