Libs, who is the greater threat to America?

Libs, who is the greater threat to America?

Conservatives

Islamic Jihadists

Don't ask me. I'm stupid.

Other

 

There is no threat to our America. We have successfully vaporized and eliminated the once minor conservative threat to our America.

Except for a few pockets of conservative resistance, America now belongs to we Democrats -- in perpetuity.

Will the last conservative to leave please turn on the lights?

Thank you

 

Well! I wasn't expecting THAT response.

 

I don't have a problem with Conservatives. My problem is with the Radical Reactionaries that control the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party. They are the clear and present danger to the survival of this republic.

 

Maybe I'm missing something. What danger does the Tea Party present to ANYONE except big government, tax & spend liberal types?

Are you a big government, tax & spend liberal?

And even then they wouldn't pose a threat to America.

 

It doesn't matter whose side they are on, Extremists want to take rights away from people.

Extremists pose the greatest threat to America. There is not one flavor that is more dangerous than another.

 

Social conservatives, perhaps. I think fiscal conservatives are A-OK.

- - - Updated - - -

Problem is, we seem to have a lot of extremists trying to define what an extremist is..

 

Sure there are. If you think about it you'll be able to name one. Maybe more than one flavor that is more dangerous than another.

 

Threat... Well Radical Islam is not a threat to the country directly. They may kill some people, but they are no threat. Our own government is the threat to America and is using radical Islam as the excuse to destroy liberty and freedom. However, this is both a problem with republicans and democrats. I think republicans are a bit worse, but both parties are pathetic and the courts are no longer defending the constitution.

 

We have seen the enemy and he is us.

 

Radical Islam to you means terrorism?

 

Other - it depends on what kind of threat we are talking about.

Conservatives and Jihadists both fall under a low tier of perceived threat to me. Whereas I think conservatives are more likely overall to undermine the sorts of rights and freedoms I want people to have, or outright persecute folks like me at some point in the future, the sorts of Islamic extremists who practice jihad pose a much greater latent threat - albeit a threat whose latency will almost certainly never become realized on U.S. soil in real life. It also depends on what kinds of conservatives and Jihadists one is speaking about. Some Jihadists don't want anything to do with me so they don't really pose any threat, some of them are fighting authoritarian regimes I want to see fall, some conservatives of an extreme bent might be interested in killing me provided a decent opportunity for it, and yet on the whole conservatives are allies of mine much more than I consider them all a "threat" or enemies.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the OP's question is a bit too broad. Whether we speak of a threat to ourselves individually or to the country as a whole there's more than one good answer.

 

People who start threads with the word "Libs".

 

Conservatives are by far the greater threat. I blame them for the Islamic jihadists.

 

Troll much?

Okay, *bite*

 

Ohhh struck a raw nerve there old boy

 

The censor wouldn't allow me to start it with, "(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s."

 

I would say the greatest threat is apathetic Americans who take no interest in their government, even when they learn that it's using their own money to spy on them.

 

Maybe it got mangled in the translation, but that was hardly a demonstration of how I'd respond from having a stricken nerve, Mate.

- - - Updated - - -

Excellent, Dude!

 

Just keep in mind that as/if Conservatives and Conservatism grows more impotent your security in the face of an aggressive wave of random, indiscriminant Islamist jihadism grows more questionable.

Who will fight for your rights when Conservatives can't?

Who will allow you the perfect illusion of safety you now enjoy from Jihad after your Obama emasculates or eliminates Conservatives?

 

Then we have the radical liberals which include the 'Peace crowd'...The 'Environmental' movement....'Womens Rights'.....'Gay Rights'...Communists and Marxists....The Black Panthers....illegal aliens....radical groups of the past (weather underground, SDS). People like Bill Ayers who bombed a statue in Chicago dedicated to police casualties. He and his group constructed bombs to blow up establishment symbols but, unfortunately, blew up 2 of their members while assembling a nail bomb. Ayers fled and is now working on education reform, curriculum and instruction. He is still as radical as ever and is best buds with Obama.

Ayers was a Prof. and the Univ. of Illinois at Chicago. He is married to the leader of the Weather Underground Bernardine Dohrn.

