Hillary says REMEMBER the Clinton Years...yes lets do

[Ringo]

Like his predecessors Carter-FDR, Clinton showed us how Democrats really run things when the TRUTH APPEARS!!

http://www.clintonmemoriallibrary.com/clint_econ.html

[BartonX]

Like his predecessors Carter-FDR, Clinton showed us how Democrats really run things when the TRUTH APPEARS!!

http://www.clintonmemoriallibrary.com/clint_econ.html

In a world where Liberal Fascism is the norm, only the right is required to be truthful. Oh by the way there is an excellant book out by that title, "Liberal Fascism", by Joshua Goldberg. It has a smiley face with a Hitler mustache on it. The book aludes to the fact that this Neo-Fascism does not attack with storm troopers it slithers in with a happy face. :)

[Yellowdogtexan]

Joshua Goldberg is an idiot. Jon Stewart had a great deal of fun with him in this interview. http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/17/stewart-to-jonah-i-dont-know-what-youre-saying/Goldberg did not do well in this interview and it was really very funny

[nixon]

Like his predecessors Carter-FDR, Clinton showed us how Democrats really run things when the TRUTH APPEARS!!

http://www.clintonmemoriallibrary.com/clint_econ.html The last eight years were O.K. by you? Put the last two Administrations side by side, and I know who gets my vote. Has anyone looked in the White House for bin Laden?

[Semantics]

In a world where Liberal Fascism is the norm, only the right is required to be truthful. Oh by the way there is an excellant book out by that title, "Liberal Fascism", by Joshua Goldberg. It has a smiley face with a Hitler mustache on it. The book aludes to the fact that this Neo-Fascism does not attack with storm troopers it slithers in with a happy face. :)

Liberal fascism is not the norm. I won't go as far as to say that it's an oxymoron, because it isn't, but liberalism and fascism don't go well together. Not nearly as well as fascism and conservative politics.

I haven't read the book, but I am familiar with Joshua Goldberg's arguments. I've also seen/ heard/ read some interviews with him and he makes me :twitch

I found it rather ironic that a man who supports eugenics and praises The Bell Curve would be pointing a finger at liberals and likening them to fascists and Nazis.

[Semantics]

Warning signs of Fascism-

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.

5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.

6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.

7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.

9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.

14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.


Shockingly familiar.

Do those sound like liberal policies to you? :think


That list came from an article I have saved in my documents so I don't have a link. It's called Fascism Anyone? by
Laurence W. Britt and was originally posted in Free Inquiry magazine.

[BartonX]

Liberal fascism is not the norm. I won't go as far as to say that it's an oxymoron, because it isn't, but liberalism and fascism don't go well together. Not nearly as well as fascism and conservative politics.

I haven't read the book, but I am familiar with Joshua Goldberg's arguments. I've also seen/ heard/ read some interviews with him and he makes me :twitch

I found it rather ironic that a man who supports eugenics and praises The Bell Curve would be pointing a finger at liberals and likening them to fascists and Nazis.

Since most Jews are Liberals for some reason:shrug It is kinda novel for one to come out and call something Liberal Fascism. I think he is on the right track but to make his point opposing rabid secularists he has to blanket them so they don't get away. :LL

[BartonX]

What is really funny is I got his name wrong. I tuned into Glen Beck to see what he was saying and I didn't have my glasses on and I thought it was Joshua Goldberg, but now they are on I just noticed it is Jonah Goldberg :rofl wrong prophet :LL

[Semantics]

What is really funny is I got his name wrong. I tuned into Glen Beck to see what he was saying and I didn't have my glasses on and I thought it was Joshua Goldberg, but now they are on I just noticed it is Jonah Goldberg :rofl wrong prophet :LL

I didn't watch the video but I knew who you were talking about. Oh well :snicker


Please, don't ever turn into Glen Beck. :beg

[BartonX]

Warning signs of Fascism-




Shockingly familiar.

Do those sound like liberal policies to you? :think


That list came from an article I have saved in my documents so I don't have a link. It's called Fascism Anyone? by
Laurence W. Britt and was originally posted in Free Inquiry magazine.


Yes it does sound liberal because "Secularism" is the religion to be protected.

[nixon]

Warning signs of Fascism-




Shockingly familiar.

