About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Right-Wing Media Link Arizona Assassin To Liberals ... Through Hitler?

January 10, 2011 11:37 am ET — 457 Comments

As details about the tragic shooting in Arizona came to light, members of the right-wing media quickly used the fact that Hitler's Mein Kampf was listed as one of Jared Loughner's favorite books as evidence that his politics are "left wing." This characterization coincides with years of effort by Fox News personalities to tie the fascist Nazi regime of Adolf Hitler to progressivism.

Suspected Gunman Jared Loughner Listed Mein Kampf As One Of His Favorite Books

Loughner Listed Mein Kampf As One Of His "Favorite Books" On His YouTube Account. From alleged gunman Jared Loughner's reported YouTube account:

Books:

I had favorite books: Animal Farm, Brave New World, The Wizard Of OZ, Aesop Fables, The Odyssey, Alice Adventures Into Wonderland, Fahrenheit 451, Peter Pan, To Kill A Mockingbird, We The Living, Phantom Toll Booth, One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, Pulp,Through The Looking Glass, The Communist Manifesto, Siddhartha, The Old Man And The Sea, Gulliver's Travels, Mein Kampf, The Republic, and Meno.

[Jared Lee Loughner's YouTube, accessed 1/9/11]

Right-Wing Media Seize On Mein Kampf To Label Loughner A "Left-Winger"

Hoft: Loughner "Reportedly Left-Wing, Quite Liberal," "His Favorite Books: Comminust [sic] Manifesto, Mein Kampf." From a January 8 post by Jim Hoft on Gateway Pundit:

He is definitely NOT a tea partier....
Killler identified: Jared Loughner. He is 22. Born September 1988.

Here's a photo of Jared at a book fair.

He was reportedly left-wing, quite liberal.

** His favorite books: Communist Manifesto, Mein Kampf

[Gateway Pundit, 1/8/11; emphasis original]

Newsmax: Shooter "Fascinated By Leftwing Politics," His Favorite Books "Hardly The Reading List Of A Palin Supporter." From a January 9 Newsmax article titled "Dems, Media Blame Tea Party, Palin for Shooting; Shooter Linked to Leftwing Politics":

As U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords fights for her life after a mad gunman shot her on Saturday, some Democrats and major media have moved to pin the blame for her attack on the tea party movement and conservatives like Sarah Palin, despite the fact that the shooter was both deranged and fascinated by leftwing politics.

[...]

Indeed, the profile of the accused shooter, 22-year-old Jared Loughner, that continues to emerge is that of a deranged young man whose mind was deeply distubred [sic], but who also tinkered with both anarchist ideas and leftwing politics.

ABC News reported Saturday night that Loughner had identified among his favorite books "The Communist Manifesto" by Karl Marx, Adolf Hitler's "Mein Kampf" and the fiction classic "One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest" -- hardly the reading list of a Palin supporter. [Newsmax, 1/9/11]

Geller Calls Loughner A "Lefty Loon," Notes That Mein Kampf Is One Of His Favorite Books. From a January 8 blog post on Geller's website Atlas Shrugs:

This is from his youtube channel. Total lefty loon.

[...]

FOX News reports the shooter's favorite books: Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf

[Atlas Shrugs, 1/8/11; emphasis in original]

WND's Klein: "'The Communist Manifesto' And Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' Were Among The Favorite Reading Materials Of Jared Lee Loughner." From a January 8 WorldNetDaily article by Aaron Klein titled "Assassin's politics lean 'left wing, quite liberal'": "'The Communist Manifesto' and Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' were among the favorite reading materials of Jared Lee Loughner, the suspected gunman in today's fatal shooting that reportedly left six dead and gravely injured a U.S. congresswoman." [WorldNetDaily, 1/8/11]

NewsBusters' Sheppard On Loughner Enjoying Mein Kampf: Hitler's "Views Were Quite Opposite Of What Conservatives In America Currently Stand For." From a January 8 blog post by Noel Sheppard at NewsBusters:

A video that he posted at his YouTube channel features a flag burning, certainly not what one would expect from a conservative. Loughner also listed his favorite books including "Mein Kampf" and "The Communist Manifesto."

Liberals love to claim Adolf Hitler and his National Socialist Party were right-wing. However, as Hitler wanted total governmental control of industry and healthcare, his views were quite opposite of what conservatives in America currently stand for, especially Palin, Beck, and members of the Tea Party. [NewsBusters, 1/8/11]

Fox News Personalities Frequently Equate Liberals And Progressives With Nazis

Glenn Beck: Nazism Is "At The End Of The Progressive Road"

"Nazis" And "Communists" Are Both "At The End Of The Progressive Road." From the March 1, 2010, edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:

BECK: It's a process. It's a process on the way to an extreme goal.

What is the extreme goal? That's the question. What is it? Complete revolution through the green movement. It's just a vehicle to him.

I'm going to show you this. This is a chart of where America really is. Everybody always says, oh, you're on the right, you're on the left. If you're on the right, if this is the system, it'd be total anarchy. Really? That's what the Republicans are for. No, no, no. They're always called fascists, Nazis.

The left, if they go too far, are always called communists, right? Those are the names we call each other. Nobody says you're an anarchist unless you're a crazy person. Got it?

Left and right -- right is anarchy and the smallest limited government you can get. And then there comes the big government, the progressive government to communism and fascism.

Our founders had us about here. This is where they had us. Now, up and down, that is actually left and right. The Republicans, the Democrats, up and down.

This bar slides by both the Republicans and the Democrats. It slides back and forth. Reagan moved it back over here, moves it back up here.

Got it? Fascism -- that's why the Republicans, they're Nazis. The left, communist, because if they get too close to big government, that's what happened.

Now, progressives -- progressives, what does the root of the word is? "Progress." You're progressing to what? Progress implies steps forward, movement, right? What are you moving toward?

You're not moving back towards the Constitution of the republic. You're not moving towards anarchy. You're moving step-by-step towards total government.

And it depends on who gets you there. Is it going to be the fascists, the Nazis, or the communists? Left -- left or right? Up or down? That's what it is.

[...]

I know it sounds like crazy talk to talk about communists, because, I mean, you've got to be kidding me. It's not about communists. It never has been about communists either. Never has been. That guy is a lunatic fringe, just like white supremacists on the other side. Right here.

This side, up and down, communist and fascist. Those people are crazy. This is about progressivism. And most people - they are in here. When they say they're progressives, they don't think they're headed here. But progress, baby steps - you are moving toward something. You're moving toward one of these.

This is why they called George Bush a fascist, because progressives know what is at the end of the progressive road. Whether it's Nazis or communists, someone has to control your life. Someone will be at the controls. Communists would like it to be them. Nazis are rooting for their side.

I'm not rooting for any side. I'm rooting for this side. Wrong side of the scale, guys. This is a war for your rights, you free agency, your free agency to choose for yourself. This has been a battle that has been raging since the beginning of time.

There have been those who wanted to take your right to choose away from you. Choose your own destiny. They may want to do it because they want to control you or just because they want to help you.

Here in America, if you read history, you know that communism has been on the progressive left, communism on the progressive left for 100 years, from 1938. Let me show you this page from Rhode Island 1938, "Progress and Democracy."

It says, "The reason that communists and the progressives failed for 100 years ago is that we were too out in the open." Too out in the open. Democracy has always played important role in history of Rhode Island. Wait until I show you the rest of this and what is in the very back. It's important.

[...]

BECK: Progress and democracy. I was going to show you this. This is something I had at the CPAC speech. And I want to show you this - and I'm going to spend some time on it tomorrow. I just want to show it you. Oscar, [unintelligible] down here.

I love this, "Vote communist." But the line before it, "Elect" -- what does it say here? "Elect progressive candidates for every office. Vote communist." All right.

In the 1930s, there was a real power play, and the progressives held both Nazis and communists. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 3/1/10, via Nexis]

"While There Are Nazis And Communists, You Are Leaving Out The One Word That Gives It All Context - Progressive." From the March 2, 2010, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: Let me tell you something. There are Nazis in America and there are communists in America. But not all Democrats are communists; not all Republicans are Nazis. Because while there are Nazis and communists, you are leaving out the one word that gives it all context - progressive. Progressive.

Let me go back to this Rhode Island booklet. Here, right here. It talks in this booklet of progress and democracy. It talks about who their - who their groupings are, who their main allies are. In its main groupings, President Roosevelt and the new deal Democrats. Independent progressive Republicans.

You see, it's both left and right. Progressives. And in the end, remember who put this out. "Vote communist" - the last words, "elect progressive candidates for every office. Vote communist."

See, what happened was FDR was reaching out to the fringes, the fringes of the progressive movement, if you will on the left, which were communists. He used them for fuel just as the Democrats now use Michael Moore. Do you remember when Michael Moore - he put "Fahrenheit 9/11."

The guy is a Marxist.

I remember being on the air, what, six, seven years ago, seeing him in the presidential box with Jimmy Carter. And I said, "Democrats, what are you doing? The guy is a Marxist. You think you are using him for fuel to bash George W. Bush but these people are going to turn around and eat you."

And that's what is happening, America. FDR used them for the same reason, because these people are motivated to go out and attack the other side. Use anything. Tear the opposition apart.

And by the way, let's try this new little idea called communism. Meanwhile, those who were opposed to FDR, the Republicans, the progressive Republicans, reached out to the enemy of the communists and the enemy of FDR, the Nazis. And they used the Nazis as fuel.

This was seared into our grandparents' heads but it was unspoken to us as children and grandchildren. Republicans are Nazis. Democrats are communists. It's because they missed one word. They miss in the tale-tell signs - social justice, economic justice.

Let me go back to Nazi rally. I want to show you this again. Can you bring up the screen one more time? Here is the rally. Got to show you a flag. Nancy Pelosi would say this is a tea party here, all the Nazis.

But there is a banner - do we have the banner? We're going to need a close-up of it. Do we have that? Hang on, it's coming. Here it is - stop. OK. Well, this is Fr. Coughlin. This is the guy that the left says I am, but I'm just a guy who is just out there going for the Nazis.

He went for the Nazis. He did. Nazi - spookiest dude you've ever seen. We don't have the banner? On the documentary, we'll show you the banner. There is a banner on the podium. And this is, I guess, a mock up of it. Social justice. Social justice.

You wouldn't have this at the tea party. Tea parties are for small limited government. The movement of the Democratic opposition in FDR's day was carrying a sign, "social justice." These were progressives. Progressives. Social justice. This was social justice.

