Michele Bachmann, in WND interview, claims gays, muslims, BLM conspire against America - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Berens claimed that the Muslim Brotherhood moved “to co-opt the media” and “organize and promote” the women’s march, adding that radical Islamists “want American women to have abortions” in order to help America’s Muslim population grow. Bachmann, for her part, said that “Black Lives Matters, the gay agenda, as well as Islamic supremacism, all seek domination over American freedoms,” and have decided to “work together” to “realize the fall of individual liberties.”[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/bachmann-gays-muslims-and-black-lives-matter-all-seek-domination-over-american-freedoms/"]Right Wing Watch[/URL] [URL="http://www.wnd.com/2017/01/why-were-protesters-wearing-hijabs/"]The original interview on WND[/URL] If anyone has better sources / more information, please do share!

Lunatic.

Can confirm, am gay married and routinely tear the fabric of society.

Remember when people expressed concern that Trump was legitimizing full blown hysteria from the racists, bigots, and xenophobic subgroups of the American social structure?

I wonder why she's so d- [QUOTE]She is a supporter of the Tea Party movement and a founder of the House Tea Party Caucus. [/QUOTE] oh.

Bachmann isn't smart, but the left calls itself intersectional for a reason. It's really no surprise you have black nationalists, sunni muslim conservatives, and various sexual identities under one flag. These groups have otherwise nothing to do with and even oppose each other, however they are united in opposition to Western traditions they see as 'marginalizing', gays and feminists against the 'heteropatriarchy', muslims at odds with strict secularism and liberal ideals, and black nationalists against the 'white supremacist power structure'. All are often united on the basis of opposing capitalism. Per bell hooks, these otherwise disunited groups are put together by opposition to the 'white supremacist capitalist patriarchy'. The women's march had a conservative muslim woman in charge of it, and in Berlin it held a Muslim call to prayer. These things are on the face contradictory, however once you look closer there's a logic to it.

Just, what? :suicide:

No one person is in charge of a grass roots movement

How do these retards remember how to breath every day?

Looks like she's wanting to give Trump some competition.

[QUOTE=Source;51730814]Looks like she's wanting to give Trump some competition.[/QUOTE] Well they want to keep the GOP in power, might as well use the same tactic even if its repercussions bone you in office.

[QUOTE=Conscript;51730785]Bachmann isn't smart, but the left calls itself intersectional for a reason. It's really no surprise you have black nationalists, sunni muslim conservatives, and various sexual identities under one flag. These groups have otherwise nothing to do with and even oppose each other, however they are united in opposition to Western traditions they see as 'marginalizing', gays and feminists against the 'heteropatriarchy', muslims at odds with strict secularism and liberal ideals, and black nationalists against the 'white supremacist power structure'. All are often united on the basis of opposing capitalism. Per bell hooks, these otherwise disunited groups are put together by opposition to the 'white supremacist capitalist patriarchy'. The women's march had a conservative muslim woman in charge of it, and in Berlin it held a Muslim call to prayer. These things are on the face contradictory, however once you look closer there's a logic to it.[/QUOTE] I've told you before, Conscript. Stop hanging out on /pol/. It provides such a narrow view of reality that it mentally damages you, brainwashes you, makes you lose touch with the way things work. Listen, I lived in a Muslim country when I was a kid. Muslims working alongside gays against a common enemy? You clearly don't have the slightest concept of how the world works. And by the way, the majority of Muslims living in western countries are in favour of secularism and liberal ideals in general - it's just that homosexuality is something the vast majority of them can't stand anyway. About half of my friends are gay. None of them have ever said anything even approaching a resemblance of 'heteropatriarchy'. And I think I have a much better feeling for the politics of the group than you do. Actually going out and meeting people, learning the way they think, it turns out, gives one a much more nuanced view of reality than something a bunch of social rejects on an ultranationalist hugbox say. Who'd have thunk? Also, you're confusing the 'left' for the 'regressive left', which is a small minority of degenerates who demand special treatment and discrimination against the majority. Just like the right has its small minority of degenerates, the majority of which hang out on /pol/ and in other such places, where they can safely ignore reality and make up their own to fill the gap. That you'd assume the millions of women who marched against Trump actually recognized a leader is proof of how divorced from the real world you've become. Or that you'd assume any one of those marchers who was Muslim was in fact marching against "strict secularism and liberal ideals". Identity politics ideologues are such idiots.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51730858]I've told you before, Conscript. Stop hanging out on /pol/. It provides such a narrow view of reality that it mentally damages you, brainwashes you, makes you lose touch with the way things work. Listen, I lived in a Muslim country when I was a kid. Muslims working alongside gays against a common enemy? You clearly don't have the slightest concept of how the world works. And by the way, the majority of Muslims living in western countries are in favour of secularism and liberal ideals in general - it's just that homosexuality is something the vast majority of them can't stand anyway. Actually going out and meeting people, learning the way they think, it turns out, gives one a much more nuanced view of reality than something a bunch of social rejects on an ultranationalist hugbox say. Who'd have thunk? Also, you're confusing the 'left' for the 'regressive left', which is a small minority of degenerates who demand special treatment and discrimination against the majority. Just like the right has its small minority of degenerates, the majority of which hang out on /pol/ and in other such places, where they can safely ignore reality and make up their own to fill the gap.[/QUOTE] You're wasting your breath if you're trying to argue with someone who hangs out on /pol. America has a huge problem with complacency and creating super tight groups like /pol where it's too comfy to leave to see how the real world works. 99% of people who comment shit wouldn't dare debate someone in real life.

