Obama: Enemy of Humanity

GreyICE

Unregistered
G
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
7,149
Yay or nay? Our GOP has brought us this latest tidbit, and we should discuss it as if they're not raving lunatics.

Remember when it was treason to criticize the president? I suppose calling him an enemy of humanity might not be criticism...

Edit: YT

 
Last edited:
Well duh! Of course he's the enemy of humanity. Isn't that the traditional role of the anti-Christ? :rolleyes:
 
Another love-the-fetus-hate-the-child member of the American Taliban speaks.

God save us if a child is aborted before becoming self-aware, but bombing their villages to flinders is totally cool.
 
leftysergeant said:
God save us if a child is aborted before becoming self-aware, but bombing their villages to flinders is totally cool.
Click to expand...
Nits make lice.

I didn't quite follow that guy's logic leap from "money to other nations for abortion" to "enemy of humanity." There were a few steps missing there. If this is the rhetoric Obama is going to be up against, it would be like me playing Federer in tennis: no contest.

Is that all they got in the war of words? If so, he's having it easier than almost any president yet, in terms of having cake for opposition.

DR
 
GreyICE said:
Our GOP has brought us this latest tidbit, and we should discuss it as if they're not raving lunatics.
Click to expand...
If that was your goal then you shouldn't have posted a video of a lunatic raving.
 
It's a one-issue thing. She's talking strictly about abortion. Anti-abortionists have been known to use... um... strong language when talking about their idealogical opponants, such as calling them "murderers" and that sort of thing. Though I can't say much for her intelligence, knowing that these days, everything is recorded and played without context, you have to give Bethany Haley a small break because she was merely "playing to the crowd". No, I don't care for such tactics, but one must realize that this is politics, and that there are no sacred cows, so I don't mind so much that she said it.

By the same token, I really don't find it unfair if her comments are used to make the Republicans look like idiots and hatemongers. That's politics too.
 
Tricky said:
It's a one-issue thing. She's talking strictly about abortion...
Click to expand...
I think you posted that in the wrong thread. This one is about a speech by Trent Franks. See the video in the first post.
 
Yep, Franks is a one-issue guy; either you're with him, or you're with the baby-killers. Unfortunately his district is safe.
 
He's a two issue guy...for all his protestations that he's not, he's also hung up about the birth certificate.
 
Ziggurat said:
GreyICE said:
Remember when it was treason to criticize the president?
Click to expand...
No. When was that? I mean, aside from in your fantasies?
Click to expand...

for example
Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., however, fired back almost immediately by attacking Daschle's right to criticize the Bush administration's prosecution of the war. "How dare Senator Daschle criticize President Bush while we are fighting our war on terrorism, especially when we have troops in the field," Lott stated. "He should not be trying to divide our country while we are united." Sen. Bill Frist, R-Tenn., called Daschle's remarks "thoughtless and ill-timed." Meanwhile, Rep. Thomas Davis, R-Va., head of the Republican House Campaign Committee, claimed Daschle's "divisive comments have the effect of giving aid and comfort to our enemies by allowing them to exploit divisions in our country."
Click to expand...

or this
The most infamous example of this kind of rhetoric, however, came in December, when Attorney General John Ashcroft bullied his critics into silence during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing:

"We need honest, reasoned debate; not fear mongering. To those who pit Americans against immigrants, and citizens against noncitizens; to those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty; my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists -- for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's enemies and pause to America's friends. They encourage people of good will to remain silent in the face of evil."
Click to expand...

or this
In 1942 George Orwell wrote this, in Partisan Review, of Great Britain's pacifists: "Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help out that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, 'he that is not with me is against me.' " . . .

An essentially identical logic obtains now. Organized terrorist groups have attacked America. These groups wish the Americans to not fight. The American pacifists wish the Americans to not fight. If the Americans do not fight, the terrorists will attack America again. And now we know such attacks can kill many thousands of Americans. The American pacifists, therefore, are on the side of future mass murders of Americans. They are objectively pro-terrorist.
Click to expand...

So, Aside from GreyICE's fantasies, it also happened here in reality.
 
Oh, Zig probably has me on ignore, either literally or psychologically.

GreyICE, feel free to plagiarize my last post to your heart's content.
 
Reposting Upchurch's rebutal to Zigg's denial of reality.

Upchurch said:
for example

Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., however, fired back almost immediately by attacking Daschle's right to criticize the Bush administration's prosecution of the war. "How dare Senator Daschle criticize President Bush while we are fighting our war on terrorism, especially when we have troops in the field," Lott stated. "He should not be trying to divide our country while we are united." Sen. Bill Frist, R-Tenn., called Daschle's remarks "thoughtless and ill-timed." Meanwhile, Rep. Thomas Davis, R-Va., head of the Republican House Campaign Committee, claimed Daschle's "divisive comments have the effect of giving aid and comfort to our enemies by allowing them to exploit divisions in our country."
Click to expand...

or this

The most infamous example of this kind of rhetoric, however, came in December, when Attorney General John Ashcroft bullied his critics into silence during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing:

"We need honest, reasoned debate; not fear mongering. To those who pit Americans against immigrants, and citizens against noncitizens; to those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty; my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists -- for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's enemies and pause to America's friends. They encourage people of good will to remain silent in the face of evil."
Click to expand...

or this

In 1942 George Orwell wrote this, in Partisan Review, of Great Britain's pacifists: "Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help out that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, 'he that is not with me is against me.' " ...

An essentially identical logic obtains now. Organized terrorist groups have attacked America. These groups wish the Americans to not fight. The American pacifists wish the Americans to not fight. If the Americans do not fight, the terrorists will attack America again. And now we know such attacks can kill many thousands of Americans. The American pacifists, therefore, are on the side of future mass murders of Americans. They are objectively pro-terrorist.
Click to expand...

So, Aside from GreyICE's fantasies, it also happened here in reality.
Click to expand...
 
Mark A. Siefert said:
Reposting Upchurch's rebutal to Zigg's denial of reality.
Click to expand...

Funny, I'm not seeing anyone accusing anyone else of treason in regards to criticism.

The first link? It's an attack on a particular person's criticism, and you can argue that it was unjustified, but it's no accusation of treason.

The quote in the second link rather explicitly accepts criticism of the administration ("We need honest, reasoned debate"), and only attacks what he calls "fear mongering" (just like Obama only wanted people to send lies about health care reform to his tip line, not just opposition to health care reform). And what's his first example of fear mongering? "those who pit Americans against immigrants, and citizens against noncitizens". You know, what the left worried that right-wing nutters would do So I don't see how you can conclude that he's equating criticism with fear mongering. Did Ashcroft's words stifle dissent? Maybe (though clearly not all that much, given how much was going around), but it doesn't constitute evidence of GreyICE's claim that criticism was called treason.

And the third link, well, if you think that pacifism is synonymous with criticism of Bush, you're just an idiot.

Edit: I should also point out the authorship of the quote in that last link: Andrew Sullivan, a.k.a. "excitable Andy". Quite the right-wing demagogue, Andy is. Or was. But he's never been credible, not when he was defending Bush and not when he started attacking him.
 
Last edited:
Treason.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom