The Desperation and Dangers of the Far-Right Extreme Evangelical Sub-Culture

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Frank Shaeffer (Former life-long Republican and author of "Crazy for God")

Shaeffer has a unique point of view. His research and incite is very compelling, but what is happening is the media and agents of hopeandchange are taking it to paint broad strokes over anyone who is pro-business, pro-life, or anti-Obama.

Frank Shaeffer's point of view is being exploited to alienate large and diverse sections of society. His intention, I'm sure, wasn't to do this, but that is how it is being used. I am sick of hearing chatter about 'the right-wing lunatics', and being grouped into that group. I hear it constantly in the news. I hear next to me in this cafe I use often and am currently in (Panera Bread on Ohio State campus).

This is like calling Catholic Priests pedophiles. It was a funny joke.... was (take note Jimmy Fallon). It has no basis in fact, but it manages to undermine a diverse group of people. Some priests did molest children, but those men are few.

I have looked long and hard at the debate(s). I have spoken, learned, researched and discussed the debate. I'm afraid you are mistaken in your judgments about me.

I admit I was venting about my frustration with my experience trying to debate the subject and only being disregarded as a kook. I apologize.

Read KEYNES' The General Theory to understand exactly what the administration is trying to do, and read Hazlitts The Failure of the New Economics to understand why it won't work. I also recommend Rothbard's America's Great Depression (FREE ONLINE for a great historical analysis of past depressions and the great depression. I am sure you have read and researched a lot, but if you haven't read these, I strongly recommend them. They provide more incite into what is going on. The last one (Rothbard) is likely the easiest one to read and the most relevent to the current situation.

I implore all ATSers to not sit or stand by as economists assume you are too dumb to understand their explanations.

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by grover

 

I agree my friend, sometimes I wonder if the radical branch of Christian fundamentalist has become a cult on itself.

We have to be honest here, they are not many but they are the loudest and the boldest.

Who are they?

Originally posted by angryamerican
the Far-Right Extreme Evangelical Are in the same vane as the Muslim jihadist.

No they don't blow up things YET but they are just as fanatical. They are also twice as dangerous to the United States as any jihadist will ever be.

[edit on 18-9-2009 by angryamerican]

What is the name of their organizations?

reply to post by DINSTAAR


You seem like a leveled headed guy to me, articulate and informative poster, thanks for the heads up on the reading material.

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
Right Wingers in general are desperate human beings. I feel sad for them..

And I feel sad for people like you who thinks that somehow right wingers are desperate, and need your pity.

There's room for everybody. Differences of opinion is what makes America great, and despite what some people think, there are American soldiers ready to defend your right to disagree with the sad right wingers, and say what you believe to everyone else without fear.

Also, I think you make a mistake in thinking that the right wingers are desperate, when many would call it dedicated to an ideal. The same applies to a far left winger. those on the right can't concieve why they believe the way they do.

Fortunately, this forum lets every one air it out, and I hope that right continues.

Originally posted by DINSTAAR
Shaeffer has a unique point of view. His research and incite is very compelling, but what is happening is the media and agents of hopeandchange are taking it to paint broad strokes over anyone who is pro-business, pro-life, or anti-Obama.

I hear you and agree with you. Any time generalizations are made, there is the danger of hooking in people who don't belong in the generalization. In fact, it's nearly a certainty.

I would like to point to something in your previous quote. "Agents of hopeandchange". This is a broad stroke. I am proudly an agent of hope and change. I have hope and I know we need change. And I voted for Obama. That doesn't mean that I am a brainless, blind follower of rainbows and penny whistles, however.

In my opinion, we don't yet know Obama's purpose, his goals, his effectiveness or his motivation. And we won't for some time. Now, I may fit under that brush of yours or I may not. But I like to think that I do not, and I don't like being swept up in the generalization any more than you do. (not saying you were doing this, but you get my point.)

Frank Shaeffer's point of view is being exploited to alienate large and diverse sections of society.

