Republican Newsletter Calls For "Armed Revolution"

[Individualist Constructivism]

Good for the Greene County Republican Party.

Now, how does this relate to a policy of the GOP?

In any case, the Greene County GOP was justified in (initially) not releasing any condemnation. Should a local Democratic Party release such a condemnation if one idiot writes about class revolution according to Conflict theory sociology?

Certaainly not. Like any reasonable institution, they would not legitimize such a post with recognition.

I fail to see how crying endlessly about a Republican doing it and then almost never doing it in the instance of anyone Democratic supports the notion that Republicans support what the 'idiot' here was saying.

[Farnhamia]

Good for the Greene County Republican Party.

Now, how does this relate to a policy of the GOP?

A policy? The national party isn't that insane. It just goes to the quality of the people that gravitate to the Republican Party these days. Every Republican President from Lincoln to, I daresay, Ronald Reagan would be appalled at what the Grand Old Party has become.

[Individualist Constructivism]

Good for the Greene County Republican Party.

Now, how does this relate to a policy of the GOP?

A policy? The national party isn't that insane. It just goes to the quality of the people that gravitate to the Republican Party these days. Every Republican President from Lincoln to, I daresay, Ronald Reagan would be appalled at what the Grand Old Party has become.

A few stragglers suddenly become vocal on social media and now they are the spokesperson of the GOP?

I guess every Democrat is hopelessly devoted to anarcho-communism.

[Nulono]

Is this really news anymore?

[Samuraikoku]

Is this really news anymore?

Considering I got this when I clicked the article...

Sorry, 186.63.37.52 has been greylisted by http:BL.
You may try whitelisting on http://www.opposingviews.com/httpbl/whitelist.

I dare say not anymore.

[Individualist Constructivism]

Is this really news anymore?

Considering I got this when I clicked the article...

Sorry, 186.63.37.52 has been greylisted by http:BL.
You may try whitelisting on http://www.opposingviews.com/httpbl/whitelist.

I dare say not anymore.

Quite odd.

[Farnhamia]

Good for the Greene County Republican Party.

Now, how does this relate to a policy of the GOP?

In any case, the Greene County GOP was justified in (initially) not releasing any condemnation. Should a local Democratic Party release such a condemnation if one idiot writes about class revolution according to Conflict theory sociology?

Certaainly not. Like any reasonable institution, they would not legitimize such a post with recognition.

I fail to see how crying endlessly about a Republican doing it and then almost never doing it in the instance of anyone Democratic supports the notion that Republicans support what the 'idiot' here was saying.

The idiot wrote it in the official newsletter of the Greene County Republican Committee. The idiot who wrote was the chairman of the Greene County Republican Committee.

Here's the politicsusa.com post for your enjoyment, spoilerized so as not to create too long a post.

The author of the Declaration of Independence is often quoted by opposing groups to support their own agenda, but there are few who accurately apply some of his oft-repeated statements. During the healthcare reform debate, angry teabaggers cited Jefferson’s line that “a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing,” as proof that revolution against government tyranny was advocated by a Founding Father as an option in 2009, and that sentiment has not diminished three years later heading into a general election. The groups claiming President Obama is a tyrannical leader have never given one example of tyranny, but they, with the GOP’s assistance, have whipped themselves into frenzy and openly called for armed insurrection against the United States government. One may be inclined to excuse talk of rebellion as angry rhetoric from a fringe element in the tea party, but a Virginia Republican Committee newsletter has called for armed revolution if President Obama is re-elected in November.

First, it is important to put Jefferson’s statement that “a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing” in its proper context. Jefferson was showing support for the French who were rebelling against the wealthy elite and church that was keeping the population poor and hungry. In fact, Jefferson hated the wealthy and their banks, and in the same letter to Edward Carrington wrote that “man is the only animal which devours his own kind, and I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.”

