American Nazis In Mufti

[owebo]

I think Fascist is the wrong term, but they are radical. Fascists is per definition right wingers

No, that's what they tell you LWNJs so you don't feel bad being fascists....

 

[Eloy]

2. The Fascist element in Liberals can be seen in the way they work, tirelessly, to shut down free speech and free thought.
A particularly poignant case is Liberals no longer allowing grandparents to see/speak to their grandchildren if the grandparent voted for Trump. ...

Liberals do not believe in stifling free speech in the way Donald Trump wanted anyone who heckled him at one of his rallies to be taken out and get punched in the face.
The example you give is a private family matter.

 

[owebo]

2. The Fascist element in Liberals can be seen in the way they work, tirelessly, to shut down free speech and free thought.
A particularly poignant case is Liberals no longer allowing grandparents to see/speak to their grandchildren if the grandparent voted for Trump. ...

Liberals do not believe in stifling free speech in the way Donald Trump wanted anyone who heckled him at one of his rallies to be taken out and get punched in the face.
The example you give is a private family matter.

You mean like how you fascist liberals attacked his political speeches?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

2. The Fascist element in Liberals can be seen in the way they work, tirelessly, to shut down free speech and free thought.
A particularly poignant case is Liberals no longer allowing grandparents to see/speak to their grandchildren if the grandparent voted for Trump. ...

Liberals do not believe in stifling free speech in the way Donald Trump wanted anyone who heckled him at one of his rallies to be taken out and get punched in the face.
The example you give is a private family matter.

You mean like how you fascist liberals attacked his political speeches?

Are people not allowed to protest against Mr Trump ?

 

[owebo]

2. The Fascist element in Liberals can be seen in the way they work, tirelessly, to shut down free speech and free thought.
A particularly poignant case is Liberals no longer allowing grandparents to see/speak to their grandchildren if the grandparent voted for Trump. ...

Liberals do not believe in stifling free speech in the way Donald Trump wanted anyone who heckled him at one of his rallies to be taken out and get punched in the face.
The example you give is a private family matter.

You mean like how you fascist liberals attacked his political speeches?

Are people not allowed to protest against Mr Trump ?

Sure are!!!!

They however are not allowed to be paid by democrat operatives to insight violence and terrorism upon innocent people....

See the difference?

 

[Theowl32]

1. If you're not familiar with the term, mufti....'Mufti, or civies/civvies (slang for "civilian attire"), refers to plain or ordinary clothes' is the reason one may not recognize Fascists and Nazis of the following sort ...until they open their mouths....

2. The Fascist element in Liberals can be seen in the way they work, tirelessly, to shut down free speech and free thought.
A particularly poignant case is Liberals no longer allowing grandparents to see/speak to their grandchildren if the grandparent voted for Trump.

3. "Look, I’m no stranger to disagreeing with relatives about politics. And that’s partly why I was so shocked to read this. Sure, some are truly upset now in light of this election’s result (welcome to how some of us felt in 2008 and 2012!), and maybe people will take different actions in the end.

But right now, at least some liberals are considering literally ending ties with relatives—including not letting grandparents see their grandkids!—over a vote for Trump. And that’s not just these two commenters. On a different Jezebel post, commenters discussed unfriending people on Facebook who supported Trump. “ImmortalAgnes” wrote:

'I also deleted everyone who supported Trump from FB. Thankfully, it wasn’t that many people. Unfortunately, it included my step-dad. I don’t think these people don’t get it – I think they don’t care. I think that to take rights from women, from people of color, from the LGBT+ community, from non-Christians is what they want.

I love my step-dad. But I cannot stand by and pretend like he didn’t just proudly support racism and misogyny. I will not be speaking to him. I will not be seeing him." The Shocking Intolerance of Anti-Trump Liberals



4. Get that?
Not debate, explain, clarify, inform....
Simply make certain that differing opinions are not to be heard.
Over and over....it is an integral part of the 'Shameful Six'...
Communists, Fascists, Nazis, Liberals, Progressives, and Socialist.

More than un-American: dangerous and abhorrent.



