When Did Liberalism Become Fascism?

[francoHFW]

Christian ideals then.

Which Christian ideals are you attributing to me that you hate so.o..o... much?

*****CHUCKLE*****

Jeebus what a dumbass. Quote the whole thing duh. The ones you vote against-

In other words you can not answer my question and have to resort to abuse like any good progressive troll.

The only dumbass here is the one who thought I was a Christian then deflects and can't state which Christian ideals they think I support when questioned which those would be.

What's the matter there rich boy can't get your thoughts straight because you spent so much time partying on you daddy's money when in college?

*****CHUCKLE*****

If you vote GOP and believe their bs propaganda you don't believe in morality or are willfully ignorant.. Screw the poor, give away to the rich, hate on minorities etc etc. This isn't rocket science. You want a diagram?

 

[Thinker101]

Christian ideals then.

Which Christian ideals are you attributing to me that you hate so.o..o... much?

*****CHUCKLE*****

Jeebus what a dumbass. Quote the whole thing duh. The ones you vote against-

In other words you can not answer my question and have to resort to abuse like any good progressive troll.

The only dumbass here is the one who thought I was a Christian then deflects and can't state which Christian ideals they think I support when questioned which those would be.

What's the matter there rich boy can't get your thoughts straight because you spent so much time partying on you daddy's money when in college?

*****CHUCKLE*****

If you vote GOP and believe their bs propaganda you don't believe in morality or are willfully ignorant.. Screw the poor, give away to the rich, hate on minorities etc etc. This isn't rocket science. You want a diagram?

If you can put together a little kindergarten type rhyme you may have something there.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Christian ideals then.

Which Christian ideals are you attributing to me that you hate so.o..o... much?

*****CHUCKLE*****

Jeebus what a dumbass. Quote the whole thing duh. The ones you vote against-

In other words you can not answer my question and have to resort to abuse like any good progressive troll.

The only dumbass here is the one who thought I was a Christian then deflects and can't state which Christian ideals they think I support when questioned which those would be.

What's the matter there rich boy can't get your thoughts straight because you spent so much time partying on you daddy's money when in college?

*****CHUCKLE*****

If you vote GOP and believe their bs propaganda you don't believe in morality or are willfully ignorant.. Screw the poor, give away to the rich, hate on minorities etc etc. This isn't rocket science. You want a diagram?

You're clueless and are incapable of conceptualizing why the current person now holds the office of President Of The United States. But you keep right on with your current rhetoric and lead to a further divide of the Democratic party.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[American_Jihad]

Christian ideals then.

Which Christian ideals are you attributing to me that you hate so.o..o... much?

*****CHUCKLE*****

Jeebus what a dumbass. Quote the whole thing duh. The ones you vote against-

In other words you can not answer my question and have to resort to abuse like any good progressive troll.

The only dumbass here is the one who thought I was a Christian then deflects and can't state which Christian ideals they think I support when questioned which those would be.

What's the matter there rich boy can't get your thoughts straight because you spent so much time partying on you daddy's money when in college?

*****CHUCKLE*****

If you vote GOP and believe their bs propaganda you don't believe in morality or are willfully ignorant.. Screw the poor, give away to the rich, hate on minorities etc etc. This isn't rocket science. You want a diagram?

...

 

[westwall]

1. On the Right, the Founders, classical Liberals, and conservatives, all of whom pay homage to the Constitution, which prominently promises this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

On the Left, Progressivism, Modern Liberalism, Socialism, Communism....and Fascism.
None of these adhere to, support or even give a nod to freedom.
All of them demand the bending of the neck and the knee to the collective.


2. Liberal Kirsten Powers wrote the most excellent best seller,
"The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech."



3. The WSJ's Kimberley Strassel has just penned an essay called,
"The Left’s War on Free Speech," part of which includes the most elemental description of politics today, explained through the words of her children.

"....three kids, ages twelve, nine, and five....a volley of protests about free speech rights....I asked each of them in turn to tell me what they thought “free speech” meant.


a. The twelve-year-old went first. A serious and academic child, he gave a textbook definition that included “Congress shall make no law,” an evocation of James Madison, a tutorial on the Bill of Rights, and warnings about “certain exceptions for public safety and libel.” I was happy to know the private-school fees were yielding something.

b. The nine-year-old went next. A rebel convinced that everyone ignores her, she said that she had no idea what “public safety” or “libel” were, but that “it doesn’t matter, because free speech means there should never be any restrictions on anything that anybody says, anytime or anywhere.”

c. ...the five-year-old’s turn. You could tell she’d been thinking hard about her answer. She fixed both her brother and sister with a ferocious stare and said: “Free speech is that you can say what you want—as long as I like it.”




4. I realized that my oldest was a constitutional conservative, my middle child a libertarian, and my youngest a socialist with totalitarian tendencies."
The Left’s War on Free Speech

Progressivism has ALWAYS been fascist. Liberalism isn't.

 

[francoHFW]

Christian ideals then.

Which Christian ideals are you attributing to me that you hate so.o..o... much?

