FRIHOST • FORUMS • SEARCH • FAQ • TOS • BLOGS • COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Why I Parted Ways With The Right





handfleisch
More interesting stuff from that former #1 right wing website that, incredibly, has changed its ways. Maybe there's hope for wingnuts after all.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/35243_Why_I_Parted_Ways_With_The_Right
Quote:
Why I Parted Ways With The Right

1. Support for fascists, both in America (see: Pat Buchanan, Robert Stacy McCain, etc.) and in Europe (see: Vlaams Belang, BNP, SIOE, Pat Buchanan, etc.)

2. Support for bigotry, hatred, and white supremacism (see: Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter, Robert Stacy McCain, Lew Rockwell, etc.)

3. Support for throwing women back into the Dark Ages, and general religious fanaticism (see: Operation Rescue, anti-abortion groups, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Tony Perkins, the entire religious right, etc.)

4. Support for anti-science bad craziness (see: creationism, climate change denialism, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, James Inhofe, etc.)

5. Support for homophobic bigotry (see: Sarah Palin, Dobson, the entire religious right, etc.)

6. Support for anti-government lunacy (see: tea parties, militias, Fox News, Glenn Beck, etc.)

7. Support for conspiracy theories and hate speech (see: Alex Jones, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Birthers, creationists, climate deniers, etc.)

8. A right-wing blogosphere that is almost universally dominated by raging hate speech (see: Hot Air, Free Republic, Ace of Spades, etc.)

9. Anti-Islamic bigotry that goes far beyond simply criticizing radical Islam, into support for fascism, violence, and genocide (see: Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, etc.)

10. Hatred for President Obama that goes far beyond simply criticizing his policies, into racism, hate speech, and bizarre conspiracy theories (see: witch doctor pictures, tea parties, Birthers, Michelle Malkin, Fox News, World Net Daily, Newsmax, and every other right wing source)

And much, much more. The American right wing has gone off the rails, into the bushes, and off the cliff.

I won’t be going over the cliff with them.
ocalhoun
^.^
The Left has its own counterparts for 7 out of those 10 complaints. (And has a few that don't apply to the right, in order to even the balance.)

Rejecting one doesn't mean you have to adopt the other.
Alaskacameradude
ocalhoun wrote:
^.^
The Left has its own counterparts for 7 out of those 10 complaints. (And has a few that don't apply to the right, in order to even the balance.)

Rejecting one doesn't mean you have to adopt the other.


Ya, but that is from someone who can see both sides of the coin. To some people the
right is a bunch of wacky nuts, and the left is the home of the messiah.
handfleisch
Alaskacameradude wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
^.^
The Left has its own counterparts for 7 out of those 10 complaints. (And has a few that don't apply to the right, in order to even the balance.)

Rejecting one doesn't mean you have to adopt the other.


Ya, but that is from someone who can see both sides of the coin. To some people the
right is a bunch of wacky nuts, and the left is the home of the messiah.


Could either of you be more specific and give examples for this, or is this just a belief you like to have, but without proof? Because I do not think what you say is true to the extent that it is true of how the right wing believes in, participates in, and is guilty of the things on this list (which was compiled by a former right winger who saw the error of his ways and became a responsible conservative).
lagoon
Welcome to the left. Hope you enjoy your stay.
Alaskacameradude
handfleisch wrote:
Alaskacameradude wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
^.^
The Left has its own counterparts for 7 out of those 10 complaints. (And has a few that don't apply to the right, in order to even the balance.)

Rejecting one doesn't mean you have to adopt the other.


Ya, but that is from someone who can see both sides of the coin. To some people the
right is a bunch of wacky nuts, and the left is the home of the messiah.


Could either of you be more specific and give examples for this, or is this just a belief you like to have, but without proof? Because I do not think what you say is true to the extent that it is true of how the right wing believes in, participates in, and is guilty of the things on this list (which was compiled by a former right winger who saw the error of his ways and became a responsible conservative).