If you look at the chart, when the fascist movement was discredited by Hitler and Mussolini, most of our grandparents got away from it. And they came back down around here. When Stalin was exposed for the monster that he was, we started saying, "Oh, boy, that's bad," and our grandparents got away.

But some didn't. Some didn't. They went back and put a mask on. They went back undercover working for their socialist utopia. Because - OK, well, these guys screwed it up. But this system works. No, it doesn't. No, it doesn't.

And they outwardly reject the revolutionary words. They just work for social justice, economic justice. The rights of the worker. Just a little bit of progress. See, our Founders put us here for a reason with a very small government. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 3/2/10, via Nexis]

"[W]e're Always Told That Nazi Germany, Who Controlled Every Aspect Of Its Citizens' Lives, Was Somehow Right-Wing. Is That True? Or Is It An Attempt To Distract From Other Much More Inconvenient Similarities?" From the January 22, 2010, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: That's modern conservatism in a nutshell. Yet, we're always told that Nazi Germany, who controlled every aspect of its citizens' lives, was somehow right-wing. Is that true? Or is it an attempt to distract from other much more inconvenient similarities?

JONAH GOLDBERG (author, Liberal Fascism): To say, you know, Hitler was a right-winger because of X, Y, Z, I say, what was Stalin's position on X, Y, and Z?

The common assumption is that the Nazis were a right-wing phenomena. They a right-wing party, that Hitler was a man of the right and all of the rest. And there are a lot of problems with this. His social agenda was for expanding universal access to health care, for expanding access to education. It was for cradle to grave welfare estate. It was for attacking big business and high finance.

People say, "Well, Hitler abolished labor unions, he was a right-wing then." Well, how did labor unions do under Stalin? How are labor unions doing under Fidel Castro? Almost anything you can find on a checklist that allegedly proves Hitler was a right-winger, you can apply to almost any one of the communist dictators of the 20th century and the similarities are almost identical. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 1/22/10, via Nexis]

Beck Ties Nazi Camps To Progressives: "This Was A Progressive Idea. Not The Extermination Camps But Eugenics Which Led To The Camps." From the January 8, 2010, edition of Glenn Beck:

I get a lot of heat for bringing up fascism on this program, but its roots -- the roots of progressivism leads to fascism. The early American progressives were for the fascists in the earliest 20th century. Read history.

You can call me all the names you want, read history and show me where I'm wrong. The reason why I bring up Hitler so much of the time is because what he did -- many of the things had their roots, their seeds here in America. The biggest example is eugenics which led to extermination camps. This was a progressive idea. Not the extermination camps but eugenics which led to the camps.

You see, the progressives in America always thought they were superior. And it was the stupid people that were just slowing us down. Hitler just took that to the next level as did Stalin.

The progressive tactics haven't changed much since then. What do they do? Watch.

They build a structure and then they make it so darn complex that people don't understand it. And then they avoid debate. Most importantly, they got to move quickly and silence any of the dissents.

Well, if that doesn't work, if they can't silence you, they bribe. They indoctrinate you. But if that still doesn't work, they will destroy you. Again, does any of this sound like today? [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 1/8/10, via Nexis]

Progressives Use "Democratic Elections" To Push Dictators -- "Hitler, 'Democratically Elected.' " From the April 28, 2009, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: Well, hello, America.

I want to talk to you again about the fundamental transformation of America. It could happen tomorrow. I have to tell you, there are -- it's like you can't catch your breath. I mean, how long have we been running? This has been a marathon now since last year.

And there are some nasty things happening -- maybe tomorrow -- that will transform our country. You will add another star to our flag. You haven't heard this anywhere. You will tonight. And you better pay attention and call your friends and tell them, because it could happen tomorrow -- the vote.

Now, before I give you the full details, there's something you have to understand, first. And that is progressives. What is it that progressives believe?

Progressives are all about big government and power and control. It doesn't matter about Democrat or Republican. It's power and control -- control over you. You don't choose for yourself. We'll give you some options. But we're not going to make them clear. We'll give you some options and we'll control it.

This is the European model, not the American model. The American model is small government. The government doesn't control every aspect of your life.

This is what gives you communism and Nazism on either side. This is not American. This is progressive -- big government and power and control. OK? They'll regulate everything from cars to food -- everything. You are seeing it right now.

The second thing that progressives, that are important to them -- I mean, if we had them on truth serum: democratic elections. Yes. Again, they'll give you the choices like for instance the progressives around the turn of the century gave you Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, both progressives. Both believe in big government and power and control. We had the choice over and over. It's why we keep voting saying, well, it seems like we still get the same thing, right?

But democratic elections mean something else because we're not a democracy. We're a republic. Democratic elections -- you'll hear this when they talk about the democratically-elected leader of Iran. The democratic leader Chavez, democratically-elected, you know? Castro, democratically-elected; Hitler, democratically-elected. It's code language. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 4/28/09, via Nexis]

Beck Likens Progressives To Nazis For Use Of Term "Social Justice." From the March 2, 2010, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: Let me go back to Nazi rally. I want to show you this again. Can you bring up the screen one more time? Here is the rally. Got to show you a flag. Nancy Pelosi would say this is a tea party here, all the Nazis.

But there is a banner - do we have the banner? We're going to need a close-up of it. Do we have that? Hang on, it's coming. Here it is - stop. OK. Well, this is Fr. Coughlin. This is the guy that the left says I am, but I'm just a guy who is just out there going for the Nazis.

He went for the Nazis. He did. Nazi - spookiest dude you've ever seen. We don't have the banner? On the documentary, we'll show you the banner. There is a banner on the podium. And this is, I guess, a mock up of it. Social justice. Social justice.

You wouldn't have this at the tea party. Tea parties are for small limited government. The movement of the Democratic opposition in FDR's day was carrying a sign, "social justice." These were progressives. Progressives. Social justice. This was social justice.

If you look at the chart, when the fascist movement was discredited by Hitler and Mussolini, most of our grandparents got away from it. And they came back down around here. When Stalin was exposed for the monster that he was, we started saying, "Oh, boy, that's bad," and our grandparents got away. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 3/2/10, via Nexis]

"This Is What Progressives Do. They Just Change The Words. Change The Meaning, It's National Socialism." From the November 22, 2010, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: I want you to have conversations at the dinner table with your friends and family, because we're headed toward the system of government that China has. And you'll hear all the leaders, all around the world, China is the new model, right? China is the new model. It's great to see the sudden reverence that we have for China.

They are a communist country. Just like they were under Chairman Mao. They only killed 80 million people. Seriously, that's it. Only 80 million.

I want to show you a picture of the people in Communist China, how wonderful life was under Mao. See these guys? These weren't prisoners, by the way. These weren't prisoners. These were just workers.

Chairman Mao thought -- ahh, this guy, let's just call him 119. We just need numbers, because that's really all people are -- numbers.

China is the same country today, except they don't call it communism anymore. They call it state capitalism.

Well, are they capitalists? Well, yes. They're not -- they're not communists really because what is communism? Communism is state- controlled, state-owned, state-run. Nobody owns anything.

So, that's not communism because now they let people make money. They let people own things.

All right. But not entirely. So, it's not communism.

Look it up in the dictionary. What is the -- what is the step between communism and capitalism? It's socialism. So, it's a socialist country, right?

Now state -- state capitalism. It's capital "S." State capitalism, which is equal to the nation. It's not local. It will be -- one world government.

State capitalism -- it's actually national socialism. Gee, who had national socialism? Who had -- hey, that's right. That's the government setting the pace of the economy using private companies to be the engine.

Who had this system? That's right. National socialism, somebody had it. We should look that up. You have privately-owned companies -- you just have to do what the state says. In China, it's completely different because they have privately-owned companies who have to do what the state says.

Well, I know we wouldn't take national socialism because that was Germany. Germany had this. That is "National Socialism," it's the Nazi Party. So, if we wouldn't go for national, let's just capitalize the "S" in that way we don't freak anybody out, because we will say that, no, no, not national socialist, it's state.

And everybody is freaked out by communism and it's not communism because you still get to own things. You just have to do what the state says. So, let's call it capitalism when actually it's national socialism - - let's call it state capitalism. And the world will feel so much better.

Do you understand? This is what progressives do. They just change the words. Change the meaning, it's national socialism. It's what Hitler said could never be defeated. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 11/22/10, via Nexis]

"The Climate Change People Are Pulling A Page From Nazi's Hitler Youth." From the February 4, 2009, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: All right. The climate change people are pulling a page from Nazi's Hitler youth. What are your kids learning at school? Do we really surround them. Yes.

How do we become a country where we're sliding into socialism and everybody's like, "Socialism is great. Canada's not so bad"?

Well, how about because of our educational system? Students at a New Jersey elementary school just got a lesson in, quote, "climate change and solar power" from - get this - a solar panel manufacturer. Anybody else see the conflict? Yes.

David Horowitz, author of "Indoctrination U" joins me now.

David, I mean, I've got two stories here, you know, for National Green Week that's happening in school. The first one is - David can you imagine this being done if Exxon came in to give a slide show on climate change?

DAVID HOROWITZ (author and activist): Never happen. There would be protests against it, and they would be organized by the teachers. By the way, this is a terrific show and a terrific theme --

BECK: Thank you.

HOROWITZ: -- because there is a movement in our country. which is very, very powerful. In the name of doing good for you is going to take control of your life through the state. And it's just wonderful that you're opposing this.

BECK: I will tell you, David. You know, you come to me with some real credibility, because you were a -- no offense -- a useful idiot when you were young. You were a guy -- go ahead.

HOROWITZ: I was better than that. I was a Marxist revolutionary. I understand Bill Ayers really well.

BECK: Right.

HOROWITZ: Bill Ayers, by the way, is a professor of early childhood education. This is the terrorist Bill Ayers - and he's the editor of the series published by the most prestigious education -- teacher education school in the country, Columbia -- called, "Teaching Social Justice in our School" theories. There are 12 books --

BECK: All right. You know, you don't have to be Bill Ayers. This is what America doesn't understand. This stuff is happening with your children all the time and this media is not covering it. Nobody is speaking out against it. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 2/4/09, via Nexis]

"Eugenics Was Popular Thought For President Woodrow Wilson, Teddy Roosevelt And Their Advisors." From the August 11, 2009, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK (voiceover): Eugenics is not an idea, and it did not start with the Nazis but with American and British socialists and progressives who thought that through measures like prohibition and later, birth control, they could cure the ills of modern society, such as more public hygiene, rising population among lower classes, and urban crowding. Indiana passed the first sterilization law in 1907 for confirmed criminals, idiots, embezzlers and rapists. And in the next 20 years, 29 other states followed suit, along with Canada and most of Europe.

