Then they came for me (?)

Karla - posted on 08/08/2011 ( 30 moms have responded )




Spin-off from S&P AAA downgrade...

-- Do you think our fear (often fed by extremist media) and demonization of the “other” (insert “left” or “right” – whatever is opposite your ideals) has created a society which easily believes in conspiracy theories and feeds paranoia?

and along those lines:
– Do you think the Patriot Act has made us vulnerable to power hungry extremists?

How do we know when to act on our grievances with the government and speak out about injustice? (is that what we are doing here?) Are our governments' checks and balances fail proof, is it enough?

Reference Checks and Balances:
"To prevent one branch from becoming supreme, protect the "opulent minority" from the majority, and to induce the branches to cooperate, government systems that employ a separation of powers need a way to balance each of the branches. Typically this was accomplished through a system of 'checks and balances.' Checks and balances allow for a system based regulation that allows one branch to limit another."
The 3 branches that do this are the legislative, executive and judicial.

Reference the statement by
Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me


Pamela - posted on 08/11/2011




@ Stacy: Lol. I am not extreme left. Twenty years ago my position would have been called "moderately conservative".

You know, what I have noticed about conservatives over these past few years (and this has not always been true) is their utter reluctance to entertain the possibility that they do not:

A) have all the answers to every issue facing us
B) might not actually be correct in all of their assumptions.

Now let me be clear. I am not saying that everything conservatives trumpet is incorrect. I firmly believe in fiscal responsibility - which is a conservative value by the way. I am not against capitalism - I just don't want it to be our mode of operation on all levels of our lives and in our society. I find this idea of privatizing everything, from our police, our schools, to everything else, utterly baffling. This rejection of anything that benefits the many is incomprehensible to me. And might I add, completely unbiblical. This lack of care for those who are marginalized, this self-righteous presupposition that conservatives somehow hold the higher moral ground while defending blatant greed and avarice, is absolutely appalling.

I do not fear Libertarianism - I am very libertarian on some issues. I hold liberal ideals as well along with a few conservative ideals. See, the difference between you and I is you see the world in black and white. I see the world in full color - life is not black and white; it is not either/ or, this/ or that. It is both/ and. It is ambiguous, messy and full of opportunity and promise - all at the same time. To solve problems, we are foolish to not look at every possibility, at every governmental system - to ask "does this work?" and if it doesn't, then we throw it out. We can pull from capitalistic ideas as well as socialistic ideas, from libertarian to whatever else is out there.

Make no mistake, black and white thinking, greed, nationalism and the wanton desire for power is what gets us atrocities like the holocaust. Fundamentalism gives us the burqa and theocracy."The love of money" Jesus said, "is the root of all evil." And we Americans love our money. Money and the power that it brings is the great American god now. We reward those who rob and steal - we give them bonuses and defend their right to screw us out of home and hearth. For their names sake we will drink filthy water that lights on fire; we will hand over our lands and let them rape it until there is nothing left. We let them take our sons, our husbands, our sisters, our daughters and turn them into killers of other peoples who are not like us, all so the Great American god of Greed and Mammon is appeased with the blood sacrifices of the innocent born. We punish our weak, our hurting, our wounded because we value only strength and might. We are worse idolators than Sodom ever was. We are worse than Gomorrah. Do you know what their crime was? It had nothing to do with homosexuality by the way. Ezekiel tells us it had everything to do with their greed and the way they treated their poor and marginalized.

It is a hard thing to watch this nation crumble. It is hard to watch our blend of republic/democracy taken apart - and not by liberals, but by corporations who cynically use an ideology that embraces fear, hierarchy, and fundamentalism in order to achieve their goals towards unquestioned power.

Karla - posted on 08/10/2011




Stacy, you’re great.

