When calling the teabaggers "Birchers," remember we have quite a few left wing Birchers here

[RB TexLa]

I didn't include their stuff about 9/11 and usually avoid the 9/11 conspiracy stuff here but probably some who agree with them on that too.


The first is from wiki the last three straight from their own website.


It opposes the United Nations, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), and other free trade agreements. They argue the U.S. Constitution has been devalued in favor of political and economic globalization, and that this alleged trend is not accidental.


The powers of Congress are described in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, and the creation of a central bank like the Federal Reserve is not listed as one of those powers. The Federal Reserve is charged with protecting the value of the dollar through managing our nation's monetary policy. However, since its inception in 1913, the dollar has lost 95 percent of its value under the Federal Reserve's monetary oversight. The John Birch Society advocates abolishing the Federal Reserve.

Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1801, “I deem the essential principles of our government [to be] peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” America would do well to heed this advice by abandoning its current role as global policeman and stop meddling in the affairs of other countries.


The JBS views trade agreements as “entangling alliances” that should be avoided. America should trade with all friendly nations but not enter into any regulated trade agreements — including “free trade” agreements. If trade is to be free, it doesn’t need to be regulated by thousands of pages of binding arbitration.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society

[PETRUS]

1. ...

[Rex]

2. Wow that is generous.

He didn't even spell the word right!

[RB TexLa]

4. Fixed it.

[PETRUS]

5. But that spelling alone was worth four points!

It's practically the whole basis of my score, y'know?

[Rex]

6. Will it go lower now that the word is acorrected?

Dam me and my big mouth! Should have kept it ashut.

[RB TexLa]

8. It was spelling error, I fixed it. Whats the big deal

[Rex]

9. Somebody already beat you to the punch.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023884259
But really nice try! Seriously, I give it a 3 or 4.5!

[RB TexLa]

10. 3 or 4.5 what?

Sorry, if it's something I'm missing.

[LostOne4Ever]

46. It is common on some internet forums

to rate people that one suspects of trolling. Usually the rating is between 0-10.


[p class=post-sig style=margin-top:0px;text-align:center;]

[div style='color: #B20000;font-size: 2.000em'] [center] Not all those who wander are LOST!!! [/center]

[Pholus]

7. Hey, give some more points because Penguins are cool...

[Rex]

22. Yeah that is about where the OP is at.

Good call.

[quinnox]

36. lol, perfect response

except I think you were being generous with that score...

[Capt. Obvious]

56. Heh

[kestrel91316]

3. There is a lot more to the Bircher/Baggers than that.

They are racist and xenophobic to the core; they are christofascists to the core; they put corporate oligarchy above all other considerations.

[villager]

11. which actually is where the OP has common ground with rhem

... Given his mangling of Jefferson to rationalize corporate usurpation of our governance...

[RB TexLa]

12. That is a direct qoute from their webpage.

[villager]

13. So now you're arguing Jefferson's a Bircher too?

Basically, you're just out to demagogue anyone who disagrees with you?

[RB TexLa]

14. No, I was giving their position. One that you hear from people here. I didn't articulate their

argument for international isolationism. Like I said it came from their webpage.

[Rex]

15. Who here on DU calls for unregulated capitalism?

I doubt you can find me a single person, even if I give you months to search.

[RB TexLa]

16. How about you find it in here first, I'll give you months to search.

It opposes the United Nations, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), and other free trade agreements. They argue the U.S. Constitution has been devalued in favor of political and economic globalization, and that this alleged trend is not accidental.


The powers of Congress are described in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, and the creation of a central bank like the Federal Reserve is not listed as one of those powers. The Federal Reserve is charged with protecting the value of the dollar through managing our nation's monetary policy. However, since its inception in 1913, the dollar has lost 95 percent of its value under the Federal Reserve's monetary oversight. The John Birch Society advocates abolishing the Federal Reserve.

Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1801, “I deem the essential principles of our government peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” America would do well to heed this advice by abandoning its current role as global policeman and stop meddling in the affairs of other countries.


The JBS views trade agreements as “entangling alliances” that should be avoided. America should trade with all friendly nations but not enter into any regulated trade agreements — including “free trade” agreements. If trade is to be free, it doesn’t need to be regulated by thousands of pages of binding arbitration.

[Rex]

17. Easy as pie.

"If trade is to be free, it doesn’t need to be regulated by thousands of pages of binding arbitration."

NEXT.