*****CHUCKLE*****

Jeebus what a dumbass. Quote the whole thing duh. The ones you vote against-

In other words you can not answer my question and have to resort to abuse like any good progressive troll.

The only dumbass here is the one who thought I was a Christian then deflects and can't state which Christian ideals they think I support when questioned which those would be.

What's the matter there rich boy can't get your thoughts straight because you spent so much time partying on you daddy's money when in college?

*****CHUCKLE*****

If you vote GOP and believe their bs propaganda you don't believe in morality or are willfully ignorant.. Screw the poor, give away to the rich, hate on minorities etc etc. This isn't rocket science. You want a diagram?

...

Enjoy the coming tax cut for the richest (ACA ditto) and all your bs propaganda beliefs proven wrong AGAIN...How's lock em up coming, dupes? Drain the swamp? LOL

 

[francoHFW]

1. On the Right, the Founders, classical Liberals, and conservatives, all of whom pay homage to the Constitution, which prominently promises this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

On the Left, Progressivism, Modern Liberalism, Socialism, Communism....and Fascism.
None of these adhere to, support or even give a nod to freedom.
All of them demand the bending of the neck and the knee to the collective.


2. Liberal Kirsten Powers wrote the most excellent best seller,
"The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech."



3. The WSJ's Kimberley Strassel has just penned an essay called,
"The Left’s War on Free Speech," part of which includes the most elemental description of politics today, explained through the words of her children.

"....three kids, ages twelve, nine, and five....a volley of protests about free speech rights....I asked each of them in turn to tell me what they thought “free speech” meant.


a. The twelve-year-old went first. A serious and academic child, he gave a textbook definition that included “Congress shall make no law,” an evocation of James Madison, a tutorial on the Bill of Rights, and warnings about “certain exceptions for public safety and libel.” I was happy to know the private-school fees were yielding something.

b. The nine-year-old went next. A rebel convinced that everyone ignores her, she said that she had no idea what “public safety” or “libel” were, but that “it doesn’t matter, because free speech means there should never be any restrictions on anything that anybody says, anytime or anywhere.”

c. ...the five-year-old’s turn. You could tell she’d been thinking hard about her answer. She fixed both her brother and sister with a ferocious stare and said: “Free speech is that you can say what you want—as long as I like it.”




4. I realized that my oldest was a constitutional conservative, my middle child a libertarian, and my youngest a socialist with totalitarian tendencies."
The Left’s War on Free Speech

Progressivism has ALWAYS been fascist. Liberalism isn't.

P and L have ALWAYS been lefty, Fascism always RW. Welcome to reality- Not bs GOP propaganda of the last 15 years....

 

[American_Jihad]

Which Christian ideals are you attributing to me that you hate so.o..o... much?

*****CHUCKLE*****

Jeebus what a dumbass. Quote the whole thing duh. The ones you vote against-

In other words you can not answer my question and have to resort to abuse like any good progressive troll.

The only dumbass here is the one who thought I was a Christian then deflects and can't state which Christian ideals they think I support when questioned which those would be.

What's the matter there rich boy can't get your thoughts straight because you spent so much time partying on you daddy's money when in college?

*****CHUCKLE*****

If you vote GOP and believe their bs propaganda you don't believe in morality or are willfully ignorant.. Screw the poor, give away to the rich, hate on minorities etc etc. This isn't rocket science. You want a diagram?

...

Enjoy the coming tax cut for the richest (ACA ditto) and all your bs propaganda beliefs proven wrong AGAIN...How's lock em up coming, dupes? Drain the swamp? LOL

 

[westwall]

1. On the Right, the Founders, classical Liberals, and conservatives, all of whom pay homage to the Constitution, which prominently promises this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

On the Left, Progressivism, Modern Liberalism, Socialism, Communism....and Fascism.
None of these adhere to, support or even give a nod to freedom.
All of them demand the bending of the neck and the knee to the collective.


2. Liberal Kirsten Powers wrote the most excellent best seller,
"The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech."



3. The WSJ's Kimberley Strassel has just penned an essay called,
"The Left’s War on Free Speech," part of which includes the most elemental description of politics today, explained through the words of her children.

"....three kids, ages twelve, nine, and five....a volley of protests about free speech rights....I asked each of them in turn to tell me what they thought “free speech” meant.


a. The twelve-year-old went first. A serious and academic child, he gave a textbook definition that included “Congress shall make no law,” an evocation of James Madison, a tutorial on the Bill of Rights, and warnings about “certain exceptions for public safety and libel.” I was happy to know the private-school fees were yielding something.

b. The nine-year-old went next. A rebel convinced that everyone ignores her, she said that she had no idea what “public safety” or “libel” were, but that “it doesn’t matter, because free speech means there should never be any restrictions on anything that anybody says, anytime or anywhere.”

c. ...the five-year-old’s turn. You could tell she’d been thinking hard about her answer. She fixed both her brother and sister with a ferocious stare and said: “Free speech is that you can say what you want—as long as I like it.”




4. I realized that my oldest was a constitutional conservative, my middle child a libertarian, and my youngest a socialist with totalitarian tendencies."
The Left’s War on Free Speech

Progressivism has ALWAYS been fascist. Liberalism isn't.

