"Protecting the country" is not the "first cause" it is the fourth out of six, after ensuring domestic tranquility and before promoting the general welfare.
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
This is ridiculous. Why do people pass me up every time just because of my Ron Paul bumper sticker. Why can't they see this information and process it like I can.
My biggest concern is that since the corruption is so well entrenched in the government that at this point its almost irreversible the damage that has been done.
Pizzaboy, you lie. the question is not about monitoring. it is about monitoring without a court warrant as required by the Constitution. How can come you rightwing nuts don't want us to uphold the Constitution?
I knew the Democrats would cave to Bush. They're just as bad as the neo-cons. They want to save Bush's illegally claimed powers for Obama, so he can do anything he wants next January.
Both Obama and McCain are voting for this? So neither candidate is willing to protect the constitution and the American people's rights. I won't vote for either of these yahoos...
Anyway it is pointless to go on about this because you obviously won't concede to something that has been proven wrong for quite sometime. Why don't you defend Obama's indefensible vote for the FISA amendment?
I like the way you Paultards think. What's next. Are you going to ask my who I don't defend the indefensible beating of my wife? Hey, I have a better question: how do you defend supporting a racist, anti-semitic, homophobic conspiracy nut who surrounds himself with white supremacists in love with his gallant defense of "state's rights" -- and we all know what that is code for, don't we?
Why can't you argue with substantive facts instead of rehashing something that the Austin leader of the NAACP has said is not true? Obama has no respect for civil liberties or the constitution.
I'm sorry, but the ignorance of the Austin leader of the NAACP should be taken as an authority because... ? Although it should be brought to your attention that Nelson Linder was forced to eat his words later. Regardless, your "logic" is laughable. It's like saying, "Hey! I know this guy who says Charles Manson was a nice guy! That seals it! Case Closed! Manson is innocent! No need to look at the evidence"... despite the fact that the evidence is undeniable and crystal clear. Paul = KKK.
The only ignorant person here is you. While Dr. was a practicing physician before running for congress there many impoverished african-american families who could not afford health care but he treated them for free. And another point you are wrong about the leader of the NAACP he never withdrew that statement but his statement holds more validity than yours since he's the leader of the group that would usually crucify someone for being a racist.
Ron Paul is a white supremacist. Paul treated blacks?! OMG! Stop the presses!! That's like saying I can't be a misogynist because I have a female wife! Linder said he didn't think Paul was a racist so it MUST be true! RP's opposition to the civil rights act, voting rights act, defense of the Confederacy, opposition to awarding Rosa Parks a congressional medal of honor, awarding his racist friend Rockwell's website, his racist, anti-semitic, homophobic newsletters... who cares about evidence!
once again you are taking things at face value and not looking at them in depth. He did not support the civil rights act of 1964 because it gave the federal govt. power jurisdiction private businesses and that sets a bad precedent. And about the newsletter, it would be concern if he had expressed consistently throughout the publication but he doesn't the guy who contributed to the newsletter did it.
What power jurisdiction was that? Oh, yes, the power to tell businesses that if they discriminated they would have to suffer legal ramifications. Hate to break it to you, but that was what the civil rights movement was about - using all means at its power to insure legal equality and psychological transformation. Private business has no right to discriminate on the basis of race and if it does it should be punished and disciplined. By any means necessary.
Newsletter went out under his name, written in the first person, published by his friend Mark Elam's company M&M Graphics & Advertising, with RP's signature on the solicitation. The subscription manager Jean McIver works for his campaign! Between May-Oct 96 many Texas papers covered the story and he never denied the articles, only saying they had been taken out of context. What of the fact that his racist friend Lew Rockwells hate-filled website received Ron Paul's first Freedom Website Award?
BS! he did deny the article he said he did not write it, does not endorse its content (keep in mind he was a busy physician at the time, he should have checked, yes) nobody has ever heard speak like that and if he had it would have been heard by now. That does not prove lew is a racist.
Not if its a private enterprise ! As horrible as it is a white business owner should have the right to discriminate if he wants to just like a black business owner has the right. In the end it is the business owner who loses out on competent employees that could be white or black.
