Political & Elections

soccerguy315 · Guru

RE: Any proud members of "American Renaissance" or "New Century Foundation" out there?

catahoula · Guru

Simple enough?

Yep.

Absent the suppositions about the effects of "charismatic politicians" and a disturbing nod towards the idea that anything that could be portrayed as 'tempting fate' should be shunned, you're simply insinuating, not accusing.

Krugman did a masterful job of it today, btw:

Just yesterday, Ezra Klein remarked that opposition to health reform was getting scary. Actually, it’s been scary for quite a while, in a way that already reminded many of us of the climate that preceded the Oklahoma City bombing.

You know that Republicans will yell about the evils of partisanship whenever anyone tries to make a connection between the rhetoric of Beck, Limbaugh, etc. and the violence I fear we’re going to see in the months and years ahead. But violent acts are what happen when you create a climate of hate. And it’s long past time for the GOP’s leaders to take a stand against the hate-mongers.

(He really ought to supplement that with a companion piece on how he views the concept of free speech. For everyone that is, not just himself.)

DonnaL · Senior Member

According to the ADL, the American Renaissance is one of those pseudo-intellectual "white people are the best" types of websites/publications that talk a lot about IQ's and immigration. But they don't accuse it of being particularly anti-Semitic:

"Taylor’s portrayal of his racist views as intellectual inquiry enables him to maintain a position as a respectable academic source for racists, many of whom frequently cite his work. He and his admirers often cite his educational background, including a Yale undergraduate degree and mastery of Japanese and French, in order to grant his and their ideas a veneer of credibility.

Jared Taylor promotes his white supremacist ideas primarily through the print publication American Renaissance, its companion Website and the biennial American Renaissance conferences. Taylor serves as the editor of American Renaissance and frequently contributes lengthy articles and book reviews to its pages. Many issues appear to be little more than his personal reflections on the state of race relations in contemporary America."

I think the DHS got the name because the website may have been mentioned somewhere in Loughner's Internet writings, so he may well have read what's on it. But there's no evidence he was ever a subscriber.

And here's a commenter on Politico, defending the place against accusations of anti-Semitism:

"There's no such thing as a 'White Supremacist.'

There are White Nationalists. White Advocates. Whites who haven't swallowed the Kosher poison pill of hatred of their own Race, history, and culture.

Have any of you ever read a word on the American Renaissance site? Some of you say you have.

Can any of you haters and slanderers counter the content of AmRen with actual facts?

No.

You cannot. So you resort to smear tactics, and lies lies lies.

Just like the Talmud tells you to.

By the by - "supremacism" is a Jew Thing."

With friends like that, the American Renaissance needs no enemies!

-- Edited by DonnaL on Sunday 9th of January 2011 08:56:57 PM

Bogney · Senior Member

Was Palin the direct cause of the shooting? No, not that I know of.

Was Palin one of many indirect causes of the shooting? I have no idea. There is not enough information and there are too many variables to know.

Is Palin helping to create a political climate where violence is more likely? Yes. Violent rhetoric from a charismatic politician is more likely to incite violence from whacko followers, or even from whackos just picking up a generally agitated vibe without much real understandng of content, than non-violent rhetoric from that same politician. We have many whackos in this country.

Is creating an environment where violence is more likely relevant where we don't know the cause of this particular incident? Yes, because many times we won't know the cause either because the shooter dies, is crazy, or won't tell the truth. It is best not to tempt fate even if you don't know whether it will cause a disaster.

Do others besides Palin, including some on left also contribute to a climate where violence is more likely? Sure, but then Palin has much more exposure and clout then most, and few politicans are as charismatic. As Spiderman's Uncle said to Spiderman, "those to whom great power is given bare great responsibility" or something along those lines (or was it Batman's butler advising Batman?)

Simple enough?

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

So you would agree that President Obama was wrong and at fault to say that if they bring a knife to a fight, we will bring a gun?

If he said that as a way to try to bring political change, then yes. As I said, I don't support any threats of violence in any sort- especially for political points.

catahoula · Guru

The second paragraph is really stirring but it's unclear if you're actually jumping on the bandwagon of blaming Palin for this, Bogney.

Would you mind being a little more specific?

Abyss · Senior Member

Do you attempt to make the most convoluted sentences on purpose?

Simplicity is good.

Bogney · Senior Member

I don't practice criminal law, but I suspect an insanity plea would be fairly plausible here.

As to Palin, if you stir up the crazies, don't be surprised if they act crazy. It really does not matter whether or not this guy was a leftie or a rightie, or listend to Palin or did not. The guy is nuts and may never be able to articulate what inspired this attack. However, this country has a sad history of political assasination and attempted assasination. This country is armed to the teeth. This country has extremists of all stripes. This country has a very high rate of violent crime. Stir and add a charismatic lunatic using violent rhetoric, and trouble will brew. Of course Palin is not alone, there is Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, the Fox pundits, etc., as well as left wing nutjobs aplenty.