P and L have ALWAYS been lefty, Fascism always RW. Welcome to reality- Not bs GOP propaganda of the last 15 years....

Wrong again little hater dupe. There is no RW/LW. There is collectivist vs individualist. If you are for authoritarian government you are left wing. Period. The ultimate form of right wing government is NO GOVERNMENT. In other words anarchy. But hater dupes like you have no clue. You just parrot the crap your progressive asshats shove up your keester.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "I went to private school after 6th grade,"
Juvie prison doesn't count as a private school

2. " I have a Masters in History that goes against all of your theories..."
I don't have theories....I post facts. Documented, sourced, linked facts.

Clearly you never learned to question any of the dogma they taught you in Clown College....and have never done your own research.

Remember the last accurate post of yours?
Me neither.


3. "The more unfair a capitalist system, the more likely it is to go communist,..."
OK....here's your lesson for today:

1. Modern history presents us with two divergent models of economic arrangement: socialism, and capitalism. One of these appears preoccupied with the common good, and social betterment, the other with profits and production.


2. In its modern beginnings, socialism was optimistic and well intentioned, without the overlay of its contemporary varieties that tend to bemoan prosperity, romanticize poverty, and promote a view that place individual rights are a secondary concern. This is to say that the earliest socialists sought the fullest possible flourishing of humanity, “the common good.”


3. A half-century before Karl Marx published the Communist Manifesto, there was Gracchus Babeuf’s Plebeian Manifesto, which was later renamed the Manifesto of the Equals. Babeuf’s early (1796) work has been described as socialist, anarchist, and communist, and has had an enormous impact. He wrote: “The French Revolution was nothing but a precursor of another revolution, on which will be bigger, more solemn, and which will be the last…We reach for something more sublime and more just: the common good or the community of goods! Nor more individual property in land: the land belongs to no one. We demand, we want, the common enjoyment of the fruits of the land: the fruits belong to all.” Here, then, are the major themes of socialist theory. It takes very little interpolation to find that opponents profit at the expense of the environment, and conditions of inequality in society.


4. For Babeur, socialism would distribute prosperity across the entire population, as it would “[have] us eat four good meals a day, [dress} us most elegantly, and also [provide] those of us who are fathers of families with charming houses worth a thousand louis each.”


5. Oscar Wilde: “Under socialism…there will be no people living in fetid dens and fetid rags, and bringing up unhealthy, hunger pinched children in the midst of impossible and absolutely repulsive surroundings…Each member of society will share in the general prosperity and happiness of the society…”


6. Marxism rested on the assumption that the condition of the working classes would grow ever worse under capitalism, that there would be but two classes: one small and rich, the other vast and increasingly impoverished, and revolution would be the anodyne that would result in the “common good.” But by the early 20th century, it was clear that this assumption was completely wrong! Under capitalism, the standard of living of all was improving: prices falling, incomes rising, health and sanitation improving, lengthening of life spans, diets becoming more varied, the new jobs created in industry paid more than most could make in agriculture, housing improved, and middle class industrialists and business owners displaced nobility and gentry as heroes.


7. These economic advances continued throughout the period of the rise of socialist ideology. The poor didn’t get poorer because the rich were getting richer (a familiar socialist refrain even today) as the socialists had predicted. Instead, the underlying reality was that capitalism had created the first societies in history in which living standards were rising in all sectors of society.
From a speech by Rev. Robert A. Sirico, President, Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty.
Delivered at Hillsdale College, October 27, 2006



See if you can find any errors, you dunce.

Communism is dictatorship, socialism is always democratic. Start there, brainwashed moron. Socialism is the cure for unfair capitalism that leads to violent revolution and communism, if you can upgrade your crap from the 1800's and GOP BS propaganda- join the rest of the world-it's 2017....

"Communism is dictatorship, socialism is always democratic."

This is where you inadvertently reveal that you never studied history.

Socialism is communism sans a gun.




In an article on socialism in the Encyclopedia Britannica, Prof. G. D. H. Cole, a leading theoretician and historian of the British Labor Party, declares: The distinction between socialism as distinguished by various Labor and Socialist parties of Europe and the New World, and communism, as represented by the Russians and minority parties in other countries is one of tactics-and-strategy rather than one of objective. Communism is indeed only socialism pursued by revolutionary means and making its revolutionary method a canon of faith...."

In The Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels stated that communist ends can be attained "only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions."

150+ years ago...

And Cole was a socialist in the modern sense. Try non GOP bs sources someday.

You were challenged.....

"The more unfair a capitalist system, the more likely it is to go communist,..."
OK....here's your lesson for today:

1. Modern history presents us with two divergent models of economic arrangement: socialism, and capitalism. One of these appears preoccupied with the common good, and social betterment, the other with profits and production.


2. In its modern beginnings, socialism was optimistic and well intentioned, without the overlay of its contemporary varieties that tend to bemoan prosperity, romanticize poverty, and promote a view that place individual rights are a secondary concern. This is to say that the earliest socialists sought the fullest possible flourishing of humanity, “the common good.”


