The Rise of Rightwing Extreamism and the Fall of the Republican Party?

page: 3
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldDragger

Now thats a laugh! a sick laugh.
Yeah, it has nothing to with the porr undocumented ( sniff sniff), guy working for minimum wage, or less, plus no benefiets.


Yes, that's exactly why these people come here...to be exploited, like drones...to be slaves.

And I'm also sure the unions have their interest in mind and are worried about "Jose" having medical insurance and receiving more than minimum wage for his work.



And I'm sure glad so many jobs went to China and India! Oh, thats right, lower middle class people can sell stuff on E Bay! Some freakin patriot.



Well, what do you think added REGULATIONS, TAXES, and subsidies for the politically connected industries do? YOU THINK THEY ARE GOING TO PRODUCE JOBS?


If that's the case we should have OBAMA RAMP-UP regulations and taxes so we can have ZERO unemployment.


[edit on 7-8-2009 by Gateway]




posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gateway

Originally posted by Animal

Please point out HOW exactly are people expressing themselves without the use of violence that is DEBILITATING the political process exactly. HAVE people stormed into congress and burned it down like the Reichstag? I think people expressing themselves without VIOLENCE is hardly DEBILITATING anything, much less the political process.


The protests that have been taking pace in town hall meetings is causing them be be canceled. A direct result of these protests that have affected the political system.



Again what exactly are you referring to that is being inhibited? You mean people protesting, showing up at town hall or meetings calling their congressman, and displaying their disgust with what is being done with their tax dollars....is inhibiting what?


because these have become aggressive and even violent the meetings are being canceled. Depriving those who wish to take part in civil debate with their representatives the opportunity to do so.


But after a series of contentious town-hall meetings, some Democratic lawmakers are thinking twice about holding large public gatherings. Instead, they are opting for smaller sessions, holding meetings by phone or inviting constituents for one-on-one office hours.
link




The only thing I see remotely inhibited is Obama's policies, by these outcries, and if this IS WHAT YOU FIND DISTURBING or unconscionable, then the problem you have then is not with the right wingers, but with democracy and freedom of speech.


I support decent 100%. I do not support decent that is aggressive, dangerous, extreme or that denys others their right to participate.



Debate? What are you debating? I've summarized you ENTIRE POST. What's there to debate? You are not outlining issues here, you are making a STATEMENT ON HOW YOU SEE THINGS.


You used a qualitative statement to summarize my post and ignored the quantitative content. That is not participating it is deflecting.



And how have I personally attacked you? Do you know what a blowhard is.


Blowhard was used as a character reference to me.



Your post reeks of generalizations,


I have done my best to avoid them. perhaps because you associate with one of the groups i have named you feel you have been part of a generalization. but this is not the case.



and self aggrandizement,


Funny you think this the case. pray tell, how so? I didnt even talk about myself.



on the fact that you disregard the entire group/movement that has been building, SINCE THE BUSH administration and being CONTINUED by the current administration.


What? This has so very little to do with the policies continued by the obama administration, in fact it has almost everything to do with my analysis of the present state of the right.



[animal] Curious what do you think my fallacious arguments are?
[gateway] Quite right. That's because you are not making any. Rather you are painting broad normative generalizations, while at the same time claiming that the FEW nutters that espouse REAL BIGOTRY (of which by the way the left also has) negates the underlying issues, for which they are trying to bring to light.


your right i am not making any fallacious arguments but a clear and concise case against the EXTREME fringe of the right wing party. I am also pointing out quite clearly the rise of this fringe and connecting this rise to the fall of the republican party.




What do you THINK about them and can you disprove them in any way?
Look, instead of focusing your efforts on writing a post which says basically:

Right wing groups, (tea parties, people who fly Gadsden flags, obama care protesters) are racists and inhibiting the political process by slowing down the OBAMA agenda, which I (Animal) LIKE and approve of.