5. "Again: What? What are the rights that supposedly Trump is going to take away? We’ve been living in a country where, as The Weekly Standard’s Mark Hemingway tweeted, “Obama did sue nuns over birth control for crying out loud,” where religious bakers and florists have been told they have to participate in same-sex weddings, where an African-American fire chief lost his job over a book he wrote about his religious beliefs that included passages on same-sex marriage, and yet, the real threat to rights is from Trump?"
The Shocking Intolerance of Anti-Trump Liberals

How's it feel to be on the receiving end of things this time. Same thing happened over Obama in 2008 and still continues to this day. While I don't mind someone talking disparingly, I do draw the line in the suggesting that OUR President needs to be Assassinated. And I let them know I didn't care for it. I served under many Presidents in the Military. Whether I liked them or not, they were MY President and if someone were plotting to assassinate them I would take any and all actions to stop them. I served under 6 presidents and NO ONE threatens the President. There were more than a few that all of a sudden started almost screaming LIBERAL at me to the point I just walked away. To this day, those close friends are not on my list of friends or even acquaintances. But it was their choice, not mine.

I am a Progressive Conservative ALA Eisenhower and Teddy R. You know, what the GOP was founded on and stayed until about 1980.

Yeah, and if that president targets American citizens? How about violating the constitution?

Where in that oath does it say a military person is suppose to defend a president who openly and deliberately violates the constitution?

Want to know the ways this American hating president who hates the constitution since it was written by.....SLAAAAVE OWWWWNERS?

1. Disregarded 1996 welfare reform law in granting broad work waivers for work requirements of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF).

2. Implemented portions of the DREAM Act, which Congress rejected, by executive action.

3. Ended some terror asylum restrictions, by allowing asylum for people who provided only “insignificant” or “limited” material support of terrorists.

4. Allowed immigrants in the U.S. illegally, who are relatives of military troops and veterans, to stay in the country and get legal status.

5. Extended federal marriage benefits by recognizing, under federal law, same-sex marriages created in a state that allows same-sex marriage even if the couple is living in a state that doesn’t recognize same-sex marriage.

6. Recognized same-sex marriage in Utah, even though the Supreme Court stayed the court order recognizing same-sex marriage in Utah and Utah said it would not recognize same-sex marriages performed before the stay.


7. Refused to prosecute violation of drug laws with certain mandatory minimums.

8. Issued signing statements, refusing to enforce parts of congressional-enacted statutes.

9. Illegally refused to act on Yucca Mountain’s application to become a nuclear waste repository.

10. Falsely portrayed the Benghazi terrorist attack as a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim YouTube video, and then lied about the White House’s involvement.

11 Illegally revealed the existence of sealed indictments in the Benghazi investigation.

12. Failed to enforce the Magnitsky Act as required by law, by not adding Russian human rights abusers to a list of people not permitted to travel to or do business in the U.S.

13. Killed four Americans overseas in counterterrorism operations without judicial process.

14. Continued to give Egypt aid after the military took over its government, even though federal law prohibits aid to Egypt in the event of a coup.

15. Granted a “hardship” exemption from the individual mandate for people whose health plans were canceled because their plans weren’t Obamacare compliant.

16. Delayed the individual mandate for two years.

17. Allowed individuals to buy health insurance plans in 2014 that did not comply with Obama
care. Extended this delay until 2016—past the mid-term elections.

18. Extended the deadline to enroll in Obamacare.

19. Illegally granted businesses a waiver from Obamacare’s employer mandate. Twice.

20. Illegally continued the Obamacare employer contribution for congressional staffs.
A List of Obama’s Constitutional Violations

I have a lot more of those violations. That is just 20 of them. Let me know if you want to me to provide more.

Tell me again about the oath you claim to have upheld. Especially about that term domestic enemies. You feel our president is a king or an emperor?

Please God, do not tell you felt that way for 40 years. One thing to disagree with policies. That is not the same as violations.

What is your stance on the skinny snake using the IRS to target citizens?

I hope you do not give me left wing double talk.

