Originally Posted by SaintStephen74

3) The left vs. right meme is pretty strong here at FTF. Lots of left-right finger pointing. If you are pissed about anything the current regime is doing, you are either a) a right wing radical or b) a conspiracy theory nut whos outta touch w/ "reality" (the REAL one). Its your choice.

What if you're pissed at the current regime because it's not progressive enough? Which category does that put you in?

Originally Posted by ASB65

Gosh I hope so. When I was a kid growing up in the 70's and early 80's, I really don't remember this kind of political hatred. People had different opinions and there were discussions but threats of violence were isolated cases and done by people who were very mentally ill and it was condemed by everyone. Too me it seems this very strong partisanship started heating up in the early 90's and has spiraled into what we have today. I have heard commentators on TV talk about how 30 to 40 years ago legislators would battle it out on the floor during the day and then go out and have drinks together after work. Can you imagine Nancy Pelosi and Michelle Bachman sitting down together for socially for a glass of wine? Never going to happen.

For some reason I don't believe that they ever did that, but then again, I'm one who's grown up watching this "battle of talking heads" and known nothing else.

So here is my fear. The millie generation was brought up knowing nothing but this. They grew up listening to their (mostly) boomer parents feeding them their extreme views and rherotic. They know nothing else. Obviously, there are sensible people in your generation, Chas, but there are an awful lot of people around your age and younger that have bought into this hook, line and sinker. Just like that millie teacher that brought her hate into my son's 5th grade classroom early this week. This hate is on both sides. My question to you...Are the student's in your college discriminating and assulting (or threatening to assult) other student's who don't agree with their views? Or can most of them sit down and have a civil conversation with one another without it getting ugly?

Actually, yeah. The diversity education and tolerance movements are strong on my campus amongst all sorts. In fact when there are acts of intolerance on campus the majority of the student body frowns upon it in universal agreement. It's only when one leaves the urban upper class bracket and goes out to the more lower class rural areas that tolerance and values of diversity start waning--I think of the Boy Scout camp I work at and remember some of the things I heard there, as well as the things I hear from my friends' parents back in my hometown--one mother cleans houses of people who get evicted and the things she tells me about the "damn 'spics she cleans up after", are never nice. I shiver at some of the things they say, but usually say nothing in order to "keep the peace".

Most of the intolerance is aimed at, "surprise, surprise" Hispanics. The only time they get fairly spoken of is when the person actually works with a person of Hispanic descent (even then there's a kind of condescending-ness about it) African-Americans are more fairly considered (but not completely). In fact I'd say that fruitcake is a good example of the kind of ideologues one finds in the more rural areas. And it's only in the very rural regions that the kids agree with their parents on this matter. Although to be fair, I have heard some things out of the mouth of the very very rich at my school akin to what I hear the lower rural class says, but generally the very very rich look down upon everyone so I don't consider that to be any example of "intolerance" beyond the typical "class warfare".

So if anything I see the upcomming "violence" between the urban and the rural communities. And I'm starting to think that we'll be seeing a return of walled cities as a response to this.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

What if you're pissed at the current regime because it's not progressive enough? Which category does that put you in?

Obama isn't progressive enough???? Not enough tax and spend for you huh? Tell me more & I'll squeeze you into a box, no problem. Don't like it? How's "Radicalized" sound?

Originally Posted by SaintStephen74

Obama isn't progressive enough???? Not enough tax and spend for you huh?

I don't feel any obligation to be bound by right-wing mischaracterizations of what "progressive" means. And yes, to a lot of people on the left, Obama is not progressive enough.

Show me that you sincerely want to know what I mean by that instead of just wanting to garner bumper-sticker talking points and I'll be happy to explain.

Originally Posted by SaintStephen74

If you are pissed about anything the current regime is doing, you are either a) a right wing radical or b) a conspiracy theory nut whos outta touch w/ "reality" (the REAL one). Its your choice.

I think that's too simplistic.

A few lefties here are upset with the Obama administration because HCR didn't go far enough; i.e., it was a sellout to the insurance companies and Big Pharma.

