And for the record blacks dont kill more we're just caught faster and reported more. Whites do mass murder sprees bombings and lets not forget they send TROOPS in to do their wet work [if they are powerful enough]. It's not racism just being analytical who runs the military? not the president. It's the people that hold our debt. Do your homework. Its despicable and unjustifiable for all races and we all should be ashamed of the blood our respective races spill.
niggers are ugly, who wants to wake up next to a smelly, nappy ass nigger bitch in the morning? they smell wierd and look like monkeys with their bi-maxillary overbites.
I got a great idea! Let's demonstrate that there's no hateful speech on the internet by POSTING HATEFUL COMMENTS! That'll show 'em where we REALLY stand!
@mtuers No we are into letting individuals decide what to do with their bodies and lives NOT THE GOVERNMENT. But all the white trash seem to be having 19 kids and counting....great.
while there is no legitimate excuse for the hate crap fm the neo nazis, where's the outrage over the music industry's hate product, under the guise of 1st amendment rights? let's clean up Both ends of the spectrum!
They're not very trafficked, but they're out there! How many have I found? Well, there is, um, this ONE, and probably more... --- Don't fall for this crap. These peeps are trying to get us worked up over essentially nothing.
Honestly I don't like watching O'Reilly because he doesn't stand up for his principles and lets whoever is on his show walk all over him regardless of their beliefs, but how can he be "schooled" if he did nothing but ask questions?
You liberals should be careful, O'Reilly is as liberal as you are that's why he is so dumb. It seems since the left has taken over Harvard all they can put out is dumb liberals.
@hooah91 I was saying the same damn thing. Why would he compare Daily Kos to a Nazi site. Nazi would love to see some kill Obama and all minorities in America.
Cultural reasons, mainly of an immediate nature. Irishmen and Italians were notoriously well known for having a representation in the criminal element of the US far out of proportion to their numbers, but now many are part of the upper classes here. Now Blacks are becoming affluent, and are being supplanted in the US criminal element by new immigrant groups.
Crime tends to be greatest amongst whosoever makes up the underclass. When such people become affluent, they are replaced by others.
Whites are the only real minority on earth yet they are the only ones who have no specific term which relates to their victimhood.....there is no ''islamophobia'' or ''anti-semitism'' equivalent which applies to the thousands of white people who are raped, assaulted, robbed or murdered by none whites every month of every year across the so called white world. Apparently, it's ok to murder us.
We sure aren't socio-economic minorities and if you're using the term only to represent population, then you're still wrong. There is only one majority, we are one of multiple minorities... that's how the whole system works.
There aren't common terms for fear or hatred of a lot of races but the one for fear of white people is ablophobia.
Well if you use money as a measure of minority status, I wonder who taught you English. There is a correlation between family size and income too which is unrelated to skin colour. I study statistics and I'm quite happy to give you some facts if that is what you require.
That shows you are stupid. The Socialist part of the name was to trick people. They were anti Socialist. That is the whole idea of the party. Do some research and you will find they used to fight in the streets communist or "the reds" as they are sometimes called.
@facefullofcum Those in America that believe the Nazi's were socialists are the same type of people that Hitler convinced that genocide was a good idea.
@facefullofcum That is the dumbest shit I have ever heard I had to read Mien Kampf for a project I did in college and Adolf Hitler was a Socialist in every sense of the word. Also he and Stalin were alllies and split Poland before Hitler lost his mind and invaded Russia. Where did you learn that I want to know? Did you make it up?
@Iraqveterankill4real " Since you are American and Americans usually only speak English I will recomend you an English book. Two book set Hitler biography by John Toland. Do your research and you will see the NSDAP was fighting the reds all the time before they came into power.
@facefullofcum I will read them I wont just put it off I formed an opinion on what I know and if your right then I will correct myself when I am done reading.
@Iraqveterankill4real You obviously didn't read mein kampf well or you would notice he thought communism to be a jew conspiracy. Either you didn't read it well or you need to look up the word socialist. Also socialist was put in the name to trick actual socialist into voting for them. It is you sir who is rewriting history.
@facefullofcum Do not tell me what I didnt do because I know I did read it I watched me do it. Now other than the man being a socialist he is also a lunatic but a very smart one. I have rewritten nothing and even if you are for socialism history proves time and again it does not work in the long term view you know that I am not agaisnt socialism in fact if it could work it would be great but it does not work becuase of greed.
@Iraqveterankill4real "even if you are for socialism history proves time and again it does not work in the long term"
That is a dumb statement. History proves that NO government works in the long term, they all collapse eventually. That is not exclusive to socialism. And greed? Capitalism is built on greed. The whole system is to be greedy and see how much money and power you can get! I hope you like the way your wallstreet has been doing you, because that is true capitalism!
@facefullofcum Also in capitalism for you to profit someone else has to lose, why does it have to be this way? Why should a man born into wealth make more profit off of a product than the workers who produced the product? I can understand a ceo making more, but millions for a ceo vs near poverty wages for his workers? that isn't right.
@facefullofcum no shit ball, it was actually Definition of National Socialist. As it was national socialism and not Free World markets, because the Jews controlled all the countries. India, China, France, England, Russia, and the USA. The Jews ran all the Drug trade, all the prostitution, all the slavery. Even if these things were illegal in Germany, the Jewish power and money would still control germany/
The Nazis were fascists - a RIGHT WING philosophy. They weren't socialists, as the American definition of the term suggests. Hitler despised socialism and communism.
True, they were not marxist socialists. They were national socialist AKA neo-cons, the worst enemy of free society. You need to understand that there are two incredibly offensive things to right wingers.
The first is competing authoritarian movements. Right wingers hate communism because it is in direct competition with their own power based ideology, but has some egalitarian value.
The second is liberals, as they are vehemently opposed to any authoritarian ideology.
@Iraqveterankill4real "And the most dreadful thing to a Liberal is Jesus" Hitler was a christian. Jesus was a communist. So what? You think the ideas of Jesus such as compassion are not socialist? You think his idea of not being greedy isn't socialist? You miss the point of socialism. It is not bad, the idea is grand. It has failed because men are weak and succumbed to greed.
@facefullofcum I do not think socialism is inherently a bad idea I just do not think humanity can pull it off it always ends badly. You have to factor in greed and mans lust for power.
@Iraqveterankill4real Correct. Neither idea is perfect, but both have good qualities which is why a mixed system is better. Neither can function in the long run. Both crumble eventually under greed. WIth socialism it is corrupt officals, and capitalism it is greedy individuals who will sell until there is no raw good on earth left to make finished goods.
@facefullofcum I cant argue with that it is the truth would it be safe to say it is not systems of government that are bad it is the people behind them correct?
@SickBritKid Incorrect. Nazis are Right-Wing because they stress nationalism and oppose communism and socialism and hate all left-wing government types. There more of the radical both of the right and left combined into one fucked up government.
Opposing socialism and stressing nationalism doesn't make you Right-Wing. All of the extremes of the Left Wing hate each other more than they hate the Right Wing.
Mind telling me how a philosophy that stresses Big Government and imposes the government's will upon every single one of its citizens is Right Wing? Do you even know what Right Wing philosophy is? Clearly, you don't, so here's a quick lesson:
Right Wing conservatism's fundamental principle is Small Government. It is our belief that the government should have little to do with the governing of our everyday lives and should stay out of the common man's life. The government is ALSO held accountable TO THE PEOPLE, whereas a Fascist government isn't held accountable to ANYONE.
THAT is the foundation of Right-Wing conservatism. Granted, its been taken to extremes...but Fascism is NOT a Right-Wing philosophy. AT ALL.
Then that means that Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and many other Right-Wing pundits are Libertarians... They constantly define that as their ideology.
Face it, you just want to equate conservatives to Nazis so that way your little liberal mind can claim the high ground, even though you're the more immoral of the two ends of the political spectrum.
@SickBritKid, there is nothing more immoral than subsequently promoting, passing, or attempting to pass legislation that excludes, discriminates, or disparages entire demographic groups. The Republican party, in it's entire functionality, is immoral. It is cataclysmic to this country and I hope that party continues to dwindle...
...what legislation has been passed that does that by the Republican party? And before you say "Arizona's Immigration law" realize that Arizona's DEMOCRATS voted for it, as well.
@SickBritKid, I consider your opinion (of whether or not the Arizona law is discriminatory) quite illusive. If a local police man harrassed you (an american citizen) about your immigration status because of the color of your skin, you would feel discriminated against. So don't be narrow minded. But other examples include the new strict abortion measures enacted in Oklahoma, the 29 states that have a constitutional ban on gay marriage... the list goes on...
What's wrong with a constitutional ban on Gay Marriage? If the people don't want it, then there shouldn't be a problem.
Oh wait, you're liberal. "The people don't know what the want", right?
For the record, I don't have anything against gay marriage. Personally, I couldn't give two shits about it. On a religious level, I'm against it, but on a secular level, that's the government's problem, not mine. So I don't care.
@SickBritKid, i don't have to explain what's wrong with a constitutional ban on gay marriage. My point was just proven by you. You admit some people don't want it so there shouldn't be a problem. This doesn't defeat the fact that it's a ban which is discriminatory towards an entire demographic group, and conservatives who support it, & other discriminatory legislation, and harmful to society in that it causes tension and mixed relations among the diverse cultures in our nation.
Also, the only party that's "dwindling" is the Democrats, who are being torn apart by ridiculous amounts of infighting over petty bullshit, which is a HUGE reason why NOTHING is being done by the feds over the Oil Spill situation...
