Yes, kids. The media is always willing to cover the Obama Adminstration’s butt: For the first time, an accused domestic terrorist is being added to the FBI’s list of "Most Wanted" terror suspects. Daniel Andreas San Diego, a 31-year-old com…

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups)

Wow… I never realized before that the anti-Prop 8 people in California are just Right-Wing Extremists, due to their hatred of Mormons.

Hint – there isn’t one, as without “definition” the groups wouldn’t be divisible.

Using its own posts:

The FDA might say “Sources of salmonella poisoning can be broadly divided into foods that contain salmonella and beverages that contain salmonella”.

According to orange, the FDA has created divisions or groups, without in any way, shape or form “defining” those groups, right? Well, no, not exactly. You see, even in orange’s example the FDA has indeed “defined” its two groups as being, one that is made up of “Beverages” and, one that is made up of “Foods”.

P.S. You cannot divide something into groups, no matter how “broadly” without defining the groups, otherwise they would be indistinguishable and, therefore, without purpose.

Sheesh

Finally, in case orange STILL doesn’t get it, the report “devides” rightwing extremism in the United States into groups DEFINED as: 1. those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (Which is then even further DEFINED as) – based on hatred of partiuclar religious, racial or ethnic groups. AND; 2. those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely.

Thus, the report has “divided” right-wing extremism into two DEFINED groups. Knock, knock – it this getting through?

Answer: It doesnt.

Yes, the poor dears are victims that obviously can’t decide themselves not to join violent groups … none of which the report bothers to name, by the way.

It’s all bad. But not surprising. Dems have a long history of treating the military as a bunch of idiots. We don’t even need to look back that far to recall John Kerry saying that if you don’t work hard in school you’ll get “stuck in Iraq”.

The whole “vets are teh right-wing extremists!!!!1!” is just plain stupid.

Oddly, while the report felt it neccesary to cite Timothy McVeigh, it left out Lee Harvey Oswald. I find that suspect.

“The footnote never purports to define rightwing extremism. It seems some people see the word “divided” and interpret that as “defined”.”

Really?

So is this an example of rightwing extremism?
Allegedly it involves Vets?

Standoff with Police as Iraq Vets Demand to Meet with Obama Campaign
By Alex Kane and Jessica Lee, Indypendent. Posted August 28, 2008

With no reply from Obama to their letter asking him to endorse their goals, IVAW marched to the Pepsi Center to demand that their voices be heard

DENVER — A little more than an hour before Sen. Barack Obama made a surprise appearance at Pepsi Center to conclude the evening at the Democratic National Convention, his campaign had an exchange with Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW).
Approximately 100 IVAW members were determined to push Obama on his stance on troop withdrawal. Leading a grueling three-hour-plus long march of an estimated 7,000 demonstrators towards the Pepsi Center late in the afternoon, IVAW hoped to deliver a folded flag and a letter calling on Obama to endorse the three main goals of unity: immediate withdrawal of American troops, full veterans benefits, and reparations for the Iraqi people.

Who knew! IVAW is a rightwing group!

Disgruntled Military Veterans
“Napolitano is not only condescending towards veterans”
‘The report identifies them as a potential national-security threat to the country which they defended on the front lines”.

Actually she’s much dumber than that.
This MORON sent this “profile report” to police departments in the USA.

Considering that military vets wartime/peacetime make up less than 1% of the USA population (aprox 24 million living today), apparently she is completely unaware that police departments have a much higher than average number of veterans among their ranks.

New police officers all military veterans
Five sworn in to Sayreville P.D. have served U.S. overseas
BY MICHAEL ACKER Staff Writer
Chicago Police Department’s unique thank you to its servicemembers [7/12/2005]

2 academies training more military vets as police
Jolly, 24, said he enjoyed his military police assignment during his 4 1/2 years in the U.S. Air Force, including a tour in Iraq.

His next job, he decided, would be civilian police work. He wanted his 2-year-old son to be able to tell his friends, “My dad’s a cop,” Jolly said.
He is one of many Iraq and Afghanistan veterans seeking civilian police jobs. Military veterans now make up about 20 to 30 percent of the police recruits enrolled at the training center at 10001 S. Wilmot Road, which opened in 1998.

Beach deal opens police jobs to Army vets
By Kathy Adams
The Virginian-Pilot
© March 7, 2009
VIRGINIA BEACH
Army reservists and veterans looking for work will have an in with the Police Department

cons don’t care about the troops.

getalife on April 20, 2009 at 9:51 AM

Yo, back at work already?

Don’t you feel exploited by the Democrats knowing that even kids in the US make $10/hr working in fast food restaurants while you’re working around the clock in a boiler room in Mumbai making $50 a month?

I’m curious: any veterans ever find their way into “left-wing extremist” groups?

cackcon on April 20, 2009 at 11:53 AM

General Wesley Clark blogs at some of the Left wing hate sites, yes.

cons don’t care about the troops.

getalife on April 20, 2009 at 9:51 AM

No, you don’t care about the troops. You proved it when you voted for Jeanne-Claude Kerri in 2004.

Who else is not finding anything redeeming in the public persona of this woman? Is the governorship of AZ such a chump prize that no one worthwhile wanted it?

bbhack on April 20, 2009 at 4:32 PM

We have a whole political class that’s a “chump prize” for the winners. And we are the chumps.

In fact, the first thing Napolitano should do is to actually get threat data, instead of making up a bunch of scare stories about political dissent while not bothering to identify actual known racist and white-supremacist groups with track records of violence who should be watched.

No, the first thing she should do is resign. And failing that, the President should fire her.

She has not only personally generally insulted all of us who have ever served in the military during time of hostilities, but she is now obviously lying about what she meant.

Veterans everywhere should demand that she go.

We cannot afford to have someone in that key position who has no idea what she is talking about.

Just two years ago the favored liberal line was, “We support the troops, just not the war.”

Now, it seems to be: “We don’t trust the Vets, and we are willing to officially make unsubstantiated and sweeping generalizations about them, including placing them in the same category as those who the majority of the American people believe are the most odious and vile characters alive in the world today.”

or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

Lone wolf extremists? Uhm, who recruits LONE Wolf’s?

Is there a Lone wolf group?

Do they know each other or would that violate the Lone wolf creed?

Are there any Leftwing Lone wolf extremists or would that require too much individualism?

but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits

extremists may be?
Doesn’t hat also mean may be not?

“What it is saying is returning veterans are targets of right-wing extremist groups that are trying to recruit those to commit violent acts within the country.

veterans are targets of right-wing extremist groups

Are targets? This is a hard, fixed, no wiggle room, claim.
She MUST have examples to back that up.

“Are targets” is not “potential” targets or “may be” targets.