Wednesday, January 12, 2011

No Reich Wing Hate Here


A Special Freedom Rants “Endorsement”: *


No sir, there’s no Reich Wing hate at Ye Olde Tea Bagger Shop for “patriots”. Step right up folks and get your tea party supplies. Show the world what “real Americans” believe. Need a license to hunt liberals? Gotcha covered, Bubba.


Does anybody recognize the frightening poster? Didn’t we see something like this on a billboard last summer?

Not only do they inform us that Democrats like Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry are traitors, but their cool poster of Stalin, Hitler and Obama teaches us they are all the same. Well, maybe not exactly the same. Stalin and Hitler shared at least one passion with our “conservative” Right Wing Extremist heroes. They both generously provided hunting licenses for their open seasons on liberals.

Be angry, very angry at these dictators, especially the “liberal” living one. And be afraid, very afraid, of the scary black man. He is destroying the country, you know. Hate is too good a word for this tyrant, so there’s no hate here. No sirree. None whatsoever. In fact this is all about love, a regular Ministry of Love, founded back in 1984 right here in Amerika.

And rest assured our tea-soaked “patriots” have the support of the president of that powerful adversary of democracy, the Heritage Foundation. He tells us the ideologically pure shop for “patriots” has posts that are a “must read” in the marketplace of ideas for “informed conservatives”.

We remember the words of Heritage Foundation co-founder Paul Weyrich, "I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of the people. They never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.”

Remember folks, democracy is what needed to be overturned in order for Bush and Cheney to seize power and get the country into corporate-friendly permanent war, record debt, and a “National Security” police state. Democracy is what put Obama into office.

The message is clear. Democracy is an anti-Amerikan liberal conspiracy. Yes, we must destroy the liberal Commie traitors and their democratic socialism! If ballots don’t work, bullets will! Hey, that’s another sentiment they share with the two older guys on their poster. That must mean Obama is the worst dictator ever, since Stalin and Hitler shared their “conservative” values.

Long live the Amerikan Fourth Reich! Long live our Konservative Korporatist Kountry!


*I will not name this fascist site by its title nor provide a link. I’m now a little too sickened to continue my “endorsement”. God help us.

54 comments:

Tom Harper said...

Now now, let's not jump to conclusions. Just because:

1. We have an attractive Annie Oakley wannabe whose every 3rd word is "target," "crosshairs" or "reload!" and

2. This Tundra Trollop has millions of not-very-bright worshippers, most of whom are horny guys who would do ANYTHING to impress her (a la John Hinkley and Jody Foster); and

3. The above-mentioned Bullseye Bimbo (I stole that name from TomCat at Politics Plus) is affiliated with other rightwing gun-toting hatewipes who do their best to persuade their inbreds to believe that Obama and other Democrats are interchangeable with Stalin, Hitler and Muslim terrorists --

None of the above has ANYTHING to do with Saturday's attempted murder of a Democratic congresswoman who had been in Sarah Palin's crosshairs, and the successful murder of a liberal judge and five other people. Nope, no connection. Move along, nothing to see here.

Dave Dubya said...

Tom,
I wish those Commies would stop blaming our Twittering Twit of the Tundra. Just because she targeted the victim doesn't mean she pulled the trigger. It's a disgrace.

Liberals condemn poor Sarah just for pouring the gas, when someone ELSE lit the match. I think that's more proof liberals hate free speech and hate real Americans. Why else would they instruct the lamestream media to cancel her liberal media TV show?

All the violence is clearly the liberals' fault, just like the national debt and unemployment and illegal immigration and terrorism and the Gulf oil leak and TARP and the mice with human brains telling me what to write.

Weaseldog said...

Hah! My writing muses are humans with mice brains!

I win!

Doc Häagen-Dazs said...

I'll have to look up the link for that Paul Weyrich quote. Priceless.

T. Paine said...

Yep, I can see that you all are doing your part to share the love though. Ridiculous...

Doc Häagen-Dazs said...

I left my guns at home.

Dave Dubya said...

TP,
Condemning hate is not the same as selling hate for profit and power.

Did you catch the irony. Right Wing hate fits in with Stalin and Hitler. Hatred for liberals and democracy, and preference for dictatorial plutocracy bind the American radical Right with both Hitler and Stalin. Your fascist friends do their best to conflate Obama "socialism" with Communism and fascism. That is what hate speech does.

Dusty,Hells most vocal Bitch said...

For starters, the teabaggers are becoming physically violent when they don't like an election outcome, and it's being caught on tape. Dave commented on my recent post that includes video of self-described TeaParty member Nick Popaditch, who lost in Nov to San Diego's Bob Filner. Popaditch and his mob went after Filner and his campaign supporters on election night when it was clear they had lost. Filner is Jewish and they taunted him, threatened him and finally attacked one of Filner's campaign guys. Not one of San Diego's media outlets reported this. Only Southwestern College reported it, and I don't consider that a major media outlet in San Diego.

T. Paine said...

"Right Wing hate fits in with Stalin and Hitler. Hatred for liberals and democracy, and preference for dictatorial plutocracy bind the American radical Right with both Hitler and Stalin."

That is ludicrous. Stalin was theoretically working for the "worker's utopia for the common good of all". He happened to use fascist techniques to implement his plan though.

I would argue the same is true of Hilter. The Nazi party was the "National Socialist Party" and if you look at many of the economic reforms enacted under Hitler, he was definitely not a right-wing free-market capitalist.

It makes for a good sound bite for you though, sir.

Dave Dubya said...

Dusty,
Thanks for pointing out yet another case of fascist behavior by the tea cult.

