Medea Benjamin is a hypocrite helping Rand Paul protect WORLD ASSAULT WEAPONS MARKETS

[patrice]

that develop into the kinds of situations that elicit drone programs.

Apparently the killing is just fine as long as it even superficially meets Libertarian standards for being freelance and being anti-UN is just the icing on this cake.

Check out the hyperbolic lying propaganda supporting a Grover Norquist style oath for Congress to protect wide open assault weapons markets all over the world:

http://www.nagr.org/UN_lp_survey2.aspx

[The Magistrate]

1. Can You Point Me, Ma'am, To Her Endorsement Of His Opposition To This Treaty?

It does not exactly jump out to a quick view of the site you linked to.

[patrice]

2. You'd think she would want to make that distinction clear. She hasn't. She has the spotlight now,

maybe she will clarify this matter.

I hope she does.

[The Magistrate]

3. Yet You, Ma'am, Have Not Made Yourself Clear

Have you anything to cite in which Ms. Benjamin opposes this treaty, or expresses support for Paul's stand regarding it?

[patrice]

7. Do you think that her endorsement on the drone issue, without this specific exception, does not

net out positively for Paul, especially amongst those who know nothing of the bill against this UN treaty?

[The Magistrate]

8. Not Particularly, Ma'am

Mind, I do not like either of them, but I like him a good deal less. Her heart is in the right place, at least, whereas he has no heart at all.

But if you are going to say what you have said here, you need to find some specific comment of Ms. Benjamin regarding this treaty which aligns with Paul on it.

[patrice]

13. Isn't it the responsibility of one seeking such a huge spotlight to make such far reaching claims

against, in this case, the President, claims that could result in more killing, btw . . . isn't it that person's RESPONSIBILITY, because of the nature of his/her own actions, to make their endorsements more clear.

I stick by my claim that her endorsement has positive results for Rand Paul and his whole agenda, because so few people actually follow this stuff.

[The Magistrate]

16. That Is A Pretty Far Stretch, Ma'am

I expect if she had to specify every point of disagreement with the wretch she had, she would have no time for anything else....

[patrice]

28. Not "every point of disagreement", but, YES, certainly, the most germane. &

Isn't this everyone's most common complaint about the political milieu? Half-truths, plausible deniability, omissions, meaningless generalities . . .

It's a meaningless generality to say you oppose drones and to say nothing of how drone programs became what they are, that is, meaningless if your real concerns are about innocent people ANYWHERE, not just the USA, being killed for any reason whatsoever. If that's not one's concern, then perhaps one would not go any further than the most accessible political payoff for one's words.

[The Magistrate]

30. I Have No Objection To The Drone Program, Ma'am

Who do you demand I explicitly distance myself from --- Chambliss, McConnell, Lindsay Graham?

[patrice]

4. Do we agree that any political support for Rand Paul, intentionally or not, supports his agenda? ...

unless the supporter speaks up otherwise.

[idwiyo]

46. That's another very silly claim. I can think about few people who's endorsement will cost RP a lot

of damage. Depending on how vocal they were, it might even finish his career.

[boilerbabe]

6. if patrice refuses, maybe the 3 people (so far) who recommended this mystery thread

can help you out! i see no mention of medea benjamin anywhere. LOL

[idwiyo]

18. Don't hold you breath. This is flamebait, nothing else.

[patrice]

21. So, you're saying wide open assault weapons markets all over Earth have nothing to do with drones?nt

[idwiyo]

27. I am saying that you are making up shit as you go. :)

[City Lights]

63. Totally agree! nt

[FarPoint]

29. Agreed.......

Medea is a good soul and deserves our respect...peace is her essence with an activist flair...

Such a claim as in the OP does not reflect who Medea is, nor what she stands for past and present.

[idwiyo]

5. Can you please provide some factual support to your claim? The link you have provided has nothing

to do with Medea Benjamin.

[patrice]

9. That's the same thing as saying all decisions about political support are based upon 100% knowledge

of everything a political figure advocates.

