Town Hall Meeting: `I'm a proud, right-wing terrorist'

[bobalot]

At a recent town hall meeting at Simpson University in Redding, Ca., 67-year-old Bert Stead rose and declared himself a “proud right-wing terrorist.”

U.S. Rep. Wally Herger (R-Calif.) replied. "Amen, God bless you. There's a great American.”

Source

These guys keep getting more nutty by the day.

[Thanas]

Well, the GOP there is scrambling to not make it look like he speaks for them. Almost everybody of notice has criticized him for that.

Not that this wouldn't fit the pattern of GOP nuttiness perfectly.

[Kodiak]

Wow, he hits all the party line points

- America was built from nothing by people who never took a single cent of foreign mercenary from anyone
- Terrorism by the Right is ok
- Obama doesn't have a birth certificate.

People seem to think that while California is considered socially liberal, the vast interior of the state is full of guys like this.

[Darth Wong]

The psycho himself is not nearly as important a story as the fact that the Republican agreed with him. Every single time this happens, Republicans trip all over themselves to say that this person is not representative of the Republican party, misspoke, etc. At what point are we allowed to notice the fact that it keeps happening? Why don't Democrats make these little verbal gaffes? Throughout eight years of the Bush presidency, can you recall any ranking Democrat praising someone for being a terrorist?

They say that some people see patterns where they don't exist. Others, however, refuse to admit patterns where they are quite obvious.

[mr friendly guy]

They say that some people see patterns where they don't exist. Others, however, refuse to admit patterns where they are quite obvious.

Not that surprising when you consider a lot of Christians continually resort to the line that <insert person> here isn't a true Christian when Christian atrocities come up, so saying this Republitard isn't representative of the Republicans is just an extension of the No True Scotsman Fallacy to other arguments.

[The Romulan Republic]

I hope this asshole has the Secret Service and the FBI watching his ass. I wonder what the response would be if a Muslim stood up and said "I'm a proud Islamic terrorist?"

As for the Congressman who supported him, well, isn't their any way to impeach a Congressman?

[Darth Wong]

As for the Congressman who supported him, well, isn't their any way to impeach a Congressman?

"Their" and "there" are NOT THE SAME GODDAMNED WORD, FOR FUCK'S SAKE.

[The Spartan]

As for the Congressman who supported him, well, isn't their any way to impeach a Congressman?

Yes. It's in the Constitution; see below.

The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

[Ritterin Sophia]

What about encouraging treasonous acts?

[The Spartan]

Well, I don't think there's anything you can really do in this specific case. I think the closest you could come, not being a legal expert myself, is incitement to violence or something similar if some act were carried out which could be tied to what he said, and that would presumably fall under the "high crimes and misdemeanors" bit.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yeah, but even that's probably a stretch.

Its just so frusterating to see an elected legislator behaving like such a fucking ass, and knowing that he'll quite possibly be voted right back in regardless of whatever disgusting comments he makes. But then, one can't legislate against stupidity.

[Patrick Degan]

We don't need government-run car companies, we can do it all by ourselves.

Funny, that's just what the car companies and banks said to themselves before they went off the financial cliff last year.

[Count Chocula]

You're all missing the reference. The constituent speaking seems to be a self-acknowledged oddball, and a "birther," which put him into the sketchy side of the spectrum.

HOWEVER, his statement "I'm a proud, right-wing terrorist" is a direct reference to this April 2009 Department of Homeland Security 'study,' a document that itself is chock(ula) full of speculation and poorly substantiated conclusions but is intended as a BOLO document for Homeland Security and affiliated agencies.

Representative Herger quite obviously understood the reference his constituent cited and played up to the crowd, hardly an unexpected act from a politician. This tells me, at least, that Rep. Herger reads more of what comes across his desk than the average Congressman.

[The Original Nex]

As for the Congressman who supported him, well, isn't their any way to impeach a Congressman?

Yes. It's in the Constitution; see below.

The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

That only applies to the Executive Branch (which is the only Branch covered in Article II). Members of Congress are not "civil officers of the state". They can be removed either by election defeat or by being booted out by their colleagues (an exceedingly rare occurrence, less common than than the already rare censure).

[Count Chocula]

Funny, that's just what the car companies and banks said to themselves before they went off the financial cliff last year.

Damnit, for the second time tonight I just can't resist.

You gotta nice case of projection there. Chrysler and GM were going bankrupt due to uncompetitive products, poor profitability, "gotta pulse gotta loan" criteria from their financing arms, legacy UAW overhead, and poor management. Hell, this is Chrysler's SECOND Fed bailout. Nardelli (Chrysler) and Wagoner (GM) had a simple equation to solve: Fed Bailout > Bankruptcy and Shame. They took the bailout (oh by the way, totally fucking over the pension funds and retirees who held preferred Chrysler and especially GM stock in favor of the UAW). Meanwhile, what's Ford doing? Making world class cars, making money, and coping with the derecession we're currently enduring.