No, TP.
It is exactly correct. Educators, journalists, unions, and liberals of all walks of life were jailed and killed by Hitler and Stalin. Are you so ignorant that this is news to you?

Your GOP shares their hatred for minimum pay and collective bargaining rights as well. I'm sure Stalin, Hitler and Cheney see eye to eye on waterboarding too.

Who cares what you state they "theoretically" were doing? Do you believe them when they say their dictatorships were "socialist"? I guess you'd rather believe their words than history. Their socialist facade was a good way to fool the gullible. In the thirties socialism was desired by most people so the dictators pretended to be socialist.

Their trappings of socialism were no more genuine than the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a democratic republic. That line of BS sells only to the ignorant.

Hitler was a capitalist's dream come true. No minimum wage, no union, no workers' rights, no shared ownership; in other words, no socialism.

You really do believe Obama is a Marxist, don't you?

Why not, you believed every fascist word from Cheney. You still revere the hateful Limbaugh and the fear-mongering Beck. What does it speak of their character when they NEVER apologize? Even when they are so vile, you can almost recognize it.

That kind of unquestioning belief leads to violence, hate, war and fascism.

As a self proclaimed Christian, I would like you to explain why you always side with the rich and powerful Mammon worshipers over the rest of us. Did Jesus tell you to always obey the rich, or is that your independent judgment?

Why do you defend their interests so fanatically over the interests of 98% of the rest us? Do you believe they have the magic lock on wisdom and morality? Do you revere wealth so much you revere the wealthy?

Or is it fear? Have they poisoned your mind so much that you really believe Obama is Marxist out to destroy America? Liberals are evil. Liberals hate America. This is Rush’s message.

I pity you, but I pity the people of this country far more, when the radical Right takes power again.

The Patriot Act will be a bleeding heart liberal policy compared to what your Reich Wing thugs will implement. Say goodbye to Medicare. Say goodbye to Social Security. Say goodbye to unemployment compensation. Say goodbye to all the "Marxism" you hate so much. Say goodbye to the middle class. Say goodbye to Habeas Corpus. Say goodbye to the Bill of Rights. Say goodbye to democracy. The people you vote for are openly hostile to all of this.

The new Republican Order has had practice. They will know just what to bring to our nation.

Say hello to more torture. Say hello to more checkpoints. Say hello to indefinite detention without charges. Say hello to more Gitmos. Say hello to one-party rule. Say hello to the Republican Fourth Reich.

Righties love to whine about FEMA camps. Guess what? When Right Wing totalitarianism takes our government, liberals will be sent there. Why? Because enough Americans have been brainwashed to believe liberals are the enemy.

Just like under Stalin and Hitler.

T. Paine said...

Just wanted to say, "Hello!"

Dusty,Hells most vocal Bitch said...

You are most welcome Dave.

Dave Dubya said...

TP,
Yes, hello, or should we say, "Hello, again"?

Doc,
We can shoot off our mouths, can't we?

Doc Häagen-Dazs said...

Yes. That's what Republicans are all about: demagoguery.

Kulkuri said...

Dave, you're on a roll. And because you are pushing back at the fear-mongers on the Reich, you are accused of hate speech!! Figures, it's always like that.

T. Paine said...

Dubya, Hilter's Germany was a conglomeration of both some capitalism and an ever-increasing amount of government central planning.

Government financing eventually dominated private investment there; in the 1933–34 biennium, the proportion of private securities issued diminished from more than 50 per cent of the total, to approximately 10 per cent in the 1935–38 quadrennium. It was NOT a free-market economy.

Your assertions on Stalin's USSR are so ridiculous as to not even really warrant a response. Of course Stalin lied to the gullible, which included his supporters amongst the American progressives, that what he was doing was noble and for the common good. His goal was to spread communism throughout the world. Any person that he thought would hamper his efforts was killed accordingly.

As for the GOP, a vast majority of them want to reform Medicare and Social Security so that they will remain solvent. They have no desire to abolish what so many millions of Americans are now dependent. They hardly want to say goodbye to them.

As for your defense of the Bill of Rights, perhaps you can explain the seeming incongruity of many of the lefts positions then.

Why do they want to severely restrict worship (except for Muslims it seems) in violation of the 1st amendment?

Why do they want to severely restrict conservative free speech with things such as the "Fairness Doctrine" and "Net Neutrality" in violation of the first amendment?

Why do they want to severely restrict or outright ban firearms in violation of the 2nd amendment?

Why do they want to further usurp power for an over-reaching federal goverment from that of the States in violation of the 10th amendment?

Or is it that the left only wants to enforce those amendments in the Bill of Rights with which it agrees? I think you need to look at cleaning up your own house here before casting stones about what the right "wants" to do to the Constitution, sir.

Doc, your comments about demagoguery being the cloak of the Republicans is quite ironic and amusing. Go back and read nearly any of Dubya's posts and see if maybe there is the tiniest speck of demagoguery to be found in any of his articles. Start by re-reading this one upon which we are now commenting, sir.

After that, you can go to nearly any story reported on MS-NBC or any of the alphabet news shows and see the left-wing bias and demagoguery towards the right.

I would submit to you that the Loughner crime is a perfect example of this being used as such against conservatives with hyperbole and specious and dubious "facts" upon which to rely.

Dusty,Hells most vocal Bitch said...

Why do they want to severely restrict or outright ban firearms in violation of the 2nd amendment? Gee, could you be anymore wishy washy Paine? Using the 2nd Amendment as a catchall to give unfettered access to all types of weaponry and large capacity clips is complete crap.