It is also a very common expectation on this board, and PO is an obvious example of this, that if a political figure holds a position with which someone disagrees, we should conclude that only unprincipled persons can support such a figure.

If that standard applies to PO, why does it not apply to Rand Paul?

[idwiyo]

17. So, you have no proof, meaning you made it up. In which case your post is a pure flamebait.

[patrice]

19. Please address my point: Her endorsement has a positive effect on RP's whole agenda, because most

people are not paying attention to what that agenda includes. It isn't necessary to say that she likes those assault weapons markets.

[idwiyo]

25. I already did: your post is a flamebait. If you insist it is not you must provide evidence to

to support your claims.

Below are 3 claims you made in your last post, can I please see some evidence to support them:

a. Medea Benjamin supports RP's position on UN arms treaty
b. Medea Benjamin's endorsement of RP's anti-war position "has a positive effect on RP's whole agenda"
c. "Most people are not paying attention to what that agenda includes"

[patrice]

33. I doubt that even 10% of the people who heard MB today have even the slightest inkling of a., b., c.

And that's part of my point.

All of us spend a great deal of time bemoaning the fact that some very incompetent and even bad people get into office, because voters regard them in a positive manner for whatever reason and now people are telling me that those positive effects don't apply when they say they don't apply, when they don't want them to apply, such as when the issue involves a popular cult figure like Medea Benjamin.

[idwiyo]

36. Actually you are making up shit as you go and INSIST that's what other people think/do.

Got some proof to your claims yet?

[patrice]

20. Proof? Prove to me that people don't form positive associations, especially in politics, with

little or no actual information.

They hear a buzz phrase "Drones bad!", add the two people linked by that phrase together and, on the average, going forward, are more positively disposed toward either one or both of them, because of that phrase.

Come on now, admit it, you KNOW that is how politics works.

[idwiyo]

35. It's up to you to provide proof to your claims. Also, your demand that I prove a negative sounds

sounds like pure desperation.

[patrice]

38. k, sorry about proving a negative! How about, just say, "People don't form positive political

associations on little or no information."

Do you disagree with that statement?

[idwiyo]

45. I prefer not to make claims about how other people form political associations. I would need those

people to provide some info about how they do it.

As to your statement: its so generalised it could be describing everyone.

How little is "little"? Who gets to decide?
What do you mean when you say "no information"?
When you talk about "information" do you mean "anything, true or false", "true only"?
Etc.

[WillyT]

10. Wow... Even The President Said She Had A Valid Point...

And yet you post... THIS ???

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. I see nothing about Medea Benjamin at the link.

Got another?

[Pragdem]

12. Medea Benjamin is a loudmouthed, disrespectful individual that should be thankful...

We have a President that tolerates her disrespectful behavior in a respectful manner.

[WillyT]

14. As Was... Mahatma Ghandi, Martin Luther King Jr., Ceasar Chavez... And Hundreds Of Others...

I'll stand with them, as you wash your soled petticoats.

[patrice]

22. That doesn't mean EVERY loudmouth is Mahatma Ghandi, MLK, or Ceasar Chaves. wow.

[woo me with science]

15. Yeah, he should have raised his scepter

and had her beheaded.

[Canuckistanian]

24. Cmon, say it. You know you want to.

"Uppity"

[FarPoint]

32. Have you ever met Medea?

Do you actually know her?

[Warren Stupidity]

23. I read the title on the latest page and thought:

what pathetic pile of putrid prevarication will this post puke up?

[KG]

26. your attempt at alliteration was affirmed

[patrice]

31. Address the point: RP gets political benefit to his whole agenda because of a favorable endoresement

[idwiyo]

37. Your "point" is pure BS unless you can prove it. :)

[Bluenorthwest]

44. What do you have to say of this favorable endorsement of Tom Coburn?

http://time100.time.com/2013/04/18/time-100/slide/tom-coburn/

[patrice]

47. I admire that someone doesn't think a friend's honest disagreement makes that person a bad

person and you probably noticed that the article closes with a statement that PO continues to make an effort to persuade TC regarding TC's errant ways.