Eugenics infected the mind-set of intellectuals such as the leader of the new liberalism movement of the early 20th century, Herbert Croly. He wrote a book in 1909 called The Promise of American Life, in which he declared that the state must, quote, "interfere on behalf of the really fittest."

Eugenics was popular thought for President Woodrow Wilson, Teddy Roosevelt and their advisors. In 1912, a year before he was president, New Jersey's governor, Woodrow Wilson, created a board of examiners of feeble- minded, epileptics and other defectives. Under it, the state could determine, quote, "when procreation is inadvisable like for criminals, prisoners, poor kids and the ill-defined, other defectives," end quote.

Roosevelt's close advisor, Charles Van Hise said, quote, "He who thinks of himself not primarily, but of his race, and of its future, is the new patriot," end quote. Former President Roosevelt later endorsed Madison Grant's passing of "The Great Race," a book that Hitler once referred to as his Bible.

What most history textbooks seemed to ignore is that before the Nazis took power, Germans lagged behind Americans and Europeans in eugenics. But World War I and the great flu pandemic basically turned doctors into social planners, and Hitler and the Nazis took the logic of public health to totalitarian extremes. They made the central policy goal affecting employment, marriage, medicine and more. The same year, Hitler joined the Nazi party in 1920, the Nazis rounded up hundreds of thousands of disabled, elderly and mentally ill, and exterminated them, as quote, "useless bread gobblers" or "life unworthy of life," end quote.

Back to America, eugenics was beings effectively written into the Constitution. In the Buck versus Bell case in 1927, progressive lawyers stood on the flimsy ground of a Massachusetts vaccination law to keep Carrie Buck from reproducing. We know now she wasn't retarded. But to add insult to injury, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes infamously wrote, quote, "Three generations of imbeciles are enough," end quote.

Seven years later, Hitler wrote to the president of the American Eugenics Society to ask for a copy of his famous case for sterilization, which called for forced sterilization of some 10 million Americans. During that year, the Nazis sterilized over 50,000 "unfit" Germans, which caused an American eugenicist to complain, quote, "The Germans are beating us at our own game."

The Nazi eugenic idea involved naturally into the eventual Holocaust and the deaths of 6 million Jews, as well as millions of other innocent people. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 8/11/09, via Nexis]

"Hitler Learned Propaganda From The Wilson Administration." From the September 24, 2010, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: Because people were going to church -- but Whitefield made an impression on people because he rejected the church of the government, the Church of England. He said, "This isn't about God. God needs to be between you two, God and you. The state has no place in that."

England had a state church. It went more than just the Church of England. You had to pay tithe. Well, that was a tax there. There wasn't any opportunity to worship as you chose. That's why Whitefield didn't go preach in the churches. He had to do it out in the fields.

And that's where our founders were trying to guard against. They knew what would happen when a state said, "Hey, wait a minute. We have these people who will listen to anything because they're stupid, I guess. And they'll just listen to whatever their pastor says. So, if we can just co- op the state, then we can get them to do anything." That's what they were guarding against -- almost like what's happening with social justice and the progressives.

Now, the worst example of this in the last century -- is probably the best example of what a state interfering into religion can do. When Hitler came to power in Germany, he knew his deception of the German people would never be complete without using religion. And that's exactly what he did.

Remember, Hitler learned an awful lot of stuff from a guy named Bernays. And Bernays was the guy who when Goebbels died, they found the book by Bernays on propaganda, an American author, an American that was with Wilson, in the office of Goebbels. It was on propaganda. They say they learned propaganda -- Hitler learned propaganda from the Wilson administration.

Well, one of the things that the Wilson administration and progressives did at the time was: they knew they had to destroy our faith. They knew they needed to get social justice in there.

Well, Hitler took it a million miles farther. He set out to draw Christians to him by explaining the seeds (ph) in "Mein Kampf," where he spoke of the Creator and universe and of eternal providence. He also states his belief that the Aryan race was created by God and that it would be a sin to dilute it through racial intermixing.

He tried to head off church resistance by professing in a speech that Jesus was the one true God. Well, one pastor who's going to be with us tonight has told us of the story when Hitler became chancellor of Germany. He met with all of the leading pastors and he openly tried to reassure them that the position of the church was secure. But he secretly was setting out to silence them. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 9/24/10, via Nexis]

Beck On Obama's Proposed "Civilian Security Force": "This Is What Hitler Did With The SS. He Had His Own People. He Had The Brown Shirts And Then The SS. This Is What Saddam Hussein." From the August 27, 2009, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: OK. I want -- we're going to talk about some of the groups that are going to come and start being folded in. But, David, let me -- let me go to you. Who is the enemy that we need a national security force inside? Who is -- can you come up with anybody?

DAVID BELLAVIA (former Army staff sergeant): You. I really don't know, Glenn. I mean, you know what it comes down to though, and I want to make this comparison. I'm not comparing my president to Saddam Hussein or to Hitler or anything else. I want your audience to understand something from a military point of view.

When Saddam Hussein lost confidence in his army in `91, when they capitulated, when they quit, when they stopped following his orders, he created and he supported -- resupported what was called (INAUDIBLE), a group of loyalists who weren't loyal to the country or the flag. They were loyal to the office of the president and to the man who held the office.

And what we're seeing now is complete disconnect to the warrior class in America to the military and to the left. They never had a common denominator. They never had a way to understand us. So, you know what? We don't need you. If we have to enforce, let's say, I don't know, polling laws.

If we want to keep pulling intimidation down in 2012, we'll send in our civilian corps. If we want the census is done correctly, we'll bring in the civilian corps. If we want to, I don't know, take away the arms of radical militias in south Texas and bring these guys in, this is scary stuff.

BECK: But I mean, I'm finding -- I'm finding this, this is the hardest part to connect to, because this is -- I mean, look, you know, David, what you just said is, you said I'm not comparing but you are. I mean, this is what Hitler did with the SS. He had his own people. He had the brown shirts and then the SS. This is what Saddam Hussein. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 8/27/09, via Nexis]

After Stating, "I Am Not Saying That Barack Obama Is A Fascist," Beck Compares Auto Bailout To Actions Of German Companies "In The Early Days Of Adolf Hitler." From the April 1, 2009, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: You know, hang on, Sheldon, I don't know what you're -- I don't know what you're trying to paint here. I am not saying that Barack Obama is a fascist.

SHELDON RICHMAN (libertarian author): Right.

BECK: I'm not saying the Democrats are fascists. I'm saying the government under Bush and under Obama --

RICHMAN: Right.

BECK: -- and under all of the presidents that we've seen or at least most of the presidents that we've seen for quite some time are slowly but surely moving us away from our republic and into a system of fascism. Yes or no? 

RICHMAN: Now, I'm agreeing with you.

BECK: OK.

RICHMAN: I'm saying we've been on that road a very long time. We've been on that road for ages from the -- into the 19th century. We -- sometimes we take two steps forward and then one back; sometimes we take one step forward or two steps back. We've been on that road, and I agree with what you're saying. The G.M. and AIG situations are more -- are more like fascism than socialism.

But I would add this one caveat and I don't approve of the policies, but I would just add this one caveat. These companies came to the government for help. They never should have .

BECK: Oh, but .

RICHMAN: . they never should have gotten it (INAUDIBLE).

BECK: If I'm not mistaken -- if I'm not mistaken, in the early days of Adolf Hitler, they were -- they were very happy to line up for help there as well. I mean, the companies were like, hey, wait a minute, we can get, you know, we can get out of trouble here, they can help, et cetera, et cetera.

You line up sometimes. You never want to give your rights away or your freedoms away for security. Our founders talked about this. We're giving our freedoms away. G.M., AIG, any of these banks, Citigroup -- they're all giving their freedom away for security.

RICHMAN: You're right. We don't have an argument here. I was just keeping the context clear. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 4/1/09, via Nexis]

Beck Compares Gore To Joseph Goebbels And Drug Dealers, Says "The Government And Its Friends Are Indoctrinating Our Children For The Control Of Their Minds." From the February 5, 2009, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: Yes. I'm going to play more of this tape for you in a minute and introduce you to the 12-year-old who was there recording it because her dad told her to. Her dad will be with us, too.

But what is the point of all this? Well, as I see it, as a father of four, you are probably a little like me. You are working hard to raise your kids right, and it seems like everything is stacked against you. In many cases, both you and your spouse are working and some are working two jobs.

You get home and you're tired. You have been dealing with a screaming boss all day, an economy that's falling apart and everybody is freaking out wondering if they're even going to have a job next week and you got a government that is out of control. You look at on TV and you're like, "What the hell are they doing now?"

And you're doing it all without any help. In fact, I think you are doing it against everything that's been set up to make your life oh, so easy. And now, you got the former vice president of the United States and a Nobel Prize winner looking your kid in the eye telling them, "You know what? You know things that your dad and mom don't."

Well, try to beat that, mom and dad. What do you know? I mean, you tell me, what a 12-year-old knows instinctively that an adult doesn't -- I mean, except being able to play "Guitar Hero." And if it is true, then why don't we appoint a 12-year-old to lead the treasury? I mean, they know things instinctively. Yes, we didn't need Tim Geithner. Or how about -- how about we appoint a 12-year-old as the new climate czar?

Why is it that our Constitution says that the president has to be 35? I'm sure he's trapped in some of that old thinking. Shouldn't we just make sure that at least the vice president is 13?

The government and its friends are indoctrinating our children for control of their minds, your freedom, and our choice and our future. It must stop, because history -- when properly taught -- has already shown us where it leads.

This is what Nazi Joseph Goebbels said about the Hitler Youth: "If such an art of active mass influence through propaganda is joined with a long-term systematic education of our nation and if both are conducted in a unified and precise way, the relationship between the leadership and the nation will always remain close."

Well, what's next? If mom and dad decide to keep the temperature above 72, should our "Gore Youth" report mom and dad? Should they also report spankings and groundings every time daddy comes home and watches that evil FOX News?