[QUOTE=Conscript;51730785](thing is bad), but the left... [/QUOTE] This entire post is just a cookie cutter generic excuse response. Really. Its fine to call yourself conservative if you do, whatever. I call myself liberal. However, when the Democratic party screws up, [I]I hold them accountable.[/I] I suggest you hold others accountable to their mess ups as well instead of redirecting the argument and avoiding blame

[QUOTE=Conscript;51730785]Bachmann isn't smart, but the left calls itself intersectional for a reason. It's really no surprise you have black nationalists, sunni muslim conservatives, and various sexual identities under one flag. These groups have otherwise nothing to do with and even oppose each other, however they are united in opposition to Western traditions they see as 'marginalizing', gays and feminists against the 'heteropatriarchy', muslims at odds with strict secularism and liberal ideals, and black nationalists against the 'white supremacist power structure'. All are often united on the basis of opposing capitalism. Per bell hooks, these otherwise disunited groups are put together by opposition to the 'white supremacist capitalist patriarchy'. The women's march had a conservative muslim woman in charge of it, and in Berlin it held a Muslim call to prayer. These things are on the face contradictory, however once you look closer there's a logic to it.[/QUOTE] The women's march was simply a protest against Trump.

lmao, WND is about as reliable as the National Inquirer. They were a [I]huge[/I] fan of the birther conspiracy and regularly ran stories claiming to have proof that Obama was a Kenyan, all lies. An example of WND headlines, from related stories on a story about voter fraud (the eternal non-problem): [QUOTE]John Fund: Sneaky feds plot to grab state election power Only 4 states can stop vote fraud Limbaugh: Dems to impeach Trump with 1 reason at top of list Obama not 1st Dem to advocate illegals voting Did Democrats really stuff ballot? Here's their answer Democrats caught stuffing ballot with campaign materials? Voter fraud 'much more widespread' than Virginia, Pennsylvania Undercover video exposes eye-popping ease of voter fraud Virginia Supreme Court kills McAuliffe's felon-voting scheme Pat Boone: What's wrong with voter ID laws?[/QUOTE] Michele should get interview time on Infowars. :v:

