Stalin was a Progressive

[GreenBean]

They can historically be linked to the Democratic Party - as the link you provided bears out .

They can not be linked to the Republicans , although progressives and liberals , fond of their semantic two step shuffle shoe word games, when all else fails, continuously try to do so.

The 21st Century KKK can absolutely be linked to the Republicans. But, they are not the only hate group that can be so linked. Consider the following:

Hate groups like God Hates F@gs are the norm and not the exception. Other norms within the Republican party are:
American Border Patrol/American Patrol
Ideology:
Anti-Immigrant
American Family Association
Ideology:
Anti-Gay
American Third Position
Ideology:
White Nationalist
Aryan Nations
Ideology:
Neo-Nazi
Blood & Honour
Ideology:
Racist Skinhead
Brotherhood of Klans
Ideology:
Ku Klux Klan

Note that last one. Ain't it a beaut?

That's got to be one of the assinine - simple minded posts I've ever seen here on USMB - just when I think it couldn't get any more retarded up pops a moron like JohnQ .

Johny Boy, you crack smoking bottom-feeder, as a freedom-hating fornicator, it's nice to see you don't let facts get in the way of your opinions. I mean seriously dude is being an inate imbecile a requirement for being in your sleeper terrorist cell?

Five of the six groups you listed are lunatic fringe groups, and they are not main stream

The First Group [American Border Patrol] you listed is a pro American Group - if being Pro-American makes you anti something else, in your watped little mind] than so be it.

None of these groups are anywhjere close to being in control or anything even resembling a position of power such as that enjoyed by the KKK - which basicaly ran the Democratic Party in fact - many of todays powerful Democratic Fascists are the offspring of the scum who ran the KKK .

There is absolutely no comparison whatsoever between a few lunatic groups who choose to identify with a particular party and an organization that terrorized the entire Nation, and controlled a Major Political Party - Your analogy - like your twisted thought process is retarded.

 

[GreenBean]

After skimming over the document for a little, I have determined that the only time it really uses the term "progressive" was in the title and two other times in the texts (which, I might add, never described the Bolshevik Party, communism, or socialism as progressive. Thank you Ctrl + F.)

This is a common misconception in conservative circles that I have seen. Often conservatives conflate progressive and socialist/communist, as if they are a part of a large monolithic conspiracy to spread world communism together somehow. I will admit some of their criticisms historically have merit, progressives generally were "light" in regards to communism, but to conflate the two political ideologies as the same is completely wrong and shows ignorance and/or inability to overcome bias in order to recognize basic facts.

Progressives (in the extreme basics) are a political group that aim to reform the current government to better aid the citizenry, and does not have an inherent anti-capitalist tendency within it. Socialists/communists seek to abolish private property in order to end the capitalists' exploitation of the working class and establish workers' ownership of the means of production, sometimes through revolutionary violence if it is deemed necessary, or through reforms but with the end goal of socialist democracy (this is strongly dependent on the tendency in question.) One can see there are clear differences between the two ideologies.

Now, about you calling Hitler a progressive, is just dead wrong. You see, if you took some time out of your day to read about the ideology of National Socialism you would see clear contradictions to all of the other "progressives" you mentioned and throughout history. Fascism is a unique nationalist ideology that emphasizes the state's role in the preservation and advancement of the organic unity that is the nation (typically defined as all members of the nation of the past, present, and future.) Fascism, being nationalistic, is inherently opposed to communism for its cosmopolitan and anti-nationalist stances (and its active opposition to nationalist organizations such as Freikorps, S.A, Falangists in Spain, etc.) In its attitude as well, communism and fascism conflict plenty. Fascism emphasizes authority, and the existing order of society as something to be upheld, only this order of society extends itself to all aspects of the national existence; in the social lives of the citizenry, economic health, and political unity of the nation (note to libtards: this does not make all conservatives fascist.) Fascists are typically reactionary, typically seeking to restore some part of the older principles of society.

This brings us into socialism/communism. In contradiction to fascism, socialism/communism is typically anti-nationalist (read: Workers of the world, unite) and very much against standing social orders such as religion, morality, family life, etc. (note: they seek the destruction of the culture of the bourgeoisie, its morals and ways of life are included.) Communist tendencies vary widely on opinions regarding the state, you would not have an anarcho-communist saying the state should play an active role in the revolution like a Marxist-Leninist (or Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) would say, but typically they desire a classless, stateless society as an end goal but this end goal society has never been accomplished. This contradicts fascism immensely. The fascist sees the state as an extension of the nation's will, while the communist sees the state as an extension of the bourgeoisie's oppression over the working class.