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[Eloy]

2. The Fascist element in Liberals can be seen in the way they work, tirelessly, to shut down free speech and free thought.
A particularly poignant case is Liberals no longer allowing grandparents to see/speak to their grandchildren if the grandparent voted for Trump. ...

Liberals do not believe in stifling free speech in the way Donald Trump wanted anyone who heckled him at one of his rallies to be taken out and get punched in the face.
The example you give is a private family matter.

You mean like how you fascist liberals attacked his political speeches?

Are people not allowed to protest against Mr Trump ?

Sure are!!!!

They however are not allowed to be paid by democrat operatives to insight violence and terrorism upon innocent people....

See the difference?

Not really.
You mean when Donald Trump tells his mob to punch a citizen in the face this is not provoking violence???
Sorry, I don't get it.

 

[owebo]

2. The Fascist element in Liberals can be seen in the way they work, tirelessly, to shut down free speech and free thought.
A particularly poignant case is Liberals no longer allowing grandparents to see/speak to their grandchildren if the grandparent voted for Trump. ...

Liberals do not believe in stifling free speech in the way Donald Trump wanted anyone who heckled him at one of his rallies to be taken out and get punched in the face.
The example you give is a private family matter.

You mean like how you fascist liberals attacked his political speeches?

Are people not allowed to protest against Mr Trump ?

Sure are!!!!

They however are not allowed to be paid by democrat operatives to insight violence and terrorism upon innocent people....

See the difference?

Not really.
You mean when Donald Trump tells his mob to punch a citizen in the face this is not provoking violence???
Sorry, I don't get it.

No one thinks you get it....you paid for it......

 

[Tommy Tainant]

2. The Fascist element in Liberals can be seen in the way they work, tirelessly, to shut down free speech and free thought.
A particularly poignant case is Liberals no longer allowing grandparents to see/speak to their grandchildren if the grandparent voted for Trump. ...

Liberals do not believe in stifling free speech in the way Donald Trump wanted anyone who heckled him at one of his rallies to be taken out and get punched in the face.
The example you give is a private family matter.

You mean like how you fascist liberals attacked his political speeches?

Are people not allowed to protest against Mr Trump ?

Sure are!!!!

They however are not allowed to be paid by democrat operatives to insight violence and terrorism upon innocent people....

See the difference?

Not really.
You mean when Donald Trump tells his mob to punch a citizen in the face this is not provoking violence???
Sorry, I don't get it.

He even offered to pay their legal costs I understand.

 

[owebo]

Liberals do not believe in stifling free speech in the way Donald Trump wanted anyone who heckled him at one of his rallies to be taken out and get punched in the face.
The example you give is a private family matter.

You mean like how you fascist liberals attacked his political speeches?

Are people not allowed to protest against Mr Trump ?

Sure are!!!!

They however are not allowed to be paid by democrat operatives to insight violence and terrorism upon innocent people....

See the difference?

Not really.
You mean when Donald Trump tells his mob to punch a citizen in the face this is not provoking violence???
Sorry, I don't get it.

He even offered to pay their legal costs I understand.

We know you do snowflake....

 

[eagle1462010]

Liberals do not believe in stifling free speech in the way Donald Trump wanted anyone who heckled him at one of his rallies to be taken out and get punched in the face.
The example you give is a private family matter.

You mean like how you fascist liberals attacked his political speeches?

Are people not allowed to protest against Mr Trump ?

Sure are!!!!

They however are not allowed to be paid by democrat operatives to insight violence and terrorism upon innocent people....

See the difference?

Not really.
You mean when Donald Trump tells his mob to punch a citizen in the face this is not provoking violence???
Sorry, I don't get it.

He even offered to pay their legal costs I understand.

Yes he did.

So What...........That clown went in their to shout out BS and DISRUPT the Rally........so he would piss someone off to get hit............He instigated the BS. Just like MoveOn paid protesters to disrupt rallies and caused violence only to say it was those their for the Rally that started it. They later bragged about shutting down the Rally.

It is those types that are at fault for trying to violate the Constitutional Rights of Others. It is those that sparked the violence across this nation who want to blame others for getting TIRED OF THEIR CRAP.