You should focus on really pointing out RACISTS ARGUMENTS WHEN THEY DO occur here on ATS and point them out as fallacious, moronic and of course should be discredited.

Instead, you turn right around and paint entire groups as racists. Here you are playing into and NOW BEING A PART OF what your entire POST is all ABOUT.


I NEVER painted entire groups as racists that is VERY clear. Basically by the response you have made I am guessing you can not discredit my critique.




[animal] Which ad hominem attacks?
Claiming that groups who dislike government growth, such as the ones involved in tea parties or recent protests of Obama care are crypto-racists. Don't you think this might be...might be...a BIG LEAP HERE?


I have made it perfectly clear, once again, I am not painting these groups wholesale as racist. Parts of the quite clearly are.



I'll say!!!! The left is notorious for having deep racism...as well. What do you think unions thugs have say about undocumented construction workers, or those pesky Chinese "TAKING er" JOBS!!


Some are some are not.



Racism is clearly a two way street, here. You are not debating issues, rather by claiming the right is full of bigots, it SHOULD therefore negate any legitimate gripe OR discord being currently displayed which those groups of people feel the encroaching growth of government is doing.
[edit on 7-8-2009 by Gateway]


Racism is only One part of what i am talking about but as your post demonstrates the right has found this to be an issue they can use effectively to counter and deflect other issues so it is the staple. Yet it, in this case, is only PART of the whole.

So I am guessing you feel there is in fact no 'right wing extremist fringe' on the rise? The instances I have documented are just your average joe and jane doing nothing out of the ordinary? all is good here folks nothing to see move along?

or do you agree that there is an extremist movement on the rise? you still have not responded to the clear focus of this thread.

[edit on 7-8-2009 by Animal]



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gateway
reply to post by Cito
 


No Cito, I think Animal would prefer that we call ourselves, racists right-wing extremists because we don't like Obama's policies and are making our voices heard.


[edit on 7-8-2009 by Gateway]


Nope, i dont think your racist unless you give me reason to.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Animal

The protests that have been taking pace in town hall meetings is causing them be be canceled. A direct result of these protests that have affected the political system.


The protesters are not canceling the the town hall meetings. That's done by the congressman or whoever is holding these group meetings, have decided that its probably best to ignore or not give a voice to those that have a problem with the "Obama" care.



because these have become aggressive and even violent the meetings are being canceled.
I do not condone violence. But here you are not understanding cause and effect. Are people storming into these town hall meetings and throwing chairs and threatening people with violence? I doubt it. If I'm wrong...please post the reference news item which indicates this to be the case. Perhaps, yelling, and being cut off at the mic before a statement or question is posed are frustrating people to the point of maybe becoming a little unruly. AND EVEN IF, unruly behavior is occurring, this too, can be dealt with in a manner in which these town hall meetings can continue. Again barring ANY violence.

Violence and Yelling are TWO different things. Even if Yelling is occurring and become unruly these people can be barred. WHY CANCEL THE town hall all together? Like you said, CANCELING them is only LIMITING DEBATE...DON'T YOU THINK?




Depriving those who wish to take part in civil debate with their representatives the opportunity to do so.
I agree, that's why I believe that you must be in FULL SUPPORT OF continuing these town hall meetings. I'm sure security at these venues can weed-out the unruly types, and have the debate continue.


But after a series of contentious town-hall meetings, some Democratic lawmakers are thinking twice about holding large public gatherings.
And this doesn't give you ANY pause? Don't you think having these town hall meetings stopped is a bad thing, don't you think IT'S A COP-OUT?



Instead, they are opting for smaller sessions, holding meetings by phone or inviting constituents for one-on-one office hours.
So having your constituents SCREENED before they enter your office will allow people who don't support this program a voice, huh? Is this not limiting the voices that can be heard?



