Some Friday night reading

[michigancat]

The paranoia creeps me out more than the idea that liberals are Nazis.

[Dirty Sanchez]

The paranoia creeps me out more than the idea that liberals are Nazis.

Paranoia like "Bush is listening to your phone calls and Dick Cheney is waiting to waterboard you!"

BTW-- here is a difference in this case between fascist and nazi.  I know its difficult to grasp the not-so-subtle difference detailed in this thread.

[michigancat]

Paranoia like "Bush is listening to your phone calls and Dick Cheney is waiting to waterboard you!"

That's not as ridiculous as "Obama is a Nazi because he wants you to eat better".  JMO.

BTW-- here is a difference in this case between fascist and nazi.  I know its difficult to grasp the not-so-subtle difference detailed in this thread.

Did you even read the first post?

[Cat Maniac]

tdaver, is that your dog?

he kicks ass. 

yep, that's Odie my Viszla

I own vizslas.  They're the coolest dogs in the world.  The sad thing is I don't hunt, so they have to settle for keeping my backyard safe from the neighborhood squirrels and rabbits.

[Dirty Sanchez]

Paranoia like "Bush is listening to your phone calls and Dick Cheney is waiting to waterboard you!"

That's not as ridiculous as "Obama is a Nazi because he wants you to eat better".  JMO.

It is just as ridiculous.  However, someone wanting someone to eat better and someone actually legislating it in a way that takes rights not granted to the government under the Constitution are different things.

BTW-- here is a difference in this case between fascist and nazi.  I know its difficult to grasp the not-so-subtle difference detailed in this thread.

Did you even read the first post?

Did you read the later ones?  nazism was just a later form of fascism.  It began as a movement when hitler was crapting his diapers.  Fascism, just like in Europe, will not come into power by jack-booted thugs kicking down doors, but by telling people what they want to hear and forcing it down the throats of those who don't.  It will come with a happy face, not a gun barrel or bogeyman with a wire-tapping machine.  wilson and fdr did exactly what people are saying about Bush and Cheney--and the current demoncratic candidates are saying they are part in parcel of that movement.  Those who give up liberty for security of what food they put in their mouths deserve neither.

Look up the fabian socialists.  They are a 100+ year old branch of socialists influential in Britains labour party.  They advocate progressive change rather than revolution.  george bernard shaw and hg wells were notable fabians in its early days. 

Here's a brief:

The group, which favoured gradual creeping change rather than revolutionary change, was named — at the suggestion of Frank Podmore — in honour of the Roman general Quintus Fabius Maximus (nicknamed "Cunctator", meaning "the Delayer"). His Fabian strategy advocated tactics of harassment and attrition rather than head-on battles against the Carthaginian army under the renowned general Hannibal Barca.

The first Fabian Society pamphlets were written to lobby for a minimum wage in 1906, for the creation of the National Health Service in 1911, and for the abolition of hereditary peers in 1917 (Fabian Society).

Fabian socialists were in favour of an imperialist foreign policy and a welfare state modelled on the Bismarckian German model; they criticised Gladstonian liberalism both for its individualism at home and its internationalism abroad. They favoured a national minimum wage in order to stop British industries compensating for their inefficiency by lowering wages; slum clearances and a health service in order for "the breeding of even a moderately Imperial race" which would be better militarily than the "stunted, anaemic, demoralised denizens...of our great cities"; and a national education system because "it is in the class-rooms that the future battles of the Empire for commercial prosperity are already being lost".[3]


The Fabians also favoured the nationalization of land, believing that rents collected by landowners were unearned, an idea which drew heavily from the work of American economist Henry George.

Here's another from http://nord.twu.net/acl/revisionism.html

British Fabian socialism was created to promote international communism and free trade with a friendlier face. Unlike Marx's open and violent revolutionary agenda, the Fabian's agenda was to quietly infiltrate and re-direct established governments. The Fabians were instrumental in creating the Peace Movement, which is the perfect antithesis to violent expansionism. Fabians also helped establish the International Court at the Hague. The Fabians designed the first League of Nations (the precursor to the United Nations). Fabian influence on the creation of the U.N. is no secret, either.

league of nations....hmmmm....oh, yeah...woodrow wilson's big idea.

