Stone to rehablitate Hilter Stalin and Mao.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I10Dv_s8FVA[/ame]

Enough said, given the mans history of stretching the truth to fit the events any "history" from Stone, would be be better placed in the "fiction" section of the local library.
 
Hugo Chavez is a great leader and a true humanitarian.

Last winter when some people in America didn't have money to afford to heat their homes.

President Chavez stepped up to the plate and helped them out with their energy needs.
 
Right out of the shute, you're wrong. It wasn't H.W. Bush, it was G. W. Bush's administration who followed through on the first 1999 lawsuit brought against tobacco companies by the US government.

It's spelled "Chute", not "shute". Just thought you'd wanna split hairs more finely. I wrote the wrong Bush, my bad. Doesn't change the fact that the Tobacco Industry did do wrong, AND the left is anti-smoking because they are anti-consumption. They want a say over what you put in your body, just like the Nazis did.

When I say "we," I don't mean the teacher's union. Duh... You and your ilk continually interpret what interest groups do or say as being all-inclusive for how ALL of us believe.

Would this be coming from the same group of people who accuse all conservatives as being mind numbed robots doing whatever Fox News says? Again, I refer you to the case of Pot V. Kettle.

Secondly, The teachers unions continually support and endorse leftists for office and anti-choice/homeschool legislation. There's no getting around that.



I'm sure the store owners standing on the roofs of their businesses with shotguns, protecting them from looters during the oh so tolerant Rodney King race riots, because the police told them they are on their own are happy they have the right to bear arms. The only ones who want a disarmed populace are totalitarians bent on enslaving their neighbor.

Planned Parenthood doesn't engage in baby killing as its priority, asshole, no matter how you spin it.

So you're denying they run abortion clinics now and push young women into getting abortions as a preferred method of dealing with an unwanted pregnancy?

And need I remind you that it wasn't the Democrats who made mockeries out of town hall meetings last summer by shouting down and cutting off debate over the health care issue. Nope, that would be members of YOUR crowd who acted like ignorant 12-year olds.

Right. Nancy Pelosi calling concerned citizens Nazis for disagreeing with her isn't trying to shut down debate. I'm sure using SEIU thugs to prevent legitimate residents into open town halls and attack those who get insistent is not any attempt whatsoever in preventing accountability from our elected officials. I'm sure a crowd of 1.3+ million people on 9/12 is just a heavy tourist day. I'm sure calling health care protesters who politely ask for facts from our congressmen in their offices as 'radicals who threatened to harm him', is not trying to scare people away from their privileged ruling class position.

So fulla shit. These are just a few examples of what the left has pulled off the top of my head. I'm sure anyone with the inclination can find hundreds more.

Don't you mean out of your ass? Really, with all the truly SERIOUS issues to debate, you come up with a half-dozen which mean squat in the bigger picture of things. So typical. Sure you don't want to make a big deal out of Obama's comment about 57 states? His verbal gaffs always grab the attention of some of the more shallow-minded too.
 
As for Nazi...you know that I am always going on about the fact that the word should not be used for lesser things...that it diminishes what the nazi's did in order to try to make whatever current situation they're talking about worse.
I totally agree with you Jillian :cool:

Aren't you cute? That's the new word for sick in the head. Hitler and his inner circle were garbage. The gorillas that carried out their orders were garbage. They caused a world war that devastated Europe and they practiced genocide against minorities and Hitler was a little short dark-haired jerk that had about as much resemblance to an Aryan as YOU.

You wanna loosen up the diaper pin on that turban, or what, raghead? :eusa_eh:

And you name's Earl from now on. You belong to a select group. Be proud.
 
Fascism comprises a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology and a corporatist economic ideology.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

Facism is extremist right wing. Communism is extremist left wing.

They are both equal in the totalitarian aspects.

strange things happen at wiki

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkiGORmirRU[/ame]​

And just moments later:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFGpMm9kHXg[/ame]
 
Fascism is largely left wing. Communism is effectively ALL left wing.

