You're moving outside the timeframe of the average tfper's lifetime.
I'm really not. The wingnuts on my side just don't seem interested in going out and killing the people they disagree with. The wingnuts on the conservative side, which may or may not include the case of the census worker, seem more than willing to commit murder.

When I expanded to "clean up your house", it was more about the fact that I don't see conservatives often cop to the fact that they often passively defend or entirely dismiss cases of conservative terrorism. "Oh, he's just one madman" doesn't deal with the issue that the madman was spurred on by the environment of ignorance, hatred, and anti-government sentiment as virtues, as if they're somehow moral. That can't be allowed to continue. It was more of a side conversation, though.

Yeah, nevermind history. Of all the relevant current political issues to address, you pick this non-issue to kvetch about. That is unfortunate. The Conservative Chupacabra seems alive and well in your imagination, breeding out its minions to terrorize the land in a wave of Conservative Madness and Violence. But really, by projecting your fear and loathing (which I believe is a secondary projection originating in unresolved matters paternal) soley onto the conservative set - when any clear thinking person can see that both sides do crazy things on occasion - you exhibit a zealotry and paranoia that I find disquieting.

Will may be an alarmist, but there's no denying the fact that the GOP handlers have whipped their flock into a foaming at the mouth frenzy, and the nut cases are feeling getting more bold all the time.

And "unresolved paternal matters"? Really? You expect to be taken seriously with that crap?

I dont think you attribute the FBI concern as expressed in a report last year on partisan politics or liberal paranoia.

White Supremacist Recruitment of Military Personnel since 9/11 (pdf)

A report researched and submitted via the SPLC. totally unbiased, right? :rolleyes:

and it's not the GOP faithful people need to be 'worried' about.

If this were a potential case of Islamic terrorism, I doubt you'd call it a non-issue.

I'm not saying this is definitely a case of conservative terrorism, but no intellectually honest, objective party could possibly dismiss that possibility based on current information. I'm not surprised that a few of the conservatives here are uncomfortable with the prospect, but that doesn't make it any less likely.

No....I think you are confusing this 08 FBI report (look at the footnotes, please) with the more recent DHS report that got the wingnuts in a tizzy and which relied on multiple sources, including the FBI, and not just the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Know what, I think I misread your post that I quoted. You were talking about terrorism in the abstract, not about this particular murder.

You're right I wouldn't because one is a relevant issue and the other isn't. What you're trying to do is equate the two and its bullshit (or boredom). Nobody at the United Nations or the G20 is talking about some lone crazy maniac cutting "K-FED" into a census worker in the American South. The media isn't reporting on an escalation of crazy maniacs in the south suddenly carving up governmental workers at the moment now are they. The obsession over this incident is representative of nothing more than delusional paranoia. You wingers have the House, the Senate and the Presidency and it's still not enough! And what is ratbastid doing back in politics after his grandiloquently self-imposed exile!

You're unwillingness to call militant extremism militant extremism is silly and represents a double-standard. I'll tell you what, when your doctor is shot in the face in public because he performs legal procedures, when a museum you frequent is shot up because it doesn't treat the Jewish people as evil, or when a cop friend of yours is gunned down because some lunatic thinks the police state is out to get him, you let me know how it's different from someone getting blown up on a market in Jerusalem or being in a building hit by a plane.

you are correct. my bad.

Will you are missing out on the key fact that liberal terrorist means any democrat in congress and conservative terrorist means the Easter bunny (that is they don't exist). At least that's what i've learned from the last 5 years of fox news.

I thought they called conservative terrorists "patriots"

I don't have a problem calling anything what it is. You conflated the Glenn Beck non-issue maniacally out of proportion and you're doing the same here with another isolated non-issue. This was one freakin incident! If a bear shits in the woods, is that a form of eco-terrorism against the insects and microbacteria crushed underneath? If a drunk slips and falls into a river and tumbles over a waterfall to his death is that corporate-distillery terrorism? If a cop tazes me for causing a public disturbance and I die of a heart attack, is that state terrorism? You call this an incident of "conservative terrorism"...now why is that? Why that exact phrase? Why not "lone crazed psychotic terrorism", or "southern inbred meth-head terrorism"? People here have given you multiple examples of criminal behavior carried out by avowed leftists but you either ignore it or patronize them into apathy (or at least a lack of further discussion). I thought it was the left who chuckled under their breath at the very idea of terrorism. Now all of the sudden Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, David Axelrod and the rest of the Dems currently in power are using the term terrorist and the leftwingers are suddenly embracing the concept of terrorism. Go figure!

9/11 was one incident.

It's conservative terrorism when the intent of the terrorist is directly based on modern conservative/neoconservative/libertarian conservative ideologies. If, in this case, the murder of the census worker was in fact spurred by Michelle Bachmann's anti-census idiocy (and I'm fine saying that's a big if), then this is another case. That'd be 6 cases of conservative terrorism involving murder since April, and yet you insist that they're not only entirely isolated (without demonstrating why, of course), but they're not even remotely related to political ideology.

On what planet do you live?

oh boy

The killer lives on Planet Tractor.

Just to reiterate... nothing was carved in the guys chest... it was s felt-tip pen...
can we atleast agree on that point since it's in the official coromer's report.

Now how did we get off track talking about all this left-wing extremism like neo-nazis and the black panthers? Oh wait... because one racist seperatist militant group is black and the other white, we get to say one is right-wing and the other is left-wing. Except for skin color I see no difference. So which is it? A bunch of right-wing nuts like the Panthers? Or a bunch of left-wing nuts like the neo-nazis? The most evil people in the world were progressive leftists... Mao, Stalin, Hitler...
just roll on down the list of evil bastards ... leftist progressives... yep... evil.