Of course, that assumes that TC is in fact honest, something I can only take PO's word for and which makes me uncomfortable because I don't like the things that TC says and does. I also worked for Mike Synar on a few occasions and was severely disappointed when the NRA bought that seat for TC with mostly, by FAR mostly, out of state money.

If Medea Benjamin occupies a similar position relative to Rand Paul, all she has to do, as far as I am concerned, is, somewhat like PO, validate her differences with RP in re that UN Treaty. If she chooses to inform us re her stance on drones, she can also choose to inform us relative to her stance in re wide open assault weapons markets that are making some places on Earth pretty drone prone.

I don't require that people agree with me, but I do require as much honesty as possible. Medea Benjamin failed that test today.

[Bluenorthwest]

55. The Rachel Maddow Show: Tom Coburn Caught Lying About His Role in Ensign Affair

Rachel Maddow reports on the latest news to come out of the C-Street House. It appears that Tom Coburn, despite previous denials, was allowed by John Ensign to basically negotiate his bribes for him. So much for those "family values".
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/rachel-maddow-show-tom-coburn-caught-lying

Here's a Tom Coburn quote, a quote from the President's very honest principled close personal friend, their wives are close too:

"the gay community has infiltrated the very centers of power in every area across this country and they wield extreme power. That agenda is the greatest threat to our freedom we face today. Why do you think we see the rationalization for abortion and multiple sexual partners? That’s a gay agenda."

So you are fine with love letters to homophobic Republican hate mongers, don't see a problem, you think maybe Coburn is honest because Obama endorses him.
Obama actually praises Coburn and Coburn's 'values' and his work in the Senate. All of that is fine with you. Gay agenda, you think that he might be right about that.

And your link said nothing about Benjamin at all. What you are snarfing about I have no idea at all. Clearly you are deeply outraged, but just as clearly you can not explain why.
Something about endorsing a person being a universal endorsement, except when Obama endorses Coburn in Time Magazine, in detail and with great personal affection.
Your double standard is appalling, but your baseless attacks on Benjamin are worse. Makes you seem hypocritical now that you are a goodsie with the Coburn Loyalty Hymn.

I've edited to add your question from upthread, can not see how you can hold that position then dismiss a love letter to Coburn:
patrice:"'Do we agree that any political support for Rand Paul, intentionally or not, supports his agenda? ..."

Yet a love letter to Coburn is 'understandable' because Coburn is 'just' anti gay and anti person?
Double standards and strained logic....

[patrice]

77. Well, honesty is a criteria for positive regard, so now PO needs to re-assess his sense of TC.

And those who know the truth about TC, should observe the facts publicly (as I did in re MB) in order to mitigate the positive associations that TC accrues from PO's regard for him, which is what you are doing, and rightly so.

As far as I am concerned, I never liked what I know about TC in the first place, so this lie doesn't change that.

[Warren Stupidity]

54. I fully addressed the point you were making.

[Comrade Grumpy]

34. This is a BS thread. OP ought to delete this crap.

[patrice]

39. It's BS to say "People form positive political associations on little or no information"? Yes or no?

[Comrade Grumpy]

40. When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging.

Kill this abortion of a thread.

You've made an irresponsible, unsupported, and ridiculous claim that you can't back up. Just stop now.

[patrice]

41. Why can't I get anyone to answer a simple question: Do people form positive political associations

based on little or no information?

Yes or no.

[Bluenorthwest]

43. You formed this OP out of no information at all, so I guess anything goes.

Does that answer your evasion?

[patrice]

48. No it doesn't answer. You are evading. Once again: Do people form positive political associations

based on little or no information.

Yes or no, please.

