A Brief History of the Radical Right »
Posted By Radiofreeeuropa 6 months, 3 weeks ago in Political News
The revelation that Scott Roeder, the alleged murderer of Dr. George Tiller, belonged to an anti-government, white separatist group called the Montana Freemen might seem like an unlikely twist. After all, such groups are generally thought of as either indifferent to the issue of abortion or actively enthusiastic about its potential for reducing the nonwhite population. As it turns out, however, the journey from radical racialist to anti-abortionist isn't as unusual as you might think.
Read Full Story at motherjones.com »
177 Views Share Story 10 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Radiofreeeuropa
All progress comes from unreasonable people.
Rats live on no evil star!
Wasilla: All I saw...
Sorry, just palindroming around with terrorists.
Are you still ...
Who Also Submitted: All »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 10 (view all)
-
100%
deathray6 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am a little confused by some of this.
Reply
on the one hand, the right tends to be pro-gun, and one of the greatest rationalizations for this is that guns are necessary to counter the tyrrany of government, while on the other, they simultaneously support government intrusions in the name of law and order.
it would seem that although both the left and the right have fringe elements that cross the line in their reactions to lawful activities, the right is far more likely to take the law in their own hands, usually with a conviction and a death sentence. so much for law and order.
what's up with that? -
-
67%
EDWARDIII6 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is a radical right. Bill O' has nothing to do with it. Even Rush Limgaugh has nothing to do with it. The radical right-- McVeigh, Roeder et all-- meet at the bottom with the radical left-- Ayers, Kim Ill.
Reply
Advocacy of smaller government is not radical. Large government and ubiquitous governmental interference are equivalent to such radical notions as monarchy, National Socialism, communism, theocracy, and rule by decree. It is not radical to oppose such things. -
-
Neutral
Radiofreeeuropa6 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
People like Bill O and Rush earn their keep fanning the flames of the radical right's loony toons. Whether they actually believe the vitriol they spew or not, they do fire up the worst of the worst, I suppose there were plenty of people who thought Father Coughlin was a nice reasonable fellow too.
Reply
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en=10005...
More News
The Huffington Post
Linda R. Monk, J.D.: A Long Twilight Struggle: America's Role in an Age of Terror
Jose Antonio Vargas: Kill Your Web 2.0 Self -- Or Change It? (VIDEO)
Nathan Gardels: China: The Harmony Express, Human Rights and Humiliating Obama
Phil Bronstein: Keeping Your New Year's Resolution is a Matter of National Security
Dr. Frank Lipman: New Year's Resolutions: 20 Ways To Add More To Your Life
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.