Otto... Hitler was not of the left. He was decidedly of the right.

If you are looking for examples of conservative oppression just look to South and Central America and the myriad juntas and dictators that have left their marks on that collection of nations (need I say that most were supported covertly and/or openly by US interests).

Yes. You can point to Stalin and Lenin but I can just as easily point elsewhere for other flavours of despotism. It's a rube's game. Why bother? The fact is, that no US government, not this one or any one prior to this one, has come close to being despotic, dictatorial or totalitarian.

To suggest otherwise is to display a level of ignorance that is shocking and embarrassing.

Hitler was a leftist? Gez man crack a book.

Actually, Hitler tried a few things on the left (hell, he even tried runeology), which is where the confusion lies. It's only when you look at what he carried out that you realize he was indeed on the far-right.

Think of it this way: he likely used left orientation to lure people into his trap. But we all should know what he was ultimately: a far-right extremist. He was simply resourceful and willing to try anything to gain power.

You guys are thinking about this too much. Hitler was a socialist, a national socialist. All socialists are lefties. And he was a facist, like Obama, who was a fascist, like Hitler. Fact. Science. QED.

Luring people with socialist propaganda isn't the same thing as being a socialist.

SA/Roehm faction: Socialists, leftists, VERY gay, and highly agitated at the rightwards swing of the;
SS/Hitler: Fascists, semi-rightist, VERY anti-gay and, after the Blood Purge, the dominant power within the Nazi party.

The Nazi Party began its' life as an explicitly leftist organization under the leadership of Earnst Roehm, whose followers were beginning to split with the Hitlerite faction over the orientation of National Socialism. Hitler and Himmler decisively put a stop to that sort of dissent, mostly by executing or assassinating almost the entire SA during what we now call the Night of Long Knives, or in Germany the Blood Purge. This established the Nazi party as firmly in the Fascist camp and led, among other things, to more formalized alignment with the Fascists of Italy, who had -always- been rightists, and who had previously been put off the Nazis by the leftist and openly homosexual mores of the Sturmabteilung and their leadership.

And being socialist in name while for the most part settling on various aspects of the right isn't the same as being socialist either.

the s.a. were hardly a left political organization. that, like so many other conservative-specific left=right "arguments" is empirically false.
national socialism has nothing to do with democratic socialism. never had. never has. never will. unless you make shit up. which is fine if you're writing fiction.

it is obvious that bill sparks is being taken as a canary in the mineshaft. ambient neo-fascist style populist conservative mobilization around "issues" on the order of the census. a census worker ends up lynched with FED carved into his chest. the linkage at the media-event level is obvious.
it's not surprising that conservatives would want to swat this away. it's a Problem for them. it's the sort of association that marks the neo-fascist style agitation for what it is. what's funny is the lengths to which conservatives will go in order to swat it away. funny, even.

at the same time, the fact is that we collectively still don't know what happened exactly.
but that doesn't make the symbolic linkages any more or less pertinent.

Reichminister Albert Speer, who was actually there, disagrees at great length and in some detail. I refer you to "Inside the Third Reich."

i've read it, dunedan.
remember the source, hmm?

maybe make another thread if you want to debate this question?

I wanna see the history books Otto has been reading.

I'll give the right this much--their brainwashing may be more effective than any other mass misinformation campaign in history.

Gee... I'd hate be misinformed. Please enlighten me regarding history and brainwashing. Specifics, if you don't mind. I consider mysef reasonable and open-minded.

So, ok, Hitler is debateable. What about Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao?

Best I can tell, neither of them killed the census worker either.

hahaha

take a bow :thumbsup:

Im sorry, but there is no debate about hitler being extreme right wing. Of course, if you don't believe me go to your nearest neo-nazi rally and ask them what they consider themselves.

As far as Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mao, if you reduce the whole gamut of political positions to a flat left-right line, sure they are on the left. But it would be a huge stretch to try to associate them with any relevant leftwing political party in the west in the last 20 years. Most, if not all, modern left parties are founded on the ideas of the sort of people that Stalin himself persecuted. Kautsky, Polanyi, Trostky, Otto Bauer, Anthony Giddens and Keynes, who are, to a greater or lesser degree the intellectual founding fathers of most current left parties, were also among the first to combat stalin, hitler, support the Hungarian uprising, and so on.

If will's idea of what happened is real, the link between this murder and positions defended by actual members of the republican party is direct and unequivocal. Stalin in this discussion is a red herring.

Good one, but I dunno...if we follow the logic here, this event was directly caused by The Republican Party. Or Hitler himself, if we extrapolate.

I don't get it.

but were they on the grassy knoll?

roachboy has a very interesting point.

a) we still don't know what happened
b) the imagery of the event suggests a connection to the shit being stirred up by certain factions in the Republican Party or the tea bag types.
c) there is a mad scramble by conservatives to distance themselves from this connection.

I won't make a judgment and say the connection is concrete but the imagery is what it is regardless of who or why this murder was perpetrated. As it stands, the imagery is an extension of the more bombastic language used by some of the more extreme tea-baggers, birthers and media critics. It doesn't look good.


On another note, what part of "rube's game" didn't you get? There is no point in bringing up which side of the political spectrum has the greatest number of dictatorial leaders. There is no winner and there is no point. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the political situation we are currently facing. Move on or start another thread.

Something along the lines of Chimpton R. McBushitler. I was just having a sarcastic moment.

We could all be completely wrong. It needs emphasis here, I think.

---------- Post added at 02:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:46 PM ----------


Don't you know that a Liberal is anyone a conservative doesn't like? Same with Communist, Socialist, etc. Really dude, get your facts straight... Ideology be damned

The truth doesn't fit the storyline you have invested in, but here it is:
Investigators: Kentucky Census Worker Killed Himself