[Bluenorthwest]

59. Upthread you claim that utter praise for Coburn does not form postive political associations when

the President says he's honest, principled, OK is lucky to have a Republican Senator, to have Coburn. When he lists the work they did as partners, points to the love their wives have for each other, none of that is going to enhance Coburn's standing, you claim, not even when it is in Time magazine, personally authored by the President.
So do you want to have the cake, or eat the cake patrice, no one can do both.
I understand the problem you face, dealing with a President who reaches out to the worst of the worst while you yourself want to attack the good, the bad, anyone who dares criticize the President. So each time you launch some slime piece to the left, you will have to deal with an Obama love letter to the right and somehow deal with the contradiction. So far, you deal with it using a double standard. It's ok for some to make written love to radical right wing Republicans, even those who libel minority groups, that's just fine....but you have some issues about others who never wrote crush letters about the likes of Coburn, who ran for office claiming there were gangs of lesbian teens in the school bathrooms of OK.
The most inconsistent, illogical, dishonest string of crap I've seen on DU in ages.

[patrice]

73. It doesn't form positive associations with me because I KNOW about TC. Most people probably do not

know that RP is defending the murder of innocents all over the world by protecting the un-regulated sale of assault weapons from a UN treaty, because they don't KNOW that, Medea Benjamin's support for RP's statements about drones creates a positive association for RP.

[idwiyo]

92. Just admit that you made a lot of statements based on assumptions that are not supported by facts.

And stop digging yourself even further into the hole. it's already deep enough.

You don't have a slightest idea what "most" people do and don't know about RP.
You don't have a slightest idea if Medea Benjamin supports RP in regards to UN treaty.
You don't have a slightest idea if Medea's endorsement of RP's anti-war position can create a "positive" association for RP.

Basically you created a whole new reality based on your unsubstantiated assumptions and now you are pissed off with DUers because they don't share it with you.

[Bluenorthwest]

42. Wow, this OP is a lie. This bullshit should be deleted and replaced with an apology.

The link says nothing about Ms Benjamin, not one thing. Extremely dishonest tactics at use here. Amazingly dishonest.

[patrice]

49. I look forward to Medea Benjamin doing the responsible thing & correcting my "mistake" if necessary.

[vanlassie]

52. Madea Benjamin doesn't have to correct anything

for you. She speaks for millions. She has guts and I respect her for doing what she does. As, apparently, does the president. Your post is garbage.

[Bluenorthwest]

57. But what are you talking about patrice? Your OP is YOUR words and the link has nothing about her.

You sure have a hard time explaining what she should apologize for. Where is a quote from her that upset you? Not in your OP, not in the link, nowhere. Why is that, patrice?
In general, if you want to damn someone for their words or opinions, you need to cite their own specific words and opinions, not draft up some version out of your own head and hold it up as if it came from someone other than you. Damn a person for their words, use their own words, or all you are doing is casting slimy words around and hoping some readers fall for your intellectually dishonest materials here today.
If she supports what you claim, you should be able to prove that. But she does not, and you know that. So you ooze some crap onto DU.

[Bluenorthwest]

58. Typical 'moderate centrist' expecting liberals to clean up your mistakes, mendacities and messes.

Your OP is bullshit made up out of thin air. Many other posters have pointed to your dishonest tactics today. It is sad to me to see you display such disrespect for DUers who ask you to support your assertions. Do you expect to make unsupported claims and have others bow to your fictions?
The fault as I see it here is all yours, patrice. You failed to make any case at all, you made up some crap,posted an unrelated link to make the crap look serious and when called on it you flailed around like a catfish on the dock.
People ask you direct questions and you refuse to answer them. That is all about you, patrice, not about Benjamin or Obama or Paul or drones or war or peace. It is about being disrespectful to others for no good reason as you have been here today.

[ucrdem]

50. It's an opinion.

This is a discussion board. Get the picture?

[bobduca]

60. an opinion based on .... ?

Getting the picture that this thread is full of smarmy smear merchants.
Do you think every opinion should be respected equally without judging merit?
You know, just like how the media treats Republican talking points?

[patrice]

80. Based on Media Benjamin's support for Ron Paul who defends the murder of innocents enabled by wide

open assault weapons markets in the world's most unstable countries.

