Read history Elganned...Hitler was a collectivist in the extreme.
Read history Elganned...Hitler was a collectivist in the extreme.
Only if you were a lily white, blue eyed, aryan, male or female.
Any so called "collectivist" mentality was limited to the "in" crowd.
Rather the same argument used to brand George Tush as a "compassionate conservative" which we all knew was a lie.
Lorax, thank you for proving my point. What difference is there if the collectivists are Aryans, or Democrats, or Communists, etc? Hitler was a racist fascist, still a fascist.
I still haven't seen a cited example. Just one would do.
Or Rethuglicans, Nazis, Fascists......
How does that make your point? Unless of course you equate all versions of collectivism as an evil thing, then you have to include anyone with an "R" after their names.
Typical either/or, black/white mentaility from the Reich.
Republicans racist? How? Fascist/ Again, how? Please be very specific Lorax.
Yes, I realize that I am asking you to dig your own grave here, but consider it a challenge to prove your character and loyalty to your convictions.
Oh, please, you've gotten chapter and verse from me to the point that you could write it yourself!
What do you think the coached shouting at the town halls "I want my country baaaack!" refers to?
The thugs don't want a black man in the white house. Now they are attacking Obama's lack of a necktie, which he's been doffing lately. According to the Reich, it's looking much like Achmedenijad in Iran, since the Mullas have decreed that neckties are symbols of western tyranny.
I'm too tired to reiterate any more of my viewpoints tonight, sorry.
Last edited by Lorax; August-21-09 at 09:10 PM.
And I shot them down before, yet you proceed to spew this vitriol as if it is accurate. So, I call you to defend it.
You shot nothing down. There isn't one point you've ever made that could withstand scrutiny.
Why not answer elganned's posts first. I think he's still waiting as well.
OK, I'll bite....I have made this reference many times before, but for those that don't recall, a detailed explanation of Fascism and Hitler can be found in Jonah Goldberg's book "Liberal Fascism"
Now, Lorax, time to pay up. BTW, you never paid up on our other wager....Are you a man of your word or not?
Yeah, you bite, allright.
Isn't that what bats do?
I have read Rand, I have read Milton Friedman, I have read Colin Powell, I have read John Dean, all conservatives. I have scanned while choking, books by dilletantes like Couldtergeist, Scarborough, Hannity, Levin, and Boortz.
I can't bring myself to read Malkin, Limbaugh, Morris, Frum, etc. Just can't stay awake long enough.
CC needs to read Sachs Common wealth...it really frames economics with responsibility...bit I am sure the "hit free " markets take will be brushed of as Idealism...but so are morals...
Lorax, you are welching...you agreed to read one of a few books I listed in exchange for my proving that I read Hartmann's "screwed" I did, you didn't..you are not man of your word and should be recognized as such on this forum
that bit of trash has been ripped to shreds everytime you have mentioned it, and the shredding has never been repaired by you or anyone else. [[of course you love it -- all it is is an attempt by someone to de-classify himself as a fascist by inventing his own definitions of terms which are not in any way supported by history. call it "corporate socialism" if you like, it is still, first and foremost, a right-wing anti-labor, pro-capital ideology)
Batts, I told you what I have read, isn't that enough pablum to choke down for one liberal?
You really want me to read [[I have scanned) Goldberg's discredited rag, and there is no point. When the majority of reviews panned it, mostly for the factual errors, not even taking into consideration the political slant, then it's a waste of my time.
What I want is irrelevant, what is at issue is whether or not you are a man of your word....thus far, and by your own admission just now, you are not.
That fact must be recognized and made clear whenever you make a claim based on a presumed air of credibility which you do not have.
I will endeavor to make this known for the benefit of other participants that may not be aware of who they are having a discussion with.
What I want is irrelevant, what is at issue is whether or not you are a man of your word....thus far, and by your own admission just now, you are not.
That fact must be recognized and made clear whenever you make a claim based on a presumed air of credibility which you do not have.
I will endeavor to make this known for the benefit of other participants that may not be aware of who they are having a discussion with.
You do that, Chicklet.
Trust me, my version of the story will be much better than yours.
Why should I, or anyone else, trust somebody who admittedly does not keep their word [[as you just confessed in #66)?
|
Bookmarks