Fascism: The Father of American Liberalism.

[MIPS]

And you lack the comprehension to realize that the 'socialist' and tyranny Hayek despised and Goldwater would despise takes the form of today's global corporate entity...it would be Hayek' 'other forms of totalitarianism.'

As usual you're just making shit up out of thin air in a weak attempt to build YET ANOTHER straw man, nothing I've posted could in any way be construed as being an advocacy for the current state of affairs or corporations, I would say "nice try" but your attempt was way too lame to earn that moniker.

*sigh* so little time... so many straw men and cheap practitioners of the art of building them to expose.

 

[Bfgrn]

And you lack the comprehension to realize that the 'socialist' and tyranny Hayek despised and Goldwater would despise takes the form of today's global corporate entity...it would be Hayek' 'other forms of totalitarianism.'

As usual you're just making shit up out of thin air in a weak attempt to build YET ANOTHER straw man, nothing I've posted could in any way be construed as being an advocacy for the current state of affairs or corporations, I would say "nice try" but your attempt was way too lame to earn that moniker.

*sigh* so little time... so many straw men and cheap practitioners of the art of building them to expose.

"I guess I owe Mr. Luntz an apology and the American People owe him a big "THANK YOU FRANK" note."


"The legitimate object of Government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done but cannot do at all, or cannot so well do, for themselves in their separate and individual capacities. But in all that people can individually do as well for themselves, Government ought not to interfere."
President Abraham Lincoln

 

[MIPS]

And you lack the comprehension to realize that the 'socialist' and tyranny Hayek despised and Goldwater would despise takes the form of today's global corporate entity...it would be Hayek' 'other forms of totalitarianism.'

As usual you're just making shit up out of thin air in a weak attempt to build YET ANOTHER straw man, nothing I've posted could in any way be construed as being an advocacy for the current state of affairs or corporations, I would say "nice try" but your attempt was way too lame to earn that moniker.

*sigh* so little time... so many straw men and cheap practitioners of the art of building them to expose.

"I guess I owe Mr. Luntz an apology and the American People owe him a big "THANK YOU FRANK" note."

LOL, how do you construe being against the Obama/Pelosi/Reid progressive agenda as advocacy for the current state of affairs or corporations, do you operate under the delusion that only radical progressive solutions like the ones being proposed by the terrible trio in Washington are the appropriate ones or something?

"The legitimate object of Government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done but cannot do at all, or cannot so well do, for themselves in their separate and individual capacities. But in all that people can individually do as well for themselves, Government ought not to interfere."
President Abraham Lincoln

Do you even read the quotes you post before you post them ?

 

[Article 15]

Another day, another hack thread from PoliticalChic.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Another day, another hack thread from PoliticalChic.

Oh, wow!

You learned to read?

Now, let's hope learning follow.

 

[Article 15]

Another day, another hack thread from PoliticalChic.

Oh, wow!

You learned to read?

Now, let's hope learning follow.

Been doing both of those things for over 25 years now. At least one of us tries to do something useful and positive with those skillz instead of dreaming up new ways to demonize people who think differently than I do.

 

[PoliticalChic]

One thing we do know for a fact is that the Republicans perfect model for national government is in Iran. The only problem is the main religion is "Islam" and not "Christianity". Other than that, it would be "perfect".

I don't know that for a fact nor do I know anyone who thinks that is so. Nor can you point to a single elected Republican who advocates for that.

Now that said, and my athiesm aside, I wonder if that would be better than what we have now. Would that mean a flat tax of 10% for everyone? I'm down with that.

Would you consider your Atheism is a non-prophet organization?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Another day, another hack thread from PoliticalChic.

Oh, wow!

You learned to read?

Now, let's hope learning follow.

Been doing both of those things for over 25 years now. At least one of us tries to do something useful and positive with those skillz instead of dreaming up new ways to demonize people who think differently than I do.

And here is the extent of this dolt's '25 years':

"Hi, you have received -104 reputation points from Article 15.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
just because

Regards,
Article 15"


More proof of the ability of those who negative rep.

Much character?

 

[Bfgrn]

As usual you're just making shit up out of thin air in a weak attempt to build YET ANOTHER straw man, nothing I've posted could in any way be construed as being an advocacy for the current state of affairs or corporations, I would say "nice try" but your attempt was way too lame to earn that moniker.