In the Virginia Republican Committee newsletter, there is nothing to imply that protecting Americans from the “prey of the rich on the poor” is the reason for calling for armed rebellion. According to the newsletter, President Obama, is a “political socialist ideologue unlike anything world history has ever witnessed or recognized,” and that the only option is “armed revolution should we fail with the power of the vote in November:” If one is confused as to what Republicans consider is a “political socialist ideologue,” the newsletter claims President Obama “shuns biblical praise, handicaps economic ability, disrespects the honor of earned military might,” and that under Obama, “the government is out of control, and this opportunity, must not be forsaken for we shall not have any coarse (sic) but armed revolution.”

Republicans calling for armed insurrection against the government is nothing new, and few are apt to forget congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) saying “I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back,” and went on to specifically cite Jefferson’s quote from 1787. Bachmann continued that, “we the people are going to have to fight back hard if we’re not going to lose our country,” and encouraged Americans “to do everything we can to thwart the Democrats at every turn,” and apparently that included armed rebellion.

Another Republican, Sharon Angle, said in a radio interview that it may come to the point that the public would bring down an out-of-control Congress with “Second Amendment remedies.” Angle repeated her warning when she called for “Second Amendment remedies” to deal with the “ever-growing tyrannical U.S. government,” and to replace her election opponent Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Conservative entertainers have spent no small amount of energy demonizing President Obama over the past three years and although their rants may be just publicity stunts, all it takes are a few crazy people with guns to take their tirades to heart and begin shooting. On Friday, country musician Hank Williams Jr. waited until the end of his show to impugn the President for being “a Muslim who hates farming, hates the military, hates the U.S. and we hate him!” Williams incited the audience to cheer his invective not unlike washed-up rocker Ted Nugent who earned a visit from the Secret Service earlier this year for saying, “If Barack Obama becomes the president in November, again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year” insinuating he will take matters into his own hands with gun play if the President wins re-election. At a 2008 concert, Nugent said while holding a gun in each hand, “Hey, Obama, you might wanna suck on one of these, you punk” and extended the threat to now-Secretary of State Clinton saying, ”Hillary, you might wanna ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless bitch.”

Throughout all of the violent rhetoric, there has not been any condemnation by leading Republicans, and after the Virginia Republican Committee newsletter, it is easy to see why. Apparently, they are serious about armed rebellion against the United States government with an African American man as President. In fact, leading Republicans have been complicit in stirring up resentment against President Obama by accusing him of promoting “European-style socialism” and not being an American. Willard Romney and his campaign have used the “not an American” meme to portray the President as “not one of us” and “foreign to American principles.”

All of the threats of armed revolution have as their basis one simple fact; the President is not a white man. Republicans cannot condemn the President’s record of saving the economy, or creating over 4-million jobs despite Republican’s obstruction, or accuse him of being weak on defense, so they portray him as a foreigner who supplanted a “white man” who should be in the White House. The truth is that it does not matter which white man should be president, it just cannot be an African American, and if voters elect President Obama to a second term, they are seriously considering an armed rebellion. Every Republican who has failed to condemn talk of armed revolution is just as guilty as those calling for “second amendment remedies” or imploring their constituents to be “armed and dangerous.” It is likely that Republican leaders are not serious about a civil war or revolution, but their approval is evident in their silence.

The Virginia Republican Committee newsletter was published in March, and the media or Republican leadership have been silent, and regardless if they support the overthrow of the government if the President wins a second term or not, they are guilty of inciting rebellion by allowing their candidates, spokespersons, and members of Congress to openly call for armed rebellion against the government of the United States. Thomas Jefferson did, indeed, say that revolution is sometimes necessary, but only against wealthy bankers “who prey on the poor” and religious leaders who have the full support of every Republican in the United States. If the people were intelligent enough to actually read why Jefferson said rebellion is necessary, they would rise up and send the GOP to the only place they would be secure; counting their dirty money in their offshore tax havens.

[Individualist Constructivism]

Good for the Greene County Republican Party.

Now, how does this relate to a policy of the GOP?

In any case, the Greene County GOP was justified in (initially) not releasing any condemnation. Should a local Democratic Party release such a condemnation if one idiot writes about class revolution according to Conflict theory sociology?