Well, it took me about 3 seconds to find this.....

http://perpetuaofcarthage.blogspot.com/2009/12/why-i-parted-ways-with-left.html

But I'm taking a wild guess that this won't convince you.....
In other words - those that disagree with you are stupid, extremist, homophobic bigots. Nice.
Yes, you do fit in nicely on the left.
deanhills
handfleisch wrote:
Alaskacameradude wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
^.^
The Left has its own counterparts for 7 out of those 10 complaints. (And has a few that don't apply to the right, in order to even the balance.)

Rejecting one doesn't mean you have to adopt the other.


Ya, but that is from someone who can see both sides of the coin. To some people the
right is a bunch of wacky nuts, and the left is the home of the messiah.


Could either of you be more specific and give examples for this, or is this just a belief you like to have, but without proof? Because I do not think what you say is true to the extent that it is true of how the right wing believes in, participates in, and is guilty of the things on this list (which was compiled by a former right winger who saw the error of his ways and became a responsible conservative).
Well, since you started the thread, can you give us an explanation of exactly what you mean with "right wing"? What is the definition of "right wing" and exactly which groups are included in your definition? Also "littlegreenballs" is a Weblog, not a Website.
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
Also "littlegreenballs" is a Weblog, not a Website.

(Aren't blogs technically a type of website?)
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
deanhills wrote:
Also "littlegreenballs" is a Weblog, not a Website.

(Aren't blogs technically a type of website?)
Weblog would consist of opinion only, whereas a Website may be much more than that. Like the blogs you would find in online newspapers as distinct from the rest of their Websites. Viz. Timesonline.

More important than Website/Weblog and Little Green Balls however is what Handfleisch means when he refers to "Right Wing" and which groups are included under the umbrella of "Right Wing".
handfleisch
Alaskacameradude wrote:
handfleisch wrote:
Alaskacameradude wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
^.^
The Left has its own counterparts for 7 out of those 10 complaints. (And has a few that don't apply to the right, in order to even the balance.)

Rejecting one doesn't mean you have to adopt the other.


Ya, but that is from someone who can see both sides of the coin. To some people the
right is a bunch of wacky nuts, and the left is the home of the messiah.


Could either of you be more specific and give examples for this, or is this just a belief you like to have, but without proof? Because I do not think what you say is true to the extent that it is true of how the right wing believes in, participates in, and is guilty of the things on this list (which was compiled by a former right winger who saw the error of his ways and became a responsible conservative).


Well, it took me about 3 seconds to find this.....

http://perpetuaofcarthage.blogspot.com/2009/12/why-i-parted-ways-with-left.html

But I'm taking a wild guess that this won't convince you.....
In other words - those that disagree with you are stupid, extremist, homophobic bigots. Nice.
Yes, you do fit in nicely on the left.


Oh, yes, stuff words in my mouth, why don't you?

Tell me, does this silly list you link to convince you?
Alaskacameradude
handfleisch wrote:
Alaskacameradude wrote:
handfleisch wrote:
Alaskacameradude wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
^.^
The Left has its own counterparts for 7 out of those 10 complaints. (And has a few that don't apply to the right, in order to even the balance.)

Rejecting one doesn't mean you have to adopt the other.


Ya, but that is from someone who can see both sides of the coin. To some people the
right is a bunch of wacky nuts, and the left is the home of the messiah.


Could either of you be more specific and give examples for this, or is this just a belief you like to have, but without proof? Because I do not think what you say is true to the extent that it is true of how the right wing believes in, participates in, and is guilty of the things on this list (which was compiled by a former right winger who saw the error of his ways and became a responsible conservative).


Well, it took me about 3 seconds to find this.....

http://perpetuaofcarthage.blogspot.com/2009/12/why-i-parted-ways-with-left.html

But I'm taking a wild guess that this won't convince you.....
In other words - those that disagree with you are stupid, extremist, homophobic bigots. Nice.
Yes, you do fit in nicely on the left.


Oh, yes, stuff words in my mouth, why don't you?

