On Sunday, September 9, 2012 7:25:57 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
>  Hi Craig Weinberg 
> I really don't know much about the John Birch Society,

"The John Birch Society has its roots in the 1950s when* it opposed the 
U.S.’s affirming the human rights principles of the United Nations*. It was 
used as a grassroots corollary to McCarthyism, insisting that imagined 
Communists were standing behind every light pole, ready to end the world as 
we know it. It still sees itself as fighting Communism, as well as the New 
World Order (whatever that is!), big government, the Civil Rights Movement, 
feminism, wealth redistribution and more. You are not likely to hear the 
John Birch Society using epithets or spewing base language; its values are 
more carefully hidden behind flag-waving and obscure and irrelevant legal 
principles. Its words are cloaked in concern for the "direction of the 

John Birchers *opposed the **1964 Civil Rights 
Act*,<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_Civil_Rights_Act>saying it violates the 
 the United States Constitution and overstepped the rights of individual 
states to enact laws regarding civil 
rights.<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_rights>On its website, the John 
Birch Society complains 
 Obama - the man who got fawning media treatment for no reason, 
was elected with a thin resume and exalted without even being a king - has 
now been given the Noble Peace Prize." The John Birch Society also opposes 
health care reform, gun control, public schools and a host of other 
progressive causes.

The Right-wing "watch" group, Public Research 
Associates,<http://www.publiceye.org/tooclose/jbs.html>notes: "(T)he Birch 
*pioneered the encoding of implicit cultural forms of ethnocentric White 
racism and Christian nationalist antisemitism* rather than relying on the 
White supremacist biological determinism and open loathing of Jews that had 
typified the old right prior to WWII. Throughout its existence, however, 
the Society has promoted open homophobia and sexism."

Because it is more "libertarian" than openly racist, anti-Semitic and 
sexist, the John Birch Society is often not characterized as a hate group 
like the Ku Klux Klan <http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/type.jsp?DT=7> or 
the Federation for American Immigration Reform 
(FAIR),<http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=846>at least 
as defined by the Southern 
Poverty Law Center. <http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intpro.jsp> One way the 
John Birch Society escapes that designation is because it receives 
support<http://watch.pair.com/jbs-cnp.html>from prominent politicians and 
elected officials. Birchers work hard to 
mask the anti-human rights beliefs that underlie their opinions." (from 

 but googling it up, find that it was once falsely accused of being racist,
> no doubt due to over-zealous liberal hatred of conservatism.
> The KKK was very racist. As far as I know it's mostly dead. Good.

Huh? Hate groups are huge. The KKK is pretty small (about 100 chapters and 
5000 members from the estimate I just saw), but there are many more Aryan 
groups, growing fast. As has been pointed out - not all conservatives are 
racists, but clearly the overwhelming majority (perhaps all?) racists are 
conservative. There are no liberals in any hate groups.

> A greater sin, IMHO is political correctness, supported by Al-qaeda,
> which is sending America down the toilet. If you don't see that,
> no amount of explaining on my part will enlighten you.

Political correctness certainly can be irritating, but it is also important 
to protect groups who are vulnerable from threats that escalate violence. 
Anti-American/Anti-Western terrorism around the world is certainly a 
threat, but not really a significant one for American citizens. Certainly 
nothing on the order of the response, which has amounted to open 
surveillance and unrestrained powers of control over the population. There 
is a far, far greater chance of being struck by lightning than being 
affected by terrorism:

"A companion 
*Wall Street Journal* lays out the statistics. Since 2000, the odds of you 
dying as a result of a terrorist act aboard a commercial American airliner 
is 1 in 25 million. The odds of getting struck by lightning: 1 in 500,000." 

Political correctness has not frozen wages for 35 years. Political 
correctness has not outsourced millions of jobs. Political correctness 
doesn't evade paying taxes in offshore accounts and lobbying for tax cuts 
for the rich. It didn't deregulate the banking industry and make billions 
of dollars disappear into a few people's pockets. These are the things that 
threaten America. Political correctness? What? Rush Limbaugh is being 
hampered in his free expression by liberals? The threat has always been 
fascism - from the left or the right. Hate, not politeness. Brutality not 

As you say though, if you don't see that already, I can't make you see it.


> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net <javascript:>
> 9/9/2012 
> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
> so that everything could function."
> ----- Receiving the following content ----- 
> *From:* Craig Weinberg <javascript:> 
> *Receiver:* everything-list <javascript:> 
> *Time:* 2012-09-08, 13:30:43
> *Subject:* Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?
> On Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:34:45 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: 
>>  because ironically and 
>> paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
>> Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
>> saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
>> the subject up. 
> Are you familiar with the KKK? The John Birch Society? Would you call 
> those liberal organizations? I don't want to get into a political flame 
> war, but just so you know, liberals do not see the world in terms of race, 
> but they are prejudiced against conservatives because they see them as 
> people who are unaware of their own ignorance of the facts and uncaring of 
> the consequences of that ignorance. Of course that may not be the case, but 
> any of the hundreds of millions of liberals who might read what you have 
> written there will interpret it in precisely that way.
> Personally, my theory is that people generally imitate or contradict the 
> political orientation of the first strongly political person they are 
> exposed to in their life. Usually a parent or older sibling - if they like 
> them, they see the political world through their eyes, if they dislike 
> them, they seek to prove themselves unlike them. It's really that simple. 
> Very few people research politics methodically and impartially and 
> formulate a set of opinions based on 'facts'.
> Craig
> Craig
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/VErj_ANZX8wJ.
> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:>
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to