Someone jumps in your face and calls you a Fascist, Hitler all the time and then try to sell the talking point of how the guy who puts them on their ASS is the problem.

Respect others views and protest all you want but do not get in their faces and PROVOKE A RESPONSE then they are the problem.

Sorry, if you keep getting in my face and threatening me I'm gonna put you on your ass and not lose a minutes sleep over it.

 

[eagle1462010]

Soros Funded MoveOn.org Takes Credit for Violence in Chicago

Ilya Sheyman, a failed Illinois contender for Congress and the executive director of MoveOn.org Political Action, has taken credit for the violence at a cancelled Trump event last night in Chicago. He promised similar violence and disruption will occur at future Trump political events leading up to the election.

The group acts as a front for wealthy Democrats. It was founded with the help of the financier George Soros who donated $1.46 million to get the organization rolling. Linda Pritzker of the Hyatt hotel family gave the group a $4 million donation.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

You mean like how you fascist liberals attacked his political speeches?

Are people not allowed to protest against Mr Trump ?

Sure are!!!!

They however are not allowed to be paid by democrat operatives to insight violence and terrorism upon innocent people....

See the difference?

Not really.
You mean when Donald Trump tells his mob to punch a citizen in the face this is not provoking violence???
Sorry, I don't get it.

He even offered to pay their legal costs I understand.

Yes he did.

So What...........That clown went in their to shout out BS and DISRUPT the Rally........so he would piss someone off to get hit............He instigated the BS. Just like MoveOn paid protesters to disrupt rallies and caused violence only to say it was those their for the Rally that started it. They later bragged about shutting down the Rally.

It is those types that are at fault for trying to violate the Constitutional Rights of Others. It is those that sparked the violence across this nation who want to blame others for getting TIRED OF THEIR CRAP.

Someone jumps in your face and calls you a Fascist, Hitler all the time and then try to sell the talking point of how the guy who puts them on their ASS is the problem.

Respect others views and protest all you want but do not get in their faces and PROVOKE A RESPONSE then they are the problem.

Sorry, if you keep getting in my face and threatening me I'm gonna put you on your ass and not lose a minutes sleep over it.

I would expect a President to behave a little better than some idiot in a bar.

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[owebo]

Are people not allowed to protest against Mr Trump ?

Sure are!!!!

They however are not allowed to be paid by democrat operatives to insight violence and terrorism upon innocent people....

See the difference?

Not really.
You mean when Donald Trump tells his mob to punch a citizen in the face this is not provoking violence???
Sorry, I don't get it.

He even offered to pay their legal costs I understand.

Yes he did.

So What...........That clown went in their to shout out BS and DISRUPT the Rally........so he would piss someone off to get hit............He instigated the BS. Just like MoveOn paid protesters to disrupt rallies and caused violence only to say it was those their for the Rally that started it. They later bragged about shutting down the Rally.

It is those types that are at fault for trying to violate the Constitutional Rights of Others. It is those that sparked the violence across this nation who want to blame others for getting TIRED OF THEIR CRAP.

Someone jumps in your face and calls you a Fascist, Hitler all the time and then try to sell the talking point of how the guy who puts them on their ASS is the problem.

Respect others views and protest all you want but do not get in their faces and PROVOKE A RESPONSE then they are the problem.

Sorry, if you keep getting in my face and threatening me I'm gonna put you on your ass and not lose a minutes sleep over it.

I would expect a President to behave a little better than some idiot in a bar.

That's why your Hillary was defeated.....

 

[eagle1462010]

Are people not allowed to protest against Mr Trump ?

Sure are!!!!

They however are not allowed to be paid by democrat operatives to insight violence and terrorism upon innocent people....

See the difference?

Not really.
You mean when Donald Trump tells his mob to punch a citizen in the face this is not provoking violence???
Sorry, I don't get it.

He even offered to pay their legal costs I understand.

Yes he did.

So What...........That clown went in their to shout out BS and DISRUPT the Rally........so he would piss someone off to get hit............He instigated the BS. Just like MoveOn paid protesters to disrupt rallies and caused violence only to say it was those their for the Rally that started it. They later bragged about shutting down the Rally.