Certaainly not. Like any reasonable institution, they would not legitimize such a post with recognition.

I fail to see how crying endlessly about a Republican doing it and then almost never doing it in the instance of anyone Democratic supports the notion that Republicans support what the 'idiot' here was saying.

The idiot wrote it in the official newsletter of the Greene County Republican Committee. The idiot who wrote was the chairman of the Greene County Republican Committee.

Here's the politicsusa.com post for your enjoyment, spoilerized so as not to create too long a post.

The author of the Declaration of Independence is often quoted by opposing groups to support their own agenda, but there are few who accurately apply some of his oft-repeated statements. During the healthcare reform debate, angry teabaggers cited Jefferson’s line that “a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing,” as proof that revolution against government tyranny was advocated by a Founding Father as an option in 2009, and that sentiment has not diminished three years later heading into a general election. The groups claiming President Obama is a tyrannical leader have never given one example of tyranny, but they, with the GOP’s assistance, have whipped themselves into frenzy and openly called for armed insurrection against the United States government. One may be inclined to excuse talk of rebellion as angry rhetoric from a fringe element in the tea party, but a Virginia Republican Committee newsletter has called for armed revolution if President Obama is re-elected in November.

First, it is important to put Jefferson’s statement that “a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing” in its proper context. Jefferson was showing support for the French who were rebelling against the wealthy elite and church that was keeping the population poor and hungry. In fact, Jefferson hated the wealthy and their banks, and in the same letter to Edward Carrington wrote that “man is the only animal which devours his own kind, and I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.”

In the Virginia Republican Committee newsletter, there is nothing to imply that protecting Americans from the “prey of the rich on the poor” is the reason for calling for armed rebellion. According to the newsletter, President Obama, is a “political socialist ideologue unlike anything world history has ever witnessed or recognized,” and that the only option is “armed revolution should we fail with the power of the vote in November:” If one is confused as to what Republicans consider is a “political socialist ideologue,” the newsletter claims President Obama “shuns biblical praise, handicaps economic ability, disrespects the honor of earned military might,” and that under Obama, “the government is out of control, and this opportunity, must not be forsaken for we shall not have any coarse (sic) but armed revolution.”

Republicans calling for armed insurrection against the government is nothing new, and few are apt to forget congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) saying “I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back,” and went on to specifically cite Jefferson’s quote from 1787. Bachmann continued that, “we the people are going to have to fight back hard if we’re not going to lose our country,” and encouraged Americans “to do everything we can to thwart the Democrats at every turn,” and apparently that included armed rebellion.

Another Republican, Sharon Angle, said in a radio interview that it may come to the point that the public would bring down an out-of-control Congress with “Second Amendment remedies.” Angle repeated her warning when she called for “Second Amendment remedies” to deal with the “ever-growing tyrannical U.S. government,” and to replace her election opponent Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Conservative entertainers have spent no small amount of energy demonizing President Obama over the past three years and although their rants may be just publicity stunts, all it takes are a few crazy people with guns to take their tirades to heart and begin shooting. On Friday, country musician Hank Williams Jr. waited until the end of his show to impugn the President for being “a Muslim who hates farming, hates the military, hates the U.S. and we hate him!” Williams incited the audience to cheer his invective not unlike washed-up rocker Ted Nugent who earned a visit from the Secret Service earlier this year for saying, “If Barack Obama becomes the president in November, again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year” insinuating he will take matters into his own hands with gun play if the President wins re-election. At a 2008 concert, Nugent said while holding a gun in each hand, “Hey, Obama, you might wanna suck on one of these, you punk” and extended the threat to now-Secretary of State Clinton saying, ”Hillary, you might wanna ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless bitch.”

Throughout all of the violent rhetoric, there has not been any condemnation by leading Republicans, and after the Virginia Republican Committee newsletter, it is easy to see why. Apparently, they are serious about armed rebellion against the United States government with an African American man as President. In fact, leading Republicans have been complicit in stirring up resentment against President Obama by accusing him of promoting “European-style socialism” and not being an American. Willard Romney and his campaign have used the “not an American” meme to portray the President as “not one of us” and “foreign to American principles.”

