It's Very Ironic that Liberals Frequently Compare Conservatives to Hitler and the Nazis

[Liminal]

I just love reading all the leftist dogma espoused by authors like George Patton, Omar Bradley, and John Pershing.

Why do you imagine they aren't leftists? We know Patton was a Democrat. Winning a few battles isn't proof that you're not a socialist. There's no profession more certain to be populated with bootlickers than the military.

I think you've just established absolute proof, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you don't really know anything about anything. One thing is certainly clear, you were never man enough to serve your country in uniform.

You keep saying that, but so far you haven't offered a shred of evidence. That's because you're an ignorant coward who knows he will be creamed in any debate on the subject.

Since I'm well over the legal age to join the service, that's highly likely. When I was of age the services were trying to reduce their manpower, so joining wasn't an option. However, it doesn't really matter since you were just posting a gratuitous insult in lieu of any facts or logic to support your idiocies.

Joining wasn't an option? What year was that? 1946? 1919? 1866?

That's enough discussion about my personal life, asshole.

Why would you want to join a bunch of bootlickers any way?

 

[mikegriffith1]

Go study history. Rohm was a socialist, Hitler was not. Rohm wanted a violent socialist regime established, whereas Hitler was consolidating his power with the far right military and Big Business. Hitler was a fascist, a right wing Big Business progressive.

You didn't read the relative links in the OP, did you?

One, Hitler believed that the government had the right to regulate or take over any business it wanted. That is hardly right wing. That is left wing.

Two, Hitler rejected the free market and practiced rank crony capitalism. Government picked and determined winners and losers via a number of methods, including stifling regulation. That is left wing, not right wing.

Three, Hitler imposed wage and price controls, a policy that is abhorred by conservatives but that is frequently employed by leftist governments.

Four, Hitler advocated nationalizing any businesses that were formed into corporations, another policy that conservatives abhor but that liberals have pushed and practiced.

I could go on, but that should suffice for now. You really should break down and read the links on the economic views and policies of Hitler and the Nazis.

 

[Liminal]

Go study history. Rohm was a socialist, Hitler was not. Rohm wanted a violent socialist regime established, whereas Hitler was consolidating his power with the far right military and Big Business. Hitler was a fascist, a right wing Big Business progressive.

You didn't read the relative links in the OP, did you?

One, Hitler believed that the government had the right to regulate or take over any business it wanted. That is hardly right wing. That is left wing.

Two, Hitler rejected the free market and practiced rank crony capitalism. Government picked and determined winners and losers via a number of methods, including stifling regulation. That is left wing, not right wing.

Three, Hitler imposed wage and price controls, a policy that is abhorred by conservatives but that is frequently employed by leftist governments.

Four, Hitler advocated nationalizing any businesses that were formed into corporations, another policy that conservatives abhor but that liberals have pushed and practiced.

You really should break down and read the links on the economic views and policies of Hitler and the Nazis.

Oh that really is a shame, you mean to say that Krupps and IG Farben were forced to make huge profits producing things they didn't really want to make. That sounds almost just like a socialist paradise.

 

[Pogo]

Go study history. Rohm was a socialist, Hitler was not. Rohm wanted a violent socialist regime established, whereas Hitler was consolidating his power with the far right military and Big Business. Hitler was a fascist, a right wing Big Business progressive.

You didn't read the relative links in the OP, did you?

One, Hitler believed that the government had the right to regulate or take over any business it wanted. That is hardly right wing. That is left wing.

Wrong. It's authoritarianism.

Two, Hitler rejected the free market and practiced rank crony capitalism. Government picked and determined winners and losers via a number of methods, including stifling regulation. That is left wing, not right wing.

Wrong. It's authoritarianism.

Three, Hitler imposed wage and price controls, a policy that is abhorred by conservatives but that is frequently employed by leftist governments.

Wrong. It's activist government, which is dabbled in by both right and left. Activist government is the opposite of Liberalism.

Four, Hitler advocated nationalizing any businesses that were formed into corporations, another policy that conservatives abhor but that liberals have pushed and practiced.

Wrong. It's fascism. Liberalism created captialism

I could go on, but that should suffice for now. You really should break down and read the links on the economic views and policies of Hitler and the Nazis.

Yuh huh.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Go study history. Rohm was a socialist, Hitler was not. Rohm wanted a violent socialist regime established, whereas Hitler was consolidating his power with the far right military and Big Business. Hitler was a fascist, a right wing Big Business progressive.

You didn't read the relative links in the OP, did you?

One, Hitler believed that the government had the right to regulate or take over any business it wanted. That is hardly right wing. That is left wing.

Two, Hitler rejected the free market and practiced rank crony capitalism. Government picked and determined winners and losers via a number of methods, including stifling regulation. That is left wing, not right wing.

Three, Hitler imposed wage and price controls, a policy that is abhorred by conservatives but that is frequently employed by leftist governments.

Four, Hitler advocated nationalizing any businesses that were formed into corporations, another policy that conservatives abhor but that liberals have pushed and practiced.

You really should break down and read the links on the economic views and policies of Hitler and the Nazis.

Oh that really is a shame, you mean to say that Krupps and IG Farben were forced to make huge profits producing things they didn't really want to make. That sounds almost just like a socialist paradise.

Now that is an idiotic, silly argument. Krupps and Farben were amoral firms and were interested solely in profit. They were only too happy to make a fortune off the business that the Nazis gave them. That is the crony capitalism I was talking about.

I mean, really, do you guys ever sit down and think before you post such stupid, inane arguments?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Go study history. Rohm was a socialist, Hitler was not. Rohm wanted a violent socialist regime established, whereas Hitler was consolidating his power with the far right military and Big Business. Hitler was a fascist, a right wing Big Business progressive.

You didn't read the relative links in the OP, did you?

One, Hitler believed that the government had the right to regulate or take over any business it wanted. That is hardly right wing. That is left wing.

Two, Hitler rejected the free market and practiced rank crony capitalism. Government picked and determined winners and losers via a number of methods, including stifling regulation. That is left wing, not right wing.

Three, Hitler imposed wage and price controls, a policy that is abhorred by conservatives but that is frequently employed by leftist governments.

Four, Hitler advocated nationalizing any businesses that were formed into corporations, another policy that conservatives abhor but that liberals have pushed and practiced.

You really should break down and read the links on the economic views and policies of Hitler and the Nazis.

Oh that really is a shame, you mean to say that Krupps and IG Farben were forced to make huge profits producing things they didn't really want to make. That sounds almost just like a socialist paradise.

mike simply does not understand what is and is not socialism and fascism and communism and capitalism and democracy and so forth. Typical far right reactionary and or libertarian making up false definitions and revisionist history.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Go study history. Rohm was a socialist, Hitler was not. Rohm wanted a violent socialist regime established, whereas Hitler was consolidating his power with the far right military and Big Business. Hitler was a fascist, a right wing Big Business progressive.

You didn't read the relative links in the OP, did you?

One, Hitler believed that the government had the right to regulate or take over any business it wanted. That is hardly right wing. That is left wing.

Two, Hitler rejected the free market and practiced rank crony capitalism. Government picked and determined winners and losers via a number of methods, including stifling regulation. That is left wing, not right wing.

Three, Hitler imposed wage and price controls, a policy that is abhorred by conservatives but that is frequently employed by leftist governments.

Four, Hitler advocated nationalizing any businesses that were formed into corporations, another policy that conservatives abhor but that liberals have pushed and practiced.

You really should break down and read the links on the economic views and policies of Hitler and the Nazis.

Oh that really is a shame, you mean to say that Krupps and IG Farben were forced to make huge profits producing things they didn't really want to make. That sounds almost just like a socialist paradise.

mike simply does not understand what is and is not socialism and fascism and communism and capitalism and democracy and so forth. Typical far right reactionary and or libertarian making up false definitions and revisionist history.

I would say that it is you who does not understand what socialism, fascism, communism, capitalism, and democracy are. Socialism, fascism, and communism are simply different forms of totalitarianism. All three concentrate power in the hands of the national government and assume the right to control virtually anything.

You can dance around all day, but the simple fact of the matter is that Hitler's economic and social policies were much closer to American liberalism than to American conservatism. It's not even a close call.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Were you educated at Private School Dumb Dumb 103?

Progressivism is Big Government power to make social, political, and cultural changes. The left wing (communism), democratic countries(regulated capitalism), and the right wing (fascism) all are Progressive.

Indiana and Arkansas are using Big Government to harm some of its citizens.

Not cool, fool, and you are very foolish.

The fact is most of our far right social cons would have been Nazis in Hitler's Germany.

 

[Liminal]

Go study history. Rohm was a socialist, Hitler was not. Rohm wanted a violent socialist regime established, whereas Hitler was consolidating his power with the far right military and Big Business. Hitler was a fascist, a right wing Big Business progressive.

You didn't read the relative links in the OP, did you?

One, Hitler believed that the government had the right to regulate or take over any business it wanted. That is hardly right wing. That is left wing.

Two, Hitler rejected the free market and practiced rank crony capitalism. Government picked and determined winners and losers via a number of methods, including stifling regulation. That is left wing, not right wing.

Three, Hitler imposed wage and price controls, a policy that is abhorred by conservatives but that is frequently employed by leftist governments.

Four, Hitler advocated nationalizing any businesses that were formed into corporations, another policy that conservatives abhor but that liberals have pushed and practiced.

You really should break down and read the links on the economic views and policies of Hitler and the Nazis.

Oh that really is a shame, you mean to say that Krupps and IG Farben were forced to make huge profits producing things they didn't really want to make. That sounds almost just like a socialist paradise.

Now that is an idiotic, silly argument. Krupps and Farben were amoral firms and were interested solely in profit. They were only too happy to make a fortune off the business that the Nazis gave them. That is the crony capitalism I was talking about.

I mean, really, do you guys ever sit down and think before you post such stupid, inane arguments?

I can hardly wait for you to make the distinction between moral and amoral corporations.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Were you educated at Private School Dumb Dumb 103?

Progressivism is Big Government power to make social, political, and cultural changes. The left wing (communism), democratic countries(regulated capitalism), and the right wing (fascism) all are Progressive.

Indiana and Arkansas are using Big Government to harm some of its citizens.

Not cool, fool, and you are very foolish.

The fact is most of our far right social cons would have been Nazis in Hitler's Germany.

What utter, ignorant jibberish. You have no clue what you're talking about. Hitler's fiercest enemies were traditional and/or religious Germans, which is why Hitler waged a merciless war on Christians. Col. Stauffenberg, the man who led the assassination plot against Hitler, was a devout Catholic. Go read the bios of the other men who plotted against Hitler--they were traditional conservatives who deplored what Hitler was doing.

"Far-right social cons" would hardly agree with Nazi abortion policy, with the Nazi hostility toward traditional values, with the Nazi war on Jews, with the Nazi tolerance of homosexuality in their upper ranks, with the Nazi policy of putting education under the sole control of the national government, with the Nazi hostility toward private schools and home schooling, etc., etc.

And no gay couple is "harmed" when a religious vendor politely declines to host or service their gay wedding. They are denied no basic right, nor are they prevented from getting married by that act, and they have plenty of reasonable, readily available alternatives.

The only people who are being harmed are religious vendors who are being harassed, bullied, and sued for merely not wanting to host or attend ceremonies that they find offensive.

 

[bripat9643]

Go study history. Rohm was a socialist, Hitler was not. Rohm wanted a violent socialist regime established, whereas Hitler was consolidating his power with the far right military and Big Business. Hitler was a fascist, a right wing Big Business progressive.

You didn't read the relative links in the OP, did you?

One, Hitler believed that the government had the right to regulate or take over any business it wanted. That is hardly right wing. That is left wing.

Wrong. It's authoritarianism.

Two, Hitler rejected the free market and practiced rank crony capitalism. Government picked and determined winners and losers via a number of methods, including stifling regulation. That is left wing, not right wing.

Wrong. It's authoritarianism.

Three, Hitler imposed wage and price controls, a policy that is abhorred by conservatives but that is frequently employed by leftist governments.

Wrong. It's activist government, which is dabbled in by both right and left. Activist government is the opposite of Liberalism.

Four, Hitler advocated nationalizing any businesses that were formed into corporations, another policy that conservatives abhor but that liberals have pushed and practiced.

Wrong. It's fascism. Liberalism created captialism

I could go on, but that should suffice for now. You really should break down and read the links on the economic views and policies of Hitler and the Nazis.

Yuh huh.

Liberalism is authoritarianism, dipstick. The right does not endorse "dabbling" in activist government, period. The liberalism that created capitalism bares no resemblance to fascist leftwing toadies like you. Nationalizing businesses is fascism, which is another was of saying it's modern liberalism.

 

[JakeStarkey]

mikegriffith has just demonstrated forever his total lack of realistic understanding of terms, their definitions, and our history. Wow! Read objective history, dude.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The TP does not represent the mainstream public of America. Support for the TP has fallen by a third in five years.

 

[bripat9643]

The TP does not represent the mainstream public of America. Support for the TP has fallen by a third in five years.

That's amazingly strong support considering the all-out war the "mainstream" media has waged against it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Between FDR's Tuskegee Experiment and the Eugenics advocated and practiced by Planned Parenthood, it's clear that Democrats were a big influence on Mengele and the Nazis

 

[Syriusly]

Just pointing out again- that pretty much every USMB post refering to Nazi's are by resident USMB Conservatives calling Liberals Nazis


Conservative Kook Koshergrl


Pastor's solution to the Christian caterer/homo gestapo dilemma:

h are you going to pretend that the homo gestapo has actually successfully gaycotted Christian establishments? Like Chick fil A? Like these...

The origin of racist Nazi policies that shocked the world....progressive dingbats in Cali.

Nutcase Conservative bripat9643

The point is the law is unjust. Apparently you think Jewish shop owners in Nazi Germany were immoral of they objected to painting a yellow star on their front window.

Here's your conception of legitimate government:


The Konservative Kooks sure love to invoke them some Hitler and Nazi's a lot.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Between FDR's Tuskegee Experiment and the Eugenics advocated and practiced by Planned Parenthood, it's clear that Democrats were a big influence on Mengele and the Nazis

The proper venue is Tuskegee Study - Timeline - CDC - NCHHSTP and not Frank's unsatiated hatred for subjects he won't or can't understand.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The far right fascists on this board, from Keys to straightmike to koshergril to Ernie S. and the rest, have no boundaries of decency and respect for common mankind.

 

[mikegriffith1]

mikegriffith has just demonstrated forever his total lack of realistic understanding of terms, their definitions, and our history. Wow! Read objective history, dude.

So said the flat earthers when confronted with evidence they couldn't explain. I know your verbiage is part of your programming to try dismiss facts you can't handle.

The facts in my OP are profusely documented, including in primary Nazi sources.

I'll tell you what: Why don't you take on a single one of my OP points and explain to me--with evidence--why it's wrong.

Did not the Nazis implement wage and price controls? This is a fact of history that is beyond dispute.

Did not the Nazis plainly condemn federalism and local control and did they not centralize power in the national government? This is a fact of history that is beyond dispute.

Did not the Nazis claim and insist that the government had the right to regulate or take over any business that it wanted? This is a fact of history that is beyond dispute.

Did not the Nazis wage a vicious war on Christianity, including the killing of tens of thousands of Christians and thousands of priests and nuns? This is a fact of history that is beyond dispute.

Did did not the Nazis loosen Germany's abortion laws and didn't they try to impose abortion on "less desirable" people? This is a fact of history that is beyond dispute.

Did not the Nazis reject traditional moral values and shut down or take over churches that would not comply with Nazi teaching? This is another documented fact of history.

Did not the Nazis put all education under the control of the national government, to the point of requiring that all curricula be approved by the government? This is another indisputable fact of history.

Of course, you don't want to deal with these facts because American liberals are pushing for similar or identical policies.

 

[bripat9643]

Just pointing out again- that pretty much every USMB post refering to Nazi's are by resident USMB Conservatives calling Liberals Nazis


Conservative Kook Koshergrl


Pastor's solution to the Christian caterer/homo gestapo dilemma:

h are you going to pretend that the homo gestapo has actually successfully gaycotted Christian establishments? Like Chick fil A? Like these...

The origin of racist Nazi policies that shocked the world....progressive dingbats in Cali.

Nutcase Conservative bripat9643

The point is the law is unjust. Apparently you think Jewish shop owners in Nazi Germany were immoral of they objected to painting a yellow star on their front window.

Here's your conception of legitimate government:


The Konservative Kooks sure love to invoke them some Hitler and Nazi's a lot.

So what's your point?