I dunno, seems to me the radicals have taken over and are trying to pose as 'middle of the road' with Obama being their "first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy" (said by Joe Biden) puppet.

The conservatives have......'The Tea Party'.....A group that champions liberty, freedom and limited government control of We The People. Anyone who thinks the Tea Party is 'radical' is either being divisive or dumb.

 

You can't be all that pleased with my username. I would have used 'libloser', but I didn't want people to think that I was the libloser...if you know what I mean.

 

I would fight if absolutely necessary, though I'm not exactly cut from the right cloth to be a fine warrior. There is no illusion of safety for me either - I already know that no amount of defense spending or military preparation can guarantee the safety of Americans from terrorist attacks. When I toggle around some budgetary priorities I do take into account that one ever-present danger out there of getting shot or blown up on our own soil.

I don't just feel threatened by conservatives though to a minor degree. Such concerns also extend to self-described liberals and people in various other camps. I also have no interest when it comes to suppressing conservatism in the States, nor have I been very fond of the President for about four or so years now. though I suppose President Obama is still my president since I live in the United States. Being an Independent doesn't affect that at all. xD

 

Other.

Political labels (Lib, TP, Dem, Rep, Green, put and locked in the mind of the voter) cause organisation. Sides are the threat, as soon as someone picks a political 'side' (truly believes there are) this persons can be organized behind a politician that is using the same label/'stream' (R, D and TP) What happened over the last hundred fifty years was a swing from R to D, D to R, every four/eight years, and since a couple of years a thirth party, the TP has emerged (if voters find out that R is about D, voters bend to the TP, here you see the organisation of a maximum of voters behind one politician/leader (the propaganda is causing R to be D and TP is absorbing from both R and D) And what you also see (other way to organize people) is more and more people demonstrating on the streets (caused by propaganda and the 'political problems' and fear/economic uncertanty) in more and more cities (Paris, London, Istanbul, Cairo, notice; mainly in Western and Islamic cities) organisation, which can lead to revolts (as happened in Iceland (small), Greece, Egypt (three times) and last week in Turkey, getting more massive, today in London a small movement, two weeks ago in France (this is an ongoing process)
So the organisation (which you cannot see at first) of more and more people is the biggest threat to any nation. That can lead eventually to end of freedom, because if a majority is going to stand as one behind one popular politician/leader they will al listen (they unconsiously submit) to this person.
Libs can be a threat to others 'carry' another political label, or visa versa. Here you see a fight appear between these two groups that both do the same, defend their party, 'political' believes (does not exist, politics is the purest deception ever created, the amount of political terminology that grew over the past century shows you that politics is a creation, and did not occur) This is how politics can cause a (false) struggle, by deception they can let groups of people fight and then they can be organized (you see it everywhere in the world, all use the same one stategy, causing people to fight)
As soon as you see that this is going on and do nothing the current situation (almost freedom, free to go were you want and do most things, real freedom means having no problems, no dependence of gov/burocracy/duties) is kept, organisation lead to the opposite of freedom (a freedom party (any party) does not create more freedom, because it's an organisation of higher authorities)
Politics, media (propaganda) and organisation combined is threat to every country.
You can see this world (mainly the western and islamic nations) getting more and more organized (this is a time were you see the most and maximum organisation going on, number of organisations, number of media outlets, number of parties, is all at a maximum) Freedom does not need politics and organisation (a fight for freedom lead to the opposite of freedom, organisation of large numbers of people) Freedom fighter also the wrong term, fight does not lead to freedom (if you think you don't have it, because that is what the propaganda let you believe, 'police state', 'terrorists', 'nukes', it's all fear mongering propaganda, that leads to resistance/fight) You can only loose the current freedom by starting to fight in large numbers, on the streets or via politics (parties) If people don't react on the propaganda nothing will happen, because they cannot be organized via politics (or by a revolt and a (radical) leader or even a union frontman, or via a 'neutral' party)

 

Xanadu:

Trying to read a dense text block, like your post, is visually intimidating and off-putting.


If you want more readers add more white space.


Additionally, dense text blocks are a particular problem for some people with learning/cognitive difficulties.

FYI