Republicans are far from Nazis....
Snowy
June 7, 199? Thomas Colton Ruthford
Letters to the Editor
June 7 - Arlington, VA
During the past several months in the American press, the Democrats have
frequently denounced the Republicans as Nazis due to their attempts to
control runaway federal spending. How very ironic. I remember the Nazis. Let
me share a little about them and recall some of their exploits.
First of all, "Nazi" was gutter slang for the verb "to nationalize". The
Bider-Mienhoff gang gave themselves this moniker during their early
struggles. The official title of the Nazi Party was "The National Socialist
Workers Party of Germany". Hitler and the Brownshirts advocated the
nationalization of education, health care, transportation, national
resources, manufacturing, distribution and law enforcement.
Hitler came to power by turning the working class, unemployed, and academic
elite against the conservative republic. After Der Fuhrer's election ceased
being a political conspiracy and was transformed into a fashionable social
phenomenon, party membership was especially popular with educators,
bureaucrats, and the press.
Being a Nazi was "politically correct". They called themselves "The Children
of the New Age of World Order" and looked down their noses at everyone else.
As Hitler acquired more power, he referred to his critics as "The Dark
Forces of Anarchy and Hatred". Anyone who questioned Nazi high-handedness in
the German press was branded a "Conservative Reactionary". Joseph Goebbels,
minister of communications, proclaimed a "New World Order".
The Nazi reign of terror began with false news reports on the Jews,
Bohemians and Gypses who were said to be arming themselves to overthrow the
"New World Order" and Hitler demanded that all good people register their
guns so that they wouldn't fall into the hands of "terrorists and
madmen".Right-wing fanatics of the "Old Order" who protested firearms
registration were arrested by the S.S. and put in jail for "fomenting hatred
against the Government of the German people".
Then the Reichstag (government building) was blown up and Hitler ram-rodded
an "Emergency Anti-Terrorist Act" through Parliament that gave the Gestapo
extraordinary powers. The leader then declared that for the well-being of
the German people, all private firearms were to be confiscated by the
Gestapo and the Wermotten (federal law enforcement and military). German
citizens who refused to surrender their guns when the "jack-boots" (Gestapo)
came calling, were murdered in their homes. By the way, the Gestapo were the
federal marshals' service of the Third Reich. The S.W.A.T. team was invented
and perfected by the Gestapo to break into the homes of the enemies of the
German people.
When the Policia Bewakken, or local police, refused to take away guns from
townsfolk, they themselves were disarmed and dragged out into the street and
shot to death by the S.A. and the S.S. Those were Nazi versions of the
B.A.T.F. and the F.B.I. When several local ministers spoke out against these
atrocities, they were imprisoned and never seen again.
The Gestapo began to confiscate and seize the homes, businesses, bank
accounts, and personal belongings of wealthy conservative citizens who had
prospered in the old Republic. Pamphleteers who urged revolt against the
Nazis were shot on site by national law enforcement and the military.
Gypsies and Jews were detained and sent to labor camps. Mountain roads
throughout central Europe were closed to prevent the escape of fugitives
into the wilderness, and to prevent the movement and concealment of partisan
resistance fighters.
Public schools rewrote history and Hitler youth groups taught the children
to report their parents to their teachers for anti-Nazi remarks. Such
parents disappeared. Pagan animism became the state religion of the Third
Reich and Christians were widely condemned as "right wing fanatics".
Millions of books were burned first and then people. Millions of them burned
in huge ovens after they were first gassed to death. Unmarried women were
paid large sums of money to have babies out of wedlock and then given medals
for it. Evil was declared as being good, and good was condemned as being
evil. World Order was coming and the German people were going to be the
"peacekeepers".
Yes, indeed, I remember the Nazis and they weren't Republicans, or "right
wing", or "patriots" or "militias". They were Socialist monsters.
-- Thomas Colton Ruthford
SupplySider
It can't be that liberals are more like nazis than conservatives because
liberals "care" and are "compassionate."