Says who? You, white supremacist? Finally, the truth revealed! You lost the Civil Rights movement. Get over it. Martin Luther King is recognized as one of the greatest Americans in history while the klansmen and neo-Nazis ideologues you support are recognized the world over as the scum of the earth. You lost. Justice won. Get over it.
I suggest you inform yourself on what Martin Luther King's positions actually were. If you are opposed to the Civil Rights Act & Voting Rights Act (controversial positions only to right-wing cultists like those who follow Paul) then you're completely opposed to what he stood for. So don't tell me you "admire" MLK while saying with your next breathe businesses have the right to discriminate against minorities. You're either a liar or a gigantic imbecile. RP likes to surround himself with both
If you believe in private property and you believe in freedom of choice then you can't have it both ways you must protect the rights of racists to with their privately owned business what they want. I never said that i was opposed to voting rights act. MLK wanted to get rid of the racism that was institutionalized by the local govt's. You are the imbecile who can't look at things past face value.
freedom of choice and property rights are are civil rights. once again you are taking things at face value he was against the voting rights bill because the federal govt intervention on things like having multiple language ballots and the cost that local govt's have to bear because of this. He is not opposed to minorities voting. You are being intellectually dishonest. Once again why don't you try and defend Obama's disrespect for the 4th amendment?
I won this debate. You have nothing and this is how you express your frustration, through arrogance. Obama is a fascist and you are the kind of idiotic voter that is suckered into his rhetoric. Remember he voted for FISA amendments and patriot act.
You obviously have no idea what a fascist is. And for the last time, what are you going to ask me next, whether I beat my wife? I am not an Obama supporter and never claimed to be. Nice try, KKKlansmen. You have been exposed as a white supremacist supporter of a white supremacist candidate.
I bet you are still one of those idiots who still believes in the antiquated model of labeling political ideologies that fascism is on the right side of a spectrum and communism is on the left side. And bedsides fascism is a concept that people still debate the meaning of, so don't pretend like you know what it means you arrogant ass.
If by antiquated ideologies you mean the common sense understanding of ALL serious scholars that fascism is a revolutionary right-wing movement then yes. Fascism is an irrational, anti-liberal, revolutionary, 'transclass' nationalist movement that bases itself on the lower middle class, arising as a response to the threat of socialism from below & the collapse of capitalism above. There is debate among the premise definition but certain criteria are agreed upon.
Under NONE of them is Obama even remotely a fascist. Using the term as a slur is an insult to all victims of fascism. The left is guilty of doing so but that does not give racist right-wing extremists like Paul & his ilk the right to do so as well. I laugh at the profound ignorance of you Paultards. I be schoolin' your ass.
If fascism and communism are such polar opposites why is result always the same? The newer and more widely accepted political spectrum is the one that rates the concentration of coercive power on one side to that of complete anarchy on the other side. If you were more open minded and educated you would see how flawed the old spectrum is.
I never said fascism and Communism were polar opposites. Trotsky analyzed quite correctly that if upon taking power Stalin had reestablished private property he would have been a fascist. There are many considerable differences between Stalinism and fascism which would take too much time to get into but that by no means are they are polar opposites. There was nothing left-wing about Stalin. He came to power on the basis of the mass murder of countless Marxists.
So you're going to tell me that Mao's cultural revolution didn't have fascist tones to it? The nationalistic fervor, the usurpation of individual rights, the mass militarization. Even during lenin fascist ideologies were materialized. They amount to the same thing. so the old spectrum is flawed
This topic doesn't have anything to do with Ron Paul's well established white supremacist ties so there is no point in continuing it, but no, that's absurd, Lenin and Mao were most certainly not fascists. Fascism is NOT a term one uses to describe any authoritarian figure or platform one does not like. Napoleon wasn't a fascist and neither was Ghengis Khan. And Obama most certainly isn't. Your ignorance is truly astounding which is about what you'd expect from a Paultard.