@SickBritKid, the democratic party is growing. Especially with the younger generation becoming of voting age. Conservatives are being weeded out. All they have left is the tea baggers LOL =) And get your facts right. Everything possible is being done about the oil spill.
Yup, EVERYTHING possible. Like that burn option that was in place for just this sort of thing...OH WAIT! Yup, EVERYTHING THAT IS POSSIBLE! Like the sandbags that Louisiana's governor requested from the feds multiple times over to keep the oil off of their beaches....OH WAIT.
And, for the record, I'm apart of the younger generation(19 years old) and I'm conservative. There are A LOT of younger conservatives than you give credit for.
@SickBritKid, if you're 19 and conservative, you are in a small minority. And trust me, you may be too young and too uninformed to even know for sure what you are. When I was 19, I considered myself someone who was moderate-to-conservative. But once I went through college (now 23 yrs old), experience life after highschool, & learned much more about politics & cultures... I turned out to be a very liberal person... just wait. Learn as much as you can & see how you feel when your a little older.
@SickBritKid, if you think the government would wast time lineing a beach (of sand) with sand bags, to protect it from oil, you are a typical conservative who speaks before thinking. Have you seen a map of Louisiana? Do you really think it's possible to line that states shoreline with sandbags in any reasonable amount of time? You do know the tide causes the shoreline to differ from day to night right? The stupid ass Lousiana governor's request was denied for good reason... trust the feds.
I was thinking of something else entirely, but used sandbags as a poor placeholder. That was my bad. However, I've seen several other ideas for the crisis that have been outright IGNORED by the government, like using hay on the surface to absorb the oil and clean the water. Just ONE of many solutions I've seen that the dumbshits in Washington are ignoring.
And TRUST my government? The one that's being run by a protege of William Ayers and filled with a bunch of incompetent twits put there by a resurgence of the Spoils System, like Napolitano? Are you KIDDING me?
For the record, the sandbags on the beaches, in addition to the water boom that's sitting collecting dust in Maine, would have stopped the oil from getting onto the main parts of the beaches, which is where it's washing up as we speak.
Now, the oil spill happened some forty-odd days ago. The oil began washing up on our shores around the 30s.
One month is MORE THAN ENOUGH TIME FOR LOUISIANA'S BEACHES TO GET PROTECTED!!
Instead, the government red-taped Louisiana's gov...
@SickBritKid, I am also distressed that you feel the Tea Party is making the Republican Party grow. In reality, with the newer generation moving in and the fact that many moderate republicans have recently turned independent or even crossed to democrat, it is mainly the far right diehard conservatives (old people) who now make up what is left of republicans (the tea party). This is a small fringe group that will soon die out.
@SickBritKid, tea party all ages and demographics? REally? howcome on TV they look like a bunch of old white people (ONLY old white people)? It is a fringe group, and I love Olbermann =) If the current administration is so incompetent, howcome jobs are being added on a monthly basis for the first time since the Bush administration fucked up everything they could get their hands on?
Perhaps if you stopped watching Olbermann and his obvious prejudice against the Tea Party, and watched a reasonable Fox News pundit, like O'Reilly, cover the Tea Party...you'll see a different side to it.
How the hell are you expecting KEITH FUCKIN' OLBERMANN, a man who made baseless accusations that Scott Brown advocated violence toward women(and was then eviscerated by JON STEWART, of all people, for it), to cover a right-wing movement without any sort of prejudice?
@SickBritKid, Did I ever insinuate that I believe Keith is not prejudice towards the Tea Party? If you would've asked me, I actually HOPE he is... and he has every right to be. The Tea Party is a disgusting, bigoted group of people. And I wouldn't trust a Fox News pundit's coverage of the Tea Party... are you kidding me? They blatantly lie to their viewers! They air footage of large crowds that gather for totally different causes & claim is is footage of your tea party! LMAO, It's OUTRAGEOUS!
Just like how MSNBC pundits lie to their viewers saying the Tea Party is nothing more than a fringe group that is only against Obama because he's black...
@SickBritKid, Oh plz, you really think oil wouldn't seep through a bunch of sandbags? There are spaceways between sandbags, this isn't some inpenetrable wall we're talking about. And 30 days is hardly enough to fill that states coastline w/ sand bags. Not to mention the fact that we wouldn't even be able to acquire such an amount of sand bags as to fill that state's coastline (not even considering all the other states that border the gulf as well).
@SickBritKid, If you don't believe the fact that tea party crowds carry confederate flags & signs of obama drawn as a monkey, is racist, then I can only presume you may be racist as well. Either that or just totally oblivious. When liberals protest, they don't focus on a persons skin color or wave symbols that will offend that person's ancestral history (the confederate flag relatively symbolizes tolerance for slavery).
@SickBritKid, MSNBC's pundits, who say the Tea Party is a fringe group against obama because he's black, are speaking a definitive truth. It IS a fringe group, and there is an overwelming amount of hard evidence PLUS 'convenient contingencies' taking place. If you watch FOX NEWS so much, don't you recall Glenn Beck saying "Obama has a deep seeded hatred for white people"? How do you like that double-standard?
Yes, so did Olbermann show the video where a black man harassed so protesters, attacked a man's wife after the man politely requested that he stop, and then attacked the man?
Oh yeah, I forgot. The Tea Party is just a racist contingent...
@SickBritKid@SickBritKid, OMG! you don't say! There's footage of a black man harassing tea bagger protesters!? Well that is one man and he is responsible for his own actions. He doesn't represent an entire so-called "movement". There is no comparison here. One black man against a man and his wife is a different scenario from thousands of people trying to intimidate and besiege one black man.
@SickBritKid, Also, please get the facts right. Obama is scheduled to meet w/ BP CEO Tony Hayward this week when Hayward will be in Washington for a congressional testimony. In case you don't remember, there were no booms immediately on hand when the rig exploded (this should have been BP's responsibility, but they were too busy equivocating regulations while making huge profits), which is why Mexico had to offer us THEIR booms until we got our shit together...
@SickBritKid, Tea Party-led acts of violence don't exist? Again you are demonstrating the infamous conservative republican tactic (avoid the facts my any means necessary). I'm sure you are not in denial, you seem very smart, just pay more attention to the news and read up more on certain topics before you dub them "nonexistent".
Yeah. You see, I trust RELIABLE news sources, like Jon Stewart or Phillip DeFranco, for my information. I don't lap up the drivel that guys like Olbermann dish out on a nightly basis.
@SickBritKid, If you can find one example of when Olbermann has ever lied to his viewers, then I'll give you some credit. Let's not forget that offering one's opinion is NOT lying. Fox News's pundits have lied numerous of times to their viewers & can't be trusted. And I don't watch Keith for 'the news' ( I get news from multiple sources each day ). I watch Keith because I tend to agree with his interpretation of the news and that he bases his opinion on the FACTS.
Same reason I watch O'Reilly. He bases himself more on fact and being grounded in reality, unlike Beck and his lofty conspiracy theories or Hannity and his tendency to be a massive prick.
It was Hannity, BTW, who used footage of an entirely different protest as proof of a "Tea Party protest". All of the other FNC pundits, however, have used real videos from both the Bold Fresh tour and the Tea Party protests.
And if Olbermann said otherwise, then he's lying to his viewers.
And he would be lying because if O'Reilly and Beck were using different footage as Tea Party footage, then Jon Stewart would be eviscerating them like he tore Hannity to shreds over it when Hannity did the same thing you're accusing ALL FNC pundits of doing.
@SickBritKid, Hannity only used fake footage WORSE than Beck did (to a large extent). That doesn't defeat the fact that Beck used fake footage as well. Type Sean Hannity Confesses Using Fake Footage: "Jon Stewart Was Right!" into your youtube search and look at the evidence yourelf. Beck is on Fox News lying to Fox New's narrow-minded viewers. Check out O'reilly lying by simply typing in Bill o'reilly lying They ALL lie dude, Fox News is one big LYING HUB!
So Fox News is, in your words, a "big lying hub" and yet MSNBC, whose pundits have been known to scathingly refer to the average American citizen as "not known what's best for themselves" isn't? Like Schultz, who openly promotes fear mongering? Or Olbermann, who does nothing but insult his competitors because he can't post up decent ratings against them?
Also, if Beck used "fake footage" as you say, then Jon Stewart, ESPECIALLY Jon Stewart, would have gotten on Beck's case...
@SickBritKid, (1) Politically, the average American DOESN'T know what's best for themselves, nor do they know what's best for the country. Sad, but true. There are FARRR more lower-educated people then there are higher-educated people. (2) Keith insults his competitors because they're unbelievably ignorant, not ratings. Fox has higher ratings cause every old naive republican confined to their bed has their TV tuned to Fox News 24/7. Walk the halls of a retirement building & see for yourself.
*shakes head* You seem to hold this ignorantly idiotic notion in your head that all Republicans, or the vast majority, are just a bunch of old people, when people like me and a few friends of mine from High School show that there ARE young Republicans.
Just because I'm 19 doesn't automatically make me a Liberal. Hell, a lot of OLDER people I know are much more LIBERAL than guys like Stewart and Keith...
So whatever, continue being an ignorant waif and ignoring the other side..
@SickBritKid, just a side note, FACTUAL STATISTICS prove that most republicans ARE older people. Since I'm a liberal, I'll actually provide proof for you. On google search, type "republicans by age", and click the first search result. Now who's ignorant? Or should i say, delusional?
