RSS Feeds
Contact Us |
|
|||||||||||||
Columnists » Clayson
Article rated a 2.6
by 10
users |
Sunday, October 5, 2008 6:06 AM CDT
Signs show fascism could be resurging
DISCLAIMER: The Courier provides our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. Please keep in mind that civility is a necessary component of productive conversation. All blatantly inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate comments (i.e. vulgarity, marketing, etc.) are subject to rejection and/or removal. Comments will appear if and when they are approved. For a more in-depth explanation of our policy, please see our Rules of the Road. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.
Signs show fascism could be resurging
By DENNIS CLAYSON
The current problems with bailouts of banks and semi-private lending institutions have the Roosevelt era ideological dinosaurs up and crowing like roosters before the dawn of a glorious new socialist awakening.
Capitalist “greed” has brought the system low and is destroying the prosperity of the nation. This is the best news in the last 60 years if you are an avid leftist, and especially if you are of the “green” variety.
Whoa, boys and girls! Roosevelt has not been resurrected and Marx will never again be raised from his slumber, but the ghost of Mussolini has been seen haunting the halls of Congress.
Free markets still work and still work better than anything ever devised in the world we actually live in. Notice the word “free.” Free markets can only exist under the rule of law.
We have been corrupting our own system as fast as possible to make a mockery of this concept. If no single human being can understand the tax code, you can only imagine what the regulatory statutes look like for a large business.
We have made the rules of the marketplace almost arbitrary. Under such a system, any logically thinking person would try to control the chaos as much as possible. That means going to Washington and trying to modify the randomness in your own favor.
The end result makes individuals and groups in Washington very powerful, very rich and very corrupt. Their self-interest is actually advanced by confusion.
Think for a moment. If you are a scoundrel intent on making yourself very powerful and rich, where are you going to go? Are you going to Washington, which is the most concentrated center of money and power in the world, and make regulations that no one understands and which can be applied in almost any fashion? Or are you going into business and try to make it in Peoria?
And if you are a scoundrel in Peoria and you know that members of Congress and regulatory agents can be bought off, do you not also go to Washington?
“Oh no!” say the leftists. “You go to Wall Street. The pure in heart go into politics and save the masses from their own worst instincts.”
Such naivete should be illegal. Of the 10 richest members of Congress, seven are Democrats. According to Roll Call, their family fortunes came from food, international industries, electronics, oil, stocks and bonds, automobiles, chemicals and running illegal booze.
Our own Tom Harkin is number 27 on the list of millionaires. Other than marriage, how do you think these enemies of capitalism made their millions? Dishing out food in soup lines and handing out condoms to those over-reproducing?
Their solution to the financial mess demonstrates what is wrong with Washington and voters who still buy into ideology that should have died out decades ago.
A little test for you.
What type of economic system is characterized by the following? Its advocates tell us that prosperity would naturally follow if a nation achieved a cultural and spiritual re-awakening. Therefore, party leaders consider the economy to be of less importance than social issues and usually do not have clear economic views.
Often, members of the political party make completely opposite statements about the economic policies they supported in the past. Once in power, they usually adopt whatever economic program is most suitable for political goals.
They argue that the state has a role in mediating economically between classes through affirmative action and other programs. In times of crisis (which is almost constant), they maintain that the government should exert strong directive influence, and effectively control production and allocation of resources.
Private property and private initiative should be maintained, but these should be contingent upon service to the nation.
What you just read is a definition of fascism.
One last little test: Who complained, “The State pays for the blunders of private enterprise ... Profit is private and individual. Loss is public and social.”
That was an Italian historian, Gaetano Salvemini, writing of fascism in 1936.
Jonah Goldberg argues in his 2007 book that fascism has been resurrected by modern liberalism. He also maintains that even the more sinister elements of fascism, including racial and class warfare, and eugenics are seeing resurgence.
Current events do nothing to invalidate his arguments.
Capitalist “greed” has brought the system low and is destroying the prosperity of the nation. This is the best news in the last 60 years if you are an avid leftist, and especially if you are of the “green” variety.
Whoa, boys and girls! Roosevelt has not been resurrected and Marx will never again be raised from his slumber, but the ghost of Mussolini has been seen haunting the halls of Congress.
Free markets still work and still work better than anything ever devised in the world we actually live in. Notice the word “free.” Free markets can only exist under the rule of law.
We have been corrupting our own system as fast as possible to make a mockery of this concept. If no single human being can understand the tax code, you can only imagine what the regulatory statutes look like for a large business.
We have made the rules of the marketplace almost arbitrary. Under such a system, any logically thinking person would try to control the chaos as much as possible. That means going to Washington and trying to modify the randomness in your own favor.
The end result makes individuals and groups in Washington very powerful, very rich and very corrupt. Their self-interest is actually advanced by confusion.
Think for a moment. If you are a scoundrel intent on making yourself very powerful and rich, where are you going to go? Are you going to Washington, which is the most concentrated center of money and power in the world, and make regulations that no one understands and which can be applied in almost any fashion? Or are you going into business and try to make it in Peoria?
And if you are a scoundrel in Peoria and you know that members of Congress and regulatory agents can be bought off, do you not also go to Washington?
“Oh no!” say the leftists. “You go to Wall Street. The pure in heart go into politics and save the masses from their own worst instincts.”
Such naivete should be illegal. Of the 10 richest members of Congress, seven are Democrats. According to Roll Call, their family fortunes came from food, international industries, electronics, oil, stocks and bonds, automobiles, chemicals and running illegal booze.
Our own Tom Harkin is number 27 on the list of millionaires. Other than marriage, how do you think these enemies of capitalism made their millions? Dishing out food in soup lines and handing out condoms to those over-reproducing?
Their solution to the financial mess demonstrates what is wrong with Washington and voters who still buy into ideology that should have died out decades ago.
A little test for you.
What type of economic system is characterized by the following? Its advocates tell us that prosperity would naturally follow if a nation achieved a cultural and spiritual re-awakening. Therefore, party leaders consider the economy to be of less importance than social issues and usually do not have clear economic views.
Often, members of the political party make completely opposite statements about the economic policies they supported in the past. Once in power, they usually adopt whatever economic program is most suitable for political goals.
They argue that the state has a role in mediating economically between classes through affirmative action and other programs. In times of crisis (which is almost constant), they maintain that the government should exert strong directive influence, and effectively control production and allocation of resources.
Private property and private initiative should be maintained, but these should be contingent upon service to the nation.
What you just read is a definition of fascism.
One last little test: Who complained, “The State pays for the blunders of private enterprise ... Profit is private and individual. Loss is public and social.”
That was an Italian historian, Gaetano Salvemini, writing of fascism in 1936.
Jonah Goldberg argues in his 2007 book that fascism has been resurrected by modern liberalism. He also maintains that even the more sinister elements of fascism, including racial and class warfare, and eugenics are seeing resurgence.
Current events do nothing to invalidate his arguments.
More Stories from Columnists » Clayson
JanInWloo wrote on Oct 5, 2008 2:10 PM:
" Call me old-fashioned, but words do mean something. You can't just redefine them to suit yourself.
Merriam-Webster's website defines fas·cism
Main Entry:
fas·cism Listen to the pronunciation of fascism
Pronunciation:
\ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi-\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date:
1921
1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
OK, so doesn't that sound a lot more like Bush and his crew, who have no respect for the balance of power inherent in our constitution than it does the "liberals"? And just which candidate is it whose chant is "Country First"?
As usual Clayson is full of it. "
Merriam-Webster's website defines fas·cism
Main Entry:
fas·cism Listen to the pronunciation of fascism
Pronunciation:
\ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi-\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date:
1921
1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
OK, so doesn't that sound a lot more like Bush and his crew, who have no respect for the balance of power inherent in our constitution than it does the "liberals"? And just which candidate is it whose chant is "Country First"?
As usual Clayson is full of it. "
hetfield wrote on Oct 5, 2008 6:52 PM:
" clayson does a great job pointing otu the liberald do-nothings in politics who are in it for the benjis! harken is 27th?! this yahoo is the worst senator in the country, and he does nothing but make millions. what a farce.
but of course the left wont blame him, instead saying he deserves what he gets because the market pays him. well guess what, the market is nothing but PACs and interest groups who harken is in bed with.
dont forget, a few months ago, harken allowed his party to go on vacation while thousands of iowans needed him(for once). he stood there and had the gall to blame bush for the floods.
what a typical hypocrit on the left.
harken, kennedy, clinton, barack hussein obama, dodd, frank, algore...the list of incompetants goes on and on, but will be relected in landslides by ignorant, minions of robots voting for gay marriage.
go usa.
time to save our unborn. vote no to these do-nothings. "
but of course the left wont blame him, instead saying he deserves what he gets because the market pays him. well guess what, the market is nothing but PACs and interest groups who harken is in bed with.
dont forget, a few months ago, harken allowed his party to go on vacation while thousands of iowans needed him(for once). he stood there and had the gall to blame bush for the floods.
what a typical hypocrit on the left.
harken, kennedy, clinton, barack hussein obama, dodd, frank, algore...the list of incompetants goes on and on, but will be relected in landslides by ignorant, minions of robots voting for gay marriage.
go usa.
time to save our unborn. vote no to these do-nothings. "
Phil wrote on Oct 5, 2008 7:57 PM:
" This is simply gibberish - written by someone who doesn't have a clue what he is talking about. Once again the dreaded "left" as Clayton calls them is up to no good. Of course this "left" has no name. No individuals listed. No orgainizations or secret societies. No politicians named. No one. Pathetic.