Razorharp, no apologies to Ms. Palin until she can name an important Supreme Court case, and explain its significance. She might like McDonald v. Chicago from last year where our wise Court that held that the Second Amendment is incorporated by the Fourth Amendment and is therefore applicable against the statesmaking state gun control regulations constitutionally suspect. It helps people like our shooter legally obtain firearms. I suspect that I won't have to apoligize for a long time.

Abyss, it sounds as if you may be the poster formerly known as Mr. Payne, but I am guessing. I actually am curious as to whether anyone here has insight into those groups in the title of the thread more than your reading habits, and am not especially interested in your sources. However, if I have pointed you to some social and intellectual peers in the groups that led to this thread, then I am glad to have been of service.

Thank you Samurai and greetings Big G.

DonnaL · Senior Member

I wonder if he'll ever say anything himself about why he did it. So far, he's apparently refusing to speak, and is invoking his rights against self-incrimination. I feel sorry for whoever gets appointed as his lawyer.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

I haven't ever heard of them, either.

Nice to see you again, Bogney.

catahoula · Guru

Those groups have been castigated as white supremacy organizations on Huff Post.
I'm unfamiliar with them, Bogney - would you mind linking to some of the castigation you're speaking of?

Razorsharp · Guru

So you would agree that President Obama was wrong and at fault to say that if they bring a knife to a fight, we will bring a gun?

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

My issue with Palin is that any politician would decide to use the words "reload" or ANYTHING suggesting violence. She was just the first example that popped into my head because she's so prominent. ANY politician who promotes ANYTHING resembling violence should be at fault here.

Razorsharp · Guru

I don't think the left or the right can claim this guy- he was just CRAZY. To try to pinpoint him to one side or the other is just not right IMO.

Exactly! Which is why those suggesting Sarah Palin is somehow responsible for the gunman's behavior should shut the heck up. Everything I have read about this guy suggests that he is unstable and just plain weird.

-- Edited by Razorsharp on Sunday 9th of January 2011 05:34:43 PM

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

Wait, so we're taking the word of ONE person who went to school with him? Ask anyone other than my closest friends in high school and they will tell you that I am either a super left gothic freak or a conservative loner- neither of which are remotely true. Plus, she hasn't "known" him since 2007. Three years can radically change a person.

I can't quite call someone far left who lists "Mein Kampf" as one of his favorite books. This guy just seemed to be VERY anti-government (as it stands now) and wanted to go back solely to the Constitution (according to his YouTube videos). I don't think the left or the right can claim this guy- he was just CRAZY. To try to pinpoint him to one side or the other is just not right IMO.

Razorsharp · Guru

A classmate of the man accused of shooting Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords this morning describes him as "left wing" and a "pot head" in a series of posts on Twitter this afternoon.

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2011/01/jared_loughner_alleged_shooter.php

It looks like the gunman was a left-wing pothead. Undoubtedly the left wing fringe who have been suggesting Sarah Palin is somehow responsible for the shooting will quickly apologize for doing so. No? Yea, I didn't think so either. Blaming Palin for something she had nothing to do with is too much fun for the left wing nutjobs.

DonnaL · Senior Member

I've never heard of either group. The American Renaissance group has already denied that the shooter was connected to them, and has denied that they are anti-Semitic.

And the claim today from people in the Palin camp that those crosshairs on that map weren't intended to represent gun targets, but were really just "surveyor's marks," is one of the most embarrassingly ridiculous assertions I've heard in a while.

-- Edited by DonnaL on Sunday 9th of January 2011 03:49:50 PM

Abyss · Senior Member

No idea what those groups are. And you are likely addressing me.

If you want to know where I get my material you can just ask me.

BigG · Guru

I have never heard of those two.

The "Palinites" are backpedaling and attempting revisionism to a significant degree.

Crosshairs, bullseyes and "don't retreat, reload" are what they are and it is the most egregious doublespeak to claim differently.

The most prevalent tactic seems to be to decry "politicization" of the tradegy.

-- Edited by BigG on Sunday 9th of January 2011 01:21:44 PM

Bogney · Senior Member

The shooter of the congresswoman, judge, et al. in Arizona may have tenuous connections with those groups. Those groups have been castigated as white supremacy organizations on Huff Post. Their views, as summarized on Huff Post, sound much like the views of some posters on CC before the politics forum was shut down, views favoring eugenics and scientific proof of racial disparaty that several of us criticized as racist.

Obviously, I am inclined to view those groups negatively. However, I admit that I know little about them other than a brief summary in an article on Huff Post. If there are supporters out there to defend them, I would be interested in reading their defense. When times are tough, all sorts of extreme groups are known to rise up and attack the new immigrants and colored minorities (the "Know Nothings," Ku Klux Klan (considered legitimate at one point in our history), John Birch Society, etc.) Of course, there are extreme left groups as well, but they tend to attack the rich and propertied more than minorities. Thoughts?