(NOTE: Readers should know that I am not implying that liberals *are* like
nazis)
The crux of the matter: Liberals wrongfully equate compassion and caring with
government expenditures and government involvement. Therefore, when anyone
attempts to reduce those expenditures or that involvement, they necessarily are
uncaring and lack compassion.
And since nazis were a pretty mean bunch (lacking care or compassion),
conservatives are necessarily nazis. Anyone familiar with logic will easily
recognize this as the fallacy of a false premise ... multiplied.
First, government expenditures and involvement does not define caring and
compassion.
Second, reducing government expenditure and involvement does not imply uncaring
or a lack of compassion
Third, and therefore, it is not necessarily the case that conservatives are
uncaring or lack compassion
Fourth, one cannot logically conclude that conservatives and nazis are
philosophical related
==========
Compassion By Any Other Name
by Mike Koller
The problem with liberals is that they can't imagine compassion in any other
form than government handouts. Thus, when a conservative talks about reducing
funding for a government program that hands out money, they immediately assume
that the conservative lacks compassion.
Well I'm here to tell you that compassion takes on many forms, most of which
have nothing to do with government. Hard working Americans freely give of their
time and money to private charitable organizations in order help those who have
come upon hard times.
If the liberals were to be believed, one would think that only by the grace of
Uncle Sam do people live. This is an insult to every American because it implies
that very few of us have compassion. This is the crux of liberalism: Don't trust
your fellow countrymen, but trust Almighty Government.
Ronald Reagan had great faith in the American people. When he reduced the top
tax rate from 70% to 50% and then again from 50% to 33%, charitable activity
doubled. In other words, when people had more money in their pockets, they
voluntarily gave more to causes which assist the less fortunate.
There is no mystery to all this. The fact is that Americans are a moral people
overflowing with compassion. If only they weren't burdened with over-taxation,
they would give even more. I am confident that if government got out of the
business of handouts and returned every single penny back to the taxpayer, that
there would be more than enough resources and compassion to fill the void.
And not only that. But private charity is much more personal and efficient than
anything government could hope to be. Private charities can and do turn lives
around. There would be no perpetual dependency because private institutions do
not have access to unlimited resources, so it is in their interest to get people
to become self-reliant.
And self-reliance is the key to overcoming the feeling of hopelessness,
helplessness, and the loss of dignity that comes from having to rely on others
to keep you fed, clothed, and housed. In other words, private charities would do
what government doesn't -- get people off the dole and get them started as a
member of the working class.
enrique
>
> But since this defies liberal beliefs, it must be history revisionism. ;-)
>
> It can't be that liberals are more like nazis than conservatives because
> liberals "care" and are "compassionate."
> (NOTE: Readers should know that I am not implying that liberals *are* like
> nazis)
>
right wing conservatives. People like Stalin, Pol Pot, Kruschev,
Breshnev and Castro are considered left wing conservatives. Right or
left wing conservatives are the same authoritarian beast with different
spots.
Conservatives are authoritarian. Liberals are not. The difference
between each one is not their politics. It is that authoritarians
choose hate and violence and liberals choose love and peace. That is
why all violent criminals from left and right, are invariably
conservative.
Loren Petrich
[the Nazis as gun controllers...]
Their real attitude was that only Real Germans and their friends
were to be allowed to have guns. It's just like the belief that prisoners
ought not to allowed to have guns; I wonder who is going to take up the
cause of the Second Amendment rights of prisoners.
In fact, one Nazi-lover here claimed that Eisenhower's armies
found whole loads of guns when they overran Germany.
Also, they were very big on patriotism, very pro-business, very
anti-union, very "pro-family", very anti-homosexual, very anti-Communist,
etc.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
pet...@netcom.com And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
enrique
> People like Hitler, Mussolini, Reagan, Helms and Lott are considered
> right wing conservatives. People like Stalin, Pol Pot, Kruschev,
> Breshnev and Castro are considered left wing conservatives. Right or
> left wing conservatives are the same authoritarian beast with different
> spots.
