Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
5 Ways That the Right Rigs The Tax Debate
Politics is an ongoing back-and-forth, cat-and-mouse 3-D chess game in which players compete for power, money, and votes via the tools of framing, message, and procedural rules. President Obama’s most recent move is his budget in which he, among other things, proposes an adult conversation about tax code reform. This is important because conservatives only want to talk about spending cuts, but taxes, aka public revenue, is the other half of the budget equation.
President Obama already has funded big initiatives, including health care and Pell grant reforms, by ending tax carve outs for special interests, aka tax loopholes. He did this almost surreptitiously, focusing attention away from funding and tax loopholes. But now he is talking about tax code reform explicitly. In fact, he laid down the challenge that no serious talk of deficit reduction can omit tax code reform.
Since corporate lobbyists worked long and hard to build their intricate network of tax loopholes that few understand, they are not thrilled to see the tax code mentioned at all, let alone potentially thrust under a bright light and a microscope. Their counter move through the corporatist machine relies on five tactics:
1. Fight all regulations on principle. Regulations are bad. In fact, the whole federal government is bad. Would this lead to anarchy, to a police state in which force is used simply to enforce power? Yes it would, but conservatives believe they control the media so tightly that no one would believe the few who might realize this and say so. And they have reason for confidence. Republicans have already gotten away with unpatriotic if not treasonous actions with little notice, not from the media and not from the Justice (?) Department. And Republicans don’t really want no government at all. They want a nominal government that people will accept as theirs but that is really controlled by corporations–we nearly have it now. I suspect a permanent state of emergency is a poor but acceptable second choice.
2. Stoke the narrative!
a. Anticipate and neutralize the opposition using scare tactics. At CPAC, Michele Bachmann warned that Democrats were scheming to get a 75% tax rate! Much as with their estate tax scare story, they neglect to mention that even when the top tax rate was 90%, few in the room would have paid it because they didn’t earn enough. But the point is not truth, the point is to graft on to their narrative. Under this narrative, tax increase = socialism.
b. Go on the offensive. When banks saw a financial collapse coming a few years ago, their sage advice to investors started including warnings that “the market” would not like any sort of financial regulation, no, not at all. And of course, they knew what they were talking about because they had, and still have, the ability to manipulate the market to “react” to prove their point. Likewise, when Republicans warn that this or that will cause a shutdown of the federal government, they really mean that they can cause a shutdown of the federal government and blame it on whatever and whoever they want.
3. Dilute support for reform. Why does this narrative matter? Look at what is happening in Wisconsin and Ohio. As we saw in Egypt, populism wins with numbers, volumes of people who disrupt commerce, won’t go home until they get what they want, and are too numerous to simply toss in jail or be “disappeared.” By reporting a protest, the media informs people who might want to join or start their own protest. By ignoring Wisconsin, the mainstream media might as well be hiding it. And when people on Fox and Eric Erickson on CNN argue that the entire federal government is bad for them, they are encouraging people to not only not join domestic protesters but to turn against them. This protest is about union representation, but this same army of Foxbots is ready to be mobilized against people who protest for fair taxation and tax enforcement. The UK has already had some successful protests over corporate tax avoidance, and the conservative movement doesn’t want that here.
4. Fight to defund what they can’t repeal outright by cutting the IRS enforcement budget. What good are tax laws if no one is there to enforce them? Thirty years of teaching people that taxes are bad can be stepped up to advocate not paying taxes! Permanent tax holiday! Woo hoo! What’s the government going to do about it? Never mind that we are escalating the destruction of our own country.
Corollary: remember when tax shelters were a big problem? They breed particularly fast when income taxes are raised. The one thing that dampens their use is the credible threat of regular audits. Tax shelters are a problem both because they hide taxable income and because their managers regularly fleece investors. Enforcement addresses both of these problems. The only winners in the tax shelter game are the financiers who build them…hmm, that sounds familiar.