[QUOTE=archangel125;51730858]I've told you before, Conscript. Stop hanging out on /pol/. It provides such a narrow view of reality that it mentally damages you, brainwashes you, makes you lose touch with the way things work. Listen, I lived in a Muslim country when I was a kid. Muslims working alongside gays against a common enemy? You clearly don't have the slightest concept of how the world works. And by the way, the majority of Muslims living in western countries are in favour of secularism and liberal ideals in general - it's just that homosexuality is something the vast majority of them can't stand anyway. Actually going out and meeting people, learning the way they think, it turns out, gives one a much more nuanced view of reality than something a bunch of social rejects on an ultranationalist hugbox say. Who'd have thunk? Also, you're confusing the 'left' for the 'regressive left', which is a small minority of degenerates who demand special treatment and discrimination against the majority. Just like the right has its small minority of degenerates, the majority of which hang out on /pol/ and in other such places, where they can safely ignore reality and make up their own to fill the gap.[/QUOTE] I don't go to /pol/ mate and you're right that crap rots the brain. I'm actually drawing from my experience going to the largest and most diverse university in my state, and years of experience with far leftists and participating in their movements. I was a black bloc hooligan when I was younger during OWS, I still mingle with campus leftists just to keep up with them, and I can tell you as an original poli sci major the social sciences hold implicitly left wing conclusions (owing in part to the influence of Gramsci and critical theory on course content, I can provide you the reading list for a course I took this past semester, it starts with Howard Zinn). Most leftists are progressives today, and you have to go to older generations to find more typical liberals, the people who weren't reluctant in voting for Hillary. Unlike those liberals, the progressives are much more willing and capable of taking on resurgent nationalism, because of their ideology. Personally, I can't help but notice how polarization of the mainstream has created significant alternative, radical undercurrents whose rivalry is indistinguishable from that of old nazis and communists. The right is hysterical and lives in another reality, but they aren't reacting to things that aren't real to at least some extent. Intersectionality became a thing in the 80s/90s with the collapse of traditional labor movements and the USSR, and boomers entering academia. Antifa used to be a European thing, but with nationalism coming to our shores (trump and the alt right are not typical for american conservatism), anti-racist action simply became like it's european counterpart which I think is a sign.

[QUOTE=Conscript;51730785]Bachmann isn't smart, but the left calls itself intersectional for a reason. It's really no surprise you have black nationalists, sunni muslim conservatives, and various sexual identities under one flag. These groups have otherwise nothing to do with and even oppose each other, however they are united in opposition to Western traditions they see as 'marginalizing', gays and feminists against the 'heteropatriarchy', muslims at odds with strict secularism and liberal ideals, and black nationalists against the 'white supremacist power structure'. All are often united on the basis of opposing capitalism. Per bell hooks, these otherwise disunited groups are put together by opposition to the 'white supremacist capitalist patriarchy'. The women's march had a conservative muslim woman in charge of it, and in Berlin it held a Muslim call to prayer. These things are on the face contradictory, however once you look closer there's a logic to it.[/QUOTE] You're at a loss for why they're unified, thinking it's unity [I]against[/I] some "white patriarchy" that only a minority discuss. You also think they're actually [I]unified[/I] when it couldn't be further from the truth. Any sense of "unity" you see from the left between gays and muslims and blacks and mexicans and whatever other minority group you can speak of isn't coming from some unified opposition to "white supremacist power structures." It's coming from unified protection of minority rights. Freedom of religion for the Muslims, where they are threatened by groups that seek to take them away. Individual liberties of the LGBT community, where they are threatened by groups that seek to take them away. You really think every feminist and LGBT rights activist and Muslim and black nationalist is strictly anti-capitalist and anti-white? Really? My sister participated in the womens' march - she's not a black nationalist, a muslim, a member of the LGBT community, or anything else. She's a white capitalist woman who likes shopping and was mad about her reproductive rights being threatened. She's never read bell hooks in her life. But she's part of this big conspiracy of minorities to bring about a globalist communist black matriarchy, right? Just toss in a few references to "cultural marxism" and reference a few random phrases that make you sound smart, like "black anarcho-syndicalism" and "counter-ethnic feminist theology" and "intersectional economic Islamism" and you'll be making ten times the sense you are right now. [editline]26th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Conscript;51730985]I don't go to /pol/ mate and you're right that crap rots the brain. I'm actually drawing from my experience going to the largest and most diverse university in my state, and years of experience with far leftists and participating in their movements. I was a black bloc hooligan when I was younger during OWS, I still mingle with campus leftists just to keep up with them, and I can tell you as an original poli sci major the social sciences hold implicitly left wing conclusions (owing in part to the influence of Gramsci and critical theory on course content, I can provide you the reading list for a course I took this past semester, it starts with Howard Zinn). Most leftists are progressives today, and you have to go to older generations to find more typical liberals, the people who weren't reluctant in voting for Hillary. Unlike those liberals, the progressives are much more willing and capable of taking on resurgent nationalism, because of their ideology. Personally, I can't help but notice how polarization of the mainstream has created significant alternative, radical undercurrents whose rivalry is indistinguishable from that of nazis and communists. The right is hysterical and lives in another reality, but they aren't reacting to things that aren't real to at least some extent. Intersectionality became a thing in the 80s/90s with the collapse of traditional labor movements and the USSR, and boomers entering academia.[/QUOTE] Okay, wait, fair points with Gramsci, fair points with poli-sci holding inherently left-wing conclusions, I don't disagree - I'm taking a course on civil society right now and loads of the core assumptions from people like Tilly and Tarrow are about inclusivity, democracy, ideological pluralism, and so on that spreads to more left-wing ideas. But I don't understand how you reached the conclusion that the Womens' March and left-wing organizations are rooted in something as far-reaching as opposition to "white supremacist capitalist patriarchy." Intersectionality, as a concept, makes perfect sense - social cleavages don't exist in a vacuum from economic inequalities and other factors, and they influence each other. The small group of radicals who focus on certain far-reaching assumptions through the lens of intersectionality really aren't a majority. I can count the people on my campus on one hand who hold the perspective you're talking about - pretty much everybody else understands the how intersectionality works as a concept, but doesn't take it to the same extreme as what you're talking about.