> Conservatives are authoritarian. Liberals are not. The difference
> between each one is not their politics. It is that authoritarians
> choose hate and violence and liberals choose love and peace. That is
> why all violent criminals from left and right, are invariably
> conservative.
I might add that the confusion over liberal-conservative and
nazi-communist ones are probably due to the misconception that
neoliberals like Clinton are purposely or accidentally labeled
"liberal".
enrique
>
> SupplySider wrote:
> >
> > But since this defies liberal beliefs, it must be history revisionism. ;-)
> >
> > It can't be that liberals are more like nazis than conservatives because
> > liberals "care" and are "compassionate."
> > (NOTE: Readers should know that I am not implying that liberals *are* like
> > nazis)
> >
> right wing conservatives. People like Stalin, Pol Pot, Kruschev,
> Breshnev and Castro are considered left wing conservatives. Right or
> left wing conservatives are the same authoritarian beast with different
> spots.
> Conservatives are authoritarian. Liberals are not. The difference
> between each one is not their politics. It is that authoritarians
> choose hate and violence and liberals choose love and peace. That is
> why all violent criminals from left and right, are invariably
> conservative.
> People like Hitler, Mussolini, Reagan, Helms and Lott are considered
> right wing conservatives. People like Stalin, Pol Pot, Kruschev,
> Breshnev and Castro are considered left wing conservatives. Right or
> left wing conservatives are the same authoritarian beast with different
> spots.
> Conservatives are authoritarian. Liberals are not. The difference
> between each one is not their politics. It is that authoritarians
> choose hate and violence and liberals choose love and peace. That is
> why all violent criminals from left and right, are invariably
> conservative.
I might add that the confusion over the liberal-conservative and
nazi-communist terms is probably due to the misconception that
Dustin Currie
Snowy wrote in message <7eqdfs$6tu$1...@news1.fast.net>...
>Washington Times - Letters to the Editor,
>June 7, 199? Thomas Colton Ruthford
>
>
>Letters to the Editor
>June 7 - Arlington, VA
>
>During the past several months in the American press, the Democrats have
>frequently denounced the Republicans as Nazis due to their attempts to
>control runaway federal spending. How very ironic. I remember the Nazis.
Let
>me share a little about them and recall some of their exploits.
>
>First of all, "Nazi" was gutter slang for the verb "to nationalize". The
>Bider-Mienhoff gang gave themselves this moniker during their early
>struggles. The official title of the Nazi Party was "The National Socialist
>Workers Party of Germany". Hitler and the Brownshirts advocated the
>nationalization of education, health care, transportation, national
>resources, manufacturing, distribution and law enforcement.
>
>Hitler came to power by turning the working class, unemployed, and academic
>elite against the conservative republic.
WRONG! Hitler came to power by SPARKING the imaginations of the people by
pushing CONSERVATIVE beliefs of national superiority. He promised to make
the country like it was, and more. This regressive promise is, by
definition conservative. Plain and simple.
Howabout this one:
ONLY in a republic form of government can such a person come to power. It
would be impossible in a democracy. Argue this!
>Millions of books were burned first and then people.
Ahh, but it's the conservatives here in the US who burn and censor books!
>Evil was declared as being good, and good was condemned as being
>evil.
Poetic bullshit.
I'm not claiming that the Right Wing is Hitler like. It's popular, yet
foolish to make these Hitler analogies. It happens all the time -- lately
Rush Limbaugh himself has been busy doing this, implicitly linking Hitler
and Clinton.
Dustin Currie
enrique wrote in message <3710DC97...@mindspring.com>...
>SupplySider wrote:
>>
>> But since this defies liberal beliefs, it must be history revisionism.
;-)
>>
>> It can't be that liberals are more like nazis than conservatives because
>> liberals "care" and are "compassionate."