All of the threats of armed revolution have as their basis one simple fact; the President is not a white man. Republicans cannot condemn the President’s record of saving the economy, or creating over 4-million jobs despite Republican’s obstruction, or accuse him of being weak on defense, so they portray him as a foreigner who supplanted a “white man” who should be in the White House. The truth is that it does not matter which white man should be president, it just cannot be an African American, and if voters elect President Obama to a second term, they are seriously considering an armed rebellion. Every Republican who has failed to condemn talk of armed revolution is just as guilty as those calling for “second amendment remedies” or imploring their constituents to be “armed and dangerous.” It is likely that Republican leaders are not serious about a civil war or revolution, but their approval is evident in their silence.

The Virginia Republican Committee newsletter was published in March, and the media or Republican leadership have been silent, and regardless if they support the overthrow of the government if the President wins a second term or not, they are guilty of inciting rebellion by allowing their candidates, spokespersons, and members of Congress to openly call for armed rebellion against the government of the United States. Thomas Jefferson did, indeed, say that revolution is sometimes necessary, but only against wealthy bankers “who prey on the poor” and religious leaders who have the full support of every Republican in the United States. If the people were intelligent enough to actually read why Jefferson said rebellion is necessary, they would rise up and send the GOP to the only place they would be secure; counting their dirty money in their offshore tax havens.

The Chairman of a county is not representative of the nation as a whole.

I am sure many would be alarmed at their county chairs, perhaps in less spectacular ways. This does not give this case any special weight.

[Samuraikoku]

The Chairman of a county is not representative of the nation as a whole.

I am sure many would be alarmed at their county chairs, perhaps in less spectacular ways. This does not give this case any special weight.

No, but it says a lot about the quality of some followers of the GOP.

[Lord Herobrine]

...if President Obama is re-elected.

Here's the relevant text as reported by PoliticsUSA:

President Obama, is a “political socialist ideologue unlike anything world history has ever witnessed or recognized,” and that the only option is “armed revolution should we fail with the power of the vote in November:” If one is confused as to what Republicans consider is a “political socialist ideologue,” the newsletter claims President Obama “shuns biblical praise, handicaps economic ability, disrespects the honor of earned military might,” and that under Obama, “the government is out of control, and this opportunity, must not be forsaken for we shall not have any coarse (sic) but armed revolution.”

Aw... when I saw the words "Armed Revolution", I got my hopes up.

I happen to like Socialism, the shunning of Biblical praise and opposition to the military. Let the Republicans try to take us over. Hopefully they'll all die trying?

[Farnhamia]

The idiot wrote it in the official newsletter of the Greene County Republican Committee. The idiot who wrote was the chairman of the Greene County Republican Committee.

Here's the politicsusa.com post for your enjoyment, spoilerized so as not to create too long a post.

The author of the Declaration of Independence is often quoted by opposing groups to support their own agenda, but there are few who accurately apply some of his oft-repeated statements. During the healthcare reform debate, angry teabaggers cited Jefferson’s line that “a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing,” as proof that revolution against government tyranny was advocated by a Founding Father as an option in 2009, and that sentiment has not diminished three years later heading into a general election. The groups claiming President Obama is a tyrannical leader have never given one example of tyranny, but they, with the GOP’s assistance, have whipped themselves into frenzy and openly called for armed insurrection against the United States government. One may be inclined to excuse talk of rebellion as angry rhetoric from a fringe element in the tea party, but a Virginia Republican Committee newsletter has called for armed revolution if President Obama is re-elected in November.

First, it is important to put Jefferson’s statement that “a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing” in its proper context. Jefferson was showing support for the French who were rebelling against the wealthy elite and church that was keeping the population poor and hungry. In fact, Jefferson hated the wealthy and their banks, and in the same letter to Edward Carrington wrote that “man is the only animal which devours his own kind, and I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.”