@SickBritKid, well when i search it, the exact article pulls up. something must be wrong with the way your searching. I would paste the link here but youtube doesn't allow copying and pasting of links to websites. I tried but then it doesn't let me submit my post.
One of my favorite sayings is how Liberals refer to "compassionate Conservative" as an oxymoron. At which point I cut them down by retorting "so is tolerant Liberal." Shuts them up everytime. Why?
Almost every Liberal I've talked to has been insulting and scathing toward my Conservative views, even though Liberals are supposedly the "tolerant" ones...whereas a lot of Conservatives I know of, including O'Reilly, actually listen to the other side more often than not.
So if you want to continue to self-righteously insult my ideals while blatantly ignoring the flaws of your own, fine. Continue to wallow in your hypocrisy. It amuses me.
On a side note, even if Beck has used fake footage, then he has still used real footage more often than not. Why? If Beck were using purely fake footage, a la Hannity, then Jon Stewart, who's always taken shots at Beck when he can, would have definitely called him out on it like he did Hannity.
Then again, you've proven that you're a disgrace to guys like Stewart, so...nvm.
@SickBritKid, "tolerant liberal" is not an oxymoron. There are many different things that a person can be tolerant of. Just because a person is tolerant, doesn't mean that person is tolerant of intolerance. And conservatives (the vast majority)... are intolerant. That is why liberals are insulting and scathing toward your conservative views. It's tolerance v.s. intolerance. I know Beck, 'more often then not", uses real footage, otherwise he'd be off the air.
@SickBritKid, Just like your delusional FOX News pundits (LOL), you LIE, you mix up the facts, and you speak before doing your research. You will fail in life if you continue to behave this way. When I say (per my post), "And conservatives (the vast majority)... are intolerant", and you turn that into, "ALL CONSERVATIVES ARE INTOLERANT!!", you are utterly mixing up the facts in an effor to prove your fallacious point of view. Do this in a real political debate and you will lose all respect.
@SickBritKid, All your whiney posts about me not accepting your opinion is just a bluff. It's a cop out, and your on a high horse. Taking it upon yourself to dub me a disgrace, while implicating you're some sort of victorious debater, only repudiates not just your argument, but the validity of your dispostion.
@SickBritKid, your being too sensitive (which is also selfdestructive in political debates). When a person counters your opinion with their own, it doesn't mean they don't accept your opinion. It means they don't agree with you. You're free to think what you want and I do accept your opinion. I just like discussing our difference in opinions for educational purposes because I'm open-minded. If you can't accept somebody countering your opinion then it is only because you are narrow-minded.
@BsSetUp The germans had it right. They were national socialist because the Jews ran all the economies so they knew the corrupt Jew banker could not be allowed to influence society. Thats what national socialism was about. Imperfect world. They hated socialists and communists but the rest of the world was totally evil. The Jew is evil. They controled England, Russia, France, and the United States. The US to a lesser degree but enough to get them to fight the germans and not the EVIL SOVIETS.
You're absolutely correct. Nazis were socialists - in fact, were more committed to socialist ideas than were Bolsheviks - and were initially labelled as "Rightist" by Marxists.
Note that Marxists have changed "Rightist" as a term twice - first, from pro-monarchists into something to describe people involved in commerce ("the bourgeoisie"), then to describe the post-Marxist socialism of fascism. Nazis were actually a competing faction of socialists, like Trotskyists or Stalinists.
I love how fox frequently drops the "anarchists" into any story which involves violent political elements even when they are islamic, fascist, or leftist. I'm willing to bet the further right fox goes the more we'll be hearing about "anarchists" everywhere. I'm just curious how well the second red scare will work when they start blacklisting people.
Except when Glenn Beck does another 9/12 project; then the people preaching against 'Obama-Care' aren't the radicals that Hannity himself referred as 'frantic extremists'
When a wicked leader rises up and says, "if you're not with us, you're against us". And, even after his administration has left the nation in utter economic and international reputation ruin, his party continues in the lockstep mentality mantra of "if you don't agree with us, you are unpatriotic". Then you can rest assured, that Adolf Hitler or worse is not far from around the next corner.
Just how historically ignorant can Americans be, that O'Reilly, Hannity & Limbaugh remain on the air?
Bill says are there any other hate Obama sites then the Nazis and she says no. Bullshit Foxnews website is one of the biggest. If you ever go there click on a few stories about Obama. Look for the comments section and you will see all kinds of fucking hate.
I'm not sure what "fucking hate" is compared to hate in general, but I guess it means, if your tired of getting fucked by Republicans, then it's time to hate.
And? Those comments were probably left by nutjobs. Why are you judging Fox News' website as "EPIC OBAMA HATE" based on people leaving hate comments WHO HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SITE APART FROM THAT!?
Now, I think it's fair to say that these positions are historically much closer to the right wing (also in fairness, they are presently way watered down). And they are somewhat more repugnant than vegetarianism and environmentalism.
Well, the left wing American "liberals" and European progressives have a tradition of opposing all of them.
But, and this is the crucial point, *they are dispensible*. I don't agree with any of them, but none is necessary for a fascist regime.
Who said it was primarily left wing? My argument is that it sides more so with left wing politics than right wing. It is in fact primarily socialist, just an outgrowth of socialism.
The underlying concerns are both revolutionary and reactionary. People such as middle eastern socialists are exactly the same, are they not socialists because they do not fit your personalized, exacted, definition?
I am done with this argument, it is clearly a waste of time.
-yet another repetition of an already debunked argument. "It is in fact primarily socialist, just an outgrowth of socialism."
- another bold escape from reality "People such as middle eastern socialists are exactly the same..." (wtf??)
- a hasty retreat "I am done with this argument, it is clearly a waste of time."
Bye, "majored in history/economics" fraud. Oh well, better make a fool of yourself in youtube than out there... in the public sphere with the cameras and all.
Let's not forget your original post about Hitler being a environmentalist, vegetarian. animal righs lover, therefore being close to the left.
He also was:
- an opponent of atheism, launching an "anti-godless" movement
- a proponent of extermination of homossexuals
- anti-feminist - "the slogan 'Emancipation of women' was invented by Jewish intellectuals... For her world is her husband, her family, her children, and her home."
This is ridiculous, it's like a born again christian arguing with Catholic tradition that they have the correct understanding of christianity even the original christians, who learned from the apostles, and wrote down the principles learned, know less than them sitting in their bedroom 2,000 years after the fact.
It's nonsensical because you are arguing not against me but against historical record which is quite clear. Would you like document names and years?
It's humorous because oppressing gays is supposedly right wing yet Pol Pot murdered people with a minor education, people who wore glasses, Stalin slaughtered Jews, and people indifferent let alone atagonistic to his cause ect ect.
Was their goal's left wing but their oppression right wing? Does a leftist's pessimistic and nihilistic view of charity's not supposedly having the guidance and wisdom to achieve welfare rightist? And then the government operation itselfs leftist? Dichotomy?
Yes, give me document names and years, please. I'm now convinced you're a complete bluff.
"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord." - Hitler
There's your atheist Hitler. Look it up.
"Extermination of gays, anti feminist, opponent of atheism, they are all right wing as you say?" - Historically, do you have any doubt? In what world do you live?
The problem with your statement of Hitler's views of religion is that it completely disregards his privately maintained motives which were stated as the stability of the state and society.
Hitler, Like many manipulative "leaders" claimed to be acting on behalf of a God he himself had nothing in common with. So many people are succored in by the I speck for God gambit.
Price controls, production quotas, labor policies such as paid vacation, socialized health care, heavy environmentalist regulation, public works projects, 65% corporate tax rate, appropriation of private land for "communal usage", old age insurance, eventual nationalization of all corporations, not to mention health inititiatives such as smoke free, meat free, banning slaughterouses ect.
Doesn't sound far from today's left wing to me. As a Catholic I agree with several of those ideas!
I am now told that I am not dually an economics major and history major because I don't argue utilizing decontextualized quotations to the detriment of the larger point?
If I disagree with you then I am no longer a mjor in these two subjects? You are most definitely a liberal.
Thomas Sowell once stated that the tragedy of the modern liberal is arrogance, and that if I disagree with you about how to deal with any specified "group" of people it must mean that I do not care about them. Tragic
That's funny, since one might say that the tragedy of the modern conservative is arrogance, and that if one disagrees with Christian, rich-pandering sentiments that you are a Marxist and un-American.
A good example can be found in evengelical christians. They are seen to be providing impetus to the supposedly" left wing" cause of environmentalism. Was it the case that they cared none at all prior of the environment? No they always affirmed as the Bible clearly states the providential authority and responsibility to maintain harmony with the "environment".
What makes them therefore leftist now? They're support of the state's intervention to achieve the supported goal now in many cases.
State intervention is of itself "leftist" as it is defined today. Emund Burke a classical conservative once advised his nation to anarchist capitalism. Paleoconservatism (classical conservatism) today largely focuses as always not as much with law, but with community and culture.
New urbanism is a wonderful point to disagree with you. Both wings of the the same tyranny claim new urbanism as both liberal and conservative. How can this be true? Can it be both? Yes it can and quite easily.
Another problem when redefining Hitler's "spirituality" is that he made several trips through the Himalayas with theosophists, materialists, in cause of finding the Aryan man's origins.
Hitler was definitely the kind of spiritualist that you can find in Borders Books today, a neo-pagan, materialist, theosophy inspired individual.
Today the "left" primarily makes up these ranks so try not to forget that the "conservativism" of the day was entirely different/Christian and not just labeled.
3 (cont)- Now, if Hitler was a socialist, not only did he never acted as one, but he sure managed to fool everybody.