I support decent 100%. I do not support decent that is aggressive, dangerous, extreme or that denys others their right to participate.
Good, great then...you should support and fully welcome groups like Gadsden flag fliers, and tea parties folks to participate in these town hall meetings and air-out their concerns, rather than have them banned, mic turned off, or closing town hall meetings altogether.





You used a qualitative statement to summarize my post and ignored the quantitative content. That is not participating it is deflecting.
I'm not deflecting, I've summarized it. And I reject the notion that most of these groups or people involved are racists.

I could make a similar statement like yours with the same argumentative concept like, "There is a rise in drunks, and so therefore all or most people that partake in driving on the road are probably drunks".

Here you are liking things that may appear on the surface as connected, but not necessarily so. If there is growing racism that does not mean that therefore the growing dislike of the obama administration is therefore a construct of the racists. This is a flawed argument. These two things are not mutually exclusive. For example, you indirectly link the possible racist assassination attempt by a few, to being therefore part of the larger groups or connected with groups such as anti-obama care, or Gadsden fliers.



Blowhard was used as a character reference to me.

It is a description of how you framed or wrote the standpoint from, that as those that you disagree with. Since you disagree with the groups I have mentioned above and lumping them as extremists and racists all in the same post.

This type of post is done so from the standpoint of a 'BLOWHARD' someone who disparages another while disguising and therefore characterizing his own views as being NON-EXTREMIST AND THEREFORE CAN ONLY BE NON-RACIST.


[edit on 7-8-2009 by Gateway]



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 



I have done my best to avoid them. perhaps because you associate with one of the groups i have named you feel you have been part of a generalization. but this is not the case.
Tried to avoid them? In your original post you try to link racist assassination plots, which by the way only a few people were involved to begin with to the same group of people which are anti-obama policies. Funny you didn’t mention the previous assassination attempts the numerous other presidents have also had to deal with. Maybe Reagan was tried to be killed because of his right wing leanings, but I digress. From the assassination attempt you move on with another all completely and legitimate form of protests. Are people that hold tea bag parties, Gadsden flags fliers, or anti-obama health care racist extremists too? I don’t get your logic.

How are these things EXTREMISTS? I DON’T GET YOUR POINT? And how is this rising GROUPS BAD? So you equate with good as “DON’T PROTEST TAXATION, OR DISPLAY LIMITED GOVERNMENT FLAG, OR ANTI-GOV HEALTH CARE with EXTREMISM? HUH?




Funny you think this the case. pray tell, how so? I didnt even talk about myself.

You don’t need to say, I’m great and a law abider, while they are not. To bolster what you hold dear and degrade other's point a view, instead you point to the groups which you disagree with and refer to them as extremists.



What? This has so very little to do with the policies continued by the obama administration, in fact it has almost everything to do with my analysis of the present state of the right.
Wrong. The Bush administration got the ball rolling with the BAIL-OUTS, SPENDING, and WARS. He railroaded these bailouts regardless of the American public's opinion. Obama is not only continuing this…but in fact increasing IT and doing so AGAIN LIKE BUSH DOING SO DISREGARDING PUBLIC OPINION! You think people woke up one day and said hell I’m just going to protests this NEW GUY for the hell of it. OR don’t you think this was a GRADUAL “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH” realization that the American public is not being listen TO.

52% percent of the American people DISAPROVE OF OBAMA’S health care. Again 52% is this not a large number of people? Is 52% of the public EXTREMISTS? 72% Don’t think Obama will be able to pay for the HEALTH PLAN!!

See here


[animal] Curious what do you think my fallacious arguments are?
I already stated them…equating racists and an assassination attempt as the same group of people involved in flying Gadsden flags and tea baggers and lumping them in the SAME EXTREMIST camp is FALLACIOUS, INDEED.



What do you THINK about them and can you disprove them in any way?
Of who? Tea baggers and Gadsden flag fliers? I certainly don’t equate them with taking part in assassination attempts or extremists. Or of racists? Those are not mutually exclusive groups. I can say I don’t like bigots and still say I like tea baggers and Gadsden flag fliers, CAN YOU SEPARATE THE TWO?