In the Virginia Republican Committee newsletter, there is nothing to imply that protecting Americans from the “prey of the rich on the poor” is the reason for calling for armed rebellion. According to the newsletter, President Obama, is a “political socialist ideologue unlike anything world history has ever witnessed or recognized,” and that the only option is “armed revolution should we fail with the power of the vote in November:” If one is confused as to what Republicans consider is a “political socialist ideologue,” the newsletter claims President Obama “shuns biblical praise, handicaps economic ability, disrespects the honor of earned military might,” and that under Obama, “the government is out of control, and this opportunity, must not be forsaken for we shall not have any coarse (sic) but armed revolution.”

Republicans calling for armed insurrection against the government is nothing new, and few are apt to forget congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) saying “I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back,” and went on to specifically cite Jefferson’s quote from 1787. Bachmann continued that, “we the people are going to have to fight back hard if we’re not going to lose our country,” and encouraged Americans “to do everything we can to thwart the Democrats at every turn,” and apparently that included armed rebellion.

Another Republican, Sharon Angle, said in a radio interview that it may come to the point that the public would bring down an out-of-control Congress with “Second Amendment remedies.” Angle repeated her warning when she called for “Second Amendment remedies” to deal with the “ever-growing tyrannical U.S. government,” and to replace her election opponent Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Conservative entertainers have spent no small amount of energy demonizing President Obama over the past three years and although their rants may be just publicity stunts, all it takes are a few crazy people with guns to take their tirades to heart and begin shooting. On Friday, country musician Hank Williams Jr. waited until the end of his show to impugn the President for being “a Muslim who hates farming, hates the military, hates the U.S. and we hate him!” Williams incited the audience to cheer his invective not unlike washed-up rocker Ted Nugent who earned a visit from the Secret Service earlier this year for saying, “If Barack Obama becomes the president in November, again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year” insinuating he will take matters into his own hands with gun play if the President wins re-election. At a 2008 concert, Nugent said while holding a gun in each hand, “Hey, Obama, you might wanna suck on one of these, you punk” and extended the threat to now-Secretary of State Clinton saying, ”Hillary, you might wanna ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless bitch.”

Throughout all of the violent rhetoric, there has not been any condemnation by leading Republicans, and after the Virginia Republican Committee newsletter, it is easy to see why. Apparently, they are serious about armed rebellion against the United States government with an African American man as President. In fact, leading Republicans have been complicit in stirring up resentment against President Obama by accusing him of promoting “European-style socialism” and not being an American. Willard Romney and his campaign have used the “not an American” meme to portray the President as “not one of us” and “foreign to American principles.”

All of the threats of armed revolution have as their basis one simple fact; the President is not a white man. Republicans cannot condemn the President’s record of saving the economy, or creating over 4-million jobs despite Republican’s obstruction, or accuse him of being weak on defense, so they portray him as a foreigner who supplanted a “white man” who should be in the White House. The truth is that it does not matter which white man should be president, it just cannot be an African American, and if voters elect President Obama to a second term, they are seriously considering an armed rebellion. Every Republican who has failed to condemn talk of armed revolution is just as guilty as those calling for “second amendment remedies” or imploring their constituents to be “armed and dangerous.” It is likely that Republican leaders are not serious about a civil war or revolution, but their approval is evident in their silence.

The Virginia Republican Committee newsletter was published in March, and the media or Republican leadership have been silent, and regardless if they support the overthrow of the government if the President wins a second term or not, they are guilty of inciting rebellion by allowing their candidates, spokespersons, and members of Congress to openly call for armed rebellion against the government of the United States. Thomas Jefferson did, indeed, say that revolution is sometimes necessary, but only against wealthy bankers “who prey on the poor” and religious leaders who have the full support of every Republican in the United States. If the people were intelligent enough to actually read why Jefferson said rebellion is necessary, they would rise up and send the GOP to the only place they would be secure; counting their dirty money in their offshore tax havens.

The Chairman of a county is not representative of the nation as a whole.

I am sure many would be alarmed at their county chairs, perhaps in less spectacular ways. This does not give this case any special weight.