[Kat Kid]

British Fabian socialism was created to promote international communism and free trade with a friendlier face. Unlike Marx's open and violent revolutionary agenda, the Fabian's agenda was to quietly infiltrate and re-direct established governments. The Fabians were instrumental in creating the Peace Movement, which is the perfect antithesis to violent expansionism. Fabians also helped establish the International Court at the Hague. The Fabians designed the first League of Nations (the precursor to the United Nations). Fabian influence on the creation of the U.N. is no secret, either.

Replace that with jews and you have a standard protocols of zion, batcrap crazy rant.  But this is respected historical analysis.  Got it.

[Dirty Sanchez]

We had the "you're a racist" tapout.

Now the "you're crazy" tapout.

No thought, just insult.

Some people will just stand by while their country is sold down the river to internationalists. 

One of the things we learn in high school political science classes is that extremists rise to power in times of economic turmoil.  See hitler, lenin, etc.  In this country we turned to fdr.  Not a hitler by any stretch, but he was such a radical change from previous economic and Constitutional theory, that he was essentially an extremist lite.  Now, the economy is not great, but its seriously nothing anywhere remotely close to 1932.  But if you listen to the left talk, the nation is at its worst point ever.     With willing accomplices in the mainstream press fawning over the next guy to come along and make promise after promise of what he will do as daddy government, people are willing to take the more extreme answer.  Government will grow and encompass more of our lives than ever before.  And some will continue to tell those who are trying to stop the government from infringing on rights that "you're crazy" or a "racist" because the guy who is bringing it is black-ish.

[mjrod]

British Fabian socialism was created to promote international communism and free trade with a friendlier face. Unlike Marx's open and violent revolutionary agenda, the Fabian's agenda was to quietly infiltrate and re-direct established governments. The Fabians were instrumental in creating the Peace Movement, which is the perfect antithesis to violent expansionism. Fabians also helped establish the International Court at the Hague. The Fabians designed the first League of Nations (the precursor to the United Nations). Fabian influence on the creation of the U.N. is no secret, either.

Replace that with jews and you have a standard protocols of zion, batcrap crazy rant.  But this is respected historical analysis.  Got it.

OMG I LOLLIED!!!!

You seriously are naive.

[Kat Kid]

We had the "you're a racist" tapout.

Now the "you're crazy" tapout.

No thought, just insult.

Some people will just stand by while their country is sold down the river to internationalists. 

One of the things we learn in high school political science classes is that extremists rise to power in times of economic turmoil.  See hitler, lenin, etc.  In this country we turned to fdr.  Not a hitler by any stretch, but he was such a radical change from previous economic and Constitutional theory, that he was essentially an extremist lite.  Now, the economy is not great, but its seriously nothing anywhere remotely close to 1932.  But if you listen to the left talk, the nation is at its worst point ever.     With willing accomplices in the mainstream press fawning over the next guy to come along and make promise after promise of what he will do as daddy government, people are willing to take the more extreme answer.  Government will grow and encompass more of our lives than ever before.  And some will continue to tell those who are trying to stop the government from infringing on rights that "you're crazy" or a "racist" because the guy who is bringing it is black-ish.

You are heaping innuendo on fdr.  FDR was the savior of capitalism in the United States.  Go back and look at the American Fascist, Socialist and Communist party enrollments when he instituted reforms that saved the United State's financial markets and instituted controls that are still in place and have been successful despite what most Republicans would say.  I'm a little bit meh about Social Security in today's world but FDR was responding to the demographics of the day and it was brilliant.

The most hilarious thing is that you retards think George W. Bush hasn't been the biggest nanny stater of them all.  Look at the meteoric rise of debt, look at the erosion of any concept of due process/civil liberties/limits on govt. power, look at the enormous and fundamental shift in the fed. govt.'s role in our schools with NCLB, the endless stream of corrupt pork that he has signed off on.  Give me a &@#%ing break.  Barack will not be substanatively worse for this country economically than George W. Bush and by ending the enormously wasteful war in Iraq and scaling back the even more enormously wasteful Missile Defense spending he may end up being more fiscally sound.  Look at Bill Clinton for Christ sakes, he makes George W. Bush look like a drunken sailor on leave.  I know he's the source of all evil, but he wasn't hurling this country in to bottomless debt.