Onto progressives, progressives may seek the same goals as Marxists do in some cases (e.g., workers' rights, increase of minimum wage, right to unionize, counter culture, etc.) but this does not make them communists whatsoever. Their methods are less radical, usually seeing reform as the ultimate route to improving social ills and oppression. The progressive also has some hope in contemporary democracies. This contradicts communists, as they do not have faith in the system whatsoever as they see the state as an agent of class oppression and thus capitalist democracies will ultimately serve the bourgeoisie.

Ichkampfe - your writing style and ideology are almost identical to an Old Timer on these forums - quite peculiar, in fact what is also peculiar is that this other guy also claims to be fluent in German - SO you been bouncing around on that POGO stick lately , or just readin Mein Kampfe ?

Sind Sie Die Marionette Der pogo ?

 

[IchKampfe]

Ichkampfe - your writing style and ideology are almost identical to an Old Timer on these forums - quite peculiar, in fact what is also peculiar is that this other guy also claims to be fluent in German - SO you been bouncing around on that POGO stick lately , or just readin Mein Kampfe ?

Sind Sie Die Marionette Der pogo ?

I never proclaimed myself to be a National Socialist, and so far the only proof you have of that is my username. I chose the name because it means "I fight", not because it was a book written in National Socialist Germany. You also pulled a complete ad hominem, and instead of attacking my ideas you attacked my character, showing a weakness within your abilities to comprehend other views than your own. Next time I would recommend reading the ideas, arguing against them in a concise manner, etc. instead of fall to the whim of emotional reactions to ideas you fail to understand.

 

[GreenBean]

Ichkampfe - your writing style and ideology are almost identical to an Old Timer on these forums - quite peculiar, in fact what is also peculiar is that this other guy also claims to be fluent in German - SO you been bouncing around on that POGO stick lately , or just readin Mein Kampfe ?

Sind Sie Die Marionette Der pogo ?

I never proclaimed myself to be a National Socialist, and so far the only proof you have of that is my username. I chose the name because it means "I fight", not because it was a book written in National Socialist Germany. You also pulled a complete ad hominem, and instead of attacking my ideas you attacked my character, showing a weakness within your abilities to comprehend other views than your own. Next time I would recommend reading the ideas, arguing against them in a concise manner, etc. instead of fall to the whim of emotional reactions to ideas you fail to understand.

No sorry Ichy - your ideas are identical to your other avatar - so is your writing style - I'm not the only one to point that out . Now your next logical step is to engage in an argument with yourself , or your other avatar that is , to try to prove you are not one and the same - see ya around POGO

 

[Pogo]

Ichkampfe - your writing style and ideology are almost identical to an Old Timer on these forums - quite peculiar, in fact what is also peculiar is that this other guy also claims to be fluent in German - SO you been bouncing around on that POGO stick lately , or just readin Mein Kampfe ?

Sind Sie Die Marionette Der pogo ?

I never proclaimed myself to be a National Socialist, and so far the only proof you have of that is my username. I chose the name because it means "I fight", not because it was a book written in National Socialist Germany. You also pulled a complete ad hominem, and instead of attacking my ideas you attacked my character, showing a weakness within your abilities to comprehend other views than your own. Next time I would recommend reading the ideas, arguing against them in a concise manner, etc. instead of fall to the whim of emotional reactions to ideas you fail to understand.

That's what he does when he loses the point, which is frequently. Now he's got a new cop-out technique: declare socks, cut and run. Perhaps he can explain how it's possible for both of us to be online at the same time.

Perhaps not -- I expect he'll just run away like the loser he is.

 

[Pogo]

They can historically be linked to the Democratic Party - as the link you provided bears out .

They can not be linked to the Republicans , although progressives and liberals , fond of their semantic two step shuffle shoe word games, when all else fails, continuously try to do so.

The 21st Century KKK can absolutely be linked to the Republicans. But, they are not the only hate group that can be so linked. Consider the following:

Hate groups like God Hates F@gs are the norm and not the exception. Other norms within the Republican party are:
American Border Patrol/American Patrol
Ideology:
Anti-Immigrant
American Family Association
Ideology:
Anti-Gay
American Third Position
Ideology:
White Nationalist
Aryan Nations
Ideology:
Neo-Nazi
Blood & Honour
Ideology:
Racist Skinhead
Brotherhood of Klans
Ideology:
Ku Klux Klan

Note that last one. Ain't it a beaut?