Whatever you say. I'm sure that if I said that all it takes for these sort of people to take over your party is for you to do nothing, you'd say, "Oh, but I'm not a Republican! Oh, goodness no, I'm an independent. Me a Republican! Surely you jest."

[Individualist Constructivism]

The Chairman of a county is not representative of the nation as a whole.

I am sure many would be alarmed at their county chairs, perhaps in less spectacular ways. This does not give this case any special weight.

No, but it says a lot about the quality of some followers of the GOP.

Certainly it does. About some.

The Chairman of a county is not representative of the nation as a whole.

I am sure many would be alarmed at their county chairs, perhaps in less spectacular ways. This does not give this case any special weight.

Whatever you say. I'm sure that if I said that all it takes for these sort of people to take over your party is for you to do nothing, you'd say, "Oh, but I'm not a Republican! Oh, goodness no, I'm an independent. Me a Republican! Surely you jest."

Treating the entire establishment that way, however, does not help the reasonable members of the Republican party.

[Xeng He]

1. There is precedence in the New Testament for opposing homosexual marriage.

I'd be interested in where in the New Testament these exist.

Mostly out of curiousity, not out of need to take sides.

[Alien Space Bats]

US Constitution, Article III, Section 3:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attained.

The newsletter could be used as evidence of intent to commit treason, and possibly also an overt act of preparation to levy war against the United States. So hypothetically this newsletter is treasonous, but I'm not certain it would be found as such. The two witnesses are not necessary to prove intent or a treasonable nature of the act, they are only needed to prove the act occurred.

Technically, the statement wasn't treason.

Rather, it was sedition.

[Farnhamia]

No, but it says a lot about the quality of some followers of the GOP.

Certainly it does. About some.

Whatever you say. I'm sure that if I said that all it takes for these sort of people to take over your party is for you to do nothing, you'd say, "Oh, but I'm not a Republican! Oh, goodness no, I'm an independent. Me a Republican! Surely you jest."

Treating the entire establishment that way, however, does not help the reasonable members of the Republican party.

One wonders how many "reasonable" members of the Republican Party are left, given the draft of the platform that's circulating in Tampa.

What the G.O.P. Platform Represents
Over the years, the major parties’ election-year platforms have been regarded as Kabuki theater scripts for convention week. The presidential candidates blithely ignored them or openly dismissed the most extreme planks with a knowing wink as merely a gesture to pacify the noisiest activists in the party.

That cannot be said of the draft of the Republican platform circulating ahead of the convention in Tampa. The Republican Party has moved so far to the right that the extreme is now the mainstream. The mean-spirited and intolerant platform represents the face of Republican politics in 2012. And unless he makes changes, it is the current face of the shapeshifting Mitt Romney.

The draft document is more aggressive in its opposition to women’s reproductive rights and to gay rights than any in memory. It accuses President Obama and the federal judiciary of “an assault on the foundations of our society,” and calls for constitutional amendments banning both same-sex marriage and abortion.

In defending one of the last vestiges of officially sanctioned discrimination — restrictions on the rights of gay men and lesbians to marry — the platform relies on the idea that marriage between one man and one woman has for thousands of years “been entrusted with the rearing of children and the transmission of cultural values.”

That familiar argument ignores the fact that the number of children raised by one-parent families has been rising steadily since the 1970s, long before anyone was talking about same-sex marriage. Census figures indicate that one out of every two children will live in a single-parent family before they reach 18. Studies purporting to show that children of lesbians are disadvantaged have been shown to be junk science. Gay marriages pose no threat to marriages between men and women.

The draft attacks President Obama for not defending in court the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages. It calls that decision a “mockery of the President’s inaugural oath,” when in fact Mr. Obama would have been wrong to ignore lawyers who concluded that the law is unconstitutional.

In passages on abortion, the draft platform puts the party on the most extreme fringes of American opinion. It calls for a “human life amendment” and for legislation “to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.” That would erase any right women have to make decisions about their health and their bodies. There are no exceptions for victims of rape or incest, and such laws could threaten even birth control.

The draft demands that the government “not fund or subsidize health care which includes abortion coverage,” which could bar abortion coverage on federally subsidized health-insurance exchanges, for example.