You want to know the inside scoop on the Wall Street meltdown? From folks who are on the inside and know how Wall Street played their game? No politicians interviewed - or blamed. No one from the "left" as Clayson would call them. Go to cbsnews.com and watch the first segment of 60 Minutes from tonight (Sunday). They let the experts do the talking - its worth 20 minutes of your life.
Spoiler alert - Jimmy Carter isn't the cause - the great minds of the "free" market are. "
You want to know the inside scoop on the Wall Street meltdown? From folks who are on the inside and know how Wall Street played their game? No politicians interviewed - or blamed. No one from the "left" as Clayson would call them. Go to cbsnews.com and watch the first segment of 60 Minutes from tonight (Sunday). They let the experts do the talking - its worth 20 minutes of your life.
Spoiler alert - Jimmy Carter isn't the cause - the great minds of the "free" market are. "
Independent wrote on Oct 5, 2008 9:58 PM:
" Is this supposed to be a defense statement for the free market system?
Prof Clayson just can't admit he was wrong. He has the "Fonze" complex.
He must be going crazy, watching Obama's numbers go up in the polls every second.
Even our own Tom Harkin gets put on the Prof's list. "
Prof Clayson just can't admit he was wrong. He has the "Fonze" complex.
He must be going crazy, watching Obama's numbers go up in the polls every second.
Even our own Tom Harkin gets put on the Prof's list. "
jeroze wrote on Oct 5, 2008 10:19 PM:
" Professor Clayson informs us that "Jonah Goldberg argues in his 2007 book that fascism has been resurrected by modern liberalism."
Are we to believe that this facism that is showing its ugly face during the Bush reign is liberalisms?
Can it be that Professor is making a case that Bush is liberal.
It's now time for our one of our friends to demand of Professor Clayson to name one edict that the government has proclaimed to prove that facism is present. Come on you Clayson supporters. Brag him up for this editorial. "
Are we to believe that this facism that is showing its ugly face during the Bush reign is liberalisms?
Can it be that Professor is making a case that Bush is liberal.
It's now time for our one of our friends to demand of Professor Clayson to name one edict that the government has proclaimed to prove that facism is present. Come on you Clayson supporters. Brag him up for this editorial. "
Whyonearth wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:54 AM:
" Finall--Cross gets it!! In the following equations he states:
"Communism = Socialism = Liberalism = Progressivism = Democrats = Fascists = Dictators..."
I really thought he was quite dense, but he finally understands that these are not individualaly exclusive. And in so recognizing this, I hope he realizes how his consistant anti-American diatribe is dividing this country even further. America was never as divided as now going back to Bill (the other Mesiah) Clinton (whom was never elected by the majority of Americans). It is the mindset of Cross, Phil, et al that the terrorists are counting on to conquer and supress this land that I love.
Yes Cross, I'm finally glad you get it.
Communism = Socialism = Liberalism = Progressivism = Democrats = Fascists = Dictators..." "
"Communism = Socialism = Liberalism = Progressivism = Democrats = Fascists = Dictators..."
I really thought he was quite dense, but he finally understands that these are not individualaly exclusive. And in so recognizing this, I hope he realizes how his consistant anti-American diatribe is dividing this country even further. America was never as divided as now going back to Bill (the other Mesiah) Clinton (whom was never elected by the majority of Americans). It is the mindset of Cross, Phil, et al that the terrorists are counting on to conquer and supress this land that I love.
Yes Cross, I'm finally glad you get it.
Communism = Socialism = Liberalism = Progressivism = Democrats = Fascists = Dictators..." "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 6, 2008 8:56 AM:
" I set up the equivalence list to show how irrational Clayson is. Now, someone literally says that the equivalence is true. All that does is show how irrational the whole of the hard right is. "
xdfred wrote on Oct 6, 2008 9:25 AM:
" cross1242 wrote on Oct 6, 2008 8:56 AM:
" I set up the equivalence list to show how irrational Clayson is. Now, someone literally says that the equivalence is true. All that does is show how irrational the whole of the hard right is. " So, one person takes the garbage you spew every week literally, and you use this as an excuse to justify calling the whole hard right irrational? You see why I call your writings garbage?
"..Communism = Socialism = Liberalism = Progressivism = Democrats = Fascists = Dictators..."= Barack Hussein Obama. There, now it's complete. Ooops, forgot to add terrorist lackey. "
" I set up the equivalence list to show how irrational Clayson is. Now, someone literally says that the equivalence is true. All that does is show how irrational the whole of the hard right is. " So, one person takes the garbage you spew every week literally, and you use this as an excuse to justify calling the whole hard right irrational? You see why I call your writings garbage?
"..Communism = Socialism = Liberalism = Progressivism = Democrats = Fascists = Dictators..."= Barack Hussein Obama. There, now it's complete. Ooops, forgot to add terrorist lackey. "
xdfred wrote on Oct 6, 2008 9:39 AM:
" JanInWloo wrote on Oct 5, 2008 2:10 PM:
" Call me old-fashioned, but words do mean something. You can't just redefine them to suit yourself.
"...OK, so doesn't that sound a lot more like Bush and his crew, who have no respect for the balance of power inherent in our constitution than it does the "liberals"?
No. Where did Roe vs Wade come from? Abortion isn't in the Constitution, so amendment 10 forces the issue to the states. But liberals take the fascist approach to overide the Constitution and the will of the people at every opportunity. Same sex "marriage" is another example of liberal fascism. The people in this country have shown time and again the refusal to be forced to recognize same sex "marriage" at the ballot box, but the fascist left wing could care less.
The Constitution explicitly states the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, yet liberals could care less.
Where has president Bush suppressed political opposition? Are his political adversaries in the gulag? No, so wrong again. Now, which political candidate is lining up prosecutors in Missouri to go after political opponents? Threatening TV and radio stations if the run NRA ads? Mr fascist, Barack Hussein Obama. "
" Call me old-fashioned, but words do mean something. You can't just redefine them to suit yourself.
"...OK, so doesn't that sound a lot more like Bush and his crew, who have no respect for the balance of power inherent in our constitution than it does the "liberals"?
No. Where did Roe vs Wade come from? Abortion isn't in the Constitution, so amendment 10 forces the issue to the states. But liberals take the fascist approach to overide the Constitution and the will of the people at every opportunity. Same sex "marriage" is another example of liberal fascism. The people in this country have shown time and again the refusal to be forced to recognize same sex "marriage" at the ballot box, but the fascist left wing could care less.
The Constitution explicitly states the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, yet liberals could care less.
Where has president Bush suppressed political opposition? Are his political adversaries in the gulag? No, so wrong again. Now, which political candidate is lining up prosecutors in Missouri to go after political opponents? Threatening TV and radio stations if the run NRA ads? Mr fascist, Barack Hussein Obama. "
Newswatcher wrote on Oct 6, 2008 9:40 AM:
" Cross, you come across as such an elitist.
The Democrats are supposed to stand for diversity and tolerance.
But in your posts, I find it obvious that for you and the many far left liberals like you, it's only if people think as YOU do that you tolerate them and accept what their particular qualification of 'diversity' is.
The rest are just evil, wrong and pathetic, right? Does being an Elitist give you a powerful feeling? Hint: It's not a compliment. "
The Democrats are supposed to stand for diversity and tolerance.
But in your posts, I find it obvious that for you and the many far left liberals like you, it's only if people think as YOU do that you tolerate them and accept what their particular qualification of 'diversity' is.
The rest are just evil, wrong and pathetic, right? Does being an Elitist give you a powerful feeling? Hint: It's not a compliment. "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 6, 2008 11:56 AM:
" Newswatcher @ Oct 6, 2008 9:40 AM said, "Cross, you come across as such an elitist."
Thank you.
Since when was it anyone's goal to be just "mediocre" and no more. "
Thank you.
Since when was it anyone's goal to be just "mediocre" and no more. "
Phil wrote on Oct 6, 2008 12:03 PM:
" cross - great job, you really stirred the hornet's nest this week, you anti-American you!
What a laugh! We have the most anti-American president in history now in office with the most fascist VP in history but cross and I are anti-American.
Of course the terrorists have already had a number of victories right under our nose. The way we travel, Guantanamo, FISA and getting Republicans to use terrorism to scare people to vote for them to name a few.
Of course we have the great constitutional scholar xdfred giving you tutoring on that subject. Hey - read up on Bush vs. Gore - where the Supreme Court made new law - judicial activism I think you call it - so that the recount was stopped.
I think this called "the pot calling the kettle black". "
What a laugh! We have the most anti-American president in history now in office with the most fascist VP in history but cross and I are anti-American.