>> (NOTE: Readers should know that I am not implying that liberals *are*
like
>> nazis)
>>
>right wing conservatives. People like Stalin, Pol Pot, Kruschev,
>Breshnev and Castro are considered left wing conservatives. Right or
>left wing conservatives are the same authoritarian beast with different
>spots.
> Conservatives are authoritarian. Liberals are not. The difference
>between each one is not their politics. It is that authoritarians
>choose hate and violence and liberals choose love and peace. That is
>why all violent criminals from left and right, are invariably
>conservative.
Thats quite a skewed view. By definition, conservatives are on the Right
wing. There can be no left wing conservatives. I think the word you are
searching for is left wing radical. The far far right is characterized by
authoritarianism, but the far far left are anarchists. Hardly the model of
peace and love. To claim one ideology is peaceful/good with the other as
hateful/bad is simple, misleading and incorrect. I don't even think you
can classify most criminals as from a specific political ideology, even if
you could, it's not their politics that make them criminals.
gdy52150
<Snow_...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:
>Washington Times - Letters to the Editor,
>June 7, 199? Thomas Colton Ruthford
>
too bad the Nazis were corporatists just like the republiCONs
>
>Letters to the Editor
>June 7 - Arlington, VA
>
>During the past several months in the American press, the Democrats have
>frequently denounced the Republicans as Nazis due to their attempts to
>control runaway federal spending. How very ironic. I remember the Nazis. Let
>me share a little about them and recall some of their exploits.
>
>First of all, "Nazi" was gutter slang for the verb "to nationalize". The
>Bider-Mienhoff gang gave themselves this moniker during their early
>struggles. The official title of the Nazi Party was "The National Socialist
>Workers Party of Germany". Hitler and the Brownshirts advocated the
>nationalization of education, health care, transportation, national
>resources, manufacturing, distribution and law enforcement.
>
>Hitler came to power by turning the working class, unemployed, and academic
====================================================
For those seeking Enlightenment
http://prairie.lakes.com/~gdy52150/whiterose.htm
home of "The Mr. Sam Memorial Blithering Idiot Of
The Month Award"
Do your patriotic duty and reward your favorite
cackling loon by voting today
at http://prairie.lakes.com/~gdy52150/award.html
GDY Weasel
======================================================
Yossarian
"Letters to the Moonie", you mean.
>June 7, 199? Thomas Colton Ruthford
Again? Does this blasted thing pop up once a month or what?
>Letters to the Editor
>June 7 - Arlington, VA
>
>During the past several months in the American press, the Democrats have
>frequently denounced the Republicans as Nazis due to their attempts to
>control runaway federal spending. How very ironic. I remember the Nazis.
Let
>me share a little about them and recall some of their exploits.
Wow, the dude's smoking crack. Show me one Democratic politician quoted in
any rational publication as comparing Repugs to Nazis.
>First of all, "Nazi" was gutter slang for the verb "to nationalize". The
>Bider-Mienhoff gang gave themselves this moniker during their early
>struggles. The official title of the Nazi Party was "The National Socialist
>Workers Party of Germany".
And China is the "People's Republic of China" and East Germany called itself
a democracy. A word of advice - crack kills.
>Hitler and the Brownshirts advocated the
>nationalization of education, health care, transportation, national
>resources, manufacturing, distribution and law enforcement.
*cough*bullshit*cough* Manufacturers and industrialists and retailers -
basically any business belonging to an "Aryan" had a wonderful time under
Hitler. Hell, we had plenty of our own businesses supporting him - DURING
THE WAR!
>Hitler came to power by turning the working class, unemployed, and academic
>elite against the conservative republic.
The "conservative republic" that had been propped up by center-left parties
for a decade.
>After Der Fuhrer's election ceased
>being a political conspiracy and was transformed into a fashionable social
>phenomenon, party membership was especially popular with educators,
>bureaucrats, and the press.
Who had to be members to keep their jobs. I notice this moron doesn't bring
up the numerous business people with very close ties to the Nazis.