The platform praises states with “informed consent” laws that require women to undergo medically unnecessary tests before having abortions, and “mandatory waiting periods.” Those are among the most patronizing forms of anti-abortion legislation. They presume that a woman is not capable of making a considered decision about abortion before she goes to a doctor.

The draft platform also espouses the most extreme Republican views on taxation, national security, military spending and other issues.

Overall, it is farther out on the party’s fringe than Mr. Romney ventured in the primaries, when he repudiated a career’s worth of centrist views on issues like abortion and gay marriage. But the planks hew closely to the views of his running mate, Paul Ryan, and the powerful right-wing. Mr. Romney has a chance to move back in the direction of the center by amending this extremist platform. It will be interesting to see if he seizes it.

[Jinos]

South threatening secession if the politician you don't like gets elected by a popular majority?

Unprecedented.

[Zeppy]

Rabble, rabble, my guns and religion, rabble, rabble.

Rabble, rabble, a slave in a suit dressing up as a president, rabble, rabble.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Because Senator Byrd received high levels of condemnation, right?

Your own ideology is making you blind to the extremists within your own camp. Every group has its extremists. You can't just claim that they aren't a part of your group. They are, they just don't represent you.

Yours are just totally out of touch with reality, and far more numerous.

No true Scotsman, right?

"We don't have any extremists!"

"Really? What about Fred Phelps?"

"Um...He's not a TRUE Democrat."

Extremists in your party believes black people can only get lower grades, that's why they made affirmative action. Your party treats poor minorities like pets and not responsible adults who can lead successful lives.

[Revolutopia]

Extremists in your party believes black people can only get lower grades, that's why they made affirmative action. Your party treats poor minorities like pets and not responsible adults who can lead successful lives.

Lets play a game, you tell us what you think affirmative action is and we all chuckle when you get it wrong.

edit: Also no where in Trot's post did he say Byrd wasn't a true Democrat, thus your attempt to squawk out a fallacy in attempt to look smart fails.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Extremists in your party believes black people can only get lower grades, that's why they made affirmative action. Your party treats poor minorities like pets and not responsible adults who can lead successful lives.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Extremists in your party believes black people can only get lower grades, that's why they made affirmative action. Your party treats poor minorities like pets and not responsible adults who can lead successful lives.

Lets play a game, you tell us what you think affirmative action is and we all chuckle when you get it wrong.

edit: Also no where in Trot's post did he say Byrd wasn't a true Democrat, thus your attempt to squawk out a fallacy in attempt to look smart fails.

Mongol said Fred Phelps was an extremist, not Byrd.

[Revolutopia]

Lets play a game, you tell us what you think affirmative action is and we all chuckle when you get it wrong.

edit: Also no where in Trot's post did he say Byrd wasn't a true Democrat, thus your attempt to squawk out a fallacy in attempt to look smart fails.

Mongol said Fred Phelps was an extremist, not Byrd.

Mongol brought up an individual that neither Trots nor the individual Trots was responding too mentioned, in the hope of allowing him to use his patented claim fallacy defense.

Therefore, the action of Mongol mentioning Phelps and then claiming the presence of a No True Scotsmen argument was a non sequitor and strawman in the discussion.

[Revolutopia]

Extremists in your party believes black people can only get lower grades, that's why they made affirmative action. Your party treats poor minorities like pets and not responsible adults who can lead successful lives.

It was under a Nixon Administration that AA really took off as policy for the Federal Government, and remind me which political party Nixon was a member of again?

[Wamitoria]

It was under a Nixon Administration that AA took really off as policy for the Federal Government, and remind me which political party Nixon was a member of again?

Nixon was a communist. I mean, he created the EPA and supported integration, two clearly communist ideas.

[Revolutopia]

It was under a Nixon Administration that AA took really off as policy for the Federal Government, and remind me which political party Nixon was a member of again?

Nixon was a communist. I mean, he created the EPA and supported integration, two clearly communist ideas.

Clearly, but what party was he infiltrating when he made those decisions.