You are completely wrong about Paul being a white supremacist so there is no point in continuing that discussion. Mao and Lenin may not have been self-descibed fascist but if you look at what they had done throughout history and you look at the definition of fascism (which ever one you chose because there is no agreed definition despite what facts you pull out of your ass) then they did rule with fascist ideologies.
Of course Napoleon and Ghengis Khan were not fascists because they were dictators. Napoleon started out as a wanna-be fascist but when he crowned himself Emperor he left all pretense of democracy behind. Fascism of the Nazi or the Communist or the Republican variety depend on the illusion of democracy.
Uh.. I hate to break it to you but 'red fascism' is a contradiction in terms. Outside of vulgar propaghanda it has no meaning. And that's quite obvious if you look at the societies in question.
Ha Ha you probably think I made it up. how old are you? I'm nearly 60 and the term "red fascism" has been around a while. I first read it in a bok by Whilm Reich titled "The Mass Psychology of Fascism" written in 1933. He was a German who had to leave Germany because the Nazis were after him. He knew more about fascism from first hand experience with boty Nazis and communists than you will ever know. Fascism definitely comes in the Red version.
Uh... Wilhelm Reich was not a scholar. He was a guy thrown in prison for selling boxes for measure the psychic power of your sperm & who thought kids should be allowed to "Explore their sexuality" in order to be psychically developed enough to battle the space alien invasion which he was sure was coming. Mention his name to a professional. It's a joke. I am aware the term 'red fascism,' like 'Islamofascism' is a common one. It's also quite meaningless.
So, no, a reductionist psychoanalyst like Wilhelm Reich (much less a space alien/sex-obsessed paranoid like Reich) does not know more about fascism than I do. S.J. Woolf edited a good book by various scholars in the 60s. Might be a good place to start.
Reich had nothing to do with "apace aliens" and you saying that he did shows you are a fool. As far as I can tell forom our posts you don't know much about fascism except what you see in the Hollywood movies.
Uh... so Wilhelm Reich had nothing to do with extraterrestrial, huh? Ok, if you say so. If being oblivious to obvious facts is your thing then by all means. Napoleon started out as a wannabe fascist, huh? And you should be taken seriously why, orgone-boy?
Xenu you are probably confusing Reich with Carl Jung who had an interest in the phenomenon of flying saucers from the psychological point of view and wrote a small book called "Flying Saucers, Things Seen in the Sky". But Jung's work was not so much about confirming flying saucers as a historical event, he remained agnostic on that, but he presented his view that flying saucers could be interpeted as a phenomenon of psychology where people see things in the sky at times of social instability.
Your information on Reich is typically distorted. I guess you were in favor of firing Surgeon General Dr. Jocelyn Elders because she said in 1994 that masturbation is normal and healthy. That's all Reich was saying 60 years earlier. And the orgone box had nothing to do with "psychic power" or "sperm" which you say only to discredit him with lies. Get your facts straight and you might have something to say about fascism.
Rosa Parks issue: he may have been wrong about the medals being tax funded but in that same speech he says he respects her for taking part in civi disobedience. RP does not support confederate movements that is bogus. Analyzing history maybe a different matter though. The republic is a voluntary union and a state has the right to secede but the main reason they seceded wasn't because of slavery the vast majority of southerners didn't own slaves. It had to do with tariffs.
Oh my God! LOL!! Are you REALLY this ignorant?? ::sigh:: Have you read a SINGLE competent historian on the causes of the Civil War? Besides your racist cult leader Ron Paul? I would recommend James McPherson. Good, informative read.
"The Case for Paleolibertarianism", by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., Liberty, January, 1990
"Right-Wing Populism: A Strategy for the Paleo Movement." Rothbard-Rockwell Report, January 1992
Do a search for article "Who Wrote Ron Paul's Newsletters?" by Julian Sanchez and David Weigel. It goes into detail about how viciously evil those two little neo-Nazis really are.
"Protecting the country" is not the "first cause" it is the fourth out of six, after ensuring domestic tranquility and before promoting the general welfare.