”NEVER, NEVER, NEVER.....TELL PEOPLE WHAT I THINK WHEN YOU HAVE NO CLUE!” Stacy, I would have had a clue if you had explained what you think instead of saying ”why did Breitbart put that video up in the first place? Do you even know, do you care, of course not you just believe what the left wing media put out. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE people do your homework, do not believe the left wing media, it twists the truth.” which says nothing except that you label and distrust the media. If you cannot express you opinion, but obscurely allude to it, then you leave me no choice but to assume.

Breitbart says of the video he posted “the NAACP, it shows people in the audience there applauding her when she discriminates against a white farmer. That was the point that I was trying to make that the NAACP is arguing about the tea party is that there are people in the crowd at the tea party and they are rebuking the tea party on that behalf. I’m telling you this is a standard if you want to talk about people clapping racist behavior that’s exactly what you see in this video.”

So yes, Breitbart was absolutely trying to say the NAACP is racist against white people, he wanted to smear the NAACP because he thought their claims of racist activity from tea partiers was false, even though several Congressmen made such claims. Also, Breitbart is known for tweaking videos to fit his agenda.

Shirley Sharrod said she did not want to help the white farmer because (in the context of her story) of the attacks and murder of her father by KKK members. BUT, she did her job and helped that white farmer and learned a big lesson for it and shared that lesson with the NAACP and (thanks to Breitbart’s antics) the world (if anyone bothered to listen to the whole speech.)

Stacy you are still believing Breitbart’s claims without question, he claims the tea party was being falsely accused of being racist… those making the claims saw and heard racist behavior from tea party members… so it’s Breitbart’s word against evidence of racism (signs, words, etc.)

Now I should go count how many times you have put words in my mouth.

Not to worry, you answered my one and only question.(all the rest were statements, not questions.)

Karla - posted on 08/11/2011




Stacy, you ask, “Again who are you to say what I believe?????”

I answer…

I am no one to say what you believe, I assumed from your defense of Breitbart that you trust him and believe his words. If I am wrong, you only have to say so, as I did when you stated I was a “paid progressive blogger” and “astroturfer” Thank you! (reference: “What America has Become” thread.)

My problem in trying to communicate with you, and understand your perspective is that you don’t leave an answer, you just allude to extremist stories that one can only find on two web sites and which cannot be confirmed by any reputable source.

The whole premise of this thread is whether or not the “news” we are getting is legitimate, and then you start ranting about opinions that are just that, an opinion!

If you are going to defend Breitbart to the Nth degree, than should I not assume you believe him to be a reputable source of information??????????????????????????????????

That is THE question

Why do you trust these sources that you obviously trust???????????????????????????

(emphasis on question marks, as that is the question. Also, I think I “get” why you trust them, but I thought I’d give you another chance to tell me. This is not a challenge; it is just a question in an effort to understand why any one of use believes what we are being told by any given source.)

Karla - posted on 08/10/2011




@ Stacy, "I also loved how you addressed NOTHING!"

Sorry, I was making an effort to stay on topic.

@ Dyan, to save Stacy the time, I know why she thinks Breitbart posted the little bitty clip from Shirley Sharrod’s 43 minute speech. Stacy & Breitbart think that the NAACP members are racist because some of them laughed at Sharrods first inclination to give the bare minimum help to the white farmer. After listening to the whole speech and the audiences’ reaction I do not agree with Stacy or Breitbart, and I don’t trust Breitbart’s methods of reporting. At that point in her speech, I too laughed. (Breitbart believes there should be no NAACP and he believes they are racist against whites… he has an agenda.)

And that was the point of my post – that upon further investigation I found Breitbart’s original post to be misleading, and now I don’t trust his methods.

@Stacy, you have demonstrated my exact position. You take one source and for some reason that even you cannot explain, you believe that one source.

This is confirmed in your defense of Breitbart and your rant about Hillary Clinton being fined $300,000 for breaking a law called the Logan Act. Well, I looked up the Logan Act and there are no known convictions of it, and if there had been the penalty is prison.

