Obama supporters view TEA party same security threat as radical Islam

[USincognito]

Unfortunately, planned logging is something that actually HELPS forests, HELPS the federal government, HELPS homeowners and forest lovers by culling out the forests of fuel. Those ignorant, self-deluded idiots have caused untold damage and heartache, expense, and even death in their utterly naive "cause" against lumber companies.

Nature has been doing a much better job - with said forest fires - and it doesn't create a monoculture that actually is damaging to forests (note, a bunch of trees lined up in rows is not a forest).

We talk about them all the time - whenever another forest fire erupts needlessly and burns innocent people out of their homes or livelihoods.

Indeed, the true victims. Those who have built expensive homes in forest fire prone areas and then cry out for the government to save their property while blaming groups that actually aren't to blame for their predicament (if folks weren't building homes in forest fire prone areas, they wouldn't have to worry about losing said homes in forest fires).

I thought you objectivists were all about personal responsibility.

 

[explodingboy]

Is there actually a point to this thread?

26% of Obama supporters don't like a group which is very vocal on a regular basis in regards to aforementioned presidents disdain for country and desire to destroy America..

and somehow it's the a sign of crazy Obama supporters?

Surely the sheer quantity of crazy on the right who think liberals work in cahoots with radical Muslims sort of makes this all rather.. redundant. Unless we feel the need to argue who has the most crazies it's just the basis of a thread that isn't going to get anywhere productive.

 

[Billnew]

Lets make sure we know what we're discussing:
TEA=Taxed enough already, believe goverment needs to limit spending to what it brings in and not raise taxes, and is peacefully vocal about this issue. Accused of hinting at threats and making racist statements even though no one has claimed the reward for proof of racist statements.

Occupy (move on) Wallstreet: Believes goverment or the people should punish or penalize corp for making a profit, and want to force corp. to give more money/benefits to the worker no matter what it does to company profit. Groups under this name have actually rioted, blocked production, shut down businesses, caused severe damage to personal property of random people(poor or rich alike), crimes related to this group: Rape, arson, rioting, promoting public unrest, destruction of public property, destruction of private property, hendering public transport.
Which group is more terrorist like?

I also believe the tea party is more dangerous than Muslim terrorists.

The country is changing, and the old people and their old ways are rotting on the vine. The republican party is dying, and the tea party is a desperation move by conservatives to hold onto the power they know is slipping away. Say goodbye to the oppressors of the past

Old ways of thinking are more dangerous then people shooting, killing, destroying buildings? Thinking and speaking is more dangerous then acting violently?
ok. Just checking.

They aren't completely nonviolent. They've made plenty of threats.

Unlike Move on Wall-street and terrorists who have actually acted out with violence.
Some isolated individauls, hinted at possible violence in a few nationwide protests.

Not the point of this thread. Of course, if you want to start your own thread to discuss how many Republicans consider the occupy movement as terrorists, have at it.
.

Some Move on(occupy) Wall street groups did acts of violence, destroyed personal property of others, and rioted, so I would say they are more of a terror group then the Tea Party.

I would also say, some groups did no violence and acted much like the Tea party in their protest, I support peaceful protest on all sides.

Is there actually a point to this thread?

26% of Obama supporters don't like a group which is very vocal on a regular basis in regards to aforementioned presidents disdain for country and desire to destroy America..

and somehow it's the a sign of crazy Obama supporters? (1)_

Surely the sheer quantity of crazy on the right who think liberals work in cahoots with radical Muslims sort of makes this all rather.. redundant. Unless we feel the need to argue who has the most crazies it's just the basis of a thread that isn't going to get anywhere productive.

1. 26% of Obama supporters think peaceful protesting is more dangerous then violent attacks of radical islamists, so yes. It does show its a sign that those people are "crazy".
Can you show a link to right wingers that believe lefties are plotting with radical Islamists? There are some that still think Obama is a Muslim, but I don't think there is 26% of right wingers that believe the left plot with the Islamists.