His political coalitions were always with the conservative and christian right. He relentlessly attacked the "two great evils of the world" in Mein Kampf: Communism and Judaism. He banned left-wing meetings once in power.
Not just Hitler, but pretty much all fascist regimes fought socialist parties - Mussolini against bolsheviks, Franco in the Spanish civil war.
Let's take a different turn, was Mao, Pol Pot, and Stalin left wing? How much rampant destruction of culture, arbitrary murdering, how many? between them all...in the ballpark of 100-120 million?
Your defintion does not stand the test at all when under the microscope.
Racism was not a factor under communism because all were relegated to the level of numbers rather than individuals and oppression was equally cruel and tyranical.
i never said Communism was good. Man, are you thickheaded. Those are Communist regimes, and yes, they were cruel, and tyrannical, and caused a great deal of destruction. And those are forms of left-wing extremism. I don't have a problem with that.
But they weren't *fascists*. And fascist regimes weren't socialist. That's the point. Communism is, in fact, one implementaion of socialism. Fascist regimes were not. Communism - left-wing. Fascism - right wing. Is that simple enough for you?
Did I infact state you thought communism was a good and positive movement? No.
If I state an objective fact that slavery in North America was not contained to blacks does that mean that I like slavery, condone it, and would like to formulate a society with it as the foundational basis? No, of course not.
See previous argument about People's *Republic* of China".
Socialism is a dirty word in modern U.S.A., a legacy of the cold war. This wasn't always the case. Socialist was a very prestigious term in the beginning of the century in Europe, much like today's "democratic". so many factions used it without in fact being socialist. Actions and doctrine is, of course, what counts.
You know what is incredibly humorous is that my close friend grew uo in The Soviet Union and my family during Fascism before coming here on a boat.
I cannot articulate how incorrect your definitions are when application to reality is viscerally and empirically studied.
Did you know that during this "leftist" regime her friends were murdered if one committed a crime yett was derelict? If you ran, your friends were identified and imprisoned or worse.
You are merely juxtaposing international socialism and national socialism. Is there really any way to extrapolate the difference and somehow define one as socialism and the other a nonsocialist?
Think about it, it the difference between micro and macro economics, different approaches to the same system but from different perspectives. National socialism was socialism applied to local and more easily controllable system. It was common sense rather than a differentiation.
Soviet Union was not a fascist regime. Are you kidding? Did you say you majored in history? What a joke. Soviet Union was a Communist regime, didn't they tell your friend that?
International vs national... No, I'm saying that Hitler wasn't socialist at all, in the same way that China isn't a republic. There is no national/international distinction. Hitler allied itself always with the conservative right, and was hostile to left movements in Germany.
Who said the Soviet Union was fascist? China is a "People's Republic".
There is actually a clear defintional difference between both a People's Republic and an actual Individualist republic which is the collective vs the individual.
The People's Republice views rights as a collective form by which societal health are viewed through such lens whereas a individualist republic views individual freedom as the benchmark of vitality.
Once again, your defintion is not as clear cut in reality.
2 (cont.) - "There are many similarities and differences between variations of "fascist" nations such as some being racist, other's not, some promoting belligerent nationalism, other's not."
So let's take Franco, Salazar, Hitler, Mussolini. They were *all* extremely nationalistic (exaltation of glorious past, variations of a great destiny, country above all else). They were all racist (Mussolini, as I said before, was racist against black people, not Jews). And they were all belligerent.
All tenuous claims as Obama/McCain ect all aspire and rhapsodize to the electorate of a previous age of purity and flowers and pedals. That is nothing more than control devices.
Mussolin as most other socialists of the time were in fat racist, as were most communists at the times also. Want quotes?
They were not all homogenous at all as you say, Franco was not belligerently nationalistic, neither Pinochet, nor Gaddafi.
you clearly disregard any (and much larger) amount of policy similarites between modern socialist and liberal governmental systems but attribute fascism to the fewer similiarities between modern "conservatism"?
Ok, let's hear those similarities so we can examine them. I expect, of course, to hear *political* similarities between them that *other political systems* don't share. So the examples you mentioned so far, vegetarianism or environmentalism, are pretty absurd.
Well, constant promotion of the abolition of the disparity between rich and poor, promotion of environmentalism, health and well being as doctrine and not personal choice, vegetarianism is minor, socialization of health care, socialization of major components of the economy over time, the allowance of free enterprise but with governmental control (socialist not communist remember) and I could go on and on.
It's funny, I actually listened to this goldberg fellow and he is mostly correct.
And for the record blacks dont kill more we're just caught faster and reported more. Whites do mass murder sprees bombings and lets not forget they send TROOPS in to do their wet work [if they are powerful enough]. It's not racism just being analytical who runs the military? not the president. It's the people that hold our debt. Do your homework. Its despicable and unjustifiable for all races and we all should be ashamed of the blood our respective races spill.
AlastorDarkAngel 4 months ago
i dunno who's dumber bill o reilly or this idiot in the comment section. I almost feel sorry for you.
AlastorDarkAngel 4 months ago
seriously, doesn anyone want to wake up tommorow next to wheezey, the fat nigger bitch from the Jeffersons?
yuri60014 5 months ago
niggers are ugly, who wants to wake up next to a smelly, nappy ass nigger bitch in the morning? they smell wierd and look like monkeys with their bi-maxillary overbites.
yuri60014 5 months ago
I got a great idea! Let's demonstrate that there's no hateful speech on the internet by POSTING HATEFUL COMMENTS! That'll show 'em where we REALLY stand!
JonasPlanck 6 months ago
Daily Kos is a hate site? That's hilarious.
SmartAmerica 7 months ago
Amanda Carpenter is HOTT!! She can analyse me any day :D
tellul8r 8 months ago 2
bill is scum
speck444 10 months ago 2
@speck444
you're a nigger loving faggot.
yuri60014 5 months ago
Aborting black children? I thought that's what progressives were into.
mtuers 11 months ago
@mtuers No we are into letting individuals decide what to do with their bodies and lives NOT THE GOVERNMENT. But all the white trash seem to be having 19 kids and counting....great.
RobVanMeter 7 months ago
O'really: Any mainstream sites, not Nazi sites, hating Obama?
Carpenter: Just Fox, Bill.
OswaldCornelius 11 months ago 2
while there is no legitimate excuse for the hate crap fm the neo nazis, where's the outrage over the music industry's hate product, under the guise of 1st amendment rights? let's clean up Both ends of the spectrum!
cloudshe 1 year ago
@JASONNHENCHMENN Left wing sheep. The irony!
Asadawa 1 year ago
They're not very trafficked, but they're out there! How many have I found? Well, there is, um, this ONE, and probably more... --- Don't fall for this crap. These peeps are trying to get us worked up over essentially nothing.
chrlpolk 1 year ago
Is Reilly getting off at all the potential hate out there..He almost seems to be bristling for MORE...What's wrong with him!!!!
Reporter: "Absolutely nasty..they talk about aborting black babies.."
O'Reilly: (Shrugs)..."Anything more..maybe some neo-nazi stuff...(Come on give me some thing a little more heinous!)"
editorofk2k 1 year ago
Honestly I don't like watching O'Reilly because he doesn't stand up for his principles and lets whoever is on his show walk all over him regardless of their beliefs, but how can he be "schooled" if he did nothing but ask questions?
jimbo525SE 1 year ago
LOL
My favourite thing on these videos is reading the comments that claim O'Reilly or Beck are liberals.
They aren't helping the Republican cause, but they are most definitely not liberals.
plasterdbastard 1 year ago 2
You liberals should be careful, O'Reilly is as liberal as you are that's why he is so dumb. It seems since the left has taken over Harvard all they can put out is dumb liberals.
tipan69 1 year ago
@tipan69 Haaha? WTF? O'Reilly's a liberal? Are you batshit insane or your-brother's-your-father retarded?
Fangtorn 1 year ago
O'Reilly still has a show? huh.
eyetolduso 1 year ago 2
Seems like O'Reilly was leading her at the end. What did he want her to say?
RadarKat73080 1 year ago
Did I just see O'Reilly call The Daily Kos a hate site? WTF?
jossman25 1 year ago
Hell O'Reilly you work for the same network that has a neo nazi by the name of Glenn Beck, helping to fuel the fire of hate!
You got a front row seat to the crazies working at FOX!
scorpionkings 1 year ago
did he REALLY just compare the KOS to nazi sites....really...FUCKING REALLY?!?!
hooah91 1 year ago
@hooah91 I was saying the same damn thing. Why would he compare Daily Kos to a Nazi site. Nazi would love to see some kill Obama and all minorities in America.
CoolScoobydoo 1 year ago
fox news tolerates Ann Coulter and brings her on all the time.. She used very offensive slurs against Arabs and Muslims. whatsup with that?
peachybeach 1 year ago
where the fuck do they get socialist in comparison to nazis? If you want to compare Obama to some dictator get your facts on dictators right! Idiots.
simsoy55 1 year ago
Yeah the Daily Kos is the left wing equivalent to the neo-nazi sites. Unbelievable. Talk about intellectually dishonest
Janetvdl 1 year ago
i see more hateful shit on youtube....
tigera10030 1 year ago
Funny when you compare the Nazis to RIGHT WING TERRORIST Timothy McVeigh, Mr. O'Reilly...
Because... for once...