[QUOTE=Conscript;51730985]I don't go to /pol/ mate and you're right that crap rots the brain. I'm actually drawing from my experience going to the largest and most diverse university in my state, and years of experience with far leftists and participating in their movements. I was a black bloc hooligan when I was younger during OWS, I still mingle with campus leftists just to keep up with them, and I can tell you as an original poli sci major the social sciences hold implicitly left wing conclusions (owing the the influence of Gramsci and critical theory on course content, I can provide you the reading list for a course I took this past semester). Most leftists are progressives today, and you have to go to older generations to find more typical liberals, the people who weren't reluctant in voting for Hillary. Unlike those liberals, the progressives are much more willing and capable of taking on resurgent nationalism, because of their ideology. Personally, I can't help but notice how polarization of the mainstream has created significant alternative, radical undercurrents whose rivalry is indistinguishable from that of nazis and communists. The right is hysterical and lives in another reality, but they aren't reacting to things that aren't real to at least some extent. Intersectionality became a thing in the 80s/90s with the collapse of traditional labor movements and the USSR, and boomers entering academia.[/QUOTE] Look, the core thing I take issue with is the idea that a religious or ethnic group could be politically homogenous. Individual factors make a much greater difference to group politics, and people can only accurately be grouped by their personal standing on divisive issues. That thing I threw out there about Muslims not liking gays? True of about two thirds of them in the West, according to polling. And that was in Britain, from a sample that was 60% first generation immigrants. Considering that Islamic theocracies like Saudi Arabia punish homosexuality with public executions, I'd say that even a third of a group primarily consisting of first generation immigrants adopting a liberal ideal is indicative of them adopting the ideals of the culture they're living within. Christians in America don't follow the book of Leviticus to a T, do they? Nor are all whites Trump supporters, or Republicans racist. In today's connected world, a person's parent ethnicity or religious affiliation may at best serve as an indicator of what their politics *might* lean towards. It's no stronger an indicator than social class, wealth or level of education. To generalize as you did in your post up there is, in my opinion, foolish.

