Fear-mongering is back as the device of choice for "Republicans"

[mikeyh9in]

Fear is the only thing Republicans have left.

They used Fear over the past 8 years to take away our rights (right to privacy, the right to habeus corpus, etc.)

They use fear to divide the country (Gays are destroying America, Gay marriage is going to destroy America).

They use fear to get ignorant Americans to vote for causes that are not in their own self interests.

I have great hope that Americans are not falling for it anymore. When fear runs out, what will the Republicans have?

They are completely void of any ideas.

I think we are seeing that LPSG is a microcosm of America... the Republicans here continue to spout "Fear, Fear, Fear... be very afraid... we know what we are talking about, you'll see... " Spooky.

But the vast majority see through the bullshit and I believe that is what is happening in America.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.. the "Jig is Up!" and I for one, love it.

 

[deleted15807]

.........the "Jig is Up!" and I for one, love it.

Exactly. Every day I read of how bad it is for them I'm just plain giddy. Even Faux News can't help them despite their 24 hr 7 day a week effort.

It's sad what's happened to the Republicans. They used to be the party of the big tent; now they're the party of the sideshow attraction, a socially awkward group of mostly white people who speak a language only they understand. Like Trekkies, but paranoid.

Bill Maher



​

'A new Gallup poll provides evidence that the Republican party has now been seriously downsized in support from 2001 to 2009 — steadily losing ground in a host of groups across the boards, particularly among college graduates and moderates.'

Gallup Poll: Republicans Lose In All Demographic Groups Except Conservatives, Churchgoers And Seniors | The Moderate Voice

 

[B_Nick8]

Talk tough on the computer don't ya. they've been following these guys since June '08 can you say "Patriot Act"?

I can say lots of things, not the least of which is that I don't spend time hitting my head against brick walls.

 

[faceking]

Well, if you actually knew something about science you'd know that our ozone layer has been depleting.

Since you know a bit about science, you'd know that's a normal thing, and biznezz as usual.

..fear mongering. it's the boogeyman you can't see. it's like The Devil meets Y2K... can't see either one, both contrived... one to sell religion the other to sell software & services.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Talk tough on the computer don't ya. they've been following these guys since June '08 can you say "Patriot Act"?

Actually, he'd say that to your face as well. Nick8 is not a poser, nor does he pretend to be something he isn't. You know, because I've actually met the man face to face.

Something for you to ponder about, of course, as you sit here with just a forum handle with no images or names.

 

[2322]

Talk tough on the computer don't ya. they've been following these guys since June '08 can you say "Patriot Act"?

And just what in the Patriot Act permitted the FBI to do anything they couldn't otherwise do?

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Since you know a bit about science, you'd know that's a normal thing, and biznezz as usual.

Please elaborate, Einstein...
This should be good.

..fear mongering. it's the boogeyman you can't see. it's like The Devil meets Y2K... can't see either one, both contrived... one to sell religion the other to sell software & services.

You're not honestly comparing Y2K to terrorism, are you? PLEASE tell me you're not trying that hard to make a point.

 

[Cowabanga]

You can be plenty fearful of Cat Stevens aka Yusef Islam, if you're Salman Rushdie. The following comes from a television interview. Islam's claim that he was misquoted is ridiculous. You can watch the interview yourself:

Robertson: You don't think that this man deserves to die?
Y. Islam: Who, Salman Rushdie?
Robertson: Yes.
Y. Islam: Yes, yes.
Robertson: And do you have a duty to be his executioner?
Y. Islam: Uh, no, not necessarily, unless we were in an Islamic state and I was ordered by a judge or by the authority to carry out such an act - perhaps, yes.

[Some minutes later, Robertson on the subject of a protest where an effigy of the author is to be burned]

Robertson: Would you be part of that protest, Yusuf Islam, would you go to a demonstration where you knew that an effigy was going to be burned?
Y. Islam: I would have hoped that it'd be the real thing.

He also said that if Mr. Rushdie turned up at his doorstep looking for help, ''I might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like.''