Do those sound like liberal policies to you? :think


That list came from an article I have saved in my documents so I don't have a link. It's called Fascism Anyone? by
Laurence W. Britt and was originally posted in Free Inquiry magazine. Neo-Cons- where are yous at??? Surely you can address these, and justify them, can't you??? FUCK NO, YOU CAN"T!!! FUCK BUSH FUCK THE GOP!!! PUT A DEM IN OFFICE!!!

[Wabash]

The last eight years were O.K. by you? Put the last two Administrations side by side, and I know who gets my vote. Has anyone looked in the White House for bin Laden?

You will, if a Demo is elected to that position...they will tell him all is forgiven and invite him over for tea!

[nixon]

You will, if a Demo is elected to that position...they will tell him all is forgiven and invite him over for tea!Don't you find it ironic that Saddam had more resources and money than bin Laden, and the U.S. captured him and not bin Laden? One man, al Qeida's leader, still making tapes and basically making a mockery of us. Cheney wants bin Laden as bad as he wants a heart attack. Vote for a Democrat. Nixon.

[jim]

Like his predecessors Carter-FDR, Clinton showed us how Democrats really run things when the TRUTH APPEARS!!

http://www.clintonmemoriallibrary.com/clint_econ.html

No truth has appeared in the Bush regime:akbar:ringo

[nixon]

No truth has appeared in the Bush regime:akbar:ringo 368 more days, my fellow Americans!!!

[Wabash]

Don't you find it ironic that Saddam had more resources and money than bin Laden, and the U.S. captured him and not bin Laden? One man, al Qeida's leader, still making tapes and basically making a mockery of us. Cheney wants bin Laden as bad as he wants a heart attack. Vote for a Democrat. Nixon.

Ironic? No.....

You are talking apples and oranges......Again!

[nixon]

Ironic? No.....

You are talking apples and oranges......Again! Please explain yourself. The way I see it bin Laden was and is more of a threat to the U.S. than Saddam Hussien ever was. How is that apples and oranges? In six months' time asshole Bush went flip flopping on bin Ladens' capture. Or do you wnat to put your head in the sand like an ostrich on that issue? By the way, where is bin Laden? I'm thinking he is at the White House.

[Wabash]

Please explain yourself. The way I see it bin Laden was and is more of a threat to the U.S. than Saddam Hussien ever was. How is that apples and oranges? In six months' time asshole Bush went flip flopping on bin Ladens' capture. Or do you wnat to put your head in the sand like an ostrich on that issue? By the way, where is bin Laden? I'm thinking he is at the White House.

Contray to Liberal beliefs, I do not, nor ever have, put my head in the sand. So nixon, do you get some personal satisfaction by telling lies about me?

Osama bin Hidin and Soddom, to me, were equally dangerous. Both a catalyst of terrorism in the region and vicariously, the world!
Huessin was a much easier target and was dispatched quickly!
Wabby Side note: 165 neighborhoods in Iraq are now considered safe, the Iraqi govt. looks to be nearly ready to take full control of that country...the US HAS prevailed and the fighting has dropped off so much, it's hardly mentioned on the nightly news. I remember a doofus named Harry Reid telling US that the war was lost, and we could not win.

As for bin Hidin, it is a far more difficult stiuation...Pakistan is an ally of ours, yet they have not fully cooperated with us in ferreting out bin Hidin.
It is not flat like Iraq in the mountains of Afganistan and Pakistan...it is very rough terrain. The US, as always, does it's best to preserve the rights of citizens in an occupied country. With the War lords and their criminal activities, it is very difficult to separate the good citizens from the bad. The bad are protecting bin Hidin.
The Pentagon has just sent an additional 2,500 troops and more equipment there...maybe we can get that asshole soon...we have come very close 2 or 3 times...

Now nix, you should know this info, it's readily available.....so, why are you bothering me specifically, with your dumb questions?

[Wabash]

Ok nix...that's why I said Apples and Oranges...because going after these two targets is vastly different...and I submit, the REAL assholes are bin hidin and Soddom...not Geo. Bush!

[nixon]

Thank you for yor reply, Mr. WAbash. I was not attacking or spreading lies about you, I was only asking you a question.

[Wabash]

Thank you for yor reply, Mr. WAbash. I was not attacking or spreading lies about you, I was only asking you a question.