Tell me, does this silly list you link to convince you?


Every bit as strongly as the 'silly' list you linked to convinced you.
handfleisch
Alaskacameradude wrote:
handfleisch wrote:
Alaskacameradude wrote:
handfleisch wrote:
Alaskacameradude wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
^.^
The Left has its own counterparts for 7 out of those 10 complaints. (And has a few that don't apply to the right, in order to even the balance.)

Rejecting one doesn't mean you have to adopt the other.


Ya, but that is from someone who can see both sides of the coin. To some people the
right is a bunch of wacky nuts, and the left is the home of the messiah.


Could either of you be more specific and give examples for this, or is this just a belief you like to have, but without proof? Because I do not think what you say is true to the extent that it is true of how the right wing believes in, participates in, and is guilty of the things on this list (which was compiled by a former right winger who saw the error of his ways and became a responsible conservative).


Well, it took me about 3 seconds to find this.....

http://perpetuaofcarthage.blogspot.com/2009/12/why-i-parted-ways-with-left.html

But I'm taking a wild guess that this won't convince you.....
In other words - those that disagree with you are stupid, extremist, homophobic bigots. Nice.
Yes, you do fit in nicely on the left.


Oh, yes, stuff words in my mouth, why don't you?

Tell me, does this silly list you link to convince you?


Every bit as strongly as the 'silly' list you linked to convinced you.
Again we come to the difference between a well-supported opinion and an absurd, baseless muttering. Are you not able to see through a quick knock-off response that just copied the original without hardly anything concrete to go along with it? It took you 3 seconds to find, and is worth about that much time.

The original post came from the writer's direct and extensive experience and dealings with fellow right wingers, and from over millions of posts to his website. He cited concrete examples of each aspect of the right wing he made, and they were examples of how a significant portion of the right wing is part of and/or goes along with each (ridiculous, immoral, etc) aspect. Your cheap knock-off list mentions things like
Quote:

6. Support for anti-government lunacy (How can anyone think Holder's idea for the trial of KSM makes any sense? )


which is just lame. That's it for "anti-government lunacy" on the left? Holding a legal trial in a US court of law? You can call it many things, but "anti-government lunacy? That's weaker than weak, and typical of the list.

Don't tell me you think this is legitimate. And try making an actual case against the original list, or supporting your statement that this is equally true of the other side, if you can.
Alaskacameradude
There is absolutely NO 'evidence' on the 'original'. All he does is name names. For example:

3. Support for throwing women back into the Dark Ages, and general religious fanaticism (see: Operation Rescue, anti-abortion groups, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Tony Perkins, the entire religious right.


Wow, since there were NAMES of people and organizations in there, that PROVES it right?
I fail to see ANY PROOF of any of these claims! Just putting 'throwing women back into the
Dark Ages' and then putting the names of 'James Dobson, Pat Robertson, and Tony Perkins'
after it means absolutely NOTHING. Who says they want to 'throw women back into the
Dark Ages'. Talk about weak.....your whole argument is weak. In fact I wouldn't even
call it an argument. When there are NO actual arguments but just statements of 'fact'
there is no way to refute them. It's like me saying

3. Support for throwing women back into the Dark Ages (see Obama)
ocalhoun
handfleisch wrote:
Again we come to the difference between a well-supported opinion and an absurd, baseless muttering.

The difference being that things one agrees with tend to be the former, and things one disagrees with tend to be the latter.
Rolling Eyes
handfleisch
Alaskacameradude wrote:
There is absolutely NO 'evidence' on the 'original'. All he does is name names. For example:

3. Support for throwing women back into the Dark Ages, and general religious fanaticism (see: Operation Rescue, anti-abortion groups, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Tony Perkins, the entire religious right.


Wow, since there were NAMES of people and organizations in there, that PROVES it right?
I fail to see ANY PROOF of any of these claims! Just putting 'throwing women back into the
Dark Ages' and then putting the names of 'James Dobson, Pat Robertson, and Tony Perkins'
after it means absolutely NOTHING. Who says they want to 'throw women back into the
Dark Ages'. Talk about weak.....your whole argument is weak.