Does it even register with you that a large percentage of NRA members disagree with the NRA leadership on responsible gun ownership and laws?

Rick Massey said...

Dave: That's a good point about who shares the values of the other two on that silly poster. Who supports torture, detention by a police state with no due process, and the establishment of secret prisons? As I recall IBM and the Ford corporations don't exactly have clean hands where the holocaust is concerned. And it's perfectly okay for them to legally buy our law makers. Interesting comparison!

Dave Dubya said...

Doc,
Exactly. If they couldn't incite fear and anger, there would never be a Republican Party in power. Death Tax and Death panels are invented for that reason. 'Liberals are the Red Menace" is the icing on the cake.

Kulkuri,
When the Right lies about the Left, it's "patriotism". When the Left calls them on their lies, it's "hate". Same old story.

Dusty,
Either TP thinks it's OK for drunks to carry flame throwers into bars, or he is a hypocrite.

Weapons must have some restrictions or we will be another Somalia, or Afghanistan.

Did you see Rachel last night showing the states with highest gun ownership (Red States all) have the highest incidence of gun violence? Those with the lowest gun ownership have the lowest gun violence.

So much for "An armed society is a polite society".

Rick,
It is indeed an inconvenient, and therefore supressed, truth that the American radical Right is truly a totalitarian threat to our freedom, safety, and democracy.

Dave Dubya said...

Doc,
Allow me to concur with, and repost, your observation:

To exhume examples of demagoguery, I don't have to look any further than TeePee's own hyperbolic rantings:

Why do they want to severely restrict worship (except for Muslims it seems) in violation of the 1st amendment?

Why do they want to severely restrict conservative free speech with things such as the "Fairness Doctrine" and "Net Neutrality" in violation of the first amendment?

Why do they want to severely restrict or outright ban firearms in violation of the 2nd amendment?

Why do they want to further usurp power for an over-reaching federal goverment from that of the States in violation of the 10th amendment?


To Myopic TeePee, all government conflates to tyrannical government. What is his problem, one wants to ask. Is he incapable of voting or unqualified of holding office? Is it a question of citizenship or education?

Dave Dubya said...

TP,
Let’s talk history.

You’re right, Germany did not have a “free market economy”, and neither do we have that now. During the years you mention there was this thing called the Great Depression. Our increased government central planning provided public works and conservation jobs to help American workers. Germany built a war machine. There’s the contrast between what Democrats and Fascists did back then; and now as well.

The Nazis helped the bottom line for American, as well as German, capitalists who in turn assisted with their banking and war machine.

The war profiteering aristocratic family you voted into power was in bed with the Nazis until shut down by the “Trading with the enemy Act” in 1942.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar


George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.
The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.

His business dealings, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.

The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator's action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.


Let’s not forget famous capitalist, and Nazi sympathizer, Henry Ford, along with GM, helped the Third Reich. There was no pesky ”liberal” minimum wage to cut into their profits from slave labor.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/nazicars30.htm


In certain instances, American managers of both GM and Ford went along with the conversion of their German plants to military production at a time when U.S. government documents show they were still resisting calls by the Roosevelt administration to step up military production in their plants at home.

"I regard Henry Ford as my inspiration," Hitler told a Detroit News reporter two years before becoming the German chancellor in 1933, explaining why he kept a life-size portrait of the American automaker next to his desk.

Although Ford later renounced his antisemitic writings, he remained an admirer of Nazi Germany and sought to keep America out of the coming war. In July 1938, four months after the German annexation of Austria, he accepted the highest medal that Nazi Germany could bestow on a foreigner, the Grand Cross of the German Eagle. The following month, a senior executive for General Motors, James Mooney, received a similar medal for his "distinguished service to the Reich."


Junior Bush shut down the efforts of survivors to claim damages from these dealings with the enemy. Figures, eh?

So not only does the radical Right share the totalitarian police state and militaristic tendencies of Hitler, our Pillars of Capitalism were comfortably in bed with the Nazi war machine. But, hey, business is business. And we all know business should NEVER be regulated by government, right?

What I said about Stalin was factual. “Your assertions on Stalin's USSR are so ridiculous as to not even really warrant a response”, is the assertion.

Dave Dubya said...

TP,
Now let’s talk current events.

I will ignore this demagoguery: “After that, you can go to nearly any story reported on MS-NBC or any of the alphabet news shows and see the left-wing bias and demagoguery towards the right,” since you ignore so much of what I say and ask.

About the Loughner crime: He is not a Republican and it is not Sarah Palin’s fault he killed those people, as far as we know. Your bias is the only foundation to build the claim that he was not influenced by Right Wing hate speech. We don’t know if it was or not. Here’s what we do know:

1. He killed with easy access to weapons and magazines with the potential for rapid mass murder. The gun climate is of the Right’s making.

2. Environment, surroundings, and media influence people. Right Wing TV and radio dominate the atmosphere in that state.

3. Public health, including community mental health, has been slashed by Republicans, further limiting a sick person’s chance for treatment.

He may not be a Republican, but the Republicans have nurtured the environment where this kind of tragedy will occur again and again.

No "hyperbole and specious and dubious facts", just the bottom line.

Weaseldog said...

T. Paine said..."That is ludicrous. Stalin was theoretically working for the "worker's utopia for the common good of all". He happened to use fascist techniques to implement his plan though."

And I take it that you trust and believe in Stalin? You believe he was an honest and goodly man that wouldn't lie about his intentions?

For you his words mean more than his deeds?

Weaseldog said...

