I tend not to write lengthy diaries here on dKos, but over on FaceBook I've been known to get into some pretty in-depth arguments with various right-wing relatives and/or former classmates.
Tonight, I decided to merge the two by reposting an ongoing discussion between myself and a guy I went to college with 20 years ago (I've blocked his name out of fairness; he didn't sign up for the dKos exposure).
Feel free to let me know how I'm doing (and to correct my points where appropriate). Remember, this is a FaceBook comment back-and-forth, so there's not room to go into too lengthy of a diatribe in any specific response.
The whole thing started when I posted a link to the instantly-infamous "Congressman praises right-wing terrorist" video...
ME: Is this what it's really come to? A man describes himself as a "proud right-wing terrorist" and is applauded and praised by a member of the United States Congress??
HIM: Seriously? You don't think he's mocking the fact that the anti-Obamacare crowd have been called brown shirts, neanderthals, un-American, etc. by the supporters of health care? If this is some attempt to draw comparisons to somebody like McVeigh, that is a huge stretch.
ME: he's the one who said it, not me, and the crowd--and the Congressman--are the ones who cheered him on. Perhaps he was being sarcastic; you'd have to ask him. All I know is that we spent 8 years being told that anyone who questioned Bush/Cheney's invasion of Iraq was "un-American" and a "terrorist sympathizer".
Note that the guy was ranting about "getting the government out of our faces" while standing in what appears to be a public high school gym. I can't tell how old he is, but assuming he's over 65, he's almost certainly benefitting from Medicare and perhaps Social Security, both of which are pure socialist programs.
So, providing healthcare for a 65-year old is a good thing, but the same healthcare for someone 35 is socialism? Um, ok...
HIM: Could it be related to comments made about the protesters like this: http://sweetness-light.com/...
Or is it traced back to Janet Napolitano's stupid report targeting returning soldiers as a terrorist risk: http://www.washingtontimes.com/...
This person certainly didn't seem like someone who actually bombed police stations.
ME: Jesus Christ, dude--the report in question was commissioned by the BUSH ADMINISTRATION, and it CORRECTLY concluded that right-wing extremist militia groups would be likely to ATTEMPT to recruit returning veterans, which is completely logical and utterly uncontroversial. Of course they'd see military veterans as a group to target, as would any militia group, since veterans have, you know, military training and all.
And yes, that reports' conclusions about the rise of right-wing terrorists have been proven CORRECT in recent months with such incidents as the shooting at the Holocaust Museum and the murder of George Tiller. None of this is a stretch.
HIM: What an asinine comparison saying the Holocaust shooter and Tiller murderer support the Napolitano report. I find no indication in articles about the two incidents of either being ex-military or supporting the profile the report spewed.
The holocaust shooter was a white supremacist. The Tiller murderer was deemed mentally ill and an anti-abortion activist. Show me something I missed that supports your statement.
ME: I never said either one was ex-military. I was talking about the rise of right-wing militant extremists--which is what white supremacists are all about.
Murdering someone for being pro-choice, or Jewish, or Black, makes you mentally ill by definition, and murdering a doctor because they perform abortions (with the specific intent of terrorizing others into not performing abortions) makes you a) a right-winger; b) an extremist; and c) a terrorist, again, by definition.
These are hardly controversial statements. If you take actions with the intent to terrorize, you're a terrorist. If you use extreme measures to do so, you're an extremist. If you do both of the above with the goal of promoting a right-wing agenda, you're a right-winger. The same would be true of a left-wing terrorist/extremist as well.
And yes, there's plenty of supporting evidence, from nonpartisan sources:
Oh, and yes, it turns out that James von Brunn was in the army, although that wasn't part of my point whatsoever.
Anyway, that's where it stands now. No idea if he'll respond at this late hour; if so, I'll post updates until I have to hit the sack myself...