''I'd try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is.'' - NY Times.​

Later attempts to claim Yusef Islam was simply describing what Islamic law would say, not what he would say personally, ring wholly untrue given the nature of his statements and the direct statements as to what he would do.

The man's an asshole.

I watch this interview, and I have to agree with Yusuf on this! Mind you this is a hypothetical question basing on the tradition of the Islamic law, which is not state law.

If you ask me if base on the old testament and someone sin according to the old testament would I be require to stone them to death and my answer would be yes.

Salman Rushdie blasphemy the Muslim religion stirring hate for the people of Muslim which in turn promoted war between Iraq and the christian war, causing death base on fearmongering tactic, then yes, Rushdie what he did was wrong, just as wrong as KKK instill fear to kill black people. Inciting riot in many state warrant the death penalty. Writing to instill a hate crime is a crime against humanity.

Considering what Iraq has gone thru trying to survive a national invasion from christian nation for something they didn't do, and yet some still call them terrorist, for just being piss that they were better off taking care of themselves. We got rid of their Dictator and replace them with ours, and it's a sad irony that we place Saddam Hussein in there in the first place, and gave him the weapon to use on his own people.

Now since we invaded Iraq, the Ayatollah now has a firm hand in Iran. The Bush adminsitration by using fear tactic have done so much for the socialism and religious dictatorship across the nation. One step forward, a mile step back. If you want to spread socialism and fascism, then keep electing warmongering leaders that take their eyes off of promoting global democracy.

 

[Flashy]

You see, what happened today in New York is that a Democratic president did exactly what John McCain and you Republicans said Barack Obama and we Democrats were incapable of: he fended off a terrorist attack and kept us safe. Put that in your fear-mongering pipe and smoke it while I sit here on my comfortably covered ass.

with all due respect nick, you stated this in the other thread as well regarding the arrests yesterday.

Your info is only partially accurate.

the investigation into these people began a year ago.

indeed, the arrests happened on his watch, and kudos to the FBI for that...but the FBI began the investigation on the Bush/Cheney watch, and was ongoing regardless of what political party was in the WH.


"The plot was uncovered in a yearlong investigation involving an FBI informant, authorities said"

...

According to New York and federal authorities, an FBI informant met with Cromitie in June 2008 in Newburgh, New York. During that meeting Cromitie said his parents lived in Afghanistan, he was angry about the U.S. war there, and he had an interest in "doing something to America."
Suspects in alleged synagogue bomb plot denied bail - CNN.com

 

[Cowabanga]

By the same token the plot against the world trade center was uncover by the Clinton's administration and Bush was on vacation, and did nothing, but let the Bin Laden family return to the middle east. Kudos to Cheney for the false drill during the attack.

 

[Flashy]

Fear is the only thing Republicans have left.

They used Fear over the past 8 years to take away our rights (right to privacy, the right to habeus corpus, etc.)

They use fear to divide the country (Gays are destroying America, Gay marriage is going to destroy America).

They use fear to get ignorant Americans to vote for causes that are not in their own self interests.

I have great hope that Americans are not falling for it anymore. When fear runs out, what will the Republicans have?

They are completely void of any ideas.

I think we are seeing that LPSG is a microcosm of America... the Republicans here continue to spout "Fear, Fear, Fear... be very afraid... we know what we are talking about, you'll see... " Spooky.

But the vast majority see through the bullshit and I believe that is what is happening in America.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.. the "Jig is Up!" and I for one, love it.

perhaps.

i would say your assumption is not far off....however, the democrats are not exactly brimming with new ideas either...and proclaiming false "hope hope hope" while offering the same tired solutions that do not work for democrats, the same way republican solutions don't work for them is no different.

California is the perfect Microcosm for failure of a variety of degrees of policy. They are easily seen considering California is bigger than most of the countries in the world, with 37 million people (bigger than all but the top 34 countries in the world) and, has been for the most part controlled by democratic state legislatures for 4 decades, with the occasional republican governor to help fuck things up.