It is those types that are at fault for trying to violate the Constitutional Rights of Others. It is those that sparked the violence across this nation who want to blame others for getting TIRED OF THEIR CRAP.

Someone jumps in your face and calls you a Fascist, Hitler all the time and then try to sell the talking point of how the guy who puts them on their ASS is the problem.

Respect others views and protest all you want but do not get in their faces and PROVOKE A RESPONSE then they are the problem.

Sorry, if you keep getting in my face and threatening me I'm gonna put you on your ass and not lose a minutes sleep over it.

I would expect a President to behave a little better than some idiot in a bar.

To each his own opinion. These people came there to here his speech in support of him. The protester came their to VIOLATE THAT RIGHT and try to piss people off until he got hit so people like you can say how bad we are when we get tired of their shit.

They are the ones who promoted violence and tried to shut down the rights of others not the Trump Supporters.

That guy and those that attacked police in Chicago can kiss this.



I don't care what the hell you think of my opinion BTW..I'm tired of their BS and so are many Americans............They will not disrupt our violate our rights anymore.....................

 

[eagle1462010]

And they both LOST.

BECAUSE AMERICANS AREN'T BUYING THE BS ANYMORE.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And that is what the Fabian socialists have been indoctrinating you with for decades. They don't want you to think for yourself. Think about it though. How can fascism ad socialism be different systems when they both advocate maximum government control over the individual? Does that make any sort of sense to you? They have tried to convince you that government types are a circle endlessly chasing one another. But they're not. They are actually quite simple. Anarchy on one extreme, and totalitarian on the other. Individualist vs collectivist.

Do some reading and think for yourself.

You want to dissasociate yourself from fascism, Im not saying Republicans or conservatives are fascists, but fascists have been conservative too, for example religious (aligned with church and having religious ideas), nationalistic etc.

Now, pay attention:

Let's begin with definitions.
Nazism, communism, socialism..Liberalism, Progressivism,.and fascism....

1. Which stem from the works of Karl Marx?
2. Which is a form of command and control big government?
3. Which has no problem with genocide, actual or figurative, as an accepted procedure on its political enemies?
4. Which is based on the collective over the individual?
5. Which oppresses and/or slaughters its own citizens as pro forma (including depriving them of a living)....?
6. Which represents totalitarian governance?
7. Which believes that mandating/dictating every aspect of their citizen's lives is their prerogative?
8. Which aims for an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life
9. Which restricts free speech and thought?
10. Which can be summed up in Hegel's “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest”



And, of course, they all are do...they are all consubstantial.

Nazism

Communism

Socialism

Fascism

Progressivism

Liberalism






How about pointing out which of them are defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society?
Right....none of 'em.
Only right wing philosophies...i.e., conservatism.

Where did you get that. The GOP was founded on Progressive Conservatism.

Now, about Marx. He advocated the disallusion of government. He laid out how to do it. He never advocated the Government doing any violence. He advocated the absence of government. You are mixing up the bastardization that Lenon and Stalin did. They came up with a plan to get communism universally accepted through violent actions and overthrowing disagreeing governments. What you think of as Communism is completely foreign to Marx's teachings. Besides, like true Democracy, true Communism only works in small groups, very small groups. Both are ideal and the oposite ends of the spectrum and neither can exist as a national government.

Sometimes you run into a fool of your caliber....and it's best to simply roll one's eyes, pat 'em on the head, and move on.

Your definitions are made up by both radical sides to try and make themselves less evil.

Our Founding Fathers knew that a Democratic Government was just a pipe dream. This is why they chose a Republic. What happens to most of us when only the Majority rules? While many believe it would be a good thing, in practice, it leads to Genocide or worse. And who decides which group will get the favors?

There are only a handful of towns ran as Communists today. They are called Koisks and are in Israel. They barter for everything. No workee no foodee. But that is about the largest that can exist and still be a workable system.