As for the banks, well that's a whole other nest of vipers that have been covered in numerous threads here. Kook or no, Herger's constituent has a valid point; Chrysler and GM should have gone through Chapter 11 reorg or Chapter 7 liquidation, rather than propped up as staggering casualties of their poor choices. It would have cleared the errors and assets faster than the train wreck I fear still awaits both companies.

What's my evidence, you ask (or don't)? The Cash for Clunkers results:

C.A.R.S. Program Statistics
Wednesday, August 26th, 2009
Dealer Transactions
Number Submitted: 690,114 Dollar Value: $2,877.9M
Top 10 New Vehicles Purchased
1. Toyota Corolla
2. Honda Civic
3. Toyota Camry
4. Ford Focus FWD
5. Hyundai Elantra
6. Nissan Versa
7. Toyota Prius
8. Honda Accord
9. Honda Fit
10. Ford Escape FWD

Notice the only US headquartered manufacturer in the top 10 is no-bailout Ford.

[Samuel]

HOWEVER, his statement "I'm a proud, right-wing terrorist" is a direct reference to this April 2009 Department of Homeland Security 'study,' a document that itself is chock(ula) full of speculation and poorly substantiated conclusions but is intended as a BOLO document for Homeland Security and affiliated agencies.

Like murder of an abortion doctor? I'm pretty sure right wing nuts coming out of the woodwork is an accurate conclusion.

[Count Chocula]

Way to cherry pick there, Samuel. By the way, the document I referenced stated "opposition to abortion," not murder of an abortion clinic doctor. Even in California murder is a crime, regardless of motivation. Try again.

[Darth Wong]

You're all missing the reference. The constituent speaking seems to be a self-acknowledged oddball, and a "birther," which put him into the sketchy side of the spectrum.

HOWEVER, his statement "I'm a proud, right-wing terrorist" is a direct reference to this April 2009 Department of Homeland Security 'study,' a document that itself is chock(ula) full of speculation and poorly substantiated conclusions but is intended as a BOLO document for Homeland Security and affiliated agencies.

Representative Herger quite obviously understood the reference his constituent cited and played up to the crowd, hardly an unexpected act from a politician. This tells me, at least, that Rep. Herger reads more of what comes across his desk than the average Congressman.

How the fuck does that make it OK? That document describes the potential rise of white supremacist and radical anti-government groups. Either way, how the fuck does membership in one of these movements make someone praiseworthy? Are you on drugs?

[Samuel]

Way to cherry pick there, Samuel. By the way, the document I referenced stated "opposition to abortion," not murder of an abortion clinic doctor. Even in California murder is a crime, regardless of motivation. Try again.

If you are trying to predict terrorism, political beliefs are relevant. How is "it is already illegal" affect that?

[Darth Wong]

Funny, that's just what the car companies and banks said to themselves before they went off the financial cliff last year.

Damnit, for the second time tonight I just can't resist.

You gotta nice case of projection there. Chrysler and GM were going bankrupt due to uncompetitive products, poor profitability, "gotta pulse gotta loan" criteria from their financing arms, legacy UAW overhead, and poor management. Hell, this is Chrysler's SECOND Fed bailout. Nardelli (Chrysler) and Wagoner (GM) had a simple equation to solve: Fed Bailout > Bankruptcy and Shame. They took the bailout (oh by the way, totally fucking over the pension funds and retirees who held preferred Chrysler and especially GM stock in favor of the UAW). Meanwhile, what's Ford doing? Making world class cars, making money, and coping with the derecession we're currently enduring.

What does that have to do with the line he was responding to, where the right wingnut claimed that "government run" is necessarily a bad thing? Yes, one company can outperform another due to various reasons; this does not in any way substantiate the claim Patrick was responding to.

As for the banks, well that's a whole other nest of vipers that have been covered in numerous threads here. Kook or no, Herger's constituent has a valid point; Chrysler and GM should have gone through Chapter 11 reorg or Chapter 7 liquidation, rather than propped up as staggering casualties of their poor choices. It would have cleared the errors and assets faster than the train wreck I fear still awaits both companies.

Yes, it would have "cleared the errors". It would have also thrown a lot more people out of work.

Notice the only US headquartered manufacturer in the top 10 is no-bailout Ford.

What is that supposed to prove? Obviously, people will not have much confidence in companies which recently underwent bailouts.

[loomer]

By virtue of having a Something Awful account, I'm apparently part of the 'Anonymous' 'terrorist group', which is pretty cool, I guess. Chocula, if you're going to link to that report, couldn't you have linked to the nice, big, long version instead of that pissy little 10 page thing?