[RB TexLa]

18. That's saying we should not have trade agreements next fail, please

[Rex]

19. Wrong, but I understand getting called out and shown proof.

Now it is your turn to show me a DUer that hates regulated capitalism. I won't be holding my breath...

[RB TexLa]

20. oh, back with the fail quick LOL

[Rex]

21. Okay I see you cannot show me any proof.

I knew your OP was a waste of time and space. Thanks for proving it!

[RB TexLa]

23. You really are a funny one. Thanks

[Rex]

24. Not at all, it was easy for me to show you how wrong you are.

Easy as pie.

[RB TexLa]

25. oh, yes, now give yourself a five high LOL

I haven't laughed at someone like this in a while.

[Rex]

27. Of course you are mad.

I cannot blame you really.

[NuclearDem]

34. I hate NAFTA. The JBS hates NAFTA.

Therefore, I believe in the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

[Luminous Animal]

26. Libertarians want to legalize pot so Demorats who want to as well are Libertarians;

You've presented a remarkable ignorant OP.

[Rex]

28. I know, it is sad how little he gets it.

Or maybe not.

[Luminous Animal]

29. Oh he gets it all right. He gets it like Goebbels.

[Oilwellian]

32. That was very entertaining :D n/t

[Rex]

33. Still having fun!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023892471

[Oilwellian]

39. Ha! I love all of this weekend entertainment. n/t

[Rex]

40. Hey when you call DUers (and cannot find ONE to prove your point)

Lefty Birchers! Well...you gotta kinda expect to be called on your outrageous BS. Or at least I do! I would fully expect to get my ass handed to me if I made such an idiotic claim.

[dem in texas]

30. Hey, Birchy Boy

Go over to Red State and give all your friend there a big kiss.

[AgingAmerican]

31. Pretzel logic

nt

[Revanchist]

35. Yeah, because it's impossible to fathom individuals of different ends of the political spectrum

agreeing on certain issues, if someone who is not from your party shares a similar position to yours then obviously that means it's tainted and has to be discarded immediately. There cannot be any bi-partisan positions, so says the true Scotsman.

[NuclearDem]

37. No, not good enough!

Now do your duty and chop one of your legs off. Republican bipedalism won't be tolerated here.

I'm working hard on finding a way to work around this damn oxygen breathing thing. I already feel myself craving a right to life amendment.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

49. I don't remember any of the OP's comments at the time but the phenomenon you describe

was on full display against anyone who questioned going into Syria. We were Randians, Putin lovers, etc.

[Revanchist]

60. Or politics that occurred before the beginning of the 2000's in general

Maybe I'm looking at it with nostalgia glasses on, but I remember there Congress being able to come together and work across the isle more before this century started.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

65. I hate politics where the sides only play between the 40-yard lines on the field

But I think what you describe comes from the ideological scales tipping -- but not decisively -- to one side or the other.

Obviously there is a lot of ill will over the manner of Bush's ascension to the presidency. That didn't help. But then we entered a period of war that has lasted more than a decade. This was after the Progressive movement thought it had banished the chimera of Viet Nam. To see the country fall into such a situation it was only natural we should resist so strongly. The pendulum had simply swung too far and it was an existential threat to Progressives.

So, we pushed back. We pushed back with the biggest push we could push: President Obama. Now, with the country operating under a Progressive banner conservatives feel the existential threat and they are reacting naturally with the same heel-digging and frenzy of activity. And they will push back with the biggest push they can push.

Also naturally, Progressives have no desire to cede victories already won, so up goes our resistance factor.

I can't help but think the moderates and independents will get sick of the acrimonious back and forth and will ultimately be the power brokers for a more middle-ish agenda unless one side or the other is decisively beaten. I think 2014 and 2016 will be harbingers for the next 20 years.

[Starry Messenger]

38. I don't cut jobs with you.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

41. Newt Gingrich supported and voted for NAFTA.

OP is Newt Gingrich.

[cali]

43. excellent. using the op's "logic", logically.

[cali]

42. that's an insane smear. yes, insane. completely.

the pathetic "logic" that you are employing goes like this: If you are against corporate giveaways in the form of FTAs, you're just like a right wing bircherite. what nonsense.

[cali]

44. aw, you got one lonely little rec. Now if we still had unrec, just imagine

the bouquet of those that would have been tossed in your general direction.

nice to know that you're a big fan of corporate rape and pillage.

not that it's a surprise.