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
DonkeyofHeaven 3 years ago
i want to be safe even without privacy
hist0ryman 3 years ago
As Patrick Henry said, "Give me liberty or give me death". Congress just gave away our liberty. Mr. Henry you can roll around in your grave now.
pongman 3 years ago
Incorrect
jonahansen 3 years ago
I love my country...i hate neo con dickheads like your self who abuse this power and they will...you fucking moron.
kingrexrex666 3 years ago
how about you take a long hard suck on my fisa dick. constitutional rights are paramount. They must trump all.
kingrexrex666 3 years ago
This is ridiculous. Why do people pass me up every time just because of my Ron Paul bumper sticker. Why can't they see this information and process it like I can.
My biggest concern is that since the corruption is so well entrenched in the government that at this point its almost irreversible the damage that has been done.
rwtheislander 3 years ago
The problem has little to nothing to do with corruption. The elite hate corruption. Corporate control over the government is completely legal.
Xenu 3 years ago
corruption is not following one's oath of office and to exercise the will of one's constituents RATHER than corporations.
There's nothing legal about not upholding the Constitution. It is the Supreme LAW of the Land afterall...
immanent 3 years ago
because they are americans.
SushiSyogun 3 years ago
Is there a video of Obama's earlier FISA filabuster statement?
I mean, not only is the bill a direct invasion of rights, but Obama flipped on it!
True?
jtguevara6357 3 years ago
your a waste of semen
GirlyVoice 3 years ago
Pizzaboy, you lie. the question is not about monitoring. it is about monitoring without a court warrant as required by the Constitution. How can come you rightwing nuts don't want us to uphold the Constitution?
DonkeyofHeaven 3 years ago
I knew the Democrats would cave to Bush. They're just as bad as the neo-cons. They want to save Bush's illegally claimed powers for Obama, so he can do anything he wants next January.
blunt1984 3 years ago 3
Both Obama and McCain are voting for this? So neither candidate is willing to protect the constitution and the American people's rights. I won't vote for either of these yahoos...
MonkeyFinger23 3 years ago 6
About a week ago it was bending over for AIPAC, now this, Obama is gettig lamer by the day
I wonder what's Obama's stance on Kucinich's articles of Impeachment for Bush?
Rickdeckard2020 3 years ago 5
Stop protecting the Megalomaniac Corporate Cleptocrats!!!
GnosticNinja 3 years ago
We are being lead by a notion of traitors. VOTE THEM ALL OUT!
bbburton 3 years ago 4
Thats messed up. I dont think we are getting enough info on these issues. -Allen
SCODgreenhood 3 years ago
And Obama voted for this. Stupid idiotic peasant voters. Should have voted for RP.
ferrozm 3 years ago 3
yes. these people don't need a shepherd--they need a role model.
Beeks84 3 years ago
If McCain drops out RP will be the candidate, thus win.
The chance for RP is not lost at all.
It's hard though, the majority of the citizens are hypocrites, and they need a hypocrite president.
asperin 3 years ago
And in what fantasy world is this?
Xenu 3 years ago
Anyway it is pointless to go on about this because you obviously won't concede to something that has been proven wrong for quite sometime. Why don't you defend Obama's indefensible vote for the FISA amendment?
ferrozm 3 years ago
I like the way you Paultards think. What's next. Are you going to ask my who I don't defend the indefensible beating of my wife? Hey, I have a better question: how do you defend supporting a racist, anti-semitic, homophobic conspiracy nut who surrounds himself with white supremacists in love with his gallant defense of "state's rights" -- and we all know what that is code for, don't we?
Xenu 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Yes, it's the voters who are idiots for not voting for a white supremacist candidate. You silly self-deluded Paultard.
Xenu 3 years ago
Why can't you argue with substantive facts instead of rehashing something that the Austin leader of the NAACP has said is not true? Obama has no respect for civil liberties or the constitution.
ferrozm 3 years ago
I'm sorry, but the ignorance of the Austin leader of the NAACP should be taken as an authority because... ? Although it should be brought to your attention that Nelson Linder was forced to eat his words later. Regardless, your "logic" is laughable. It's like saying, "Hey! I know this guy who says Charles Manson was a nice guy! That seals it! Case Closed! Manson is innocent! No need to look at the evidence"... despite the fact that the evidence is undeniable and crystal clear. Paul = KKK.