3. A half-century before Karl Marx published the Communist Manifesto, there was Gracchus Babeuf’s Plebeian Manifesto, which was later renamed the Manifesto of the Equals. Babeuf’s early (1796) work has been described as socialist, anarchist, and communist, and has had an enormous impact. He wrote: “The French Revolution was nothing but a precursor of another revolution, on which will be bigger, more solemn, and which will be the last…We reach for something more sublime and more just: the common good or the community of goods! Nor more individual property in land: the land belongs to no one. We demand, we want, the common enjoyment of the fruits of the land: the fruits belong to all.” Here, then, are the major themes of socialist theory. It takes very little interpolation to find that opponents profit at the expense of the environment, and conditions of inequality in society.


4. For Babeur, socialism would distribute prosperity across the entire population, as it would “[have] us eat four good meals a day, [dress} us most elegantly, and also [provide] those of us who are fathers of families with charming houses worth a thousand louis each.”


5. Oscar Wilde: “Under socialism…there will be no people living in fetid dens and fetid rags, and bringing up unhealthy, hunger pinched children in the midst of impossible and absolutely repulsive surroundings…Each member of society will share in the general prosperity and happiness of the society…”


6. Marxism rested on the assumption that the condition of the working classes would grow ever worse under capitalism, that there would be but two classes: one small and rich, the other vast and increasingly impoverished, and revolution would be the anodyne that would result in the “common good.” But by the early 20th century, it was clear that this assumption was completely wrong! Under capitalism, the standard of living of all was improving: prices falling, incomes rising, health and sanitation improving, lengthening of life spans, diets becoming more varied, the new jobs created in industry paid more than most could make in agriculture, housing improved, and middle class industrialists and business owners displaced nobility and gentry as heroes.


7. These economic advances continued throughout the period of the rise of socialist ideology. The poor didn’t get poorer because the rich were getting richer (a familiar socialist refrain even today) as the socialists had predicted. Instead, the underlying reality was that capitalism had created the first societies in history in which living standards were rising in all sectors of society.
From a speech by Rev. Robert A. Sirico, President, Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty.
Delivered at Hillsdale College, October 27, 2006


This was your challenge:
See if you can find any errors, you dunce.



You couldn't find a single error....as expected.

In effect, you've served your purpose: proven me.....again.....100% correct.

Try something new and not BS GOP propaganda, superdupe.

You were challenged.....

"The more unfair a capitalist system, the more likely it is to go communist,..."
OK....here's your lesson for today:

1. Modern history presents us with two divergent models of economic arrangement: socialism, and capitalism. One of these appears preoccupied with the common good, and social betterment, the other with profits and production.


2. In its modern beginnings, socialism was optimistic and well intentioned, without the overlay of its contemporary varieties that tend to bemoan prosperity, romanticize poverty, and promote a view that place individual rights are a secondary concern. This is to say that the earliest socialists sought the fullest possible flourishing of humanity, “the common good.”


3. A half-century before Karl Marx published the Communist Manifesto, there was Gracchus Babeuf’s Plebeian Manifesto, which was later renamed the Manifesto of the Equals. Babeuf’s early (1796) work has been described as socialist, anarchist, and communist, and has had an enormous impact. He wrote: “The French Revolution was nothing but a precursor of another revolution, on which will be bigger, more solemn, and which will be the last…We reach for something more sublime and more just: the common good or the community of goods! Nor more individual property in land: the land belongs to no one. We demand, we want, the common enjoyment of the fruits of the land: the fruits belong to all.” Here, then, are the major themes of socialist theory. It takes very little interpolation to find that opponents profit at the expense of the environment, and conditions of inequality in society.


4. For Babeur, socialism would distribute prosperity across the entire population, as it would “[have] us eat four good meals a day, [dress} us most elegantly, and also [provide] those of us who are fathers of families with charming houses worth a thousand louis each.”


5. Oscar Wilde: “Under socialism…there will be no people living in fetid dens and fetid rags, and bringing up unhealthy, hunger pinched children in the midst of impossible and absolutely repulsive surroundings…Each member of society will share in the general prosperity and happiness of the society…”


6. Marxism rested on the assumption that the condition of the working classes would grow ever worse under capitalism, that there would be but two classes: one small and rich, the other vast and increasingly impoverished, and revolution would be the anodyne that would result in the “common good.” But by the early 20th century, it was clear that this assumption was completely wrong! Under capitalism, the standard of living of all was improving: prices falling, incomes rising, health and sanitation improving, lengthening of life spans, diets becoming more varied, the new jobs created in industry paid more than most could make in agriculture, housing improved, and middle class industrialists and business owners displaced nobility and gentry as heroes.


7. These economic advances continued throughout the period of the rise of socialist ideology. The poor didn’t get poorer because the rich were getting richer (a familiar socialist refrain even today) as the socialists had predicted. Instead, the underlying reality was that capitalism had created the first societies in history in which living standards were rising in all sectors of society.
From a speech by Rev. Robert A. Sirico, President, Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty.
Delivered at Hillsdale College, October 27, 2006


This was your challenge:
See if you can find any errors, you dunce.



