McCain: Obama Supporters are Mean! Waaahh

[Count Chocula]

General Zod wrote:

Are you seriously trying to use someone calling McSame a hypocrite as an example of extremism?

I don't believe the protester was calling McCain a hypocrite, but yelling at, and I quote, "someone entering the hotel." The implication, not stated in the article, was that that someone was a Republican and would inevitably, at some point in the future, desire an abortion. Which is against the Republican credo, duh. They're screwed. In other words, it seems like an emotional outburst designed to elicit an emotional response.

As far as the best quote goes, I'll take "Let's stone her, old school" for a thousand, Alex! Ironically, that ties into Obama's name, Muslim allegations, and what some Muslims do to "misbehaving" women. Probably not the association desired by the Democrat protestor.

[chr335]

I dunno, it seems that there are more vocal nutbags on the McCain side, and more subtle nutbags on the Obama side (have you seen any through-the-legs shots of Michelle Obama?). Honestly, I couldn't even attempt to quantify how many "extremists" are on one side vs. the other...I just know we'll see more of them in the next couple weeks!

I'm failing to see any particular reason why anyone should assume there's just as many left wing "extremists" when right wing assholes are far more vocal and visible about it, and more socially acceptable to boot. The fact that these supposed left wing extremists aren't nearly as vocal is somewhat damning against them being just as numerous.

Shit like this from his supporters doesn't help, either

Outside on Broad Street, waiting for Palin to leave, one man was heard saying: "Let's stone her, old school."

Another protester shouted at someone entering the hotel, "Wait till your daughter wants an abortion, you hypocrite."

Are you seriously trying to use someone calling McSame a hypocrite as an example of extremism?

We really haven't had many extreme leftist come out lately the last time I really remember a lot of leftist extremist was a few years back when a lot of conservative speakers had stuff thrown at them (mostly dressing if I remember correctly) and of course the usually motley crew of extremist from all different angles that protested both parties primaries. I think the real reason we haven't heard much from the left fringe is Obama has mad them really happy so they don't have any reason to go all ape shit in front of a camera. The right wing extremist are pissed they got stuck with a 2000 election washout as their choice this year.

[General Zod]

I don't believe the protester was calling McCain a hypocrite, but yelling at, and I quote, "someone entering the hotel." The implication, not stated in the article, was that that someone was a Republican and would inevitably, at some point in the future, desire an abortion. Which is against the Republican credo, duh. They're screwed. In other words, it seems like an emotional outburst designed to elicit an emotional response.

How the fuck does emotional outburst translate into extremist? I suppose equal rights protestors are extremists when they're outraged at inequality too?

As far as the best quote goes, I'll take "Let's stone her, old school" for a thousand, Alex! Ironically, that ties into Obama's name, Muslim allegations, and what some Muslims do to "misbehaving" women. Probably not the association desired by the Democrat protestor.

Do you have anything resembling actual context with this or are you just going to keep throwing out unsourced one-liners?

[General Zod]

We really haven't had many extreme leftist come out lately the last time I really remember a lot of leftist extremist was a few years back when a lot of conservative speakers had stuff thrown at them (mostly dressing if I remember correctly) and of course the usually motley crew of extremist from all different angles that protested both parties primaries. I think the real reason we haven't heard much from the left fringe is Obama has mad them really happy so they don't have any reason to go all ape shit in front of a camera. The right wing extremist are pissed they got stuck with a 2000 election washout as their choice this year.

Was there some kind of point in this incoherent mess of broken English?

[Count Chocula]

linky for my unsourced one-liners. The whole Muslim-stoning-oops-not-the-impression-we-want-to-make thing was mine.

[chr335]

We really haven't had many extreme leftist come out lately the last time I really remember a lot of leftist extremist was a few years back when a lot of conservative speakers had stuff thrown at them (mostly dressing if I remember correctly) and of course the usually motley crew of extremist from all different angles that protested both parties primaries. I think the real reason we haven't heard much from the left fringe is Obama has mad them really happy so they don't have any reason to go all ape shit in front of a camera. The right wing extremist are pissed they got stuck with a 2000 election washout as their choice this year.

Was there some kind of point in this incoherent mess of broken English?

Oh I'm sorry was it too long let me shorten it up. The leftist wackos are happy and staying at home. The rightist wackos are pissed and letting the world know it.

[General Zod]

Oh I'm sorry was it too long let me shorten it up. The leftist wackos are happy and staying at home. The rightist wackos are pissed and letting the world know it.