That's got to be one of the assinine - simple minded posts I've ever seen here on USMB - just when I think it couldn't get any more retarded up pops a moron like JohnQ .

Johny Boy, you crack smoking bottom-feeder, as a freedom-hating fornicator, it's nice to see you don't let facts get in the way of your opinions. I mean seriously dude is being an inate imbecile a requirement for being in your sleeper terrorist cell?

Five of the six groups you listed are lunatic fringe groups, and they are not main stream

The First Group [American Border Patrol] you listed is a pro American Group - if being Pro-American makes you anti something else, in your watped little mind] than so be it.

None of these groups are anywhjere close to being in control or anything even resembling a position of power such as that enjoyed by the KKK - which basicaly ran the Democratic Party in fact - many of todays powerful Democratic Fascists are the offspring of the scum who ran the KKK .

There is absolutely no comparison whatsoever between a few lunatic groups who choose to identify with a particular party and an organization that terrorized the entire Nation, and controlled a Major Political Party - Your analogy - like your twisted thought process is retarded.

Once again -- it may have been another thread where I just posted this-- the KKK has never been affiliated with a political party. In the few times they dabbled in politics they were Democrats in the South and Republicans in the midwest and west. And after the party shift they were Republicans in the South too (see Duke, David).

None of that makes the KKK the "controllers" of, or even affiliated with, either political party. So your mythmaking isn't gonna find any legs here.

 

[Pogo]

After skimming over the document for a little, I have determined that the only time it really uses the term "progressive" was in the title and two other times in the texts (which, I might add, never described the Bolshevik Party, communism, or socialism as progressive. Thank you Ctrl + F.)

This is a common misconception in conservative circles that I have seen. Often conservatives conflate progressive and socialist/communist, as if they are a part of a large monolithic conspiracy to spread world communism together somehow. I will admit some of their criticisms historically have merit, progressives generally were "light" in regards to communism, but to conflate the two political ideologies as the same is completely wrong and shows ignorance and/or inability to overcome bias in order to recognize basic facts.

Progressives (in the extreme basics) are a political group that aim to reform the current government to better aid the citizenry, and does not have an inherent anti-capitalist tendency within it. Socialists/communists seek to abolish private property in order to end the capitalists' exploitation of the working class and establish workers' ownership of the means of production, sometimes through revolutionary violence if it is deemed necessary, or through reforms but with the end goal of socialist democracy (this is strongly dependent on the tendency in question.) One can see there are clear differences between the two ideologies.

Now, about you calling Hitler a progressive, is just dead wrong. You see, if you took some time out of your day to read about the ideology of National Socialism you would see clear contradictions to all of the other "progressives" you mentioned and throughout history. Fascism is a unique nationalist ideology that emphasizes the state's role in the preservation and advancement of the organic unity that is the nation (typically defined as all members of the nation of the past, present, and future.) Fascism, being nationalistic, is inherently opposed to communism for its cosmopolitan and anti-nationalist stances (and its active opposition to nationalist organizations such as Freikorps, S.A, Falangists in Spain, etc.) In its attitude as well, communism and fascism conflict plenty. Fascism emphasizes authority, and the existing order of society as something to be upheld, only this order of society extends itself to all aspects of the national existence; in the social lives of the citizenry, economic health, and political unity of the nation (note to libtards: this does not make all conservatives fascist.) Fascists are typically reactionary, typically seeking to restore some part of the older principles of society.

This brings us into socialism/communism. In contradiction to fascism, socialism/communism is typically anti-nationalist (read: Workers of the world, unite) and very much against standing social orders such as religion, morality, family life, etc. (note: they seek the destruction of the culture of the bourgeoisie, its morals and ways of life are included.) Communist tendencies vary widely on opinions regarding the state, you would not have an anarcho-communist saying the state should play an active role in the revolution like a Marxist-Leninist (or Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) would say, but typically they desire a classless, stateless society as an end goal but this end goal society has never been accomplished. This contradicts fascism immensely. The fascist sees the state as an extension of the nation's will, while the communist sees the state as an extension of the bourgeoisie's oppression over the working class.

Onto progressives, progressives may seek the same goals as Marxists do in some cases (e.g., workers' rights, increase of minimum wage, right to unionize, counter culture, etc.) but this does not make them communists whatsoever. Their methods are less radical, usually seeing reform as the ultimate route to improving social ills and oppression. The progressive also has some hope in contemporary democracies. This contradicts communists, as they do not have faith in the system whatsoever as they see the state as an agent of class oppression and thus capitalist democracies will ultimately serve the bourgeoisie.