[Dirty Sanchez]

There's a reason why the Constitution was changed to prevent guys like him from being president for life immediately following his death. 

Its not innuendo to know that the guy wanted to pack the court so he could push through whatever he wanted.  That's something someone wanting political domination would do.  If Bush tried that, you'd be howling mad. 

Its not innuendo to say that he ordered the interment of Japanese-Americans citizens.  Amazing what the left will excuse from their boys but go nuts at the slightest hint of from a Republican.

Its not innuendo to say that wilson supported and signed the espionage act of 1917 and the sedition act of 1918 and imprisoned guys like eugene debs for violating it.  Those acts made it illegal to speak out against the government.  Violations could be punished by a $10,000 fine and up to 20 years in prison.

Its not innuendo to say that wilson put out the first progressive income tax and the modern version of the central bank--the federal reserve.  He also advocated for a world court.  These were  things that karl marx called for in the communist manifesto.

Its not innuendo to say that wilson had people, including feminist leader margaret sanger, arrested for promoting contraception and abortion in violation of the comstock act--which he signed into law. 

Its not innuendo to say that the economy was improving in 1935 and 1936, then the effects of social security and many of fdr's other programs started to take root and the economy went into recession in 1937 and extended the depression until the outbreak of WWII.

Its not innuendo to say that wilson signed the literacy test act of 1917, which stopped anyone over the age of 16 who was illiterate from becoming a citizen.

Its not innuendo that the wilson administration supported the american protective league.  This was a quasi-governmental organization that numbered 250,000 members at its height that detained, interrogated, abused American citizens in opposition to WWI and the wilson administration. This was similar to the brownshirts that came around in germany a few years later.

Nowhere in this thread has anyone heaped praise on Bush, but the accusations against him aren't even as bad as what these icons of liberalism really did.  Lord knows bush isn't perfect and many of his policies have not worked, but they're also not as bad as the crybabies on the left want people to believe.  If you listened to the dnc or most libs in the media or blogosphere, the economy for the entire Bush administration has been worse than 1932.  It simply isn't true.  American's have been incredibly successful and affluent beyond the wildest dreams of our Founding Fathers. 

hillary and obama liken themselves to early 20th C. progressives like wilson and fdr.  But if you look at the real record of those two, its astounding the way they played fast and loose with power.  Never have two administrations violated civil liberties as much as them.  And these are the left's paragons of virtue?

[Cat Maniac]

Barack will not be substanatively worse for this country economically than George W. Bush

Will that be available as a bumper sticker?

[Kat Kid]

Barack will not be substanatively worse for this country economically than George W. Bush

Will that be available as a bumper sticker?

lol

I am irked when "conservatives" said absolutely zilch while Bush was maniacally spending billions and now before Obama has even set foot in the White House they are predicting economic ruin because of his "liberal spending" proposals.

[Kat Kid]

There's a reason why the Constitution was changed to prevent guys like him from being president for life immediately following his death. 

Its not innuendo to know that the guy wanted to pack the court so he could push through whatever he wanted.  That's something someone wanting political domination would do.  If Bush tried that, you'd be howling mad. 

Its not innuendo to say that he ordered the interment of Japanese-Americans citizens.  Amazing what the left will excuse from their boys but go nuts at the slightest hint of from a Republican.

Its not innuendo to say that wilson supported and signed the espionage act of 1917 and the sedition act of 1918 and imprisoned guys like eugene debs for violating it.  Those acts made it illegal to speak out against the government.  Violations could be punished by a $10,000 fine and up to 20 years in prison.

Its not innuendo to say that wilson put out the first progressive income tax and the modern version of the central bank--the federal reserve.  He also advocated for a world court.  These were  things that karl marx called for in the communist manifesto.