You say "To get any information on Bilderberg you have to go to Prison Planet or infowars" Really? Why, because only infowars and Prison Planet know about this incident? Why would this even be worth covering up? If it were true don’t you think the tea partiers and the RNC would be all over it? I do. I think it would have definitely made it to FoxNews at the least and all other news outlets as well.

Your belief in Prison Planet is a perfect example of extremist media feeding fear, and that fear is irrational because the information is false and the source is slanted. I did not want to proclaim your news source as false, but you left me no choice.

Unfortunately it’s obvious that you believe every extreme right wing propaganda statement you find on the web – I’m just wondering why you are so sure of them.

The reason I trust my sources is because they are logical, and they cite factual, verifiable information.

Now, I have just one question, why do you trust your source?


View replies by

Karla - posted on 08/20/2011




Here's an interesting interview about the subject of where we get our news.

A portion is on youtube as linked

And the transcript of the whole interview:

Here is a portion of the interview...

BROOKE GLADSTONE: And I'm Brooke Gladstone, with another examination of the evolving media echo chamber. We all know the Internet is a moving target, and so our concerns about it can yo-yo. The fact that we can now choose among myriad information streams allows us to cherry pick our media diet, so we encounter only news that reinforces our world view.

Back in 2004, University of Chicago Professor Cass Sunstein, who now works for the Obama administration, said that we should be afraid, very afraid.

PROFESSOR CASS SUNSTEIN: The greatest danger of the echo chambers is unjustified extremism. So it's a well-known fact that if you get a group of people who tend to think something, after they talk to each other, they end up thinking a more extreme version of what they thought before.

And the danger of that is you can make a situation where people demonize those who disagree with them. And that's an ongoing threat to our democracy.

BROOKE GLADSTONE: That gave me the willies, until 2009, when I spoke to Lee Rainie of the PEW Internet and American Life Project. He conducted a study of people's behavior on the Internet during the 2004 presidential campaign.

LEE RAINIE: One of the surprising things we found in that survey was that those who are the most technologically adept and those who are the most engaged with information actually are not in the echo chamber pattern. They are actually seeking out and finding out more arguments opposed to their views than those who are less technologically adept and less interested in political information.

The most technologically adept people are, you know, scanning every horizon they can. And they can't help but bump into stuff that doesn't agree with them.

BROOKE GLADSTONE: So I stopped being afraid, until last month, when I spoke to Eli Pariser, author of The Filter Bubble. He said that Google, which once ranked search results solely on popularity, now personalizes results according to our online clicking behavior. In fact, there's a whole industry based on gathering information, so that websites and advertisers can serve us better.

Later in the interview....

ELI PARISER: Earlier this year I asked a number of friends to Google “Obama” and see what came up. Sure enough, you know, one person got the top link from The New York Times about Obama. The other person got the top link from FOX News. And there did seem to be a partisan tilt in the information that they were getting, based on, apparently, what they had been clicking on before.

You know, neither of them were even aware that their search results differed from each other at all. I mean, you can't see how much your experience of the Web is re-directing you towards things that you're gonna find palatable or you're gonna already agree with.

[deleted account]

@Stacey: Again who are you to say what I believe?????

We're making assumptions based upon your own words. If we are incorrect, by all means correct us. I would prefer to be corrected than continue with an incorrect assumption. I'm sure you'll agree with that.

So now that that's out of the way, would you please answer my question? Do you disagree with Karla's suggeston of *not* trusting a single source in relation to news stories?

[deleted account]

@ Pamela...Of course you are afraid of the Koch Brothers they are Libertarians and you are extreme Left. Since I don't know that much about Libertarians and I do know there is someone on this site that is one, maybe she could help you become unafraid, sorry I forgot who it was, just remember the video?

[deleted account]

@Karla..."Stacy you are still believing Breitbart’s claims without question"

Again who are you to say what I believe?????