Of course the terrorists have already had a number of victories right under our nose. The way we travel, Guantanamo, FISA and getting Republicans to use terrorism to scare people to vote for them to name a few.
Of course we have the great constitutional scholar xdfred giving you tutoring on that subject. Hey - read up on Bush vs. Gore - where the Supreme Court made new law - judicial activism I think you call it - so that the recount was stopped.
I think this called "the pot calling the kettle black". "
xdfred wrote on Oct 6, 2008 12:27 PM:
" Phil wrote on Oct 6, 2008 12:03 PM:
"..What a laugh! We have the most anti-American president in history now in office with the most fascist VP in history but cross and I are anti-American..." And what evil deeds have they done to get those titles? I have shown what the fascist Marxist Obama has been up to.
"...Of course the terrorists have already had a number of victories right under our nose. The way we travel, Guantanamo, FISA and getting Republicans to use terrorism to scare people to vote for them to name a few..." Funny. Left wingers always trot out the canards of fear, gloom, and doom. When is Bush going to take SS away from our retirees? Lock us all up. I'll bet there isn't when thing that the administartion has done that directly affects you.
"..Of course we have the great constitutional scholar xdfred.."
Thank you, thank you. Hold the applause.
"...giving you tutoring on that subject. Hey - read up on Bush vs. Gore - where the Supreme Court made new law - judicial activism I think you call it - so that the recount was stopped...." All the supreme court did was stop the endless stream of illegal recounts. But, hey, feel free to try to rewrite history.
"...I think this called "the pot calling the kettle black"...." Then there's racism rearing it's ugly head. "
"..What a laugh! We have the most anti-American president in history now in office with the most fascist VP in history but cross and I are anti-American..." And what evil deeds have they done to get those titles? I have shown what the fascist Marxist Obama has been up to.
"...Of course the terrorists have already had a number of victories right under our nose. The way we travel, Guantanamo, FISA and getting Republicans to use terrorism to scare people to vote for them to name a few..." Funny. Left wingers always trot out the canards of fear, gloom, and doom. When is Bush going to take SS away from our retirees? Lock us all up. I'll bet there isn't when thing that the administartion has done that directly affects you.
"..Of course we have the great constitutional scholar xdfred.."
Thank you, thank you. Hold the applause.
"...giving you tutoring on that subject. Hey - read up on Bush vs. Gore - where the Supreme Court made new law - judicial activism I think you call it - so that the recount was stopped...." All the supreme court did was stop the endless stream of illegal recounts. But, hey, feel free to try to rewrite history.
"...I think this called "the pot calling the kettle black"...." Then there's racism rearing it's ugly head. "
unionlabel wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:36 PM:
" The drums of socialism and its extremist ways are beating loudly.
Check out the "Obama youth" video,
reminds me of 1930's Germany. "
Check out the "Obama youth" video,
reminds me of 1930's Germany. "
Phil wrote on Oct 6, 2008 4:24 PM:
" xdfred - first, Obama can't be both a fascist and a Marxist, and for that matter a socialist too - you have to pick one as they are very different.
Second, do I really have to list everything Bush/Cheney have done?
- Ignore 9/11 warnings
- Illegally invade countries
- Expose covert CIA agents
- Bankrupt the country
- Illegal spying
Third, read "The Vote: Bush, Gore and the Supreme Court" - one of several books on this topic. Basically Scalia and company made it up as they went.
Fourth, no nothing the admistration has done directly affects me - just the way I travel both in the USA and overseas and the taxes I pay to name two. Hopefully, many of these things can be reversed soon.
Finally, you like to bring up how nothing Bush has done has affected me yet nothing Obama has done has affected you - has it? And I am sure it won't either. "
Second, do I really have to list everything Bush/Cheney have done?
- Ignore 9/11 warnings
- Illegally invade countries
- Expose covert CIA agents
- Bankrupt the country
- Illegal spying
Third, read "The Vote: Bush, Gore and the Supreme Court" - one of several books on this topic. Basically Scalia and company made it up as they went.
Fourth, no nothing the admistration has done directly affects me - just the way I travel both in the USA and overseas and the taxes I pay to name two. Hopefully, many of these things can be reversed soon.
Finally, you like to bring up how nothing Bush has done has affected me yet nothing Obama has done has affected you - has it? And I am sure it won't either. "
hetfield wrote on Oct 6, 2008 7:56 PM:
" phil, it is going to rain tomorrow. I thought I would let you know so you could blame bush/cheney. I mean, heck, why not just give ME a noble prize for forecasting the rain. this wouldnt be far from what algore got one for.
oh, he also invented the internet. i forgot.
in regards to FL 8 years ago. (i know it goes fast. in a few years you will be a adult on state aid, paid by the folks you dont care for; wage earners.) bush won the state any way you look at it. just because gore had the gall to try to contend that some votes should matter more than others didnt matter. what did was how the polls were wrong(again) and bush won the presidency. you can blame the court all you want. you will anyway.
oh and for the record, any dote can write a book; barack hussein obama even managed to write two.
say no to socialism, racism, terrorism, and barack hussein obamaism. vote no to the party that insists abortion is good for society. "
oh, he also invented the internet. i forgot.
in regards to FL 8 years ago. (i know it goes fast. in a few years you will be a adult on state aid, paid by the folks you dont care for; wage earners.) bush won the state any way you look at it. just because gore had the gall to try to contend that some votes should matter more than others didnt matter. what did was how the polls were wrong(again) and bush won the presidency. you can blame the court all you want. you will anyway.
oh and for the record, any dote can write a book; barack hussein obama even managed to write two.
say no to socialism, racism, terrorism, and barack hussein obamaism. vote no to the party that insists abortion is good for society. "
Independent wrote on Oct 6, 2008 11:30 PM:
" xdfred and hetfield are the same person and I challenge the WCF to prove me wrong with the registration system. A simple yes or no will do.
If that assumption is wrong then, I presume Schizophrenia is the culprit. "
If that assumption is wrong then, I presume Schizophrenia is the culprit. "
hetfield wrote on Oct 7, 2008 6:48 AM:
" independent, talk about paranoid schizo? i suggest you take a break, get a little fresh air. dont worry, be happy.
i know that is not in the typical liberal ideal but try it once. "
i know that is not in the typical liberal ideal but try it once. "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:49 AM:
" hetfield @ Oct 6, 2008 7:56 PM said, "in regards to FL 8 years ago. bush won the state any way you look at it."
Actually, hetfield, that's another myth. After the election was final, several media groups undertook a complete recount of the whole state of Florida. What they found was that if a recount was done the way the Democrats wanted (localized in the precincts under dispute) Bush did win. However, if the whole state was recounted, Gore won Florida. Since it was an unofficial recount and the US Supreme Court had already ruled that Bush was president, there was nothing that could be done about it.
The purpose of the media recount was to provide an answer for posterity to the question, "Who would have won had there been a full recount?" The unequivocal answer was that Gore would have won.
Your assertion the Bush won "any way you look at it" is just another counter-factual argument by you. "
Actually, hetfield, that's another myth. After the election was final, several media groups undertook a complete recount of the whole state of Florida. What they found was that if a recount was done the way the Democrats wanted (localized in the precincts under dispute) Bush did win. However, if the whole state was recounted, Gore won Florida. Since it was an unofficial recount and the US Supreme Court had already ruled that Bush was president, there was nothing that could be done about it.
The purpose of the media recount was to provide an answer for posterity to the question, "Who would have won had there been a full recount?" The unequivocal answer was that Gore would have won.
Your assertion the Bush won "any way you look at it" is just another counter-factual argument by you. "
xdfred wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:32 AM:
" "..After the election was final, several media groups undertook a complete recount of the whole state of Florida. What they found was that if a recount was done the way the Democrats wanted..." Prove it.
"..US Supreme Court had already ruled that Bush was president..." No, they put a stop to illegal re-counts. The democrat strategy was to recount over and over until they took the election. You sir are a blatant liar. "
"..US Supreme Court had already ruled that Bush was president..." No, they put a stop to illegal re-counts. The democrat strategy was to recount over and over until they took the election. You sir are a blatant liar. "
Leo46 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:44 AM:
" Cross... I believe it was NORC that did the study on behalf of several media outlets. See http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html
The last two paragraphs are important. "
The last two paragraphs are important. "
Phil wrote on Oct 7, 2008 10:23 AM:
" hetfield - The other counter factual argument is that just because the Supreme Court ruled in Bush's favor, it was a fundamentally solid ruling. The truth is it was anything but that.
Is it still the law? Sure. But it was "judicial activism" pure and simple - new "made up" law, not based on any precedent.
But hey, judicial activism is OK when it works for you, isn't it?
And by the way, continuing to claim that Al Gore said he invented the internet shows your ignorance. No one with an IQ above 20 believes that one anymore. Urban legend of the dumb for the dumb.
Finally, there are religious people - Christian and non-Christian, as well as those who hold no religious view, who believe individuals have the right to choose what is best for them. Does that make them pro-abortion? Of course not, only an idiot would claim that. Yet I never hear you say one word about the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths Bush - and McCain - are responsible for - nor the millions who have been displaced, wounded, etc. They had no choice, no say in their fate, but I guess since they are already born they don't matter. Several hundred thousand of them were Christian and Jewish, as well as Muslim.