Xenu 3 years ago
The only ignorant person here is you. While Dr. was a practicing physician before running for congress there many impoverished african-american families who could not afford health care but he treated them for free. And another point you are wrong about the leader of the NAACP he never withdrew that statement but his statement holds more validity than yours since he's the leader of the group that would usually crucify someone for being a racist.
ferrozm 3 years ago
Ron Paul is a white supremacist. Paul treated blacks?! OMG! Stop the presses!! That's like saying I can't be a misogynist because I have a female wife! Linder said he didn't think Paul was a racist so it MUST be true! RP's opposition to the civil rights act, voting rights act, defense of the Confederacy, opposition to awarding Rosa Parks a congressional medal of honor, awarding his racist friend Rockwell's website, his racist, anti-semitic, homophobic newsletters... who cares about evidence!
Xenu 3 years ago
once again you are taking things at face value and not looking at them in depth. He did not support the civil rights act of 1964 because it gave the federal govt. power jurisdiction private businesses and that sets a bad precedent. And about the newsletter, it would be concern if he had expressed consistently throughout the publication but he doesn't the guy who contributed to the newsletter did it.
ferrozm 3 years ago
What power jurisdiction was that? Oh, yes, the power to tell businesses that if they discriminated they would have to suffer legal ramifications. Hate to break it to you, but that was what the civil rights movement was about - using all means at its power to insure legal equality and psychological transformation. Private business has no right to discriminate on the basis of race and if it does it should be punished and disciplined. By any means necessary.
Xenu 3 years ago
Newsletter went out under his name, written in the first person, published by his friend Mark Elam's company M&M Graphics & Advertising, with RP's signature on the solicitation. The subscription manager Jean McIver works for his campaign! Between May-Oct 96 many Texas papers covered the story and he never denied the articles, only saying they had been taken out of context. What of the fact that his racist friend Lew Rockwells hate-filled website received Ron Paul's first Freedom Website Award?
Xenu 3 years ago
BS! he did deny the article he said he did not write it, does not endorse its content (keep in mind he was a busy physician at the time, he should have checked, yes) nobody has ever heard speak like that and if he had it would have been heard by now. That does not prove lew is a racist.
ferrozm 3 years ago
Not if its a private enterprise ! As horrible as it is a white business owner should have the right to discriminate if he wants to just like a black business owner has the right. In the end it is the business owner who loses out on competent employees that could be white or black.
ferrozm 3 years ago
Says who? You, white supremacist? Finally, the truth revealed! You lost the Civil Rights movement. Get over it. Martin Luther King is recognized as one of the greatest Americans in history while the klansmen and neo-Nazis ideologues you support are recognized the world over as the scum of the earth. You lost. Justice won. Get over it.
Xenu 3 years ago
I am not a white supremacist. I am a legalized citizen who came from Medellin,Colombia. I highly admire MLK so I don't disagree with you on that.
ferrozm 3 years ago
I suggest you inform yourself on what Martin Luther King's positions actually were. If you are opposed to the Civil Rights Act & Voting Rights Act (controversial positions only to right-wing cultists like those who follow Paul) then you're completely opposed to what he stood for. So don't tell me you "admire" MLK while saying with your next breathe businesses have the right to discriminate against minorities. You're either a liar or a gigantic imbecile. RP likes to surround himself with both
Xenu 3 years ago
If you believe in private property and you believe in freedom of choice then you can't have it both ways you must protect the rights of racists to with their privately owned business what they want. I never said that i was opposed to voting rights act. MLK wanted to get rid of the racism that was institutionalized by the local govt's. You are the imbecile who can't look at things past face value.
ferrozm 3 years ago
Civil rights trumps property rights. -- RP is opposed to the Voting Rights Act, in case you didn't know.