5. Distraction! Liberals can’t focus as effectively on tax code reform–or anything else, really–if they are being hit on multiple battle fronts with increasingly extreme proposals that the media will take seriously. Conservatives know that they have far more resources. Therefore, it is to their advantage to spread out, both in issues and geographically (using states they control). They have attacked women, education, unions, the environment, and the usual list of the most vulnerable citizens. Banning Sharia law! Printing state currency! Private state militias! Justifiable homicide against abortion providers! The only thing more surprising than that these bizarre proposals are being discussed in real U.S. government houses is that so few people have spoken out against them. Think about it. How numb does a population have to be to say, “eh, whatever” to all of this?
Never forget that the ultimate purpose of everything above is to move money to the wealthy from the rest of us and keep it there. Every part of the conservative/corporatist machine–the Dominionist ideology, crazy Glenn Beck, birthers, guns, and everything else is mobilized to support this in one of the ways above.
Taxes are the number one way the population collects money to benefit the public. Thus, corporatists work very hard to prevent the wealthy from ever paying tax.
There are some things that only government can do for the public, and when they are done well, the result lifts everyone. It is fair that the wealthy should pay more–they benefit more. Our own post-war golden age was financed by high tax rates on the wealthy. And that is why we must never take our eyes and our efforts off tax reform.
Personal note: I am a member of the Progressive Leadership Action Network, and we could use your help to fight this sort of thing. Join us at www.planamerica.org
Welcome to the Politicus Pulse. Here are the links you need to see to get your day started off right. Co ...
Welcome to the Politicus Pulse. Here are the links you need to see to get your day started off right. Co ...
Welcome to the Politicus Pulse. Here are the links you need to see to get your day started off right. Consid ...
Welcome to the Politicus Pulse. Here are the links for a late afternoon kick. Consider this a strong cup ...
Welcome to the Politicus Pulse. Here are the links of the day. Consider this a cup of coffee for your m ...
Chet
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 3:07 pm
“Never forget that the ultimate purpose of everything above is to move money to the wealthy from the rest of us and keep it there.”
Notice the convoluted premise here…”move money TO the wealthy FROM the rest of us”.
In other words, corporations and individuals may create revenue and profits through THEIR hard-work and organization, but it’s not THEIR money at all, it’s OURS.
I’m all for a fair and equitable tax policy, but when the argument is presented in such monumentally prejudicial language, one realizes there is no hope for a rational meeting of minds.
Rmuse
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 4:21 pm
Chet, you forget that corporations make all their money off the backs of working people. The government gives them breaks, tax credits and labor gives their sweat…and taxes. You are preaching a tired sermon that corporatists and conservatives have preached for decades. After a while, we get it. And you snark about prejudicial language? You’re making yourself look bad. Give it a rest.
Chet
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 5:46 pm
On the contrary, working people get their jobs because of corporations and business. Are you actually advocating for socialism? History’s verdict came in long ago…it was an abject failure that produced only the equality of poverty. You’re making yourself look bad. Give it a rest.
jlt
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 8:38 am
The corporations do not pay taxes to the extent that the worker does..Lies and distortion are easily disproved!
www.forbes.com/2010/04/01...
EMT
Feb. 27th, 2011 at 6:14 am
Socialism’s heyday came at the turn to the 20th century. Policies that everyone takes for granted today: no child labor, 40-hr. work week and overtime pay beyond that, etc., which lifted the boats of all workers.
Now conservatives yell socialism to shout down everything they don’t like. Just keep piling on the exaggerated rhetoric.
Actually Chet, communism has been found to not work; much more than socialism has been a problem.
Cassandra Vert
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 4:11 pm
I’m not against corporate profits or the idea that some people are and should be richer than others. But 20% of the people own 93% of the wealth in this country. Would that happen if wealth were spread around based on effort and contribution? It would not. The labor of the bulk of the population is worth more than the capital of the rich. If wealth were distributed by who deserved it, it would be distributed more evenly. The right has rigged things to move money from us to them.