T. Paine said, "I would argue the same is true of Hilter. The Nazi party was the "National Socialist Party" and if you look at many of the economic reforms enacted under Hitler, he was definitely not a right-wing free-market capitalist."

Yes, I see the problem, you trust liars and don't trust evidence...

you trust the words of Hitler. you believe him when he said he was a socialist, because his words carry a lot of weight with you.

Hitler filled his government cabinet posts with bankers and industrialists.

You can find that information hidden in books.

T. Paine said...

Dave, you have once again become the pot casting stones at the kettle. "If they couldn't incite fear and anger, there would never be a Republican Party in power."

How about the left telling the electorate that the GOP wants to kill their Medicare, particularly when it was the Democrats that just cut HUGE amounts from it to finance Obamacare?


Or how about telling old people that the GOP wants to cut social security? That one scared my wife's grandma enough to vote for Clinton when she otherwise wouldn't.

How about the Republicans don't care if they make it where old people have nothing to eat but dog food?

And I love some of your ones too, Dave.

The right wants to eliminate Habeas Corpus for liberals.

The right wants to create FEMA camps for liberals... blah... blah... blah...

Yep, no fear or anger being incited from the left here, huh?

Next, your hyperbole about carrying flamethrowers into bars. Come on now. Even fully automatic weapons are illegal, let alone such weaponry as flamethrowers.

I saw Rachel Maddow's show last night and laughed my ass off as the study she cited is the only one I have heard of that has drawn such erroneous conclusions. For a comprehensive researched study on the issue, I suggest you read Lott's book, More Guns, Less Crime.

Next, why are my examples of the left's ignoring or thwarting the Bill of Rights demagoguery? I gave you specific examples for each one, none of which you refuted other than to say it was demagoguery.

As for my citizenship AND education and I dare say I can hold my own, even on a leftist blog against a dozen different liberals. :)

As for Ford and Prescott Bush, I will not defend them. They were wrong and should have suffered severe consequences for their actions. I have no problem calling someone that may be closer to me in ideology than they are to you as being wrong and condemning them when warranted. It would be nice if many on the left would be so kind as to reciprocate when their fellow political travelers do wrong.

Lastly, as to your current events issues:

I agree that Loughner had way too easy access to weapons. A large part of the fault there was his multiple arrests and mental instability as feared by his college were not entered into the background database so that he was flagged when he tried to purchase his Glock. Even the gun store worker said that they weren't comfortable selling him a gun, but there was no record in his background check preventing him from buying one.

Your second issue is crap. Both a Quinnipiac and Rasmussen poll now released shows that a majority of people in the country don't by the left's line about conservative creating a hateful environment. One poll even had a majority of people saying the left was far more guilty of this charge. I guess you can't fool the American people with this lie, Dave.

Lastly, on the release of the mentally unstable, I will agree and concede that this was a stupid thing largely done by the GOP, sir.

At this point, I think I am finished with my rebuttal and try to restrain myself and follow Cat's advice from your previous post, my friend.

Weaseldog said...

T. Paine, you bring up some good points about the Democratic Party.

You provide ample evidence that at the top levels, Republicans and Democrats are the same people with the same ideals, the same philosophies and the same goals.

You might think it would be a better world if we only had one party in power, but what you don't seem to understand is that we do. The charade of Republicans vs. Democrats is just a Punch and Judy Show. It's designed to make fools of, and manipulate the faithful.

They are playing you for a fool T. Paine.

You've made it clear in previous posts that you favor the rights and power of the corporate machine against the interests of your fellow human beings, family and friends. I think this is a good indication of just how deep your indoctrination into our current political theater is.

You fight with all your heart and spirit for the right have chains put upon you by the masters that have trained you to be what you are.

It's a real shame that you don't follow the ideology of the man that first bore your moniker.

Dave Dubya said...

TP,

I was going to let your comment stand, but you accused me of lying.

I can understand you are somewhat overwhelmed. You do a pretty good job of holding your own and I admire your spirit in doing so, despite your reliance on beliefs, unreferenced assertions, and standard Right Wing talking points in lieu of documented referenced sources. Why don’t you give a link to your polls, for example?

When in the last three decades did the Democrats represent the left? Certainly not with Romneycare, er, “Obamacare”. Not by extending tax breaks for the rich. Not by accepting bribe money from corporations. TARP and auto bailouts were Bush/corporatist ideas. Need I go on?

Your Grandmother was wise. The Republican president after Clinton wanted to privatize Social Security. Republicans want to raise the retirement age as well. I’m not making this up, you know.

Why, you ask, did I not address these questions?

As for your defense of the Bill of Rights, perhaps you can explain the seeming incongruity of many of the lefts positions then. Why do they want to severely restrict worship (except for Muslims it seems) in violation of the 1st amendment? Why do they want to severely restrict conservative free speech with things such as the "Fairness Doctrine" and "Net Neutrality" in violation of the first amendment? Why do they want to severely restrict or outright ban firearms in violation of the 2nd amendment? Why do they want to further usurp power for an over-reaching federal government from that of the States in violation of the 10th amendment?

You may as well be asking, “Why do they want to beat their women and children?” This is demagoguery by vague and loaded questions, my friend. Not worthy of consideration. Also since you mischaracterized my points on Habeas Corpus and camps, I’ll ignore your false accusation of incitement.

I was providing historic evidence on the cozy relationship between Nazis and capitalists that supported my valid claim. This was not an attempt to get you to approve or disapprove, and then take a vague dig at liberals not condemning wrongdoing. It clearly supported my point that you promptly wanted to distract us from: “Hitler was a capitalist's dream come true. No minimum wage, no union, no workers' rights, no shared ownership; in other words, no socialism.”