Ron Paul is a white supremacist.
Xenu 3 years ago
freedom of choice and property rights are are civil rights. once again you are taking things at face value he was against the voting rights bill because the federal govt intervention on things like having multiple language ballots and the cost that local govt's have to bear because of this. He is not opposed to minorities voting. You are being intellectually dishonest. Once again why don't you try and defend Obama's disrespect for the 4th amendment?
ferrozm 3 years ago
::yawn::
Ron Paul is a white supremacist.
Xenu 3 years ago
I won this debate. You have nothing and this is how you express your frustration, through arrogance. Obama is a fascist and you are the kind of idiotic voter that is suckered into his rhetoric. Remember he voted for FISA amendments and patriot act.
ferrozm 3 years ago
You obviously have no idea what a fascist is. And for the last time, what are you going to ask me next, whether I beat my wife? I am not an Obama supporter and never claimed to be. Nice try, KKKlansmen. You have been exposed as a white supremacist supporter of a white supremacist candidate.
Xenu 3 years ago
I bet you are still one of those idiots who still believes in the antiquated model of labeling political ideologies that fascism is on the right side of a spectrum and communism is on the left side. And bedsides fascism is a concept that people still debate the meaning of, so don't pretend like you know what it means you arrogant ass.
ferrozm 3 years ago
If by antiquated ideologies you mean the common sense understanding of ALL serious scholars that fascism is a revolutionary right-wing movement then yes. Fascism is an irrational, anti-liberal, revolutionary, 'transclass' nationalist movement that bases itself on the lower middle class, arising as a response to the threat of socialism from below & the collapse of capitalism above. There is debate among the premise definition but certain criteria are agreed upon.
Xenu 3 years ago
Under NONE of them is Obama even remotely a fascist. Using the term as a slur is an insult to all victims of fascism. The left is guilty of doing so but that does not give racist right-wing extremists like Paul & his ilk the right to do so as well. I laugh at the profound ignorance of you Paultards. I be schoolin' your ass.
Xenu 3 years ago
If fascism and communism are such polar opposites why is result always the same? The newer and more widely accepted political spectrum is the one that rates the concentration of coercive power on one side to that of complete anarchy on the other side. If you were more open minded and educated you would see how flawed the old spectrum is.
ferrozm 3 years ago
I never said fascism and Communism were polar opposites. Trotsky analyzed quite correctly that if upon taking power Stalin had reestablished private property he would have been a fascist. There are many considerable differences between Stalinism and fascism which would take too much time to get into but that by no means are they are polar opposites. There was nothing left-wing about Stalin. He came to power on the basis of the mass murder of countless Marxists.
Xenu 3 years ago
So you're going to tell me that Mao's cultural revolution didn't have fascist tones to it? The nationalistic fervor, the usurpation of individual rights, the mass militarization. Even during lenin fascist ideologies were materialized. They amount to the same thing. so the old spectrum is flawed
ferrozm 3 years ago
This topic doesn't have anything to do with Ron Paul's well established white supremacist ties so there is no point in continuing it, but no, that's absurd, Lenin and Mao were most certainly not fascists. Fascism is NOT a term one uses to describe any authoritarian figure or platform one does not like. Napoleon wasn't a fascist and neither was Ghengis Khan. And Obama most certainly isn't. Your ignorance is truly astounding which is about what you'd expect from a Paultard.
Xenu 3 years ago
You are completely wrong about Paul being a white supremacist so there is no point in continuing that discussion. Mao and Lenin may not have been self-descibed fascist but if you look at what they had done throughout history and you look at the definition of fascism (which ever one you chose because there is no agreed definition despite what facts you pull out of your ass) then they did rule with fascist ideologies.
ferrozm 3 years ago
Of course Napoleon and Ghengis Khan were not fascists because they were dictators. Napoleon started out as a wanna-be fascist but when he crowned himself Emperor he left all pretense of democracy behind. Fascism of the Nazi or the Communist or the Republican variety depend on the illusion of democracy.