Tax is the best tool to move significant money into public revenue. In the short term, since a small number of people have a disproportionate amount of wealth, public revenue has to come disproportionately from them. We have to move wealth distribution back to a more equitable footing. In the long term, the wealthy should still pay more in tax because they benefit more from what public revenue pays for, but the long-term rates may be different than needs for short-term adjustments would indicate.
Until recently, there was widespread societal agreement that tax revenue spent wisely raises the standard of living for everyone. It is still true, but the campaign outlined above has been working to hide that.
Rmuse
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 4:17 pm
Nice job Cassandra of articulating the Koch philosophy. I find it interesting that conservatives and Republicans push the government as a business meme, but do not want to take in more revenue. Corporatists do not run their businesses on cuts alone.
Every American benefits from government. The idiots in the tea party like their roads, police & fire protection but they don’t like to pay. My wife and I actually pay a higher net tax rate than many wealthy Americans and we are happy to contribute. I am not happy though, when I pay my fair share and it’s given to the rich.
Once the middle-class is dead, and all regulations are eliminated, America will fail and fall.
Chet
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 6:23 pm
It’s just astonishing the hatred here for corporate capitalism. All one need do is look at China and India, socialist back-waters mired in poverty until the 90s, when they instituted free-market reforms. Today, both are on the cusp of super-power status…all made possible via the multinational corporation.
The multinational is the most efficient mechanism ever devised for the distribution of goods and services. This is an objective fact. It doesn’t necessarily imply that the multinational is innately “good”…which is a subjective judgment. Like individuals and governments, multinationals are capable of good or evil, depending on the entity, the place, and the time.
Such is the need for proper regulation of private enterprise, but within the parameters of what is reasonable to insure a viable atmosphere for market success (competitiveness). You liberals want to confiscate the wealth of business under the guise of taxation…with no forethought on the long-term. Kill the health and vitality of the free market, and you kill your source for future revenue.
Cassandra Vert
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 6:37 pm
I do not hate capitalism. I am an entrepreneur, and I understand and agree with incentives to excel. However, I believe that all businesses should provide a net benefit to the public and that businesses should be accountable to the public for that. Businesses should exist to benefit people, not the other way around.
There is no such thing as a free market. You can’t have a market without setting rules. And our markets are rigged for the biggest players. That is not efficiency. That is corruption, and corruption suppresses efficiency, innovation, and advancement for everyone.
Chet
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 7:25 pm
“Businesses should exist to benefit people, not the other way around.”
Business exist for one reason, for the benefit of the proprietor or – if a corporation – for the shareholders. Any other consideration is ancillary. This is reality.
Shiva (Moderator)
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 6:53 pm
you still don’t get it. There is no hatred here for corporate capitalism. There is a great deal of dislike for corporate capitalism that is corrupt. Everyone recognizes that we all work for a living for a company that is fine. There are far too many corporations who take advantage and rip the people off at every chance.I give you the financial sector.
I’m glad you like the multinational corporations. Because someday it may be your job, or your product that is lost. No one is killing the health and vitality the free market because there is no free market. There is exactly 0 competition for the most part in this country. Take the healthcare industry. There are four or five major companies who all collude to charge the same prices within reason. They eat up every small company that has grown.that is what we are against. There is hardly a major Corporation today that is not gouging you in some way. That is what we are against. The corporations are taxed far less today than they used to be, and most of them have their work centered overseas. They are crowding the American workforce out of the market. And you expect us to bow down and kiss some healthy vital free-market that doesn’t exist?
Small business does not taxed as heavily as you think. They also are getting lots of government loan opportunities they are also getting breaks on healthcare, up to 50% of the cost. You are forgetting the vast number of factories that have closed in the United States in the last 12 years. You can cheerlead for some free market, but that free market doesn’t exist
Chet
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 7:31 pm
SHIVA: “There is exactly 0 competition for the most part in this country.”