Its not innuendo to say that wilson had people, including feminist leader margaret sanger, arrested for promoting contraception and abortion in violation of the comstock act--which he signed into law. 

Its not innuendo to say that the economy was improving in 1935 and 1936, then the effects of social security and many of fdr's other programs started to take root and the economy went into recession in 1937 and extended the depression until the outbreak of WWII.

Its not innuendo to say that wilson signed the literacy test act of 1917, which stopped anyone over the age of 16 who was illiterate from becoming a citizen.

Its not innuendo that the wilson administration supported the american protective league.  This was a quasi-governmental organization that numbered 250,000 members at its height that detained, interrogated, abused American citizens in opposition to WWI and the wilson administration. This was similar to the brownshirts that came around in germany a few years later.

Nowhere in this thread has anyone heaped praise on Bush, but the accusations against him aren't even as bad as what these icons of liberalism really did.  Lord knows bush isn't perfect and many of his policies have not worked, but they're also not as bad as the crybabies on the left want people to believe.  If you listened to the dnc or most libs in the media or blogosphere, the economy for the entire Bush administration has been worse than 1932.  It simply isn't true.  American's have been incredibly successful and affluent beyond the wildest dreams of our Founding Fathers. 

hillary and obama liken themselves to early 20th C. progressives like wilson and fdr.  But if you look at the real record of those two, its astounding the way they played fast and loose with power.  Never have two administrations violated civil liberties as much as them.  And these are the left's paragons of virtue?

I didn't read it all.  But clearly Obama has no plans to inter Arab-Americans.  It could be argued Bush did.  The nonsensical selective comparisons and connecting of dots from a random array of points is difficult to argue with because we started out talking about something about economics I thought (I was only half paying attention) and ended up discussing internment.  Jesus Christ, I didn't know a schizophrenic Alex Jones/Bill Buckley pseudo-luminary wrote your talking points.

Now is the time where you claim victory because you wrote the longest, most ridiculous post and forced everyone to either read your tome of a rant or tap out.

[Dirty Sanchez]

It could be argued that Bush did.  Could've...kinda...twisted arguments into that.  wilson and fdr, the early liberal fascists, DID.

To sum up what I wrote:  I outlined things liberals DID DO as can be proved incontrovertibly through historic fact.  These are the models the current crop use for their agendas by their own admission.  No need to twist any soundbites for that.

Let's recap:

Conservative--fact, fact, fact
lib- you racist high school wannabe!
Conservative-fact, fact, fact
lib-you're crazy
mj-lol
conservative--fact, fact, fact
lib--I don't read things that completely destroy my worldview
Conservative--fine, I'll make the Cliff's notes version for the mtv generation mind.

[fatty fat fat]

Can you imagine when Obama wins?

A muslim in office. Jesus tits. Yes. !

[AzCat]

It could be argued that Bush did.  Could've...kinda...twisted arguments into that.  wilson and fdr, the early liberal fascists, DID.

To sum up what I wrote:  I outlined things liberals DID DO as can be proved incontrovertibly through historic fact.  These are the models the current crop use for their agendas by their own admission.  No need to twist any soundbites for that.

Let's recap:

Conservative--fact, fact, fact
lib- you racist high school wannabe!
Conservative-fact, fact, fact
lib-you're crazy
mj-lol
conservative--fact, fact, fact
lib--I don't read things that completely destroy my worldview
Conservative--fine, I'll make the Cliff's notes version for the mtv generation mind.

Arguing with lefties is usually pointles.  They're too intellectually lazy to consider your points ... after all if they weren't intellectually lazy (or just plain stupid) they wouldn't be lefties.

[fatty fat fat]

It could be argued that Bush did.  Could've...kinda...twisted arguments into that.  wilson and fdr, the early liberal fascists, DID.

To sum up what I wrote:  I outlined things liberals DID DO as can be proved incontrovertibly through historic fact.  These are the models the current crop use for their agendas by their own admission.  No need to twist any soundbites for that.