In California, the State Legislature has been in Democratic hands exclusively since 1970.

Only once, from (1995 to 1996), was the CA State Assembly in Republican hands since the 1970 election and even then, the Senate was controlled by the democrats

The CA State Senate has been in Democratic hands continuously since 1970.

You have to admit, nearly 4 decades is quite a long time, for one party...and ironically, California has gotten worse and worse to the current state it is in now.

I would say that puts democrats on equal footing with regards to being devoid of workable solutions.


the jig has long been up for both parties...only a seriously deranged partisan would say that only one of the parties are devoid of ideas.

 

[Flashy]

By the same token the plot against the world trade center was uncover by the Clinton's administration and Bush was on vacation, and did nothing, but let the Bin Laden family return to the middle east. Kudos to Cheney for the false drill during the attack.

actually, the plot was not uncovered by the Clinton administration.

there had been one previous attack, if you recall, on the WTC in 1993.

the Clinton administration knew that there were "possible" terrorist acts being considered....they identified Atta, Al Shehhi and a couple of the other hijackers nearly a year before the event...but did not act on the information, based on the fact that the CIA and FBI did not share information, because of the wall between the twom which was reinforced by deputy attorney general Jaime Gorelick

the CIA also did not tip off the FBI in spring 2000 when [FONT=Courier, Times New Roman]two more of the hijackers entered the US legally (Khalid al-Mihdhar ,Nawaf al-Hazmi)

the fact is, that both the later Clinton years, and the first Bush years, represented a massive intelligence failure.

Condoleeza Rice may have been the worst national security advisor in history...(i believe she was) but the fact is, that the plot was never "uncovered"...either by Clinton or by Bush...

there were dire warnings, over and over that something "massive" and "bad" was going to happen.

but *NO* specifics of where and when. Just continued warnings, reports with no specifics and other general fear and dread, but nothing concrete

no specifics that the CIA, FBI or any other intelligence gathering organization found of a deliberate planning of the 9/11 attack itself, and when or where it would or might occur.

hell, US embassies and troops in a number of countries went on alert several times during the later Clinton years and Bush year before 9/11. for a variety of unspecified "threats".

the fact is, that both administrations failed egregiously to stop Bin Laden.

the fact is, this time BOTH adminsitrations *SUCCEEDED* in stopping this lower scale attempt.


I would suggest you read this excerpt (and then by the book if you find it interesting) from[/FONT] The Commission - The Uncensored History Of The 9/11 Investigation


They knew, but did nothing - World - smh.com.au
[FONT=Courier, Times New Roman]


[/FONT]

 

[2322]

I watch this interview, and I have to agree with Yusuf on this! Mind you this is a hypothetical question basing on the tradition of the Islamic law, which is not state law.

If you ask me if base on the old testament and someone sin according to the old testament would I be require to stone them to death and my answer would be yes.

Salman Rushdie blasphemy the Muslim religion stirring hate for the people of Muslim which in turn promoted war between Iraq and the christian war, causing death base on fearmongering tactic, then yes, Rushdie what he did was wrong, just as wrong as KKK instill fear to kill black people. Inciting riot in many state warrant the death penalty. Writing to instill a hate crime is a crime against humanity.

Considering what Iraq has gone thru trying to survive a national invasion from christian nation for something they didn't do, and yet some still call them terrorist, for just being piss that they were better off taking care of themselves. We got rid of their Dictator and replace them with ours, and it's a sad irony that we place Saddam Hussein in there in the first place, and gave him the weapon to use on his own people.

Now since we invaded Iraq, the Ayatollah now has a firm hand in Iran. The Bush adminsitration by using fear tactic have done so much for the socialism and religious dictatorship across the nation. One step forward, a mile step back. If you want to spread socialism and fascism, then keep electing warmongering leaders that take their eyes off of promoting global democracy.

You have never read The Satanic Verses.