Environmentalists, along with everybody else, looking to promote an agenda understand what the drug dealer understands instinctively, and he's not 12, and that's this: Get kids hooked when they're young and you will have a customer for life.

We just played a little bit of Al Gore's tape, but I want you to meet the 12-year-old who recorded it and her dad, who, according to Al Gore, she's not supposed to be listening to. Welcome Caitlin and Andy Glenn.

Hello, Caitlin. How are you? [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 2/5/09, via Nexis]

Beck Said Gore Using "Same Tactic" In Fight Against Global Warming As Hitler Did Against Jews. From the April 30, 2007, edition of Beck's radio show:

BECK: And I read this one part on global warming about how they got -- what was the first thing they did to get people to exterminate the Jews. Now, I'm not saying that anybody's going to -- you know Al Gore's not going to be rounding up Jews and exterminating them. It is the same tactic, however. The goal is different. The goal is globalization. The goal is global carbon tax. The goal is the United Nations running the world. That is the goal. Back in the 1930s, the goal was get rid of all of the Jews and have one global government.

You got to have an enemy to fight. And when you have an enemy to fight, then you can unite the entire world behind you, and you seize power. That was Hitler's plan. His enemy: the Jew. Al Gore's enemy, the U.N.'s enemy: global warming. [Premiere Radio Networks, The Glenn Beck Program, 4/30/07]

  • ADL Rebuked Beck's Smear Of Gore. Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director and a Holocaust survivor, said of the remark, in part: "Glenn Beck's linkage of Hitler's plan to round up and exterminate Jews with Al Gore's efforts to raise awareness of global warming is outrageous, insensitive and deeply offensive." [ADL.org press release, 5/2/07]

Beck Compares Michael Moore To Nazi SS General Joseph Goebbels.  From the September 24, 2010, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK:  Now, you will hear many people claim that Hitler was a Christian. And they use Hitler to make their point about how frightening Christian fundamentalists can be. They always say this. But anyone who says that has not read history or they have read history written by progressive, not the people who were there.

Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda minister, noted in a diary entry in 1939 a conversation with Hitler. He wrote and I quote, "The Fuhrer is a man totally attuned to antiquity. He hates Christianity because it has crippled all that is noble in humanity." That sounds more like Michael Moore, doesn't it? [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 09/24/10, via Nexis]

Beck Compares ACORN To "Brown Shirts." From the September 24, 2010, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: You know, I have to tell you something, you know, ACORN -- we all think we know what ACORN is. But there is so much more to this story.

Tomorrow, America, we're going to introduce you to a couple of people that I don't think anybody has really introduced to you to before. They're part of the "ACORN 8." We tried to get all eight in, but because of scheduling and everything else we couldn't -- well, we got a couple of them in.

They're going to lay out the story for you. They were -- they were on the board at ACORN. They are all African-Americans and they say this is corrupt all the way start to finish. Wait until you hear the people who were there, and are part -- they want nothing to do with ACORN, but are speaking out.

Can you tell me this? Here is something, Kevin, that I don't see anybody really talking about is the link between ACORN and SEIU. This is the service union.

These are the people -- these are the people that ACORN was protesting, driving people out to the AIG people. These are the "brown shirts." Then the service workers union, or the SEIU, these are the people that were protesting in front of AIG. They're henchmen. Are they tied together?

KEVIN MOONEY (Washington Examiner commentary staff writer): They are absolutely. You can find this through disclosure forms that labor unions have to report, the LM-2 disclosure forms. The Service Employees International Union and ACORN have exchanged funds back and forth. And as you may know, the SEI Union has been leading the charge for the card check bill, the Employee Free Choice Act, which has been -- was reintroduced just earlier this year.

So, they are very much linked in with labor unions. In fact, the day after we published our story linking in ACORN with the Service Employees International Union, they actually took down from their Web site the member affiliation portion that identified SEIU.

BECK: Hold on just a second. Wasn't -- what's his name, Wade Rathke, right?

MOONEY: That's the founder of ACORN.

BECK: Founder of ACORN. He is now tied into the unions because -- didn't he leave ACORN because his brother embezzled $1 million as the CFO? And Wade, was he involved? Did he know about it or what happened?

MOONEY: His brother Dale Rathke was the chief financial officer at the time, and he was being accused of embezzling close to a million dollars. ACORN was going to bring suit, but they dropped it, instead now, some restitution, and he's permitted to pay some of that back in the form of a loan. Wade Rathke, apparently, did not report that to the police and was removed from ACORN, at least according to their board minutes. But Wade Rathke is still active with the Service Employees International Union as their chief organizer.

BECK: Right.

MOONEY: So, he's not really separated.

BECK: Right. Yes. So, he's not with ACORN, but he's with the -- he's with the union.

OK, thank you very much. We'll talk again.

And don't miss tomorrow, we've got more on this -- I mean, look, gang, let's just tell the truth. Let's play the cards face up on the table. Let's show you the stuff that nobody else, for some reason or another -- maybe these people are just smarter than I am, you know, on the whole -- you really shouldn't show all of this, because they break kneecaps. I don't know. Maybe they do, maybe they don't, I don't know. But they don't seem really on the up and up. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 9/24/10, via Nexis]

Beck Links Health Care Reform To Nazis, Suggests Reform Would Kill Elderly And Newborns. From the August 6, 2009, edition of Beck's radio show:

BECK: You have three people in the White House that are in love with eugenics or whatever it is you would call it today. Of course it's not eugenics, because eugenics has been so horribly maligned.  How did the T4 program start in Germany? It started through compassion. And it started because we needed to get control of the costs. So first they emptied out the sanitariums. They emptied out all of the people who had dimentia. They emptied out all of the people that were handicapped and living in hospitals. Then they started going after the babies. Any baby that was born that was cripple. [sic] Then they started weeding all of the cripples in between. Then, believe it or not -- I can't believe I'm making this statement -- then it got ugly. Well some believe the idea of eugenics got ugly before they started gassing Jews and homosexuals. Some believe it got ugly when they started cleaning out the sanitariums. When they first started to seriously have the conversation: "Well, we can't really afford them. Wouldn't it be better if they just died?" We have quotes, not ancient 1960 quotes, the oldest one we have is from nineteen ninety, I think, ninety-five. And some of them have been written or said this year, by people who are advising this president on healthcare. [Premiere Radio Networks, The Glenn Beck Program, 8/6/09]

Beck Juxtaposed Hitler's "Decree Permitting Euthanasia" With Hillary Clinton's Plan For Health Care. From the November 14, 2006, edition of CNN Headline News' Glenn Beck:

BECK: Once he [Hitler] was through with the babies, the elderly were next. As it has been said over and over again with tragedies regarding the Holocaust: never again. So, when you see politicians making statements like this one yesterday --

CLINTON [video clip]: But the whole issue of health care is coming back. That may be a bad dream for some, but for others, it's a very welcome possibility, because we are on an unsustainable course. I think that we have to come up with a uniquely American solution.

BECK: OK. When you see statements like that, be afraid. Be very, very afraid. It's not a bad dream for me; it is a nightmare. Hillary, thanks, but no thanks. 1993 wasn't that long ago. I remember all too well that confused, nonsensical mess you tried to make of the greatest health care system in the world. [CNN Headline News, Glenn Beck, 11/14/06]

Beck On Nazi Germany: "It Looks Like That's The Direction We're Heading For." From the February 24, 2009 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:

BECK: More on this coming up. Also controlling you -- it's all about controlling the message. It's the language. It's not a bailout, you know. I mean, it is a bailout. It's not a rescue program. Bailout language, next.

I'm just reading something here, "The state must take over when private industry has proved itself that it can no longer -- it is no longer able to carry on."

By the way, that's not from one of our current presidents or anybody else. That's scaring -- from Nazi Germany. It looks like that's what we're doing. It looks like that's the direction we're heading for. And yet, nobody seems to think that socialism is a bad thing. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 2/24/09; accessed via Nexis]

Goebbels Said The Nazis Learned "Everything They Needed To Know About Propaganda Came From The Progressives Here In The United States." From the January 26, 2010 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:

Let me tell you about them. This is an institution that originated from a group of academics and professionals, who participated in the so- called Inquiry in Paris. They sought to offer advice to the progressive Woodrow Wilson.

Amongst its members: Walter Lippmann. I love this man. He studied in journalism schools. He's a hero of journalism. He founded a socialist club in college whose ideas were influential in crafting the Treaty of Versailles. And we all know how that ended -- oh, so well.

And according to Joseph Goebbels, the people who taught the Nazis -- yes. Oh, by the way, the Nazis grew out of the Treaty of Versailles. That's weird. Anyway, Goebbels says in his diaries, everything they needed to know about propaganda came from the progressives here in the United States. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 1/26/10; accessed via Nexis]

Notion That Nazis Are Right Wing "Doesn't Make Any Sense Whatsoever." From the June 10, 2009 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck

BECK: But this is also -- this same pressure is being pushed down on the average American through things like the G.M. bailouts where -- I mean, I heard extreme anger on my radio show today from listeners. Are you concerned at all about the direction we are headed?

HARRY BINSWANGER (Ayn Rand Institute board of directors): Oh, yes. It's only going to get worse, because under pressure, people should resort to their standards and principles -- but they don't have any standards and principles today. Standards have been knocked down by our universities who tell us that truth is relative, there is no morality. It's all your culture or my culture.

Well, this [Holocaust Museum shooter James] von Brunn's culture is a tribe of racist anti-Jewish, anti- negro, anti-immigrant -- everything, and therefore, he's the phenomenon of the left, because racism is a form of collectivism. The right wing is individualist, believes in individual rights, freedom, the dignity of each individual life. But it's the left wing -- you know, Hitler was national socialism, right?

BECK: How did -- Harry, how did -

BINSWANGER: It's a leftist phenomenon.

BECK: How did it happen that this was -- that you look at people who are Nazis and you say that those are right-wing? It doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

BINSWANGER: No. There was the deal made between the communists and Nazis in Germany in the '30s where they each agreed to define themselves as the opposite of the other. You see the percentage in that, you define my gang or your gang, and you rule out of court any other possibility, such as freedom, without any gang rule.

BECK: Right.

BINSWANGER: So, it's actually a strategy adopted in Germany in the Weimar Republic in the '30s.

BECK: We're -- America, we are -- we are surrounded by people who want to control you. You've got the government that is, I think, just going crazy out-of-control. You have -- you have some crazy nutjob who wants to control what races are here, you know, what our makeup looks like.

