A NAZI

pointing out that the guy who killed 11 Jews in a synagogue is a nazi makes me an "emotional hyperbolic child"?

You're as cynical as you Orange Leader

You are a left wing socialist...the shooter was a left wing socialist....he hated Trump, you hate Trump, he hated Israel, you hate Israel...

Look in the mirror....

Do you have proof of this??????

Where did Robert Bowers profess his admiration for Socialism, or even National Socialism (NAZISM)


P.S
You're an actual Leftist & Liberal according to classical definitions.


No...I am a Classical Liberal.... current liberals are left wing socialists...who have to hide who they are by pretending to be "Liberals."

The first Leftists were Capitalists for freedoms, and rights & the first Right-Wing were Monarchist Authoritarians for traditions.

Market Liberalism means to loosen up the regulations on the market, and Liberalism of guns means to loosen up regulations on guns.


You sound like a huge Liberal Leftist to me.

Only in really, really dumb country would ANYBODY think you were a Right-Wing Conservative.


Your stupid is showing..... better tuck that back in...

Nazis fit like 95% with the Right-Wing / Conservatives
&
You fit like 95% with the Left-Wing / Liberals.


Here's proof.

The First Leftists were Capitalists.
I made such a thread.

First Leftists were Capitalists.


Here's MORE.

Left–right political spectrum - Wikipedia

Generally, the left-wing is characterized by an emphasis on "ideas such as freedom, equality, fraternity, rights, progress, reform and internationalism", while the right-wing is characterized by an emphasis on "notions such as authority, hierarchy, order, duty, tradition, reaction and nationalism".[14]


5 May 1789, opening of the Estates-General in Versailles in 1789, as the conservatives sat on the right
The political term right-wing was first used during the French Revolution, when liberal deputies of the Third Estategenerally sat to the left of the president's chair, a custom that began in the Estates General of 1789. The nobility, members of the Second Estate, generally sat to the right. In the successive legislative assemblies, monarchists who supported the Old Regime were commonly referred to as rightists because they sat on the right side. A major figure on the right was Joseph de Maistre, who argued for an authoritarian form of conservatism. Throughout the 19th century, the main line dividing Left and Right in France was between supporters of the republic (often secularists) and supporters of the monarchy (often Catholics).[18] On the right, the Legitimists and Ultra-royalists held counter-revolutionary views, while the Orléanists hoped to create a constitutional monarchy under their preferred branch of the royal family, a brief reality after the 1830 July Revolution. The centre-right Gaullists in post-World War II France advocated considerable social spending on education and infrastructure development as well as extensive economic regulation, but limited the wealth redistribution measures characteristic of social democracy.[citation needed]

Left–right political spectrum - Wikipedia

Here's more CLASSICAL definitions.

Right-wing politics - Wikipedia

Right-wing politics hold that certain social orders and hierarchies are inevitable, natural, normal or desirable,[1][2][3] typically supporting this position on the basis of natural law, economics or tradition.[4]:p. 693, 721[5][6][7][8][9] Hierarchy and inequality may be viewed as natural results of traditional social differences[10][11] or the competition in market economies.[12][13] The term right-wing can generally refer to "the conservative or reactionary section of a political party or system".[14]

The political terms "Left" and "Right" were first used during the French Revolution (1789–1799) and referred to seating arrangements in the French parliament: those who sat to the right of the chair of the parliamentary president were broadly supportive of the institutions of the monarchist Old Regime.[15][16][17][18] The original Right in France was formed as a reaction against the "Left" and comprised those politicians supporting hierarchy, tradition and clericalism.[4]:693 The use of the expression la droite ("the right") became prominent in France after the restoration of the monarchy in 1815, when it was applied to the Ultra-royalists.[19] The people of English-speaking countries did not apply the terms "right" and "left" to their own politics until the 20th century.[20]
 
You are a left wing socialist...the shooter was a left wing socialist....he hated Trump, you hate Trump, he hated Israel, you hate Israel...

Look in the mirror....

Do you have proof of this??????

Where did Robert Bowers profess his admiration for Socialism, or even National Socialism (NAZISM)


P.S
You're an actual Leftist & Liberal according to classical definitions.


No...I am a Classical Liberal.... current liberals are left wing socialists...who have to hide who they are by pretending to be "Liberals."

The first Leftists were Capitalists for freedoms, and rights & the first Right-Wing were Monarchist Authoritarians for traditions.

Market Liberalism means to loosen up the regulations on the market, and Liberalism of guns means to loosen up regulations on guns.


You sound like a huge Liberal Leftist to me.

Only in really, really dumb country would ANYBODY think you were a Right-Wing Conservative.


Your stupid is showing..... better tuck that back in...

Nazis fit like 95% with the Right-Wing / Conservatives
&
You fit like 95% with the Left-Wing / Liberals.


Here's proof.

The First Leftists were Capitalists.
I made such a thread.

First Leftists were Capitalists.


Here's MORE.

Right-wing politics - Wikipedia

Generally, the left-wing is characterized by an emphasis on "ideas such as freedom, equality, fraternity, rights, progress, reform and internationalism", while the right-wing is characterized by an emphasis on "notions such as authority, hierarchy, order, duty, tradition, reaction and nationalism".[14]


5 May 1789, opening of the Estates-General in Versailles in 1789, as the conservatives sat on the right
The political term right-wing was first used during the French Revolution, when liberal deputies of the Third Estategenerally sat to the left of the president's chair, a custom that began in the Estates General of 1789. The nobility, members of the Second Estate, generally sat to the right. In the successive legislative assemblies, monarchists who supported the Old Regime were commonly referred to as rightists because they sat on the right side. A major figure on the right was Joseph de Maistre, who argued for an authoritarian form of conservatism. Throughout the 19th century, the main line dividing Left and Right in France was between supporters of the republic (often secularists) and supporters of the monarchy (often Catholics).[18] On the right, the Legitimists and Ultra-royalists held counter-revolutionary views, while the Orléanists hoped to create a constitutional monarchy under their preferred branch of the royal family, a brief reality after the 1830 July Revolution. The centre-right Gaullists in post-World War II France advocated considerable social spending on education and infrastructure development as well as extensive economic regulation, but limited the wealth redistribution measures characteristic of social democracy.[citation needed]

Right-wing politics - Wikipedia

Here's more CLASSICAL definitions.

Right-wing politics - Wikipedia

Right-wing politics hold that certain social orders and hierarchies are inevitable, natural, normal or desirable,[1][2][3] typically supporting this position on the basis of natural law, economics or tradition.[4]:p. 693, 721[5][6][7][8][9] Hierarchy and inequality may be viewed as natural results of traditional social differences[10][11] or the competition in market economies.[12][13] The term right-wing can generally refer to "the conservative or reactionary section of a political party or system".[14]

The political terms "Left" and "Right" were first used during the French Revolution (1789–1799) and referred to seating arrangements in the French parliament: those who sat to the right of the chair of the parliamentary president were broadly supportive of the institutions of the monarchist Old Regime.[15][16][17][18] The original Right in France was formed as a reaction against the "Left" and comprised those politicians supporting hierarchy, tradition and clericalism.[4]:693 The use of the expression la droite ("the right") became prominent in France after the restoration of the monarchy in 1815, when it was applied to the Ultra-royalists.[19] The people of English-speaking countries did not apply the terms "right" and "left" to their own politics until the 20th century.[20]


You are confusing the European Right with the American Right.....you are wrong....

nasism is Socialism...the exact opposite of the Conservative/Right in America....

Nazism is Socialism -- F A Hayek, et al

One of the main reasons why the socialist character of National Socialism has been quite generally unrecognized, is, no doubt, its alliance with the nationalist groups which represent the great industries and the great landowners. But this merely proves that these groups too -as they have since learnt to their bitter disappointment -have, at least partly, been mistaken as to the nature of the movement. But only partly because -and this is the most characteristic feature of modern Germany – many capitalists are themselves strongly influenced by socialistic ideas, and have not sufficient belief in capitalism to defend it with a clear conscience. But, in spite of this, the German entrepreneur class have manifested almost incredible short-sightedness in allying themselves with a move movement of whose strong anti-capitalistic tendencies there should never have been any doubt.

A careful observer must always have been aware that the opposition of the Nazis to the established socialist parties, which gained them the sympathy of the entrepreneur, was only to a very small extend directed against their economic policy. What the Nazis mainly objected to was their internationalism and all the aspects of their cultural programme which were still influenced by liberal ideas. But the accusations against the social-democrats and the communists which were most effective in their propaganda were not so much directed against their programme as against their supposed practice -their corruption and nepotism, and even their alleged alliance with “the golden International of Jewish Capitalism.”

It would, indeed, hardly have been possible for the Nationalists to advance fundamental objections to the economic policy of the other socialist parties when their own published programme differed from these only in that its socialism was much cruder and less rational. The famous 25 points drawn up by Herr Feder,[2] one of Hitler’s early allies, repeatedly endorsed by Hitler and recognized by the by-laws of the National-Socialist party as the immutable basis of all its actions, which together with an extensive commentary is circulating throughout Germany in many hundreds of thousands of copies, is full of ideas resembling those of the early socialists. But the dominant feature is a fierce hatred of anything capitalistic -individualistic profit seeking, large scale enterprise, banks, joint-stock companies, department stores, “international finance and loan capital,” the system of “interest slavery” in general; the abolition of these is described as the “[indecipherable] of the programme, around which everything else turns.” It was to this programme that the masses of the German people, who were already completely under the influence of collectivist ideas, responded so enthusiastically.

That this violent anti-capitalistic attack is genuine – and not a mere piece of propaganda – becomes as clear from the personal history of the intellectual leaders of the movement as from the general milieu from which it springs. It is not even denied that man of the young men who today play a prominent part in it have previously been communists or socialists. And to any observer of the literary tendencies which made the Germans intelligentsia ready to join the ranks of the new party, it must be clear that the common characteristic of all the politically influential writers – in many cases free from definite party affiliations – was their anti-liberal and anti-capitalist trend. Groups like that formed around the review “Die Tat” have made the phrase “the end of capitalism” an accepted dogma to most young Germans.[3]

And more...

The Myth of "Nazi Capitalism" | Chris Calton

German socialism, as Mises defines it, differs from what he called “socialism of the Russian pattern” in that “it, seemingly and nominally, maintains private ownership of the means of production, entrepreneurship, and market exchange.” However, this is only a superficial system of private ownership because through a complete system of economic intervention and control, the entrepreneurial function of the property owners is completely controlled by the State. By this, Mises means that shop owners do not speculate about future events for the purpose of allocating resources in the pursuit of profits. Just like in the Soviet Union, this entrepreneurial speculation and resource allocation is done by a single entity, the State, and economic calculation is thus impossible.

“In Nazi Germany,” Mises tells us, the property owners “were called shop managers or Betriebsführer. The government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham. As all prices, wages and interest rates are fixed by the authority, they are prices, wages and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the authoritarian orders determining each citizen’s income, consumption and standard of living. The authority, not the consumers, directs production. The central board of production management is supreme; all citizens are nothing else but civil servants. This is socialism with the outward appearance of capitalism. Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify here something entirely different from what they mean in the market econ
 
I hadn't heard that. Sounds believable. Link?
It’s been all over the news with video clips.. Trump complained about this murderer and bomber saying they stopped his momentum.

Yeah, already covered deanie. Thanks. Thing is, I've been busy having a life and missed it, not to mention the fact that I really am sick of the words spewing forth from Trump's pie hole...
 
Walked into a House of Worship and killed 11 members of that synagogue and shot four law enforcement officers...and our "President" was upset NOT that this horrific event occurred...but that it upset his political momentum!

Are ya kidding?

WTF

Here we have the malevolent trying but failing to put the odius on the person of his worst fear. Go crawl back under your bed
scardy cat. Whimper a little louder mommy might hear you.
 
Do you have proof of this??????

Where did Robert Bowers profess his admiration for Socialism, or even National Socialism (NAZISM)


P.S
You're an actual Leftist & Liberal according to classical definitions.


No...I am a Classical Liberal.... current liberals are left wing socialists...who have to hide who they are by pretending to be "Liberals."

The first Leftists were Capitalists for freedoms, and rights & the first Right-Wing were Monarchist Authoritarians for traditions.

Market Liberalism means to loosen up the regulations on the market, and Liberalism of guns means to loosen up regulations on guns.


You sound like a huge Liberal Leftist to me.

Only in really, really dumb country would ANYBODY think you were a Right-Wing Conservative.


Your stupid is showing..... better tuck that back in...

Nazis fit like 95% with the Right-Wing / Conservatives
&
You fit like 95% with the Left-Wing / Liberals.


Here's proof.

The First Leftists were Capitalists.
I made such a thread.

First Leftists were Capitalists.


Here's MORE.

Right-wing politics - Wikipedia

Generally, the left-wing is characterized by an emphasis on "ideas such as freedom, equality, fraternity, rights, progress, reform and internationalism", while the right-wing is characterized by an emphasis on "notions such as authority, hierarchy, order, duty, tradition, reaction and nationalism".[14]


5 May 1789, opening of the Estates-General in Versailles in 1789, as the conservatives sat on the right
The political term right-wing was first used during the French Revolution, when liberal deputies of the Third Estategenerally sat to the left of the president's chair, a custom that began in the Estates General of 1789. The nobility, members of the Second Estate, generally sat to the right. In the successive legislative assemblies, monarchists who supported the Old Regime were commonly referred to as rightists because they sat on the right side. A major figure on the right was Joseph de Maistre, who argued for an authoritarian form of conservatism. Throughout the 19th century, the main line dividing Left and Right in France was between supporters of the republic (often secularists) and supporters of the monarchy (often Catholics).[18] On the right, the Legitimists and Ultra-royalists held counter-revolutionary views, while the Orléanists hoped to create a constitutional monarchy under their preferred branch of the royal family, a brief reality after the 1830 July Revolution. The centre-right Gaullists in post-World War II France advocated considerable social spending on education and infrastructure development as well as extensive economic regulation, but limited the wealth redistribution measures characteristic of social democracy.[citation needed]

Right-wing politics - Wikipedia

Here's more CLASSICAL definitions.

Right-wing politics - Wikipedia

Right-wing politics hold that certain social orders and hierarchies are inevitable, natural, normal or desirable,[1][2][3] typically supporting this position on the basis of natural law, economics or tradition.[4]:p. 693, 721[5][6][7][8][9] Hierarchy and inequality may be viewed as natural results of traditional social differences[10][11] or the competition in market economies.[12][13] The term right-wing can generally refer to "the conservative or reactionary section of a political party or system".[14]

The political terms "Left" and "Right" were first used during the French Revolution (1789–1799) and referred to seating arrangements in the French parliament: those who sat to the right of the chair of the parliamentary president were broadly supportive of the institutions of the monarchist Old Regime.[15][16][17][18] The original Right in France was formed as a reaction against the "Left" and comprised those politicians supporting hierarchy, tradition and clericalism.[4]:693 The use of the expression la droite ("the right") became prominent in France after the restoration of the monarchy in 1815, when it was applied to the Ultra-royalists.[19] The people of English-speaking countries did not apply the terms "right" and "left" to their own politics until the 20th century.[20]


You are confusing the European Right with the American Right.....you are wrong....

nasism is Socialism...the exact opposite of the Conservative/Right in America....

Nazism is Socialism -- F A Hayek, et al

One of the main reasons why the socialist character of National Socialism has been quite generally unrecognized, is, no doubt, its alliance with the nationalist groups which represent the great industries and the great landowners. But this merely proves that these groups too -as they have since learnt to their bitter disappointment -have, at least partly, been mistaken as to the nature of the movement. But only partly because -and this is the most characteristic feature of modern Germany – many capitalists are themselves strongly influenced by socialistic ideas, and have not sufficient belief in capitalism to defend it with a clear conscience. But, in spite of this, the German entrepreneur class have manifested almost incredible short-sightedness in allying themselves with a move movement of whose strong anti-capitalistic tendencies there should never have been any doubt.

A careful observer must always have been aware that the opposition of the Nazis to the established socialist parties, which gained them the sympathy of the entrepreneur, was only to a very small extend directed against their economic policy. What the Nazis mainly objected to was their internationalism and all the aspects of their cultural programme which were still influenced by liberal ideas. But the accusations against the social-democrats and the communists which were most effective in their propaganda were not so much directed against their programme as against their supposed practice -their corruption and nepotism, and even their alleged alliance with “the golden International of Jewish Capitalism.”

It would, indeed, hardly have been possible for the Nationalists to advance fundamental objections to the economic policy of the other socialist parties when their own published programme differed from these only in that its socialism was much cruder and less rational. The famous 25 points drawn up by Herr Feder,[2] one of Hitler’s early allies, repeatedly endorsed by Hitler and recognized by the by-laws of the National-Socialist party as the immutable basis of all its actions, which together with an extensive commentary is circulating throughout Germany in many hundreds of thousands of copies, is full of ideas resembling those of the early socialists. But the dominant feature is a fierce hatred of anything capitalistic -individualistic profit seeking, large scale enterprise, banks, joint-stock companies, department stores, “international finance and loan capital,” the system of “interest slavery” in general; the abolition of these is described as the “[indecipherable] of the programme, around which everything else turns.” It was to this programme that the masses of the German people, who were already completely under the influence of collectivist ideas, responded so enthusiastically.

That this violent anti-capitalistic attack is genuine – and not a mere piece of propaganda – becomes as clear from the personal history of the intellectual leaders of the movement as from the general milieu from which it springs. It is not even denied that man of the young men who today play a prominent part in it have previously been communists or socialists. And to any observer of the literary tendencies which made the Germans intelligentsia ready to join the ranks of the new party, it must be clear that the common characteristic of all the politically influential writers – in many cases free from definite party affiliations – was their anti-liberal and anti-capitalist trend. Groups like that formed around the review “Die Tat” have made the phrase “the end of capitalism” an accepted dogma to most young Germans.[3]

And more...

The Myth of "Nazi Capitalism" | Chris Calton

German socialism, as Mises defines it, differs from what he called “socialism of the Russian pattern” in that “it, seemingly and nominally, maintains private ownership of the means of production, entrepreneurship, and market exchange.” However, this is only a superficial system of private ownership because through a complete system of economic intervention and control, the entrepreneurial function of the property owners is completely controlled by the State. By this, Mises means that shop owners do not speculate about future events for the purpose of allocating resources in the pursuit of profits. Just like in the Soviet Union, this entrepreneurial speculation and resource allocation is done by a single entity, the State, and economic calculation is thus impossible.

“In Nazi Germany,” Mises tells us, the property owners “were called shop managers or Betriebsführer. The government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham. As all prices, wages and interest rates are fixed by the authority, they are prices, wages and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the authoritarian orders determining each citizen’s income, consumption and standard of living. The authority, not the consumers, directs production. The central board of production management is supreme; all citizens are nothing else but civil servants. This is socialism with the outward appearance of capitalism. Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify here something entirely different from what they mean in the market econ

The definitions come from Europe, France to be exact.

Europeans are STILL using the definitions more, or less in tact.

Nazis are in fact Right-Wing, the Far-Right actually.

The problem is Americans are really THAT Stupid, that they'd flip politics upside down from it's original meaning & definiton, and
STILL get political implementation WRONG.

As I also pointed out, many dopey Republicans consider themselves as Capitalist & Nationalists.

As I made in another thread, Capitalism is incompatible with Nationalism.

Capitalism & Nationalism incompatible.

I also made in another thread, about Poland getting a lot more Diverse under Capitalism.

Poland: Diversity by Capitalism.

Europeans get things right more often than Americans when it comes to politics.
 
s there an actual proof that Bowers was an actual Nazi, AKA a person who loves Hitler?????????????????

If he did support Hitler, and wore Swastikas I'm sure THE MEDIA would have a frigging field day.

Now, I'm anti-Nazi, and anti-Bowers, and anti-Hitler.

It's JUST, the Left's shrieking Nazi, chimp chimp, Nazi, chimp, chimp, Nazi, chimp, chimp, Nazi.......... Is getting old & tired.

Just because you don't like someone doesn't automatically make them a Nazi.

Good for you. Not even close to the point of the thread

But for the record...when you massacre Jews BECAUSE they are Jews...you're a NAZI
 
s there an actual proof that Bowers was an actual Nazi, AKA a person who loves Hitler?????????????????

If he did support Hitler, and wore Swastikas I'm sure THE MEDIA would have a frigging field day.

Now, I'm anti-Nazi, and anti-Bowers, and anti-Hitler.

It's JUST, the Left's shrieking Nazi, chimp chimp, Nazi, chimp, chimp, Nazi, chimp, chimp, Nazi.......... Is getting old & tired.

Just because you don't like someone doesn't automatically make them a Nazi.

But for the record...when you massacre Jews BECAUSE they are Jews...you're a NAZI

Uh, Jews were massacred LONG before Nazis existed, so how can it automatically be Nazism?????????
 
Trump Calls for Unity After Synagogue Shooting, Then Swiftly Denounces Democrats

Or something.

  • Oct. 27, 2018
MURPHYSBORO, Ill. — President Trump said on Saturday that “the hearts of all Americans are filled with grief” after a mass shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue left at least 11 people dead, and he called on the country to combat hate crimes together.

“It will require all of us working together to extract the hateful poison of anti-Semitism,” Mr. Trump said to a rally crowd here at an airplane hangar in rural Illinois. “The scourge of anti-Semitism can’t be ignored.”
 
What is your intent with this thread?

To mourn the dead? Or to score a partisan point against your enemy?


HOw is what you are doing any different than what you are complaining about?
I'm thinking the point is to express irritation with the self centered selfishness of Cheeto Jesus.

Surely you don't deny that.


By emulating it?
 
Walked into a House of Worship and killed 11 members of that synagogue and shot four law enforcement officers...and our "President" was upset NOT that this horrific event occurred...but that it upset his political momentum!

Are ya kidding?

WTF
Wow. A progressive socialist did what?
 
Is that the freaking best the crazy left can get outraged about? President Trump is Israel's best friend after neo-nazi Barry Sotoro Hussein insulted Prime Minister Netanyaho every chance he got. Nazi lefties were outraged that the U.S. moved the embassy to Jerusalem but they stopped talking about it after one of their own murdered 11 Jews.
 
Of course this is no big deal...to Trumpers.

They think like Trump
 
AR-15s kill fewer people than lawn mowers do you moron..

Take a lawn mower to a school and see how many kids die

Moron


No...you are the moron...you want AR-15 rifles banned because of emotion, not truth or facts...it is a fact that lawn mowers kill more people every single year than AR-15s do in mass public shootings....it is a fact that there are over 8 million AR-15 rifles in private hands and that every single year, knives, bare hands and clubs kill more people than AR-15 rifles do..

Following your logic, lawn mowers, knives, clubs and empty hands need to be banned.
 
What is your intent with this thread?

To mourn the dead? Or to score a partisan point against your enemy?


HOw is what you are doing any different than what you are complaining about?
I'm thinking the point is to express irritation with the self centered selfishness of Cheeto Jesus.

Surely you don't deny that.


By emulating it?
In what way is the OP self centered and selfish?
 
What is your intent with this thread?

To mourn the dead? Or to score a partisan point against your enemy?


HOw is what you are doing any different than what you are complaining about?
I'm thinking the point is to express irritation with the self centered selfishness of Cheeto Jesus.

Surely you don't deny that.


By emulating it?
In what way is the OP self centered and selfish?


He looked at this carnage and his thought was how to turn it to partisan advantage.


That is selfish.
 

Forum List

Back
Top