Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I'm just saying she isn't the cause for the loss.<< She is certainly one of the major reasons. A Mini History Recap of Election 2008: Obama was soaring after the DNC. And then came Sarah. She appeared on the scene as a surprise. The GOP base went bonkers for her, she had them at "you betcha." Her speech garnered huge ratings. The Republicans by and large flew past "smitten" and straight into adoration. Article after article discussed what a game changer she was, how she had eclipsed Obama and destroyed his post-convention bounce. And then she didn't give many interviews. The handful she did, she performed poorly in (except perhaps the Hannity ones, surprise surprise). As more and more the public got to know her, she became a repellant rather than an attraction to moderates, who liked John McCain in elections past. A devastatingly funny spoof of her by Tina Fey sealed the deal. So, she helped boost support for McCain right we he needed it most, and then imploded and actually chased votes away. Now, his on-again, off-again campaign stalling stunts during the fiscal meltdown certainly are McCain's own fault, and didn't help him any, that's for sure. But on her own, Palin did considerable damage. Remember McCain's bailing on Letterman to hover nervously during the latter Couric/Palin interview session? That's the sort of troubles no candidate needs in a close election.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney I was just watching Boston Legal, which is a very entertaining and brilliant show if anyone hasn't seen it. On this episode one of the lawyers was unable to fly because he had the same name as a terrorist on the no-fly list (re-run from 2004). Well, something said on the show really made me think, here's the quote: "Denny Crane: It doesn’t do any good to sit back and criticize. Alan Shore: Sometime it does, Denny. Sometimes the most patriotic thing you can do is criticize. Liberty in this country was founded on that very ideal. How did it happen that dissent became some form of heresy?"
Originally Posted By DyGDisney This is the problem with the far right. They think it's un-American to disagree with things to the point of becomming extreme in their views. We could not disagree with the war, the treatment of possible terrorists, the furtiveness of the administration, anything the Bush administration did. We were un-American. Now, we are un-American if we AGREE with the decisions Obama makes.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney AT the same time, this dissent is still not un-American when it comes to these tea parties, crazy as they may be. Hopefully they will be peaceful and keep the fear-mongering to a minimum, and do what they SAY they are there to do.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090414/us_nm/us_usa_security_extremists;_ylt=AsCJYg5r09DDQ61T1LNIVfms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJzaDUwdmY3BGFzc2V0A25tLzIwMDkwNDE0L3VzX3VzYV9zZWN1cml0eV9leHRyZW1pc3RzBGNwb3MDNwRwb3MDMTYEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDcmVjZXNzaW9uZnVl" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/200...aW9uZnVl</a> >>Right-wing extremists in the United States are gaining new recruits by exploiting fears about the economy and the election of the first black U.S. president, the Department of Homeland Security warned in a report to law enforcement officials. The April 7 report, which Reuters and other news media obtained on Tuesday, said such fears were driving a resurgence in "recruitment and radicalization activity" by white supremacist groups, antigovernment extremists and militia movements. It did not identify any by name. DHS had no specific information about pending violence and said threats had so far been "largely rhetorical." But it warned that home foreclosures, unemployment and other consequences of the economic recession "could create a fertile recruiting environment for right-wing extremists." "To the extent that these factors persist, right-wing extremism is likely to grow in strength," DHS said.<< This is scary stuff and these people are f-ing crazy.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad yes f'ing crazy... LOL. So this is the start of it? I suppose it won't be long before Hannity is off the air and in jail. Homeland security? To hell with US Citizens' rights. I wondered how the Hannity witch hunt would take shape. It won't be long now.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad I guess I'd better stay away from the tea party. I don't want to be associated with right wing extremists that ate a threat to homeland security. I'm completely serious. This homeland security business is only ramping things up, drawing a line in the sand, invoking a call to fear that is unfounded. Which is worse? A babbling Fox News talking head, or a president who has begun calling law abiding citizens with no history of anything wrong, threats to homeland security? Come on! I NEVER NEVER thought I would live to see myself fear my government. No way am I going to the tea party now. I'm properly intimidated. We ALL should at the VERY least raise an eyebrow to this. ecdc? What do you say?
Originally Posted By Mr X I wouldn't worry about it if I were you (besides, we all want a trip report! ). It seems to me that they're talking more about militant, neo-nazi type groups. At least, I hope so.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad Oh, well ok then. You know I missed THIS part of the report.... >>>A similar assessment of left-wing radicals completed in January was distributed to federal, state and local police agencies at that time.<<< Ok maybe I am over reacting and should actually READ something before getting all bothered.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>So this is the start of it? I suppose it won't be long before Hannity is off the air and in jail.<< I think that'll defend on how far Hannity and Co. are willing to push this. Under normal circumstances there's no way that anyone but the most foaming left-wingers would call for the arrest of somebody for their political speech. But if this "movement" of theirs gets people scared enough, then all bets are off. America just doesn't handle being scared very well.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<Homeland security? To hell with US Citizens' rights.>> I have to ask - why the sudden fear of Homeland Security now? Was the department not at all scary the past 8 years during the Bush years? Are you only worried now because of the new administration being in power? Frankly, I've never liked the idea behind this department. The whole "Protect the Homeland" thing just sounds too much like crap that Hitler used to say. But really, I don't think we have any reason to fear them more NOW than we did the past 8 years.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Blinders firmly on.> No - I see you all too clearly, Doug, as #97 points out, and you can't refute. The rest of us do, too.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Then she says... >>>(homosexuals) and the historical parallel to that is the racism<<< WHAT?!?!?! I find it EXTREMELY hard to believe that Martin Luther King Jr would be in favor of homosexuals especially in terms of marriage. What parallel is there? > Plenty. As has been pointed out by Coretta Scott King, and other important associates from the time such as John Lewis and Julian Bond. You might want to check out their comments on the subject. Also worth checking out is the relationship between Dr. King himself and Bayard Rustin, an out gay man (quite rare in the late 50's/early 60's). They worked closely at first, then King distanced himself after people like J. Edgar Hoover and Strom Thurmond started talking about Rustin's old arrest on a "morals charge" (making out with a man in a parked car). But to his credit, King re-established his relationship with Rustin, who went on to organize the 1963 March on Washington, something of a scale never before carried out. Many people still think King was the organizer, but he was the keynote speaker; Rustin was the man who pulled it off.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad >>> I have to ask - why the sudden fear of Homeland Security now? Was the department not at all scary the past 8 years during the Bush years? <<< Ouch! Very good point, to which I have no defense. You're exactly right.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad >>>Plenty. As has been pointed out by Coretta Scott King, and other important associates from the time such as John Lewis and Julian Bond. You might want to check out their comments on the subject.<<< Okay, fair enough. I'm willing to take lumps that I deserve, and obviously I deserve this one. I actually will go and try to fill in some holes in my knowledge on this subject.