The fact remains that fascism and capitalism are not incompatible. Democratic socialism, on the other hand, is antithetical to both fascism and communism.

Dave Dubya said...

TP,
Let’s be honest and admit Lott and Maddow each have their bias on guns. Here’s a more neutral perspective.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/are_violent_crimes_more_or_less_common.html

Studies that have looked at gun ownership and murder rates, he says, have shown "yes, there’s a strong relationship." Such studies, Hemenway says, have controlled for certain variables, comparing urban areas to other urban areas or households in violent areas to other households in violent areas. With those types of studies, "the evidence is very compelling." There’s more gun murder in areas with more guns, and more murder overall, he says.

That's not to say that taking the guns away from such areas would necessarily lead to a reduction in the murder rate. Such studies have shown a statistically significant relationship between guns and murder but not a causal one.


Note that you accuse me of a lie on this: “Environment, surroundings, and media influence people. Right Wing TV and radio dominate the atmosphere in that state” without any documented evidence. Right Wing talk is everywhere on the radio. FOX(R), unlike MSNBC, is provided as a basic channel on cable and satellite. You assert a mythical “liberal media” influence, but magically believe Right Wing media has none. And you call me the liar? Once again you hide behind hypocrisy. You equate my exposure and condemnation of Right Wing hate, with hate. True to the pattern, you accuse MSNBC’s challenge to the Right’s falsehoods and demagoguery as demagoguery.

You missed my point on weapons. If you support regulation of automatic weapons, and yes even flame throwers, then it is a matter of differences of degree of regulation of Second Amendment rights, right? You do not have First Amendment rights to shout “Fire” in a theatre either. See my point now?

Back to the topic at hand. Aside from Tucson, Right Wing hate is promoted and marketed, and it has left a bloody trail of dead Americans. There is no equivalency from the left and you cannot show it.

One more thing. Apparently you do believe Obama is a Marxist. Isn’t it the patriotic obligation of “Good Americans” to fear, hate and destroy Marxist threats to our freedom?

T. Paine said...

Weasel writes, "You've made it clear in previous posts that you favor the rights and power of the corporate machine against the interests of your fellow human beings, family and friends."

You must have something wrong with your Funk & Wagnells if you think the meaning of my words written in past posts are contrary to the best interests of my fellow human beings, family, and friends.

I would argue that my positions have been very consistent in support of our constitutional republic and the liberty that it is supposed to ensure. I would further argue that free-market capitalsim is the best way to ensure prosperity for the most people in our society.

I don't support completely unfettered monopolistic capitalism. People still need to play by the rules of common decency.

Far better than fostering an ever-increasing dependent class of people that cannot survive without the intrusion of government. (Something which you seem to advocate in the policies you choose to support, sir.)

T. Paine said...

Dubya, first I apologize for saying that you lied. You are wrong, but you believe in what you said, so it wasn't a lie. That would only be the case if you knew what you said was wrong and continued to say it.

Polls:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2011/most_americans_view_arizona_shootings_as_random_act_of_violence_not_politics

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1548

I would argue that Obamacare, Cap & Trade, government control of student loans, etc are far more goals of the left, then they ever would be for the right, sir.

Vague and loaded questions? I even gave examples of the left wanting to restrict free speech via Net Neutrality and the Fairness Doctrine. I think you are just avoiding the tough question there, Dubya.

Next, Hitler was a "capitalist's dream come true?" Perhaps you missed my stats I have previously provided that showed the Nazi government being responsible for 90 percent of the funding of business by the end of 1938. Hardly what I would call a capitalist economy. (With that funding of a business comes the restrictions and demands placed upon the business by the government rather then the private consumer.)

In fact, at the risk of sounding inflammatory, do you know of any other recent government that has financed huge too-big-to-fail formerly PRIVATE businesses to such a degree that they are now technically government owned?

Has government replaced the executive staff and CEO such as at GM and dictated what branches of the company it must sell and what car models it must make? Yes!

As for Lott and Maddow, lets just say that I have seen a several researchers in the not too distant past come up with the same conclusion as Lott. Lott was very thorough and was well documented and footnoted in his research. I have not seen that depth of researh by a credible, non-agenda-driven researcher come up with Maddow's stated conclusion.

Perhaps I did miss your point on owning weapons. So are you advocating the complete ignoring of the 2nd amendment since people cannot own flame-throwers and it is just a matter of degrees of weapons ownership that is the matter here?

I don't advocate private citizens owning WMD's either, but they should absolutely be allowed to have what ever rifle, shotgun, or handgun they wish.

You write, "Right Wing hate is promoted and marketed, and it has left a bloody trail of dead Americans."

Are there cases where right wingers have done violence? Yep. And I have given you examples of the left's equivalency of hatred and violence. Heck, the Malkin piece does a pretty good job of that.

The 60's and 70's bombings, kidnappings, and killings were done almost exclusively by the left, from Obama's friend William Ayers bombing police departments and the Pentagon to the old black panther party and the Watts riots.
These were not right-wing drummed up incidents.

Lately you have the idiot that went in and killed people at the Discovery Channel who was a devout leftist. How about Ted Kazcinski - the Unabomber? How about the left wing nut that intentionally flew his plane into the building in Austin?

Unfortunately there is hate to be found on both sides of the political aisle. The left, as recognized by the American populace in the Quinipiac poll even realize that the left is the most guilty of hate speech.