You're actually spot on!
nafaidni 1 year ago
Everything on Fox News is a psyop.
loccysmif 1 year ago
She's an ignorant air head
TheyreAllCrazy 1 year ago
I think she's talking about freerepublic or maybe Pamela Geller's hate site "Atlas shrugs"
robertzimer 2 years ago
hmm.
try me.
why are some races predisposed to crime more than others?
clownubian 2 years ago
Cultural reasons, mainly of an immediate nature. Irishmen and Italians were notoriously well known for having a representation in the criminal element of the US far out of proportion to their numbers, but now many are part of the upper classes here. Now Blacks are becoming affluent, and are being supplanted in the US criminal element by new immigrant groups.
Crime tends to be greatest amongst whosoever makes up the underclass. When such people become affluent, they are replaced by others.
DrCruel 2 years ago
Good point
clownubian 2 years ago
Whites are the only real minority on earth yet they are the only ones who have no specific term which relates to their victimhood.....there is no ''islamophobia'' or ''anti-semitism'' equivalent which applies to the thousands of white people who are raped, assaulted, robbed or murdered by none whites every month of every year across the so called white world. Apparently, it's ok to murder us.
wlwak 2 years ago
We sure aren't socio-economic minorities and if you're using the term only to represent population, then you're still wrong. There is only one majority, we are one of multiple minorities... that's how the whole system works.
There aren't common terms for fear or hatred of a lot of races but the one for fear of white people is ablophobia.
penguinworm 2 years ago
Well if you use money as a measure of minority status, I wonder who taught you English. There is a correlation between family size and income too which is unrelated to skin colour. I study statistics and I'm quite happy to give you some facts if that is what you require.
wlwak 2 years ago
Not just money, but social position. That's a pretty common usage of the word "minority".
I'm not sure what family size has to do with anything...?
penguinworm 2 years ago
Comment removed
wlwak 2 years ago
"Any other mainstream sites...?"
("I gotta get IN on this!")
Lndmk227 2 years ago
does any of those sites have jokes because I don't want to here about hate but I'm always about a good racial slur joke.
hollywoodjokerpicalo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Nazi's are leftists, "national socialist party" not right
jhjh1732 2 years ago
That shows you are stupid. The Socialist part of the name was to trick people. They were anti Socialist. That is the whole idea of the party. Do some research and you will find they used to fight in the streets communist or "the reds" as they are sometimes called.
facefullofcum 2 years ago 7
@facefullofcum Those in America that believe the Nazi's were socialists are the same type of people that Hitler convinced that genocide was a good idea.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@facefullofcum That is the dumbest shit I have ever heard I had to read Mien Kampf for a project I did in college and Adolf Hitler was a Socialist in every sense of the word. Also he and Stalin were alllies and split Poland before Hitler lost his mind and invaded Russia. Where did you learn that I want to know? Did you make it up?
Iraqveterankill4real 1 year ago
@Iraqveterankill4real " Since you are American and Americans usually only speak English I will recomend you an English book. Two book set Hitler biography by John Toland. Do your research and you will see the NSDAP was fighting the reds all the time before they came into power.
facefullofcum 1 year ago
@facefullofcum I will read them I wont just put it off I formed an opinion on what I know and if your right then I will correct myself when I am done reading.
Iraqveterankill4real 1 year ago
@Iraqveterankill4real You obviously didn't read mein kampf well or you would notice he thought communism to be a jew conspiracy. Either you didn't read it well or you need to look up the word socialist. Also socialist was put in the name to trick actual socialist into voting for them. It is you sir who is rewriting history.
facefullofcum 1 year ago
@facefullofcum Do not tell me what I didnt do because I know I did read it I watched me do it. Now other than the man being a socialist he is also a lunatic but a very smart one. I have rewritten nothing and even if you are for socialism history proves time and again it does not work in the long term view you know that I am not agaisnt socialism in fact if it could work it would be great but it does not work becuase of greed.
Iraqveterankill4real 1 year ago
@Iraqveterankill4real "even if you are for socialism history proves time and again it does not work in the long term"
That is a dumb statement. History proves that NO government works in the long term, they all collapse eventually. That is not exclusive to socialism. And greed? Capitalism is built on greed. The whole system is to be greedy and see how much money and power you can get! I hope you like the way your wallstreet has been doing you, because that is true capitalism!
facefullofcum 1 year ago
@facefullofcum Also in capitalism for you to profit someone else has to lose, why does it have to be this way? Why should a man born into wealth make more profit off of a product than the workers who produced the product? I can understand a ceo making more, but millions for a ceo vs near poverty wages for his workers? that isn't right.
facefullofcum 1 year ago
@facefullofcum no shit ball, it was actually Definition of National Socialist. As it was national socialism and not Free World markets, because the Jews controlled all the countries. India, China, France, England, Russia, and the USA. The Jews ran all the Drug trade, all the prostitution, all the slavery. Even if these things were illegal in Germany, the Jewish power and money would still control germany/
nVei06 1 year ago
The Nazis were fascists - a RIGHT WING philosophy. They weren't socialists, as the American definition of the term suggests. Hitler despised socialism and communism.
BsSetUp 2 years ago 15
@BsSetUp
True, they were not marxist socialists. They were national socialist AKA neo-cons, the worst enemy of free society. You need to understand that there are two incredibly offensive things to right wingers.
The first is competing authoritarian movements. Right wingers hate communism because it is in direct competition with their own power based ideology, but has some egalitarian value.
The second is liberals, as they are vehemently opposed to any authoritarian ideology.
yubarraboo 1 year ago
@yubarraboo And the most dreadful thing to a Liberal is Jesus.
Iraqveterankill4real 1 year ago
@Iraqveterankill4real "And the most dreadful thing to a Liberal is Jesus" Hitler was a christian. Jesus was a communist. So what? You think the ideas of Jesus such as compassion are not socialist? You think his idea of not being greedy isn't socialist? You miss the point of socialism. It is not bad, the idea is grand. It has failed because men are weak and succumbed to greed.
facefullofcum 1 year ago
@facefullofcum I do not think socialism is inherently a bad idea I just do not think humanity can pull it off it always ends badly. You have to factor in greed and mans lust for power.
Iraqveterankill4real 1 year ago
@Iraqveterankill4real Correct. Neither idea is perfect, but both have good qualities which is why a mixed system is better. Neither can function in the long run. Both crumble eventually under greed. WIth socialism it is corrupt officals, and capitalism it is greedy individuals who will sell until there is no raw good on earth left to make finished goods.
facefullofcum 1 year ago
@facefullofcum I cant argue with that it is the truth would it be safe to say it is not systems of government that are bad it is the people behind them correct?
Iraqveterankill4real 1 year ago
@Iraqveterankill4real so we should just let the arseholes rip us?
Wanderlustus 1 year ago
@BsSetUp you speak the turth
alfredo8r6 1 year ago
@BsSetUp NAZI stands for National Socialists Party WHen did you decide to rewrite history and leave the word socialist OUT OF IT?
Iraqveterankill4real 1 year ago
@BsSetUp
Liberal Failure.
Fascism is an extreme LIBERAL philosophy. It emphasizes BIG GOVERNMENT dominating EVERY ASPECT OF THE CITIZEN'S LIFE!!
You know what philosophy Big Government fits under? That's right...THE LEFT WING.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid Incorrect. Nazis are Right-Wing because they stress nationalism and oppose communism and socialism and hate all left-wing government types. There more of the radical both of the right and left combined into one fucked up government.
simsoy55 1 year ago
@simsoy55
Opposing socialism and stressing nationalism doesn't make you Right-Wing. All of the extremes of the Left Wing hate each other more than they hate the Right Wing.
Mind telling me how a philosophy that stresses Big Government and imposes the government's will upon every single one of its citizens is Right Wing? Do you even know what Right Wing philosophy is? Clearly, you don't, so here's a quick lesson:
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@simsoy55
Right Wing conservatism's fundamental principle is Small Government. It is our belief that the government should have little to do with the governing of our everyday lives and should stay out of the common man's life. The government is ALSO held accountable TO THE PEOPLE, whereas a Fascist government isn't held accountable to ANYONE.
THAT is the foundation of Right-Wing conservatism. Granted, its been taken to extremes...but Fascism is NOT a Right-Wing philosophy. AT ALL.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid
Wrong. You are making up your own definition of right-wing. You are describing Libertarianism.
henryclemente 1 year ago
@henryclemente
Then that means that Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and many other Right-Wing pundits are Libertarians... They constantly define that as their ideology.
Face it, you just want to equate conservatives to Nazis so that way your little liberal mind can claim the high ground, even though you're the more immoral of the two ends of the political spectrum.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, there is nothing more immoral than subsequently promoting, passing, or attempting to pass legislation that excludes, discriminates, or disparages entire demographic groups. The Republican party, in it's entire functionality, is immoral. It is cataclysmic to this country and I hope that party continues to dwindle...
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
...what legislation has been passed that does that by the Republican party? And before you say "Arizona's Immigration law" realize that Arizona's DEMOCRATS voted for it, as well.
Nor is it discriminatory.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, I consider your opinion (of whether or not the Arizona law is discriminatory) quite illusive. If a local police man harrassed you (an american citizen) about your immigration status because of the color of your skin, you would feel discriminated against. So don't be narrow minded. But other examples include the new strict abortion measures enacted in Oklahoma, the 29 states that have a constitutional ban on gay marriage... the list goes on...
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
What's wrong with a constitutional ban on Gay Marriage? If the people don't want it, then there shouldn't be a problem.
Oh wait, you're liberal. "The people don't know what the want", right?