About your sister, those kind of white feminists were harassed for not being ideologically pure enough, had their group blamed for Trump winning, and told to take a subordinate position and listen to people of color. Sectarianism is a pretty big facet to the progressive left, and 'white liberal feminists' are not as well regarded as 'socialist feminist PoC'. I don't know why we're disputing that the left is united on the basis of opposing the 'Islamophobic white supremacist capitalist patriarchy', which is as much of a code word for 'the west' as much as 'problematic' is for 'reactionary', or 'marginalized' is for 'oppressed'. Maybe not everyone is actually far left, but with polarization young liberals are certainly influenced by them which isn't out of the realm if we agree the social sciences are. I don't think it's any coincidence that a recent Democrat speaker was talking about how white people need to shut up and listen to PoC because they 'don't get it', or that an ex-sanders spokeswoman said om CNN the Democrats don't need to be 'led by white people'. This is about a female muslim leader in the women's march: [Quote] Sarsour’s seminal policy battle in New York was her fight with the city to recognize Muslim holidays in public schools, as Christian and Jewish high holidays are observed. The Arab American Association worked with the help of New York Jewish groups to make it happen, she told the Vox website in an interview this month. Sarsour was honored by the Obama administration as a “champion of change” in 2011 for improving the lives of others through her charitable work. Growing in her activist role, Sarsour has increasingly linked her Palestinian cause with struggles facing the wider Arab American community since September 11th, with the concerns of the Black Lives Matter movement,•and with the responsibility to protect undocumented immigrants, LGBTQ citizens, women and girls. “[b]The same people who justify the massacres of Palestinian people and call it collateral damage are the same people who justify the murder of black young men and women,” she told the 20th anniversary Million Man March on Washington, an event held on the National Mall for African American civil rights, organized by Louis Farrakhan in 2015. “The same people who want to deport millions of undocumented immigrants are the same people who hate Muslims and who want to take our right to worship freely in this country. That common enemy, sisters and brothers, is white supremacy,” Sarsour said. “Let’s call it what it is.”[/b][/quote] Remember that during Ferguson some Palestinians protested in solidarity. I think young white men are being radicalized too for the record.

[quote]adding that radical Islamists “want American women to have abortions” in order to help America’s Muslim population grow.[/quote] ??? no correlation?

[QUOTE=Conscript;51731141]About your sister, those kind of white feminists were harassed for not being ideologically pure enough, had their group blamed for Trump winning, and told to take a subordinate position and listen to people of color. Sectarianism is a pretty big facet to the progressive left, and 'white liberal feminists' are not as well regarded as 'socialist feminist PoC'. I don't know why we're disputing that the left is united on the basis of opposing the 'Islamophobic white supremacist capitalist patriarchy', which is as much of a code word for 'the west' as much as 'problematic' is for 'reactionary', or 'marginalized' is for 'oppressed'. Maybe not everyone is actually far left, but with polarization young liberals are certainly influenced by them. I don't think it's any coincidence that a recent Democrat speaker was talking about how white people need to shut up and listen to PoC because they 'don't get it', or that an ex-sanders spokeswoman said om CNN the Democrats don't need to be 'led by white people'. This is about a female muslim leader in the women's march:[/QUOTE] Again, you're making the assumption that the regressive left is the majority of the left, and that the left wing as a whole is shifting closer to regressive ideals. You'll have to prove it with more than just political theory. There is an increased perception that the far left and the far right are growing stronger, but the truth is they're just growing louder.

[QUOTE=The Rifleman;51730811]How do these retards remember how to breath every day?[/QUOTE] They simply have to pause what they're doing to focus on breathing, the poor bastards.