[The Spartan]

That only applies to the Executive Branch (which is the only Branch covered in Article II). Members of Congress are not "civil officers of the state". They can be removed either by election defeat or by being booted out by their colleagues (an exceedingly rare occurrence, less common than than the already rare censure).

Yeah, you're right. Seems I jumped the gun.

[Patrick Degan]

Funny, that's just what the car companies and banks said to themselves before they went off the financial cliff last year.

Damnit, for the second time tonight I just can't resist.

You gotta nice case of projection there. Chrysler and GM were going bankrupt due to uncompetitive products, poor profitability, "gotta pulse gotta loan" criteria from their financing arms, legacy UAW overhead, and poor management. Hell, this is Chrysler's SECOND Fed bailout. Nardelli (Chrysler) and Wagoner (GM) had a simple equation to solve: Fed Bailout > Bankruptcy and Shame. They took the bailout (oh by the way, totally fucking over the pension funds and retirees who held preferred Chrysler and especially GM stock in favor of the UAW). Meanwhile, what's Ford doing? Making world class cars, making money, and coping with the derecession we're currently enduring.

Which defeats the point how, exactly?

As for the banks, well that's a whole other nest of vipers that have been covered in numerous threads here. Kook or no, Herger's constituent has a valid point; Chrysler and GM should have gone through Chapter 11 reorg or Chapter 7 liquidation, rather than propped up as staggering casualties of their poor choices. It would have cleared the errors and assets faster than the train wreck I fear still awaits both companies.

No, he has an idiotic point. Simply letting the banks and car companies fail is more or less the same approach which led to the Great Depression. The liquidation of two of the big three automakers would have resulted in the immediate unemployment of several hundred thousand auto workers in one fell swoop. This consequence however has, for the present, been averted.

Notice the only US headquartered manufacturer in the top 10 is no-bailout Ford.

You mean the Ford Motor Co. which didn't take a direct bailout but still took a line of credit from the Feds. Got news for you: the secret of Ford's ability to avoid having to take bailout money was CEO Allan Mullaley refinancing the company's debt when cheap loans were easy to get back in 2006, which gave them the cash reserve to ride out the crash. They still lost $18bn last year, they just had more of a cushion than GM or Chrysler did. And they've still got big problems of their own looming:

One of Ford’s (G) largest suppliers, Visteon, will also make a trip to bankruptcy court. Ford is giving Visteon debtor-in-possession financing. Visteon was a part of Ford until it was spun out in 2000. The No. 2 US car company insists it has the cash to both bail out the parts company and keep its own head above water even with ongoing losses. Despite that Ford admits that trouble with its suppliers could become increasingly expensive. In its last 10-Q the company wrote “it is reasonably possible that our costs to ensure an uninterrupted supply of materials and components could be higher than our present planning assumptions by a material amount.”

With all of the news coverage that GM and Chrysler are getting it is hard to remember that Ford lost $2.3 billion in the first quarter of the year and only had $24.8 billion on its balance sheet. A conversion of convertible notes has improved Ford’s finances since March 31. Revenue for that period was down to $21.4 billion from $39.1 billion in the same period a year ago.

Ford faces two problems, and it is possible that it will not be able to solve either of them. The firm’s US market share in the first quarter was only 13.9%. That is down from 15% in the first quarter of 2008. Ford cannot afford for that figure to go any lower. The large Japanese and Korean manufacturers will use their balance sheets to make certain that product development and efficient operations give them an ongoing edge in costs and quality. Ford also faces competition which it might well deem as unfair from GM and Chrysler. They will be free of many of their costs after bankruptcies and government assistance. The Administration will be tempted to throw good money after bad if its two wards do not meet their projections. Ford will not have access to that kind of funding if it stays with its pledge to keep its hands out of the government’s pockets.

Ford cannot avoid the fact that the auto parts industry is in as much or more trouble than the large manufacturers. That is not news to anyone who reads the papers, but the trouble is becoming more acute each month that the auto market does not improve and with every call from the car companies asking for more price concessions. A breakdown of the auto supply chain will hurt every car company in America, but Ford may not have access to capital to ride out a long interruption.

Ford has been hailed a bit of a miracle company, the one US manufacturer that has been able to stand on its own. It took the risk of refinancing its balance sheet two years ago when the action was not popular. The gamble paid off. Now Ford has to do something that it may not be capable of doing. It has to increase its piece of the US car market during a period when some of its suppliers cannot ship parts.

So don't be getting too smug about Ford —they stand a good chance of getting fucked up anyway and in part for not taking government cash when it was available to replenish that earlier cushion.

[Count Chocula]

My apologies, loomer; I try to adhere to the aphorism "brevity is the soul of wit."

How the fuck does that make it OK? That document describes the potential rise of white supremacist and radical anti-government groups. Either way, how the fuck does membership in one of these movements make someone praiseworthy? Are you on drugs?

