I’m sure you were told to believe so.

MarkTheGreat on April 15, 2009 at 3:39 PM

Let me guess, I was told by:

• George Soros
• Saul Alinsky
• Nancy Pelosi
• Harry Reid
• Sherrod Brown
• Ted Strickland
• Lou Dobbs
• Rachel Maddow
• Keith Olbermann
• Jack Cafferty
• Rick Sanchez
• The local union reps

Who’s writing the checks this time?

- Refuses to be a contributor to society in the form of holding a job. Prefers welfare and food stamps.
- Participates in anti-war protests, especially those wearing pink.
- Obtains information, usually inaccurate, from MoveOn.org.
- Wants more gun control so that he/she is less likely to be shot when committing his/her crime.
- Thinks abortion is okay so he/she doesn’t have to take responsibility for their actions.

The problem is that actually happened.

sethstorm on April 15, 2009 at 3:04 PM

I’m sure you were told to believe so.

MarkTheGreat on April 15, 2009 at 2:41 PM

The problem is that actually happened.

Where were you between 2001 and 2008 when the fed government started tapping phones?

Funny how selective both your memory and outrage is.

cornfedbubba on April 15, 2009 at 11:34 AM

Where were you during the Clinton Administration? Wiretapping exploded under Clinton. Increases of 30-40 percent per year in some cases. Remember CALEA? Clipper chip? Any of this ringing a bell?

That’s because the right wing is quick to use the imprimaturs of federal government and right-wing media to validate it.

Where was this in the 1980’s when workers were being railed on by business? They were being attacked by those who had been given a signal that they were in season. That is, in season for being attacked by business interests. Not just unionized ones, but of all levels of work.

sethstorm on April 15, 2009 at 2:30 PM

Liberals actually believe that if they lie often enough, others will begin to believe as well.

One of these days sethsquall will say something with the impratuer of accuracy.

Today isn’t that day.

there’s something wrong with your variety of conservatism if it involves plotting against the government.

sesquipedalian on April 15, 2009 at 1:53 PM

I love the way liberals feel the right to rewrite reality to fit their pasions.

There is nothing in this report about plotting against the govt. Unless you consider people getting together to oppose a liberal president constitutes plotting against the govt.

MarkTheGreat on April 15, 2009 at 12:33 PM

That’s because the right wing is quick to use the imprimaturs of federal government and right-wing media to validate it.

Remember this is not some powerless organization… this is the GOVERNMENT! The government should be in the business of protecting all points of view. If Obama is my President he should renounce this kind of political hack job for what it is! But alas Obama only cares about people who agree with him.

petunia on April 15, 2009 at 2:03 PM

Where was this in the 1980′s when workers were being railed on by business? They were being attacked by those who had been given a signal that they were in season. That is, in season for being attacked by business interests. Not just unionized ones, but of all levels of work.

there’s something wrong with your variety of conservatism if it involves plotting against the government.

sesquipedalian on April 15, 2009 at 1:53 PM

You see I don’t consider dissent to be plotting against the government. I don’t consider discussion and holding politicains accountable as plotting. But You and Obama are paranoid enough to consider the democratic process as a danger to your complete mind control of the people.

Obama’s paranoia is not plotting.

If this just concerned with actual radicals why mention federalism? Why mention abortion? Why mention gay marriage? Why talk about Obama’s skin color? This is a purge document, an attempt to marginalize political dissent.

This is the United States government attempting to squash political debate by labeling opposing view points as radical.

There will always be nut jobs like the ones you talk about… they may claim affiliation with any number of causes… but they are still nut jobs and the causes they attatch themselves to do not become suspect because someone in their mental illness talks about that cause. This report is opportunist in that it benefits Obama to slap labels on his opposition.

TAKE POLITICS OUT OF THE DHS. DO NOT USE IT AS A TOOL TO SUPRESS DISSENT! Right-wing is not a violent term the way Napolitano’s report uses it.

Remember this is not some powerless organization… this is the GOVERNMENT! The government should be in the business of protecting all points of view. If Obama is my President he should renounce this kind of political hack job for what it is! But alas Obama only cares about people who agree with him.

I appreciate the fact that they use McVeigh as the reason for slandering vets coming home from the war.

Is it ok for us to use Osama to pigeon-hole all Muslims now? After all, using the same logic, if one member of a group does it, all members are capable and should be watched.

Troika37 on April 15, 2009 at 11:22 AM

Excellent analogy! Where’s McCain on this? He should be all over the media dirivng this point home.