The anarcho-libertarians are pissed because we're still killing people in Iraq and Afghanistan, and because the Patriot Act is still in place, and government in general is enmeshed with Big Business, and the War on Drugs is still going on, etc., etc.

Chas88 observes "-one mother cleans houses of people who get evicted and the things she tells me about the "damn 'spics she cleans up after", are never nice."

Of course - that house cleaners think the class of people they clean up after is full of slobs and pigs is nothing new, or why I pick up the place before she comes. And people who get evicted are probably not the ones most anxious to leave the place in good shape!

However, it is bad that she expresses her opinion of them in ethnic terms.

Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

Chas88 observes "-one mother cleans houses of people who get evicted and the things she tells me about the "damn 'spics she cleans up after", are never nice."

Of course - that house cleaners think the class of people they clean up after is full of slobs and pigs is nothing new, or why I pick up the place before she comes. And people who get evicted are probably not the ones most anxious to leave the place in good shape!

However, it is bad that she expresses her opinion of them in ethnic terms.

Which is exactly my point. Thanks GB.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Chas'88

I'm nearly positive its those same guys who've been accosting me and several other students at night. And while these guys say that it happened "off campus", really it was less than a block from campus.

Things are getting bad...

~Chas'88

Please stay safe.

Originally Posted by Chas'88

Things are getting bad...

I wonder how this is congruent with the well know fact that crime rates have been dramatically falling for almost two decades. S/H make this point. Others have credited Roe v Wade since the drop began about 20 years after the decision. Of course, you did not experience the crime rates of the 70s and 80s, so perhaps your baseline is different from mine.

http://bit.ly/8ftfst

James50

Originally Posted by James50

I wonder how this is congruent with the well know fact that crime rates have been dramatically falling for almost two decades. S/H make this point. Others have credited Roe v Wade since the drop began about 20 years after the decision. Of course, you did not experience the crime rates of the 70s and 80s, so perhaps your baseline is different from mine.

http://bit.ly/8ftfst

James50

And I come from an exurban community where the only bad thing that happened, was a friend of mine in first grade stole a train set out of his neighbor's garage & another neighbor's Nintendo-wave Xer teen broke into my other neighbor's house to steal things for drug money. As he was breaking in to the house the man heard the commotion downstairs and tried to hurry down, he fell down the stairs and died.

I was actually a witness in that case (at 8), because I was the one who had seen the Nintendo Xer's red car parked in the driveway of my other neighbor's property.

So yeah, beyond petty theft, I haven't really witnessed much in the way of crime. Exurbia can be so boring at times and so isolated.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by XerTeacher

Thanks. Postmodern academe suits the Xer in me... only gamblers would choose this route in 2010. It's very much like playing the nerd equivalent of Survivor.



Wayne, beautifully put. My worry is that no "Great Uniter" apparent is on the scene. Both Bush and Obama promised bipartisanship, and it eluded both of them. With each handover of power, the country becomes more and more polarized.

I am going to make a point about this that I intend to keep making everywhere that I can for the next few years at least--most notably in a lecture to my students in a couple of weeks.

There's a lot of nostalgia out there for the High, when politicians worked together, but no one seems to have any idea of what the last Crisis was like. FDR did momentarily unite most of the country in 1933 and then again during the war, but for the bulk of his Presidency he faced the violent, unremitting hatred of millions of Americans, and in particular, of most of the print media. Lincoln didn't have a single moment of that kind of unity even in the North, much less in the South. He won 54% of the northern vote in 1864 which means that 40% at least hated his guts. Obama's position is not dissimilar to Lincoln's.

I've been out of circulation for a couple of days but the morning paper shows Obama making recess appointments and (echoing Lincoln on habeas corpus!) saying that if Congress won't exercise its responsibilities, he will. An excellent sign. But as I plan to tell my students, based on history, it's safe to filter out the hysterical abuse that crises Presidents invariably receive. Any resemblance to the truth is purely incidental. And I'm taking my advice--anyone who pours it out here (which is their right) goes onto my ignore list.

Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

Chas88 observes "-one mother cleans houses of people who get evicted and the things she tells me about the "damn 'spics she cleans up after", are never nice."

Of course - that house cleaners think the class of people they clean up after is full of slobs and pigs is nothing new, or why I pick up the place before she comes. And people who get evicted are probably not the ones most anxious to leave the place in good shape!

However, it is bad that she expresses her opinion of them in ethnic terms.

GB, I always chuckle when some one admits they clean for their housekeeper. . .one of the nice things about my parents (there were a few) was their social self-confidence. They assumed people came to their house to see them, and they really didn't much care how it looked. I've always admired that.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

I don't feel any obligation to be bound by right-wing mischaracterizations of what "progressive" means. And yes, to a lot of people on the left, Obama is not progressive enough.

Show me that you sincerely want to know what I mean by that instead of just wanting to garner bumper-sticker talking points and I'll be happy to explain.

Sorry I sounded so....uh... bombastic? I had intended it to sound more Stephen Colbert (intentionally oversimplified and divisive) My point being that (as CoS noted) that it was too simplified -The whole right-left debate is toooooo simplified -Especially if you are wanting 'change'. What grows in the Spring (1st turning) won't come from either the left or the right. It will grow from their decay in the 4th. Sorry if the heat I added smelled like..... ....Is it in the garden bed now?

Originally Posted by SaintStephen74

What grows in the Spring (1st turning) won't come from either the left or the right.

I disagree, in a complicated way. Let me explain what I mean.

First off, "left" and "right," though certainly not useless concepts as you seem to imply, don't have constant meanings. They change in two ways, one cyclic, the other linear.

The cyclic way is that there are what we might call Awakening issues and Crisis issues. Awakening issues always involve moral and cultural questions, while Crisis issues involve political and economic ones. In the 1970s, "left" meant being for racial civil rights or affirmative action, being an environmentalist, being a feminist, being pro-choice on abortion. It still includes those things, but the focus now is on such things as regulating the banking system, reforming health care, and ending dependence on fossil fuels. Economics has become more important than culture. "Right" in both cases centers around opposition to these progressive pushes.

The linear variation comes about simply because progressive efforts sometimes succeed. As such, things that were burning issues in the past cease to be issues at all; they're battles that have been won. Thus, one finds no women's suffragists among leftists today; not because the left has changed its collective mind and now thinks women shouldn't vote, but because women DO vote -- we won that battle a long time ago, so there's no need to re-fight it.

Because the Awakening is culture-focused and the Unraveling is conservative, civic decay -- wait, that's an inappropriate term. The civic order hasn't just "decayed." It's become obsolete. In some respects it HAS decayed, with undoing of financial regulations for example. But mostly, new circumstances have arisen that render old solutions unworkable (e.g. the emergence of outsourcing that has made traditional labor activism ineffective) or raise new problems that weren't urgent in the old days (e.g. peak oil and global warming requiring a change in energy economy).

So, to rephrase: for the above two reasons, civic obsolescence has been allowed to proceed without any serious attempt to remedy the problem, hence we find ourselves in deep doo-doo yet again. The solutions to these problems are -- as always -- progressive. Because that's true almost by definition. When you are faced with new problems, new solutions (which is another way of saying progressive ones) are needed to solve them.

We will get to the 1T by way of progressive victory. It will, almost certainly, be a partial victory not a total one. But a progressive victory must happen in order to generate a new, non-obsolete civic order, one that works. One that produces an economy with high wages, sustainable energy, stable finances, a healthy population, and an international order that isn't constantly exploding. There is no conservative road to that civic order, for the perfectly simple and obvious reason that conservatives don't want high wages (they conflict with profit-taking), don't want sustainable energy (it conflicts with oil-company profits), don't want stable finances (that conflicts with Wall Street bank profits), don't want a healthy population (that conflicts with insurance-industry profits), and don't want a non-explosive international order (that conflicts with defense-industry profits).