I guess you are the self appointed judge and jury of which lives (or potential lives) are important and which aren't. "
Is it still the law? Sure. But it was "judicial activism" pure and simple - new "made up" law, not based on any precedent.
But hey, judicial activism is OK when it works for you, isn't it?
And by the way, continuing to claim that Al Gore said he invented the internet shows your ignorance. No one with an IQ above 20 believes that one anymore. Urban legend of the dumb for the dumb.
Finally, there are religious people - Christian and non-Christian, as well as those who hold no religious view, who believe individuals have the right to choose what is best for them. Does that make them pro-abortion? Of course not, only an idiot would claim that. Yet I never hear you say one word about the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths Bush - and McCain - are responsible for - nor the millions who have been displaced, wounded, etc. They had no choice, no say in their fate, but I guess since they are already born they don't matter. Several hundred thousand of them were Christian and Jewish, as well as Muslim.
I guess you are the self appointed judge and jury of which lives (or potential lives) are important and which aren't. "
Phil wrote on Oct 7, 2008 10:24 AM:
" Newswatcher - maybe you found it funny.
Anyway, I note since you didn't deny any of it - you acknowledge its factual. "
Anyway, I note since you didn't deny any of it - you acknowledge its factual. "
think wrote on Oct 7, 2008 10:25 AM:
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States
"Internal Revenue Code of 1939, to include:gains, profits, and income derived from salaries, wages or compensation for personal service . . . of whatever kind and in whatever form paid, or from professions, vocations, trades, businesses, commerce, or sales, or dealings in property, whether real or personal, growing out of the ownership or use of or interest in such property; also from interest, rent, dividends, securities, or the transaction of any business carried on for gain or profit, or gains or profits and income derived from any source whatever". Sounds like FDR was the man behind the mask. FDR changed wage to income and added 60 million new tax payers over night. A real Robbing Hood for sure. FDR was a fascist.The same can be said of FDR getting us into WW II. We had no business there. "
"Internal Revenue Code of 1939, to include:gains, profits, and income derived from salaries, wages or compensation for personal service . . . of whatever kind and in whatever form paid, or from professions, vocations, trades, businesses, commerce, or sales, or dealings in property, whether real or personal, growing out of the ownership or use of or interest in such property; also from interest, rent, dividends, securities, or the transaction of any business carried on for gain or profit, or gains or profits and income derived from any source whatever". Sounds like FDR was the man behind the mask. FDR changed wage to income and added 60 million new tax payers over night. A real Robbing Hood for sure. FDR was a fascist.The same can be said of FDR getting us into WW II. We had no business there. "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:23 AM:
" Phil @ Oct 7, 2008 10:23 AM said, speaking of the US Supreme Court's ruling in Bush v. Gore, "Is it still the law? Sure."
Actually, it's probably not "the law." In the court's decision, they forbade the citation of the case as precedent for anything. That's unusual, to say the least. No one knows of any other time when the court has done that. So, if the case can't be cited as precedent, then it's not "good law" as the lawyer's say.
It's also an indication that the five justices who signed the decision knew it was a political decision and not something they wanted mucking up decisions in the future. "
Actually, it's probably not "the law." In the court's decision, they forbade the citation of the case as precedent for anything. That's unusual, to say the least. No one knows of any other time when the court has done that. So, if the case can't be cited as precedent, then it's not "good law" as the lawyer's say.
It's also an indication that the five justices who signed the decision knew it was a political decision and not something they wanted mucking up decisions in the future. "
xdfred wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:23 PM:
" Phil wrote on Oct 7, 2008 10:23 AM:
" hetfield - The other counter factual argument is that just because the Supreme Court ruled in Bush's favor, it was a fundamentally solid ruling. The truth is it was anything but that.
Is it still the law? Sure. But it was "judicial activism" pure and simple - new "made up" law, not based on any precedent..." For the umteenth time and the weak of mind, all the supreme court did was tell Florida to follow it's election laws with respect to counts and recounts. That's it. Florida democrats were trying to change the game.
"...Finally, there are religious people - Christian and non-Christian, as well as those who hold no religious view, who believe individuals have the right to choose what is best for them...." Sure genius, but who speaks for the baby? Let's say you wanted to jump off a roof because Obama lost, and you think that's what's best for you. Fine, but you can't take a 2 week old kid with you. See the point?
"...Yet I never hear you say one word about the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths Bush - and McCain - are responsible for - nor the millions who have been displaced, wounded, etc. They had no choice,..." What hundreds of thousands? And what's this have to do with the previous? War is bad. People die in war. But, guess what, wars happen. Maybe Saddam shouldn't have started this one? And the true hundreds of thousands (they found the bodies) Saddam was killing to get his jollies? They really didn't have a choice. The ones you pretend to lament for did. They could have tried to hand Hussein over.
As to your joke list:
- Ignore 9/11 warnings What warnings?
- Illegally invade countries It was legal and you know it
- Expose covert CIA agents Covert? You can't be talking about Plame, right?
- Bankrupt the country How did Cheney bankrupt the country? Fanni and Freddie are more in bed with Obama than Cheney.
- Illegal spying. What illegal spying. Oh, the stuff you make up.
Really funny stuff. "
" hetfield - The other counter factual argument is that just because the Supreme Court ruled in Bush's favor, it was a fundamentally solid ruling. The truth is it was anything but that.
Is it still the law? Sure. But it was "judicial activism" pure and simple - new "made up" law, not based on any precedent..." For the umteenth time and the weak of mind, all the supreme court did was tell Florida to follow it's election laws with respect to counts and recounts. That's it. Florida democrats were trying to change the game.
"...Finally, there are religious people - Christian and non-Christian, as well as those who hold no religious view, who believe individuals have the right to choose what is best for them...." Sure genius, but who speaks for the baby? Let's say you wanted to jump off a roof because Obama lost, and you think that's what's best for you. Fine, but you can't take a 2 week old kid with you. See the point?
"...Yet I never hear you say one word about the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths Bush - and McCain - are responsible for - nor the millions who have been displaced, wounded, etc. They had no choice,..." What hundreds of thousands? And what's this have to do with the previous? War is bad. People die in war. But, guess what, wars happen. Maybe Saddam shouldn't have started this one? And the true hundreds of thousands (they found the bodies) Saddam was killing to get his jollies? They really didn't have a choice. The ones you pretend to lament for did. They could have tried to hand Hussein over.
As to your joke list:
- Ignore 9/11 warnings What warnings?
- Illegally invade countries It was legal and you know it
- Expose covert CIA agents Covert? You can't be talking about Plame, right?
- Bankrupt the country How did Cheney bankrupt the country? Fanni and Freddie are more in bed with Obama than Cheney.
- Illegal spying. What illegal spying. Oh, the stuff you make up.
Really funny stuff. "
xdfred wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:24 PM:
" think wrote on Oct 7, 2008 10:25 AM:
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States
You're right Think. That's when it started. "
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States
You're right Think. That's when it started. "
cubbies09 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:48 PM:
" Here is the question I have for all you brilliant lefties. Let's just say for argument sake that Gore had been elected as President. Do you really think 9/11 would not have happened? They had been planning these attacks for years. Mostly on Clintons watch. More than likely with Gore in office we would have been attacked again because he would not of had the resolve to go after these killers. "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:50 PM:
" think @ Oct 7, 2008 10:25 AM said, "FDR was a fascist. The same can be said of FDR getting us into WW II. We had no business there."
Just out of curiosity, think, what was to be done about the Japanese attacking us at Pearl Harbor and the Germans declaring war on us?
And, if FDR was a fascist, why did they attack us to begin with? "
Just out of curiosity, think, what was to be done about the Japanese attacking us at Pearl Harbor and the Germans declaring war on us?
And, if FDR was a fascist, why did they attack us to begin with? "
xdfred wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:50 PM:
" cross1242 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:23 AM:
" Phil @ Oct 7, 2008 10:23 AM said, speaking of the US Supreme Court's ruling in Bush v. Gore, "Is it still the law? Sure."
Actually, it's probably not "the law." In the court's decision, they forbade the citation of the case as precedent for anything. That's unusual, to say the least. No one knows of any other time when the court has done that. So, if the case can't be cited as precedent, then it's not "good law" as the lawyer's say.
It's also an indication that the five justices who signed the decision knew it was a political decision and not something they wanted mucking up decisions in the future. "
Your grasp of law and election history is....embarassing. If you actually read the decision it pretty much says that the court should not have had to decide this case. Political operatives within Florida tried to cirumvent their own law, then, the Florida court, instead of doing it's job and stopping the illegal activities rendered a ridiculous decision based on politics. "
" Phil @ Oct 7, 2008 10:23 AM said, speaking of the US Supreme Court's ruling in Bush v. Gore, "Is it still the law? Sure."
Actually, it's probably not "the law." In the court's decision, they forbade the citation of the case as precedent for anything. That's unusual, to say the least. No one knows of any other time when the court has done that. So, if the case can't be cited as precedent, then it's not "good law" as the lawyer's say.