You have everybody who is struggling for control. And I think you are just somebody that wants to be left alone, quite honestly, just wants to be -- let me just please, let my kids go to school and be safe, let me go to work, let me -- let me just have a normal life. But it's getting harder and harder.[Fox News, Glenn Beck, 6/10/09, via Nexis]

Bill O'Reilly: Progressive Websites Use "The Same Exact Tactics That The Nazis Used"

"Today's Totalitarians Are Primarily On The Left," Compares Those Who Support Gun Control To Hitler And Mussolini. From the March 3, 2010. edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:

O'REILLY: For example, criminal gangs can threaten your well-being. That's tyranny. And that's why 76-year-old Ottis McDonald wants to keep a handgun in his home. McDonald lives on Chicago's South side, a very chaotic neighborhood. But the city says McDonald has no right to have a handgun, thus the Supreme Court case.

Incredibly, the very liberal New York Times, which is supposed to champion individual liberty, editorialized this today quote, "The Bill of Rights once was largely thought to be a set of limitations on the federal government. Does the right to bear arms apply against city and state governments as well?"

Of course it does. Are you telling me the city of Chicago could restrict freedom of speech in violation of the Constitution? The case isn't even close. And I predict the Court will rule 5 to 4 that Ottis McDonald can own a handgun.

But the four justices who would violate Mr. McDonald's rights are troubling. Because they don't like guns, they don't like the Second Amendment and, therefore, would restrict it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is an assault on individual freedom. It's interesting that America today, it's the far left that wants the government to call the shots, not the folks.

In the past, right-wing extremists like Hitler and Mussolini were in the forefront of state control. But with the exception of Burma, today's totalitarians are primarily on the left. Certainly, that's the case in the USA. [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 3/2/10]

Huffington Post Uses The "Same Exact Tactics That The Nazis Used." From the March 5, 2008, edition of The O'Reilly Factor:

O'REILLY: Also, Arianna Huffington's Web site continues its hateful agenda. Posted on there is stuff like this: "Hillary would kick a baby in the head if it would get her what she wanted."

"The B---- finally won."

"Go ahead and someone punch the F-word B-word in the nose, she deserves it."

"Have you ever in your life seen a more dominating, manhandling shrew than Michelle Obama. Boy Obama loves to be lead around by the nose."

"Why are so many Obama lovers such right-wing tools?"

And the hits just keep on coming.

Our Internet cop, Mary Katherine Ham, has been investigating the situation, joins us now from Washington.

Now, when we last left you, I was telling you about the tactics, Nancy Reagan fell down, go to the hospital. Bang, on the Huffington Post: "We hope she suffers and dies." All kinds of vile stuff. And I said these tactics being used on this Web site, the Huffington Post, are the same exact tactics that the Nazis used in the late 1920's and early 1930's to demonize certain groups of people, so it would become easier for them, the Nazis, when they took power to hurt those people.

First you have to demonize; first you have to create the hatred. Then you can take action. Now the hatred is by left against left. That's what's going on there.

MARY KATHARINE HAM (Townhall.com): I still disagree with you about the Nazi comparison. But this is -- partly this is the cost of having, you know, very open free speech on the Internet. And I am in favor of that and love people getting involved in the electoral process.

On the other hand, this is what I was talking about with people taking responsibility for their own sites and the comments that go on. Because as you see on Arianna's site, if you let the culture get nasty in the comments, and eventually it comes back to bite your own party.

Well, these guys, you know, the right is certainly watching this and saying heck, yes, we want to watch them eat their own. And they're really going after each other with pretty much the same vehemence that they go after the right.

O'REILLY: OK, now would you say that a newspaper with an editor, and the editor is there hired to keep hatred, defamation, irresponsibility out of the paper, that wouldn't be freedom of speech, that paper wouldn't be exercising the freedom to communicate to the folks? Are you saying that?

HAM: No? You know, on Arianna Huffington's site, to be fair, she has a moderation policy where things do get some sort of vetting. And she has an extreme amount...

O'REILLY: Nancy Reagan, we want her to suffer and die, that has been vetted, and that's OK?

HAM: There are different rules for different posts. But there is sort of a policy. But they want to allow as many comments as possible. No, I agree with you that you need to -- you need to vet these things and watch out for your own site and take responsibility for what's going on.

O'REILLY: Yes, because -- because if you go to that site, and you know I'm -- what I'm saying is true. There is hate from top to bottom on that site. There is defamation on that site. There is the worst possible stuff. So you don't tell me that's freedom of speech, because that isn't. That's irresponsible. And I'm standing by my comparison.

HAM: Well, I -- well, my only point is that when you're getting a lot of people involved in the electoral process and commenting like this, which I think is a good thing, you're going to get some bad apples in the bunch.

O'REILLY: Well, you knock the bad apples down.

HAM: Right. You need to --

O'REILLY: This is what we do on BillOReilly.com. Those people do not have a right to spread hatred around and, you know, wish people die and all of that. That is not freedom of speech. That's irresponsible.

HAM: I agree with that. You need to do your best to kick it out of there.

O'REILLY: And she doesn't. She traffics in that. That's one of her marquee players. You can be as vile as you want. [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 3/5/08]

Daily Kos Comparable To The Nazi Party And KKK.

  • From the July 17, 2007 edition of The O'Reilly Factor:

O'REILLY: But we told them what was on there before we did the story. You got to understand that. We didn't ambush this guy. We gave them a week. We said look, look at this stuff. And they don't care. Jet Blue doesn't care that they said all the things Jesse said at all. And I'm saying to myself are they just plain stupid? Because this is hate of the worst order. It's like the Ku Klux Klan. It's like the Nazi party. There's no difference here. People should die. They want Tony Snow to die. Cheney to die. Doesn't get worse than this, Ms. Brady. [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 7/16/07; accessed via Nexis]

  • From the July 30, 2007 edition of The O'Reilly Factor:

O'REILLY: OK, but this smear merchant is insignificant, Lanny. What is significant is that this website and the others mentioned have intimidated the entire Democratic presidential field with the exception of Joseph Biden, who will not go to that convention. And we respect the senator for that.

They are afraid of the DailyKos and Moveon. They being the Democratic presidential candidates, Lanny. They know. And this picture, if people missed our reporting last week, we have been giving you on a daily basis the most vile basic stuff. Nothing different than the Nazis or the Ku Klux Klan do. And yet the Democratic party chooses to embrace and legitimize this website, Lanny. This is a disaster. [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 7/30/07 via Nexis]

O'Reilly On Michael Moore's "Power":"[T]His Happened In Nazi Germany." From the July 28 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor.

O'REILLY: I believe that he [Michael Moore] has power now. He has more power than probably anybody else other than [Senators John] Kerry and [John] Edwards. It's scary. It's scary. You know this happened in Nazi Germany. ... Who was the most powerful person in Nazi Germany other than Hitler and Himmler and Goering, who? You guys know? ...Goebbels. The propaganda minister. That frightens me when truth no longer exists, gentlemen. It doesn't exist for Michael Moore, it doesn't. [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 7/28/04]

O'Reilly Compares Michael Moore, Al Franken To Goebbels. From the June 10, 2004 episode of The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:

O'REILLY: Joseph Goebbels was the Minister of Propaganda for the Nazi regime and whose very famous quote was, "If you tell a lie long enough, it becomes the truth." All right? "If you tell a lie long enough, it becomes the truth."

And that's what Stuart Smalley [O'Reilly regularly refers to Franken as Stuart Smalley, a character Franken created on Saturday Night Live], and Michael Moore and all of these guys do. They just run around. [The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly, 6/10/04]

"Hitler Would Be A Card-Carrying Member Of The ACLU. So Would Stalin." From the January 19, 2005 episode of The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:

O'REILLY: They won't even tell you in the statement what intelligent design entails. They won't mention a creator, a deity, a God. You know why? Because the ACLU then can haul them into court and cost them $100,000 to defend themselves. Fascism, fascism, fascism. Okay? Ah, drive me nuts! Hitler would be a card-carrying ACLU member. So would Stalin. Castro probably is. And so would Mao Zedong. [The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly, 1/19/05; emphasis added]

Sean Hannity Suggests Obama Making America "Less Free," Just Like Hitler In Nazi Germany

Hannity Connects Obama Administration Policies To "The Horrors Of Nazi Germany And Fascist Italy."  From the September 27, 2010, edition of Fox News' Hannity, while airing footage of President Obama followed by footage of Hitler and Nazi Germany:

HANNITY: [EU Parliament member Daniel] Hannan argues that government overreach from the massive power grab of the new deal to the explosion of federal intervention ushered in by President Obama is making Americans less free.

Austrian philosopher Friedrich Von Hayek issued the same warning half a century ago having witnessed the horrors of Nazi Germany and fascist Italy. Hayek argued that centralizing the economy is a first step towards fascism.

In order to achieve their ends, Hayek wrote, the planners must create power, power over men wielded by other men of a magnitude never before known democracy is an obstacle to the suppression of freedom, which the centralized direction of an economic activity requires. We didn't listen then, but will we now? [Fox News, Hannity, 09/27/10 via Nexis]

Hannity Criticizes Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison For Using Koran For Swearing In: "Would You Have Allowed Him To Choose, You Know, Hitler's Mein Kampf?" From the November 3, 2006, edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:

ALAN COLMES (co-host): All right, Malik Shabazz, let me get Malik in here. I don't personally think the government should be able to dictate what any one person uses in terms of a religious book. That would be an establishment issue, as outlined by the First Amendment, Mr. Shabazz.

MALIK ZULU SHABAZZ (New Black Panther Party): If the congressman has freedom of religion in his constitutional rights, he should be able to use the book of his choice. Fact check: Presidents Pierce, Hayes, Franklin Roosevelt, and Lyndon B. Johnson used no book. And...

DENNIS PRAGER (radio host): It's not true.

[crosstalk]

SHABAZZ: -- as all Muslims do -- I didn't interrupt you.

PRAGER: You're right.

SHABAZZ: All Muslims respect the Bible, but he should have the opportunity. Now, your ignorance, Mr. Prager, Islam has contributed a lot to America. In the middle of the Supreme Court is -- in the rotunda is a statue or bust of the Prophet Muhammad showing the respect that American law and jurisprudence has for the revealer of the Koran.

Many of our American presidents are masons and shrines who got to the 33rd degree and studied the Koran in secret and have the star and the crescent on their fez.

HANNITY: Malik --

SHABAZZ: So Islam is at the basis of Western and American civilization.

HANNITY: I want to ask you a question, as it relates to Dennis' column. Thank you both for being here. And he says, you know, on what grounds will those of you defending this congressman's decision and his right to choose his favorite book, you know, would you have allowed him to choose, you know, Hitler's Mein Kampf, which is the Nazi bible?

In other words, where does this stop? Is there any limitations whatsoever? Does anybody get any choice they want, Malik? [Fox News, Hannity & Colmes, 11/30/06]

Jonah Goldberg: Author Of "Liberal Fascism"

Beck And Jonah Goldberg Suggest Hitler Was A Liberal. From the January 22, 2010, edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:

BECK (voice-over): We live in a time that seems to move faster than time -- a place that seems to have no place for the truth, a reality that seems to have no connection to reality. So to get our feet on solid ground in the future, we must first walk through the past with our eyes wide open.

RONALD REAGAN (video clip): Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem.

BECK: That's modern conservatism in a nutshell. Yet, we're always told that Nazi Germany, who controlled every aspect of its citizens' lives, was somehow right-wing. Is that true? Or is it an attempt to distract from other much more inconvenient similarities?

GOLDBERG: To say, you know, Hitler was a right-winger because of X, Y, Z, I say, what was Stalin's position on X, Y, and Z?

The common assumption is that the Nazis were a right-wing phenomena. They a right-wing party, that Hitler was a man of the right and all of the rest. And there are a lot of problems with this. His social agenda was for expanding universal access to health care, for expanding access to education. It was for cradle to grave welfare estate. It was for attacking big business and high finance.

People say, "Well, Hitler abolished labor unions, he was a right-wing then." Well, how did labor unions do under Stalin? How are labor unions doing under Fidel Castro? Almost anything you can find on a checklist that allegedly proves Hitler was a right-winger, you can apply to almost any one of the communist dictators of the 20th century and the similarities are almost identical. [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 1/22/10]

On MSNBC, Goldberg Claimed "You Can Draw A Line" From Mussolini To Clinton And Obama. From the January 10, 2008, edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe:

SCARBOROUGH: So explain your theory, because obviously, we've always heard that communism and socialism were the precursors to modern American liberalism post-war. How do you tie Mussolini to the liberal movement?

GOLDBERG: Sure. Well, part of the problem is that we now believe that fascism and communism are opposites, that they lie on the opposite ends of the political spectrum, and that's essentially the product of Soviet propaganda. Mussolini was a socialist. He said he was going to live to the end of his days as a socialist. He earned the label "Il Duce" as a socialist. The Nazis were the National Socialists. They ran as socialists. They said over and over again, "We are socialists." And what the reality is, is that fascism and bolshevism, which led to the Soviet Union, were both heresies of socialism. They were different kinds of socialism. One was international socialism, one was National Socialism.

And in the 1920s, American progressives like at The New Republic, still around today, were objectively pro-Mussolini. You had the founder of The New Republic defending Mussolini against his critics. You had Lincoln Steffens, you know, the famous muckraker, who goes to the Soviet Union and says, "I've seen the future, and it works." The year before, he went to Mussolini's Italy and said, "That place was the cat's meow." They did not see at the time that what Lincoln Steffens called "the Russian method and the Italian method," they called them the Russian-Italian method as if they were part and parcel of the same thing.

SCARBOROUGH: But you're not suggesting in this book, though, that you can draw a line from Mussolini to Hillary Clinton or Mussolini to Barack Obama, are you?

GOLDBERG: Well, I'm saying you can draw a line, but it's not a straight one. It goes all sorts of different places. I'm not saying that today's liberalism is the son of Nazism or the son of Italian fascism. I'm saying it's sort of like the great-grandniece once removed.

[laughter]

GOLDBERG: They have some common DNA, some common themes, some family resemblances that come up. But we also have them in the Republican Party today. I think compassionate conservatism is essentially a right-wing progressivism, and it's very scary which way that can go. [MSNBC, Morning Joe, 1/10/08; emphasis added]

Fox's Nazi Rhetoric Starts At Top, Permeates Network

Fox News President Roger Ailes: NPR Executives Are "The Left Wing Of Nazism." According to an interview conducted by the Daily Beast:

The onetime Republican strategist is a man of strong opinions, in case that wasn't clear, and he also puts his money where his mouth is. When Juan Williams was fired by National Public Radio for remarks he made on Fox about fearing airplane passengers in Muslim garb, Ailes rushed to award him a three-year, $2 million contract. 

"A guy who gets fired and humiliated in the press can lose a lot of confidence," Ailes says. Calling Williams "a pure liberal," Ailes says he wanted to compensate the pundit for his losses because he was "mad" and "I didn't want him to have to call his wife and say we lost money." 

Then he turned his sights on NPR executives.    

"They are, of course, Nazis. They have a kind of Nazi attitude. They are the left wing of Nazism. These guys don't want any other point of view. They don't even feel guilty using tax dollars to spout their propaganda. They are basically Air America with government funding to keep them alive." [Daily Beast, 11/17/10]

On Fox News' America Live, Guest Bill Donahue Stated That The Secularization Of Christmas Was "What Hitler Wanted." From the December 21, 2010, edition of Fox News' America Live:

DAVE SILVERMAN (president, American Atheists): You asked where this is going, and where it's going is that Christmas is going to completely become secular. They can't stop it.

BILL DONOHUE (president, Catholic League): We won't let you have that -

SLIVERMAN: It's going to happen. It's not our fault, it's your doing.

DONOHUE: That's what Hitler wanted, that's what Stalin wanted, that's what Mao wanted.

SILVERMAN: I don't care.

DONOHUE: We won't allow it in this country.

MEGYN KELLY (host): And now when we busted out the Hilter references, we've got to go. It's official. [Fox News, America Live, 12/21/10]

Fox Contributor Gingrich: "The Secular Socialist Machine Represents As Great A Threat To America As Nazi Germany." From the May 16, 2010, edition of Fox News Sunday:

CHRIS WALLACE (host): You also write this, and let's put it up on the screen: The secular socialist machine represents as great a threat to America Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did." Mr. Speaker, respectfully. Isn't that wildly over the top?

NEWT GINGRICH (former House speaker): No. Not if by America you mean the historic contract we've had which is that our rights come from your creator. They're unalienable. You're allowed to pursue happiness. Just listen to President Obama's language. He gets to decide who earns how much. He gets to decide what is too much.

WALLACE: Yeah but in fairness, we're talking, not just about any company, we're talking about companies that the government has put billions of dollars in with his pay czar.

GINGRICH: But he has said publicly, generically, you know some Americans earn too much. So now he's going to decide that?

WALLACE: No, well he's not. He has said that, I agree, that some Americans earn too much.

GINGRICH: So you want a politician to become the arbiter of your dreams? A politician gets to say "We're gonna raise," and they proposed this at one point. "We're gonna have a punitive tax on those we don't like. We're gonna decide that you have too much money so we're gonna take it from you."

WALLACE: But you compare that to the Nazis?

GINGRICH: I compare that as a threat. Not in terms of moral - look, there is no comparison to the Nazis in terms of a moral - or, by the way Mao's China, or the Soviet Union, which were evil. But as a threat to our way of life, the degree to which the secular socialist left represents a fundamental replacement of America, a very different worldview, a very different outcome, I think is a serious threat to our way of life. [Fox Broadcasting Co., Fox News Sunday, 5/16/2010]

Fox Contributor Mike Gallagher: Gore And Hitler "Brilliantly Put Together Side By Side" In New Bush-Cheney '04 Ad. From the June 28 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:

GALLAGHER: The left has been calling -- comparing George Bush to Hitler and Saddam for a long time now, all throughout this entire ugly, ugly year of campaigning.

But I've got to ask you something. I thought this spot [the Bush-Cheney '04 video posted on GeorgeWBush.com on June 25] brilliantly put together side by side Al Gore's raging, maniacal rant next to Adolf Hitler. It was actually pretty cleverly done.

Does the Kerry campaign, do you think, not expect that Adolf Hitler could even be evoked when it's MoveOn.org, a Kerry machine, that is actually using that image? [Fox News, Hannity & Colmes, 6/28/04]

Hannity Guest: "National Socialism Is Very Much What We See Today In This Administration." From the August 24, 2009, edition of Fox News' Hannity:

HANNITY: Now you're not part of any organized group, you're not part of a mob? Um, you're not, you're obviously passionate and obviously you had the crowd with you. I read that one of the main reasons you wanted to be there is because Congressman Baird had used the term Brownshirts to describe people showing up at the town halls. You confronted him on that. What happened?

DAVID HEDRICK (activist): I did confront him on that and I don't think it's acceptable language, that he's, you know, comparing us to Nazis. And it's uh, Pelosi did this, he did this. Now he's compared us to McVeigh and talked about bombings there. And basically I called him on it and I said you know what? If you want to call us Nazis, let's look at the Nazi doctrine, let's look at National Socialism. And what is National Socialism? Since you let the cat out of the bag, we'll talk about it. National Socialism is very much what we see today in this administration. It's a policy almost line for line, it's the same economic policy, it' the political policy. So if they want to talk about Nazis they'd better be careful about that conversation, because they might find at the swastika is on their own arm. [Fox News' Hannity, 8/25/09]

Gingrich: "It's Not An Insulting Comment" To Compare Bush Administration Critics To "Those Who Enabled Hitler." From the September 1, 2006, edition of Hannity & Colmes:

COLMES: We were just talking about Nancy Pelosi and what she wants to do in this effort to perhaps get Rumsfeld removed. He recently made some very controversial comments, basically suggesting that critics of the Iraq war are tantamount to Hitler's appeasers. Do you agree with him on those comments?

GINGRICH: Essentially, sure. I mean, I think you've got to say that --

COLMES: You're calling appeasers people who disagree with the Bush policy administration --

GINGRICH: Look --

COLMES: -- comparing them to those who enabled Hitler?

GINGRICH: Yes.

COLMES: That's an astounding comment --

GINGRICH: What's your -- what's your -- why? Why is it astounding?

COLMES: -- that's a very insulting comment --

GINGRICH: It's not an insulting comment.

COLMES: -- to most of the American population, which doesn't agree with the Iraq war, for example.

GINGRICH: Look, look, no. First of all, the question is, if you have a North Korea with nuclear weapons threatening us, you have an Iran trying to get nuclear weapons threatening us. We've now found over 700 chemical warheads and weapons in Iraq, which supposedly had none, according to our friends on the left. You have a terrorist organization in Great Britain, a terrorist organization in Canada. My question, Alan, is, for the people who want us to cut and run in Iraq, and let's be clear --

COLMES: It's not cut and run. I don't agree with that.

GINGRICH: It's withdrawal. It's leave. It's accept defeat. I mean --

LOWRY: Yeah, that's exactly what it is. [Fox News, Hannity & Colmes, 9/1/06]

O'Reilly Guest Ann Coulter Claims Liberals "Rooted For Nazis."  From the May 7, 2010 edition of The O'Reilly Factor:

COULTER: No. There isn't. You keep complicating things by trying to look at this rationally and not seeing and not accepting my perspective on this. You will find liberals always rooting for savages against civilization. If you accept that --

O'REILLY: Always?

COULTER: -- none of this will confuse you.

O'REILLY: They didn't root for the Nazis against civilization.

COULTER: Oh, yes, they did up until --

O'REILLY: Liberals rooted for Nazis?

COULTER: Absolutely, absolutely, it is all in Treason. Reread Treason. It was only when Hitler invaded their precious Soviet Union that at the last minute they came in and suddenly started saying oh no, now you have to fight Hitler.

O'REILLY: All right, so your --

COULTER: You're absolutely wrong about that.

O'REILLY: -- bottom line on this is that liberal people will always root for barbarians against civilization?

COULTER: Yes, I have an entire book on that. [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 05/07/10 via Nexis]

O'Reilly Guest Ann Coulter Calls Liberals "Nazi Block Watchers."  From the December 1, 2005, edition of The O'Reilly Factor, discussing CNN's decision to drop Coulter after viewers e-mailed expressing displeasure with her views:

O'REILLY: OK, but to answer your question, CNN is perceived to be a left wing outlet, and they don't like your voice on the left wing outlet. But, you know, aren't liberals or far left people supposed to be champions of freedom of speech? Isn't that what the ACLU is all about?

COULTER: No, of course not. They're Nazi block watchers. This is what they're good at.

O'REILLY: They're Nazi what?

COULTER: Block watchers, you know. They tattle on their parents, turn them into the Nazis. They're little Nazi block watchers.

O'REILLY: See, this is why they don't want you on CNN there. You're calling them Nazis. [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 12/01/05 via Nexis]

Fox News Radio's Tom Sullivan Aired "Side-By-Side Comparison" Of Speeches By Hitler And Obama. From the February 11, 2008, edition of Fox News Radio's Tom Sullivan Show:

SULLIVAN: OK. Before the break, a caller just before the bottom of the hour said that Barack Obama's speech reminds him of hearing the speeches of Adolf Hitler. So, ladies and gentlemen, from the past, a little archive, a little walk down Der Fuehrer's memory lane. Here he is, the one, the only, Adolf Hitler.

[audio clip of Hitler speech]

SULLIVAN: Yay! Yay! All right, great. I don't know what he said. Here's Barack Obama.

[audio clip of Obama speech]

SULLIVAN: Yay!

[audio clip of Hitler speech]

SULLIVAN: Yay! [Fox News Radio, Tom Sullivan Show, 2/11/08]

A few days later, Sullivan began his radio show by stating that he didn't compare Obama to Hitler. From the February 14, 2008, edition of the Tom Sullivan Show:

SULLIVAN: Before we get started on this big program today, there's a issue which has come up which I want to address. And that issue is before we start the program today -- listen, this is crazy. But I want to clarify something that happened on Monday's show. We were talking about Barack Obama and his ability to excite crowds through his speaking ability, his rhetoric, his -- I mean, he's an orator that is unbelievable. I mean, I was talking about the fact that he had this big speech after winning over the weekend all these primaries, and I thought, "Wow, this guy can really knock it right out of the ballpark when it comes to his speech." So we're talking about how he can -- and I was playing clips about how Barack Obama was getting cheers and the crowd was going wild and he was talking about winning. And a caller called and said -- suggested that -- the caller suggested that he thought that Hitler had the same ability.

Well, once you enter the word "Hitler" into a conversation, everything changes. So, I said, "Really?" So we played clips of both to let you decide. Well, guess what happened? Sometimes people pick up on things, and they pick up on them in a way that they really misinterpret what really was going on. Some people picked up on what we said on the show on Monday and suggested that I was in some way equating Barack Obama and Adolf Hitler, and there was nothing of the sort that came up. Nothing like that happened. In fact, you know, I know, everyone knows, Hitler was one of the most despicable, evil people -- mass murderer, who, without question, one of the worst people to ever walk the face of the earth. No humanity. Absolutely, there is no comparison. I wasn't trying to make a comparison. There isn't any comparison. There was none yesterday, there was none Monday, there will not be any in the future. It's nonsense. Absolutely pure nonsense that anyone would think otherwise, but it has come up with some people picking up -- and, you know, it's one of those things where they hear only part or they hear what they want to hear. [Fox News Radio, Tom Sullivan Show, 2/14/10]

Fox Business Host Napolitano: Hitler And Mussolini Situations Are "Eerily Reminiscent" Of "Exactly What's Happening Today." From the June 24, 2010, edition of Genesis Communication Network's The Alex Jones Show:

ALEX JONES: I don't want a bunch of distant bureaucrats, who happen to be crooks 9 times out of 10 running my life. It's so fundamental. They've bankrupted our society. They've launched all these illegal wars. Bush three weeks ago was out giving speeches about how he ordered torture. Meanwhile they sent people to prison who followed those orders. I mean this is tyranny. And I keep saying that, I mean folks, do you know where tyranny leads? And I think God's given us a chance, I think history is giving us a chance, uh Judge, and I want you to speak to this. We are at a crossroads. and if good people like yourself and Ron Paul and others, but also just the rank and file folks out there stand up as leaders. Speak up. Point out the emperor is wearing no clothes ane rebuke this evil, like Hitler should've been rebuked, like Stalin should have been rebuked, or Mao Tze Tung, before they really got going. We have a chance to avert a historical disaster. Because there's no doubt studying history that if we don't take America back right now, America won't lead us into the 21st century, worldwide for liberty America will lead the way into a new dark age of despotism that dwarfs anything ever seen in the history of Man.

ANDREW NAPOLITANO: I am reading a terrific book. It's the second time I've read it in my life. It's Hayek's, H-A-Y-E-K-, F.A. Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom." It was written in 1944 and it describes how Europe descended into serfdom as people like Mussolini and Hitler were popularly elected against legitimate opponents and the public and the government gave them all the power they had. It is eerily, eerily reminiscent, eerily predictive, because it was written 65 years ago, of what's happening today. Central planning by bureaucrats, not even by popularly elected officials, but by bureaucrats. The decision that power is more in the spotlight than liberty. The decision that individuals should not be able to make choices for themselves. Look, we have to be on the watch for the loss of liberty. IT doesn't happen overnight. It happens slowly and it happens gradually. And whenever anyone sees the loss of liberty, whether it's a cop preventing someone from taking a picture of what the cop is doing, or whether its a prosecutor prosecuting someone for speaking the truth. Whether it's a judge compromising liberty or whether it's a public, an elected official compromising liberty, it needs to be shouted from the rooftops. They can send it to me at Fox News and I'll get it on the air and they can send it to you at infowars and you'll get it on the air, and it all makes sense. [Genesis Communication Network, The Alex Jones Show, 6/24/10]

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by IRONY 101 (January 10, 2011 11:46 am ET)
      25  
      Curiously, the kid says "I had favorite books."

      Some of these books sound like high school reading assignments...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by progressivevoicedaily (January 10, 2011 12:09 pm ET)
        25  
        This claim is absolutely absurd. The idea the the "left", who wants to control guns and is about treating everyone as equals is somehow responsible for this is completely ludicrous. The right wing is responsible for this kind of dialogue. They peddle fear and hate ALL DAY LONG, 24/7!!!! STOP THE CRAZY "BOTH SIDES DO IT" ARGUMENT! If this conversation doesn't take place based in reality this WILL HAPPEN AGAIN. The right wing talkers both cable and radio need to be held responsible for the irresponsible rhetoric and behavior.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by shaggles (January 10, 2011 12:13 pm ET)
          16  
          Well there's always the liberal plant angle if they can't get people to by the idea of a liberal going after a Democrat.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by stpdlib (January 10, 2011 12:32 pm ET)
            1 4
            Let's not be coy and totally ignore the fact that both sides are throwing blame both ways here. It's truly sad that anyone, whether it's a poster on a website or a political leader trying to gain political points over someone's murder. It's totally absurd that we are avoiding the fact that this kid was driven to murder by his mental instabilities, not his political ideology.

            We should all be ashamed.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 12:57 pm ET)
            13  
            I scanned through a thread on the Blaze and names repeated over and over were Cloward, Piven, Alinsky, and Van Jones.

            Who are these people and why do the nutjobs care about them so much?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by magnolialover (January 10, 2011 1:02 pm ET)
              16  
              I also went through some threads on there yesterday, and that's what I kept reading from the folks over there.

              Cloward, Piven, Alinsky, and Van Jones.

              Cloward and Piven, nobody ever paid attention to. As far as I can tell. They were left wing extremists, and were not even remotely in the mainstream of, well, anything. Not to mention, they came out with that in 1966. I don't ever hear anyone espousing their beliefs on the news networks.

              Alinsky was a community organizer and has been DEAD since 1972. How is he affecting anything again?

              And Van Jones? What has he done that was a call to violence? Nothing.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 1:06 pm ET)
                17  
                And the Beckbots blame them for everything because Beck tells them they are to blame for everything.