>Being a Nazi was "politically correct".
Just like being a Christian.
>They called themselves "The Children of the New Age of World Order"
Like Nancy Reagan?
> and looked down their noses at everyone else.
Like Repuglican hypocrites?
>As Hitler acquired more power, he referred to his critics as "The Dark
>Forces of Anarchy and Hatred". Anyone who questioned Nazi high-handedness
in
>the German press was branded a "Conservative Reactionary".
Actually, they were probably labeled a "Jew-lover" or Marxist, as these were
Hitlers favorite targets.
>Joseph Goebbels, minister of communications, proclaimed a "New World
Order".
Woo-hoo. Shrub the Elder proclaimed a "thousand points of light." Ray-gun
pronounced a nap while his psychic friend proclaimed the USSR was the "evil
empire."
>The Nazi reign of terror began with false news reports on the Jews,
>Bohemians and Gypses who were said to be arming themselves to overthrow the
>"New World Order" and Hitler demanded that all good people register their
>guns so that they wouldn't fall into the hands of "terrorists and
>madmen".Right-wing fanatics of the "Old Order" who protested firearms
>registration were arrested by the S.S. and put in jail for "fomenting
hatred
>against the Government of the German people".
Proof?
>Then the Reichstag (government building) was blown up and Hitler ram-rodded
>an "Emergency Anti-Terrorist Act" through Parliament that gave the Gestapo
>extraordinary powers.
Guess who supported Hitler's power grab? Centrists and rightists. It was the
Social Democrats who were the last party to oppose Hitler.
> The leader then declared that for the well-being of
>the German people, all private firearms were to be confiscated by the
>Gestapo and the Wermotten (federal law enforcement and military). German
>citizens who refused to surrender their guns when the "jack-boots"
(Gestapo)
>came calling, were murdered in their homes.
Proof? Everything I've seen has showed that the gun acts were used only
against Jews.
>By the way, the Gestapo were the
>federal marshals' service of the Third Reich. The S.W.A.T. team was
invented
>and perfected by the Gestapo to break into the homes of the enemies of the
>German people.
What amazing hyperbole and stupidity. How are the federal marshals anything
like Hitler's private killers?
>When the Policia Bewakken, or local police, refused to take away guns from
>townsfolk, they themselves were disarmed and dragged out into the street
and
>shot to death by the S.A. and the S.S. Those were Nazi versions of the
>B.A.T.F. and the F.B.I. When several local ministers spoke out against
these
>atrocities, they were imprisoned and never seen again.
>
>The Gestapo began to confiscate and seize the homes, businesses, bank
>accounts, and personal belongings of wealthy conservative citizens who had
>prospered in the old Republic.
*cough*bullshit*cough*
<snip>
>Public schools rewrote history and Hitler youth groups taught the children
>to report their parents to their teachers for anti-Nazi remarks.
Like conservatives want to re-write history so that we didn't commit
genocidal policies against Indians? That we didn't essentially keep
minorities and women as chattel for 125 years? On and on...
> Such
>parents disappeared. Pagan animism became the state religion of the Third
>Reich and Christians were widely condemned as "right wing fanatics".
*bullshit*cough*bullshit* Hitler got on quite well with the Head
Inquisitor - I mean, the Pope.
>Millions of books were burned first and then people.
Like all then conservatives who wanted to band Steinbeck because "Grapes of
Wrath" was communist propaganda?
>Yes, indeed, I remember the Nazis and they weren't Republicans, or "right
>wing", or "patriots" or "militias". They were Socialist monsters.
Bullshit. Pure and utter bullshit. Nazis were nationalists, militarists,
meritocracists, capitalists, fascists, and a host of other
conservative -ists.
>-- Thomas Colton Ruthford
Anyone want to put out his address? I'd like to send him a critique of his
letter.
enrique
>
> enrique wrote in message <3710DC97...@mindspring.com>...
