Glenn Beck is not fooling around anymore, he is attempting to incite violence

[JBeukema]

Words are violence to ... according to the moonbats.

Words like violence
Break the silence
Come crashing in
Into my little world
Painful to me
Pierce right through me
Cant you understand
Oh my little girl

All I wanted
All I needed
Is here in my arms
Words are very unnecessary
They can only do harm

Vows are spoken
To be broken
Feelings are intense
Words are trivial
Pleasure remain
So does the pain
Words are meaningless
And forgettable

All I wanted
All I needed
Is here in my arms
Words are very unnecessary
They can only do harm


​

 

[Vast LWC]

Also note that the common term for doing what Mr Beck did is "Talking out both sides of your mouth".

I was just curious of what your opinion is of my opinion. i'll quote it below for you.

I understand your sentiment. I am infuriated with Obama for making fun of me because I am questioning this bill. I am angry with Pelosi too for calling me a fake.....go read some of my HR3200 stuff and its plain to see that I am actually reading and interpreting the bill for myself and not going by left/right talking points on it.

Maybe Obama and the rest of the reps/dems in congress should actually READ the freaking bill and show us the comprehend it instead of just bashing people for not blindly following their political talking points on it. Jerks.

These politicians treating hard working taxpayers like this is inciting violence more than anything that Glenn Beck says on the airwaves.

I see your point, and agree, if they're going to make a 1200 page bill, which is a choice among a few that might be the final draft, mind you, they should read it.

Of course they all have extensive staffs that do the reading for them, that gives me some hope that they know what they're talking about.

But of course opponents of the bill haven't read it either, and they sure seem to making up a hell of a lot of lies about it.

Of course, the representatives may in fact have read the bills.

They may be trying to communicate what they have read to their constituents at TownHall meetings.

Of course no-one can hear them with all the shouting and pushing.

 

[Intense]

Protest all you want, but don't unlawfully disrupt. You don't get to play that game.

Non-Violent Civil Disobedience is an acceptable, respectful, form of Protest. You don't make the rules.

The rules were made long before you and me, and, yes, you will follow the rules or pay the consquence. Don't like it? Tough luck.

Consequence for CD is usually pretty minimal, if at all. Circumstance dictates Jake. People don't usually get arrested, without really going out of their way to force it. True, there are exceptions. How many arrests have there been at Town Hall Meetings to date Jake? .... Thought so. Tea Parties?.... Thought so too.

In truth Jake, the folks you have to especially watch are the Anarchists. Their first Rule would be close to "There are No Rules or Limitations", however that would violate the first rule itself, if there was one, so it can't be a rule in the first place, so it is like a double negative, and pointless to argue. Gotta Love those Anarchists, just don't trust them. They are Left of You, so they won't generally be out there helping grandma protest in her wheel-chair though they could steal it.

Security Guards better keep your shit together and play by the rules. You may find yourself on You-Tube.

 

[Vast LWC]

Read further through the rise and fall of the Sturmabteilung in the Night of the Long Knives, with their leftist leaders, including Ernst Röhm. Really, keep reading.

The question was who founded the Nazi Party. I answered it. It was refounded in 1924 after being banned, by Adolf Hitler himself after he got out of jail.

Hitler himself was not really interested in the Socialist aspects of the founding members of the party, as described by Wikipedia thusly:

"Unlike Drexler and other party members, Hitler was less interested in the "socialist" aspect of "national socialism" beyond moving Social Welfare administration from the Church to the State. Himself of provincial lower-middle-class origins, he disliked the mass working class of the big cities, and had no sympathy with the notions of attacking private property or the business class (which some early Nazis espoused). For Hitler the twin goals of the party were always German nationalist expansionism and Antisemitism. These two goals were fused in his mind by his belief that Germany's external enemies - Britain, France and the Soviet Union - were controlled by the Jews, and that Germany's future wars of national expansion would necessarily entail a war against the Jews. For Hitler and his principal lieutenants, national and racial issues were always dominant. This was symbolised by the adoption as the party emblem of the swastika or Hakenkreuz, at the time widely used in the western world. In German nationalist circles, the swastika was considered a symbol of an "Aryan race". The Swastika symbolized the replacement of the Christian Cross with allegiance to a National Socialist State.

This would make sense, since when the Nazis actually were in power over Germany, they chose to support and work hand in hand with large monopolistic corporations rather than have the government take control of industry. As I posted in a prior post.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Non-Violent Civil Disobedience is an acceptable, respectful, form of Protest. You don't make the rules.

The rules were made long before you and me, and, yes, you will follow the rules or pay the consquence. Don't like it? Tough luck.

The "rules" also state that if the government encroaches on our freedoms we should take up arms and over throw them.

Go for it.

Remember you have popguns. The gummint has frigates, missiles, carriers, stealth fighters, several hundred thousand warriors (seven might be on your side) . . . and you have . . . you?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Non-Violent Civil Disobedience is an acceptable, respectful, form of Protest. You don't make the rules.

The rules were made long before you and me, and, yes, you will follow the rules or pay the consquence. Don't like it? Tough luck.

Consequence for CD is usually pretty minimal, if at all. Circumstance dictates Jake. People don't usually get arrested, without really going out of their way to force it. True, there are exceptions. How many arrests have there been at Town Hall Meetings to date Jake? .... Thought so. Tea Parties?.... Thought so too.

In truth Jake, the folks you have to especially watch are the Anarchists. Their first Rule would be close to "There are No Rules or Limitations", however that would violate the first rule itself, if there was one, so it can't be a rule in the first place, so it is like a double negative, and pointless to argue. Gotta Love those Anarchists, just don't trust them. They are Left of You, so they won't generally be out there helping grandma protest in her wheel-chair though they could steal it.

Security Guards better keep your shit together and play by the rules. You may find yourself on You-Tube.

We "is" talkin' about "youse", not the Anarchists, for Lucille Ball's sake.

Quit acting the moonbat, please.

 

[Intense]

Words are violence to ... according to the moonbats.

Words like violence
Break the silence
Come crashing in
Into my little world
Painful to me
Pierce right through me
Cant you understand
Oh my little girl

All I wanted
All I needed
Is here in my arms
Words are very unnecessary
They can only do harm

Vows are spoken
To be broken
Feelings are intense
Words are trivial
Pleasure remain
So does the pain
Words are meaningless
And forgettable

All I wanted
All I needed
Is here in my arms
Words are very unnecessary
They can only do harm


​

So that is a bright ray of sunshine to make baby's day. Should baby really be taught to grow up mute, or is mommy just hanging with aunt flow? Or is it April 15th?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Read further through the rise and fall of the Sturmabteilung in the Night of the Long Knives, with their leftist leaders, including Ernst Röhm. Really, keep reading.

The question was who founded the Nazi Party. I answered it. It was refounded in 1924 after being banned, by Adolf Hitler himself after he got out of jail.

Hitler himself was not really interested in the Socialist aspects of the founding members of the party, as described by Wikipedia thusly:

"Unlike Drexler and other party members, Hitler was less interested in the "socialist" aspect of "national socialism" beyond moving Social Welfare administration from the Church to the State. Himself of provincial lower-middle-class origins, he disliked the mass working class of the big cities, and had no sympathy with the notions of attacking private property or the business class (which some early Nazis espoused). For Hitler the twin goals of the party were always German nationalist expansionism and Antisemitism. These two goals were fused in his mind by his belief that Germany's external enemies - Britain, France and the Soviet Union - were controlled by the Jews, and that Germany's future wars of national expansion would necessarily entail a war against the Jews. For Hitler and his principal lieutenants, national and racial issues were always dominant. This was symbolised by the adoption as the party emblem of the swastika or Hakenkreuz, at the time widely used in the western world. In German nationalist circles, the swastika was considered a symbol of an "Aryan race". The Swastika symbolized the replacement of the Christian Cross with allegiance to a National Socialist State.

This would make sense, since when the Nazis actually were in power over Germany, they chose to support and work hand in hand with large monopolistic corporations rather than have the government take control of industry. As I posted in a prior post.

How funny. We fired across each other's bows (pull up your pants, Gunny, we are not talking to you). Yes, you are 100% right. The NDSP went rightist and statist under the Party's power of police terrorism.

Thus, the talk of NDSP "socialists" among the Obama-mamas is simply stupid.

 

[Vast LWC]

And Ernst Röhm?

Hitler killed him because he was an actual socialist.

 

[Vast LWC]

Read further through the rise and fall of the Sturmabteilung in the Night of the Long Knives, with their leftist leaders, including Ernst Röhm. Really, keep reading.

The question was who founded the Nazi Party. I answered it. It was refounded in 1924 after being banned, by Adolf Hitler himself after he got out of jail.

Hitler himself was not really interested in the Socialist aspects of the founding members of the party, as described by Wikipedia thusly:

"Unlike Drexler and other party members, Hitler was less interested in the "socialist" aspect of "national socialism" beyond moving Social Welfare administration from the Church to the State. Himself of provincial lower-middle-class origins, he disliked the mass working class of the big cities, and had no sympathy with the notions of attacking private property or the business class (which some early Nazis espoused). For Hitler the twin goals of the party were always German nationalist expansionism and Antisemitism. These two goals were fused in his mind by his belief that Germany's external enemies - Britain, France and the Soviet Union - were controlled by the Jews, and that Germany's future wars of national expansion would necessarily entail a war against the Jews. For Hitler and his principal lieutenants, national and racial issues were always dominant. This was symbolised by the adoption as the party emblem of the swastika or Hakenkreuz, at the time widely used in the western world. In German nationalist circles, the swastika was considered a symbol of an "Aryan race". The Swastika symbolized the replacement of the Christian Cross with allegiance to a National Socialist State.

This would make sense, since when the Nazis actually were in power over Germany, they chose to support and work hand in hand with large monopolistic corporations rather than have the government take control of industry. As I posted in a prior post.

How funny. We fired across each other's bows (pull up your pants, Gunny, we are not talking to you). Yes, you are 100% right. The NDSP went rightist and statist under the Party's power of police terrorism.

Thus, the talk of NDSP "socialists" among the Obama-mamas is simply stupid.

LOL, that's funny. Good stuff man, I was a bit confused there...

 

[Intense]

The rules were made long before you and me, and, yes, you will follow the rules or pay the consquence. Don't like it? Tough luck.

Consequence for CD is usually pretty minimal, if at all. Circumstance dictates Jake. People don't usually get arrested, without really going out of their way to force it. True, there are exceptions. How many arrests have there been at Town Hall Meetings to date Jake? .... Thought so. Tea Parties?.... Thought so too.

In truth Jake, the folks you have to especially watch are the Anarchists. Their first Rule would be close to "There are No Rules or Limitations", however that would violate the first rule itself, if there was one, so it can't be a rule in the first place, so it is like a double negative, and pointless to argue. Gotta Love those Anarchists, just don't trust them. They are Left of You, so they won't generally be out there helping grandma protest in her wheel-chair though they could steal it.

Security Guards better keep your shit together and play by the rules. You may find yourself on You-Tube.

We "is" talkin' about "youse", not the Anarchists, for Lucille Ball's sake.

Quit acting the moonbat, please.

Got a Link to all of those Arrests Jake..... "Youse really know your shit".

 

[Intense]

Nationalist Socialism as a path to Totalitarian Utopia. See any familiar patterns here?


Description: The author focuses on the main Nazi work creation programs like motorization, Autobahn, emergency relief, and rearmament. He stresses on the fact that most work creation from the period 1933-1936 was not a result of rearmament rather a fierce attack on employment through some of the methods mentioned above. In addition, the growing control of the Nazi party over all aspects of the economy is clearly identified in every chapter as this control grows. The book is loaded with information.
Professor Silverman argues, as a result of impressive research in Nazi archives, that it was work creation programs that account for this "miracle" and it was the 4-year Plan announced in 1936 that represented an emphasis on autarky and arms and a seller's market. Plans called for motorization and the famous autobahns. It is natural to compare Hitler's achievements with FDR's New Deal. Strangely Silverman hardly mention the USSR as a source of ideas in the Hitler years, though the 4-year Plan itself was inspired by the Soviet FYP, the second of which was being completed by the time Goebbels began administering the German equivalent. Earlier (February,1935) Soviet-type "work books" necessary for employment were introduced.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hitler was named "Man of the Year" in 1938 by Time Magazine. They noted Hitler's anti-capitalistic economic policies:

"Most cruel joke of all, however, has been played by Hitler & Co. on those German capitalists and small businessmen who once backed National Socialism as a means of saving Germany's bourgeois economic structure from radicalism. The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on other what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for food- stuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism."

(Source: Time Magazine; Jaunuary 2, 1939.)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hitler setup the Labour Front. Both employers and employees joined it. According to the National Labour Law of January 20, 1934, the state would exert direct influence and control over all business employing more than twenty persons. In other words, both employers and employees were put under the control of the government.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Summary: Below is a short economic analysis of German Economy under the Nazis. It is apparent they ran a centralized collectivist economy just like the Soviet Union. It was a political party that acted much in the same way the American Left does in regard to unemployment and trying to use the government to decrease it. It notes that the Nazis used public works to a large extent, which is exceedingly leftist, and put people to work for the State.

The Nazis started enacting other leftist ploys like price freezes and starting expanding the role of the government and destroying any freedom left in the Market. Private Property owners were dictated to by the State. Clearly Nazis were opponents of capitalism through and through.



Notes on: "On the Theory of the Centrally Administered Economy: An Analysis of the German Experiment," by Walter Eucken

Walter Eucken was a professor of economics at the University of Freiburg, Germany and an architect of the economic reforms that led to the Economic Miracle. In this article Eucken wanted to explain the problems and weaknesses of centrally administered economies such as that of National Socialist (Nazi) Germany and the Soviet Union.

Hitler's Leftist Economic Policies

 

[JakeStarkey]

And Ernst Röhm?

Hitler killed him because he was an actual socialist.

Just so.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nationalist Socialism as a path to Totalitarian Utopia. See any familiar patterns here?

[sigh -- nothing posted above makes sense in relationship to your statement/question. Try again?]

Hitler's Leftist Economic Policies

 

[Vast LWC]

Nationalist Socialism as a path to Totalitarian Utopia. See any familiar patterns here?

<Snip> (Edited: I'll just leave the link... If someone wants to see your original text they can go there or read it from your post.)

Hitler's Leftist Economic Policies

See, but here's the thing.

Hitler did indeed seize alot of businesses. I'm with you there.

But then, instead of incorporating them into the government, and distributing the profits equally to the people, which would be Socialism,

...he joined them to other existing businesses, creating large cartels and monopolized corporations.

If a government takes a business and gives it to someone else, that is NOT socialism.

Socialism is when a government takes control of business and runs it themselves, re-distributing the wealth equally among the populace.

See the difference?

 

[Vast LWC]

Thus my point:

Hitler was not a socialist, he was just a control-freak.

There are societies that combine socialism with democracy.

There are nations that combine totalitarianism with capitalism.

Hitler mixed capitalism with socialism as he saw fit in whatever way gave him and his cronies the most power.

And NONE of this has to do with modern liberalism, which attempts to combine Democracy with a mix of capitalism and socialism.

Modern liberalism tries to emulate governments like those of modern day France or Sweden, not to push toward "totalitarianism" or "Communism".

Has France become a Fascist state? I think not, nor has Sweden, nor has any modern industrialized country that has a Socialist Democracy.

 

[Oddball]

Nationalist Socialism as a path to Totalitarian Utopia. See any familiar patterns here?

<Snip> (Edited: I'll just leave the link... If someone wants to see your original text they can go there or read it from your post.)

Hitler's Leftist Economic Policies

See, but here's the thing.

Hitler did indeed seize alot of businesses. I'm with you there.

But then, instead of incorporating them into the government, and distributing the profits equally to the people, which would be Socilalism,

...he joined them to other existing businesses, creating large cartels and monopolized corporations.
If a government takes a business and gives it to someone else, that is NOT socialism.

Socialism is when a government takes control of business and runs it themselves, re-distributing the wealth equally among the populace.

See the difference?

That's how socialists roll, Bubba.

And they don't redidtribute the wealth, they redistribute lack and misery.

 

[Intense]

Nationalist Socialism as a path to Totalitarian Utopia. See any familiar patterns here?

<Snip> (Edited: I'll just leave the link... If someone wants to see your original text they can go there or read it from your post.)

Hitler's Leftist Economic Policies

See, but here's the thing.

Hitler did indeed seize alot of businesses. I'm with you there.

But then, instead of incorporating them into the government, and distributing the profits equally to the people, which would be Socilalism,

...he joined them to other existing businesses, creating large cartels and monopolized corporations.

If a government takes a business and gives it to someone else, that is NOT socialism.

Socialism is when a government takes control of business and runs it themselves, re-distributing the wealth equally among the populace.

See the difference?

No I don't. To Hitler Both the People and Businesses were the Property of the State. There was no recourse, separate from his will, without his consent . Nazi's were controlled through the State. Socialist's are controlled through the State. Through the Government. Totalitarian, different brands, thats all.

 

[Vast LWC]

Nationalist Socialism as a path to Totalitarian Utopia. See any familiar patterns here?

<Snip> (Edited: I'll just leave the link... If someone wants to see your original text they can go there or read it from your post.)

Hitler's Leftist Economic Policies

See, but here's the thing.

Hitler did indeed seize alot of businesses. I'm with you there.

But then, instead of incorporating them into the government, and distributing the profits equally to the people, which would be Socilalism,

...he joined them to other existing businesses, creating large cartels and monopolized corporations.
If a government takes a business and gives it to someone else, that is NOT socialism.

Socialism is when a government takes control of business and runs it themselves, re-distributing the wealth equally among the populace.

See the difference?

That's how socialists roll, Bubba.

And they don't redidtribute the wealth, they redistribute lack and misery.

I think I see the issue here. Conservatives don't really understand the concept of socialism.

No offense, but I believe this to be true.

Now, I'm not saying that there hasn't been some evil done in the world in the name of socialism (Russia, etc), or that all actual socialism has been good (China, etc). Because that is not the case.

What I AM saying is that Nazi Germany under Hitler was NOT socialism.

 

[Vast LWC]

No I don't. To Hitler Both the People and Businesses were the Property of the State. There was no recourse, separate from his will, without his consent . Nazi's were controlled through the State. Socialist's are controlled through the State. Through the Government. Totalitarian, different brands, thats all.

Ahh, but in socialism, the businesses belong to the state, but the state belongs to the people.