For the record, I don't have anything against gay marriage. Personally, I couldn't give two shits about it. On a religious level, I'm against it, but on a secular level, that's the government's problem, not mine. So I don't care.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, i don't have to explain what's wrong with a constitutional ban on gay marriage. My point was just proven by you. You admit some people don't want it so there shouldn't be a problem. This doesn't defeat the fact that it's a ban which is discriminatory towards an entire demographic group, and conservatives who support it, & other discriminatory legislation, and harmful to society in that it causes tension and mixed relations among the diverse cultures in our nation.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
Also, the only party that's "dwindling" is the Democrats, who are being torn apart by ridiculous amounts of infighting over petty bullshit, which is a HUGE reason why NOTHING is being done by the feds over the Oil Spill situation...
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, the democratic party is growing. Especially with the younger generation becoming of voting age. Conservatives are being weeded out. All they have left is the tea baggers LOL =) And get your facts right. Everything possible is being done about the oil spill.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
Yup, EVERYTHING possible. Like that burn option that was in place for just this sort of thing...OH WAIT! Yup, EVERYTHING THAT IS POSSIBLE! Like the sandbags that Louisiana's governor requested from the feds multiple times over to keep the oil off of their beaches....OH WAIT.
And, for the record, I'm apart of the younger generation(19 years old) and I'm conservative. There are A LOT of younger conservatives than you give credit for.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, if you're 19 and conservative, you are in a small minority. And trust me, you may be too young and too uninformed to even know for sure what you are. When I was 19, I considered myself someone who was moderate-to-conservative. But once I went through college (now 23 yrs old), experience life after highschool, & learned much more about politics & cultures... I turned out to be a very liberal person... just wait. Learn as much as you can & see how you feel when your a little older.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
Seeing as I used to be a punk-rocking Anarchist left-wing fanatic for the better part of Middle School as well as half of High School....
I'm pretty damn sure who I am.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
And the Dem party may be growing, but that same growth is causing it to fracture more and more along their sectional lines.
The Republicans, as well, are ALSO growing, mind you. Moreso because of the Tea Party movement.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, if you think the government would wast time lineing a beach (of sand) with sand bags, to protect it from oil, you are a typical conservative who speaks before thinking. Have you seen a map of Louisiana? Do you really think it's possible to line that states shoreline with sandbags in any reasonable amount of time? You do know the tide causes the shoreline to differ from day to night right? The stupid ass Lousiana governor's request was denied for good reason... trust the feds.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
I was thinking of something else entirely, but used sandbags as a poor placeholder. That was my bad. However, I've seen several other ideas for the crisis that have been outright IGNORED by the government, like using hay on the surface to absorb the oil and clean the water. Just ONE of many solutions I've seen that the dumbshits in Washington are ignoring.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
And TRUST my government? The one that's being run by a protege of William Ayers and filled with a bunch of incompetent twits put there by a resurgence of the Spoils System, like Napolitano? Are you KIDDING me?
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
For the record, the sandbags on the beaches, in addition to the water boom that's sitting collecting dust in Maine, would have stopped the oil from getting onto the main parts of the beaches, which is where it's washing up as we speak.
Now, the oil spill happened some forty-odd days ago. The oil began washing up on our shores around the 30s.
One month is MORE THAN ENOUGH TIME FOR LOUISIANA'S BEACHES TO GET PROTECTED!!
Instead, the government red-taped Louisiana's gov...
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid
Correction, 55 days ago the oil well burst...
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
They red-taped Louisana's governor until it was TOO LATE for the boom or protective sandbags to even matter...
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, I am also distressed that you feel the Tea Party is making the Republican Party grow. In reality, with the newer generation moving in and the fact that many moderate republicans have recently turned independent or even crossed to democrat, it is mainly the far right diehard conservatives (old people) who now make up what is left of republicans (the tea party). This is a small fringe group that will soon die out.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
You seriously think that the Tea Party, composed of people of all ages and all demographics, will soon die out? And that it's a fringe group?
Have you been watching Olbermann a bit too much?
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, tea party all ages and demographics? REally? howcome on TV they look like a bunch of old white people (ONLY old white people)? It is a fringe group, and I love Olbermann =) If the current administration is so incompetent, howcome jobs are being added on a monthly basis for the first time since the Bush administration fucked up everything they could get their hands on?
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
Perhaps if you stopped watching Olbermann and his obvious prejudice against the Tea Party, and watched a reasonable Fox News pundit, like O'Reilly, cover the Tea Party...you'll see a different side to it.
How the hell are you expecting KEITH FUCKIN' OLBERMANN, a man who made baseless accusations that Scott Brown advocated violence toward women(and was then eviscerated by JON STEWART, of all people, for it), to cover a right-wing movement without any sort of prejudice?
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, Did I ever insinuate that I believe Keith is not prejudice towards the Tea Party? If you would've asked me, I actually HOPE he is... and he has every right to be. The Tea Party is a disgusting, bigoted group of people. And I wouldn't trust a Fox News pundit's coverage of the Tea Party... are you kidding me? They blatantly lie to their viewers! They air footage of large crowds that gather for totally different causes & claim is is footage of your tea party! LMAO, It's OUTRAGEOUS!
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
Just like how MSNBC pundits lie to their viewers saying the Tea Party is nothing more than a fringe group that is only against Obama because he's black...
Nice double-standard, there.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, Oh plz, you really think oil wouldn't seep through a bunch of sandbags? There are spaceways between sandbags, this isn't some inpenetrable wall we're talking about. And 30 days is hardly enough to fill that states coastline w/ sand bags. Not to mention the fact that we wouldn't even be able to acquire such an amount of sand bags as to fill that state's coastline (not even considering all the other states that border the gulf as well).
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
Sandbags were but ONE of the many solutions that Obama disregarded. There was also the offshore booms that Louisiana requested around day 3...
What did Obama and the government do? Oh yeah, NOTHING!!
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, If you don't believe the fact that tea party crowds carry confederate flags & signs of obama drawn as a monkey, is racist, then I can only presume you may be racist as well. Either that or just totally oblivious. When liberals protest, they don't focus on a persons skin color or wave symbols that will offend that person's ancestral history (the confederate flag relatively symbolizes tolerance for slavery).
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, MSNBC's pundits, who say the Tea Party is a fringe group against obama because he's black, are speaking a definitive truth. It IS a fringe group, and there is an overwelming amount of hard evidence PLUS 'convenient contingencies' taking place. If you watch FOX NEWS so much, don't you recall Glenn Beck saying "Obama has a deep seeded hatred for white people"? How do you like that double-standard?
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
Yes, so did Olbermann show the video where a black man harassed so protesters, attacked a man's wife after the man politely requested that he stop, and then attacked the man?
Oh yeah, I forgot. The Tea Party is just a racist contingent...
*facepalm*
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid @SickBritKid, OMG! you don't say! There's footage of a black man harassing tea bagger protesters!? Well that is one man and he is responsible for his own actions. He doesn't represent an entire so-called "movement". There is no comparison here. One black man against a man and his wife is a different scenario from thousands of people trying to intimidate and besiege one black man.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
And seeing as Obama's displayed obvious prejudice toward capitalists, outright refusing to speak with the BP CEO about the crisis...
Glenn Beck may be a nutcase a lot of the time, but he's made a LOT of good points in his breakdowns of the Obama Administration's conduct...
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
And what "hard evidence" are you talking about? Are you talking about those numerous Tea Party-led acts of violence against the government?
Oh wait...THOSE DON'T EXIST!!
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, Also, please get the facts right. Obama is scheduled to meet w/ BP CEO Tony Hayward this week when Hayward will be in Washington for a congressional testimony. In case you don't remember, there were no booms immediately on hand when the rig exploded (this should have been BP's responsibility, but they were too busy equivocating regulations while making huge profits), which is why Mexico had to offer us THEIR booms until we got our shit together...
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, Tea Party-led acts of violence don't exist? Again you are demonstrating the infamous conservative republican tactic (avoid the facts my any means necessary). I'm sure you are not in denial, you seem very smart, just pay more attention to the news and read up more on certain topics before you dub them "nonexistent".
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
Yeah. You see, I trust RELIABLE news sources, like Jon Stewart or Phillip DeFranco, for my information. I don't lap up the drivel that guys like Olbermann dish out on a nightly basis.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, If you can find one example of when Olbermann has ever lied to his viewers, then I'll give you some credit. Let's not forget that offering one's opinion is NOT lying. Fox News's pundits have lied numerous of times to their viewers & can't be trusted. And I don't watch Keith for 'the news' ( I get news from multiple sources each day ). I watch Keith because I tend to agree with his interpretation of the news and that he bases his opinion on the FACTS.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
Same reason I watch O'Reilly. He bases himself more on fact and being grounded in reality, unlike Beck and his lofty conspiracy theories or Hannity and his tendency to be a massive prick.
It was Hannity, BTW, who used footage of an entirely different protest as proof of a "Tea Party protest". All of the other FNC pundits, however, have used real videos from both the Bold Fresh tour and the Tea Party protests.
And if Olbermann said otherwise, then he's lying to his viewers.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
And he would be lying because if O'Reilly and Beck were using different footage as Tea Party footage, then Jon Stewart would be eviscerating them like he tore Hannity to shreds over it when Hannity did the same thing you're accusing ALL FNC pundits of doing.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, Hannity only used fake footage WORSE than Beck did (to a large extent). That doesn't defeat the fact that Beck used fake footage as well. Type Sean Hannity Confesses Using Fake Footage: "Jon Stewart Was Right!" into your youtube search and look at the evidence yourelf. Beck is on Fox News lying to Fox New's narrow-minded viewers. Check out O'reilly lying by simply typing in Bill o'reilly lying They ALL lie dude, Fox News is one big LYING HUB!
