Well, after a few seconds, Google spit out this little gem from Mike Van Winkle, spokesman for the California Terrorism Intelligence Center* (snerk… like military intelligence…). Anyway.
I can keep looking, if you like.
RTF: Even though you didn’t offer any examples, I’ll throw you two Nazi comparisons:
I thought we were talking about elected officials talking about other elected officials. If not, then this is just silly, because of course there are pundits or others out there saying outrageous things about their political opponents. And, frankly, I’m sure if you look hard enought you will find some elected Republcans doing just what **RTF **said. My response is still, so what? Both sides have their bomb throwers, and neither side relegates those bomb throwers to the netherworld of poltical limbo. Is the point that politicians play dirty? Well, shocker!!! Stop the presses!!!
Let’s relook at the statement that started this little hijack:
So, let’s clarify. By “Mainstream Republicans” do we mean Ann Coulter? Because she ain’t loony, she’s evil. She knows exaclty what she’s doing. But if we mean Mainstream Repulbican Politicians, I’d still like to see one that lump the Democratic Party (ie, the whole thing) in with al Qaeda.
aren’t you discounting Karl Rove and John Ashcroft? Traitors in The War Against Terrorists certainly is as linked to Al Q as “Brown shirt” tactics is to Nazis
In the first place, this wasn’t a pundit. It was a statement made by a spokesperson of an agency which enforces anti-terrorist laws in California, and was appointed by the governor with the endorsement of the AG of the US.
In the second: perhaps I misunderstood what you meant by “mainstream.” I figured you meant average-SUV-drivin-football-watchin-beer-drinkin-mainstream-Joe Blow Republican. But while we’re at it…where do you think those misconceptions come from, John? You think they just descend out of the blue and are held only by wing nuts who polish their guns every night? There’s a derision for anyone who dares speak out, and it’s shared by most Republicans, you among them, that anyone who dares speak out is a loony, is only hurting Dem’s chances of accomplishing anything, and if we were really smart and swallowed shit like good little boys and girls, we might be allowed to sit at the big table.
I’m still waiting for **RTF **to clarify what he meant. I meant elected officials.
Wow… you’re going on about misconceptions and you just paint Republicans as Joe-sixpack. Looks like you’re the wing-nut here!
I’ve only called Sheehan a loon, and yet you extrapolate that to “anyone who dares speak out”. You’re just blowing shit out of your ass now. If you have an actual argument to make, make it. But you’re making my point for me. It’s always the mean ol’ Republican’s fault. Fuck that. Let the Democrats stand up for what they believe in. If they can’t do it, then they don’t deserve to be in positions of power.
Oh, good. At least you’re not tapdancing anymore.
That’s my point. We’re not talking about “being in positions of power.” We’re talking about acknowledging the trampling of our constitutional rights. Tell me, would the entire Republican party grind to a stop if you just once admitted the Chimp in Charge or for that matter any of your party’s elected officials did something wrong? Would Republican values cease to be? Why can’t you just admit it’s bullshit? I promise, it won’t hurt. You won’t even be branded a shudder moderate or anything.
WEll, ignoring your ad hominem about the chimp, what makes you think I’ve never said Bush did anything wrong? You’re confusing me with someone else. I didn’t even vote for Bush in the last election. You want a list of things Bush has done wrong? Save me the trouble and ask for a list of things he’s done right-- it’ll be a lot shorter. Why do you find it so hard to comprehend that a person can think Sheehan is nutty but not necessarily suport Bush? There’s a lot of ground inbetween.
You know John Mace. I have no problems with you not supporting Cindy Shaheen’s politics or protests.
I don’t think that makes you a diehard Bush supporter by any means.
What I do object to is your branding her ‘loony’ or ‘nutty’, without ever coming up with any evidence of her lunacy.
And calling Bush a terrorist is not evidence of anything but her deeply held conviction that he has invaded a foriegn country without cause or reason, leading to the death and destruction of both Iraqs and Americans.
By his own definition of terrorism, Bush fits the bill.
I don’t. I just wanted you to acknowledge that list of quotes RTFirefly posted before the dick measuring started over yet another minor detail in someone’s argument that someone else intentionally misconstrued.* And as I said before, plenty of politicians use that tactic; it’s hardly new. Inferrence that Sen. McCain had an interracial child out of wedlock wasn’t the first example, and character assassination works so much better than actually sticking to facts. That attitude is passed down to constituents. I don’t think Cindy Sheehan is much more than a grieving mom who wants the world to share her anger and outrage and pain. She’s taking it a step further than most, but if it gets the message across, then good on her. Not so much a loony as someone who refuses to give up. Disagreeing with her methods doesn’t make her nuts. From all the interviews I’ve seen, she’s seemed rational. Just determined.
*This is not to infer that you or anyone else did that. Merely an observation on tactics used to hijack in general.
Considering I didn’t vote for him, it would pretty hard for me to be one.
No, I’ve given two pieces of evidence. The fact that your reject the evidence doesn’t mean I have given any. The two pieces or evidence are her calling Bush the biggest terrorist in the world, and her threat to run against Feinstein.
First of all, can we have a cite for what Bush’s defintion of terrorism is? And, like I’ve said before, we’ve had plenty of GD threads about what terrorism is. It’s about the deliberate targetting of civilians in order to accomplish political goals. If you’re going to call Bush a terrorist, then is Bill Clinton a terrorist because he bombed Serbia? After all, in that bombing campagin we bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. Not only did innocent civilians die, we had no reason to bomb that embassy.
I’m still waiting to hear a reply from the rightwingnuts who said Sheehan should have been beat up and thrown down the stairs. How about a reply and some pretense at a line of reasoning for it? This whole Commies vs Nazis “thing” has been fun to watch, but still I want to hear from the “armchair commandos” and “heroes in momma’s basement” who think it would be cool to put a smackdown on “little ole ladies” loke Sheehan. Yeah, it’s all about freedom of speech for you guys, but not for someone else.
And who said that? Was it someone on this board?
Who are you talking about? Who are these “you guys” of whom you speak? If it wasn’t someone on this board, you’ll be waiting a loooooong time for a reply, methinks.
That’s not even the worse of it. To add insult to injury, this woman praises Hugo Chavez and bashes our country on the world stage. Sheehan & Chavez: Politics makes strange bedfellows!
How am I suppose to take her seriously when she has proven that she’s merely part of this fringe left-wing Harry Bellafonte mentality? I understand she is mourning the loss of her son, but lets not pretend here. She has a definite political agenda supported and paid for by fringe Left groups.
Here it is, unless I was whooshed that is possible)…
You done been whooshed, baby! 
Damn. I feel so stupid.
OMG!
She criticizes America? On the world stage, no less!
String her up!
OMG!
She has a political agenda? And it’s not conservative?
String her up, i say!
To tell you the truth, moron, whether you take her seriously or not is probably something that doesn’t weigh very heavily on her mind. People who imply that there’s something wrong with criticizing your country, and something wrong with taking an adversarial political position, don’t deserve to be taken seriously.