You couldn't find a single error....as expected.

In effect, you've served your purpose: proven me.....again.....100% correct.

 

[jon_berzerk]

When Did Liberalism Become Fascism?

as soon as they didnt get their way

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. On the Right, the Founders, classical Liberals, and conservatives, all of whom pay homage to the Constitution, which prominently promises this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

On the Left, Progressivism, Modern Liberalism, Socialism, Communism....and Fascism.
None of these adhere to, support or even give a nod to freedom.
All of them demand the bending of the neck and the knee to the collective.


2. Liberal Kirsten Powers wrote the most excellent best seller,
"The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech."



3. The WSJ's Kimberley Strassel has just penned an essay called,
"The Left’s War on Free Speech," part of which includes the most elemental description of politics today, explained through the words of her children.

"....three kids, ages twelve, nine, and five....a volley of protests about free speech rights....I asked each of them in turn to tell me what they thought “free speech” meant.


a. The twelve-year-old went first. A serious and academic child, he gave a textbook definition that included “Congress shall make no law,” an evocation of James Madison, a tutorial on the Bill of Rights, and warnings about “certain exceptions for public safety and libel.” I was happy to know the private-school fees were yielding something.

b. The nine-year-old went next. A rebel convinced that everyone ignores her, she said that she had no idea what “public safety” or “libel” were, but that “it doesn’t matter, because free speech means there should never be any restrictions on anything that anybody says, anytime or anywhere.”

c. ...the five-year-old’s turn. You could tell she’d been thinking hard about her answer. She fixed both her brother and sister with a ferocious stare and said: “Free speech is that you can say what you want—as long as I like it.”




4. I realized that my oldest was a constitutional conservative, my middle child a libertarian, and my youngest a socialist with totalitarian tendencies."
The Left’s War on Free Speech

Progressivism has ALWAYS been fascist. Liberalism isn't.

P and L have ALWAYS been lefty, Fascism always RW. Welcome to reality- Not bs GOP propaganda of the last 15 years....

Fascism was the model FDR used.....what sort of moron claims FDR was Rightwing???

Raise your paw.

 

[BlindBoo]

a dislike for God

Which God? Who's God, is it that we supposedly dislike?

Does not believing in supernatural beings controlling our destiny count as a dislike for 'God'?

View attachment 125976

So instead of the believing some supernatural being might be controlling your destiny in some way you'd prefer the mortal with all of it's MacBeth intrigues, deceit, and frailties.

******CHUCKLE*****

First of all I said beings, not just one. Like the devil. Satan is a supernatural being. If I believed in it, disliking that one is okay right?

Christian mythology is full of them. History is full of them too.

Nice Kansas however.

I feel a part of something that is greater than myself. What that something is, is as of yet indescribable in words. But that doesn't mean I believe in the immaculate reception (fuching Pittsburgh!!!), Jesus's divinity, or the resurrection. Doesn't make me hate my mother or devalue humanity.

Yet you apparently devalue beliefs that many people hold.

*****SMILE*****

How does my rejection of those beliefs devalue anyone's belief? You're the one who said I dislike God. How can I dislike something that I don't believe exists?



That's okay though, I don't believe in Zeus or any other man made mythology.

 

[BlindBoo]

If you are for authoritarian government you are left wing

Sounds like Grabby one and his supporters are left wing. Who knew?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Which Christian ideals are you attributing to me that you hate so.o..o... much?

*****CHUCKLE*****

Jeebus what a dumbass. Quote the whole thing duh. The ones you vote against-

In other words you can not answer my question and have to resort to abuse like any good progressive troll.

The only dumbass here is the one who thought I was a Christian then deflects and can't state which Christian ideals they think I support when questioned which those would be.

What's the matter there rich boy can't get your thoughts straight because you spent so much time partying on you daddy's money when in college?

*****CHUCKLE*****

If you vote GOP and believe their bs propaganda you don't believe in morality or are willfully ignorant.. Screw the poor, give away to the rich, hate on minorities etc etc. This isn't rocket science. You want a diagram?

...

Enjoy the coming tax cut for the richest (ACA ditto) and all your bs propaganda beliefs proven wrong AGAIN...How's lock em up coming, dupes? Drain the swamp? LOL

"Enjoy the coming tax cut for the richest..."

1. There is no perennial group known as 'the richest.'
The economic mobility in our system moves individuals up and down on the wealth scale.
"...economic mobility. About 60 percent of the households that were in the lowest income quintile in 1999 were in a higher quintile ten years later. During the same decade, almost 40 percent of the richest households fell to a lower quintile. This is a nation where you can rise or fall. It is a nation where you can climb the economic ladder based not on who you are born to, or what class you are born into, but based on your talents, your passion, your perseverance, and the content of your character." https://imprimisarchives.hillsdale.edu/file/archives/pdf/2013_05_Imprimis.pdf

2. ..to disabuse oneself of any idea that the Left cares about anyone....simply look at the party that has led the 10 worst performing cities for half a century, and the truth is staring you in the face.

3. Your hatred of those who have made better life decisions, and/or worked harder than you have, leads one to conclude that your post really means 'why haven't I done better???"
Any reading of your posts answers the question.