In other words a massive non sequitor based on. . .absolutely nothing but your say so. So far the only thing the facts indicate is that there are fewer left wing nuts than right wing nuts, but feel free to keep pretending that's not the case.

[Darth Raptor]

So that's where all the US liberals are! Indoors!

[Darth Wong]

We really haven't had many extreme leftist come out lately the last time I really remember a lot of leftist extremist was a few years back when a lot of conservative speakers had stuff thrown at them (mostly dressing if I remember correctly) and of course the usually motley crew of extremist from all different angles that protested both parties primaries. I think the real reason we haven't heard much from the left fringe is Obama has mad them really happy so they don't have any reason to go all ape shit in front of a camera. The right wing extremist are pissed they got stuck with a 2000 election washout as their choice this year.

Do you have any evidence of this large number of extreme leftists? Because the extreme right-wingers constitute at least a third of the population, based on the hard-liners whose resistance to facts is so extreme that they still think Saddam Hussein orchestrated 9/11. If you look at the religious extreme right, it's nearly half of the population: between 40% and 50% of the population which thinks that the Noah's Ark story literally happened and that the Book of Genesis is a historically accurate document.

[The Kernel]

Do you have any evidence of this large number of extreme leftists? Because the extreme right-wingers constitute at least a third of the population, based on the hard-liners whose resistance to facts is so extreme that they still think Saddam Hussein orchestrated 9/11. If you look at the religious extreme right, it's nearly half of the population: between 40% and 50% of the population which thinks that the Noah's Ark story literally happened and that the Book of Genesis is a historically accurate document.

"Extreme leftists" is an entirely subjective term, but if you take that to mean consistently votes Democrat regardless of the candidate, then 40% of the country is "extreme leftist". The biggest blowout election in modern American history was in 1984 where Reagan faced down Walter Mondale. Reagan won 49 states with only Mondale's home state of Minnesota breaking for him where Reagan ended up with 525 electoral votes to Mondale's 13. Despite this, 40.6% voted for Mondale. The old adage that 40% of the country votes for one party and 40% for the other regardless of the candidates applies here.

Now I'll grant that the 40% who voted Mondale might not qualify as what you call "Extreme Leftist" but religious zealots and conservatives break almost exclusively Republican these days.

[The Guid]

"Extreme leftists" is an entirely subjective term, but if you take that to mean consistently votes Democrat regardless of the candidate, then 40% of the country is "extreme leftist".

I entirely reject your nonsense assumption. The Democrats have consistently been the more left wing of the candidates over the last 20 years, not by much I grant you, but you could quite easily be a centre left person and have voted Democrat all that time.

The fact that Raegan won 49 states does not mean that he was a centrist candidate that got 49/50 people behind him and therefore could only have been opposed by the "extreme left", its just a reflection of the winner takes all style elections

[Covenant]

What the fuck is an extreme leftist? A marxist? Ooh, scary marxists. What are they going to do? Talk me to death? I stand by the assertion that a scary leftist will bitch and whine and moan and vote on election day, but won't do a damn thing. I did a google for "extreme left in america" and the big scary lefties they raving about are, in this order, students, law professors, and librarians. Librarians. Wouldn't the extreme left be a bunch of grass-eating pacifists?

Compare this to the moderate-right (or as Buckley would put it, a small "c" conservative) but uneducated bigots with guns, bibles, and a head full of horseshit about their fictional version of America's history. You don't need to be an extreme right winger to be a dangerous son of a bitch, and if anything the people on the left are more likely to be a bunch of waffling tea-drinking pansies. This is simply not equivalent. Hate and anger is one thing--and it's vile. But threats of violence are another thing altogether.

Color me flabberghasted. I had no fricking idea that "Pinata Politics" was actually a tactic in use by the McCain crew. I meant that comment exactly the way you interpreted it. Wow. Where's the quote from?

Ahh, yeah. You just got unlucky. It's not terribly well known outside of the latino community (of which I am not a member, I just know many things!) but Pinata Politics generally refer to disingenuous identity politics. In this sense calling Obama's tactics Pinata Politics could be seen as referencing the practice with Latinos, but on a larger scale with the non-whites, so it's basically one misunderstanding away from a big "Racist!" kerfuffle. If you had been a well-meaning Republican commentator on Keith Olbermann's show, for example, your honest misstatement would have probably been played for the next three weeks as he harasses you for calling the dreams of minorities or something a "pinata" for Obama to whack apart. But, like I said, the term is not one in common usage. That first link is from 2002, this one is from 2004, talking about the time that Kerry basically showed up and said "I love me some Mexicans! Vote!" But no harm, certainly. It sounds nice, which is why someone already decided to use the term. I don't know if it has any offical national meaning, I just know the one I know.