An absolutely jaded and hopelessly inaccurate appraisal of the state of affairs. Automobile manufacturers compete diligently for market share. So does just about every other industry. There are exceptions of course, but they are exceptions.
SHIVA: “Take the healthcare industry. There are four or five major companies who all collude to charge the same prices within reason.”
Republicans had hoped to open up health-care to interstate competition as part of the reform package to lower prices. Their other major plank was tort reform. Obama rejected both…(the latter because the ‘Trial Lawyers of America’ are the #1 contributors to the Democratic Party).
Shiva (Moderator)
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 8:17 pm
There is very little competition in the auto industry. Autos are priced for the most part the same and sales run when desired. Suppliers are picked and there is no cross sourcing.Most of the vehicles are now sold in Europe or other places overseas. GM’s sudden rise back to prominence is because of overseas sales. I worked in the auto industry for a very long time.
Chet
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 8:50 pm
So that’s why automakers spend tens of millions in advertising every year…because there is NO competition and they are NOT fighting over market share. Truth is, the competition is absolutely FIERCE, just as it is in most industries (again, there are exceptions).
It’s sad, Shiva. You and I, we probably grew up in similar circumstances…in the same culture. I grew up an aficionado of Marx, reefer, beer, rock-n-roll, film, football, Mexican food, and the opposite sex. By every measure, I could call you friend. And yet, via worldview, we live on different planets. Such is the state of America today.
Shiva (Moderator)
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 9:51 pm
I have never read Marx,Alinsky, Stalin, Lenin (Lennon yes). I did read War and Peace once,
I was 18 in 1968 and trust me, there isnt anything I didn’t do back then as far as things I shouldnt have done. I still have a music collection of over 51,000 songs spread out over a lot of hard drives lol. As we talk during the day I am up to my ears in PHP and other assorted goodies. Which of course explains the fact I ramble heavily.
There is no competition, look at the prices. They are the same for the same genre of cars. Also, advertising is a write off to a degree. They advertise heavily of course, they want you to buy their cars. but the fact remains, the prices are the same. No one will undersell anyone else unless its a special sale. Advertising of course is required to sell cars. They could sell the same amount of cars by just showing a pic of the car on TV with no sound.
There is competition in other areas, production methods, inventory, and other facility requirements etc. The biggest competition is seeing how many suppliers they can run out of business so they dont have to negotiate with anyone. I have seen that first hand
Sarah Jones
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 10:17 pm
See, that’s sort of a tell. Most liberals don’t read Marx unless its assigned for school and then it’s not a doctrine but historical context, contrary to the conservative notion of our reading lists. I have never read Alinksy until my conservative father sent it to me this year for Christmas. I recognized the Tea Party tactics in it. Mirror, mirror…..
So labels and assumptions that are sold to conservatives about liberals are sadly outdated and in fact, apply to the modern conservative – the modern right are the radicals, the anti-government anarchists, the flag abusers (see Sarah Palin), and the very poor red states sucking off the hard working successful states and then pretending they are rich when they post things on the internet (statistics re red states and who voted for Obama tell a much more complicated story than conservatives are told). Most of the liberals I am friends with have their own businesses and are very successful artists who employee others. That doesn’t fit into the conservative meme either. I find it exceptionally boring to hear these tired, fifty year old talking points trotted out but what else can we expect from a party populated by older folks who may not be familiar with liberals except during the 1960′s.
Shiva (Moderator)
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 10:39 pm
Its most unfortunate to find that most liberals, like most conservatives, are all named Joe and are all pretty much the same & live the same type of lives. I have never met anyone thats read Marx or Alinsky. But I have read most sci fi out there :)
Chet
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 10:54 pm
Actually, my opinion of liberals is derived by my discourse with them. Most of my friends and relatives are liberals. They are educated, intelligent, cultured people, most of whom I love dearly, and who are either woefully uninformed on critical issues (e.g., Islam) or effectively conditioned by psychological preconceptions (e.g., “compassion”, emotionalism, etc) that color and contort sociological analysis.