Pamela - posted on 08/10/2011




I don't think the Annenberg Foundation is nearly as influential as you wish they were. However, if you want to discuss funding that influences our policies and politics, you need look no further than the Koch Brothers. And what they do is far scarier than the Annenberg Foundation. Anyway, is your only info regarding Annenberg from Karl's blog? If not, could you include some other sources?

[deleted account]

@Dyan Annenberg Foundation, do we really have to go there again? NOT.

Remember folks, who owns, funds or has been on the board of directors, or has affiliations with the source you are getting your information from!

@Karla "Sorry, I was making an effort to stay on topic" If that was true why did I have to answer all the non topic questions you had?

"Stacy & Breitbart think that the NAACP members are racist "


What nerve of you to ASSUME that you would know what I think?

I told people to check all their information and see for themselves how they felt PERIOD!

You are walking a fine line of telling people I and Breitbart think the NAACP are racist...have you ever heard of slander, 100 percent illegal! Keep you thoughts on how you think I feel to yourself since you have no idea or facts!

[deleted account]

Strange you think I was giving weird random questions when I was answering Karla's post the best I could....Maybe you should re read Karla's post one section at a time then read mine one section at at time...It may just be too much for you all at once?

Rosie - posted on 08/10/2011




yes we've seen the whole sherrod video (as karla pointed out earlier). and made the only logical conclusion that you can about the video. she was railroaded. how anybody can look at the entire video and not see that either has to be a racist pig or ignorant.
please explain breitbarts reasons for posting an edited video, since you seem to think they are so important. wouldn't you want us to know the "real" reasons"

as for the lemonade stands, i agree. that is crap. it happened recently in a nearby town. but somehow i doubt obama is sitting in the oval office thinking of ways to screw over little kids lemonade stands.
and the FDA claims power to seize food when there's no evidence of contamination? how about the turkey recall going on right now? it took them over a year to recall that, even after numerous samples were proven to be contaminated. the FDA is a joke plain a simple. but hell, can you imagine what would happen if there was no regulation at all, if this happens while there is regulation? *shivers*

the shooting is horrible, the garden lady story is ridiculously stupid, i think we agree on everything there. i just fail to see how conspiracy theories are part of all of that, or how this has anything to do with biased or unbiased news sources.

could you maybe talk instead of throwing out weird random questions? it's very hard to follow what you are trying to say.

[deleted account]

"So America what happened to real news, real information, and why are they hiding stuff?"


I also loved how you addressed NOTHING!

Karla - posted on 08/10/2011




@ Stacy: Please explain to me why you trust your news sources? (whatever they may be.) What about those sources makes you so very sure they are being truthful?

[deleted account]

Stacy, did you actually READ what Karla posted? I think you must have skimmed it and just posted because had you read her entire post, you would have clearly understood that she takes no single news source at face value. No one should (which was also her point.)

Do you understand now? Do you disagree that we should trust any single source of information?

[deleted account]

NPR? Is that the Radio Station Republicans were talking about defunding due to only being left wing media propaganda, rofl. Search (defund NPR)

As for CNN and Fox news, how was that coverage of the Bilderbergs? Remember Hillary was fined 300k for going violated the Logan Act. Are you even bothered that US General Robert Gates was at 2011? **Mario Borghezio, an Italian representative in the European Parliament denied entry and detained, while Swiss President Doris Leuthard was inside among the Bilderbergers with other select Swiss nationals, Baettig—a member of his nation’s largest political party, the Swiss People’s Party (SVP)—was denied entry after police called and asked if he could enter.** ( To get any information on Bilderberg you have to go to Prison Planet or infowars, just so they can call you a conspiracy nut job for even talking about the corruption! There was no media coverage! So as for your Right and Left Wing media, its all gone! You only get spoon fed what they want you to know! So America what happened to real news, real information, and why are they hiding stuff?

