General Discussion

Fantastic Anarchist

(7,309 posts)

145. Disgusting, insane, reactionary, fascist ...

Fri May 24, 2013, 05:34 AM

May 2013

You name it, but if this is what passes for "liberal", I want no part of it.

I AM A PROGRESSIVE. It reinforces my thought on the liberal and progressive divide. Democrats, whom of course can be both, have to decide.

I am a PROGRESSIVE:

I'll state my positions here:

I believe in a "free market"*
*Market meaning that labor possesses the means of production and the distribution thereof. (I don't think liberals think the same)
I believe in total freedom of body and soul - this means everyone, no one excluded
I believe in civil rights
I believe in women's rights - which is redundant
I believe in environmental protectionism
I believe that the Democratic Party is only slightly worse than the Republican Party
I believe that the Oligarchy will kill us all
I believe that any party is always against the common interest

If I get banned, I only apologize for saying the above not more often.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

153 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The assassination of 16 y/o American citizen Abdulrahman al-Awlaki. That's part of what she shouted [View all] Poll_Blind May 2013 OP

Text below posted previously on DU... Tx4obama May 2013 #1

The division of pre-crime must pay well nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #2

I hope you will demonstrate your bona fides for this statement by demonstrating how you are not patrice May 2013 #28

Perhaps you should do well to read The actual book nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #153

Thank you for your post, nadin..... truth2power May 2013 #73

I got your back, Nadin. Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #81

None of the details about the son or his upbringing are in any way relevant. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #4

He was A Combatant, Sir: A Young One, And Not the Target, But A Participant The Magistrate May 2013 #6

So you may claim, but you have no evidence to provide to prove your claim, other than proximity. MNBrewer May 2013 #10

His Up-Bringing And Connection Make It Obvious, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #12

I believe that's called circumstantial evidence and is not probative. MNBrewer May 2013 #15

Thank You For The Laugh, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #17

You're welcome MNBrewer May 2013 #20

And a fine standard employed by our government. rug May 2013 #27

You Live In The World You Live In, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #33

So I do. I'd like to keep more of us here without my government's removing them. rug May 2013 #34

We Are Talking Cases, Sir, Not Totals The Magistrate May 2013 #38

"involved (in) jihadi activity" is not the standard enunciated today. rug May 2013 #44

Since He was Not the Target Of the Attack, Sir, That Has No Relevance The Magistrate May 2013 #48

Ah, no relevance. Perhaps these comments today will supply that. rug May 2013 #49

So You Come Back, Sir, To Whether He Was a Civilian Or Not The Magistrate May 2013 #51

I would be surprised if he was a combatant. rug May 2013 #53

Again, Sir, You Provide No Argument The Magistrate May 2013 #56

You're right. I did not provide an argument, I provided a conclusion: "a mistake, a bad mistake." rug May 2013 #59

Well, Sir, I Have To Go Cook, And Clearly You Are Not Up To the Demands Of Actually Arguing A Point The Magistrate May 2013 #62

I usually don't argue a point. I demonstrate it. rug May 2013 #63

By the same token, it's not remarkable that the government Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #74

This is very dangerous ground and ground based on assumptions ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #71

It Will Save Me Time, Sir, Simply To Renew A Previous Post.... The Magistrate May 2013 #85

I'll Save You Nothing Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #133

Always Nice To Start The Day With A Belly Laugh, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #149

Amazing ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #151

So says the authority that has used violence Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #70

That's everyone's wish. The only disagreement is to the degree that it is possible and still stevenleser May 2013 #39

I get where you're coming from, Steve, but often hesitation is a better course than regret. rug May 2013 #46

Therein lies the rub ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #75

Correct, but that isn't what we are doing stevenleser May 2013 #79

Two points: Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #80

No, and no stevenleser May 2013 #124

Really? Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #134

Report of brussels group says more civilians are killed by drones than terrorists. HiPointDem May 2013 #94

That is alarming. Thanks for posting. nt Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #106

+1 HiPointDem May 2013 #93

Ways can be changed with knowledge ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #69