As for Obama being a Marxist... no I don't think he is a Marxist. I absolutely think that he has some Marxist tendencies though. I am not using the word as a perjorative but rather as an accurate descriptive of what he has done, as per the take over of previously private businesses by the government.

Lastly, Obama's desire for the redistribution of wealth from each according to their ability to each according to their needs, as he candidly slipped up and stated to Joe the Plumber was his goal is the first tenet of Marxism. What else is that, if not Marxism?

Doc Häagen-Dazs said...

Weasel Dog, Thanks for this to TeePee

"It's a real shame that you don't follow the ideology of the man that first bore your moniker. '

Long overdue.

T. Paine said...

Dubya, I responded to your last comments but I don't seem them on your post. They may have gone to your spam folder, sir.

John Myste said...

Dave -- The “liberal media” is a unicorn conservatives use to create the illusion of an uphill battle. Back in the days when all opinion-makers in the Media were conservative, as our Leader Rush Limbaugh came to power and as Fox news reported fair-and-balancedly why liberals are stupid, amoral and misguided and conservatives are intellectual, right and righteous, there were plenty of liberal reporters, but no one knew it, as they were objective journalists and their specific spin on issues were not easily detected. A whole network was designed around “balanced reporting,” which in conservative speak means we report our conservative philosophy and you decide whether to embrace it or to be stupid. It was around this time that reigning conservatives started proclaiming in earnest and to audiences greater than ever before, how liberal the media is. For a while there was no out-spoken liberal representative in the media to challenge the accusation, so it became a “known” fact. T. Paine, do not point to Colmes, who was installed as evidence of a the liberal’s lack of ability to support a position. It would be like having a Fair and Balanced newscast with two reporters: Keith Olbermann and George W. Bush. Anyone who claims they think the Fox network is “fair and balanced” is either a liar and a hypocrite or embarrassingly fooled. Out of respect, I will give them the benefit of the doubt and assume them to be a hypocritical liar unless they convince me otherwise.

Secondly, I would like to say one thing for T. Paine. He does rush into the enemy camp, six guns blazing, and walks out standing tall, bruised at best. Very few people could do that and fewer still would consider it. He also has chosen the strongest of liberal blogs to make his stand. There are plenty of weak sites with barely knowledgeable crews. He mostly stays away from them. I am a huge fan of T. Paine’s, and the value he adds to this blog specifically, is enormous. If the discussions that happen here were televised, the audience would be glued to the screen. We would all be very fat.

Also, think about this: T. Paine is wrong on almost every position he takes. When the game begins he must overcome the odds. He must try to win in one of the following ways: not enough facts become known and among the known facts, his were better; his opponent makes a mistake, creating a target for him to exploit, such as a silly argument or a contradiction of something stated in a previous argument; someone commits a named fallacy and he catches it; someone embraces a story that is demonstrably not legitimate. In the absence of any of these events, he has to rely on out-researching or out-arguing his questionable positions. Though it should not be so, it must: on liberal sites, the burden of proof is on the conservative position.

One other thing that works to Paine’s favor is that most political opinions in America are drawn atop a very large set of axioms. The conservative is convinced that the axioms of the liberal are nonsense and the liberal knows that the axioms of the conservative are false. Most arguments do not begin at the point where the legitimacy of the underlying axioms are disputed, but somewhere well beyond it, making both sides of the discussion somewhat of a religious debate about competing faiths. Liberals and conservatives fundamentally disagree about things: about the social role of government, especially federal government; about the role of morality, and who is ultimately in charge of defining it; about the strategies for economic success and economic philosophy; about what defines junk science.

Until the more fundamental matters are resolved, T. Paine, and liberals to some extent also, are protected from the demolition of their positions by an unforeseen blast of reason from the opposing side.

(Used up my 4096 characters. Your turn is coming up, T. Paine).

John Myste said...

Dave -- Yes, my long comment that preceded this one also is missing.

T. Paine – Though you are a skilled conservative debater, you cannot convince me of much, because, as I am sure you will concede, you are wrong about almost everything. However, you are oddly capable in representing the conservative position. I cannot imagine having to try to pull that off. I expect some of your arguments to be fallacious and others to be more subtle misrepresentations. Interspersing good argument with bad is all included in the game. Since this is expected, I easily forgive in advance most such occurrences. I see this phenomenon on the liberal side of the debates also and they have the comfort of arguing from correct side, which is generally easier. I certainly cannot speak for everyone, but you certainly have earned one liberal’s respect.

Dusty,Hells most vocal Bitch said...

They may have gone to your spam folder, sir. - As well they should for the friggin love of key-rist!

Couldn't resist gents. ;)

Dave Dubya said...

John,
I too admire TP for his willingness to engage us in dialogue rather than diatribe. And I admire your acceptance and civility in return. From my experience, I've seen liberals treated much more harshly at Right Wing blogs than conservatives are here. And that's only appropriate, since we are the good guys. ;-)

I'm sure TP would welcome you to one of our symbolic Wild Turkey toasts.

Politics is very much like religion and discussions always spring from points of view that are largely based on beliefs. While I believe in principles of democracy, TP believes the Golden Rule (Those with the gold make the rules) is best.

All in all, I think it is far better for us to hear each other out than to shout each other down.

Dusty,Hells most vocal Bitch said...

But..but..but..if the spam Gawd got it..it's a sign!

Dave Dubya said...

Dusty,
Coming from you, thats' almost kind of sweet. ;-)

T. Paine said...

Myste, I was drafting a response that was eerily a verbatim copy of yours except for the fact that left and right, conservative and liberal are placed in the proper order. :)

Myste, you are gentleman and a confused scholar. By the way, who the heck keeps conceding to you on my behalf?!?