It's also an indication that the five justices who signed the decision knew it was a political decision and not something they wanted mucking up decisions in the future. "
Your grasp of law and election history is....embarassing. If you actually read the decision it pretty much says that the court should not have had to decide this case. Political operatives within Florida tried to cirumvent their own law, then, the Florida court, instead of doing it's job and stopping the illegal activities rendered a ridiculous decision based on politics. "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:01 PM:
" xdfred w@ Oct 7, 2008 12:23 PM said, "all the supreme court did was tell Florida to follow it's election laws with respect to counts and recounts."
Well, that's not true either. It's the Florida Supreme Court was the one that said that the recount should follow Florida's law. The Florida court's decision was based purely on Florida law and under long precedent, the Florida Supreme Court's word should have been the last word on that.
What the US Supreme Court did, by 5 - 4, was to say that despite the law and precedent that only the Florida courts should decide was to be judicial activists of the highest order and just order the result that they wanted for political reasons. That's the reason that they said that Gore v. Bush was not precedent for anything. Technically, it overruled an entire line of case law that the local courts decide what local law means. They didn't want to do that so they had to make the decision non-precedential.
I just wish that those on the hard right didn't make up history as they went along. "
Well, that's not true either. It's the Florida Supreme Court was the one that said that the recount should follow Florida's law. The Florida court's decision was based purely on Florida law and under long precedent, the Florida Supreme Court's word should have been the last word on that.
What the US Supreme Court did, by 5 - 4, was to say that despite the law and precedent that only the Florida courts should decide was to be judicial activists of the highest order and just order the result that they wanted for political reasons. That's the reason that they said that Gore v. Bush was not precedent for anything. Technically, it overruled an entire line of case law that the local courts decide what local law means. They didn't want to do that so they had to make the decision non-precedential.
I just wish that those on the hard right didn't make up history as they went along. "
Phil wrote on Oct 7, 2008 3:16 PM:
" cross - thanks for the correction and the clarification. I shouldn't have said it was "the law" but rather a ruling to be followed.
Truth is hard for folks like xdfred - like saying Saddam started the war - of course he will go back to when Iraq invaded Kuwait - like that had anything to do with the current war. The Florida Supreme Court had done their job - clarified the Florida law - not writing new law. The US Supreme Court should have stayed out of it - as most legal scholars thought they would. But Scalia had too much to lose.
I get it xdfred - you get to decide who speaks for the fetus - you are the decider - just like Bush. You are all knowing and the arbitrator of right and wrong. "
Truth is hard for folks like xdfred - like saying Saddam started the war - of course he will go back to when Iraq invaded Kuwait - like that had anything to do with the current war. The Florida Supreme Court had done their job - clarified the Florida law - not writing new law. The US Supreme Court should have stayed out of it - as most legal scholars thought they would. But Scalia had too much to lose.
I get it xdfred - you get to decide who speaks for the fetus - you are the decider - just like Bush. You are all knowing and the arbitrator of right and wrong. "
Phil wrote on Oct 7, 2008 3:20 PM:
" cubbies09 - no telling if 9/11 would have still happened or not, but if you think Bush has done anything to stop the attacks you haven't been paying attention. The attacks continued, just not all in the USA - like Spain. Also, as you said it takes years to plan them. It took 8 years from the first World Trade Center attacks until 9/11. For all we know they could be planning another one for next year - so I wouldn't give Bush any credit at all for this - none. "
think wrote on Oct 7, 2008 4:26 PM:
" "And, if FDR was a fascist, why did they attack us to begin with? "
Easy and read history next time. FDR got us into the war between China & Japan was going to embargo Japan’s oil. That’s the only reason they attacked us. "
Easy and read history next time. FDR got us into the war between China & Japan was going to embargo Japan’s oil. That’s the only reason they attacked us. "
hetfield wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:20 PM:
" Phil wrote on Oct 7, 2008 3:20 PM:
" cubbies09 - no telling if 9/11 would have still happened or not, but if you think Bush has done anything to stop the attacks you haven't been paying attention. The attacks continued, just not all in the USA - like Spain. Also, as you said it takes years to plan them. It took 8 years from the first World Trade Center attacks until 9/11. For all we know they could be planning another one for next year - so I wouldn't give Bush any credit at all for this - none. "
oh bull phil! you and your leftist friends have blamed bush for 911 and continue to spread fear about our security today.
911 was the ugly step child left from clinton and his failed foreign and domestic security policies.
say no to terrorism and barack hussein obama's friends! "
" cubbies09 - no telling if 9/11 would have still happened or not, but if you think Bush has done anything to stop the attacks you haven't been paying attention. The attacks continued, just not all in the USA - like Spain. Also, as you said it takes years to plan them. It took 8 years from the first World Trade Center attacks until 9/11. For all we know they could be planning another one for next year - so I wouldn't give Bush any credit at all for this - none. "
oh bull phil! you and your leftist friends have blamed bush for 911 and continue to spread fear about our security today.
911 was the ugly step child left from clinton and his failed foreign and domestic security policies.
say no to terrorism and barack hussein obama's friends! "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:10 PM:
" cubbies09 @ Oct 7, 2008 1:48 PM asked, "Let's just say for argument sake that Gore had been elected as President. Do you really think 9/11 would not have happened?"
No, I don't. It's for the reason that had Gore gotten an intelligence memo saying "Ben laden determined to attack America" he wouldn't have blown it of like W did. Had people then been on alert, the hijackers would have been intercepted.
Remember, you asked. "
No, I don't. It's for the reason that had Gore gotten an intelligence memo saying "Ben laden determined to attack America" he wouldn't have blown it of like W did. Had people then been on alert, the hijackers would have been intercepted.
Remember, you asked. "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 8, 2008 6:07 AM:
" "think" @ Oct 7, 2008 4:26 PM, "FDR got us into the war between China & Japan was going to embargo Japan’s oil. That’s the only reason they attacked us."
So, you would have had us continue to send oil and steel to Japan to continue their bloody rape of China? "
So, you would have had us continue to send oil and steel to Japan to continue their bloody rape of China? "
x5291 wrote on Oct 8, 2008 8:27 AM:
" it was already here...as long as the federal reserve is in true control this country and businesses corporations do the dirty work of enslaving us to pay for money that isnt even there...making us feel that we have to have a job or perish, when actually its to pay a neverending debt...the is nothing more than a business deal to create scarcity to make us think there is no other way...when actually we can do away with oil, if thats what the war is partially about...even if they dont get u to join the war they will tug at you with the leash of religion...politicians dont solve problems, they make sure the problem still exists, if that wasnt the case, why do we need them...the same goes for laws...they are there because there is no true solution at the time...BUT THERE IS...what savages we become... "
x5291 wrote on Oct 8, 2008 8:46 AM:
" these accusations of saddam being a murderer, where is ur supporting facts, i'll tell u where one fact is...u can look in the mirror...remembr just like bin laden was a freedom fightr, saddam did some of the US' dirty work...then he began to have a conscience...US could no longer buy him resulting in the persian gulf war because the US jackals and economic hitmen couldnt get to him...where did he get the weapons from?...WE only have to look in the mirror...we are tagging people as terrorist to the point that there are 100 million people in the US that under watch...fear, fear to do right, fear to do wrong...mindless sentinels... "
think wrote on Oct 8, 2008 10:34 AM:
" "So, you would have had us continue to send oil and steel to Japan to continue their bloody rape of China? "
That war was none of our business and very same argument made against the war in Iraq could be used then. There is a difference between boycott and embargo Cross. Japan was buying oil and iron ore from others. We were just going to blockade the island and starve them. Sorry but I am an isolationist and we have no business making our own mess. They attack us we destroy them but until someone does stay out of it. "
That war was none of our business and very same argument made against the war in Iraq could be used then. There is a difference between boycott and embargo Cross. Japan was buying oil and iron ore from others. We were just going to blockade the island and starve them. Sorry but I am an isolationist and we have no business making our own mess. They attack us we destroy them but until someone does stay out of it. "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 8, 2008 2:24 PM:
" "think" @ Oct 8, 2008 10:34 AM says, "That war was none of our business and very same argument made against the war in Iraq could be used then. There is a difference between boycott and embargo Cross. Japan was buying oil and iron ore from others. We were just going to blockade the island and starve them. Sorry but I am an isolationist and we have no business making our own mess. They attack us we destroy them but until someone does stay out of it."
Sorry, "think" but you still don't have your facts right. Before the war, we weren't sending oil or steel to Japan but we weren't enforcing it on anyone else. (I assume, but do not know, that other nations chose not to trade oil and steel either.) There was NO attempt at a complete embargo. So, food still got through.
It was only AFTER the war started that a complete embargo on anything was imposed and enforced effectively by our submarine force.
At least you recognize that you're an isolationist. (Why did you earlier blame FDR for getting us into a war. He wasn't an isolationist. The problem wasn't with FDR but with your outmoded political views.) I'd also say that your position is morally objectionable. Trading oil and steel with pre-war Japan makes us participants in their crime. Those are not benign commodities. "
Sorry, "think" but you still don't have your facts right. Before the war, we weren't sending oil or steel to Japan but we weren't enforcing it on anyone else. (I assume, but do not know, that other nations chose not to trade oil and steel either.) There was NO attempt at a complete embargo. So, food still got through.