*sigh* so little time... so many straw men and cheap practitioners of the art of building them to expose.

"I guess I owe Mr. Luntz an apology and the American People owe him a big "THANK YOU FRANK" note."

LOL, how do you construe being against the Obama/Pelosi/Reid progressive agenda as advocacy for the current state of affairs or corporations, do you operate under the delusion that only radical progressive solutions like the ones being proposed by the terrible trio in Washington are the appropriate ones or something?

"The legitimate object of Government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done but cannot do at all, or cannot so well do, for themselves in their separate and individual capacities. But in all that people can individually do as well for themselves, Government ought not to interfere."
President Abraham Lincoln

Do you even read the quotes you post before you post them ?

Yes I do read them...do YOU read the WHOLE quote, or just what you like???

People CAN'T afford cartel insurance that is NOT about people's health, the cartel is only beholden to medical loss ratio controlled by Wall Street strings.

People CAN'T implement corporate regulation or a comprehensive energy policy...

And...Frank Luntz and the Republicans are against ANY reform, be it health care, energy or regulation...

If you stand aside, then YOU stand with them...

Those who stand for nothing fall for anything.
Alexander Hamilton

 

[Article 15]

Oh, wow!

You learned to read?

Now, let's hope learning follow.

Been doing both of those things for over 25 years now. At least one of us tries to do something useful and positive with those skillz instead of dreaming up new ways to demonize people who think differently than I do.

And here is the extent of this dolt's '25 years':

"Hi, you have received -104 reputation points from Article 15.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
just because

Regards,
Article 15"


More proof of the ability of those who negative rep.

Much character?

Yup.

Neg rep for being a total hack.

Expect them from now on whenever you start hack threads like these.

 

[MIPS]

Oh, wow!

You learned to read?

Now, let's hope learning follow.

Been doing both of those things for over 25 years now. At least one of us tries to do something useful and positive with those skillz instead of dreaming up new ways to demonize people who think differently than I do.

And here is the extent of this dolt's '25 years':

"Hi, you have received -104 reputation points from Article 15.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
just because

Regards,
Article 15"


More proof of the ability of those who negative rep.

Much character?

ROFLMAO! Did he really do that? If so, wow, talk about childish and petty........

 

[Article 15]

Been doing both of those things for over 25 years now. At least one of us tries to do something useful and positive with those skillz instead of dreaming up new ways to demonize people who think differently than I do.

And here is the extent of this dolt's '25 years':

"Hi, you have received -104 reputation points from Article 15.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
just because

Regards,
Article 15"


More proof of the ability of those who negative rep.

Much character?

ROFLMAO! Did he really do that? If so, wow, talk about childish and petty........

You can have one too, buddy

 

[MIPS]

And here is the extent of this dolt's '25 years':

"Hi, you have received -104 reputation points from Article 15.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
just because

Regards,
Article 15"


More proof of the ability of those who negative rep.

Much character?

ROFLMAO! Did he really do that? If so, wow, talk about childish and petty........

You can have one too, buddy

As you can probably already tell, I'm crushed, because the opinions of vapid children matter so much to me.

 

[PoliticalChic]

YOu really like to throw those words around, don't you?
Calling liberals fascists just shows what a parisan hack you are, and that you really don't know what fascism means. When liberals start putting in place programs like postive eugenics, you can then post crap like this.

You can't be as ignorant as you appear, and have the gall to show the ignorance in a post such as this.

Eugenics is a policy of the early 19th century Progressives, the ones that Hillary claims as her provenance.

"Eugenics, the attempt to improve the human species socially through better breeding was a widespread and popular movement in the United States and Europe between 1910 and 1940. Eugenics was an attempt to use science (the newly discovered Mendelian laws of heredity) to solve social problems (crime, alcoholism, prostitution, rebelliousness), using trained experts. Eugenics gained much support from progressive reform thinkers, who sought to plan social development using expert knowledge in both the social and natural sciences. In eugenics, progressive reformers saw the opportunity to attack social problems efficiently by treating the cause (bad heredity) rather than the effect."
Eugenics and American social history, 1880-1950. [Genome. 1989] - PubMed result


For your education:
Francis Galton, geneticist, statistician, eugenicist, and psychologist: a prime mover in these fields in the 19th century. He introduced terms like “nature versus nurture,” and used surveys to gather data about intellect, and encouraged the breeding of those he believed superior. By the early 20th century, Galton’s eugenics-disciples predominated in academia, and wrote that the mentally retarded and other ‘degenerates’ should be prevented from breeding. A utopia organized by a eugenic religion, designed to breed fitter and smarter humans. Francis Galton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1927, a young unwed mother named Carrie Buck was sterilized against her will by order of the Supreme Court, decision written by Oliver Wendell Holmes, who said : ”The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes.” Based on the Buck Decision, more than 60 thousand were operated on across the U.S. as late as the 1970’s. And the opinion was adopted in Germany, where, within a year, some 56 thousand German ‘patients’ had been sterilized.

"Ultimately, 60,000 Americans were coercively sterilized — legally and extra-legally. Many never discovered the truth until decades later. Those who actively supported eugenics include America's most progressive figures: Woodrow Wilson, Margaret Sanger and Oliver Wendell Holmes."
War Against the Weak


And we see the echo in the current administration: Now called ‘bioethicists,’ there are new acolytes of eugenics who are ready and able to make decisions about the lives of patients, assigning numerical ‘quality of life’ measurements, and parcel out health care based on the scores. The retarded, handicapped, elderly, infirm would be low on the list. Those who don’t score high enough will surely be deprived of healthcare.

"In the emergency stimulus legislation was substantial funding for a Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, comparative effectiveness research is generally code for limiting care based on the patient's age. Economists are familiar with the formula already in use in the U.K., where the cost of a treatment is divided by the number of years (called QALYS or quality-adjusted life years) the patient is likely to benefit. In the U.K., the formula leads to denying treatments for age-related diseases because older patients have a denominator problem -- fewer years to benefit than younger patients with other diseases."
Defend Your Health Care

Do you want to provide unlimited government healthcare for everyone regardless of condition, regardless of cost? Because if you don't, you're just as guilty of what you're trying to blame on others.

Here are the two factors left out of your consideration of the equation:

1. Historically, the progressive theorem is based on government determining exactly what rights an individual has, and, by extension, how one may live- or if one should live.
This is the antithesis of our founding principles.

2. You have no way of knowing how much 'healthcare' there will be in the future, nor how much will be needed, other than your conjecture.
Could there be medical and scientific breakthroughs that will obviate rationing? Well, historically there always have been. As long as we have a free market to reward such breakthroughs.

I suggest that we remain consistent with the principles that have made this country the 'shining light.'

The individual, not the state or the collective.

 

[rdean]

Republcians go on endlessly about what they "imagine" liberals to be.

Of course, they also believe Iraq is "free".

Except for the Iraqi Christians. It's estimated a million are missing.

And the women, many of whom are back in bags.

And the gays, hiding and murdered.

All this from Conservatism. All this from Republicans. They accuse everyone else, but it's they who are dangerous, as endless examples prove beyond a doubt.

 

[Oddball]

What...Did mascale hijack your user account?

 

[Political Junky]

The SCROTUS, just handed more power to corporations.
Mussolini described Fascism as Corporatism. He made corporate heads the lawmakers in Fascist Italy.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You can't be as ignorant as you appear, and have the gall to show the ignorance in a post such as this.

Eugenics is a policy of the early 19th century Progressives, the ones that Hillary claims as her provenance.

"Eugenics, the attempt to improve the human species socially through better breeding was a widespread and popular movement in the United States and Europe between 1910 and 1940. Eugenics was an attempt to use science (the newly discovered Mendelian laws of heredity) to solve social problems (crime, alcoholism, prostitution, rebelliousness), using trained experts. Eugenics gained much support from progressive reform thinkers, who sought to plan social development using expert knowledge in both the social and natural sciences. In eugenics, progressive reformers saw the opportunity to attack social problems efficiently by treating the cause (bad heredity) rather than the effect."
Eugenics and American social history, 1880-1950. [Genome. 1989] - PubMed result


For your education:
Francis Galton, geneticist, statistician, eugenicist, and psychologist: a prime mover in these fields in the 19th century. He introduced terms like “nature versus nurture,” and used surveys to gather data about intellect, and encouraged the breeding of those he believed superior. By the early 20th century, Galton’s eugenics-disciples predominated in academia, and wrote that the mentally retarded and other ‘degenerates’ should be prevented from breeding. A utopia organized by a eugenic religion, designed to breed fitter and smarter humans. Francis Galton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1927, a young unwed mother named Carrie Buck was sterilized against her will by order of the Supreme Court, decision written by Oliver Wendell Holmes, who said : ”The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes.” Based on the Buck Decision, more than 60 thousand were operated on across the U.S. as late as the 1970’s. And the opinion was adopted in Germany, where, within a year, some 56 thousand German ‘patients’ had been sterilized.

"Ultimately, 60,000 Americans were coercively sterilized — legally and extra-legally. Many never discovered the truth until decades later. Those who actively supported eugenics include America's most progressive figures: Woodrow Wilson, Margaret Sanger and Oliver Wendell Holmes."
War Against the Weak


And we see the echo in the current administration: Now called ‘bioethicists,’ there are new acolytes of eugenics who are ready and able to make decisions about the lives of patients, assigning numerical ‘quality of life’ measurements, and parcel out health care based on the scores. The retarded, handicapped, elderly, infirm would be low on the list. Those who don’t score high enough will surely be deprived of healthcare.

"In the emergency stimulus legislation was substantial funding for a Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, comparative effectiveness research is generally code for limiting care based on the patient's age. Economists are familiar with the formula already in use in the U.K., where the cost of a treatment is divided by the number of years (called QALYS or quality-adjusted life years) the patient is likely to benefit. In the U.K., the formula leads to denying treatments for age-related diseases because older patients have a denominator problem -- fewer years to benefit than younger patients with other diseases."
Defend Your Health Care

Do you want to provide unlimited government healthcare for everyone regardless of condition, regardless of cost? Because if you don't, you're just as guilty of what you're trying to blame on others.

Here are the two factors left out of your consideration of the equation:

1. Historically, the progressive theorem is based on government determining exactly what rights an individual has, and, by extension, how one may live- or if one should live.
This is the antithesis of our founding principles.

2. You have no way of knowing how much 'healthcare' there will be in the future, nor how much will be needed, other than your conjecture.
Could there be medical and scientific breakthroughs that will obviate rationing? Well, historically there always have been. As long as we have a free market to reward such breakthroughs.

I suggest that we remain consistent with the principles that have made this country the 'shining light.'

The individual, not the state or the collective.

The free market 'rations' healthcare on one's ability to pay. Just like it 'rations' everything else.

If you are content to have a society where personal health is proportionate to personal wealth, then you are hardly in a position to condemn the possibility that government provided healthcare (to those who can't otherwise afford it) might have some limitations that could be characterized as rationing.

 

[PoliticalChic]

ROFLMAO! Did he really do that? If so, wow, talk about childish and petty........

You can have one too, buddy

As you can probably already tell, I'm crushed, because the opinions of vapid children matter so much to me.

Let's see if this buffoon will live up- or in this case, down- to my estimation of him.

Ah, the next threat:

"Just because you are a partisan hack.

I think I will neg all of your hack threads from now on. "

It appears I've exposed a sensitive nerve!


Although we have low personal standards on the board, it appears he has consistently failed to achieve them.

 

[Ragnar]

Let's again go to the real fascist:

"The fate of nations is intimately bound up with their powers of reproduction. All nations and all empires first felt decadence gnawing at them when their birth rate fell off."

Benito Mussolini

Sounds like a FASCIST guy against birth control and abortion. Doesn't sound at all like American liberalism.

Ah, google-fu at work I see.

Quotes are easy enough to find...

Benito Mussolini...

“The best blood will at some time get into a fool or a mosquito.” (sounds like birth control to me, the opperative word being control)

"Given that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism, of Liberalism, and of Democracy, it does not necessarily follow that the twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy: political doctrines pass, but humanity remains, and it may rather be expected that this will be a century of authority ... a century of Fascism. For if the nineteenth century was a century of individualism it may be expected that this will be the century of collectivism and hence the century of the State."

“It is the State which educates its citizens in civic virtue, gives them a consciousness of their mission and welds them into unity”

“All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.”

“Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power”