Louis Farrakhan is not an old dying man, but completely fucking insane, and repeatedly denounced by Senator Obama.

Why the hell isn't THIS being reported in the news? You would think that denunciation of a Muslim, uh, cleric by a prominent candidate with a Muslim name would be big big news for the talking heads. Shit, that fact alone is a major point in Obama's favor, and I'm not even a fan!

It happened a long way back. Remember, Obama came to Chicago as a community organizer after not living here when he was growing up, so when you're working to organize black communities it's not unlikely that black community leaders like Farrakhan will be involved, so his repudiations of Louis happened way back when, back when it mattered the first time. Honestly, I know the rest of the country is all excited like they found some goddamn easter egg nobody else noticed was there, but we fucking know about Louis Farrakhan already. I mean, it's Louis Farrakhan. The man doesn't live in a shack.

First of all, he lives in Hyde Park. This may sound familiar by now, because it also houses the University of Chicago, and a hell of a lot of people live in Hyde Park Township. Such as Jessie Jackson, Carol Moseley Braun, and the now famous Bill Ayers and Barack Obama neighborhood, and a lot of other UoC staff which explains the fairly liberal makeup. Remember, Barack taught at UoC. It's an affluent neighborhood, but surrounded by poverty, and racial tension--those two things are obviously related--and racial tension is still a big element of the area. But Obama didn't grow up in Hyde Park anyway, he grew up in Hawaii, with it's own unique history of minority abuse.

So if you, as a UoC professor, a past community organizer, a prominent black figure and someone looking for ways to continue to unite people... were approached by crazyass Louis Farrakhan, what right would you have to tell him he can't be involved in his own neighborhood?

Now, the one thing I'll disagree with is calling him a prominent Muslim leader. The Nation of Islam has been widely criticized for muddling with Islamic teachings, and has only recently as Farrakhan gets old begun to drift anywhere near the mainstream of Islamic teaching. It really was just black power propaganda, and the famously pro-rights Southern Poverty Law Center added the Nation of Islam to it's list of Hate Groups, in such fine company as the Klu Klux Klan and Volksfront. The Islamic community has a lot of crazy people, and crazy black muslims are not rare by any stretch, but the NoI is really kind of an African-American invention that was an attempt to break away from what they felt was a national religion that was hostile to them. I can't really blame them--a lot of blacks got hung, beaten, and shot by "good Christian" white folk, and I'm sure they got sick of seeing crosses on their lawns.

In any case, this is all ancient history, and it's the kind of handshaking that's done anytime you live anywhere. Sarah Palin and the America-hating secessionist Independance Party is a similar thing, as is McCain's membership to the World Anti-Communist League, which was formed by Chiang Kai-shek and was involved in enough horrible scandal that you'll have no trouble googling it for yourself. This relation by McCain to the WACL wasn't just a handshake, but from what we've had told he didn't seem to take an active role, just one of support. I assume that the details went over his head, and didn't really understand the full implications of the bizzare Moonie/CIA connection and it's work in supporting Iran Contra. There's really no harm here, since guilt by association isn't fair, but it is fair to ask about judgement. I'm just of the opinion that none of these connections are really all that damning, just embarassing.

[Covenant]

CC, I apologize, I messed up the formatting. My response to your question about Pinata Politics is merged into the quotes. It's an old term, from at least 2002, I haven't found one earlier than that yet on the internet. I'm sure you had no idea.

[Zablorg]

Indeed, Mike once pointed out, how come there's a huge difference between the amount of Republican e-mail newsletters compared to the amount of Democrat ones? Even if these legions of left-wing nutjobs are staying "in hiding", that wouldn't explain the obvious lack of internet based activity.

[Hillary]

As far as the best quote goes, I'll take "Let's stone her, old school" for a thousand, Alex! Ironically, that ties into Obama's name, Muslim allegations, and what some Muslims do to "misbehaving" women. Probably not the association desired by the Democrat protestor.

Of course, stoning is exclusive to Islam

[The Kernel]

I entirely reject your nonsense assumption. The Democrats have consistently been the more left wing of the candidates over the last 20 years, not by much I grant you, but you could quite easily be a centre left person and have voted Democrat all that time.

Then define your criteria for what you'd consider a leftist. There are plenty of policy polls done on a constant basis in the US so it's easy to find how many people support universal health care, believe in gun control, believe in separation of church and state, etc.