It was only AFTER the war started that a complete embargo on anything was imposed and enforced effectively by our submarine force.
At least you recognize that you're an isolationist. (Why did you earlier blame FDR for getting us into a war. He wasn't an isolationist. The problem wasn't with FDR but with your outmoded political views.) I'd also say that your position is morally objectionable. Trading oil and steel with pre-war Japan makes us participants in their crime. Those are not benign commodities. "
thereader wrote on Oct 8, 2008 4:04 PM:
" Earlier this year the Courier wrote an article that included an uncomplimentary comment about Hillary Clinton juxtaposed with a description of the same book mentioned in the Clayson article. It would seem the writer of the book is an extremist.
Several actions of the George W Bush administration lead me to believe that any fascist signs of America's governance might be more clearly linked to the George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and their neoconservative entourage. I submit the following examples:
1. Vice President Cheney's invitation to large energy producing corporations to write energy policy;
2. Invasion of Iraq for oil and corporate benefits.
The roundup of thousands for imprisonment at Guantanamo and elsewhere without so much as being charged, or access to defense, and the use of torture techniques.
3. The extensive use of signing statements by this president.
4. Use of the Justice Department to change duly appointed judgeships
5. Massive "wire tapping" outside of the law, even before the Patriot Act virtually allowed almost anything.
6. The numerous irregular incidents that occurred in Florida during the 2000 election, including the Supreme Court's hearing of an issue normally reserved for the states, as well as irregular incidents that occurred in Ohio and other states during the 2004 election. "
Several actions of the George W Bush administration lead me to believe that any fascist signs of America's governance might be more clearly linked to the George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and their neoconservative entourage. I submit the following examples:
1. Vice President Cheney's invitation to large energy producing corporations to write energy policy;
2. Invasion of Iraq for oil and corporate benefits.
The roundup of thousands for imprisonment at Guantanamo and elsewhere without so much as being charged, or access to defense, and the use of torture techniques.
3. The extensive use of signing statements by this president.
4. Use of the Justice Department to change duly appointed judgeships
5. Massive "wire tapping" outside of the law, even before the Patriot Act virtually allowed almost anything.
6. The numerous irregular incidents that occurred in Florida during the 2000 election, including the Supreme Court's hearing of an issue normally reserved for the states, as well as irregular incidents that occurred in Ohio and other states during the 2004 election. "
xdfred wrote on Oct 8, 2008 4:16 PM:
" "...At least you recognize that you're an isolationist. (Why did you earlier blame FDR for getting us into a war. He wasn't an isolationist. The problem wasn't with FDR but with your outmoded political views.) I'd also say that your position is morally objectionable. Trading oil and steel with pre-war Japan makes us participants in their crime. Those are not benign commodities...." FDR got us into the war for one reason only: To save the soviet union, which didn't deserve it. "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 8, 2008 6:34 PM:
" xdfred @ Oct 8, 2008 4:16 PM said, "FDR got us into the war for one reason only: To save the soviet union, which didn't deserve it."
Baloney.
The sole reason we got into WW II was because we were attacked. Had the Japanese not attacked, it's really questionable whether we would have gotten into the war at all. (With the exception of giving major aid to Great Britain.)
FDR knew that the people of the US didn't want to go to war. FDR knew that and obviously would not go unless and until we were attacked. The most FDR can be accused of is knowing that attack would come sooner that later and working to get us ready to go.
xdfred's position is counter-historical. Why those on the hard right are forever making up history is one of life's great mysteries. "
Baloney.
The sole reason we got into WW II was because we were attacked. Had the Japanese not attacked, it's really questionable whether we would have gotten into the war at all. (With the exception of giving major aid to Great Britain.)
FDR knew that the people of the US didn't want to go to war. FDR knew that and obviously would not go unless and until we were attacked. The most FDR can be accused of is knowing that attack would come sooner that later and working to get us ready to go.
xdfred's position is counter-historical. Why those on the hard right are forever making up history is one of life's great mysteries. "
Phil wrote on Oct 9, 2008 8:26 AM:
" cross - the hard right has to make up history, otherwise they wouldn't be able to justify their warped views. Plus it also allows them to view themselves as victims. The world is out to get them, i.e. the left, the media, the communists, the Muslim terrorists, you name it - someone is out to get them (also called destroying America because they are the "real" Americans) or disparage their views.
Actually we just want them to:
- Grow up
- Stop watching Fox news
- Leave us normal folks alone "
Actually we just want them to:
- Grow up
- Stop watching Fox news
- Leave us normal folks alone "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 9, 2008 9:41 AM:
" Phil - Thanks for the reminder. Somehow, when I'm confronted by their historical revisionism, my first instinct is to think that it's just an innocent mistake. But, it is deliberate since if they must believe history is what they say it is because, if they don't, their policies can't be justified.
I must also remember what that great sage, Stephen Colbert, said. "The truth has a liberal bias." "
I must also remember what that great sage, Stephen Colbert, said. "The truth has a liberal bias." "
xdfred wrote on Oct 9, 2008 10:26 AM:
" cross1242 wrote on Oct 9, 2008 9:41 AM:
" Phil - Thanks for the reminder. Somehow, when I'm confronted by their historical revisionism, my first instinct is to think that it's just an innocent mistake. But, it is deliberate since if they must believe history is what they say it is because, if they don't, their policies can't be justified.
I must also remember what that great sage, Stephen Colbert, said. "The truth has a liberal bias." "
Left wingers were in love with Hitler until he invaded the Soviet Union. Alger Hiss come to mind? When the war ended, why did the size of the soviet union increase by leaps and bounds? thousands of our young men died to push communism into eastern europe. England had already saved itself, remember. "
" Phil - Thanks for the reminder. Somehow, when I'm confronted by their historical revisionism, my first instinct is to think that it's just an innocent mistake. But, it is deliberate since if they must believe history is what they say it is because, if they don't, their policies can't be justified.
I must also remember what that great sage, Stephen Colbert, said. "The truth has a liberal bias." "
Left wingers were in love with Hitler until he invaded the Soviet Union. Alger Hiss come to mind? When the war ended, why did the size of the soviet union increase by leaps and bounds? thousands of our young men died to push communism into eastern europe. England had already saved itself, remember. "
Phil wrote on Oct 9, 2008 11:03 AM:
" xdfred - you must mean left-wingers like Bush's grandfather, and those other captains of industry who were doing business with Hitler's government. Is that who you mean? "
xdfred wrote on Oct 9, 2008 11:43 AM:
" Phil wrote on Oct 9, 2008 11:03 AM:
" xdfred - you must mean left-wingers like Bush's grandfather, and those other captains of industry who were doing business with Hitler's government. Is that who you mean? "
No. "
" xdfred - you must mean left-wingers like Bush's grandfather, and those other captains of industry who were doing business with Hitler's government. Is that who you mean? "
No. "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 9, 2008 1:17 PM:
" xdfred @ Oct 9, 2008 10:26 AM said, "Left wingers were in love with Hitler until he invaded the Soviet Union."
BALONEY!
In the Great Depression there were some Americans who thought that capitalism was dead. Considering conditions, it was not unreasonable to think so. Some very few looked at the Soviet Union as possibly having a solution to the economic chaos. But, history teaches us that they were few and far between. The vast majority remained loyal and, when we were attacked, they were in the lines to fight the enemy.
xdfred also said, "When the war ended, why did the size of the soviet union increase by leaps and bounds?"
YET MORE BALONEY!
Having just finished the war against Nazism and getting close to winning against militarism, few in the US had the stomach to take on the Red Army and try to push the Soviet Union back within its borders. The Red Army, having just ripped the guts out of technically superior German forces, would have been a tougher war than the one we just finished. Plus, do you have any idea about the amount of land east of Berlin? Do you have any idea about the size of our army then verses the size of the Red Army back then?
Reportedly, when FDR came back from Yalta, Eleonore gave him hell about not providing some guarantee for the independence of the Baltic countries.
His response was along the lines of, "The President of the United States is constrained by what is possible."
xdfred also said, "thousands of our young men died to push communism into eastern europe"
BALONEY!!!
Thousands did die but where on Earth did you dig up the idea that we were fighting the Soviet Union and not the Nazis? All the troops we engaged in Europe were wearing German grey and not Soviet green.
xdfred also said, "England had already saved itself, remember."
BALONEY.
The British did fight off the Germans. The Battle of Britain is one of the major milestones of the war. However, you neglect Lend-Lease and other aid we provided to the British. Churchill spoke about fighting "on the landing grounds, ... in the street, ... in the hills. We shall never surrender." He wasn't just speaking hypothetically. He was preparing the people for a guerrilla war if the German's invaded. There can be little historical doubt how long the British could hold out had we not done everything we could to help them. (I take nothing away from the Brits themselves. They did the fighting. But I doubt that they would claim that they could have held out alone.
Other than that, your facts are right. "
BALONEY!