DonkeyofHeaven 3 years ago
Both Nazism and Communism are fascism. Communism was Red Fascism and Nazism was Black Fascism.
DonkeyofHeaven 3 years ago
Uh.. I hate to break it to you but 'red fascism' is a contradiction in terms. Outside of vulgar propaghanda it has no meaning. And that's quite obvious if you look at the societies in question.
Xenu 3 years ago
Ha Ha you probably think I made it up. how old are you? I'm nearly 60 and the term "red fascism" has been around a while. I first read it in a bok by Whilm Reich titled "The Mass Psychology of Fascism" written in 1933. He was a German who had to leave Germany because the Nazis were after him. He knew more about fascism from first hand experience with boty Nazis and communists than you will ever know. Fascism definitely comes in the Red version.
DonkeyofHeaven 3 years ago
Uh... Wilhelm Reich was not a scholar. He was a guy thrown in prison for selling boxes for measure the psychic power of your sperm & who thought kids should be allowed to "Explore their sexuality" in order to be psychically developed enough to battle the space alien invasion which he was sure was coming. Mention his name to a professional. It's a joke. I am aware the term 'red fascism,' like 'Islamofascism' is a common one. It's also quite meaningless.
Xenu 3 years ago
So, no, a reductionist psychoanalyst like Wilhelm Reich (much less a space alien/sex-obsessed paranoid like Reich) does not know more about fascism than I do. S.J. Woolf edited a good book by various scholars in the 60s. Might be a good place to start.
Xenu 3 years ago
Reich had nothing to do with "apace aliens" and you saying that he did shows you are a fool. As far as I can tell forom our posts you don't know much about fascism except what you see in the Hollywood movies.
DonkeyofHeaven 3 years ago
Uh... so Wilhelm Reich had nothing to do with extraterrestrial, huh? Ok, if you say so. If being oblivious to obvious facts is your thing then by all means. Napoleon started out as a wannabe fascist, huh? And you should be taken seriously why, orgone-boy?
Xenu 3 years ago
Xenu you are probably confusing Reich with Carl Jung who had an interest in the phenomenon of flying saucers from the psychological point of view and wrote a small book called "Flying Saucers, Things Seen in the Sky". But Jung's work was not so much about confirming flying saucers as a historical event, he remained agnostic on that, but he presented his view that flying saucers could be interpeted as a phenomenon of psychology where people see things in the sky at times of social instability.
DonkeyofHeaven 3 years ago
Your information on Reich is typically distorted. I guess you were in favor of firing Surgeon General Dr. Jocelyn Elders because she said in 1994 that masturbation is normal and healthy. That's all Reich was saying 60 years earlier. And the orgone box had nothing to do with "psychic power" or "sperm" which you say only to discredit him with lies. Get your facts straight and you might have something to say about fascism.
DonkeyofHeaven 3 years ago
Rosa Parks issue: he may have been wrong about the medals being tax funded but in that same speech he says he respects her for taking part in civi disobedience. RP does not support confederate movements that is bogus. Analyzing history maybe a different matter though. The republic is a voluntary union and a state has the right to secede but the main reason they seceded wasn't because of slavery the vast majority of southerners didn't own slaves. It had to do with tariffs.
ferrozm 3 years ago
Oh my God! LOL!! Are you REALLY this ignorant?? ::sigh:: Have you read a SINGLE competent historian on the causes of the Civil War? Besides your racist cult leader Ron Paul? I would recommend James McPherson. Good, informative read.
Xenu 3 years ago
Read Thomas Di Lorenzo. He has debated many Lincoln historians on this subject and has beaten all of them.
ferrozm 3 years ago
there is no evidence that Lew Rockwell is a racist.
ferrozm 3 years ago
"The Case for Paleolibertarianism", by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., Liberty, January, 1990
"Right-Wing Populism: A Strategy for the Paleo Movement." Rothbard-Rockwell Report, January 1992
Do a search for article "Who Wrote Ron Paul's Newsletters?" by Julian Sanchez and David Weigel. It goes into detail about how viciously evil those two little neo-Nazis really are.
Xenu 3 years ago