> >SupplySider wrote:
> >>
> ;-)
> >>
> >> It can't be that liberals are more like nazis than conservatives because
> >> liberals "care" and are "compassionate."
> >> (NOTE: Readers should know that I am not implying that liberals *are*
> like
> >> nazis)
> >>
> >right wing conservatives. People like Stalin, Pol Pot, Kruschev,
> >Breshnev and Castro are considered left wing conservatives. Right or
> >left wing conservatives are the same authoritarian beast with different
> >spots.
> > Conservatives are authoritarian. Liberals are not. The difference
> >between each one is not their politics. It is that authoritarians
> >choose hate and violence and liberals choose love and peace. That is
> >why all violent criminals from left and right, are invariably
> >conservative.
>
> Thats quite a skewed view. By definition, conservatives are on the Right
> wing. There can be no left wing conservatives. I think the word you are
> searching for is left wing radical. The far far right is characterized by
> authoritarianism, but the far far left are anarchists. Hardly the model of
> peace and love. To claim one ideology is peaceful/good with the other as
Authoritarians are people who use hate and violence to dominate
others. Both extreme left and right wings have had their share of
authoritarians.
Anarchists, who by definition are anti-authoritarian have been mistaken
as authoritarian bomb throwers, which is the realm of the radical right
and left wings. Please visit some of the many anarchist websites and
find out for yourself what anarchy really means.
> hateful/bad is simple, misleading and incorrect. I don't even think you
> can classify most criminals as from a specific political ideology, even if
> you could, it's not their politics that make them criminals.
Political ideologies aside, (violent) criminals are authoritarian
because they use hate and violence to dominate others. "Authoritarian"
and "conservative" are the opposite of "liberal". That makes
"conservative" and "authoritarian" one and the same.
There are however, degrees of conservatism and liberalism in each one
of us, each of which will surface at different times. Our humanist
liberal side is the side favored by Ghandi, Jesus and other humanists
who spread love and peace, and preached generosity and non-violence
toward others.
Our bestial conservative side is the side favored by frightened,
superstitious and dysfunctional people, dictators, despots and criminals
who seek to dominate others using violence and hate to satisfy their
animal greed. Their lust for money and power reflects their repressed
sexuality and their victimization at the hands of other conservatives.
Their love of phallic symbols like guns, bullets, bombs and missiles
reflect the fact that inconsiderate conservatives can't enjoy good
sexual relations with another person so they are literally out to screw
the world.
gdy52150
<dcu...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>
>Snowy wrote in message <7eqdfs$6tu$1...@news1.fast.net>...
>>Washington Times - Letters to the Editor,
>>June 7, 199? Thomas Colton Ruthford
>>
>>
>>Letters to the Editor
>>June 7 - Arlington, VA
>>
>>During the past several months in the American press, the Democrats have
>>frequently denounced the Republicans as Nazis due to their attempts to
>>control runaway federal spending. How very ironic. I remember the Nazis.
>Let
>>me share a little about them and recall some of their exploits.
>>
>>First of all, "Nazi" was gutter slang for the verb "to nationalize". The
>>Bider-Mienhoff gang gave themselves this moniker during their early
>>struggles. The official title of the Nazi Party was "The National Socialist
>>Workers Party of Germany". Hitler and the Brownshirts advocated the
>>nationalization of education, health care, transportation, national
>>resources, manufacturing, distribution and law enforcement.
>>
>>Hitler came to power by turning the working class, unemployed, and academic
>>elite against the conservative republic.
>
>
>WRONG! Hitler came to power by SPARKING the imaginations of the people by
>pushing CONSERVATIVE beliefs of national superiority. He promised to make
>the country like it was, and more. This regressive promise is, by
>definition conservative. Plain and simple.
>
>
>Howabout this one:
>
>ONLY in a republic form of government can such a person come to power. It
>would be impossible in a democracy. Argue this!
>
>
>>Millions of books were burned first and then people.
>
>Ahh, but it's the conservatives here in the US who burn and censor books!