Well I think with the election of Trump the far right has a little more power than the far left, if only because the more moderate right gave them space.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51731159]Again, you're making the assumption that the regressive left is the majority of the left, and that the left wing as a whole is shifting closer to regressive ideals. You'll have to prove it with more than just political theory. There is an increased perception that the far left and the far right are growing stronger, but the truth is they're just growing louder.[/QUOTE] There's plenty of evidence for it. Besides America's culture wars making a comeback, a socialist candidate seriously challenged a liberal one, a nationalist candidate overthrew the GOP establishment during primaries and destroyed the blue wall in the rust belt. 'SJWs' are a thing and the euro far right is resurgent. The internet is basically a battleground for the two sides, there is a war between alternative and mainstream media, and all of this is getting caught up between the information war between the West and Russia and the latter's hybrid warfare (espionage and destabilizing liberal democracy). All evidence seems to point towards the political moderation and prosperity of the 90s/2000s up to 08 (the 'end of history') is coming to an end and there's no reason to believe it's going to get better. We are going back to the ideological battles and great power conflict of the 20th century. [url]http://www.euractiv.com/section/future-eu/news/2017-seen-as-likely-turning-point-for-liberal-democracies/[/url] [Quote]Western democracies will•be further challenged next year, as populist parties are expected to make gains in Europe, while China and Russia increasingly set the global agenda, taking advantage of a US withdrawal. When the Soviet Union•collapsed in 1991, American political scientist Francis Fukuyama famously proclaimed the “end of history”, seeing the triumph of the United States as the only remaining superpower and the leader of Western democracies. “The end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalisation of Western liberal democracy (is)•the final form of human government,” he•wrote in his best-selling 1992 book,•The End of History and the Last Man. Twenty-five years later, Fukuyama’s certainties have all but vanished. Liberal democracy in Europe and the United States is in crisis, while China and Russia demonstrate that authoritarian regimes are increasingly determining global priorities.[/quote]

[QUOTE=Conscript;51731225]There's plenty of evidence for it. Besides America's culture wars making a comeback, a socialist candidate seriously challenged a liberal one, a nationalist candidate overthrew the GOP establishment during primaries and destroyed the blue wall in the rust belt. 'SJWs' are a thing and the euro far right is resurgent. The internet is basically a battleground for the two sides, there is a war between alternative and mainstream media, and all of this is getting caught up between the information war between the West and Russia and the latter's hybrid warfare (espionage and destabilizing liberal democracy). All evidence seems to point towards the political moderation and prosperity of the 90s/2000s up to 08 (the 'end of history') is coming to an end and there's no reason to believe it's going to get better.[/QUOTE] First of all, wow. Sanders. You think Sanders is a socialist? He isn't even really a a Democratic socialist, as he claims. His ideology has little in common with Democratic socialism. The internet has a polarizing effect, but the vast majority of people neither know nor care, except to remark at how batshit crazy the few extremists who leak into Facebook sound. The only reason you're so convinced that extremists on the two sides are becoming dominant political voices of the left and right is because, as you yourself admitted, you spend entirely too much time in environments where you're exposed to the rhetoric of those groups precisely, when in reality most people don't give a fuck. The difference? Moderates make a lot less noise. With your declaration that the left as a whole is united against an 'Islamophobic White Supremacist capitalist patriarchy', you're sounding more and more like one of those ideologues yourself. Grouping the concerns of the left wing together like that using such loaded language is a strawman. Most people just want to go through their lives afforded the same dignity, respect and opportunities as any other person. Not a fucking revolution.

And as we all know, socialism is one step away from Naziism in the US political spectrum. :downs: Critical thinking and logic need to be taught in schools again. We are witnessing the result of three decades of undermining the education system and it is terrible and beautiful to watch unfold.

[QUOTE=1239the;51730764]Can confirm, am gay married and routinely tear the fabric of society.[/QUOTE] We all know you're lying here. Gays wouldn't dare destroy fabric! [editline]26th January 2017[/editline] source: me, am gay, routinely decorate interiors

[QUOTE=The Rifleman;51730811]How do these retards remember how to breath every day?[/QUOTE] The sooner we call them what they really are: Evil, instead of stupid, the better.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51730765]Remember when people expressed concern that Trump was legitimizing full blown hysteria from the racists, bigots, and xenophobic subgroups of the American social structure?[/QUOTE] Trump had nothing to do with this. She was already saying this ten years ago minus BLM.