[Lusankya]

Oh, and Obama doesn't do himself any favors when he says, to a man who owns a plumbing business worth over $250k (but still a small business):

“It’s not that I wanna punish your success, I just wanna make sure that everybody behind you, that they have a chance at success, too. I think we need to spread the wealth around.“

... I'm not entirely sure how anything in that quote is a Bad Thing.

Then define your criteria for what you'd consider a leftist. There are plenty of policy polls done on a constant basis in the US so it's easy to find how many people support universal health care, believe in gun control, believe in separation of church and state, etc.

That doesn't make someone a leftist. Otherwise you'd find that most of the world outside of the US would be "extreme leftist". Hell, I could walk down the street here in China and 99% of people would agree with the idea that universal health care, gun control and separation of church and state are good things to have. Does that mean that almost everyone in China is "extreme left wing"? Or does it just mean that an abnormally large proportion of the US population is composed of selfish, Christian dicks?

Criteria for "extreme" leftism in most of the world would be a matter of degree: if their proposed policies are simply unaffordable or unworkable. In Australia, they often vote for the Greens. Your proposed criteria are not in any way, shape or form "extreme".

[Edi]

I entirely reject your nonsense assumption. The Democrats have consistently been the more left wing of the candidates over the last 20 years, not by much I grant you, but you could quite easily be a centre left person and have voted Democrat all that time.

Then define your criteria for what you'd consider a leftist. There are plenty of policy polls done on a constant basis in the US so it's easy to find how many people support universal health care, believe in gun control, believe in separation of church and state, etc.

In other words, which people are moderates on any other political spectrum than American. But I guess that qualifies them as "leftists" or even "extreme leftists" in US politics. The claims about the US having any significant numbers of extreme leftists are completely fabricated bullshit lies. Finding actual extreme right wing people on the other hand is trivially easy.

[ArcturusMengsk]

Oh, no nutters here.

PHILADELPHIA -- There was a scare Tuesday at the South Philadelphia campaign headquarters of Democratic Sen. Barack Obama.

The office at 15th and Christian streets was filled with volunteers around 5 p.m. when one of them brought in the mail and opened a letter that had a note and a powdery substance on it that immediately set off alarms.

She notified a supervisor. Then, they placed the letter outside, evacuated the building and called police.

Fortunately, the substance found in the letter was harmless and nobody was hurt. But the incident is still under investigation as a threat, Fox 29's Sharon Crowley reported.

Philadelphia police, fire officials, hazardous materials teams, the Secret Service, FBI and the U.S. Postal Service responded to the presidential nominee's campaign office.

SkyFox was over the scene as a hazardous materials unit member carefully removed the suspicious letter.

"The letter was somewhat threatening in nature, and it contained a substance that we believed to be a hazmat," Philadelphia police Capt. Mike Gillespie said.

Examining the letter, investigators determined the substance was just harmless brown sugar. The all-clear was given by 5:50 p.m.

But federal agencies will be trying to track down from where the letter addressed to Obama headquarters was sent and, of course, who sent it.

"We want to look over the letter through the plastic bag that we have it in to see what's actually being stated in the letter, to the best of our knowledge, and then determine who's going to be investigating that situation," Gillespie said.

That's the second time a 'white powder' has been involved in an anti-Obama mailing, with this being the first.

[mr friendly guy]

Oh I'm sorry was it too long let me shorten it up. The leftist wackos are happy and staying at home. The rightist wackos are pissed and letting the world know it.

So how do you know the leftist wackos are staying at home. Do you go spy on random homes to see if they are leftist leaning or something? Hey, maybe we can see this study you did to derive this piece of information. However I suspect all we would see is your arse because thats where you pulled this piece of crap from.

[Count Chocula]

Lusankya wrote:

Count Chocula wrote:

Oh, and Obama doesn't do himself any favors when he says, to a man who owns a plumbing business worth over $250k (but still a small business):
Quote:
“It’s not that I wanna punish your success, I just wanna make sure that everybody behind you, that they have a chance at success, too. I think we need to spread the wealth around.“

... I'm not entirely sure how anything in that quote is a Bad Thing.

I believe the question relates to this position from Obama's Tax Plan:

Families making more than $250,000 will pay either the same or lower tax rates than they paid in the 1990s.

In other words, Obama proposed rolling back taxes for high earners to the higher, Clinton-era levels.

I'm uncertain where or how his proposal affects small businesses earning over $250,000, as it's light on specifics.