In the Great Depression there were some Americans who thought that capitalism was dead. Considering conditions, it was not unreasonable to think so. Some very few looked at the Soviet Union as possibly having a solution to the economic chaos. But, history teaches us that they were few and far between. The vast majority remained loyal and, when we were attacked, they were in the lines to fight the enemy.
xdfred also said, "When the war ended, why did the size of the soviet union increase by leaps and bounds?"
YET MORE BALONEY!
Having just finished the war against Nazism and getting close to winning against militarism, few in the US had the stomach to take on the Red Army and try to push the Soviet Union back within its borders. The Red Army, having just ripped the guts out of technically superior German forces, would have been a tougher war than the one we just finished. Plus, do you have any idea about the amount of land east of Berlin? Do you have any idea about the size of our army then verses the size of the Red Army back then?
Reportedly, when FDR came back from Yalta, Eleonore gave him hell about not providing some guarantee for the independence of the Baltic countries.
His response was along the lines of, "The President of the United States is constrained by what is possible."
xdfred also said, "thousands of our young men died to push communism into eastern europe"
BALONEY!!!
Thousands did die but where on Earth did you dig up the idea that we were fighting the Soviet Union and not the Nazis? All the troops we engaged in Europe were wearing German grey and not Soviet green.
xdfred also said, "England had already saved itself, remember."
BALONEY.
The British did fight off the Germans. The Battle of Britain is one of the major milestones of the war. However, you neglect Lend-Lease and other aid we provided to the British. Churchill spoke about fighting "on the landing grounds, ... in the street, ... in the hills. We shall never surrender." He wasn't just speaking hypothetically. He was preparing the people for a guerrilla war if the German's invaded. There can be little historical doubt how long the British could hold out had we not done everything we could to help them. (I take nothing away from the Brits themselves. They did the fighting. But I doubt that they would claim that they could have held out alone.
Other than that, your facts are right. "
Phil wrote on Oct 9, 2008 4:17 PM:
" John Sydney McSmear is now really showing his true colors.
Yes Mr. Clayson, facism is beginning to rear its ugly head - just go to any of McSmear's campaign "rallies" and see it in action.
Disgusting. Pretty soon they will be hanging Sen. Obama in effigy at the rallies and nothing will be done to stop it.
No character or leadership there. But these are the folks who call themselves "real" Americans, patriots, Christians.
Pathetic - revolting - and McSmear stands at the microphone and urges them on. "
Yes Mr. Clayson, facism is beginning to rear its ugly head - just go to any of McSmear's campaign "rallies" and see it in action.
Disgusting. Pretty soon they will be hanging Sen. Obama in effigy at the rallies and nothing will be done to stop it.
No character or leadership there. But these are the folks who call themselves "real" Americans, patriots, Christians.
Pathetic - revolting - and McSmear stands at the microphone and urges them on. "
tom wrote on Oct 9, 2008 4:57 PM:
" Before all you liberal nay sayers think that Clayson is spewing alot of BS. I encourage you to research the DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST PARTY online. It does list members such as Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, just to name a few. The democratic party is NOT JFK's Party. "
the_bat wrote on Oct 9, 2008 7:47 PM:
" Despite amateur sophists who spout dictionary definitions and confuse this for understanding what they're talking about, Clayson gets to the core of something I've been observing — since the 60s — since the day's of Obama's buddy William Ayers and the Weather Underground/SDS. And all that. Since back in those "hurdy gurdy good ol' days" when they were telling us to kill our parents and burn down our cities and stores and factories. Yes, I remember those people. They haven't gone away. What they do now is sit home and post quasi-liberal neo-Marxist rants on internet blogs.
Yes, the Left in this country has become progressively more and more fascist. That the "Obama Youth Brigade" video "unionlabel" mentions should remind him of the "Hitler Youth" shows perception going above and beyond dictionary definitions. That's exactly what it looks like to me, too. It's the modern day derivative. At least, from what I understand, the Kansas City middle school teacher that orchestrated this bit of bizarreness has been suspended, but that's small consolation. What it bodes for our country and our society is scary.
In fact, I'm just now finishing up a novel, "Straight Into Darkness," by Faye Kellerman. Set in pre-war Germany, it's a historical novel that paints an uncomfortable and frightening picture. The rise of the "National Socialist German Workers" or "NSDAP" seems to bear just a bit too much of a passing resemblance to the current evolution of so-called liberalism. This is supposed to be a country based on laws, the Constitution, and common values and traditions. Not a cult of personalities and certainly not what might seem expedient to those who think the solution is ever bigger government with ever growing controls and regulations.
Now we have an economy teetering, certainly, on the brink of a recession and, very probably, depression. Driven to this NOT by a lack of government regulation but, rather, by too much government regulation. And what's their solution? More government regulation. Basically, we're right not driving ourselves even deeper into becoming a socialist state with even more control by those who created the mess to begin with.
Yes, there are so many of us who don't seem to be really seem to be seeing what they're looking at right under their noses. While many on the Left may applaud the "Obama Youth Brigade" in their paramilitary getup, imagine how aghast they'd be if this was a bunch of white kids in paramilitary getup dishing out similar homilies to John McCain. But, I so far don't see anything like that coming from conservatives. Nor, do I expect to.
^o^
— Very interesting times we live in. "
Yes, the Left in this country has become progressively more and more fascist. That the "Obama Youth Brigade" video "unionlabel" mentions should remind him of the "Hitler Youth" shows perception going above and beyond dictionary definitions. That's exactly what it looks like to me, too. It's the modern day derivative. At least, from what I understand, the Kansas City middle school teacher that orchestrated this bit of bizarreness has been suspended, but that's small consolation. What it bodes for our country and our society is scary.
In fact, I'm just now finishing up a novel, "Straight Into Darkness," by Faye Kellerman. Set in pre-war Germany, it's a historical novel that paints an uncomfortable and frightening picture. The rise of the "National Socialist German Workers" or "NSDAP" seems to bear just a bit too much of a passing resemblance to the current evolution of so-called liberalism. This is supposed to be a country based on laws, the Constitution, and common values and traditions. Not a cult of personalities and certainly not what might seem expedient to those who think the solution is ever bigger government with ever growing controls and regulations.
Now we have an economy teetering, certainly, on the brink of a recession and, very probably, depression. Driven to this NOT by a lack of government regulation but, rather, by too much government regulation. And what's their solution? More government regulation. Basically, we're right not driving ourselves even deeper into becoming a socialist state with even more control by those who created the mess to begin with.
Yes, there are so many of us who don't seem to be really seem to be seeing what they're looking at right under their noses. While many on the Left may applaud the "Obama Youth Brigade" in their paramilitary getup, imagine how aghast they'd be if this was a bunch of white kids in paramilitary getup dishing out similar homilies to John McCain. But, I so far don't see anything like that coming from conservatives. Nor, do I expect to.
^o^
— Very interesting times we live in. "
cross1242 wrote on Oct 9, 2008 8:18 PM:
" "tom" there is no such thing as the "Democratic Socialist Party" in the United States. There is a "Socialist Party USA" but nobody you list is a member of it. This is just a product of your imagination. And, assuming that you already know that, I have no idea what your point happens to be. "
MAC wrote on Oct 10, 2008 5:01 AM:
" Not many seem to remember McCain's association with John Singlaub...the OSS guy who employed Nazis following WWII (Also started the CIA) and, with his U.S. Council for World Freedom (a 'private' organization), helped Reagan White House circumvent Congress for financing that little thing called Iran-Contra (again, forgetting about that 'piece of paper' the rest of us call the Constitution). He also was connected to the death squads in Nicaragua...the ones that supposedly neutralized communist leaders and sympathizers. But in fact, murdered priests and nuns who questioned govt practices vis a vis the poor.
McCain's name was used on the U.S. Council for World Freedom's letterhead for a while. "
McCain's name was used on the U.S. Council for World Freedom's letterhead for a while. "
Newswatcher wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:04 AM:
" MAC, you dig pretty deep to find this one, Singlaub. However, you cannot place him and McCain together in their home together (Ayers), at church together for 20 years (Wright), investing and fundraising together (Rezko), working on the same campaign (Fannie/Freddie execs), the list is long, and I have to go to work.
Another point is this: If John McCain had the popularity with Terrorist Organizations and countries that Obama has, you all would be screaming at the top of your lungs! Good grief, he butts heads with Bush and you STILL act as though their connected at the hip.
Obama is a scam and you all are idiots for just believing what you want to hear. Our country needs more than just "hope in a speech".
Remember folks: HAMAS wants Obama to be President, because they know he'd be a knockover! Mr. Niceguy who will just hand over our country to the poor radicals (like HAMAS, Ayers) who rightly hate us (says Wright) and then maybe our economy will be flooded with oil money (& control) from the Middle East instead of bad mortgages (Fannie/Freddie).
This guys connections are just hideous! And you can't see it for the tear in your eye from hearing his speeches. How lovely! "
Another point is this: If John McCain had the popularity with Terrorist Organizations and countries that Obama has, you all would be screaming at the top of your lungs! Good grief, he butts heads with Bush and you STILL act as though their connected at the hip.
Obama is a scam and you all are idiots for just believing what you want to hear. Our country needs more than just "hope in a speech".