Again, it's not my argument, just like I was clear that the thing you cited wasn't exactly your argument. I agree "throwing women back into the Dark Ages" is hyperbole, but by citing names of major right wing religious leaders with extreme views toward women and conservative organizations that hold extreme views in terms of harassment of women at women's health care clinics, I think he at least gives an abbreviated reference to what he's talking about.

But even that abbreviated reference is a quantum leap of difference from the list you cited, which literally had no references, or references like the really ridiculous one I pointed out.

And aren't you going to follow thru on your words, and support your statement that the other side is just as guilty?
ocalhoun
handfleisch wrote:

And aren't you going to follow thru on your words, and support your statement that the other side is just as guilty?

Who here actually needs convincing of that?
Alaskacameradude
ocalhoun wrote:
handfleisch wrote:

And aren't you going to follow thru on your words, and support your statement that the other side is just as guilty?

Who here actually needs convincing of that?


LMAO
handfleisch
Alaskacameradude wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
handfleisch wrote:

And aren't you going to follow thru on your words, and support your statement that the other side is just as guilty?

Who here actually needs convincing of that?


LMAO


That's your reply? Ocalhoun, who thinks it's just fine to debate the mass sterilization of humans, thinks this issue isn't worthy of debate?

Alaskacam, if you want to retreat from your shaky position, so be it. But at least buck up and do it openly.
deanhills
handfleisch wrote:
The original post came from the writer's direct and extensive experience and dealings with fellow right wingers, and from over millions of posts to his website.
I don't understand how you can know the author of the blog you quoted. Who is he as his name is not listed against the blog? How can you vouch for the author's expert knowledge about the right-wing? I'm still waiting for your definition of "right wing" and exactly which groups are included in your definition?
ocalhoun
handfleisch wrote:


That's your reply? Ocalhoun, who thinks it's just fine to debate the mass sterilization of humans, thinks this issue isn't worthy of debate?


The issue of Republican failings doesn't need debate, because, as far as I know, everybody here agrees that they are numerous and grievous.

(And for your information, the mass sterilization of humans is quite preferable to them dying because of overpopulation. If you feel like debating that more, please do so in a different thread though... I'll be sure to notice the new topic.)
gandalfthegrey
The right wing in most other countries are not as crazy and ignorant as those who seem to have to have come to dominate the Republican party. What ever happened to reasonable Republicans, the kind that John McCain use to be before his sold his soul for a chance at the Presidency?
Alaskacameradude
Quote:
Again, it's not my argument, just like I was clear that the thing you cited wasn't exactly your argument. I agree "throwing women back into the Dark Ages" is hyperbole, but by citing names of major right wing religious leaders with extreme views toward women and conservative organizations that hold extreme views in terms of harassment of women at women's health care clinics, I think he at least gives an abbreviated reference to what he's talking about.

But even that abbreviated reference is a quantum leap of difference from the list you cited, which literally had no references, or references like the really ridiculous one I pointed out.

And aren't you going to follow thru on your words, and support your statement that the other side is just as guilty?


Again, that may be YOUR view.....ie that he cites names of right wing leaders with 'extreme' views.
MY view is that the OTHER side cites names of left wing leaders with 'extreme' views.

Quote:
Alaskacam, if you want to retreat from your shaky position, so be it. But at least buck up and do it openly.


Uh,.....sorry not going to happen. Must have been wishful thinking on your part....
Related topics
Da Vinci Code
xbox 360
Right to Lifers' Problem
Hints? or reading to far into it?
Evil
Sex Before Marriage
The lies they tell you and you accept
Name a (wacky?) English language cultural difference.
Referring to "The Truth"
Dem's Global Warming Debacle
Obamacare Fiasco
The ethics of firing someone for off-the-job bad behaviour
Traveling to meet her - GOOD OR BAD IDEA?
Politics? Does it hurt us?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.