Your whole idea doesn't take into account what works and doesn't work. You can call Sweden a socialist country but it's not. It's a Republic leaning towards Socialism. But a true socialist government can't exist for a Country anymore than a true Democracy can be sustainable either.

Sweden?

Conservative, you dunce.


The Economist: The Nordic countries are reinventing their model of capitalism, says Adrian Wooldridge
Feb 2nd 2013 |From the print edition

1. THIRTY YEARS AGO Margaret Thatcher turned Britain into the world’s leading centre of “thinking the unthinkable”. Today that distinction has passed to Sweden….Sweden has reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP from 67% in 1993 to 49% today…. It has also cut the top marginal tax rate by 27 percentage points since 1983, to 57%, and scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance. This year it is cutting the corporate-tax rate from 26.3% to 22%.
2. Sweden has also donned the golden straitjacket of fiscal orthodoxy with its pledge to produce a fiscal surplus over the economic cycle. Its public debt fell from 70% of GDP in 1993 to 37% in 2010, and its budget moved from an 11% deficit to a surplus of 0.3% over the same period.
3. Most daringly, it has introduced a universal system of school vouchers and invited private schools to compete with public ones. Private companies also vie with each other to provide state-funded health services and care for the elderly….Sweden is pioneering “a new conservative model”…
4. …Sweden’s quiet revolution has brought about a dramatic change in its economic performance. The two decades from 1970 were a period of decline: the country was demoted from being the world’s fourth-richest in 1970 to 14th-richest in 1993, …The two decades from 1990 were a period of recovery: GDP growth between 1993 and 2010 averaged 2.7% a year and productivity 2.1% a year, compared with 1.9% and 1% respectively for the main 15 EU countries.
5. For most of the 20th century Sweden prided itself on offering what Marquis Childs called, in his 1936 book of that title, a “Middle Way” between capitalism and socialism…As the decades rolled by, the middle way veered left. The government kept growing: public spending as a share of GDP nearly doubled from 1960 to 1980 and peaked at 67% in 1993.
a. Taxes kept rising. The Social Democrats (who ruled Sweden for 44 uninterrupted years from 1932 to 1976 and for 21 out of the 24 years from 1982 to 2006) kept squeezing business. “The era of neo-capitalism is drawing to an end,” said Olof Palme, the party’s leader, in 1974. “It is some kind of socialism that is the key to the future.”
6. The other Nordic countries have been moving in the same direction,… Denmark has one of the most liberal labour markets in Europe. It also allows parents to send children to private schools at public expense and make up the difference in cost with their own money. Finland is harnessing the skills of venture capitalists and angel investors to promote innovation and entrepreneurship.
7. But the new Nordic model begins with the individual rather than the state. It begins with fiscal responsibility rather than pump-priming: all four Nordic countries have AAA ratings and debt loads significantly below the euro-zone average. It begins with choice and competition rather than paternalism and planning.
a. The leftward lurch has been reversed: rather than extending the state into the market, the Nordics are extending the market into the state.
8. “The welfare state we have is excellent in most ways,” says Gunnar Viby Mogensen, a Danish historian. “We only have this little problem. We can’t afford it.”
9. ….they have reached the future first. They are grappling with problems that other countries too will have to deal with in due course, such as what to do when you reach the limits of big government and how to organise society when almost all women work.
10. … the new Nordic model is proving strikingly successful. The Nordics dominate indices of competitiveness as well as of well-being. Their high scores in both types of league table mark a big change since the 1980s when welfare took precedence over competitiveness.”
http://www.economist.com/news/speci...einventing-their-model-capitalism-says-adrian


a. reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP
b. cut the top marginal tax rate
c. scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance.
d. cutting the corporate-tax rate
e. pledge to produce a fiscal surplus
f. public debt fell from 70% of GDP in 1993 to 37% in 2010
g. budget moved from an 11% deficit to a surplus of 0.3%
h. a universal system of school vouchers
i. invited private schools to compete with public ones.
j. Private companies also vie with each other to provide state-funded health services and care for the elderly

the new Nordic model begins with the individual rather than the state.
Sweden is pioneering “a new conservative model”…

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here are your Nazis in mufti.