Remember folks: HAMAS wants Obama to be President, because they know he'd be a knockover! Mr. Niceguy who will just hand over our country to the poor radicals (like HAMAS, Ayers) who rightly hate us (says Wright) and then maybe our economy will be flooded with oil money (& control) from the Middle East instead of bad mortgages (Fannie/Freddie).
This guys connections are just hideous! And you can't see it for the tear in your eye from hearing his speeches. How lovely! "
Tom wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:41 AM:
" Cross1242: Your statement is obvious that you have not searched the party online SO to help you out just type Demcratic Socialist Party and see what you get. You maybe surprised that what you think is MY IMAGINATION is in fact VERY REAL. WAKE UP AMERICA "
50674 wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:32 PM:
" Tom everything online isn't true. I went to the website. (Heck I even read it!) Where is all the information you ae citing? Bat_ great you read that NOVEL. Now go find some non-fiction books on Nazi Germany. It will give you a more level palying field when you want to debate FACTS. "
avee wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:51 PM:
" " Posted: October 09, 2008
8:03 pm Eastern
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, another powerful Chicago-based political figure associated with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and other long-time associates of Democratic Party presidential candidate Barack Obama, is leaving no doubt about what he thinks of the leader in the campaign for the White House.
"""He says when Obama talks "the Messiah is absolutely speaking.""""
If you know anything about Farrakahn this should scare the heck out of you. Not so much what he says but that a lot of people will beleive him without question. " "
8:03 pm Eastern
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, another powerful Chicago-based political figure associated with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and other long-time associates of Democratic Party presidential candidate Barack Obama, is leaving no doubt about what he thinks of the leader in the campaign for the White House.
"""He says when Obama talks "the Messiah is absolutely speaking.""""
If you know anything about Farrakahn this should scare the heck out of you. Not so much what he says but that a lot of people will beleive him without question. " "
Newswatcher wrote on Oct 10, 2008 3:50 PM:
" My spouse read Obama's book.
Yes, fascism is resurging and will be strongly present if Obama wins POTUS.
His book makes it frighteningly clear.
Too bad you liberals won't take time to read it and the list of his friends. Instead, you try to find things that VP Candidate Palin has done wrong. Lipstick? NOT firing the Trooper for a wrong reason? NOT allowing the Bridge To Nowhere?
Still looking for a list of what Obama's ACTUALLY DONE!
No one will answer me that one!!!!! "
Yes, fascism is resurging and will be strongly present if Obama wins POTUS.
His book makes it frighteningly clear.
Too bad you liberals won't take time to read it and the list of his friends. Instead, you try to find things that VP Candidate Palin has done wrong. Lipstick? NOT firing the Trooper for a wrong reason? NOT allowing the Bridge To Nowhere?
Still looking for a list of what Obama's ACTUALLY DONE!
No one will answer me that one!!!!! "
Newswatcher wrote on Oct 10, 2008 5:44 PM:
" With this months' (as well as prior months') woeful economic news, it's obvious that American's have been living with their "hope" just a little too much.
They HOPE'd to not have to save any hard earned money.
They HOPE'd to be able to afford the too-large house, too-expensive car, too-big tv, too many trips, etc.
They HOPE'd they'd win the income lottery and get that dream job or promotion so they could pay for the things they already have.
They HOPE'd their credit wouldn't catch up to them.
They HOPE'd their neighbors would think they were doing just GREAT, financially.
Too many people are not realistic and take personal responsibility for their actions.
Unfortunately, I'm afraid too many people are also looking at Obama as this great "we don't know, we just HOPE candidate", not unlike the false hope that financal messes would miraculously repair themselves, Liberals are blindly following in line with the Obamabots who are supporting a candidate who has done virtually nothing to earn his way into the White House.
Look folks, you gambled with your finances, fine. Now tighten your belt and live within your means. You may have gambled and lost, but you can gain it back with thoughtful, intelligent responsible planning.
BUT: PLEASE do not gamble with our country! It is far too dangerous a time to not do your homework!
Obama has more Anti-American friends than any of the former Presidents combined! If you need a count, just read up. The info is out there. You just have to be willing to take your blinders off! "
They HOPE'd to not have to save any hard earned money.
They HOPE'd to be able to afford the too-large house, too-expensive car, too-big tv, too many trips, etc.
They HOPE'd they'd win the income lottery and get that dream job or promotion so they could pay for the things they already have.
They HOPE'd their credit wouldn't catch up to them.
They HOPE'd their neighbors would think they were doing just GREAT, financially.
Too many people are not realistic and take personal responsibility for their actions.
Unfortunately, I'm afraid too many people are also looking at Obama as this great "we don't know, we just HOPE candidate", not unlike the false hope that financal messes would miraculously repair themselves, Liberals are blindly following in line with the Obamabots who are supporting a candidate who has done virtually nothing to earn his way into the White House.
Look folks, you gambled with your finances, fine. Now tighten your belt and live within your means. You may have gambled and lost, but you can gain it back with thoughtful, intelligent responsible planning.
BUT: PLEASE do not gamble with our country! It is far too dangerous a time to not do your homework!
Obama has more Anti-American friends than any of the former Presidents combined! If you need a count, just read up. The info is out there. You just have to be willing to take your blinders off! "
Independent wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:07 PM:
" Hey Newswatcher, my friend's, wife's, brother's, cousin read a book, too. I can't believe you don't take the time to read, but you call out the libs, for not reading? Are you being hipocritical?
Do your OWN homework! "
Do your OWN homework! "
Independent wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:21 PM:
" Nerdwatcher, McLiar has "done" plenty in his numerous years as a public servant?
The hard-right fact that Obama hasn't done anything, makes him free of any charge that the current dibacle is his fault. However, your 'ol boooyyeee McPain has some fault, yes or no? "
The hard-right fact that Obama hasn't done anything, makes him free of any charge that the current dibacle is his fault. However, your 'ol boooyyeee McPain has some fault, yes or no? "
Newswatcher wrote on Oct 12, 2008 10:10 AM:
" Independent, your spelling/name calling is reflective of your childish inability to come up with any intelligent facts that support WHAT your POTUS candidate has done to deserve anyone's vote.
I haven't had the time to read the book yet, I've been working 50-60 hours a week for a while. YOU? "
I haven't had the time to read the book yet, I've been working 50-60 hours a week for a while. YOU? "
Newswatcher wrote on Oct 12, 2008 10:17 AM:
" Independent thinks that our next President of the United States would be best having little to no experience so that he can't be found at fault for anything.
Wow, what a concept!
Ayers, Wright, Rezko, ACORN, FMac/FMae heads embedded in his campaign, voted most Lib Senator, Chavez support, HAMAS support, Iran support... oh I could go on, couldn't I?
You call FMac & FMae heads being in Obama's campaign free of any charge that the current debacle is his fault?
How about your beloved Dem Barney Frank and the Dem Congress who did nothing these last couple of years while this ship was sinking? They had more power than Bush ever could have had and they did NOTHING, even when being warned 2 years ago by Senator John McCain!!!!!!! "
Wow, what a concept!
Ayers, Wright, Rezko, ACORN, FMac/FMae heads embedded in his campaign, voted most Lib Senator, Chavez support, HAMAS support, Iran support... oh I could go on, couldn't I?
You call FMac & FMae heads being in Obama's campaign free of any charge that the current debacle is his fault?
How about your beloved Dem Barney Frank and the Dem Congress who did nothing these last couple of years while this ship was sinking? They had more power than Bush ever could have had and they did NOTHING, even when being warned 2 years ago by Senator John McCain!!!!!!! "
Due to the amount of spam and negative comments received, the Courier implement a registered-user system for participation in the comment portion of our site. In doing so, the Courier reserves the right to ban any user(s) at any time without notice if we feel they are not following the terms of agreement.
DISCLAIMER: The Courier provides our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. Please keep in mind that civility is a necessary component of productive conversation. All blatantly inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate comments (i.e. vulgarity, marketing, etc.) are subject to rejection and/or removal. Comments will appear if and when they are approved. For a more in-depth explanation of our policy, please see our Rules of the Road. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.
~ADVERTISEMENT~
NEWS |
SPORTS |
COMMUNITY |
BUSINESS |
ENTERTAINMENT |
FEATURES |
OPINIONS |
OBITUARIES |
CLASSIFIEDS |
PRIVACY POLICY |
CONTACT US |
CARRIER PAGES
|
cross1242 wrote on Oct 5, 2008 12:59 PM:
Communism = Socialism = Liberalism = Progressivism = Democrats = Fascists = Dictators = Anybody else that doesn’t agree with Prof. Clayson
This week, he hones in on the “fascists” part of that litany of equivalence. In doing so, he’s ripping off (but at least acknowledges) the book “Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning” by Jonah Goldberg. I have not read Goldberg’s book and do not intend to. The connection between liberalism and fascism by Goldberg that Clayson repeats makes a connection that is ludicrous on its face. The purpose is clearly to smear liberalism than to make a careful analysis of both political philosophies.
Also, since his illogic is manifest, there is no point in wasting time in arguing specifically where he goes wrong. "