If the left really wanted to know what is right they would be outraged by the lack of news! We all know when the left is upset!

As for your second post about isolated incidents, I think you need to learn how to search, are they really isolated or are they a growing number of the same kind of reports all over America? I have seen just in the past year about 10 stories of children with koolaid stands being harassed, so is it isolated, or a growing government take over of our lives? How dangerous are these koolaid stands to warrant such behavior by our government officials? Tip of the iceberg, oh thats right they are all melting and the polar bears cant swim, rofl.

[deleted account]

Seriously your bringing up Shirley Sherrod? Here is the best example of Left wing propaganda! Here we go folks....why did Breitbart put that video up in the first place? Do you even know, do you care, of course not you just believe what the left wing media put out. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE people do your homework, do not believe the left wing media, it twists the truth.

Personally I would love for every American to read the entire Shirley Sherrod incident, starting from why Breitbart put it up in the first place to the explosion of the White House! The Shirley Sherrod video is well worth seeing the entire video (ENTIRE VIDEO), talk about learning a few things! This is 100 percent the reason to be afraid in America! Learn it all, study it, then read all the old media propaganda, and decide for yourselves! Awesome Karla....I hope by this we can educate more Americans!

Another good read the, Pigford case, the poor black farmers really got screwed! Since all the other black people are getting theirs no one cares about the original black farmers that filed, why? Where is the left wing outrage on this? Shhhhhhhhhhhh your not supposed to know!

Karla - posted on 08/10/2011




Because of the wording of your post I cannot tell if you are answering the question of “Irrational Fears based on extreme information?” with a bunch of other questions or by saying all those things are real or baseless.

Even though I believe you cited actual stories, I don’t see what they have to do with your first questions, or how any one of them is more than an isolated (and disturbing) incident rather than a trend. I only glanced at your sources and find some of them contain very slanted reporting.

For instance the site about the FDA says ” FDA thinks it can engage in search and seizure willy nilly.” and that is not an objective statement. (Without comment on the FDA and as a point of information: the fourth amendment applies to an individual – when one runs a business the product is no longer personal, it now can affect the community, and can therefore be governed.)

Without getting into whether your points are valid my question to you is, why do you trust these sources?

Karla - posted on 08/10/2011




I understand there will be isolated individual abnormalities in law and order and politics, but that wasn’t my goal with this OP. I think I’m better defining the goal now…

The really difficult thing about using slanted news sources is that you can't really have a debate about it, because everything you cite is proclaimed false.

Here's the crux of the debate: how do you know your news source is truly balanced and thorough?

How do we know?

I have found some news sources to definitely take things out of context, or report only half the information. (For instance when Shirley Sherrod was quoted out of context, I went on-line and found her whole speech, and proved to myself that the reporting was slanted.) I have found this problem with both left and right leaning news sources.

I have found commentators to be interesting, but their opinions are one-sided and definitely alter how the story is perceived.

I have some news sources that I trust, but that trust comes primarily from my own investigations into their reporting. My primary trusted sources are NPR, PBS and the AP. If a story comes from some other place I find it’s either slanted or incomplete; I find I need to investigate further.

In my opinion – I find MSNBC to have a lot of left leaning programming and FoxNews of course represents the right. NBC, CBS and ABC try to remain neutral in politics. Nightly network news is not what it used to be though, and usually only tells a tidbit of the story. (my jury is still out on CNN.) The biggest problem today with the big 3 is they often repeat what MSNBC or FoxNews commentators have said without doing their own investigation, so that news becomes more and more distorted.

With the internet, it is often possible to find the original/primary source for information, but even that cannot always be trusted. I never, ever trust a bloggers’ original source because so many of them will post doctored documents. That is where the Internet is scary.

A college student today can only use a few Internet sites for research because of the misinformation and doctored document problem.