You as well are missing the point. Here's the overview of key findings, from Page 3 of the report:

(U) Key Findings
(U//LES) The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific
information that domestic rightwing* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence,
but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about
several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first
African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and
recruitment.

The key findings are speculation, directly contradicted by evidence or intelligence, yet the report is presented as an authoritative list of people to consider as potential domestic terrorists. In addition, you are missing the many other groups of Americans that are lumped into your "white supremacist and radical anti-government" categorization.

Here are some of the population groups that are considered "right wing terrorist" threats, per this report:

• groups and individuals that are dedicated to a
  single issue, such as opposition to abortion or [illegal, notation added] immigration
• those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority. That would be states' rights adherents
• Returning veterans. Yep, this report states that soldiers coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan could be terrorist threats. My cousin, who's an Iraq and Afghanistan veteran and now a policeman, must be an exception [:jackoff]
• Anti-Semitic conspiracists. Okay, this is a valid and perennial candidate; conceded;
• "Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms." In other words, folks who are against illegal immigration, increased taxes for welfare programs, and further Second Amendment infringements, are potential terrorists! The NRA now has over 4 million members; it stretches credulity past all limits to imagine that even a tiny minority of NRA members are potential terrorists; and if say half of NRA members were, how would the Feds separate the wheat from the chaff? Gee, does this mean that Americans who oppose HR3200 (universal health care) are potential terrorists? How can we monitor all of them? The mind boggles!
• "High unemployment, however, has the potential to lead to alienation, thus increasing
  an individual’s susceptibility to extremist ideas. According to a 2007 study from the German Institute
  for Economic Research, there appears to be a strong association between a parent’s unemployment
  status and the formation of rightwing extremist beliefs in their children—specifically xenophobia and
  antidemocratic ideals." So a German study equates poverty with xenophobia and totalitarianism. This is a study of German culture, which is distincly different from American culture and has no place in an American advisory document;
• "Both rightwing extremists and law-abiding citizens share a belief that rising crime rates
  attributed to a slumping economy make the purchase of legitimate firearms a wise move
  at this time." So who's the extremist and who's the prudent person? Surprise surprise, there's no differentiation in this report.
• "Rightwing extremist views bemoan the decline of U.S. stature and
  have recently focused on themes such as the loss of U.S. manufacturing capability
  to China and India, Russia’s control of energy resources and use of these to
  pressure other countries, and China’s investment in U.S. real estate and
  corporations as a part of subversion strategy." So if you don't like the fact that US manufacturing has largely moved overseas, your PC support desk is in Bangalore, Russia can halt gas shipments to Europe in the winter, China is in the position Japan was vis-a-vis the US in the late 1980s, you are a potential terrorist? The suspect list expands exponentially! Don't tell the UAW! Don't buy Microsoft!

In condensed form, Mike, this DHS report casts such a wide net of potential "right wing terrorist" suspects that actual threat identification becomes impossible to determine. Is it the 70 year-old woman at a town hall meeting protesting health care? Is it an Arizona rancher who's fed up with illegals cutting his fences and killing his cattle? Is it the ex-Army Ranger who had tours in Afghanistan and Iraq and is now a city cop? Or is it this guy:

MALICIOUSLY DAMAGING AND DESTROYING, AND ATTEMPTING TO DESTROY AND DAMAGE, BY MEANS OF EXPLOSIVES, BUILDINGS AND OTHER PROPERTY; POSSESSION OF A DESTRUCTIVE DEVICE DURING, IN RELATION TO, AND IN FURTHERANCE OF A CRIME OF VIOLENCE
DANIEL ANDREAS SAN DIEGO

Remarks: San Diego has ties to animal rights extremist groups. He is known to follow a vegan diet, eating no meat or food containing animal products. In the past, he has worked as a computer network specialist and with the operating system LINUX. San Diego wears eyeglasses, is skilled at sailing, and has traveled internationally. He is known to possess a handgun

Oh never mind, he's a left winger. I guess they don't ping DHS' radar.

[Samuel]

Commence the dogpile!

Returning veterans. Yep, this report states that soldiers coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan could be terrorist threats. My cousin, who's an Iraq and Afghanistan veteran and now a policeman, must be an exception

And like this guy.

How can we monitor all of them? The mind boggles!

I don't know- maybe we moniter what their leaders are up to like is tradition. The FBI has kept tabs on large organizations before.

So a German study equates poverty with xenophobia and totalitarianism. This is a study of German culture, which is distincly different from American culture and has no place in an American advisory document;

America FUCK YEAH! Is NOT a valid answer to psychological studies.

Oh never mind, he's a left winger. I guess they don't ping DHS' radar.

And left wingers are going to increase terrorist activity because...? Since the US doesn't have a communist movement I don't see an increase in the left's terrorism due to the down turn and a black president.