They have a propensity for civilizational apologia…and seem to have no real comprehension that Western culture, as imperfect as it is, is infinitely preferable to possible alternatives. They emphasize the historical sins of the West (the Atlantic slave-trade, the Native American genocide, colonialism, etc), while ignoring or white-washing the sins of non-Western cultures (the Islamic conquests, the Armenian, Hindu and Sudeanese genocides, the Muslim slave-trade, etc).
Most fascinating of all, they show a remarkable tolerance of a culture which practices polygamy, honor killings, female genital mutilation, the stoning of adulteresses, the killing of those who convert out of the faith, child marriage, etc.,…and yet are remarkably intolerant of those who insist these practices are antithetical to our values.
Shiva (Moderator)
Feb. 18th, 2011 at 11:50 pm
Everyone makes personal choices. To be muslim, christian or devil worshipper.
The tolerance you want to see so badly is not tolerance, but the knowledge there is little you can do about it. Over here, we put murders mother rapers and cross tie walkers in prison. As for those doing the honor killings, there is nothing we can do about it. Possibly you see tolerance as not willing to attack and murder the murderers. I do not approve of any of the things you constantly attribute to muslims, but there is little I can do about it. I suppose I can complain at length about it as you do, but you must understand you are getting no wheres with the complaint as far as solving the problem.
Some people can face the sins of the past. Some cant. You on the other hand seem to be obsessed with muslims. Just because others dont dwell on the sins of the muslims does NOT mean someone is ignoring them. In your posts, you constantly return to the acts of the muslims and indict all 1 billion of them. Others are not as obsessed. You may look into not documenting your friends as wrong or tolerant simply because you think you have the right version of the story. Others do not torment themselves with muslims. There are far better things to do.
Sarah Jones
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 7:53 am
And some people worshipped Bush while he took us into an illegal war and left the war off of the budget and ruined this country. They were calling us traitors then when we spoke up, but now it’s all been proven true and instead of owning up to it they claim Obama is bad. It’s so boring in its lack of accountability and sense.
Sarah Jones
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 7:59 am
What you call discourse is nothing more than you having a hard line, pre-ordained set of opinions you are looking to justify. Tolerance for others is a liberal mind set, it doesn’t mean they agree. Speaking of people who “tolerate” killings, what about that illegal war Bush and the conservatives led us into that killed hundreds of thousands of citizens and over 5,000 of our own troops?
And what about conservatives wanting to push women into back allies so they can die getting a medical procedure? Since conservatives don’t like that, they decided to kill the doctors and clinic workers and harass and stalk them — using terror as a political weapon instead of our courts. I guess you all are against “court activism” –lol. Instead you take to the streets like vigilantes while preaching about about the constitution while you violate it and violate other Americans’ freedom and liberty.
And you come here and act all superior and then claim you are dialoguing with us and found us wanting, while calling us tolerant of things you abhor.
Chet
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 12:01 pm
Sarah,
I know this will be impossible for you to understand, but George Bush invading Iraq on false pretense does NOT make Islam a peaceful, tolerant religion.
jlt
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 8:42 am
Read most of those in undergrad but the very best layout of what is happening in this country now re: WI manufactured CRISIS is the ‘Shock Doctrine’ by N. Campbell..
All laid out for even the most scripted to understand!
Beth
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 8:03 am
“Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital and deserves much the higher consideration.” ~ Abraham Lincoln
Chet
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 11:59 am
SHIVA: “I do not approve of any of the things you constantly attribute to muslims, but there is little I can do about it. I suppose I can complain at length about it as you do, but you must understand you are getting no wheres with the complaint as far as solving the problem.”