So you're pro-censorship and believe in applying the death penalty to people who disregard that censorship.

That opinion is either colossally ignorant or beyond scary.

 

[midlifebear]

The Satanic Verses, good book. Rushdie's not my favorite author, but if anyone has a soupçon of understanding of the spooky hearts of the two main threads of Islam and the scary bible thumping backwoods evangelical anti intelligence movement, he does.

 

[mikeyh9in]

Flashy, I absolutely agree with you... California is a mess and it is the career Politicians serving the corporate interests that is a big part of the issue.

My point is that Republicans need to stop using Fear as a motivator. Republicans are not my Dad... I don't need to be threatened with a belt.

The majority of people in America are intelligent and can understand nuance, they can understand that we should all be "pro-life", but also understand the importance for the option of an abortion to be there. We can understand that we need to close Gitmo, but it is complex and won't happen overnight. We can understand that we need to protect the idea of marriage, but you don't do that be denying someone else right to marry. We understand that it won't be easy (or cheap) to fix healthcare in this country, but we need to do it.

These are not democratic issues. They are issues of America... the democrats have just picked up on them and are using them to win elections... what we need to see is continued movement to the solutions.

perhaps.

i would say your assumption is not far off....however, the democrats are not exactly brimming with new ideas either...and proclaiming false "hope hope hope" while offering the same tired solutions that do not work for democrats, the same way republican solutions don't work for them is no different.

California is the perfect Microcosm for failure of a variety of degrees of policy. They are easily seen considering California is bigger than most of the countries in the world, with 37 million people (bigger than all but the top 34 countries in the world) and, has been for the most part controlled by democratic state legislatures for 4 decades, with the occasional republican governor to help fuck things up.

In California, the State Legislature has been in Democratic hands exclusively since 1970.

Only once, from (1995 to 1996), was the CA State Assembly in Republican hands since the 1970 election and even then, the Senate was controlled by the democrats

The CA State Senate has been in Democratic hands continuously since 1970.

You have to admit, nearly 4 decades is quite a long time, for one party...and ironically, California has gotten worse and worse to the current state it is in now.

I would say that puts democrats on equal footing with regards to being devoid of workable solutions.


the jig has long been up for both parties...only a seriously deranged partisan would say that only one of the parties are devoid of ideas.

 

[mikeyh9in]

You forget the FBI Agent in Phoenix with repeated dire warnings of Arab individuals in flight school learning to fly commercial jets and his concern that they were training for an attack using commercial airliners into buildings.

Those warnings were ignored.

You also forget that Dick Cheney was in charge of the Terrorism task force -- and he held zero meetings (I guess he was too busy meeting with Exxon, Chevon, formulating his "energy policy" -- his priorities were very clear).

If we *had* listened to those warnings, we would have placed these individuals under surveillance, and the attack, in all likelihood, would not have happened.

We did not need to know the exact time and place of the attack, we just needed to be paying attention.

actually, the plot was not uncovered by the Clinton administration.

there had been one previous attack, if you recall, on the WTC in 1993.

the Clinton administration knew that there were "possible" terrorist acts being considered....they identified Atta, Al Shehhi and a couple of the other hijackers nearly a year before the event...but did not act on the information, based on the fact that the CIA and FBI did not share information, because of the wall between the twom which was reinforced by deputy attorney general Jaime Gorelick

the CIA also did not tip off the FBI in spring 2000 when [FONT=Courier, Times New Roman]two more of the hijackers entered the US legally (Khalid al-Mihdhar ,Nawaf al-Hazmi)

the fact is, that both the later Clinton years, and the first Bush years, represented a massive intelligence failure.