I NEVER painted entire groups as racists that is VERY clear. Basically by the response you have made I am guessing you can not discredit my critique.


Then I don’t understand your posts, and I don’t think YOU do either. Are you saying that those groups I have mentioned are EXTREMISTS? And therefore EXTREME = BAD…or OBAMABA POLICY HATERS = BAD? AM I missing something?


I have made it perfectly clear, once again, I am not painting these groups wholesale as racist. Parts of the quite clearly are.
If you are not then you are saying that these GROUPS ARE EXTREMIST and therefore dangerous. If they are dangerous, then SHOULD THEY BE STOPPED IN SOME WAY?



Racism is only One part of what i am talking about but as your post demonstrates the right has found this to be an issue they can use effectively to counter and deflect other issues so it is the staple. Yet it, in this case, is only PART of the whole.

Again I don’t understand what you are trying to say. What whole?


So I am guessing you feel there is in fact no 'right wing extremist fringe' on the rise?
So tea bagger (people who don’t like increasing taxes) , Anti-Obama health Care (people who don’t like gov health care) Gadsden flag flyers (people who believe in limited federal government) are part of some growing conspiracy EXTREMISM TO YOU?


The instances I have documented are just your average joe and jane doing nothing out of the ordinary? all is good here folks nothing to see move along?
Ah…I figured out your problem. You equate these people as extremist because they do not like these things OF WHICH are happening, so therefore YOU label them as EXTREMISTS. BECAUSE they do not go along with those that are in power. Wait? Are not politicians OUR SERVANTS, or are WE there SERVANTS? IF people DO NOT like what government is doing and forming groups and being VOCAL about it then they are being UN-AMERICAN and therefore EXTREMISTS?


or do you agree that there is an extremist movement on the rise? you still have not responded to the clear focus of this thread.
I’ll respond to your question, despite your NEGATIVE lable. YES, there is a RISE OF Patriotic duty to see to it that GOVERNMENT RESTRAIN ITSELF. I would hardly call this movement EXTREMIST, I would prefer the term Patriotic, since it is what the original founding fathers imagined what this nation would STILL BE. A government not INVOLVING itself in COMMERCE, HEALTH, or EDUCATION, while protecting the sovereignty of STATE’S RIGHTS.




[edit on 7-8-2009 by Gateway]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 12:04 AM
link   
Animal, its quite simple really.

People who dislike Obama's economic or political philosophy and do so by forming groups are not racists nor extremists.

Just like people who protest WAR. ANY War they don't like...they are simply EXPRESSING THEIR VIEW POINT. The viewpoint that they don't like which is the direction of where government is perceived to be headed. I certainly would not equate people who don't go along with government as EXTREMISTS. That's ridiculous, and a misnomer. War protesters are not extremists!!

Extremists are people who destroy property, and trample over others rights. Extremism is something usually done by government, despite the consent of the people. If the people don't want the bail-outs to occur or would prefer that GM and Chrysler file for bankruptcy rather than receive a taxpayer hand-out and congress disregards it and proceeds anyway...TO ME...THIS IS EXTREMIST...AND DANGEROUS.



[edit on 8-8-2009 by Gateway]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Honestly, I only read half your post before I got really bored. Do you really think what is going on right now has anything to do with Republicans or Democrats?

If you really do, you should have spent that 2 hours getting your post together informing yourself of the situation going on right in front of your eyes in your own country.

Don't be a puppet, don't fall for the idea that it's [R] Vs [D] thats just a tactic to make you stop using your common sense and to kick in your standard human switch of self importance when it comes to your own ideals that you want to share with the world.

Nobody cares, there doing what they want and manipulating the weak. Wake up.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory
If you have to ask then it's probably already to late for you to come to your senses.

I think I know my senses better than you do. So don't tell me it's too late for me.



Originally posted by WhatTheory
However, tell me what socialist country is better than America?