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986, like i said before, do research and make sure your statements are TRUE before blabbing away...
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
So Fox News is, in your words, a "big lying hub" and yet MSNBC, whose pundits have been known to scathingly refer to the average American citizen as "not known what's best for themselves" isn't? Like Schultz, who openly promotes fear mongering? Or Olbermann, who does nothing but insult his competitors because he can't post up decent ratings against them?
Also, if Beck used "fake footage" as you say, then Jon Stewart, ESPECIALLY Jon Stewart, would have gotten on Beck's case...
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, (1) Politically, the average American DOESN'T know what's best for themselves, nor do they know what's best for the country. Sad, but true. There are FARRR more lower-educated people then there are higher-educated people. (2) Keith insults his competitors because they're unbelievably ignorant, not ratings. Fox has higher ratings cause every old naive republican confined to their bed has their TV tuned to Fox News 24/7. Walk the halls of a retirement building & see for yourself.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
*shakes head* You seem to hold this ignorantly idiotic notion in your head that all Republicans, or the vast majority, are just a bunch of old people, when people like me and a few friends of mine from High School show that there ARE young Republicans.
Just because I'm 19 doesn't automatically make me a Liberal. Hell, a lot of OLDER people I know are much more LIBERAL than guys like Stewart and Keith...
So whatever, continue being an ignorant waif and ignoring the other side..
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, just a side note, FACTUAL STATISTICS prove that most republicans ARE older people. Since I'm a liberal, I'll actually provide proof for you. On google search, type "republicans by age", and click the first search result. Now who's ignorant? Or should i say, delusional?
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
*searches term and comes up with numerous unrelated articles*
Yeah...so why is it no stats-based articles are coming up?
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, well when i search it, the exact article pulls up. something must be wrong with the way your searching. I would paste the link here but youtube doesn't allow copying and pasting of links to websites. I tried but then it doesn't let me submit my post.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
One of my favorite sayings is how Liberals refer to "compassionate Conservative" as an oxymoron. At which point I cut them down by retorting "so is tolerant Liberal." Shuts them up everytime. Why?
Almost every Liberal I've talked to has been insulting and scathing toward my Conservative views, even though Liberals are supposedly the "tolerant" ones...whereas a lot of Conservatives I know of, including O'Reilly, actually listen to the other side more often than not.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
So if you want to continue to self-righteously insult my ideals while blatantly ignoring the flaws of your own, fine. Continue to wallow in your hypocrisy. It amuses me.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, (3) Beck DID use fake footage. Proof has already been provided.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
On a side note, even if Beck has used fake footage, then he has still used real footage more often than not. Why? If Beck were using purely fake footage, a la Hannity, then Jon Stewart, who's always taken shots at Beck when he can, would have definitely called him out on it like he did Hannity.
Then again, you've proven that you're a disgrace to guys like Stewart, so...nvm.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, "tolerant liberal" is not an oxymoron. There are many different things that a person can be tolerant of. Just because a person is tolerant, doesn't mean that person is tolerant of intolerance. And conservatives (the vast majority)... are intolerant. That is why liberals are insulting and scathing toward your conservative views. It's tolerance v.s. intolerance. I know Beck, 'more often then not", uses real footage, otherwise he'd be off the air.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
Indeed. If you're a conservative, you're intolerant. You heard it here, folks! ALL CONSERVATIVES ARE INTOLERANT!!
*facepalm*
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, Just like your delusional FOX News pundits (LOL), you LIE, you mix up the facts, and you speak before doing your research. You will fail in life if you continue to behave this way. When I say (per my post), "And conservatives (the vast majority)... are intolerant", and you turn that into, "ALL CONSERVATIVES ARE INTOLERANT!!", you are utterly mixing up the facts in an effor to prove your fallacious point of view. Do this in a real political debate and you will lose all respect.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, All your whiney posts about me not accepting your opinion is just a bluff. It's a cop out, and your on a high horse. Taking it upon yourself to dub me a disgrace, while implicating you're some sort of victorious debater, only repudiates not just your argument, but the validity of your dispostion.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@Wickedsky1986
And notice how you don't deny that you're not accepting my opinion...
Nice tolerance, there.
SickBritKid 1 year ago
@SickBritKid, your being too sensitive (which is also selfdestructive in political debates). When a person counters your opinion with their own, it doesn't mean they don't accept your opinion. It means they don't agree with you. You're free to think what you want and I do accept your opinion. I just like discussing our difference in opinions for educational purposes because I'm open-minded. If you can't accept somebody countering your opinion then it is only because you are narrow-minded.
Wickedsky1986 1 year ago
@BsSetUp The germans had it right. They were national socialist because the Jews ran all the economies so they knew the corrupt Jew banker could not be allowed to influence society. Thats what national socialism was about. Imperfect world. They hated socialists and communists but the rest of the world was totally evil. The Jew is evil. They controled England, Russia, France, and the United States. The US to a lesser degree but enough to get them to fight the germans and not the EVIL SOVIETS.
nVei06 1 year ago
You're absolutely correct. Nazis were socialists - in fact, were more committed to socialist ideas than were Bolsheviks - and were initially labelled as "Rightist" by Marxists.
Note that Marxists have changed "Rightist" as a term twice - first, from pro-monarchists into something to describe people involved in commerce ("the bourgeoisie"), then to describe the post-Marxist socialism of fascism. Nazis were actually a competing faction of socialists, like Trotskyists or Stalinists.
DrCruel 2 years ago
Damn bill bitch ass probably on them Neo Nazi sites twat face bitch.
nokia3591 2 years ago
you know where the most obama haters are neo nazi obama vids
VIKINGOSRIFFA 2 years ago
I love how fox frequently drops the "anarchists" into any story which involves violent political elements even when they are islamic, fascist, or leftist. I'm willing to bet the further right fox goes the more we'll be hearing about "anarchists" everywhere. I'm just curious how well the second red scare will work when they start blacklisting people.
Ril74 2 years ago
Except when Glenn Beck does another 9/12 project; then the people preaching against 'Obama-Care' aren't the radicals that Hannity himself referred as 'frantic extremists'
Now they're American Heroes.
Yea..Faux doesn't have an agenda my ass.
Homieathome 2 years ago 2
When a wicked leader rises up and says, "if you're not with us, you're against us". And, even after his administration has left the nation in utter economic and international reputation ruin, his party continues in the lockstep mentality mantra of "if you don't agree with us, you are unpatriotic". Then you can rest assured, that Adolf Hitler or worse is not far from around the next corner.
Just how historically ignorant can Americans be, that O'Reilly, Hannity & Limbaugh remain on the air?
richardaberdeen 2 years ago 6
Bill says are there any other hate Obama sites then the Nazis and she says no. Bullshit Foxnews website is one of the biggest. If you ever go there click on a few stories about Obama. Look for the comments section and you will see all kinds of fucking hate.
facefullofcum 2 years ago
I'm not sure what "fucking hate" is compared to hate in general, but I guess it means, if your tired of getting fucked by Republicans, then it's time to hate.
richardaberdeen 2 years ago 3
Good point.
Homieathome 2 years ago
@facefullofcum
And? Those comments were probably left by nutjobs. Why are you judging Fox News' website as "EPIC OBAMA HATE" based on people leaving hate comments WHO HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SITE APART FROM THAT!?
SickBritKid 1 year ago
Comment removed
richardaberdeen 2 years ago
(continuation)
Now, I think it's fair to say that these positions are historically much closer to the right wing (also in fairness, they are presently way watered down). And they are somewhat more repugnant than vegetarianism and environmentalism.
Well, the left wing American "liberals" and European progressives have a tradition of opposing all of them.
But, and this is the crucial point, *they are dispensible*. I don't agree with any of them, but none is necessary for a fascist regime.
dgferreira 3 years ago
Who said it was primarily left wing? My argument is that it sides more so with left wing politics than right wing. It is in fact primarily socialist, just an outgrowth of socialism.
The underlying concerns are both revolutionary and reactionary. People such as middle eastern socialists are exactly the same, are they not socialists because they do not fit your personalized, exacted, definition?
I am done with this argument, it is clearly a waste of time.
REBEWEOJ 3 years ago
And we finish with:
-yet another repetition of an already debunked argument. "It is in fact primarily socialist, just an outgrowth of socialism."
- another bold escape from reality "People such as middle eastern socialists are exactly the same..." (wtf??)
- a hasty retreat "I am done with this argument, it is clearly a waste of time."
Bye, "majored in history/economics" fraud. Oh well, better make a fool of yourself in youtube than out there... in the public sphere with the cameras and all.
dgferreira 2 years ago
Fraud? Please friend, do yourself a favor and research Muslim/Middle Eastern socialism, it is objectively "fascist" in nature as you define fascism.
REBEWEOJ 2 years ago
Let's not forget your original post about Hitler being a environmentalist, vegetarian. animal righs lover, therefore being close to the left.
He also was:
- an opponent of atheism, launching an "anti-godless" movement
- a proponent of extermination of homossexuals
- anti-feminist - "the slogan 'Emancipation of women' was invented by Jewish intellectuals... For her world is her husband, her family, her children, and her home."
- a persecutor of modern degenerate art.
(continued down)
dgferreira 3 years ago
This is ridiculous, it's like a born again christian arguing with Catholic tradition that they have the correct understanding of christianity even the original christians, who learned from the apostles, and wrote down the principles learned, know less than them sitting in their bedroom 2,000 years after the fact.