Once we have sufficient progressive victories to achieve a new civic order with the above characteristics, then things will improve enough that we can afford a conservative era and stop stirring the pot for a while. At that point, we will find ourselves in a 1T. So: a 1T comes from the left, and is on the right.

EDIT: Now, about Obama -- he's like Lincoln in this respect. He's not governing from a far-left perspective. He's a center-left kind of guy, at least in his governance to date. There are progressives both in and out of Congress who want to move much more radically. For example, a truly progressive health-care reform act would have simply expanded Medicare to cover everyone, subsumed the functions of Medicaid into Medicare and abolished it as a separate program, and allowed everyone to buy Medicare coverage for themselves and their dependents, with sliding subsidies for lower-income people and (as now) for the elderly. Private health insurance would still be permitted, but would have to compete with Medicare, and most people would mainly be covered by that.

Instead, we get a system that, while much improved over the status quo ante, panders overly much to the insurance industry (IMO). Similar observations can be made about most of Obama's positions. He's certainly no right-winger, but he's only sort of progressive. That's to be expected in a 4T president, though.

Now this is interesting.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100328/...s/us_fbi_raids

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

Now this is interesting.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100328/...s/us_fbi_raids

One line from the article made me laugh:

"Needless to say, this has everyone talking," said Mills, 62. "We have a lot of retirees here who don't want all this commotion."

I thought all boomers like "commotion". He must have been asleep for most of his life.

James50

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

Because the Awakening is culture-focused and the Unraveling is conservative, civic decay -- wait, that's an inappropriate term. The civic order hasn't just "decayed." It's become obsolete.

I have snipped out most of what is a good analysis to focus on this thought. What makes me nervous is the danger that to get to that 1T we will try to create a new society from scratch and lose the stabilizing history of our constitution. We have a long history of laws and governing polity that has served us well. These laws have survived two 4Ts so far. I want them to survive this one as well. The progressive impulse is often a good one, but there are limits. Reform, yes, revolution, no.

I could not help but think of the part of "Man for All Seasons" where Thomas More defends the devil's right to the law.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMqReTJkjjg

BR - your zeal is admirable, but it does scare me at times.

James50

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

I disagree, in a complicated way. Let me explain what I mean.

First off, "left" and "right," though certainly not useless concepts as you seem to imply, don't have constant meanings. They change in two ways, one cyclic, the other linear..

I don't think they are useless per se. I would ask for what purpose they are used.
[/QUOTE]
The solutions to these problems are -- as always -- progressive. Because that's true almost by definition. When you are faced with new problems, new solutions (which is another way of saying progressive ones) are needed to solve them..[/QUOTE]
This is a neat way of claiming victory no matter what happens because its 'progress'
.[/QUOTE]
We will get to the 1T by way of progressive victory. It will, almost certainly, be a partial victory not a total one. But a progressive victory must happen in order to generate a new, non-obsolete civic order, one that works. One that produces an economy with high wages, sustainable energy, stable finances, a healthy population, and an international order that isn't constantly exploding. There is no conservative road to that civic order, for the perfectly simple and obvious reason that conservatives don't want high wages (they conflict with profit-taking), don't want sustainable energy (it conflicts with oil-company profits), don't want stable finances (that conflicts with Wall Street bank profits), don't want a healthy population (that conflicts with insurance-industry profits), and don't want a non-explosive international order (that conflicts with defense-industry profits)..[/QUOTE]

..... Is your post compostable? If so, I think this part is more readily useful than the rest.
.[/QUOTE]
Once we have sufficient progressive victories to achieve a new civic order with the above characteristics, then things will improve enough that we can afford a conservative era and stop stirring the pot for a while. [/QUOTE]
If I am not mistaken, the 'stirring the pot' reference has to do with manure. My next guess is that it could have to do with cooking. In either case, it is alchemical and the end result contains what came before, but they have been transformed. I don't think you disagreed with me, so much as you clarified your case for what you see unfolding (which I wouldn't disagree with -save some pettiness).