By contrast, McCain's plan has specific items spelled out in it, including this one that will go over very very big with family businesses (family farms, anyone?):

Allow Families To Keep Their Businesses: John McCain proposes reducing the Estate Tax rate to 15 percent and permit a generous $10 million exemption.

Of course, if Obama wins and the Democrats control Congress, he'll have a better chance of getting his proposals passed than McCain would.

[Stargate Nerd]

In other words, Obama proposed rolling back taxes for high earners to the higher, Clinton-era levels.

And just what is wrong with that?

[Andrew_Fireborn]

Chosen One? Pfft. And some of McCain's supporters are indeed racist. Surprised the "liberal" media hasn't picked-up on that... Oh wait, no I'm not.

Goddamn, every time I think I can't have any less faith in humanity...

Then again, I'm running into quite a few people around here who're McCain supporters for no good reason... Including people whom I'd figured for smarter, including my own mother. (Who, every time I've pointed out how bad Pallin is, she basically says I'm not being fair to her... Least she's reasonable enough that we can actually hold such conversations without them degrading into a fight.)

Even ran into one who still believes in trickle-down.

It's pretty sad that the mere accusation of Islamic background, no matter how baseless, is dangerous to a political candidate in America. Meanwhile, we have a full-blown Doomsday Cult fundamentalist fanatic from Alaska parading around the country, and no one dares attack her on it.

Yeah, but it's a Christian Doomsday cult... (Though I'd be hard pressed to say ANY sect that isn't expecting the rapture isn't a DDay cult...)

[Gigaliel]

I believe the question relates to this position from Obama's Tax Plan:

Families making more than $250,000 will pay either the same or lower tax rates than they paid in the 1990s.

In other words, Obama proposed rolling back taxes for high earners to the higher, Clinton-era levels.

I'm uncertain where or how his proposal affects small businesses earning over $250,000, as it's light on specifics.

By contrast, McCain's plan has specific items spelled out in it, including this one that will go over very very big with family businesses (family farms, anyone?).

I am now going to contradict you with something I found with Google in 5 seconds.

FactCheck.org

The actual number of business owners who would be affected turns out to be well under a million, and the number of employers would be even less. Based on the number of taxpayers who now report any sort of business income on their returns, the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center projects that 663,608 taxpayers with business income, or business losses, will fall into the top two tax brackets in 2009, when any Obama tax changes would first take effect. Not all of those can properly be called "small-business owners," however. Some are farmers. Many are lawyers, accountants or other professionals who get some of their income in the form of partnership distributions. Others may be passive investors in real-estate partnerships or similar investment arrangements and not really persons who own and manage a business.

And

While Obama's plan would raise rates at the top, it also would grant what he calls a “Making Work Pay” tax credit of up to $500 per person, or $1,000 per working family. Since this credit would not begin to phase down for couples making less than $150,000, we judge it likely that many, if not most of the 23 million that McCain counts as "small-business owners" would likely get tax reductions.

The article also talks about how McCain's 23 million figure is comically inflated which would also shrink this estimate, but that's not relevant.

So, in conclusion, the number of family businesses who do not benefit from this plan is really, really small. Any other myths I can debunk with a search engine or were you just talking about < 3% of small business owners?

[Darth Wong]

Do you have any evidence of this large number of extreme leftists? Because the extreme right-wingers constitute at least a third of the population, based on the hard-liners whose resistance to facts is so extreme that they still think Saddam Hussein orchestrated 9/11. If you look at the religious extreme right, it's nearly half of the population: between 40% and 50% of the population which thinks that the Noah's Ark story literally happened and that the Book of Genesis is a historically accurate document.

"Extreme leftists" is an entirely subjective term, but if you take that to mean consistently votes Democrat regardless of the candidate, then 40% of the country is "extreme leftist". The biggest blowout election in modern American history was in 1984 where Reagan faced down Walter Mondale. Reagan won 49 states with only Mondale's home state of Minnesota breaking for him where Reagan ended up with 525 electoral votes to Mondale's 13. Despite this, 40.6% voted for Mondale. The old adage that 40% of the country votes for one party and 40% for the other regardless of the candidates applies here.

Now I'll grant that the 40% who voted Mondale might not qualify as what you call "Extreme Leftist" but religious zealots and conservatives break almost exclusively Republican these days.

Leave it to an American to think that "leftist" is another word for "Democrat". I seem to recall watching a recent vice-presidential debate where all four candidates' anti-gay marriage stance was proudly repeated for the whole nation.

Republicans are generally extreme-right, but Democrats are either centrist or right-wing themselves. There is almost no real leftism at all in America, at least not in the halls of power.