Let's recap:

Conservative--fact, fact, fact
lib- you racist high school wannabe!
Conservative-fact, fact, fact
lib-you're crazy
mj-lol
conservative--fact, fact, fact
lib--I don't read things that completely destroy my worldview
Conservative--fine, I'll make the Cliff's notes version for the mtv generation mind.

Arguing with lefties is usually pointles.  They're too intellectually lazy to consider your points ... after all if they weren't intellectually lazy (or just plain stupid) they wouldn't be lefties.

the only ones with facts here are the "lefties"

the "righties" are 'fact-less'

[AzCat]

It could be argued that Bush did.  Could've...kinda...twisted arguments into that.  wilson and fdr, the early liberal fascists, DID.

To sum up what I wrote:  I outlined things liberals DID DO as can be proved incontrovertibly through historic fact.  These are the models the current crop use for their agendas by their own admission.  No need to twist any soundbites for that.

Let's recap:

Conservative--fact, fact, fact
lib- you racist high school wannabe!
Conservative-fact, fact, fact
lib-you're crazy
mj-lol
conservative--fact, fact, fact
lib--I don't read things that completely destroy my worldview
Conservative--fine, I'll make the Cliff's notes version for the mtv generation mind.

Arguing with lefties is usually pointles.  They're too intellectually lazy to consider your points ... after all if they weren't intellectually lazy (or just plain stupid) they wouldn't be lefties.

the only ones with facts here are the "lefties"

the "righties" are 'fact-less'

Thanks for provin my point. 

[fatty fat fat]

Please. We all await the "facts"

Thanks, again. Maybe an HD-Cap? Something concrete plz.

[AzCat]

All you have to do to find the facts fatty fat fascist is to read the thread you're posting in.

[Kat Kid]

facts without logic or context are meaningless.

E.g.

2 + 2 = 4.  Airplanes fly in the air.  Only 4 airplanes can ever fly in the air because that is the highest number I can count to.

[jeffy]

This post is meaningless.

E.g.

2 + 2 = 4.  Airplanes fly in the air.  Only 4 airplanes can ever fly in the air because that is the highest number I can count to.

FYP

[dohminator]

Fact:  When you start from a conclusion, it's pretty easy to find evidence to fit that conclusion. 

Fact:  I can make the republicans look like fascists to, except that I don't have to stretch things very far to do it. 

Bush, and most republicans rely on this fuzzy notion of patriotism and national defense to support a series of policies that have eroded rights of Americans and solidified power in the hands of a unitary executive. 

Hitler relied on nationalistic feelings and a sense of being attacked and at war to support a series of policies that eroded civil rights and consolidated power in a supreme ruler. 

It's really not that hard.

[Dirty Sanchez]

Fact:  I can make the republicans look like fascists to, except that I don't have to stretch things very far to do it. 

We didn't have too either. 

liberalism is responsible for more murders and suppression of rights in the name of "the people" than anything else since 1900.

[dohminator]

Really this is a pretty silly argument overall as there are parallels on both sides. 

Well, except that of course we did almost have a fascist government installed in the US.  They really did seem more "conservative" than liberal.  http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2007/240707fascistcoup.htm  Edit:  Er, I meant to say patriots trying save the US from the fascist Roosevelt. 

This is a pretty good breakdown of Jonah Goldberg's book.  http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=jonah_goldbergs_bizarro_history

[Dirty Sanchez]

Yeah, I've studied the coup attempt somewhat.  Those guys were supporters of German/Italian style fascism.  However, as much as leftover hippies want you to believe, fascism is not a construct of the right on the linear political spectrum.  It, like libertarianism, is not on the linear spectrum.  Both Penn Jillette and Ron Paul are both libertarians, but they come at it from different directions.  fascism works much the same way, but just the opposite.  It relies on total government control of the individual through coercive methods, whether by thug or by law.  Looking at history, one of the major things fascist states have relied on to achieve their power is a cult of personality and  spellbinding populist leadership.  These rise up in times of economic crisis, like the great depression--and what some spoiled few have claimed the last decade has been.

And you're using a liberal blogaganda site as a good descriptor of the book?  You'll get a fair and honest review there.