RESPONSE: Martin Luther King once said “a threat to justice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
I don’t know what to do about the sociological pathologies written about earlier in this thread that Islam has afflicted upon the world, but I know one thing: Pretending they don’t exist is NOT the answer. Acknowledging and repudiating them may not make them go away, but will at least clarify the situation for the general public, will help mobilize us for the ideological and moral dimensions of the struggle, and will make things that much harder for the apologists who are either in denial or who are active abettors of Sharia.
Liberals were not just willing but eager to join the struggle against Apartheid in South Africa, and deserve credit for such. They didn’t take the attitude that “there’s nothing we can do about it.”
Yet, monstrosities and barbarisms such as slavery and genocide in Sudan doesn’t seem to interest them (with some notable exceptions, e.g., George Clooney). And let’s be clear about this: Many conservatives are equally culpable in validating Islam as a “religion of peace”, all theological and historical evidence to the contrary. The difference is that the ONLY voices on record as acknowledging the ethics and practice of Islam as antithetical to our own values are conservative.
Imagine for a moment a Christian sect specifying that anyone who converted out of their faith would be killed? You would probably perceive this as a bizarre cult that ought to be outlawed (I know I would). Yet, the death penalty for apostasy is codified by all 4 schools of Sunni jurisprudence AND by the Shia. Where is our outrage?
Shiva, you seem like a thoughtful, intelligent guy. Surely you understand that Islam is not some remote, obscure religion, it is a faith of 1.5 billion strong with a growing presence in Europe and America. It will exert an increasing influence on culture and public policy as the years go by. It may someday have a very real impact on the lives of your female descendants. Conjure the wisdom to investigate it in theory and practice.
Read not only the apologia of Karen Armstrong and John Esposito, where all things Islam will be validated, but the expositions of Robert Spencer, Andrew Bostom, and Bat Ye’or, where the troubling synergy between Islam’s theological particulars and the sociological pathologies discussed earlier are thoroughly documented. The problems are NOT about “tribalism” or “culture” or the other red herrings the apologists would have you believe, it’s about specific and unqualified promulgations in the Quran and the Hadith that foster FGM, stonings, the killing of apostates, etc.
Read ‘While Europe Slept’, by Bruce Bawer, a gay, liberal America living in Europe who finally opened his eyes to the realities unfolding before him. His story is instructive.
Google the words of Norwegian sociologist and feminist Una Wikan, who wrote – in response to the increasing number of Norwegian women who have been raped by “immigrant” men (mostly Pakistani) – that “[Norwegian women must understand, we live in a multicultural society...and they should dress accordingly"]. In other words, to this liberal sociologist, Pakistani immigrants shouldn’t be expected to modify their values and behaviors to conform with Norwegian norms, so Norwegian women should dress modestly and perhaps wear head-scarves if they don’t want to be raped. This is the type of madness that multiculturalism and political-correctness are fostering in Europe today.
Unlike most of your friends here at Politico, Shiva, I see a glimmer of fair-mindedness and objectivity in you. I beg you, do a little investigation about “the religion of peace”…and please, don’t confine it to apologia.
I just stumbled upon this web-site and ended up staying for a couple of days. It’s obvious my views are not welcome, so I’ll take my leave. It’s been both illuminating and disheartening, but I like to think I’m better for the experience.
Take care friend.
Shiva (Moderator)
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 12:20 pm
No one that I know of doesnt think the actions you describe dont occur.
Do not criticize others for their reactions when you have no answers yourself
Shivabeach – 2/19/2011
Next, your views are welcome. You have no attacked anyone as yet, feel free to post but…accept others opinions as you want your accepted.
We all know what islam is and does. And I would hope in that flar flung fluture that Islam is converted by its own people to a lack of murder. Living in a democratic world will do that. If I do not have a plan of action against them, I am not going to obessess over them. Nor will I try and stop the muslims in the US from having their own faith. Right now their faith is doing far less to destroy this coutnry than our facist christians are. I am far more worried about them than I am muslims.