What's With The "Sir" Business? otohara May 2013 #84

It is? davidthegnome May 2013 #105

Even to their children? N.T. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #19

Since It Is Obvious You Understand The Ludicrous Stretching You Are Engaged In, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #21

As is the charge of the government ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #65

'Evidence' means nothing in an accident. randome May 2013 #13

Funny but that "leader" has never been named. Luminous Animal May 2013 #72

I dont disagree with much about what you say but I would argue that with regards to collateral stevenleser May 2013 #8

But "not firing anything at all" was also an option. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #22

That's always an option for all involved. I encourage you to pursue it equally with all parties. stevenleser May 2013 #25

So you're happy with moral equivalence with Al Quaeda? Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #26

There is something wrong with the idea that no one should try to hurt each other? stevenleser May 2013 #29

It's wrong because there are situations in which not trying to hurt someone is morally wrong. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #35

There are other options you and others seem to keep overlooking though to. cstanleytech May 2013 #128

I'm not interested in al-Awlaki's options. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #132

Wow. Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #137

As I said in the third paragraph of the post you're replying to, no. N.T. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #152

Can you say "bad person" again, pretty please? Bonobo May 2013 #148

But the kid was just there for the bar-b-que! baldguy May 2013 #32

I think it was his 'family' in the USA that first said he was at a BBQ, the reports I read said... Tx4obama May 2013 #37

Well, that makes it alright then. Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #64

My USC spouse spent ten years of childhood in Germany. Does that make it more ok to kill my spouse? leveymg May 2013 #78

He Should Have Been Someplace Else, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #3

Exactly. I'm hoping we find what I call a post-drone solution to the Al-Qaeda and affiliate problem stevenleser May 2013 #5

Or ever. As long as it's a Dem in, right? morningfog May 2013 #108

Actually ignored, no, I had no problem with Bush going after actual terrorists either. nt stevenleser May 2013 #127

And you're "The Magistrate" MNBrewer May 2013 #11

It Certainly Does For Me, Sir The Magistrate May 2013 #14

Yes sir MNBrewer May 2013 #16

So You Have No Objection To My Stating My View Of The Matter, Sir? The Magistrate May 2013 #18

I object not to the existence, but rather to the content of the opinions you express MNBrewer May 2013 #23

Then Let Us Review, Sir, So The Matter Is Clear The Magistrate May 2013 #31

Consider the paternalistic assumptions about the rest of us that you make in such statements. wow.nt patrice May 2013 #42

Of what relevance is the fact that he was American? randome May 2013 #7

The argument is that an American is entitled to the bill of rights and a non-American is not stevenleser May 2013 #9

+1 treestar May 2013 #58

i agree, i never understand why they keep bringing that up JI7 May 2013 #101

Your picture fails because ... JoePhilly May 2013 #24

yeah? Still puzzled about what happened to the chechen friend of Tamerlan Tsarnaev librechik May 2013 #30

Definitely part of the cover-up. JoePhilly May 2013 #36

This message was self-deleted by its author patrice May 2013 #41

Those Unnamed Sources Are No Longer So Sure Tamerlan's Friend Pulled a Knife MNBrewer May 2013 #45

Awe come on ... JoePhilly May 2013 #47

He's probably not MNBrewer May 2013 #50

Please, for the sake of your own case against this, could everyone opposed to these kinds of actions patrice May 2013 #40

This is just joelz May 2013 #43

This is murder too. patrice May 2013 #57

and here I thought the "terrorist sympathizer" trope was RWNJ fiction sagat May 2013 #52

taking your son to high level al-quaeda meetings should raise some ethical questions too arely staircase May 2013 #54

The father was already dead at the time the son went to the meeting Tx4obama May 2013 #67

apparantly he learned nothing from that eom arely staircase May 2013 #68

Here is the ProSense May 2013 #55

k, so if I can't get an answer to #40, I am forced to conclude that the killing IS OKAY as long as patrice May 2013 #60

Shit happens. nt Pragdem May 2013 #61

I don't believe his killing was a coincidence or an accident. GoneFishin May 2013 #66

She's barking at the wrong car marshall May 2013 #76

Saved the picture. I will never forgive that heinous act. n/t truth2power May 2013 #77