The contention that fascism is "right wing" is mere baseless propaganda. Well, maybe not ALL baseless. But mostly baseless.

They are indeed both totalitarian.

would be nice if you applied actual definitions instead of the fantasy in your head. ;)

It would be nice if YOU'd stop citing wiki-fucking-pedia as though whatever they vomit constitutes something legitmate.

It's disconcerting that people continue to allege that Wikipedia is an unreliable source based on a few incidents of edits to certain pages that happened back in 2003. The online encyclopedia has since then made it difficult to just drop in and change words willy-nilly, and whenever information has NOT been fully sourced, there is a disclaimer to that effect directly next to the entry.

Wikipedia remains the most comprehensive go-to place on the Internet when searching for something specific. If you don't like its entries, then I suggest you scroll down to the sources at the bottom of pages that are cited and use those as your verification.

Reliability of Wikipedia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
would be nice if you applied actual definitions instead of the fantasy in your head. ;)

It would be nice if YOU'd stop citing wiki-fucking-pedia as though whatever they vomit constitutes something legitmate.

It's disconcerting that people continue to allege that Wikipedia is an unreliable source based on a few incidents of edits to certain pages that happened back in 2003. The online encyclopedia has since then made it difficult to just drop in and change words willy-nilly, and whenever information has NOT been fully sourced, there is a disclaimer to that effect directly next to the entry.

Wikipedia remains the most comprehensive go-to place on the Internet when searching for something specific. If you don't like its entries, then I suggest you scroll down to the sources at the bottom of pages that are cited and use those as your verification.

Reliability of Wikipedia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lol.
You used a wiki site to support your claims that wiki is a source of reliable information?

Wiki provides decent information for anything that is not debatable.

Anything that is debatable is crap from wiki. Fucking Obama's wiki site read like a fucking campaign ad.
 
It would be nice if YOU'd stop citing wiki-fucking-pedia as though whatever they vomit constitutes something legitmate.

Be nice. She is.

I was nice. And she is usually nice. But what she calls the "fantasies in my head" is not a "nice" way to couch her criticism. And my rebuke of her less than nice rejoinder is not ad hominem, either. Wiki, as a source, blows. I was addressing her source, not her.

Seriously, wiki properly serves solely as a sometimes useful point of departure to begin looking into a question. To cite it as a source for ANY actual contention, however, is silly.

This contains all the warnings Wikipedia uses. Does Brittanica do warnings that an entry might be contested? Why would someone believe that encyclopedia as being entirely credible? Just because it's older? Gee, I wish people believed me more just because I'm older.

Joho the Blog: Wikipedia's credibility
 
Hugo Chavez is a great leader and a true humanitarian.

Last winter when some people in America didn't have money to afford to heat their homes.

President Chavez stepped up to the plate and helped them out with their energy needs.

Oh c'mon...talk about agendas. Chavez was grandstanding by that giveaway to win over popularity in the US. If he was such a generous and kindly gent, why has he pulled the plug on it this year when people in the US need help more than ever?

Venezuela's Chávez shuts off free oil program for US poor / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com
 
Hugo Chavez is a great leader and a true humanitarian.

Last winter when some people in America didn't have money to afford to heat their homes.

President Chavez stepped up to the plate and helped them out with their energy needs.

On 11 April 2002, chaos erupted in Venezuela, with huge protests of over half a million people organized demanding the immediate resignation Chávez. Chávez ordered the military to control the riots instead of the police "Plan Avila", possibly with orders to fire upon the protesters; the military refused to carry out Plan Avila, forcing Chávez to leave the capitol and resign, which was announced on 12 April 2002. A vacuum of power ensued and Pedro Carmona was placed in power; however due to missteps even in his first day of power, many who had supported the removal of Chávez now refused to back Carmona, forcing his resignation and the restoration of Chávez to power

In mid-March of 2005 Chávez passed legislation further clamping down on the press, by broadening controls on how the press can report articles deemed "disrespectful" or "insulting" of the government. Sentencing for such transgressions ranges between 20 and 40 months incarceration, depending on the gravity of the offense. Moreover laws have been passed against the media, tightening controls on what would be considered slanderous, carrying sentences up to 30 months and what would amount to tens of thousands of US dollars in fines.