Dubya, I choose to visit your blog not under any false illusions that I could ever hope to persuade you or your readers to the errors of your thinking, history, economics, facts etc, but because I learn from hearing opposing viewpoints.

I either learn that my position is weak or wrong and I need to rethink it, or that I am indeed correct and you all are nuts. :)

Also, I enjoy the fact that I seem to annoy the crap out of Dusty without really even intending to do so. Sorry in advance, Dusty! lol!

There have been some areas where Dubya and I have even reached agreement on a rare issue. Indeed, I think our ultimate goals for the country are even the same ones. We just have radically different ideas on how best to achieve those goals. (History has proven repeatedly that his won't work.)

Indeed, I raise a toast of Wild Turkey to both you Dubya and to you Myste.

You are both incontrovertibly and seemingly irredeemably wrong, but you are good guys nonetheless. See! No hate from this right-winger! :)

Dusty,Hells most vocal Bitch said...

I have partaken of various medicinal things this morning and I was attempting to be sweet and goofy whilst at the same time being my usual self. It's a hard row to hoe Dave, believe me. ;)

Dave Dubya said...

TP,
Apology accepted, although when you asserted I was wrong, you gave an opinion poll as evidence. If I said “Most people think...” maybe you’d be right, but I did not. Let’s look at this more clearly. My point was this:
“Environment, surroundings, and media influence people. Right Wing TV and radio dominate the atmosphere in that state.” Right Wing talk is everywhere on the radio. FOX(R), unlike MSNBC, is provided as a basic channel on cable and satellite.”

This is true.

You contend the poll negates this truth. It does not of course, any more than near universal medieval flat Earth believers made the Earth flat.

Now let’s look at that Quinnipiac poll. (Thank you for the link.)

Do you think heated political rhetoric drives unstable people to commit violence or don't you think so? Yes-52%, No-41%

This is in agreement with my point.

Who do you think is more responsible for using heated political rhetoric, liberals or conservatives? Libs-36%, Cons-32% (This is the total, within the 4% margin of error, BTW.)

Furthermore since you assert far more Americans are conservative than liberal one would think those numbers would reflect that, right? Now look at what the moderates said. LIbs-31%, Cons-36%.

So you see, I’m not trying to fool anybody, am I? I still appreciate you efforts to keep me honest.

Given the fairness doctrine is a non-issue it needs no discussion.

You gave nothing but assertion on net neutrality. I presume you want more corporate control of access to information.

My Second Amendment point was gun rights should have some restrictions. You agree. Neither of us wants more Tucson massacres.

Dave Dubya said...

TP,

Leftist violence in the 60’s was real, and it was wrong, although it was motivated in large part by self defense. We were being drafted to go to our deaths in a war based on lies.

I didn’t know all those rioters were liberals. That seems a tad racist, or at least prejudiced. I bet they were just angry, unemployed punks who never voted. Tell me what you know that I don’t.

None of the other examples you gave were liberals. Liberals never attack the IRS or bomb college professors. Right Wing anthrax killers did attack Democrats and media people.

The bottom line you refuse to see is the body count.

I see the clever little insertion you placed into Obama ‘s talk with the un-licensed plumber. “From each according to their ability to each according to their needs” is a Marxism. However there is no government on Earth that does not redistribute money. Period. It is what government does. Your hatred of government and taxes for the rich are at odds with your militarist sympathies and debt concerns too.

If Obama has Marxist tendencies then Bush and Cheney certainly had fascist inclinations. War of aggression based on falsehoods, torture, warrantless surveillance of citizens, detention without charge and counsel are all hallmarks of fascism. In fact, Obama’s continuation and non-investigation of these measures place him further in the fascist camp than Marxist. I politely refer to him as a corporatist, as does Tea Party mentor Ron Paul.

You argue that free-market capitalism is the best way to ensure prosperity for the most people in our society. Fine. But how’s that workin’ out for us?

One more thing for the fun of it, here’s something I found at Rasmussen:


Voters for the first time are slightly less fearful of having their health care decisions made by the federal government than by private insurers.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 41% of Likely U.S. Voters now fear the federal government more than private insurance companies when it comes to health care decisions. But that’s down from 51% when Rasmussen Reports first asked the question in August 2009 and 48% this past June.
Slightly more voters (45%) now fear private insurance companies more than the government when it comes to health care decision-making. That compares to 41% in August 2009. Fourteen percent (14%) are not sure which they fear more. The House is expected to vote to repeal the health care law this coming week. Voters overwhelmingly want to see the law changed, but there is substantial disagreement about how best to do it.

John Myste said...

DAVE --

One more thing …

My last long post (ending in "still not moving" probably did not post).

Your site has outgrown blogger. The 4096 character restriction is burdensome and it is finicky. It is one of my favorite sites, in the top five for sure. If you moved to Word Press, I would not mind.

T. Paine said...

Dubya, my contention was not that the poll negated the truth. I was simply responding to your premise that right wing rhetoric was responsible for it. The poll is just one piece of data that shows most peoples' perceptions are contrary to that premise.

I am curious why you find the Fairness Doctrine to be a non-issue, BTW. If the Democrats had the votes in congress, it is pretty certain that it would be enacted, particularly now.

As for net netrality, I am curious... were you having issues with the net beforehand? The government really has no legitimate reason to insert itself into "managing" the internet. Nothing good for either political side will come from it.

As for my example given, Kazynski was absolutely a Marxist.