[Douglas Carpenter]

45. We have plenty of Nazis posting here too.

"One may regret living at a period when it's impossible to form an idea of the shape the world of the future will assume. But there's one thing I can predict to eaters of meat: the world of the future will be vegetarian." - Adolph Hitler

[djean111]

47. Wow! Is this a trial balloon for a new meme, in preparation for TPP critics?

Hate the TPP? You're a Bircher!!!!!!
Bwahahahaha!
Fail.

Here's a thought - love ya some TPP?
You're a Koch-roach.

[GoneFishin]

57. You may be onto something. Smells like a trial balloon. nt

[djean111]

58. Actually, who stands to gain most from demonizing The Crazy Left?

Belittling and marginalization would more logically be designed to drive voters away, methinks.....

[Enthusiast]

48. You actually thought you could convince us with this?

Sorry.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

50. Are you saying FTAs are good or we should accept political alliances where they emerge?

Honest question.

[RB TexLa]

69. Yes, free trade agreements are good. And we should push for a North American political alliance

[HappyMe]

51. I think this is chock full of fail.

[Bluenorthwest]

52. Is this OP ignorance or intentional stupidity? Clearly the OP has no idea what Birchers

are because the idea that some of them are 'left wing' is ludicrous they are right wing reactionary racist homophobic nuts of a very well established variety. The very link the OP offers identifies them as 'radical right wing' prior to elucidating further:
"The organization identifies with Christian principles, seeks to limit governmental powers, and opposes wealth redistribution, and economic interventionism. It opposes collectivism, totalitarianism, and communism. It opposes socialism as well, which it asserts is infiltrating US governmental administration. In a 1983 edition of Crossfire, Congressman Larry McDonald (D-Georgia), then its newly appointed president, characterized the society as belonging to the Old Right rather than the New Right.

The society opposed aspects of the 1960s civil rights movement and claimed the movement had communists in important positions. In the latter half of 1965, the JBS produced a flyer entitled "What's Wrong With Civil Rights?", which was used as a newspaper advertisement In the piece, one of the answers was: "For the civil rights movement in the United States, with all of its growing agitation and riots and bitterness, and insidious steps towards the appearance of a civil war, has not been infiltrated by the Communists, as you now frequently hear. It has been deliberately and almost wholly created by the Communists patiently building up to this present stage for more than forty years."
The society opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964"

There you go. The OP is an idiotic piece of writing.

[struggle4progress]

64. Oh. I had wondered why there wasn't a local "Birchers For International Socialism" meetup group

[Caretha]

53. I've underlined & bolded my favorite parts of DU's TOS

Don't do anything else which is similarly disruptive.

Just because it isn't listed here, doesn't mean it's ok. If you post anything which is obviously disruptive, malicious, or repugnant to this community, its members, or its values, you risk being in violation of these Terms of Service.
One more thing: Don't push your luck.

The DU Community Standards state: "It is the responsibility of all DU members to participate in a manner that promotes a positive atmosphere and encourages good discussions among a diverse community of people holding a broad range of center-to-left viewpoints." Members who demonstrate a pattern of disruptive behavior over time and end up getting too many of their posts hidden by the jury (measured by raw number or percentage) may be found to be in violation of our Terms of Service. If you seem to be ruining this website for a large proportion of our visitors, if we think the community as a whole would be better off without you here, if you are constantly wasting the DU Administrators' time, if you seem to oppose the mission of DU, or if the DU Administrators just don't like you, we will revoke your posting privileges. Remember: DU is supposed to be fun — don't make it suck.

[Sunlei]

54. think I remember,JBS had a booth at the republican primary & sponsored the expensive venue

must have a wealthy donor to spend that kind of cash

[99Forever]

55. Hmmm....

... guess that bucket of chum didn't work out quite like you expected, eh?


Reel in some more fail for us.

[WilliamPitt]

59. This OP is slathered in Fail.

[Iggo]

61. I'll just keep calling them teabaggers.

[pscot]

62. I don't think bircher means

what you think it means.

[Blue_In_AK]

63. Left-wing Bircher is an oxymoron.

[Vashta Nerada]

66. Wait...what?

[Dash87]

67. I must Rec this...

Not at all because of content, but because this is an RB TexLa post. The angry responses here are the most entertaining part.

Your trolling is legendary and entertaining. You get a gold star of awesomeness!

[pampango]

68. The far-right in Europe shares most of these Bircher views. They hate the EU rather than

NAFTA, of course, preferring enhanced national sovereignty to the cooperation implicit in the functioning of the EU.

Agreeing with the JBS in these policy areas does not necessarily make one a 'Bircher' but it does raise the question as to whether enhanced international cooperation or more nationalism is the more 'liberal' policy.