[burnodo]

86. Not deleted

not locked

not going to be

[bobduca]

90. Hippie Punching

always gets a pass here.

[dlwickham]

51. she's been an attention whore from day one

never had any respect for her; feel sorry for all the people she's fooled over the years

[Hell Hath No Fury]

53. Fail.

[patrice]

69. That's nice to see. Now if Medea or CP would make some statement about that UN Treaty

I would be able to credit their opposition to drones.

[Enrique]

56. i.e. she heckled Obama

[ohiosmith]

61. This post was alerted on. The jury voted 5/1 to let it stand.

At Fri May 24, 2013, 07:39 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Medea Benjamin is a hypocrite helping Rand Paul protect WORLD ASSAULT WEAPONS MARKETS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022893135

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

pure smear by association... the poster doesnt even cite links or even mention Benjamin except in the title.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri May 24, 2013, 07:43 AM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: I agree with the alerter. The link the OP provided does not even mention Benjamin. Pathetic OP, IMO. HIDE!
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: http://www.nagr.org/UN_lp_survey2.aspx isn't a link?

Leave IT!
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Let it run it's course. Leave it.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Warren Stupidity]

65. I'm fine with that. It keeps the record clear about who the op is and what the op's intentions are.

[Marr]

67. Indeed. I'll never take this one seriously again.

It's clearly all about a political agenda. Facts, logic, and fairness be damned.

[patrice]

71. Notice how NO ONE in this thread gave a moments consideration to a relationship between

assault weapons and drones.

How honest is that?

[Marr]

83. Maybe because it's just a transparent and flimsy smear? /nt

[patrice]

85. Maybe because one or more of a whole lot of other reasons, too. Can you think of any others?

[patrice]

87. Smear? Has Benjamin expressed positive regard for Rand Paul? Are assault weapons markets

uncontrolled?

Do assault weapons make their way into some very unstable countries?

Does violence and instability elicit demands for U.S. military intervention?

Are drone programs a convenient alternative to U.S. boots-on-the-ground?

Do both Benjamin & Paul criticize drone programs?

Does RP benefit politically from Benjamin's praise because of their connection in re drone programs?

Does popularity from a positive political association between RP & MB make RP's legislative agenda, including the protection of wide open assault weapons markets amongst the world's poor, more likely?

[idwiyo]

93. Do statements based on unsubstantiated assumptions make one look silly? Yes, they do! :)

[idwiyo]

95. Correction, no one in this thread gives consideration to your assumptions about relationship between

Medea Benjamin, RP, drones, assault weapons, and "positive associations".

[SomethingFishy]

62. Wow this is impressive.. I never met a mind reader before...

To answer your stupid question asked many times in this thread, sometimes people form political alliances with little or no information and sometimes they don't. However, the fact that it happens does not give you anymore or less insight to whether or not she is "endorsing" Rand Paul's paranoid fantasy about "world gun control"..

You stated in your OP that Medea Benjamin is helping Rand Paul protect "world assault weapons markets". You have stated this as a fact. But you have yet to back up your claim, so I have to assume that you are using your psychic powers to read minds from around the globe to come up with your "facts".

This is one of the worst threads I have seen on DU in awhile. And that is really saying something...

[City Lights]

64. I miss UNREC.

to this OP.

[Marr]

66. You ought to be ashamed of this.

Some people will do anything to smear critics.

[patrice]

88. I'm not. I'm proud. I'm ashamed that DU insults people they don't agree with.

I am ashamed that DU is so completely guilty of the very things that they accuse Obama supporters of that their sycophantic attitude toward people like Medea Benjamin PREVENTS them from honestly considering the connection between drone programs and assault weapons in the world's unstable nations.

This place is NOT the Liberal bastion it pretends to be.

[SomethingFishy]

94. LMFAO!!!

"This place is NOT the Liberal bastion it pretends to be."

Yeah and neither is the Obama administration. Or the country for that matter.