Condoleeza Rice may have been the worst national security advisor in history...(i believe she was) but the fact is, that the plot was never "uncovered"...either by Clinton or by Bush...

there were dire warnings, over and over that something "massive" and "bad" was going to happen.

but *NO* specifics of where and when. Just continued warnings, reports with no specifics and other general fear and dread, but nothing concrete

no specifics that the CIA, FBI or any other intelligence gathering organization found of a deliberate planning of the 9/11 attack itself, and when or where it would or might occur.

hell, US embassies and troops in a number of countries went on alert several times during the later Clinton years and Bush year before 9/11. for a variety of unspecified "threats".

the fact is, that both administrations failed egregiously to stop Bin Laden.

the fact is, this time BOTH adminsitrations *SUCCEEDED* in stopping this lower scale attempt.


I would suggest you read this excerpt (and then by the book if you find it interesting) from[/FONT] The Commission - The Uncensored History Of The 9/11 Investigation


They knew, but did nothing - World - smh.com.au
[FONT=Courier, Times New Roman]


[/FONT]

 

[Cowabanga]

You have never read The Satanic Verses.

So you're pro-censorship and believe in applying the death penalty to people who disregard that censorship.

That opinion is either colossally ignorant or beyond scary.

Yes, the Bible is one scary book and so is the Koran, if one were to follow it, in that hypothetical scenario that you hold Yusuf and now me to it.

So, your for free speech even if can incite a riot to kill people base on Hate crime?

Again we deported or tried them in global tribunal court for war crimes for this behavior. Did you think it was wrong to send NAZI's to prison for hate speech inciting riots and death for the Jews and their sympathizers?

All I am saying its hypocritical to hold someone for hypothetical behavior of religious dogma when the our side had plenty of it as well, and to set a different mode of exceptionable behavior to apply only to what you see, but not yourself. Remember we had the torture scenario of Jack Bauer that most Americans were being ask of, and plenty have said sure lets torture, regardless that it was illegal to do so. Not only laws protect others , but they also protect ourselves from behaving like a mob riot.

So I would have to include that for me to behave in fear would be unfound base on hypothetical religious dogma of parts of the Koran and the Bible.

The sad thing is we sent that kind of scenario to Iraq, because of fear mongering that we were there because of a religious war that our leaders brought forth. No president have done more to promote powerful Ayatollah ruling class than the Bush administration.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Cowabanga: A person should have the right to say whatever they want, regardless if one agrees with the message or not. At the same time, we wouldn't have to worry about those spreading hate speech against a certain social demographic if we educate ourselves (and the next generation) and learn what is best for us as human beings.

Let the ignorant say what they want. As long as responsible people do what's right, we won't have to worry about the feeble minded that rally around them. Plus, you'd
could also use your right to free speech to voice your opinion in retaliation.

 

[midlifebear]

We have any teenage blonde virgins left??

Actually, no. If you stand the majority of them on their heads you end up with stinky brunettes. (sorry, I couldn't help myself) :biggrin1:

 

[2322]

Yes, the Bible is one scary book and so is the Koran, if one were to follow it, in that hypothetical scenario that you hold Yusuf and now me to it.

So, your for free speech even if can incite a riot to kill people base on Hate crime?

Again we deported or tried them in global tribunal court for war crimes for this behavior. Did you think it was wrong to send NAZI's to prison for hate speech inciting riots and death for the Jews and their sympathizers?

All I am saying its hypocritical to hold someone for hypothetical behavior of religious dogma when the our side had plenty of it as well, and to set a different mode of exceptionable behavior to apply only to what you see, but not yourself. Remember we had the torture scenario of Jack Bauer that most Americans were being ask of, and plenty have said sure lets torture, regardless that it was illegal to do so. Not only laws protect others , but they also protect ourselves from behaving like a mob riot.

So I would have to include that for me to behave in fear would be unfound base on hypothetical religious dogma of parts of the Koran and the Bible.

The sad thing is we sent that kind of scenario to Iraq, because of fear mongering that we were there because of a religious war that our leaders brought forth. No president have done more to promote powerful Ayatollah ruling class than the Bush administration.

If I've figured out what you've said, you're contradicting yourself. Somehow Cat Stevens is allowed to condone the extralegal killing of a man yet you're saying I'm defending the Nazis??

Your argument is illogical and unethical.