>
>
>>Evil was declared as being good, and good was condemned as being
>>evil.
>
>Poetic bullshit.
>
>I'm not claiming that the Right Wing is Hitler like. It's popular, yet
>foolish to make these Hitler analogies. It happens all the time -- lately
>Rush Limbaugh himself has been busy doing this, implicitly linking Hitler
>and Clinton.
actually its not that foolish at all to look for Nazis among the right
wingers. Many of the right wing groups have direct links to Nazis, for
examples the "Posse" was founded by a former Silver Shirt--they were a
pro-Nazi group from the thirties, likeswise the American Security
Council founders had been members in 3 different pro Nazi groups
during the 30s. Both the Minutemen and the Klan has had Nazi
associations as has the Liberty Lobby. In fact so does Paul
Wyreich(sp).
Tricky Dick got his start in politics as a young naval officer,
when Dulles asked him to cover up the information that he was supposed
to have been investigating for the Navy. That information was captured
nazi documents concerning Konti-the Nazi oil corporation ran by
Blessing a person with extensive ties to Dulles. Raygun as well had
ties to Nazis he was a fundraiser for a front organization that helped
war criminals escape from Europe. Nixon was well aware of the war
criminals in some of the ethnic groups but thought they were useful in
getting out the vote. Once he was elected prez he formed the ethnic
heritage groups inside the republiCON party. Many of these groups are
controlled by past war criminals. ANd then there is an extensive list
of American companies that dealt with the nazis before and durning the
war.
Ted Kegebein
Only in a society where it is accepted that the Government
has that kind of power can genocide exist. And never where
the public is armed.
Ted
http://www.EagleRing.com/tour.html
Thomas Mahoney
The Kosovars didn't accept the rule of the Serbians and were trying to set up
an autononomous region but the Serbs came anyway.
It seems to me that the KLA has a lot more guns than your pea-poppers and
just what are they doing to stop the Serbian tanks?
The only thing your gun is good for is for a thief to steal it and shoot you
or some other innocent person.
Tom Mahoney
Mr. Horrible
>
> Actually, the line to the gas chambers starts on the Left.
> Only in a society where it is accepted that the Government
> has that kind of power can genocide exist. And never where
> the public is armed.
How exactly does that explain the Spanish Civil War, for example?
Mr. H
MW
Snowy wrote in message <7eqdfs$6tu$1...@news1.fast.net>...
>Washington Times - Letters to the Editor,
>June 7, 199? Thomas Colton Ruthford
>
>
>Letters to the Editor
>June 7 - Arlington, VA
>
>During the past several months in the American press, the Democrats have
>frequently denounced the Republicans as Nazis due to their attempts to
>control runaway federal spending. How very ironic. I remember the Nazis.
Let
>me share a little about them and recall some of their exploits.
>
>First of all, "Nazi" was gutter slang for the verb "to nationalize". The
>Bider-Mienhoff gang gave themselves this moniker during their early
>struggles. The official title of the Nazi Party was "The National Socialist
>Workers Party of Germany".
No -- National Socialist Democratic Workers' Party, in translation.
>Hitler and the Brownshirts advocated the
>nationalization of education, health care, transportation, national
>resources, manufacturing, distribution and law enforcement.
>
>Hitler came to power by turning the working class, unemployed, and academic
>elite against the conservative republic.
He had his greatest support among the upper class.
<snip>
>Yes, indeed, I remember the Nazis and they weren't Republicans, or "right
>wing", or "patriots" or "militias". They were Socialist monsters.
They were indeed socialists.
Andrew Manore
[A whole slew of diatribe and petty insults snipped]
> >Public schools rewrote history and Hitler youth groups taught the children
> >to report their parents to their teachers for anti-Nazi remarks.
>
> Like conservatives want to re-write history so that we didn't commit
> genocidal policies against Indians?
1.) Exactly who is this "we" you are referring to?
