You know that story cites a Democratic Representative who was offended by it, right?
-
If it is an accurate, good faith report, I don’t care who is offended
-
If it is an inaccurate, partisan / bad faith report, it should have been quashed by some review process
-
My guess here, it is a good faith report (and a best guess, as strong as a report like that can be) and the “vetting” she speaks of is purely political, and not related to accuracy per se. Part of her responsibility is to not hang albatrosses around the neck of the administration- that competes with the responsibility to get accurate information to law enforcement. When in competition, useful information should win.
Of course I am biased- this administration strikes me as thoughtful and competent so I view things through that lens. I’ll be interested to see what happens with this going forward.
Along with veterans,
Why didn’t the report simply say everyone is a potential terrorist? If (and I said IF) this report was so poorly researched and written, then it was useless.
Hmmmm. I’m a white, Catholic veteran. Should I start hiring henchmen, building a secret lair and work on my super villain evil laugh or is it too soon?
Unfortunately, Dumbocrat politicians often follow the lead of stupid right-wingers.
I can’t tell from the article, but it looks like that’s from a glossary of terms.
I wonder. Is there a chance the original report is floating around on the web?
Here you go: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/5410658/DHS-Report-on-Right-Wing-Extremism
I don’t think it’s a big secret that right-wing extremists go after veterans or anyone else with military training. I also don’t think it’s a secret that veterans lean right.
http://digg.com/politics/Republican_ad_attacks_President_Obama_s_dog This really seemed like a good idea, guys? Criticizing the money he spent on the dog?
Republicans: Kicking Puppies Since 1994
Republicans: If you thought our last idea was stupid, wait until you see the next one!
DNC’s response: “We understand the RNC is frustrated their lack of a coherent message, but going negative on Bo isn’t going to help, and neither is blatant hypocrisy.”
The thing is, he didn’t spend anything on buying the dog at all. Bo was a gift from Ted Kennedy. The Obamas spent nothing to adopt him, except for whatever personal donation they made to a shelter in DC to make up for not getting a shelter dog.
Okay, I’m not a huge fan of this thread, but there is clearly something utterly bizarre going on here.
Next up: “Obama spends $20 on haircut, enrages Hair Cuttery Dads.”
The bizarre thing going on is that the Republican party is losing it. They’ve got a serious but low-key civil war going on and the party is lurching in all directions as the politicians and the party organization try to keep the Republican coalition together.
They have NO strategy. They have NO internal agreement. They have NO leader who actually cares about the party and not his own interests. The religious faction is running wild while the financial faction is trying to figure out how to cut them loose while surreptitiously increasing their lobbying of “New” Democrats. The party pundits are almost all insane, or at least think that shockjock tactics are the best way to get their voices out there. They’ve gone from total political control to losing the White House, Capitol Hill and (hopefully) the Supreme Court. They’ve gone from hero to zero in less than a year.
And the more they talk, the more they lose. They’ve tiny-tented their way into irrelevancy.
Thanks for the link. I’m relieved it was a short report, too many reports just go on and on and on.
So as far as I can tell, it was saying that “this is the situation and here’s how extremists may try to take advantage”
War veterans would be attractive “recruiting targets” I suppose, because they already know how to shoot, or how to hande “demolition”. How successful the recruiting effort is, would be an entirely different story. I think (and hope) the success rate would be abysmally low. There are always a few nut jobs out there, but that doesn’t mean everyone is one.
If this is the hot subject of the day, all I can say is
hahahahahahah gasp hahahahhaahaha sniff hahahahhahaha wheeze hahahahahaha guffaw
War veterans tend to make a large contingent of the really right wing groups anyway.
Bo Gritz is a good example. The problems with the “far right” nomenclature are that (1) it’s not always clear whether the crazy person is a right winger- Gritz, for example, worked with liberal groups to force the Reagan Administration to do something about US POWs he believed were still being held in Southeast Asia; and (2) they’re so far off the map that they won’t support Republicans any more than Democrats.
Some writers use the term “Far Middle” to describe these groups; I think “off the wing” makes more sense.
It wasn’t when they tried it on Fala.
They fell apart very quickly, but it’s taken much longer than a year. Remember that they were gaining power in congress as late as 2004. Jeffords left the GOP in 2001, splitting the Senate 50/50, but the GOP took it back in 2002 and gained more seats in 2004. We, as a nation, were still too scared of terrorism, and not enough people grasped how fucked up Iraq was yet.
Democrats retook congress in 2006, in my recollection primarily because people had enough scaremongering and were furious about Iraq. Nobody was voting based on economic concerns at the time (ok some were but it was low). If you reflect on it or read articles from the time, most Republicans publicly claimed that it was a momentary blip - a reaction to a deeply unpopular president and a terribly waged war. Very few Republicans wanted to talk about fundamental problems with their party.
It wasn’t until 2008 elections now that nobody can seriously claim there isn`t a serious problem. As recently as EARLY 2008 a lot of people said, “oh sure, we may not win the presidency because Bush is so unpopular, but the GOP brand isn’t all that bad”. Even the idiots who want to exclude more moderates and push more extreme versions of the ideals they’ve proven are so disastrous at least acknowledge that it’s a shift to conservative extremes. They actually think the party is too moderate, but they do acknowledge it needs to move to win elections again (in the wrong direction, but whatever)
It’s really fast, to be sure. But not a year. Compare to the Democrats losing congress in '94, maintaining the presidency until 2000 and only really having an upward trend as of 2006. The Democratic ideals were never as scorned or (legitimately) repudiated as the GOP’s ideals have been.
See, this is what amazes me. Four years ago the Repubs were the party in power, now they’re reduced to… well, this. That pendulum swung rather quickly.
I see the RNC is petitioning Nancy Pelosi to stop federal funding for ACORN.
That should go over real well after this week’s attacks on Pelosi.
Maybe the re-education camps will get funding this year.
I’m getting a bad feeling with all the talk about Pelosi knowing about torture and all the Bush programs and regulations that Obama is leaving on the table, that the Democratic momentum is slowing down. It’s nothing really happening yet, but I just get that feeling. I’m not terribly comfortable with that.
People view Pelosi separately from Obama. I don’t think anybody, left, right or center, has ever really loved Pelosi or Reid. If anything, I think we might see a coup against Pelosi as Speaker, but I don’t think that affects Obama.
And when are the Republicans going to stick a sock in it with this totally fabricated, blatantly racist smear against ACORN?
I think the Democratic Congressional leadership is and has been completely lame, especially since Pelosi took impeachment off the table years ago. If it turns out she’s been lying, it wouldn’t bother me at all to see her go. And if it turns out she’s been telling the truth, it wouldn’t bother me at all to see her go.