I’m not trying to justify anyone’s fears. My goal with this OP is not to prove I’m right; it’s to ask everyone to consider their source. I’ve explained my sources and why I trust them here. I think it’s been well displayed that skewed stories are being reported, so how do you know your news source is truly balanced and thorough?

[deleted account]

The current Left news media ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC are you waiting until FOX turns Left to be concerned?

Irrational Fears based on extreme information?

Global Warming?
Spending millions to hide your personal information?
There is no government takeover of Healthcare?
National Debt?
Loss of AAA rating?
No congressional consent for war? UN, people we did not elect?
Unemployment 9.1% of those still being counted?
Welfare 50.1 million? (1 in 6 Americans)

Just Cause?

Bureaucrats in Michigan threaten woman with jail time for planting vegetable garden in her own yard

Learn more:

Jennifer "Jade" Jones being handcuffed and arrested at a Town Council session. Jones was recognized by the mayor and was trying to discuss First Amendment rights when she was removed

Read more:

A $500 ticket for not having a vendor’s permit issued to…six kids running a lemonade stand? Yup.

Read more:

Police opened fire at a guy who was stopped?

FDA claims power to seize food without evidence of contamination

Karla - posted on 08/09/2011




Ah yes, photo-shopped pictures, it brings a whole new reality to propaganda.

Some times I think the Internet-age is great, because it is so easy to make contact with others and to look up information. On the other hand I think it’s a terrible invention, there’s a frightening amount of misinformation, spin, lack of decorum, and downright lies on the Internet. People “share information” quickly and easily without checking the back-story to know whether or not it is factual. IMO there is an extreme need for an editor on the Internet. (That’s one reason I like CoM – the no T.H.U.M.P.S. rules and the administrators and moderators.)

Then there is the big question, how do we know whether or not our fears are rational or not. Of course if our fears are based on extremist “information” then they are likely irrational fears.

Let’s look at what happened with Hitler. He bulldozed his way into office and he would not give it up. He got rid of certain groups of people and took over the airwaves. (I mean a total – do it my way or die - take over of the airwaves.) That’s a lot different than having some regulations for the media. We do not have another Hitler-type situation.

I think if I see a national leader who refuses to leave office at the end of his/her term, or who takes over the media, or who starts locking away people without just cause, then I will be on edge. (Which may be why Bush/Cheney scared me so much; but then they left office and I felt better.)

Irrational fear is just a short jump away from rational fear.

Johnny - posted on 08/09/2011




Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they are not out to get you.

The problem is, that a good proportion of those crazy conspiracy theories stem from a grain of truth. The funny thing I've noticed that the left wing and the right wing conspiracies are generally about the same fears of losing rights and losing power in society, they just imagine different villains. Or they imagine the same villain, except they ascribe that person/group with the characteristics of the enemy (socialist/communist vs. fascist - or those people who like to mix them up *cough*Glenn Beck*cough).

People are overwhelmed by all the information flying at their heads in this day and age. It is so challenging to pick out what is real, what is exaggerated and what is false. Sometimes things that appear to be straight forward and easy to believe are incorrect and the crazy conspiracy turns out to be true (see recent UK phone hacking scandal for instance) People laugh at these nutty ideas and then they turn out to be true. But a lot of the time, they're just cracked.

Rosie - posted on 08/09/2011




yeah, i do feel it happens. unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it) i don't feel that the left buys into the shit as much as the right. which creates a hostile atmosphere for us on the left. i've had to explain how obama isn't a muslim, and if he was why the fuck does anyone care, about a thousand times. they show me pictures they get from other concerned right wingers, and it's all bullshit. lies. pictures taken at different occassions making it look like the situation being talked about is different than it is. it is ridiculous and annoys the fuck out of me how we can't wade through the sea of SHIT, to get to the real issues.

[deleted account]

Stacy, can you please specify what you're talking about? Or is that a general warning. In a general sense, I agree. However, I have a feeling we disagree on certain truths but I may be wrong.

Thank you.

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms