Tea Party=The New Nazi Party?

[Dante]

The men who threw King George asunder were a minority too, comrade.

They also waited until they were left with no other options and they went kicking and screaming into a revolt. The Declaration of Independence took a long time and bloodshed and debate. It was not a movement of stupid people upset over supposedly high taxes, a supposed foreign born leader, and big government. It was about identity and representation.

 

[edthecynic]

And the fact that those who speak at Tea Party events are affiliated with a political party is not an issue. Tea Partiers are made up of Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Greens, Libertarians, and various others or people of no affiliation at all. If you are going to condemn them for not inviting only people with no political affliation to speak, do you hold those on your side to that same standard?

The Nazi's recruited from all sides too.

I do not have a side.


Is this about Obama with you? Who is the other side ("your side")
? If the Tea Party has no sides, how is there another side? What side? who or what do you think represents me---my side ("your side")?


you more than deserve a neg rep or two, because you aren't even aware when you are deflecting, deceiving and using deception. You have become so used to it, it makes me weep for you. Impressionable minds like yours should never be treated that way

Excellent point!

In Fascism there are only two sides, their side and the enemy.
In CON$ervoFascism there is no middle, anything that isn't Far Right is Far Left!

May 12, 2008
RUSH: I maintain that moderates and independents are Democrats. Because, by definition, if someone or some organization is not conservative, it's by definition going to be liberal, not moderate, not independent, it's going to be liberal

February 11, 2008
RUSH: See, I think liberalism needs to be beaten back; I think it needs to be defeated; I think politically it is the enemy; ... It has to be beaten, not joined, not be reached out to, not be gotten along with, not worked with. It needs to be beaten

 

[Oddball]

The men who threw King George asunder were a minority too, comrade.

They also waited until they were left with no other options and they went kicking and screaming into a revolt. The Declaration of Independence took a long time and bloodshed and debate. It was not a movement of stupid people upset over supposedly high taxes, a supposed foreign born leader, and big government. It was about identity and representation.

The also dealt with idiotic lemmings, who believed that living in supplication to a detached and indifferent potentate was an acceptable option, as opposed to striking out on their own.

And nobody is "dragged kicking and screaming" into revolt...Being dragged off is for fools who believe that being today's useful idiot can prevent them from being tomorrow's gulag slave....Real men with real backbone revolt.

 

[Dante]

The men who threw King George asunder were a minority too, comrade.

They also waited until they were left with no other options and they went kicking and screaming into a revolt. The Declaration of Independence took a long time and bloodshed and debate. It was not a movement of stupid people upset over supposedly high taxes, a supposed foreign born leader, and big government. It was about identity and representation.

The also dealt with idiotic lemmings, who believed that living in supplication to a detached and indifferent potentate was an acceptable option, as opposed to striking out on their own.

And nobody is "dragged kicking and screaming" into revolt...Being dragged off is for fools who believe that being today's useful idiot can prevent them from being tomorrow's gulag slave....Real men with real backbone revolt.

True (about lemmings). Read the diaries of those in the debates in Philadelphia. Many were dragged into revolt. They didn't want to leave England and strike out on their own.

 

[Big Fitz]

And the fact that those who speak at Tea Party events are affiliated with a political party is not an issue. Tea Partiers are made up of Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Greens, Libertarians, and various others or people of no affiliation at all. If you are going to condemn them for not inviting only people with no political affliation to speak, do you hold those on your side to that same standard?

The Nazi's recruited from all sides too.

I do not have a side.


Is this about Obama with you? Who is the other side ("your side")
? If the Tea Party has no sides, how is there another side? What side? who or what do you think represents me---my side ("your side")?


you more than deserve a neg rep or two, because you aren't even aware when you are deflecting, deceiving and using deception. You have become so used to it, it makes me weep for you. Impressionable minds like yours should never be treated that way

Excellent point!

In Fascism there are only two sides, their side and the enemy.
In CON$ervoFascism there is no middle, anything that isn't Far Right is Far Left!

May 12, 2008
RUSH: I maintain that moderates and independents are Democrats. Because, by definition, if someone or some organization is not conservative, it's by definition going to be liberal, not moderate, not independent, it's going to be liberal

February 11, 2008
RUSH: See, I think liberalism needs to be beaten back; I think it needs to be defeated; I think politically it is the enemy; ... It has to be beaten, not joined, not be reached out to, not be gotten along with, not worked with. It needs to be beaten

You know, it's interesting that Glenn Beck did a monologue in his second hour of the radio show today that answered this in a really bad metaphor, but I can distill it, to this:

One side of the spectrum is the European Socialist model. This includes all the communism, socialism, fascism philosophies that are based on elitism and big government, privilege and social status. The citizenry are the servants to the masters. This is the nation Obama wants us to become. Power is held in perpetuity by one class, in secret over the rest. This is the history and power structure our founding fathers through our grandparents rebelled against and rejected for 225 years. This is the philosophy that has been trying to reconquer this nation ever since.

On the other side of the equation, you have the Free Market Capitalism model. This is a form Liberalism in the traditional sense, based on liberty. It's foundations are personal responsibility, application of the law, content of character and limited government power. There are no classes permanently entrenched, there is both upward and downward opportunity based on one's own effort, work and merit. Power is not sequestered away, out of sight and reach of the common man, but front and center accountable to every man for have his say.

These are the two sides. It's not socialism versus fascism. It's freedom versus feudalism. Look at the foundations of the philosophies, and you can see how glaringly different they are. Tea parties are screaming for small government, equal application of the law, responsible and accountable government to the citizenry. On the other side, Pelosi/Reid/Obama are consolidating everything they can under government "regulation" which is shorthand for control. They want the citizens to be their subjects and to have this status frozen forever.

That is the clear line in stone. Misrepresentation of the argument cannot hide it for more than a few seconds, and only to the ones who are blinded by their own dogma.

 

[Dante]

The Nazi's recruited from all sides too.

I do not have a side.


Is this about Obama with you? Who is the other side ("your side")
? If the Tea Party has no sides, how is there another side? What side? who or what do you think represents me---my side ("your side")?


you more than deserve a neg rep or two, because you aren't even aware when you are deflecting, deceiving and using deception. You have become so used to it, it makes me weep for you. Impressionable minds like yours should never be treated that way

Excellent point!

In Fascism there are only two sides, their side and the enemy.
In CON$ervoFascism there is no middle, anything that isn't Far Right is Far Left!

May 12, 2008
RUSH: I maintain that moderates and independents are Democrats. Because, by definition, if someone or some organization is not conservative, it's by definition going to be liberal, not moderate, not independent, it's going to be liberal

February 11, 2008
RUSH: See, I think liberalism needs to be beaten back; I think it needs to be defeated; I think politically it is the enemy; ... It has to be beaten, not joined, not be reached out to, not be gotten along with, not worked with. It needs to be beaten

You know, it's interesting that Glenn Beck did a monologue in his second hour of the radio show today that answered this in a really bad metaphor, but I can distill it, to this:

One side of the spectrum is the European Socialist model. This includes all the communism, socialism, fascism philosophies that are based on elitism and big government, privilege and social status. The citizenry are the servants to the masters. This is the nation Obama wants us to become. Power is held in perpetuity by one class, in secret over the rest. This is the history and power structure our founding fathers through our grandparents rebelled against and rejected for 225 years. This is the philosophy that has been trying to reconquer this nation ever since.

On the other side of the equation, you have the Free Market Capitalism model. This is a form Liberalism in the traditional sense, based on liberty. It's foundations are personal responsibility, application of the law, content of character and limited government power. There are no classes permanently entrenched, there is both upward and downward opportunity based on one's own effort, work and merit. Power is not sequestered away, out of sight and reach of the common man, but front and center accountable to every man for have his say.

These are the two sides. It's not socialism versus fascism. It's freedom versus feudalism. Look at the foundations of the philosophies, and you can see how glaringly different they are. Tea parties are screaming for small government, equal application of the law, responsible and accountable government to the citizenry. On the other side, Pelosi/Reid/Obama are consolidating everything they can under government "regulation" which is shorthand for control. They want the citizens to be their subjects and to have this status frozen forever.

That is the clear line in stone. Misrepresentation of the argument cannot hide it for more than a few seconds, and only to the ones who are blinded by their own dogma.

The amazing thing about the above post, is the amount of shit one person can believe and still function in society without shooting up a McD's in a lefty neighborhood.

If I believed like wingnuts do, that my neighbors were that much of a threat, survival would dictate getting rid of them..

hmmmm, makes one think...

 

[Big Fitz]

If I believed like wingnuts do, that my neighbors were that much of a threat, survival would dictate getting rid of them..

Huh... so, believing that my neighbors deserve as much freedom as possible as long as it does not interfere with mine is a threat?

<re-reading>

Nope... sorry, I don't get that from there. Please, explain how you come to such a conclusion?

 

[edthecynic]

The Nazi's recruited from all sides too.

I do not have a side.


Is this about Obama with you? Who is the other side ("your side")
? If the Tea Party has no sides, how is there another side? What side? who or what do you think represents me---my side ("your side")?


you more than deserve a neg rep or two, because you aren't even aware when you are deflecting, deceiving and using deception. You have become so used to it, it makes me weep for you. Impressionable minds like yours should never be treated that way

Excellent point!

In Fascism there are only two sides, their side and the enemy.
In CON$ervoFascism there is no middle, anything that isn't Far Right is Far Left!

May 12, 2008
RUSH: I maintain that moderates and independents are Democrats. Because, by definition, if someone or some organization is not conservative, it's by definition going to be liberal, not moderate, not independent, it's going to be liberal

February 11, 2008
RUSH: See, I think liberalism needs to be beaten back; I think it needs to be defeated; I think politically it is the enemy; ... It has to be beaten, not joined, not be reached out to, not be gotten along with, not worked with. It needs to be beaten

You know, it's interesting that Glenn Beck did a monologue in his second hour of the radio show today that answered this in a really bad metaphor, but I can distill it, to this:

One side of the spectrum is the European Socialist model. This includes all the communism, socialism, fascism philosophies that are based on elitism and big government, privilege and social status. The citizenry are the servants to the masters. This is the nation Obama wants us to become. Power is held in perpetuity by one class, in secret over the rest. This is the history and power structure our founding fathers through our grandparents rebelled against and rejected for 225 years. This is the philosophy that has been trying to reconquer this nation ever since.

On the other side of the equation, you have the Free Market Capitalism model. This is a form Liberalism in the traditional sense, based on liberty. It's foundations are personal responsibility, application of the law, content of character and limited government power. There are no classes permanently entrenched, there is both upward and downward opportunity based on one's own effort, work and merit. Power is not sequestered away, out of sight and reach of the common man, but front and center accountable to every man for have his say.

These are the two sides. It's not socialism versus fascism. It's freedom versus feudalism. Look at the foundations of the philosophies, and you can see how glaringly different they are. Tea parties are screaming for small government, equal application of the law, responsible and accountable government to the citizenry. On the other side, Pelosi/Reid/Obama are consolidating everything they can under government "regulation" which is shorthand for control. They want the citizens to be their subjects and to have this status frozen forever.

That is the clear line in stone. Misrepresentation of the argument cannot hide it for more than a few seconds, and only to the ones who are blinded by their own dogma.

We didn't have "free market capitalism" long before Obama was elected. We've had MONOPOLISTIC CORPORATE FEUDALISM for over a century. Corporations control the government through lobbyists and election funding. The Extreme Court just upheld the strangle hold the Corporate Feudalists have over the government and the CON$ and Teabaggers applauded it.

CON$ and Teabaggers are the "useful idiots" of the Corporate Feudalists. They shill for the Corporate Feudalists and project their own philosophy on the "enemy." See the first quote in my sig.

 

[Big Fitz]

MONOPOLISTIC CORPORATE FEUDALISM for over a century

We were on our way to that until we did the trust busting and put in anti-monopoly laws in place back in the early 1900's. That ended that, and the pendulum swung another direction. Gyrating and trying to build velocity. Today, it's goal is still the same... moving towards totalitarianism. the question is, which version of totalitarianism will succeed... unless we stop the pendulum once and for all.

Now we've got to do it again to bust up the monopoly of looters formed by politicians, unions and corporate management trying to create a new feudalism in THAT mould.

What you fail to notice is that the one thing these groups have in power is an unvarnished desire for permanent power over someone. They all believe them better than the common man. They're not. The Tea Parties represent a blow against this elitism and desire for corrupt control.

Power corrupts, and these people are no different. That is why laws must be crafted to prevent too much power from piling up in any one place and make it easily countered from multiples of sources. But we don't have this protection now. And that's what we need to get.

 

[edthecynic]

MONOPOLISTIC CORPORATE FEUDALISM for over a century

We were on our way to that until we did the trust busting and put in anti-monopoly laws in place back in the early 1900's. That ended that, and the pendulum swung another direction. Gyrating and trying to build velocity. Today, it's goal is still the same... moving towards totalitarianism. the question is, which version of totalitarianism will succeed... unless we stop the pendulum once and for all.

Now we've got to do it again to bust up the monopoly of looters formed by politicians, unions and corporate management trying to create a new feudalism in THAT mould.

What you fail to notice is that the one thing these groups have in power is an unvarnished desire for permanent power over someone. They all believe them better than the common man. They're not. The Tea Parties represent a blow against this elitism and desire for corrupt control.

Power corrupts, and these people are no different. That is why laws must be crafted to prevent too much power from piling up in any one place and make it easily countered from multiples of sources. But we don't have this protection now. And that's what we need to get.

Again you show your gullibility by falling for the propaganda that anti-trust laws broke up the monopolies. They did not.

All they did was prevent the monopolists from OWNING their monopolies IN THEIR NAME. They still CONTROL their monopolies through vehicles like their phony charities that they CONTROL. They just "donate" the controlling interest of their monopolies to the "charities" they control and get a tax deduction for donating to themselves.

For example, when Rockefeller was forced to divest his OWNERSHIP of Standard Oil he owned on paper only 25% afterwards. So some stockholders tried to oust him from the board. Rockefeller VOTED 60% of the proxies!!!!! The Rockefeller family still controls the oil monopoly to this day.

This is why the Corporate Feudalists see you and your fellow travelers as "useful idiots." They know you can't understand the subtle difference between "ownership" and "control."

 

[Big Fitz]

Oy.

Well I was willing to give you some credit by making a valid point that both sides, capitalist and feudalists want a permanent class system with the on top.

But, then you go ahead and dive off the Conspirator's "The Profiteers are hiding the truth!!!" Cliff. You don't believe in the Trilateral Commission, Gnomes of Zurich and Protocols of Zion do you?

 

[edthecynic]

Oy.

Well I was willing to give you some credit by making a valid point that both sides, capitalist and feudalists want a permanent class system with the on top.

But, then you go ahead and dive off the Conspirator's "The Profiteers are hiding the truth!!!" Cliff. You don't believe in the Trilateral Commission, Gnomes of Zurich and Protocols of Zion do you?

IOW, you can't deny that anti-trust laws have not stopped the Corporate Feudalists from CONTROLLING their monopolies, so you divert with typical CON$ervative arrogant condescension.
Again the subtle difference between ownership and control is completely beyond you.

 

[Big Fitz]

So... you're saying you do believe in those conspiracies? You've ignored the question. I will be happy to continue the conversation after you address the question in front of you.

no dessert without cleaning off your plate.

 

[edthecynic]

So... you're saying you do believe in those conspiracies? You've ignored the question. I will be happy to continue the conversation after you address the question in front of you.

no dessert without cleaning off your plate.

IOW, you STILL can't deny that anti-trust laws have not stopped the Corporate Feudalists from CONTROLLING their monopolies, so you continue to try to divert.
Again the subtle difference between ownership and control is completely beyond your comprehension.

 

[CMike]

MONOPOLISTIC CORPORATE FEUDALISM for over a century

We were on our way to that until we did the trust busting and put in anti-monopoly laws in place back in the early 1900's. That ended that, and the pendulum swung another direction. Gyrating and trying to build velocity. Today, it's goal is still the same... moving towards totalitarianism. the question is, which version of totalitarianism will succeed... unless we stop the pendulum once and for all.

Now we've got to do it again to bust up the monopoly of looters formed by politicians, unions and corporate management trying to create a new feudalism in THAT mould.

What you fail to notice is that the one thing these groups have in power is an unvarnished desire for permanent power over someone. They all believe them better than the common man. They're not. The Tea Parties represent a blow against this elitism and desire for corrupt control.

Power corrupts, and these people are no different. That is why laws must be crafted to prevent too much power from piling up in any one place and make it easily countered from multiples of sources. But we don't have this protection now. And that's what we need to get.

Again you show your gullibility by falling for the propaganda that anti-trust laws broke up the monopolies. They did not.

All they did was prevent the monopolists from OWNING their monopolies IN THEIR NAME. They still CONTROL their monopolies through vehicles like their phony charities that they CONTROL. They just "donate" the controlling interest of their monopolies to the "charities" they control and get a tax deduction for donating to themselves.

For example, when Rockefeller was forced to divest his OWNERSHIP of Standard Oil he owned on paper only 25% afterwards. So some stockholders tried to oust him from the board. Rockefeller VOTED 60% of the proxies!!!!! The Rockefeller family still controls the oil monopoly to this day.

This is why the Corporate Feudalists see you and your fellow travelers as "useful idiots." They know you can't understand the subtle difference between "ownership" and "control."

 

[CMike]

So... you're saying you do believe in those conspiracies? You've ignored the question. I will be happy to continue the conversation after you address the question in front of you.

no dessert without cleaning off your plate.

IOW, you STILL can't deny that anti-trust laws have not stopped the Corporate Feudalists from CONTROLLING their monopolies, so you continue to try to divert.
Again the subtle difference between ownership and control is completely beyond your comprehension.

Which corporation in America has no competition whatsoever?

 

[GHook93]

Hitler was also a staunch environmentalist, his first act was to impose complete gun control, he outlawed tobacco (much like the he huge tax on tabacco nowadays) started the National SOCIALIST Party (meaning he was a socialist), he hated capitalism, he played race politics, he supported forced sterilization and promoted abortion.

Heck if you ask me, Hitler's party looks like the Democratic party.

 

[gslack]

From Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels' Diary

April 13, 1926

"Hitler was there. Tall healthy and vigorous." "I like him. He puts us to shame with his kindness." "We met. We asked questions. He gave brilliant replies." "I love him."

"The social issue, completely new insights. He has it all thought out." Hitler's ideal: "a mixture of collectivism and individualism. Production must remain a matter for individuals, big corporations, trusts, etc, all to be nationalized. This is what we discuss."

---

I'm watching the documentary: The Goebbels Experiment. I got to thinking about the correlations between the Nazi's in Germany and the Conservatives in America.

Before using the Tea Party name, as a name for a movement, took hold in the imagination of the popular right wing nutso-sphere---Dale Robertson was using Tea Party dot org, as a name in September of 2004 (as far as I can tell).

Who is Dale and what why do I and others call him a leader and founder of the Tea Party movement?

---

There is no denying Dale was using the name Tea Party, and calling for conservatives to take back the GOP. Dale is a lair, and a propagandist. There is no denying Dale Robertson was involved with starting and helping tom organize Tea Party rallies in Texas, before they got scared with him and his racist ideology. There is no denying the right is distancing themselves from Robertson with deceit and deception as to how he is connected to them. Dale is at Tea Party events in 2009.

In a brief bio on his website, he lies about his military career. According to the website,

Dale served his nation first as a U.S. Marine. After completing his duties with the Corps, he reenlisted into the U.S. Navy and became a U.S. Naval Officer. During his distinguished time of service, Dale’s Battle Group was first to the scene on 9/11 as well as first to launch an offensive in Afghanistan. He was stationed on the USS Sacramento which was the life blood of the Battle Group. He faithfully served our nation with Honor and Integrity, retiring after 22 years.

But a Freedom of Information Act request by blogger Jonn Lilyea at This Ain't Hell reveals that Robertson was discharged from the U.S. Marine Corps Reserves after serving less than a year. That is quite an embellishment from the record he claims on his website. Robertson's statement is, in fact, riddled with falsehoods.

Read more: STORY RETRACTED | Fake Tea Partier Also a Phony Soldier | NewsBusters.org

I post a few links from the right wing blowhardo-sphere and others.

‘N-Word’ Sign Dogs Would-Be Tea Party Leader The Washington Independent

STORY RETRACTED | Fake Tea Partier Also a Phony Soldier | NewsBusters.org

'Warning: Tea Party In Danger': Leader Slams Palin As 'Wolf In Sheep's Clothing' | TPMMuckraker

Tea Partier Tells Mediaite Racist Sign Was Forged; We Have Him On Record Defending Its Use Alan Colmes' Liberaland

---

back to the Nazi Party/Tea Party correlations.

Bush was the GOP and conservative pick to lead the nation. What did Bush do in 2008? He all but nationalized the banks as he called for individual responsibilities, etc.
Sound familiar? What did Hitler call for? (see above quote from the diary of Joseph Goebbels)

We have Tea Party people speaking about how they view the nation. How they view fellow citizens as outsiders. We have Tea Party rallies where people speak openly about challenging the will of the Republic (the vote) with armed insurrection.

there's lots more...

I'll be back.


dD

I saw this thread and assumed it would die a natural death soon... Well its just not soon enough for me...

First, its really easy to sit back and pick one guy out of a crowd or one person who coined a phrase or term and say, "thats who the are". But it doesn't make it true or even reasonable... Want me to prove it? Okay...

I can look over at Obama and make some rather judgmental statements and make sweeping claims if I wanted to. They would have as much truth or merit as the OP. I could claim since Obama is mentored by Kissinger, he is a globalist conspirator. Kissinger is the head and CEO of Kissinger Associates, and international consulting firm. Whose purpose is to assist those seeking international trade, partnerships, and business relations. I could also claim Obama is a secret Nazi, since Kissinger was born in Germany. Is any of this actually pertinent or factual in regards to Obama? No not really but it sounds bad just the same doesn't it....

Or how about the fact Kissinger is a proponent of "Realpolitik" , and that means Obama as his pupil is an uncaring and unfeeling automaton seeking governmental power and nothing more. Is it true? In what sense? Kissinger is a proponent of realpolitik and that is one way that discipline is viewed. Also he is mentored by Kissinger....

kind of like what you just did with the OP... Thats the thing about mass judgments, they are often inaccurate, and unfair.

And as far as Nazi-like tendencies... Like the way the liberals and progressives push for absolutism? How they try and push everything through "for us" and "for our own good", but do so in a manner that is exactly like the national socialists did in Germany? They told the people how the "other guys" did it all, and how they have to consider them the enemy.

Whether you like it or not the name Nazi was actually national socialist. yeah Socialists... Funny how that is...

But I shouldn't paint all socialists as Nazi's that would be unfair..... Wouldn't it....

The op is just another baiting statement meant to stir the shit. Hmm, maybe someone should make a socialist liberal/national socialists similarities thread....

 

[California Girl]

The men who threw King George asunder were a minority too, comrade.

They also waited until they were left with no other options and they went kicking and screaming into a revolt. The Declaration of Independence took a long time and bloodshed and debate. It was not a movement of stupid people upset over supposedly high taxes, a supposed foreign born leader, and big government. It was about identity and representation.

The also dealt with idiotic lemmings, who believed that living in supplication to a detached and indifferent potentate was an acceptable option, as opposed to striking out on their own.

And nobody is "dragged kicking and screaming" into revolt...Being dragged off is for fools who believe that being today's useful idiot can prevent them from being tomorrow's gulag slave....Real men with real backbone revolt.

Dude, it's Dainty.... you're actually trying to have a reasoned discussion with dainty? Seriously? The majority of this thread is dainty bumping his own posts..... again. You'd get more sense having a discussion with rdean.

 

[edthecynic]

Hitler was also a staunch environmentalist, his first act was to impose complete gun control, he outlawed tobacco (much like the he huge tax on tabacco nowadays) started the National SOCIALIST Party (meaning he was a socialist), he hated capitalism, he played race politics, he supported forced sterilization and promoted abortion.

Heck if you ask me, Hitler's party looks like the Democratic party.

Heck if you ask me, Hitler IS a movement CON$ervative.

The Nazi Party (NSDAP)

[SIZE=+1]The Party Gets a New Name[/SIZE]
In April, 1920, Hitler advocated that the party should change its name to the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP). Hitler had always been hostile to socialist ideas, especially those that involved racial or sexual equality. However, socialism was a popular political philosophy in Germany after the First World War. This was reflected in the growth in the German Social Democrat Party (SDP), the largest political party in Germany.
Hitler, therefore redefined socialism by placing the word 'National' before it. He claimed he was only in favour of equality for those who had "German blood." Jews and other "aliens" would lose their rights of citizenship, and immigration of non-Germans should be brought to an end.