 

[BlindBoo]

1. On the Right, the Founders, classical Liberals, and conservatives, all of whom pay homage to the Constitution, which prominently promises this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

On the Left, Progressivism, Modern Liberalism, Socialism, Communism....and Fascism.
None of these adhere to, support or even give a nod to freedom.
All of them demand the bending of the neck and the knee to the collective.


2. Liberal Kirsten Powers wrote the most excellent best seller,
"The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech."



3. The WSJ's Kimberley Strassel has just penned an essay called,
"The Left’s War on Free Speech," part of which includes the most elemental description of politics today, explained through the words of her children.

"....three kids, ages twelve, nine, and five....a volley of protests about free speech rights....I asked each of them in turn to tell me what they thought “free speech” meant.


a. The twelve-year-old went first. A serious and academic child, he gave a textbook definition that included “Congress shall make no law,” an evocation of James Madison, a tutorial on the Bill of Rights, and warnings about “certain exceptions for public safety and libel.” I was happy to know the private-school fees were yielding something.

b. The nine-year-old went next. A rebel convinced that everyone ignores her, she said that she had no idea what “public safety” or “libel” were, but that “it doesn’t matter, because free speech means there should never be any restrictions on anything that anybody says, anytime or anywhere.”

c. ...the five-year-old’s turn. You could tell she’d been thinking hard about her answer. She fixed both her brother and sister with a ferocious stare and said: “Free speech is that you can say what you want—as long as I like it.”




4. I realized that my oldest was a constitutional conservative, my middle child a libertarian, and my youngest a socialist with totalitarian tendencies."
The Left’s War on Free Speech

Progressivism has ALWAYS been fascist. Liberalism isn't.

P and L have ALWAYS been lefty, Fascism always RW. Welcome to reality- Not bs GOP propaganda of the last 15 years....

Fascism was the model FDR used.....what sort of moron claims FDR was Rightwing???

Raise your paw.

"To compare is not to equate, as Schivelbusch says. It’s sobering to note the real parallels among these systems. But it’s even more important to remember that the U.S. did not succumb to dictatorship. Roosevelt may have stretched the Constitution beyond recognition, and he had a taste for planning and power previously unknown in the White House. But he was not a murderous thug. And despite a population that “literally waited for orders,” as McCormick put it, American institutions did not collapse. The Supreme Court declared some New Deal measures unconstitutional. Some business leaders resisted it. Intellectuals on both the right and the left, some of whom ended up in the early libertarian movement, railed against Roosevelt. Republican politicians (those were the days!) tended to oppose both the flow of power to Washington and the shift to executive authority.

Germany had a parliament and political parties and business leaders, and they collapsed in the face of Hitler’s movement. Something was different in the United States. Perhaps it was the fact that the country was formed by people who had left the despots of the Old World to find freedom in the new, and who then made a libertarian revolution. Americans tend to think of themselves as individuals, with equal rights and equal freedom. A nation whose fundamental ideology is, in the words of the recently deceased sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset, “antistatism, laissez-faire, individualism, populism, and egalitarianism” will be far more resistant to illiberal ideologies."

Hitler, Mussolini, Roosevelt

 

[Damaged Eagle]

a dislike for God

Which God? Who's God, is it that we supposedly dislike?

Does not believing in supernatural beings controlling our destiny count as a dislike for 'God'?

View attachment 125976

So instead of the believing some supernatural being might be controlling your destiny in some way you'd prefer the mortal with all of it's MacBeth intrigues, deceit, and frailties.

******CHUCKLE*****

First of all I said beings, not just one. Like the devil. Satan is a supernatural being. If I believed in it, disliking that one is okay right?

Christian mythology is full of them. History is full of them too.

Nice Kansas however.

I feel a part of something that is greater than myself. What that something is, is as of yet indescribable in words. But that doesn't mean I believe in the immaculate reception (fuching Pittsburgh!!!), Jesus's divinity, or the resurrection. Doesn't make me hate my mother or devalue humanity.

Yet you apparently devalue beliefs that many people hold.

*****SMILE*****

How does my rejection of those beliefs devalue anyone's belief? You're the one who said I dislike God. How can I dislike something that I don't believe exists?



That's okay though, I don't believe in Zeus or any other man made mythology.

The way you present your argument suggests a devaluation of others beliefs in God.

I never stated that you dislike God. Best to keep you facts straight.

Do you subscribe to the creation beliefs most atheists follow called the Big Bang?

*****SMILE*****

Jethro Tull - One Brown Mouse (subtitulado al español)

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. On the Right, the Founders, classical Liberals, and conservatives, all of whom pay homage to the Constitution, which prominently promises this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

On the Left, Progressivism, Modern Liberalism, Socialism, Communism....and Fascism.
None of these adhere to, support or even give a nod to freedom.
All of them demand the bending of the neck and the knee to the collective.


2. Liberal Kirsten Powers wrote the most excellent best seller,
"The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech."



3. The WSJ's Kimberley Strassel has just penned an essay called,
"The Left’s War on Free Speech," part of which includes the most elemental description of politics today, explained through the words of her children.