Sweeden, nuff said.
They made socialism work.


Originally posted by WhatTheory
Unfortunately with the way our country has been sliding towards socialism it will not be long before we are pulled down to their level instead of the ideals of America pulling them up from the crapper.

I guess you worship the all-not-so-mighty-anymore-dollar. The countries you say that are in the crapper had to band together in order to survive after American and European companies raped their land, economy, and took most of their resources. So don't go calling them crappy. I'd fight along side them anyday, instead of the U.S.


Originally posted by WhatTheory
The same happens within the country. Instead of having people prosper and giving even the poorest of people a chance to become wealthy, socialism makes everybody equally miserable and poor and succumb to the will of the government.

With all the taxes there are in your 'glorious' country, how can the poor even make it, people are losing their houses, jobs and mony under a Capitolist rule. They wouldn't lose their jobs with socialism. They would still be able to go to the top, with out having to destroy anybody on the way like any big-wig executive and CEO. You saw the bailouts, only the rich get bailed out while the rest are left to fend for them selves. The world would be a much better place with socialism as it's economic system. So don't nock it until you try it.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Killah29
I think I know my senses better than you do. So don't tell me it's too late for me.

I don't think you do judging by your response.



Sweeden, nuff said. They made socialism work.

Sorry, I had to laugh at that ridiculous statement.

You were being facetious or sarcastic right?


The countries you say that are in the crapper had to band together in order to survive after American and European companies raped their land, economy, and took most of their resources. So don't go calling them crappy.

Cry me a river but that is your totally deluded opinion.


With all the taxes there are in your 'glorious' country, how can the poor even make it, people are losing their houses, jobs and mony under a Capitolist rule. They wouldn't lose their jobs with socialism.

True capitalism has not been in America for years. For years socialism has been creeping in ever so slowly. The reason for all this current mess is socialism and all the government involvement. It's very obvious. This is happening because of all the uneducated people who are gullible and easily swayed by talking points. Individualism and self reliance is just about gone thanks to socialism. Sad, just sad.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 07:06 PM
link   
If anything has destroyed "individualism and self reliance" it's abject consumerism. Shop where your peers shop, buy what they buy, dress how they dress. Don't make your own stuff when you can buy it - don't repair stuff when you can just buy new.

There may be some people who take advantage of a socialist system and become leeches - but that's a different issue. Economic socialism didn't set the stage for making people into stupid unthinking drones - Glorified consumerism, and the unsatisfying hunt for More! More! More! The desire for instant gratification - and easy credit (money for nothing!) - does.

And anyway, by current republican standards every single first world country on this planet is socialist and wow, it may be crazy, but their populations still manage to run profitable businesses.

I am not against Capitalism, and neither are the first world Socialist countries today. They just believe that businesses need rules or else they will take shocking liberties that are to the good of no-one, ultimately not even their own businesses!



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Avenginggecko
Good OP!

Interestingly enough, there's another thread created today talking about the fall of Liberals and the rise of Conservatism, although it isn't worded quite as nicely as this one. I wonder which is more correct?


Just a thought:

I think that it's entirely possible that we're actually seeing the rise of Conservatism and the fall of the Republican party.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by theWCH

Originally posted by Avenginggecko
Good OP!

I think that it's entirely possible that we're actually seeing the rise of Conservatism and the fall of the Republican party.


That could be very possible. However I doubt if the Conservatives could ever put together a cohesive party that would be taken seriously.
From my experience, conservatives seem to be overly paranoid even among themselves. I do subscribe to some conservatives ideals like smaller government but the one issue that seems to unite the Right Wing evangelical conservatives is their stance on abortion. This stance will destroy any conservative movement and doom them to forever be losers.
As long as the Political conservatives are allied with the Christian Right, you're toast. For a Conservative movement to be successful they are going to have to attract moderates. Ain't gonna happen.





new topics
top topics
 
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join