Sadly, I believe you are right. And I'm getting pretty sick of the chatter about "lunatics" of all stripes who are merely people with beliefs. It certainly is not my intent to paint all of any group (Republicans, Christians, conservatives, Anti-Obama, or even "birthers") with this "brush" in the OP. I hope I've been clear on that (though some with a clear anti-BH agenda would disagree, but who cares?)

I admit I was venting about my frustration with my experience trying to debate the subject and only being disregarded as a kook. I apologize.

Absolutely no problem. I can understand your frustration and it's clear to me that you are no "kook".

Thank you for the links. I am familiar with some. But I will look into them further.

I implore all ATSers to not sit or stand by as economists assume you are too dumb to understand their explanations.

I would agree. I don't think we should sit by while ANYONE assumes that we are too dumb or apathetic to understand or care what is happening to our country. Worse yet, prove that we are.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
What is the name of their organizations?

As I said in the sister thread of this one, the label isn't as important as the FACT of their existence and their potential to threaten. Who cares if they have a name? What difference does that make?


[edit on 18-9-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by DINSTAAR

 

You seem like a leveled headed guy to me, articulate and informative poster, thanks for the heads up on the reading material.

LINK TO KEYNES' book. I am glad some of these resources are free online. I will warn anyone who wants to read this..... boring. I am trying to find a condensed version.

I will try to give some basics of Keynesian Economics in another thread, and maybe an intro into other schools of economics. Our greatest resource against an intrusive government or fraudulent corporations is information. Information is the very fiber that freedom relies upon. Without information, we have to rely on our oppressors to give freedom to us. Is it any wonder that some of our founding fathers were printers?

I will link the thread to you. I have to do it later.... my battery is dying and there are no plugs available.

reply to post by DINSTAAR



Thank you DIN,

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

I would like to point to something in your previous quote. "Agents of hopeandchange". This is a broad stroke.

Clarification...

You are an agent of Hope and Change as you demonstrate. I am as well. An agent of hopeandchange is a more colorful way of describing aids and people working directly for the president or the democratic party who use broad strokes to destroy credibility.

Originally posted by uaocteaou
Fear and loathing in Washington, DC.....

The GOP::

.........................................................................................
Voted against civil rights
.........................................................................................

[edit on 17-9-2009 by uaocteaou]

I haven't had time to check your other claims yet, but I do know that history has been re-written in one of the instances you mentioned.

You may find this link enlightening -- en.wikipedia.org...

Thanks for your attention to this small detail.

Originally posted by DINSTAAR
Clarification...

You are an agent of Hope and Change as you demonstrate. I am as well. An agent of hopeandchange is a more colorful way of describing aids and people working directly for the president or the democratic party who use broad strokes to destroy credibility.

Ah! Thank you for the clarification. I admit to being "sensitive" to the anti-Obama brushes that are swirling around. Even though I vocally disagree with many of his policies, I have gotten caught under the "Obamessiah" brush more times than I care to think about, simply because I support some of his policies and because I voted for him.

I'm glad you brought up the political party of Democrats and some of their tactics to destroy the credibility of Republicans. Because, in the end, I think the political parties are behind BOTH extremists groups. I think some people in Congress are probably feeding the propagandists of their "side" so they can in turn disseminate information for them, because we can't have our Senators out there saying that they "want Obama to fail" or that "people who hate Obama are racists". Or at least they can't harp on it like the propagandists can. And the propagandists are more than happy to harp on it all day long...

Who are the people that like to burn cars, throw rocks at cops and break windows among other things? Is it these conservative protesters or the hardcore christians? Didn't think so! So who can more acurately be compared to Muslim fundamentalists? Think you can get a million liberals together protesting something and come away from it without a single negative incident? Not that I think liberals are like muslim fundamentalist, just you people are seriously trying to demonize the hardcore believers of christianity and they are good people. Keep patting each other on the back though, it is theraputic to feel welcomed and agreed with.

You just can't comprehend why so many people are actually getting off their butts and opposing this administration. This many people don't awake from decades of a wandering stupor for no reason, we can see where his policies are taking us and people are genuinely scared of what they see. You just can't comprehend this, so you make your own conclusions as to why....So, I pity you people in your little dream land.

[edit on 18-9-2009 by Sheeper]

reply to post by Sheeper


I have already addressed your concerns here so I will just give you the link.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Believe what you wish.

I don't think people should have an equal right to express their opinion . I think sometimes one side is plain and outright wrong and their opinion should not be considered. That is the danger of democracy , it allows the fool the same vote as the learned. Sometimes , progress and advancement just have to be , no matter what some dimwit element of society has to say about it . Should the end of slavery have been debated , should the spread of the enlightenment or the renaissance or the industrial revolution be open to the opinion of fools ? When you get a section of society that is happy to play the ignoramus , then they should forfeit their right to an equal say in how that society should progress and develop. They should be ostracized and marginalized .

Years ago, they would ship such idiots off to foreign shores , aka the puritans . It was either that , or imprisonment or execution. But society , even then knew how to reduce the influence of the miscreants that were not in accordance with the wishes of the society as a whole . You can't ship these people off to foreign shores (fortunately for us ) , but you will have to find a way to disencumber yourselves from these burdensome people , a modern method of filtering out the spurious voices and voters.


[edit on 19-9-2009 by Gun Totin Gerbil]

reply to post by Gun Totin Gerbil

If that idea of yours were enforced we would all be excluded from comment and consideration at one time or the other since we are all ignorant about something.

If you pay close attention you can still learn from the most wrong, ignorant and misplaced argument...if anything you can learn why someone believes something patently wrong or be put in the position of having to reexamine your own belief system and why you feel something is true or false.

Confronting ignorance in other words can be an enlightening and educating process...

so by that argument...you are wrong.

No, at some stage , society must leave behind those that do not wish to embrace progress , development and forward change . Perhaps it is acceptable to lend an ear to their concerns , but only if it is of genuine origin . Not the product of brainwashing and falsehoods or disinformation or something that has been channelled through them by a 3rd party agency . You cannot guarantee that in America , When you see these people at the tea parties , ok, they interview the dumbest of them all . But every single one of them thinks the same , they all have identical fallacies of information and the same false notions . What is the point in trying to obtain a separate opinion from one of these types, when one is exactly the same as the thousands. I could tell you what they think . Because they don't actually 'think' it , they are told it and they do not know really why .

What is the point of garnering information from such as these . You may as well go to their single disinformation source and spare having to question the multitudes to get the same spurious answer.

[edit on 19-9-2009 by Gun Totin Gerbil]

Originally posted by Gun Totin Gerbil
What is the point of garnering information from such as these .

It's not about you or us garnering information. It's about THEIR RIGHT to express themselves. EVERYONE in the US has that right and I will protect it fiercely, REGARDLESS of their ignorance.

Originally posted by Gun Totin Gerbil
I don't think people should have an equal right to express their opinion .

With all due respect, if ignorant statements were not permitted, this statement would be in real trouble.

Some of your population is waiting on that hill for the rapture . It was ok a few centuries ago, almost everybody was in religious ignorance . Today , it is a problem to you , they are not quite what you want.. but you say , listen to them . In 200 years time, they will still be on that hill , and society will have moved further on and they will be even further estranged . Will anyone listen to them then . What date would you propose that they should still be listened too. Why should we not be listening to the advocates of the spanish inquisition today ?

"With all due respect, if ignorant statements were not permitted, this statement would be in real trouble. "

That opening sentence was meant to be controversial. I hoped the further explanation would put some light onto why I thought it . If you single it out like that , then it does not really represent the whole statement I am making . I understand your concern thou, in regard of that one sentence taken as an isolated quote.

[edit on 19-9-2009 by Gun Totin Gerbil]

Fox News the organization the fuels all the fires gets eviscerated in this caught out LIE: www.thrfeed.com...