"....three kids, ages twelve, nine, and five....a volley of protests about free speech rights....I asked each of them in turn to tell me what they thought “free speech” meant.


a. The twelve-year-old went first. A serious and academic child, he gave a textbook definition that included “Congress shall make no law,” an evocation of James Madison, a tutorial on the Bill of Rights, and warnings about “certain exceptions for public safety and libel.” I was happy to know the private-school fees were yielding something.

b. The nine-year-old went next. A rebel convinced that everyone ignores her, she said that she had no idea what “public safety” or “libel” were, but that “it doesn’t matter, because free speech means there should never be any restrictions on anything that anybody says, anytime or anywhere.”

c. ...the five-year-old’s turn. You could tell she’d been thinking hard about her answer. She fixed both her brother and sister with a ferocious stare and said: “Free speech is that you can say what you want—as long as I like it.”




4. I realized that my oldest was a constitutional conservative, my middle child a libertarian, and my youngest a socialist with totalitarian tendencies."
The Left’s War on Free Speech

Progressivism has ALWAYS been fascist. Liberalism isn't.

P and L have ALWAYS been lefty, Fascism always RW. Welcome to reality- Not bs GOP propaganda of the last 15 years....

Fascism was the model FDR used.....what sort of moron claims FDR was Rightwing???

Raise your paw.

"To compare is not to equate, as Schivelbusch says. It’s sobering to note the real parallels among these systems. But it’s even more important to remember that the U.S. did not succumb to dictatorship. Roosevelt may have stretched the Constitution beyond recognition, and he had a taste for planning and power previously unknown in the White House. But he was not a murderous thug. And despite a population that “literally waited for orders,” as McCormick put it, American institutions did not collapse. The Supreme Court declared some New Deal measures unconstitutional. Some business leaders resisted it. Intellectuals on both the right and the left, some of whom ended up in the early libertarian movement, railed against Roosevelt. Republican politicians (those were the days!) tended to oppose both the flow of power to Washington and the shift to executive authority.

Germany had a parliament and political parties and business leaders, and they collapsed in the face of Hitler’s movement. Something was different in the United States. Perhaps it was the fact that the country was formed by people who had left the despots of the Old World to find freedom in the new, and who then made a libertarian revolution. Americans tend to think of themselves as individuals, with equal rights and equal freedom. A nation whose fundamental ideology is, in the words of the recently deceased sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset, “antistatism, laissez-faire, individualism, populism, and egalitarianism” will be far more resistant to illiberal ideologies."

Hitler, Mussolini, Roosevelt

I read the book.
Your use of Schivelbusch's quote has nothing to do with my statement:
Fascism was the model FDR used.....what sort of moron claims FDR was Rightwing???

You should know by now that I'm never wrong....but, let's gild the lily.


1. It is a fact that none of the New Dealers were constitutionalists. Roosevelt's economist, Rexford Tugwell said: Any people who must be governed according to the written codes of an instrument which defines the spheres of individual and group, state and federal actions must expect to suffer from the constant maladjustment of progress. A life' which changes and a constitution for governance which does not must always raise questions which are difficult for solution."


2. Tugwell was opposed to any private business not controlled by the government. General Hugh Johnson was working with Tugwell on a bill to create the NRA, and gave Francis Perkins the book by Rafaello Viglione, "The Corporate State," in which the neat Italian system of dictatorship for the benefit of the people was glowingly described."
Francis Perkins, "The Roosevelt I Knew."
The NRA was copied from Mussolini's corporative system.


3. Perkins, FDR's Sec'y of Labor, questioned whether Johnson 'really understood the democratic process..." New Dealers had no problem with the fascist nature of their plans.

See Chesly Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," chapter four.


How ya' like them apples, boyyyyyeeeeeee???

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. On the Right, the Founders, classical Liberals, and conservatives, all of whom pay homage to the Constitution, which prominently promises this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

On the Left, Progressivism, Modern Liberalism, Socialism, Communism....and Fascism.
None of these adhere to, support or even give a nod to freedom.
All of them demand the bending of the neck and the knee to the collective.


2. Liberal Kirsten Powers wrote the most excellent best seller,
"The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech."



3. The WSJ's Kimberley Strassel has just penned an essay called,
"The Left’s War on Free Speech," part of which includes the most elemental description of politics today, explained through the words of her children.

"....three kids, ages twelve, nine, and five....a volley of protests about free speech rights....I asked each of them in turn to tell me what they thought “free speech” meant.


a. The twelve-year-old went first. A serious and academic child, he gave a textbook definition that included “Congress shall make no law,” an evocation of James Madison, a tutorial on the Bill of Rights, and warnings about “certain exceptions for public safety and libel.” I was happy to know the private-school fees were yielding something.

b. The nine-year-old went next. A rebel convinced that everyone ignores her, she said that she had no idea what “public safety” or “libel” were, but that “it doesn’t matter, because free speech means there should never be any restrictions on anything that anybody says, anytime or anywhere.”

c. ...the five-year-old’s turn. You could tell she’d been thinking hard about her answer. She fixed both her brother and sister with a ferocious stare and said: “Free speech is that you can say what you want—as long as I like it.”




