what ever happened to respecting the deceased? this is probably worse than the basso thread after sen. kennedy passed away.
I'm glad there is a thread devoted to Safire. Aside from being a celebrated columnist, he was a brilliant wordsmith. University credentials are good but hardly defining in the face of sheer intellect and talent.
nice Thumbs I have stayed out of this thread because I was under the assumption that you were just misguided and a bit of a political novice. But I have since come to understand that you are much more sinister and disingenuous. You are a smart guy and you know how you are manipulating the conversation here. You fake bipartisanship and disarm people by feigning friendship when your motives are much more insidious and dangerous. In other works you are a tea bagger, you are a fake. So I guess that answers your question.
No, actually, you didn't. Look at your original post. http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=4760372&postcount=1 You mention "distortions from highly partisan sources such as diverse as Daily Kos, New York Times and MSNBC." Nowhere did you mention any distortions from Fox news, or any other right-wing biased source. Now you're going back and changing your story after the fact. If you were truly bothered by "distortions in the media", you would be furious with ALL media, including Fox. But you're not. You're backing the Fox Bagger parties. Thumbs, I'm beginning to think more and more that you aren't the reasonable person I thought you were: that your just another hater.
Again, I ask that you read back. I already cited Post #30. However, I should refrain from correcting you lest I corrupt your ability to reason for yourself with the insidious bite of the moderate spider.
"Leftwing" or "greenies" you have already drawn the distinction. Anyway as others poster have noted Anarchists aren't the same as Greens. I myself can attest that your greenies for the most part are very peaceful and as I noted in my earlier post the violence was taken out by a very small group and often not during a major protest. I have also personally witnessed police forcefully crackdown on otherwise peaceful protestors during the RNC with little provocation other than the rumor of action by Anarchists. Now for someone who is upset about the media focussing on the radicals at Tea Party protests you seem very eager to buy into a stereotype regarding Leftwing protest, "greenies" if you prefer. I posted some pictures in another thread regarding protestors at the RNC carrying messages threatening violence, similar to what was shown from the Tea Party protests. Now while you are calling for understanding of the Tea Partiers apparently you aren't willing to extend that to those so called greenies.
How else should they be defined then as "Greenies" or "Teabaggers"? Would that be less biased? Yes there are political differences between Left and Right that we use to distinguish between those two general views but just using those terms doesn't in itself imply bias. I mean if I called the FARC "Leftwing terrorists" and the UDA "Rightwing terrorists" does that mean I am saying the FARC are better than the UDA?
Actually Anarchists are ultimately neither Left or Right but until they show up at Tea Parties I think in our present context they are afiliated with the Leftwing.
Nonsense - the best example I can think of anarchy in practice is New Orleans after Katrina. It was practically an anarchist/anti-government tea partier fantasy. Except there were too many black people.
Yes philosophically but I'm not talking about it just as philosophy I'm talking about these guys: and I haven't seen these guys showing up at Tea Parties.
Except for the part where they were under martial law and had the Feds come in with ski masks breaking down doors and confiscating people's guns.
Please don't use the term anarchy if you are unfamiliar with it's more academic roots. I'd label the Katrina aftermath pseudo-barbarism, not anarchy. Props for the joke though.
Based on the misinformation they are spreading and embracing, and their particular policies, they line up with radical right-wing ideology, talking points, and demographics. I have yet to see any voices come from Tea-baggers that demonstrate a moderate or liberal stance on issues. It's all conservative. I mean, I don't see anyone saying anything in those marches that are moderate or on the left. So....how can you claim it's diverse opinions?????? You know what they say, if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, jumps like a duck, has duck DNA, kids call it a duck when they see it....I doubt you can pass it off as anything other than a duck.
I admit I don't know much about anarchism. But wasn't Timothy McVeigh an anarchist? And those waco guys??? Seems to me they cut across political affiliation.
No, not really. I admit I am not an expert on the Branch Davidian cult or McVeigh's politics. I have read his (McVeigh's) interview with Gore Vidal, which was a fantastic piece of writing. McVeigh was angry about Waco and Ruby Ridge, and considered his actions as opposition to tyrannical government (he was also very angry about his experiences in Iraq). I'd hesitate to use the label "anarchist", as I have seen nothing that would indicate McVeigh was acting in any vein other than what he felt was a patriotic responsibility to react to what he saw as US abuse of it's own citizenry and ideals. The Waco group was undoubtedly apocalyptic, but not necessarily accordingly anti-government - I thought them indifferent, but I may be wrong. Anarchism as a whole is too wide ranging to be lumped into any one boat, and I would be doing myself (and you) a disservice to pretend otherwise. Nominally, I think it can be stated that the anarchist "absence of state" is more ideologically supportive of the worker instead of simply anti-authority. End thread derail.