Forget it, Poll Blind -- Hell Hath No Fury May 2013 #82

I thought it was interesting what a frenzy could be caused simply by relaying what... Poll_Blind May 2013 #83

Kool-aid -- Hell Hath No Fury May 2013 #86

Well said. woo me with science May 2013 #89

I have never understood . . . markpkessinger May 2013 #92

I agree .. Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #147

people who dissed Bush all those years are all of a sudden concerned about "respecting the boilerbabe May 2013 #88

"..the only reason these folks didn't like bush is because he wasn't a democrat." Scurrilous May 2013 #150

Wow, all the way fucked up "Kid had it coming cuz he was likely to become a terrorist" apologias whatchamacallit May 2013 #87

The arguments I have seen defending this seem to amount to: Bonobo May 2013 #90

1 and 2 are not contradictory. jeff47 May 2013 #100

But the defenses for the action are themselves in contradiction. Bonobo May 2013 #115

No, they're not. jeff47 May 2013 #122

Yes they are. Bonobo May 2013 #123

Why do you bother replying if you don't bother to read the posts? jeff47 May 2013 #125

I read your post. Bonobo May 2013 #126

. Bonobo May 2013 #130

Holy fuck balls ... look upthread Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #142

Can you give me a clue? Bonobo May 2013 #144

LOL ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #146

I have a laser pointed on me. Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #143

No, it's not. Plenty of combatants have been killed without being targeted Recursion May 2013 #141

1 and 2 don't contradict each other. There are plenty of combatants we don't target (nt) Recursion May 2013 #136

I think I covered that above. Bonobo May 2013 #139

Nope, you didn't Recursion May 2013 #140

Posts saying he was accidentally hit belong in the Creative Speculation forum. nt Bonobo May 2013 #91

Any standard that would require that would put posts saying he was targeted there, too. n/t Bolo Boffin May 2013 #96

Hmmm, let me think about that.... Bonobo May 2013 #98

It's amazing how "does not pass the smell test" always manages to confirm one's own bias. n/t Bolo Boffin May 2013 #99

It is equally amazing how people will accept anything Bonobo May 2013 #114

Until I have a reason to discount what the Obama administration has said... Bolo Boffin May 2013 #120

I would expect no less. Bonobo May 2013 #121

Holder said, yesterday, that he was not the target Recursion May 2013 #135

Yeah, that settles it! nt Bonobo May 2013 #138

The rationalizations on this thread for execution without trial, execution of bystanders, execution HiPointDem May 2013 #95

Sometimes I have to check I didn't accidentally wander into Free Republic n/t whatchamacallit May 2013 #97

on certain issues there's no difference. HiPointDem May 2013 #103

So we should invade Yemen? jeff47 May 2013 #102

i don't see how your comments follow from anything i said. i nevertheless doubt your conclusion. HiPointDem May 2013 #104

It appears you are saying we should not do drone strikes. jeff47 May 2013 #111

A hypothetical. If we could have killed OBL to prevent 9/11, but in doing so perhaps kill still_one May 2013 #107

If capture and prosecution is not an option, then bombing is the least-bad alternative. jeff47 May 2013 #112

I think most would say Yes because of the lives it would save, and this is really what still_one May 2013 #116

Yes same thing with Hitler the week before he gave the orders to load up the trains graham4anything May 2013 #131

Sorry you are disgusted, but ... kwassa May 2013 #113

where are these 'terrorist' attacks on 'us' taking place? because the only war *i'm* seeing HiPointDem May 2013 #117

There are no drone strikes in the class war ... kwassa May 2013 #118

i repeat, where are these terrorist attacks in this 'war' against 'us' taking place? because the HiPointDem May 2013 #119

Disgusting, insane, reactionary, fascist ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2013 #145

her behavior today resulted in her having zero credibility in my opinion ZRT2209 May 2013 #109

she looked like a crazed maniac, she has NO IDEA how to effectively advocate for anything. ZRT2209 May 2013 #110

I know she means well but she came off like a fool today. MrSlayer May 2013 #129