Ichkampfe - your writing style and ideology are almost identical to an Old Timer on these forums - quite peculiar, in fact what is also peculiar is that this other guy also claims to be fluent in German - SO you been bouncing around on that POGO stick lately , or just readin Mein Kampfe ?

By that logic, is Derideo_Te a Roman centurion then? Is Lumpy1 an actor on Leave It to Beaver? What about Steve McGarrett? Harry Dresden? Is Templar_Kormac a game that posts on the internets?

Btw where did I say I was fluent in German, liar? Where did I even bring up German at all?

 

[IchKampfe]

No sorry Ichy - your ideas are identical to your other avatar - so is your writing style - I'm not the only one to point that out . Now your next logical step is to engage in an argument with yourself , or your other avatar that is , to try to prove you are not one and the same - see ya around POGO

Lol. You seriously think that I'm a puppet account? Wow. Perhaps if you saw the differences in the IP addresses and IP ranges, then you would see that we are two different people, but you're going to continue on in your little rant about how I'm the Fuhrer of the Fourth Reich regardless. So I'll just leave what I said before here:

Attack my ideas, and not my character. Now are you going to do that, or call me a Nazi all day?

 

[GreenBean]

No sorry Ichy - your ideas are identical to your other avatar - so is your writing style - I'm not the only one to point that out . Now your next logical step is to engage in an argument with yourself , or your other avatar that is , to try to prove you are not one and the same - see ya around POGO

Lol. You seriously think that I'm a puppet account? Wow. Perhaps if you saw the differences in the IP addresses and IP ranges, then you would see that we are two different people, but you're going to continue on in your little rant about how I'm the Fuhrer of the Fourth Reich regardless. So I'll just leave what I said before here:

Attack my ideas, and not my character. Now are you going to do that, or call me a Nazi all day?

Listen POGO2 - you are certainly not the fuhrer of any of your fantasy "Fourth Reichs" - your caliber is too low . So far as IP adresses , I used to think that also, but another poster on a diff. thread set me straight about that - IP adress and range are easily masked.

If your not a puppet , then the coincidences are just that - but they are pretty peculiar coincidences

 

[daveman]

Of course in reality none of that's entirely accurate, any more than it would be accurate to imply that a given political party today represents the same thing it did 50, 100, or 150 years ago --- which I know Dave would never do...

The KKK (the first one) was started by CSA Army veterans, not politicians, as were several other vigilante groups at the time that wanted to ignore surrender and continue the Civil War. Meanwhile the Democratic Party, being the largest and oldest and in the South (where a president from a then-upstart new party had just defeated them) in effect the only party, represented very different factions in different regions. That was a time when a Liberal or Conservative might belong to either party, and in the South those conservatives were all Democrats. So "terrorist arm of the Democratic Party" is quite a stretch, implying some kind of natal relationship. For being a Democrat in Mississippi was a whole different ball game from being a Democrat in Massachusetts.

The Klan was gone and driven out by the end of the 1870s. The new Klan revived in 1915 by an ex-minister doctor named Simmons, did get involved in politics and actually elected a few governors and a Senator, who were all Republicans. This second Klan also got a Democratic governor (Walton) impeached when he tried to drive them out of Oklahoma.

So the KKK has always involved conservatives but political party has been whatever was convenient at the time. If there was any political party at all.

You seem to be leaving out a large number of prominent Democrat Klan members.

Ku Klux Klan members in United States politics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All Southerners. Which is the point I just made. All except for David Duke, which represents the temporal shift. Again, as noted: always conservatives, aligned with whatever political party was convenient in the time and place. The Southern Republicans of today are the Southern Democrats of yesterday; parties change according to convenience; the conservatism remains the foundation.

You had already tried to float that tired old idea that the Democratic Party invented slavery, or some variation thereof (yawn) so I presented the contrary. We're a team. You set 'em up, I knock 'em down.

Long story short: in the pre-party-shift South, Klan were usually Democrats if they were with a political party at all. In the midwest and west, and in the post-shift South, they were usually Republicans. Whatever was expedient in that time and place. That is, if they were involved in political activity at all.

Handy, isn't it? Everything bad comes from conservatives, everything good from liberals.

Oh, and this bit of horseshit? "You had already tried to float that tired old idea that the Democratic Party invented slavery, or some variation thereof..." Don't be stupid. I said nothing even remotely like that.

 

[daveman]

Of course in reality none of that's entirely accurate, any more than it would be accurate to imply that a given political party today represents the same thing it did 50, 100, or 150 years ago --- which I know Dave would never do...



The KKK (the first one) was started by CSA Army veterans, not politicians, as were several other vigilante groups at the time that wanted to ignore surrender and continue the Civil War. Meanwhile the Democratic Party, being the largest and oldest and in the South (where a president from a then-upstart new party had just defeated them) in effect the only party, represented very different factions in different regions. That was a time when a Liberal or Conservative might belong to either party, and in the South those conservatives were all Democrats. So "terrorist arm of the Democratic Party" is quite a stretch, implying some kind of natal relationship. For being a Democrat in Mississippi was a whole different ball game from being a Democrat in Massachusetts.



The Klan was gone and driven out by the end of the 1870s. The new Klan revived in 1915 by an ex-minister doctor named Simmons, did get involved in politics and actually elected a few governors and a Senator, who were all Republicans. This second Klan also got a Democratic governor (Walton) impeached when he tried to drive them out of Oklahoma.



So the KKK has always involved conservatives but political party has been whatever was convenient at the time. If there was any political party at all.

You seem to be leaving out a large number of prominent Democrat Klan members.



Ku Klux Klan members in United States politics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But you totally ignore the fact that those Democrat Klan members were right-wingers, not progressives. They cannot be linked to the Democrat party as it has been the last 10 years. But also not to the Republicans, they might vote for one of the 2 parties, but nobody wants them.

Everything bad comes from conservatives, everything good from liberals.

That seems to be a popular fantasy.

 

[Pogo]

You seem to be leaving out a large number of prominent Democrat Klan members.

Ku Klux Klan members in United States politics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All Southerners. Which is the point I just made. All except for David Duke, which represents the temporal shift. Again, as noted: always conservatives, aligned with whatever political party was convenient in the time and place. The Southern Republicans of today are the Southern Democrats of yesterday; parties change according to convenience; the conservatism remains the foundation.

You had already tried to float that tired old idea that the Democratic Party invented slavery, or some variation thereof (yawn) so I presented the contrary. We're a team. You set 'em up, I knock 'em down.

Long story short: in the pre-party-shift South, Klan were usually Democrats if they were with a political party at all. In the midwest and west, and in the post-shift South, they were usually Republicans. Whatever was expedient in that time and place. That is, if they were involved in political activity at all.

Handy, isn't it? Everything bad comes from conservatives, everything good from liberals.

Oh, and this bit of horseshit? "You had already tried to float that tired old idea that the Democratic Party invented slavery, or some variation thereof..." Don't be stupid. I said nothing even remotely like that.

I know -- that was Lumpy

That was a fun thread too.

Just a li'l joke about the whole revisionist thing. You did after all go there when you posted:

And another required historical correction: The KKK was the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.

I wouldn't say everything bad comes from conservatives of course, speaking of binary thinking... but the KKK always did.

 

[daveman]

All Southerners. Which is the point I just made. All except for David Duke, which represents the temporal shift. Again, as noted: always conservatives, aligned with whatever political party was convenient in the time and place. The Southern Republicans of today are the Southern Democrats of yesterday; parties change according to convenience; the conservatism remains the foundation.

You had already tried to float that tired old idea that the Democratic Party invented slavery, or some variation thereof (yawn) so I presented the contrary. We're a team. You set 'em up, I knock 'em down.

Long story short: in the pre-party-shift South, Klan were usually Democrats if they were with a political party at all. In the midwest and west, and in the post-shift South, they were usually Republicans. Whatever was expedient in that time and place. That is, if they were involved in political activity at all.

Handy, isn't it? Everything bad comes from conservatives, everything good from liberals.

Oh, and this bit of horseshit? "You had already tried to float that tired old idea that the Democratic Party invented slavery, or some variation thereof..." Don't be stupid. I said nothing even remotely like that.

I know -- that was Lumpy

That was a fun thread too.

Just a li'l joke about the whole revisionist thing. You did after all go there when you posted:

And another required historical correction: The KKK was the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.

I wouldn't say everything bad comes from conservatives of course, speaking of binary thinking... but the KKK always did.

Like I said...handy.

 

[JQPublic1]

They can historically be linked to the Democratic Party - as the link you provided bears out .

They can not be linked to the Republicans , although progressives and liberals , fond of their semantic two step shuffle shoe word games, when all else fails, continuously try to do so.

The 21st Century KKK can absolutely be linked to the Republicans. But, they are not the only hate group that can be so linked. Consider the following:

Hate groups like God Hates F@gs are the norm and not the exception. Other norms within the Republican party are:
American Border Patrol/American Patrol
Ideology:
Anti-Immigrant
American Family Association
Ideology:
Anti-Gay
American Third Position
Ideology:
White Nationalist
Aryan Nations
Ideology:
Neo-Nazi
Blood & Honour
Ideology:
Racist Skinhead
Brotherhood of Klans
Ideology:
Ku Klux Klan

Note that last one. Ain't it a beaut?

That's got to be one of the assinine - simple minded posts I've ever seen here on USMB - just when I think it couldn't get any more retarded up pops a moron like JohnQ .

I've seen worse, including most of the phlegm you've been depositing in this thread. You are good at regurgitating garbage, but I guess that is only natural for a pig like you. I am still searching for your point in all of this jail house prose but it really got deep with this:

]Johny Boy, you crack smoking bottom-feeder, as a freedom-hating fornicator, it's nice to see you don't let facts get in the way of your opinions. I mean seriously dude is being an inate imbecile a requirement for being in your sleeper terrorist cell?

If you are going to hurl insults at least spell them right, idiot! After wading through your oral diarrhea, we finally come to the source of your angst:

Five of the six groups you listed are lunatic fringe groups, and they are not main stream

What's with that "mainstream BS?" They are your fellow haters, dudette! Judging by your stupid irrelevant posts, you fit right in with them. that racist cubby hole is getting a bit crowed isn't it? Heh heh heh!

The First Group [American Border Patrol] you listed is a pro American Group - if being Pro-American makes you anti something else, in your watped little mind] than so be it.

Pro-America? Do they support the sitting President? If they are anything like you , they are scum sucking traitors who don't deserve to live on American soil!

None of these groups are anywhjere close to being in control or anything even resembling a position of power such as that enjoyed by the KKK - which basicaly ran the Democratic Party in fact - many of todays powerful Democratic Fascists are the offspring of the scum who ran the KKK .

All of these dangerous hate groups have assembled under the GOP banner for one reason: to plot some nefarious strategy for preserving that early 20th Century racism, genderism, and sexism which kept all the resources and power in the hands of White males. If my revealing that angers you, so be it. Look, fool, whether you like it or not, the KKK operates in all American political parties but more so in the GOP than any other.
The Democrat party of today nominated, elected the first Black President
not once but twice! If the KKK elements in the party had any significance, that would never have happened!

There is absolutely no comparison whatsoever between a few lunatic groups who choose to identify with a particular party and an organization that terrorized the entire Nation, and controlled a Major Political Party - Your analogy - like your twisted thought process is retarded.

I made no such comparison. Only a recalcitrant retard would make such a frivolous assumption! Stop making stuff up, liar!

I guess a rabid-frothing -at - the- mouth- crazy like you would recognize a lunatic group after seeing a lunatic in the mirror all these years. What you don't recognize or understand is the English language. You seem to read a post and respond to it with a bunch of superfluous nonsense that your opponent never said. That is INSANE!

 

[GreenBean]

The 21st Century KKK can absolutely be linked to the Republicans. But, they are not the only hate group that can be so linked. Consider the following:

Hate groups like God Hates F@gs are the norm and not the exception. Other norms within the Republican party are:
American Border Patrol/American Patrol
Ideology:
Anti-Immigrant
American Family Association
Ideology:
Anti-Gay
American Third Position
Ideology:
White Nationalist
Aryan Nations
Ideology:
Neo-Nazi
Blood & Honour
Ideology:
Racist Skinhead
Brotherhood of Klans
Ideology:
Ku Klux Klan

Note that last one. Ain't it a beaut?

That's got to be one of the assinine - simple minded posts I've ever seen here on USMB - just when I think it couldn't get any more retarded up pops a moron like JohnQ .

What's with that "mainstream BS?" They are your fellow haters, dudette! Judging by your stupid irrelevant posts, you fit right in with them. that racist cubby hole is getting a bit crowed isn't it? Heh heh heh!

You just said absolutely Nothing - That entire paragraph makes no point ! Oh well I guess the poor little fascist got his feelings hurt

GreenBean: The First Group [American Border Patrol] you listed is a pro American Group - if being Pro-American makes you anti something else, in your watped little mind] than so be it.

JohnQ: Pro-America? Do they support the sitting President?

Last time I checked Dude we didn't have a De-Jure President - we had a De-Facto wanna be dictator

If they are anything like you , they are scum sucking traitors who don't deserve to live on American soil!

Yup - I see the meltdown coming, tell me John boy were you drooling all over the keyboard when you typed that ?? Yup, American Patriots who patrol our borders when the Government controlled by socio-fascists won't -they're the traitors in your warped little excuse for a mind. Johnny Boy your minds been mined

GreenBean: None of these groups are anywhere close to being in control or anything even resembling a position of power such as that enjoyed by the KKK - which basicaly ran the Democratic Party in fact - many of todays powerful Democratic Fascists are the offspring of the scum who ran the KKK .

JohnQ:All of these dangerous hate groups have assembled under the GOP banner for one reason: to plot some nefarious strategy for preserving that early 20th Century racism, genderism, and sexism which kept all the resources and power in the hands of White males. If my revealing that angers you, so be it. Look, fool, whether you like it or not, the KKK operates in all American political parties but more so in the GOP than any other. The Democrat party of today nominated, elected the first Black President
not once but twice! If the KKK elements in the party had any significance, that would never have happened!

Yo - dumbass - the discussion pertained to the KKK and racist history of the Democratic Party - you attempted to link certain low membership fringe organizations to the Republicans - and I simply made a comparison - demonstrating that the groups you mentioned are fringe elements who have no power or positions within the party. Unlike the KKK which was the ruling force within the party of the Jack Ass for many years.

I made no such comparison.

Yes you Did

I guess a rabid-frothing -at - the- mouth- crazy like you would recognize a lunatic group after seeing a lunatic in the mirror all these years. What you don't recognize or understand is the English language. You seem to read a post and respond to it with a bunch of superfluous nonsense that your opponent never said. That is INSANE!

No - you are insane - like I said your minds been mined and your sorry ass excuse for an argument has been blown the fuck up. C YA

 

[Pogo]

The 21st Century KKK can absolutely be linked to the Republicans. But, they are not the only hate group that can be so linked. Consider the following:

Hate groups like God Hates F@gs are the norm and not the exception. Other norms within the Republican party are:
American Border Patrol/American Patrol
Ideology:
Anti-Immigrant
American Family Association
Ideology:
Anti-Gay
American Third Position
Ideology:
White Nationalist
Aryan Nations
Ideology:
Neo-Nazi
Blood & Honour
Ideology:
Racist Skinhead
Brotherhood of Klans
Ideology:
Ku Klux Klan

Note that last one. Ain't it a beaut?

That's got to be one of the assinine - simple minded posts I've ever seen here on USMB - just when I think it couldn't get any more retarded up pops a moron like JohnQ .

I've seen worse, including most of the phlegm you've been depositing in this thread. You are good at regurgitating garbage, but I guess that is only natural for a pig like you. I am still searching for your point in all of this jail house prose but it really got deep with this:



If you are going to hurl insults at least spell them right, idiot! After wading through your oral diarrhea, we finally come to the source of your angst:



What's with that "mainstream BS?" They are your fellow haters, dudette! Judging by your stupid irrelevant posts, you fit right in with them. that racist cubby hole is getting a bit crowed isn't it? Heh heh heh!



Pro-America? Do they support the sitting President? If they are anything like you , they are scum sucking traitors who don't deserve to live on American soil!

None of these groups are anywhjere close to being in control or anything even resembling a position of power such as that enjoyed by the KKK - which basicaly ran the Democratic Party in fact - many of todays powerful Democratic Fascists are the offspring of the scum who ran the KKK .

All of these dangerous hate groups have assembled under the GOP banner for one reason: to plot some nefarious strategy for preserving that early 20th Century racism, genderism, and sexism which kept all the resources and power in the hands of White males. If my revealing that angers you, so be it. Look, fool, whether you like it or not, the KKK operates in all American political parties but more so in the GOP than any other.
The Democrat party of today nominated, elected the first Black President
not once but twice! If the KKK elements in the party had any significance, that would never have happened!

There is absolutely no comparison whatsoever between a few lunatic groups who choose to identify with a particular party and an organization that terrorized the entire Nation, and controlled a Major Political Party - Your analogy - like your twisted thought process is retarded.

I made no such comparison. Only a recalcitrant retard would make such a frivolous assumption! Stop making stuff up, liar!

I guess a rabid-frothing -at - the- mouth- crazy like you would recognize a lunatic group after seeing a lunatic in the mirror all these years. What you don't recognize or understand is the English language. You seem to read a post and respond to it with a bunch of superfluous nonsense that your opponent never said. That is INSANE!

He does that to me all the time. When he couldn't think of any more ad homs he picked one of the other posters, declared him to be my sock, and unilaterally decided that meant he didn't have to argue the point. Just as he unilaterally declared himself a winner in his onanistic fantasy.

As I said before he's got no guts. Declares himself the winner and gets out while he can.

 

[JQPublic1]

A sure sign of desperation emerges when a rat forgets what he posted. Case in point:
When I wrote “What's with that "mainstream BS?" They are your fellow haters, dudette! Judging by your stupid irrelevant posts, you fit right in with them. That racist cubby hole is getting a bit crowed isn't it? Heh heh heh” My seditious antagonist, GreenBean, seems to have forgotten that I was responding to his previous quoted statement:

Five of the six groups you listed are lunatic fringe groups, and they are not main stream

Now, to sane people, my response is ensconced well within the realm of reasonability; but, not for the vacuous GreenBean! His fractious persona seeps from within and exposes his stupidity for all to see. Enigmatically, he piteously peeps:

You just said absolutely Nothing - That entire paragraph makes no point ! Oh well I guess the poor little fascist got his feelings hurt

How does one deal with such abject stupidity? Is his head as short as his memory?
But it doesn't stop there.
When I asked if the American Border Patrol supported the President, GreenBean’s answer uncovered his treasonous mentality:

Last time I checked Dude we didn't have a De-Jure President - we had a De-Facto wanna be dictator

Chalk it up to “free speech” if you want; but, for the patriots who patrol these threads, GreenBean has reinforced suspicions that he is possibly one of those surreptitious elements seeking to undermine liberty and justice for all.

When I listed a few of the White male dominated hate groups who have aligned themselves with the GOP platform their defender tried to distance himself... but too late:

None of these groups are anywhere close to being in control or anything even resembling a position of power such as that enjoyed by the KKK - which basicaly ran the Democratic Party in fact - many of todays powerful Democratic Fascists are the offspring of the scum who ran the KKK .

GreenBean completely sidestepped acknowledging the cumulative effect an amalgam of hate groups could have when united under one banner: the GOP! Perhaps though, I underestimated him, he is definitely more pathologically stupid than I ever imagined!

I stated:
“. The Democrat party of today nominated, elected the first Black President
not once but twice! If the KKK elements in the party had any significance, that would never have happened!”
GreenBean’s weak response:

Yo - dumbass - the discussion pertained to the KKK and racist history of the Democratic Party - you attempted to link certain low membership fringe organizations to the Republicans - and I simply made a comparison - demonstrating that the groups you mentioned are fringe elements who have no power or positions within the party. Unlike the KKK which was the ruling force within the party of the Jack Ass for many years.

How convenient to overlook the reference to the Democrats electing the first Black President!
The discussion has many facets, and is open to myriad points of view. Your focus on the KKK as the premier icon of racism is relevant but so too is any reference to a consortium of smaller hate groups united with the KKK under the “conservative” banner. That is exactly what has happened. And, the GOP, the last bastion of RW White male rule, has not rejected their Inclusion. The GOP is, in fact, desperate for their votes and their support.





!

 

[Pogo]

This whole thread was born of desperation. It's always revealed in the language when the Revisionistas want to foist another historical rewrite on the innerwebs (typical whiny-desperation title "It's just a fact that Hitler was left wing!" (<< real thread) ). Now they're on to an amorphous term "progressive" which I believe Glenn Beck made up -- a handy-dandy label because not only can you put your opponents into a box, you don't even have to define what the box means because you just made the term up. And that means Hitler and Stalin and Mao and Genghis Khan and Beelzebub can all go in the same box, and if you dare disagree, you can go in there too because you're all alike in this nebulous box that never gets defined.

It's like Godwin's Law on PEDs.

 

[bendog]

This whole thread was born of desperation. It's always revealed in the language when the Revisionistas want to foist another historical rewrite on the innerwebs (typical whiny-desperation title "It's just a fact that Hitler was left wing!" (<< real thread) ). Now they're on to an amorphous term "progressive" which I believe Glenn Beck made up -- a handy-dandy label because not only can you put your opponents into a box, you don't even have to define what the box means because you just made the term up. And that means Hitler and Stalin and Mao and Genghis Khan and Beelzebub can all go in the same box, and if you dare disagree, you can go in there too because you're all alike in this nebulous box that never gets defined.

It's like Godwin's Law on PEDs.

Oh come now, Pogo. Who could deny that Obama, like Stalin, wants to continue his power via rigged elections and purges that terrify any opposition into silence? They're one in the same. It's as plane ad the nose on my face.

 

[Discombobulated]

Progressive......looks like another word rendered completely meaningless with superficial definitions.