Lee, the Discovery Channel shooter was absolutely a leftist. As per MS-NBC's report, "Lee said at the time that he experienced an ‘‘awakening” when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth.”

Lee thought the environment was in danger and the earth needed no more humans. See what Al Gore's fictional and largely debunked Nobel Prize winning piece of garbage has wrought?

As for the Watts riot, I was not ascribing a prejudice or bias but was using logic. The Watts area is overwhelmingly black in population. Most of black Americans (90%+) tend to be leftist leaning and Democratic constituents accordingly. Don't go looking for a racist boogeyman where none exists, sir.

Next, I understand that redistribution of tax payer money is a process of all governments, but when it is a goal of the government's for social engineering reasons, then it is Marxism.

BTW, you constantly mischaracterize me as hating the government and favoring the rich. Neither is true. I understand and support the functions of our federal government fully when they stick to the law of the land as enumerated in the Constitution.

As for the rich, I don't envy or favor them. I would very much like to be in a place where I could be one of them someday, although that is quite unlikely. I also don't hate the poor.

In fact, I would put my record of time and money volunteered in support of the poor and disadvantaged against that of any typical liberals.

Why is it that liberals want to help the poor with other peoples' money and far less often wish to help these folks through their own efforts or charitable contributions?

And as far as free market capitalism working, well we need to remove a lot more of federal government over-reach from the equation before you see improvement in our current status.

I find it sad and ironic that places such as England and France have begun to see the error of their ways and are trying to save whats left of their economies through some measures to begin privatizing aspects of health care and social programs.

They have seen the harm that these things have done, while America's liberals wish to run head long into that abyss.

I dearly hope we turn that ship around quickly, as we don't have as long as Europe did to learn from such a critical mistake.

John said...

Dave

My poosts are not saving unless they are only a few characters.

John Myste said...

Dave –

You are correct in that this blog is welcoming to a diversity of opinion and is mostly respectful of it. That is probably why the intellectual discourse here as risen to the level that it has. I have seen liberal sites that are completely intolerant of alternative ideas. They very much have a “go home, you are not wanted here” view of conservatism. I am sure that sentiment would tend to be more violent on the conservative side overall, though, because we know how much conservatives tend to love their violence. (That was for you, Mr. Paine).

T. Paine --

“Dubya, I choose to visit your blog not under any false illusions that I could ever hope to persuade you or your readers to the errors of your thinking, history, economics, facts etc, but because I learn from hearing opposing viewpoints.”

In other words, you visit this blog to sharpen your blades. Your goal is to abandon your own arguments that did not stand up so well and to walk out with only the stronger arguments. This is very attorney-istic of you, and I definitely admire it.

“You are both incontrovertibly and seemingly irredeemably wrong, but you are good guys nonetheless.” If I am wrong, it is likely irredeemable, but certainly not incontrovertible.

In Dave’s defense, on rare occasions he makes mistakes about specific details (or spins them a tad), but he virtually never draws the wrong conclusion. It is uncanny, so you must be mistaken.

Dusty –

To agree with one of your main points, no poll ever negates anything. The assumption that is does is known as argumentum ad populum in the study of logic and critical thinking. Its more common name is Fallacy of Appeal to Majority, the idea that one need not support a position, as lots of people hold it to be true. The fact that the question is in dispute, discredits that data. To say we cannot ask a question unless the question is already asked, is fallacious.

All –

Something is not wrong because we plop a label of “Marxist” on it. Things are wrong or right without considering some box we can squeeze them into in order to arrive at a conclusion about them. I am not a Marxist, but I know two things. One, he is quoted out of context constantly, and two, he was very intelligent and you cannot judge all of his words by your opinion of the conclusion of his basic philosophy. To put it another way, if I try to build a car and I get everything right, but the fuel injector, the car is still not moving.

Dave Dubya said...

John,
I wonder what Blogspot has against our wordy comments...

I've seen similar spam filter issues at wordpress.

Dave Dubya said...

TP,
You're shifting the subject.

This was the second issue that you called a lie:

2. Environment, surroundings, and media influence people. Right Wing TV and radio dominate the atmosphere in that state.

This was your accusation: Your second issue is crap. Both a Quinnipiac and Rasmussen poll now released shows that a majority of people in the country don't by the left's line about conservative creating a hateful environment.

Then you switched to: Dubya, my contention was not that the poll negated the truth. I was simply responding to your premise that right wing rhetoric was responsible for it.

This is what I said just before points 1,2,and 3.: Your bias is the only foundation to build the claim that he was not influenced by Right Wing hate speech. We don’t know if it was or not.

See the disconnect?

Snowbrush said...

Wow! I'm somewhat isolated from a lot of the hatred since I live in the liberal Willamette Valley. Of course, I moved here from Mississippi because of the hatred.

Dave Dubya said...

Snowbrush,
Thanks for the comment. Glad you live in an oasis of sanity. Anybody looking for a guitar or bass player in your neck of the woods?;-)

Beekeepers Apprentice said...

How about the left telling the electorate that the GOP wants to kill their Medicare, particularly when it was the Democrats that just cut HUGE amounts from it to finance Obamacare?

TP, you aren't aware that numerous republican "leaders" have said just that - they want to kill Medicare? Really? You're not aware of that??

Green Eagle said...

Thanks so much for publishing the picture at the top of your post. There are things to learn every day.
Who knew that Hitler and Stalin were black?

Dave Dubya said...

Green Eagle,
I'm glad you were observant enough to notice that. Dark forces of evil do look alike, don't they?

jism singh said...

Very nice post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed browsing your blog posts. thanks for sharing. Great work.
diesel pickup trucks for sale