The political view points considered extreme in this report are common garden variety conservatism!!!

there’s something wrong with your variety of conservatism if it involves plotting against the government.

Of course any document that sesquatch says is right wing, must be.

I’ve also pointed the hypocrisy of claiming that since some people labeled right wing have shown themselves to be dangerous, therefore everyone labeled right wing must be watched. Especially while complaining about the monitoring of left wing groups with proven records of violence.

There are instances of people whom you have labeled right wingers, (usually without justification) committing violent acts.

- Police found right-wing political books, brass knuckles, empty shotgun shell boxes and a handgun in the Powell home of a man who said he attacked a church in order to kill liberals “who are ruining the country,” court records show.

- Eric Robert Rudolph, also known as the Olympic Park Bomber, is an American far-right radical described by the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a terrorist who committed a series of bombings across the southern United States which killed two people and injured at least 150 others.

- Timothy James McVeigh was a United States Army veteran and security guard who was convicted of bombing the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City… as revenge or to inspire revolt against what he considered a tyrannical federal government.

etc.

Saltysam on April 15, 2009 at 11:44 AM

They just want explain to you “Shut Up!”, that’s all?

Suppose this report said people who recycle should be watched for dangerous tendencies… Or if someone joined the teachers union they should be watched… or if someone thought that the Wic food program should be expanded to include undocumented mothers… These views are dangerous to our society and the government should be on alert for signs of suicide bombings…

Do you get this? The political view points considered extreme in this report are common garden variety conservatism!!! Protecting the young, strengthening families, serving in the military, leaving most laws to states to decide… those are core to conservatism and Obama considers that dangerous to his regime.

the report is clearly about right wing extremists. do you consider yourself one of them? malkin obviously does, but do you? because if you don’t, this report has nothing to do with you. it never equates the conservative movement with right wing radicalism. funny you should feel involved in this at all.

sesquipedalian on April 15, 2009 at 12:58 PM

Yes. I believe that abortion is wrong. I believe that gay marriage will further destroy the fragile state of the family. I believe that states should have more control over what happens inside states than the federal government. I think the Obama’s stimulus plan passed with no input of the American people that will balloon our deficits beyond anything yet seen in history is wrong, dishonest and an evil power grab.

I am an American and I am extreme in my support of our Constitution which this Congress and the Obama administration is shredding before our very eyes!!!

I am an extremist and Obama has declared war on me.

but you can’t find out because you can’t sue the telecoms.

You really do enjoy playing the idiot, don’t you.
You can’t sue the telecom’s for damages.
The records were never kept by the telecom’s in the first place.

it’s not about disagreement, it’s about murdering people. there have been instances of right wing extremists committing heinous acts, and i want protection from their ilk. what’s so hard to understand about that?

There are instances of people whom you have labeled right wingers, (usually without justification) committing violent acts. Based on this you want everyone that you label “right winger” to be monitored.

On the hand, I have provided lists of many, many more left wingers who have comitted violent acts, but you instead of demanding that they be monitored, you complain about past monitoring of them.

3) Because some “right wingers” are dangerous all are.
can we at least attempt to find out which ones are dangerous?

There are instances of people whom you have labeled right wingers, (usually without justification) committing violent acts. Based on this you want everyone that you label “right winger” to be monitored.

every violent group should be monitored.

sesquipedalian on April 15, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Among your so far non-existent strengths, we can’t list consistency.

Just a few posts ago you were complaining vociferously regarding the past monitoring of left wing groups with a proven track record of violent behavior.

1) We know who was wire tapped because records were kept.

but you can’t find out because you can’t sue the telecoms.

2) So now everyone who you disagree with is automatically a right winger?

it’s not about disagreement, it’s about murdering people. there have been instances of right wing extremists committing heinous acts, and i want protection from their ilk. what’s so hard to understand about that?

3) Because some “right wingers” are dangerous all are.

can we at least attempt to find out which ones are dangerous? like, you know, when airport security looks twice at anyone with a turban?

4) On the other hand, you object when left wing groups, even ones with proven records of killing others are watched.

every violent group should be monitored.

no one mentioned the CIA – the question was in reference to the federal government’s domestic wiretapping between 2001 and 2008.

Are you really this stupid?

I’m outraged that they came to that “conclusion” without a shred of evidence

the report is clearly about right wing extremists.

Apparently you are.

sesquipedalian on April 15, 2009 at 12:58 PM