On 02 December 2002 a general strike at the Venezuelan Oil Company PDVSA was cracked down by Chávez, resulting in his dismissal of 18.000 employees, many who had not been involved in the strike but were simply not seen as loyal to Chávez; the lack of oils workers brought the country's oil production and export to a standstill until February 2003. Poor sentiment at the company had gradually increased due to the appointment of Rafael Ramírez Carreno to president of the company, a man who was regarded by many to be a Marxist and an enemy of management. Chávez later admitted to having a hand in the crisis at PDVSA in order for him to gain more control over the company and consolidate his power. However the consolidation of control over PDVSA by Chávez did have a price, as even in May, 2005 the company had still not fully recovered to productivity before the strikes.

Hugo Chavez, Dictator of the Month June, 2005


Okay apart from Stone, Danny Glover, Sean Penn, and few others, Chavez is a tinpot dictator that even his own people hate and they only reason he remains in power has little if anything to do with the will of the people there. Your talking about Citizens energy, Joe Kennedy's little venture that was given crude oil that it sold for 163 million dollars. If you think it was a wonderful thing, ask Joe Kennedy why then he is not running for the seat that used to be Ted Kennedys.
 
It would be nice if YOU'd stop citing wiki-fucking-pedia as though whatever they vomit constitutes something legitmate.

It's disconcerting that people continue to allege that Wikipedia is an unreliable source based on a few incidents of edits to certain pages that happened back in 2003. The online encyclopedia has since then made it difficult to just drop in and change words willy-nilly, and whenever information has NOT been fully sourced, there is a disclaimer to that effect directly next to the entry.

Wikipedia remains the most comprehensive go-to place on the Internet when searching for something specific. If you don't like its entries, then I suggest you scroll down to the sources at the bottom of pages that are cited and use those as your verification.

Reliability of Wikipedia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lol.
You used a wiki site to support your claims that wiki is a source of reliable information?

Wiki provides decent information for anything that is not debatable.

Anything that is debatable is crap from wiki. Fucking Obama's wiki site read like a fucking campaign ad.

There are other fucking articles supporting Wikipedia's fucking credibility. The one cited explains what they employ. As for Obama's entry, every fucking politicians reads like a bio. His is no different. Did you even bother to scroll down to "The Presidency"?? I see no clapping or saluting or salivating. It states just the facts, exactly as it should.

So I got three fucks in for your two. Wanna try again, child?
 
I know what you mean, but in this case there really is no question at all that Nazism is inherently right wing.
You simply don't know what you are talking about.

The Nazis made an allaince with the right wing of germans in 1933, they were NOT however 'inherently right wing.'

In fact, hitler views on labor and private ownership show he was not 'right wing' at all.

The only part of Nazism that could be considered 'right wing' was nationalism, this is in fact where so many make the mistake of claiming Nazism is 'right wing', they take this one similarity and try to fit it into what the Nazis were.

This common mistake has existed for many years and does indeed have its roots as someone mentioned with Communist accusations against the Nazis in the 1930s, as another goal of Nazism was the destruction of communism.

You mean the National Socialist German Workers Party?:eek:

Say it isn't so.
Oh noes, Gunny! Soda's gonna neg rep you too for daring to disagree with him!

:lol:
 
Don't you mean out of your ass? Really, with all the truly SERIOUS issues to debate, you come up with a half-dozen which mean squat in the bigger picture of things. So typical. Sure you don't want to make a big deal out of Obama's comment about 57 states? His verbal gaffs always grab the attention of some of the more shallow-minded too.

Ah yes, you get petty, I call you on it and you punt.

Here... have another spin on the wheel.

I wonder how many Dan Quayle jokes you still make?
 

Forum List

Back
Top