Well, when you accuse me of putting my head in the sand....and I don't....I take affront to that!
If it was retorical and not accusatory on your part, I apologize for the misunderstanding...

[Trueblue]

Joshua Goldberg is an idiot. Jon Stewart had a great deal of fun with him in this interview. http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/17/stewart-to-jonah-i-dont-know-what-youre-saying/Goldberg did not do well in this interview and it was really very funny

That was excellent.

Liberal fascism is not the norm. I won't go as far as to say that it's an oxymoron, because it isn't, but liberalism and fascism don't go well together. Not nearly as well as fascism and conservative politics.

I haven't read the book, but I am familiar with Joshua Goldberg's arguments. I've also seen/ heard/ read some interviews with him and he makes me :twitch

I found it rather ironic that a man who supports eugenics and praises The Bell Curve would be pointing a finger at liberals and likening them to fascists and Nazis.

Warning signs of Fascism-


Shockingly familiar.

Do those sound like liberal policies to you? :think


That list came from an article I have saved in my documents so I don't have a link. It's called Fascism Anyone? by
Laurence W. Britt and was originally posted in Free Inquiry magazine.

Jonah seemed to believe he was being terribly clever with that title. :roll

Well, when you accuse me of putting my head in the sand....and I don't....I take affront to that!
If it was retorical and not accusatory on your part, I apologize for the misunderstanding...

Then why not stop saying that kind of thing to others, if you find it so offensive when someone does it to you????

[Lone Laugher]

Wabby....it is painfully clear that you have your head stuck somewhere....is it in sand? Not so sure. But it would be nice if you would pull that thing out soon.

[Wabash]

Wabby....it is painfully clear that you have your head stuck somewhere....is it in sand? Not so sure. But it would be nice if you would pull that thing out soon.

You....can be relpaced!

I'm just gonna ignore TB here...

[Indy]

The Clinton years were some of the best years of my life. I remember them fondly.

[Trueblue]

I remember the Ford years fondly, but it didn't have anything to do with Gerald.

:tarty:dance:party:cheers:aww

:drink:max:romeo:headbang

:woohoo2:drunks

[Wabash]

The Clinton years were some of the best years of my life. I remember them fondly.

The Reagan years for me...as an adult...the Johnson years as a kid...didn't have anything to do with LBJ thou..

I remember the Ford years fondly, but it didn't have anything to do with Gerald.

:tarty:dance:party:cheers:aww

:drink:max:romeo:headbang

:woohoo2:drunks

Rumor has it that Fred will beat Hillary or Obama!

[Trueblue]

The Reagan years for me...as an adult...the Johnson years as a kid...didn't have anything to do with LBJ thou..



Rumor has it that Fred will beat Hillary or Obama!

:rofl

http://meuse.com/john/tabloid2.jpg

[Wabash]

Somebody is talking about you on another forum TB...

Is that woman a Lib? Is she having sex with that Shark? If so, is that porno, or just cruelty to animals?

[Trueblue]

Somebody is talking about you on another forum TB...

:cuckoo

Is that woman a Lib? Is she having sex with that Shark? If so, is that porno, or just cruelty to animals?

That's the cover of the tabloid that has your "Fred Thompson will be President" story.

[Wabash]

:cuckoo



That's the cover of the tabloid that has your "Fred Thompson will be President" story.

Tip: Every so often...the Tabloids actually get it right....I'm not writing Fred off yet...

[Yellowdogtexan]

In a world where Liberal Fascism is the norm, only the right is required to be truthful. Oh by the way there is an excellant book out by that title, "Liberal Fascism", by Joshua Goldberg.It is Jonah Golberg and you will be please to see that Amazon has correctly put this book in the parody category and not the politics category. http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Amazon_categorizes_Golbergs_Liberal_Fascism_under_ 0204.htmlJonah Goldberg's new book Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning has provoked controversy and dispute in a variety of media. But at internet commerce giant Amazon.com, Goldberg's critics appear to have advanced a new front in their battle against the book: having it classified as a "parody."

In a Monday morning post at his National Review blog, Goldberg complained about the book's placement on the Amazon pages.

"Over at Amazon, my book's page no longer displays its rank in 'politics,' but in 'parodies,'" the columnist notes in a post with the subject heading, "More Amazon Chicanery."

He adds, "I'm sure it's just an honest mistake."
This classification was no mistake