It's nonsensical because you are arguing not against me but against historical record which is quite clear. Would you like document names and years?
REBEWEOJ 3 years ago
It's humorous because oppressing gays is supposedly right wing yet Pol Pot murdered people with a minor education, people who wore glasses, Stalin slaughtered Jews, and people indifferent let alone atagonistic to his cause ect ect.
Was their goal's left wing but their oppression right wing? Does a leftist's pessimistic and nihilistic view of charity's not supposedly having the guidance and wisdom to achieve welfare rightist? And then the government operation itselfs leftist? Dichotomy?
REBEWEOJ 2 years ago
Are you kidding me? Have you ever researched the progressive era? Your clear cut definitions are intellectually dishonest.
I live in a predominatly "liberal" area where art is censored, cameras in every public sphere, high taxation, atheiestic (as Hitler was), ect.
Extermination of gays, anti feminist, opponent of atheism, they are all right wing as you say? You need to get more my friend. Good god.
REBEWEOJ 3 years ago
Yes, give me document names and years, please. I'm now convinced you're a complete bluff.
"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord." - Hitler
There's your atheist Hitler. Look it up.
"Extermination of gays, anti feminist, opponent of atheism, they are all right wing as you say?" - Historically, do you have any doubt? In what world do you live?
dgferreira 2 years ago
The problem with your statement of Hitler's views of religion is that it completely disregards his privately maintained motives which were stated as the stability of the state and society.
REBEWEOJ 2 years ago
Hitler, Like many manipulative "leaders" claimed to be acting on behalf of a God he himself had nothing in common with. So many people are succored in by the I speck for God gambit.
ConvictWarCriminals 2 years ago
Price controls, production quotas, labor policies such as paid vacation, socialized health care, heavy environmentalist regulation, public works projects, 65% corporate tax rate, appropriation of private land for "communal usage", old age insurance, eventual nationalization of all corporations, not to mention health inititiatives such as smoke free, meat free, banning slaughterouses ect.
Doesn't sound far from today's left wing to me. As a Catholic I agree with several of those ideas!
CatholicConversion 2 years ago
I am now told that I am not dually an economics major and history major because I don't argue utilizing decontextualized quotations to the detriment of the larger point?
If I disagree with you then I am no longer a mjor in these two subjects? You are most definitely a liberal.
Thomas Sowell once stated that the tragedy of the modern liberal is arrogance, and that if I disagree with you about how to deal with any specified "group" of people it must mean that I do not care about them. Tragic
REBEWEOJ 2 years ago
That's funny, since one might say that the tragedy of the modern conservative is arrogance, and that if one disagrees with Christian, rich-pandering sentiments that you are a Marxist and un-American.
icanhazstapler 2 years ago
A good example can be found in evengelical christians. They are seen to be providing impetus to the supposedly" left wing" cause of environmentalism. Was it the case that they cared none at all prior of the environment? No they always affirmed as the Bible clearly states the providential authority and responsibility to maintain harmony with the "environment".
What makes them therefore leftist now? They're support of the state's intervention to achieve the supported goal now in many cases.
REBEWEOJ 2 years ago
State intervention is of itself "leftist" as it is defined today. Emund Burke a classical conservative once advised his nation to anarchist capitalism. Paleoconservatism (classical conservatism) today largely focuses as always not as much with law, but with community and culture.
New urbanism is a wonderful point to disagree with you. Both wings of the the same tyranny claim new urbanism as both liberal and conservative. How can this be true? Can it be both? Yes it can and quite easily.
REBEWEOJ 2 years ago
Another problem when redefining Hitler's "spirituality" is that he made several trips through the Himalayas with theosophists, materialists, in cause of finding the Aryan man's origins.
Hitler was definitely the kind of spiritualist that you can find in Borders Books today, a neo-pagan, materialist, theosophy inspired individual.
Today the "left" primarily makes up these ranks so try not to forget that the "conservativism" of the day was entirely different/Christian and not just labeled.
REBEWEOJ 2 years ago
4 - Wastes of space
"You really should sigh...in the mirror with your specious arguments."
"That is a secious and tenuous avenue my friend."
"I almost forgot more about the National Socialist Worker's Party than you apparently ever knew. No offense."
Would you look at that... Aren't you a feisty one!
dgferreira 3 years ago
3 (cont)- Now, if Hitler was a socialist, not only did he never acted as one, but he sure managed to fool everybody.
His political coalitions were always with the conservative and christian right. He relentlessly attacked the "two great evils of the world" in Mein Kampf: Communism and Judaism. He banned left-wing meetings once in power.
Not just Hitler, but pretty much all fascist regimes fought socialist parties - Mussolini against bolsheviks, Franco in the Spanish civil war.
Some socialism.
dgferreira 3 years ago
Let's take a different turn, was Mao, Pol Pot, and Stalin left wing? How much rampant destruction of culture, arbitrary murdering, how many? between them all...in the ballpark of 100-120 million?
Your defintion does not stand the test at all when under the microscope.
Racism was not a factor under communism because all were relegated to the level of numbers rather than individuals and oppression was equally cruel and tyranical.
REBEWEOJ 3 years ago
i never said Communism was good. Man, are you thickheaded. Those are Communist regimes, and yes, they were cruel, and tyrannical, and caused a great deal of destruction. And those are forms of left-wing extremism. I don't have a problem with that.
But they weren't *fascists*. And fascist regimes weren't socialist. That's the point. Communism is, in fact, one implementaion of socialism. Fascist regimes were not. Communism - left-wing. Fascism - right wing. Is that simple enough for you?
dgferreira 2 years ago
Did I infact state you thought communism was a good and positive movement? No.
If I state an objective fact that slavery in North America was not contained to blacks does that mean that I like slavery, condone it, and would like to formulate a society with it as the foundational basis? No, of course not.
REBEWEOJ 2 years ago
3 - already debunked
"national *socialist* worker's party"
"Hitler also identified as a socialist."
See previous argument about People's *Republic* of China".
Socialism is a dirty word in modern U.S.A., a legacy of the cold war. This wasn't always the case. Socialist was a very prestigious term in the beginning of the century in Europe, much like today's "democratic". so many factions used it without in fact being socialist. Actions and doctrine is, of course, what counts.
dgferreira 3 years ago
You know what is incredibly humorous is that my close friend grew uo in The Soviet Union and my family during Fascism before coming here on a boat.
I cannot articulate how incorrect your definitions are when application to reality is viscerally and empirically studied.
Did you know that during this "leftist" regime her friends were murdered if one committed a crime yett was derelict? If you ran, your friends were identified and imprisoned or worse.
It is personally offensive to me.
REBEWEOJ 3 years ago
You are merely juxtaposing international socialism and national socialism. Is there really any way to extrapolate the difference and somehow define one as socialism and the other a nonsocialist?
Think about it, it the difference between micro and macro economics, different approaches to the same system but from different perspectives. National socialism was socialism applied to local and more easily controllable system. It was common sense rather than a differentiation.
REBEWEOJ 2 years ago
There we go again.
Soviet Union was not a fascist regime. Are you kidding? Did you say you majored in history? What a joke. Soviet Union was a Communist regime, didn't they tell your friend that?
International vs national... No, I'm saying that Hitler wasn't socialist at all, in the same way that China isn't a republic. There is no national/international distinction. Hitler allied itself always with the conservative right, and was hostile to left movements in Germany.
dgferreira 2 years ago
Who said the Soviet Union was fascist? China is a "People's Republic".
There is actually a clear defintional difference between both a People's Republic and an actual Individualist republic which is the collective vs the individual.
The People's Republice views rights as a collective form by which societal health are viewed through such lens whereas a individualist republic views individual freedom as the benchmark of vitality.
Once again, your defintion is not as clear cut in reality.
REBEWEOJ 2 years ago
2 (cont.) - "There are many similarities and differences between variations of "fascist" nations such as some being racist, other's not, some promoting belligerent nationalism, other's not."
So let's take Franco, Salazar, Hitler, Mussolini. They were *all* extremely nationalistic (exaltation of glorious past, variations of a great destiny, country above all else). They were all racist (Mussolini, as I said before, was racist against black people, not Jews). And they were all belligerent.
dgferreira 3 years ago
All tenuous claims as Obama/McCain ect all aspire and rhapsodize to the electorate of a previous age of purity and flowers and pedals. That is nothing more than control devices.
Mussolin as most other socialists of the time were in fat racist, as were most communists at the times also. Want quotes?
They were not all homogenous at all as you say, Franco was not belligerently nationalistic, neither Pinochet, nor Gaddafi.
REBEWEOJ 3 years ago
2 - Usupported statements.
you clearly disregard any (and much larger) amount of policy similarites between modern socialist and liberal governmental systems but attribute fascism to the fewer similiarities between modern "conservatism"?
Ok, let's hear those similarities so we can examine them. I expect, of course, to hear *political* similarities between them that *other political systems* don't share. So the examples you mentioned so far, vegetarianism or environmentalism, are pretty absurd.
dgferreira 3 years ago
Well, constant promotion of the abolition of the disparity between rich and poor, promotion of environmentalism, health and well being as doctrine and not personal choice, vegetarianism is minor, socialization of health care, socialization of major components of the economy over time, the allowance of free enterprise but with governmental control (socialist not communist remember) and I could go on and on.
It's funny, I actually listened to this goldberg fellow and he is mostly correct.
REBEWEOJ 3 years ago