Seems to me people don't even know what that word means anymore. You actually believe you are a liberal? With a post like this? All innuendo, hyperbole, and bullshit with not a single fact to back it up. Seems quite conservative to me.

[Marr]

98. You're projecting again.

The sycophant here is you. The person insulting and defaming a person because they disagree with them is you.

[LWolf]

68. I don't see credible evidence for your assertions.

Quite an outburst of over-the-top hyperbole.

Meanwhile, I wish we had more people of Medea's caliber in higher office. We wouldn't have rolled over and offered up our bellies to the Republicans and the neoliberals after we finally dumped GWB.

[patrice]

70. Look at all of the DU-ers who insult me, because I make a connection between drones & asault weapons

[vanlassie]

72. No dear. That's not what's happening.

Either.

[bobduca]

74. Look at all the people who called you out on your baseless smear by association!

[patrice]

75. Do you agree with this statement: People form positive associations for politicians based on little

or no information.

Benjamin's praise for Rand Paul results in positive regard for Rand Paul, because many/most people don't know or think about the fact that there is a connection between drones and the political un-rest and violence enabled by assault weapons in some of the world's least stable nations. Rand Paul supports the causes of that violence, wide open assault weapons' markets, AND he objects to the drone programs that are a response to that violence.

BTW, I don't like drones either, but I'm not going to say "Killing people with drones is bad, but killing them with assault weapons is okay."

[bobduca]

79. Sure, people make associations, like 'baseless smears by association.'

"People on DU advance the anti-liberal agenda, and jump on negative associations for liberal anti-war activists based on little or no information."

Are you stating that Medea Benjamin is a hypocrite because she said something positive about a Pro NRA republican who brought up the drones program in an opportunistic and cynical ploy to score "points" on Obama?

Apparently when drones are on the national news because some regressive inbred republican jumped on the topic, just to criticize Obama, progressives should sit quietly, with hands folded in their lap like good Rand Paul hating partisans, like good pro-war centrists.

[patrice]

81. A real Liberal would defend those being murdered because of wide-open assault weapons markets

in some very unstable places in the world.

Do you think Rand Paul is liberal?

[bobduca]

82. "Real Liberal" I see, but you asked me if I think Rand Paul is Liberal... Disingenuous much?

More waterproof logic in action!

Medea should be more upset about assault guns in general than US drone policy in the specific.... you know because its much better if she was mad at *YOUR* partisan enemies rather than interrupt someone who you consider beyond criticism, and whose drone policy is above question from "Real Liberals"

keep digging!

[patrice]

84. Perhaps the connection between drones & assault weapons is baseless to you. It isn't to others.nt

[bobduca]

91. you are being intentionally obtuse

For anyone else who is confused by your little act, the baseless smear to which I'm referring is that Medea Benjamin holds the same beliefs as Rand Paul, and you know that to be false.

good evening, and enough kicks for your bait thread.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

76. Uh...she was there protesting the use of drones. Nor has she ever supported assault weapons.

It's Obama who supports the use of drones.

[patrice]

78. She supports Rand Paul who supports one of the biggest causes of drone programs, wide open assault

weapons markets in the world's most unstable countries.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

89. Does she support the use of drones or assault weapons? Have a link to that?

Do you support the use of drones? If so, do you support Obama?

[Eleanors38]

101. Gun-controllers think you are fulla beans. Take a hint.

[achile]

96. Obama has repeatedly waived sanctions against countries using child soldiers.

He's making an arms deals worth 10 billion$ with Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. He's arming to the teeth the enemies of Iran.
So according to your logic, anyone who supports Obama also supports child soldiers, and a war with Iran.

[burnodo]

100. +1

[davidpdx]

97. Hearts and Flowers from Code Pink to Ron Paul

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022901402#post7



Oh wait, it must be a photoshop job! Yeah that's it!

[Fire Walk With Me]

99. Code Pink were praising him until he stated that killing Americans by drone is okay.

I haven't seen word one out of Code Pink about him since; hopefully that says enough in and of itself.

FUCK THE PAULS!