Originally Posted by James50

I have snipped out most of what is a good analysis to focus on this thought. What makes me nervous is the danger that to get to that 1T we will try to create a new society from scratch and lose the stabilizing history of our constitution.

I really don't think there's any danger of that. I do think there are some amendments to the Constitution that would at some point be worth pursuing (most obviously, abolishing the Electoral College), but I don't see them as burning issues for this Crisis.

New societies are rarely created from scratch. But sometimes it can look that way when necessary change has been delayed for too long.

Seven arrested in FBI raids linked to Christian militia group

JENNIFER CHAMBERS
The Detroit News

At least seven people, including some from Michigan, have been arrested in raids by a FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Force in Michigan, Ohio and Indiana as part of an investigation into an Adrian-based Christian militia group, a person familiar with the matter said.

The suspects are expected to make an initial appearance in U.S. District Court in Detroit on Monday.

On Sunday, a source close to the investigation in Washington, D.C. confirmed that FBI agents were conducting activities in Washtenaw and Lenawee counties over the weekend in connection to Hutaree, a Christian militia group. Detroit FBI Special Agent Sandra Berchtold told The Detroit News the federal warrants in the case are under court seal and declined further comment.

Sources have said the FBI was in the second day of raids around the southeastern Michigan city of Adrian that are connected to a militia group, known as the Hutaree, an Adrian-based group whose members describe themselves as Christian soldiers preparing for the arrival and battle with the anti-Christ.

WXYZ-TV reports that helicopters were spotted in the sky for much of Saturday night, and agents set up checkpoints throughout the area. Witnesses told the station that it was like a small army had descended on the area. The Department of Homeland Security and the Joint Terrorism Task Force are also involved in the raids.

Mike Lackomar, of Michiganmilitia.com, said both The Southeast Michigan Volunteer Militia and the Michiganmilitia.com were not a part of the raid.

Lackomar said he heard from other militia members that the FBI targeted the Hutaree after its members made threats of violence against Islamic organizations.

"Last night and into today the FBI conducted a raid against homes belonging to the Hutaree. They are a religious cult. They are not part of our militia community," he said.

Lackomar said he was told there were five arrests Saturday and another five early Sunday. The FBI declined to comment.

One of the Hutaree members called a Michigan militia leader for assistance Saturday after federal agents had already began their raid, Lackomar said, but the militia member -- who is of Islamic decent and had heard about the threats -- declined to offer help. That Michigan militia leader is now working with federal officials to provide information on the Hutaree member for the investigation, Lackomar said Sunday.

"They are more of survivalist group and in an emergency they withdraw and stand their ground. They are actively training to be alongside Jesus," he said.

Sources from the Michigan militia community said one of the FBI raids took place Saturday during a wake for a Hutaree member who had died of natural causes. A Hutaree leader was arrested during the wake while at the same time agents were conducting raids at other locations.

The Associated Press is reporting that FBI spokesman Scott Wilson in Cleveland said agents arrested two people Saturday in northwest Ohio. A third arrest was made in Illinois on Sunday, a day after raids in northwest Indiana.

Dawud Walid, executive director of the Council on Islamic-American Relations of Michigan, made an announcement Sunday during the group's 10th anniversary banquet about receiving a call from a network journalist about the alleged threat against Muslims.

"Don't allow this news to scare you away from practicing your faith," said Walid.

Audible gaps were heard throughout the banquet hall when the news was announced. Walid said he will call local authorities about more information on the allegations. He urged local Muslims to recommitt themselves to their faith in light of the accusations.

David Shepardson and Oralandar Brand-Williams contributed to this report. jchambers@detnews.com">jchambers@detnews.com

Originally Posted by TnT

If you listen to Rush Limbaugh, the spokesperson for much of the Right, there is a consistent thread of anti-intellectualism and anti-scientism. His inability to deal with anything more nuanced than a duality is pounded home throughout each broadcast. I wish I had $100 for every time I've heard him state two diametrically opposed sides of a question, and then shout into his microphone, "It's THAT simple!!" When of course it is never THAT simple.

Go for example to the "Townhall Conservatives" website and look in on the commentary to the various columnists. The same thread of anti-intellectualism, religion/superstition, anti-science and right-wing mythology abounds.

Thus the notion that "common sense," whatever that is, is so vastly superior to education, becomes attractive to those who for whatever reason have no education, and no tools for digging out facts and figures and analyzing the same. The ability of the uneducated to use a chain saw or rebuild a carberator is held up as evidence that the "pointy-headed" liberal elite has their collective heads up their collective ass.

This bunch is convinced that every college campus is rife with wild-eyed lesbian-studies professors out to take away their guns and make them drink tea from china with their little finger crooked. I would challenge them to sit in on a semester of differential equations and report back. Or balance a page of oxidation-reduction chemical equations and then tell us if they even know what their professor's political stance is on any issue.

I'm reminded of the Ghost of Christmas Present from Dickens:

From the foldings of its robe, it brought two children; wretched, abject, frightful, hideous, miserable. They knelt down at its feet, and clung upon the outside of its garment.

They were a boy and a girl. Yellow, meagre, ragged, scowling, wolfish; but prostrate, too, in their humility. Where graceful youth should have filled their features out, and touched them with its freshest tints, a stale and shrivelled hand, like that of age, had pinched, and twisted them, and pulled them into shreds. Where angels might have sat enthroned, devils lurked, and glared out menacing. No change, no degradation, no perversion of humanity, in any grade, through all the mysteries of wonderful creation, has monsters half so horrible and dread.

"Spirit, are they yours?" Scrooge could say no more.

"They are Man's," said the Spirit, looking down upon them. "And they cling to me, appealing from their fathers. This boy is Ignorance. This girl is Want. Beware them both, and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy, for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the writing be erased."

First let me say that I'm not a fan of Rush Limbaugh and do not agree with his views. However, I do think Rush Limbaugh is a fairly intellegent man. I also understand that he is an entertainer who his appealing to his audience. Whether or not he truly does not believe in the theory of evolution deep down inside, I don't know. However, I can tell you that my neighbor and friend, who is an engineer with a bachelor of science degree, does not believe in this theory of evolution because of his religious fundamental upbringing. I was shocked when I discovered this about our friend. He is an intelligent, college educated man. It is a matter of faith for him. This only goes to show how those with deep far right religious convictions, supersedes commonly accepted scientific thought.

Here in America we all have the rights of freedom and religion and freedom of speech. And even though I don't agree with this particular ideology, I understand that just because someone doesn't feel the same way I do, doesn't mean they are ignorant. There is no black and white. There are always shades of gray. Both sides do need to learn tolerance for eachother and have respect eachother's opinions and convictions. (And that goes for Rush Limbaugh too. But then of course, he wouldn't have a show.)

Watching the militia thing with interest... everyone knows how I've been tracking their development. It was just a matter of time before they started taking "action." Now I'm interested in how Obama deals with them.

There is a huge amount of anger out there. Chas, I agree with you... things are getting scary.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

I really don't think there's any danger of that. I do think there are some amendments to the Constitution that would at some point be worth pursuing (most obviously, abolishing the Electoral College), but I don't see them as burning issues for this Crisis.

Could you please expand on why you feel abolishing the Electoral College would be worth pursuing?

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

GB, I always chuckle when some one admits they clean for their housekeeper. . .one of the nice things about my parents (there were a few) was their social self-confidence. They assumed people came to their house to see them, and they really didn't much care how it looked. I've always admired that.

People who "clean for their housecleaners" are in reality tidying up so that the housecleaners don't have to pick up socks, paperwork, and various knickknacks and figure out where to put them before they can vacuum and mop the floors and dust the table tops. It seems to be common courtesy, not a sign of being an insecure neurotic.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

People who "clean for their housecleaners" are in reality tidying up so that the housecleaners don't have to pick up socks, paperwork, and various knickknacks and figure out where to put them before they can vacuum and mop the floors and dust the table tops. It seems to be common courtesy, not a sign of being an insecure neurotic.

90% of cleaning up is picking up.

James50