4. I realized that my oldest was a constitutional conservative, my middle child a libertarian, and my youngest a socialist with totalitarian tendencies."
The Left’s War on Free Speech

Progressivism has ALWAYS been fascist. Liberalism isn't.

P and L have ALWAYS been lefty, Fascism always RW. Welcome to reality- Not bs GOP propaganda of the last 15 years....

Fascism was the model FDR used.....what sort of moron claims FDR was Rightwing???

Raise your paw.

"To compare is not to equate, as Schivelbusch says. It’s sobering to note the real parallels among these systems. But it’s even more important to remember that the U.S. did not succumb to dictatorship. Roosevelt may have stretched the Constitution beyond recognition, and he had a taste for planning and power previously unknown in the White House. But he was not a murderous thug. And despite a population that “literally waited for orders,” as McCormick put it, American institutions did not collapse. The Supreme Court declared some New Deal measures unconstitutional. Some business leaders resisted it. Intellectuals on both the right and the left, some of whom ended up in the early libertarian movement, railed against Roosevelt. Republican politicians (those were the days!) tended to oppose both the flow of power to Washington and the shift to executive authority.

Germany had a parliament and political parties and business leaders, and they collapsed in the face of Hitler’s movement. Something was different in the United States. Perhaps it was the fact that the country was formed by people who had left the despots of the Old World to find freedom in the new, and who then made a libertarian revolution. Americans tend to think of themselves as individuals, with equal rights and equal freedom. A nation whose fundamental ideology is, in the words of the recently deceased sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset, “antistatism, laissez-faire, individualism, populism, and egalitarianism” will be far more resistant to illiberal ideologies."

Hitler, Mussolini, Roosevelt

Fascism was the model FDR used.....what sort of moron claims FDR was Rightwing???

You should know by now that I'm never wrong....but, let's gild the lily.

1. English and French commentators routinely depicted Roosevelt as akin to Mussolini. A more specific reason why, in 1933, the New Deal was often compared with Fascism was that with the help of a massive propaganda campaign, Italy had transitioned from a liberal free-market system to a state-run corporatist one. And corporatism was considered by elitists and intellectuals as the perfect response to the collapse of the liberal free-market economy, as was the national self-sufficiency of the Stalinist Soviet Union. The National Recovery Administration was comparable to Mussolini’s corporatism as both had state control without actual expropriation of private property. Schivelbusch, "Three New Deals"
   1. Mussolini wrote a book review of Roosevelt’s “Looking Forward,” in which he said “…[as] Roosevelt here calls his readers to battle, is reminiscent of the ways and means by which Fascism awakened the Italian people.” Popolo d’Italia, July 7, 1933.
   2. In 1934, Mussolini wrote a review of “New Frontiers,” by FDR’s Sec’y of Agriculture, later Vice-President, Henry Wallace: “Wallace’s answer to what America wants is as follows: anything but a return tyo the free-market, i.e., anarchistic economy. Where is America headed? This book leaves no doubt that it is on the road to corporatism, the economic system of the current century.” Marco Sedda, Il politico, vol. 64, p. 263.

Did you have enough of a spanking yet?

Did you learn your lesson, never to doubt me?????


Speak up, boyyyyeeeeeeee.

 

[BlindBoo]

Which God? Who's God, is it that we supposedly dislike?

Does not believing in supernatural beings controlling our destiny count as a dislike for 'God'?

View attachment 125976

So instead of the believing some supernatural being might be controlling your destiny in some way you'd prefer the mortal with all of it's MacBeth intrigues, deceit, and frailties.

******CHUCKLE*****

First of all I said beings, not just one. Like the devil. Satan is a supernatural being. If I believed in it, disliking that one is okay right?

Christian mythology is full of them. History is full of them too.

Nice Kansas however.

I feel a part of something that is greater than myself. What that something is, is as of yet indescribable in words. But that doesn't mean I believe in the immaculate reception (fuching Pittsburgh!!!), Jesus's divinity, or the resurrection. Doesn't make me hate my mother or devalue humanity.

Yet you apparently devalue beliefs that many people hold.

*****SMILE*****

How does my rejection of those beliefs devalue anyone's belief? You're the one who said I dislike God. How can I dislike something that I don't believe exists?



That's okay though, I don't believe in Zeus or any other man made mythology.

View attachment 126097

The way you present your argument suggests a devaluation of others beliefs in God.

I never stated that you dislike God. Best to keep you facts straight.

Do you subscribe to the creation beliefs most atheists follow called the Big Bang?

*****SMILE*****

Jethro Tull - One Brown Mouse (subtitulado al español)

I completely disagree. It does tend to piss off certain types of Religionist however. Calling their one true god part of a mythological superstition that includes a whole host of supernatural creatures, while true, sends them off in to more incoherent and illogical rants than you can imagine.

I stand corrected. It was not you who said it but you did quote it and question me about it.

I understand the theory. Scientist observed that the Universe is expanding as time goes on. Where did it expand from?