A.) If this "we" you refer to is the government of the United
States, post proof that the U.S. government had a written
plan for the systematic extermination of each and every
Native American on the North American continent.
2.) Post your evidence stating that conservatives wish to rewrite
history.
--
Andrew Manore http://home.earthlink.net/~manorea
E-Mail: man...@earthlink.net
PGP Keys: 0xCE209032 and 0x165DF309
"Fogger" on IRC, ICQ and The Palace
Mark Nichols
<man...@migate.net> wrote:
> Yossarian <mrwe...@tabrasa.hypermart.net> wrote in message
news:mGdQ2.1296$aW5....@news.flash.net...
>
> [A whole slew of diatribe and petty insults snipped]
>
> > >Public schools rewrote history and Hitler youth groups taught the children
> > >to report their parents to their teachers for anti-Nazi remarks.
> >
> > Like conservatives want to re-write history so that we didn't commit
> > genocidal policies against Indians?
>
> 1.) Exactly who is this "we" you are referring to?
>
> A.) If this "we" you refer to is the government of the United
> States, post proof that the U.S. government had a written
> plan for the systematic extermination of each and every
> Native American on the North American continent.
>
> 2.) Post your evidence stating that conservatives wish to rewrite
> history.
>
>
What an asshole. Proof of number one is what happened to the Native
Americans. Proof of number two is #1.
Mark
Andrew Manore
> In article <92412909...@axilla.wwnet.net>, "Andrew Manore" <man...@migate.net> wrote:
>
> > Yossarian <mrwe...@tabrasa.hypermart.net> wrote in message
> news:mGdQ2.1296$aW5....@news.flash.net...
> >
> > [A whole slew of diatribe and petty insults snipped]
> >
> > > >Public schools rewrote history and Hitler youth groups taught the children
> > > >to report their parents to their teachers for anti-Nazi remarks.
> > >
> > > Like conservatives want to re-write history so that we didn't commit
> > > genocidal policies against Indians?
> >
> > 1.) Exactly who is this "we" you are referring to?
> >
> > A.) If this "we" you refer to is the government of the United
> > States, post proof that the U.S. government had a written
> > plan for the systematic extermination of each and every
> > Native American on the North American continent.
> >
> > 2.) Post your evidence stating that conservatives wish to rewrite
> > history.
>
> What an asshole.
Ahhh. I see you're reduced to petty insults when you reach your
capacity for logical debate.
> Proof of number one is what happened to the Native Americans.
Then you won't have any trouble posing citations or references to
actual U.S. government documents declaring the intent of total and
complete extermination of every Native American, hence the
definition of the word 'genocide':
----------------------------------------------------------------
genocide (jčn´e-sěd´) noun
The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national,
racial, political, or ethnic group.
(Excerpted from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English
Language, Third Edition)
----------------------------------------------------------------
>Proof of number two is #1.
All you've done is insult me. You haven't shown me any proof of
#1a. Therefore, your argument is null and void.
David A LaRue
after reading this?
Dave
Arcata, Ca
> On Mon, 12 Apr 1999 00:39:35 -0400, enrique <ezef...@mindspring.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> > Their love of phallic symbols like guns, bullets, bombs and missiles
> >reflect the fact that inconsiderate conservatives can't enjoy good
> >sexual relations with another person so they are literally out to screw
> >the world.
>
> Who needs more therapy...the person who loves a phallic symbol, or the
> person who feels the need to take someone's phallic symbol away?
>
> Sometimes a pencil is just a pencil.
Niles K. (Nik) Mouser
Liberty wrote:
> Who is a libertarian?
>
> "A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under
> any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to
> advocate or delegate its initiation. Those who act consistently with this
> principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail
> to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they
> may claim."
Sorry Pal, I like the sentiments, but libertarian thinking is far more
diverse and deep than your little ditty. As to your classifying who is
or isn't libertarian, is downright non-libertarian :)
It isn't about force initiation. It's about enjoying yours and
respecting other's rights. To me :)
NM