As I said, speaking for myself, you are welcome to post here. I need someone to argue with
Jay Jordan Hawke
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 12:31 pm
Chet, I’ve been concerned about the spread of fundamentalist Islam for a very long time, and I’m somewhat sympathetic to your opinion on this, as I’ve also seen many liberals counter that they are a religion of peace and that I should stop being so bigoted. If not wanting my head cut off in the public square makes me a bigot, then so be it. But I’m ultimately in agreement with Shiva here. I see the crazy, bigoted, hate-filled, gay hating, Nazis Christians in my own backyard as much more of a threat. If you really want to counter Islam’s power, however, I would suggest you strop driving and stop supporting a political party that keeps us so dependent on oil. That money feeds Islam.
Chet
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 2:00 pm
Thanks for the input, Jay.
My only response would be…
…to characterize Christian opposition to gay marriage as being somehow WORSE than the Muslim proclivity to persecute, imprison and sometimes execute homosexuals, this exemplifies liberal myopia as poignantly as anything I could have come up with myself.
Chet
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
Thanks for the input, Jay.
My only response would be…
…to characterize Christian opposition to gay marriage as being somehow WORSE than the Muslim proclivity to persecute, imprison and sometimes execute homosexuals, this exemplifies liberal myopia as poignantly as anything I could have come up with myself.
Shiva (Moderator)
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 2:26 pm
You missed his point. We view the nut case xtians (not the run of the mill xtians) as more dangerous to us HERE. Not more dangerous than muslims who while they hate gays have no effect on gays here.
Jay Jordan Hawke
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 2:27 pm
Chet – I didn’t say anything about gay marriage, and rest assured, the only thing that separates the Nazis Christians in this country from the Nazis fundies in Islamic countries, is the Enlightenment. It inconveniently stands in there way in this country, but they have been obviously trying to remove that barrier for some time now.
Chet
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 2:46 pm
Well gentlemen, I’m no fan of right-wing Christians, but I would never refer to them as “Nazis”…and I would distinguish their attitudes and behavior HERE in America and Europe as being far less extreme and malignant than their radical Muslim counterparts.
I implore you to Google the writings of Bruce Bawer…a gay liberal who once had all the same misconceptions as you do, but who – through his experiences living in Europe – had a profound evolution in his thinking. It can’t possibly hurt you to open your mind and at least investigate alternative viewpoints. You might find yourselves better, more enlightened human beings.
Jay Jordan Hawke
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 3:23 pm
What exactly do I need to open my mind to? Unlike Gary Bawer, I didn’t start off liking Islam. (and I read his book years ago by the way) “I would distinguish their attitudes and behavior HERE in America and Europe as being far less extreme and malignant than their radical Muslim counterparts.” As I said, that’s because we have an Enlightenment in there way. Something they fought, and still fight to this day. But by taking over the Republican Party, they are quickly eroding that. Why do you think Republicans didn’t support the Matthew Shepard Act? One kind of person supports attacking gay people violently? And then lies about it? Why did Republicans support sodomy laws? Less than a decade ago, Christian Nazis Republicans were actually supporting laws that said police could bash down your door and jail you for being gay. No difference? Really? Maybe you need to open your mind and wake up. Maybe your buddy needs to write a book called “While America Slept.”
Chet
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 3:32 pm
“Christian Nazi Republicans”….?
You’re a beacon of rationality, objectivity, and fair-mindedness, Jay.
Jay Jordan Hawke
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 3:39 pm
You’re right, of course. I shouldn’t have been so redundant.
Shiva (Moderator)
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 5:27 pm
There are xtians here in the US like Bryan Fisher that I would call a nazi. Not many others though
Jay Jordan Hawke
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 6:12 pm
When they remove the portion of their “holy book” that says I should be stoned to death, I’ll consider backing off of the Nazis rhetoric.
Shiva (Moderator)
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 6:14 pm
Or that you can sell slaves. Or that man is the head of the household,
Jay Jordan Hawke
Feb. 19th, 2011 at 6:28 pm
Amen Shiva.