                The ignorance and idiocy of the Blaze comments was quite disturbing.
                Report Abuse
        • Author by Media Mumblings (January 10, 2011 4:39 pm ET)
            26
          The left doesn't favor equal treatment. Leftist gorups are always advoating laws that have absoultely nothing to do with equality under the law. The left advocates different rules for people who earn differnt wages. The left wants differnet rules for races. The left wants a so-called progressive income tax that treats people differntly according to income. The left is about interest group politcs. Spare me this "equality" nonsense.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 4:57 pm ET)
            16  
            You're so full of SH!T that your eyes have turned brown. So, by setting up laws that prevent unequal treatment based on race, gender, age, etc.. the "left" is realy advocating different rules for different races? I guess it makes sense to you wingnuts, just like calling someone out for racism makes the accuser a racist. The "left" wasn't/isn't the only ones in favor of a progressive income tax system. Adam Smith was also in favor of it.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Media Mumblings (January 10, 2011 5:18 pm ET)
                19
              Yes, What do you think affirmative action laws are? I didn't say that the left was racist by definition. I said they favor differnet rules for different gropus. They do. Teh left frequently has very good intentions for their policies, but that doesn't mean that they favor equality under the law. The form of democracy that we have now is one in which the legislature is unlimited. The most organized interest factions are in control. They always will be under such a system as we have now. There will be no equality under the law. Take off those ideological blinders.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 5:26 pm ET)
                12  
                Affermative Action laws do not set up different rules for different groups. In order for anyone to use Affirmative action, they must meet the same requirement as everyone else.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 5:36 pm ET)
                  9  
                  Betcha Media Mumblings is an alias for a known troll. We'll just have to figure out which one.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by curiousindependent (January 11, 2011 12:52 am ET)
                    6  
                    Nice deflect though, you spent quite a bit of space, right up at the top, straying off the topic of the Tucson terrorist. The longer he can keep you talking about affirmative action, the longer you are not making points that might lead people to believe that there is hate speech emanating from the right, and that there is virtually NONE from the left. Right at the top of the comments section, where people are most likely to move on if the subject matter changes and stays changed.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by progressivevoicedaily (January 11, 2011 9:45 am ET)
                      5  
                      I'm not sure which rock Mumble boy lives under, but affirmative action laws where intended to make sure EVERYONE is treated EQUALLY under the law. You people are so god-damn ignorant and unwilling to put aside your dumbdumb glasses long enough to see some truth. Wow, read a friggin book dude.
                      Report Abuse
            • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 6:01 pm ET)
                18
              No matter the intent, the left does advocate for differant rules depending on you race, etc. That is a fact, that I see you really haven't disputed. I guess you realize that there are what is known as protected classes of citizens in this country, do you not? These are not in place to achieve equality, but to make up for past mistakes, that, by the way, where a direct result of legislation put in place by the democrats. I will point out the Jim Crowe laws as an example.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by smalljaws (January 10, 2011 6:21 pm ET)
                11 1
                I'm an advocate for reinstituting the jim crow laws of the south. Instead of targeting people of color,all conservatives should be required to pass a literacy test before they are granted the right to vote.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 6:24 pm ET)
                  5  
                  According to Dork/projector, they're "Jim Crowe" laws.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Old_Benjamin (January 10, 2011 6:57 pm ET)
                    7  
                    According to Dork/projector, they're "Jim Crowe" laws.


                    And also according to the pos projector they are the result of progressive policies which cause white police officers to shoot black people in liberal nothern cities. Mumble mumble southern strategy!

                    Why can't you just see the facts you big brother lover!

                    (btw - when does the next season of big brother start - I LOVE that show)
                    Report Abuse
                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 9:46 pm ET)
                  1 14
                  So, you progressives are now in favor of literacy tests before being GRANTED the right to vote? Didn't you try that before, only target minorities? You have just proven what I have been saying all along. You lefties haven't changed, you've just switched your hate from minorities to conservatives. The hate and vitriol is something that seems par for the course for you lefties.

                  By the way, apparently you are unaware that our right to vote is not subject to your sides whims.
                  Report Abuse
              • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 6:23 pm ET)
                5  
                I did dispute it your mental midget. Equal opportunity laws DON'T give preferential treatment to any specific group. It only prevents them from being disqualified on whatever difference they have with the other groups. And you do realize that Jim Crowe laws were enacted on state and local levels and not at the federal level?
                Report Abuse
                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 9:52 pm ET)
                    10
                  Your wrong. And you do know that if not for the democratic party, those laws would never have been enacted and upheld in this country?
                  Report Abuse
              • Author by eweston8542983 (January 10, 2011 6:24 pm ET)
                8  
                Sorry advocating for equal righs does not equate with differant rights for differant folks.

                Currently gay rights are being promted. I supposes you can fabricate something about this being about special rights for gays. History indicates that would you will.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 10:00 pm ET)
                    11
                  What rights are being denied homosexuals? And please, don't say marriage. Under the law, they can marry. Marriage, under the law is defined as being between a man and a woman. And it has been defined that way for thousands of years, and in thousands of cultures. So, please tell me exactly what rights are gays promoting? What you seem to not realize, is that many civil rights laws were meant to atone for past misdeeds. In doing so, they have set up a de-facto system of differences in evaluation, based on criteria other than qualifications.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Johaely (January 10, 2011 10:15 pm ET)
                    6  
                    Well gay couples cannot represent legally thgeir partners nor their marriages are recognized civily. If a gay person dies, their partner can't claim the body nor they have any visitation rights when hospitalized. In some states you can fire a person just because of the fact that they are gay and let's not forget the recently repealed Don't Ask Don't Tell. Before thgat, gays couldn't serve even if they were just premused to be open. And that's just from the top of my head.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by Maimon (January 11, 2011 12:15 am ET)
                    9  
                    I find it funny that christians claim marriage as they define it. You know pagans use to get married. Spartans use to take gay lovers all the time. And ahh I am not sure what definition you are talking about thats thousands of years old. The Hamurapi legal code? Some Egyptian Steele? The ideas that marriage is the same today as it was thousands of years ago is a pretty big stretch.

                    Women were property in most societies of the ancietn world.

                    And you keep talking about dems and republicans like they never change. Dems and republicans flipped years ago. Why else to you think the south is run by republicans now? Because they have captured the black vote?

                    Abraham Lincoln would not be allowed in the republican party of today.

                    Woodrow Wilson would not be in the democratic party today.

                    Eisenhower and Nixon would likely be democrats today.

                    You keep defining parties and terms as if they are static.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 11, 2011 2:18 pm ET)
                    2  
                    "What rights are being denied homosexuals? And please, don't say marriage. Under the law, they can marry." - projectdork

                    Once again, I do think project is dumb enough that he really believes this is true.

                    "Marriage, under the law is defined as being between a man and a woman. And it has been defined that way for thousands of years, and in thousands of cultures." - projectdork

                    Really? Marriage has only been between one man and one woman for thousands of years? I cannot imagine how woefully misinformed you have to be of the very basics of world history to believe that is true. What a proudly ignorant fool.
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 9:28 am ET)
                3  
                I'm wondering if you are a fan of Justice Scalia and his 'originalist' views on what the Constitution should be. Simple question. Are you?
                Report Abuse
          • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 11, 2011 2:14 pm ET)
            2  
            Only the left is intelligent and rational enough to understand the need for a progressive tax system? Wow. I hope you are not correct that everyone on the right has gotten so ignorant as to not even understand the need for a progressive tax system.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by kamrom (January 11, 2011 3:08 am ET)
          2  
          Yep. Now they're actively trying to get away with this harm. Thats what we get for, you know, not being horrible and spiteful republicans.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by user01 (January 10, 2011 12:18 pm ET)
        3 1
        How anyone can assign a coherent political ideology to the shooter based on this reading list hodge-podge is beyond me. But interestingly, the right wing fails to mention the presence of Ayn Rand's We the Living...
        Report Abuse
        • Author by riverdog (January 11, 2011 12:03 pm ET)
            3
          well user you just did the same as the righties. yeah his list of books can't be to blame it has to be rush and becks fault. perfect sense. how bout hes a nut job.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by rtwmd1230 (January 10, 2011 12:19 pm ET)
        22  
        "Hardly The Reading List Of A Palin Supporter"

        Reading and Palin supporter in the same phrase?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Andy Kreiss (January 10, 2011 12:30 pm ET)
          28  
          I got into a little Donnybrook on Facebook the other day. Somebody had mentioned the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf, parroting the sites above as proof that the shooter was a lefty.

          I asked how having read books from both ends of the spectrum proved that ( He seemed fairly bright, I honestly didn't know what he was getting at), and that's when I got it.

          Realizing that he was going with the " Hitler the Hippy" angle, I decided to just have some fun. I told him it was pretty offensive to assume that anybody who had read two books couldn't be a right winger.

          It wasn't pretty after that.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by MickD (January 10, 2011 12:44 pm ET)
            9  
            Into the fray, AK!
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Media Mumblings (January 10, 2011 5:24 pm ET)
              16
            That's just it. The National Socialists (Nazis) were collectivists. They were not polar opposites of Internaitonal Socialists. They were rival factions of the same collectivist trees. The International socialists (communists) didn't care about borders. A worker in Poland was a brother of the worker in Hungary as far as they were concerned. The term right-wing in early 20th centruy Europe was used to identify any party or indivdual that was nationalistic or ultra-nationalist. It had nothing to do with economics. The National Socialists were racial collectivists AND economic collectivists who rejected international socialism. They were above all else nationalists first and economic collectivists second.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 5:39 pm ET)
              9  
              I'll make it simple for you (and you're free to copy this for future use if you like):

              The Nazi's were fascists.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Media Mumblings (January 10, 2011 6:52 pm ET)
                1 11
                Yes, that is probably right though there is dispute even among fascist scholars about whether they fit into the classical fascist model. Italy was the best case study in fascism. Fascist economics is really just state-administered syndicalism. We came dangerously close to it during the New Deal period. I am speaking only of economic fascism.

                It's just not as simply as some of you would like. Some of you just employ the term fascism in regard to anything that you don't like. It doesn't work that way.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 7:02 pm ET)
                  8  
                  Some of you just employ the term fascism in regard to anything that you don't like

                  Uh, no, some of us don't.
                  Report Abuse
                • Author by SolomonKane (January 10, 2011 8:28 pm ET)
                  8  
                  Some of you just employ the term fascism in regard to anything that you don't like


                  Let's correct that:

                  Some of you just employ the term communism in regard to anything that you don't like


                  Project much?
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 10:11 pm ET)
                      9
                    Some do some don't. Tell me, SolomonKane: I believe that, for the most part, the modern progressive movement is made up of Marxists. Do you? How is the modern progressive beliefs different from marxism? Is this not a progressive site? Are not most of those on the left, who post on this site, self professed progressives? I really would like to hear your answer. Enlighten me.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 10:31 pm ET)
                      5  
                      How is the modern progressive beliefs different from marxism?

                      I'd be happy to enlighten you. First explain what you understand Marxism to be?
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by curiousindependent (January 11, 2011 12:59 am ET)
                      6  
                      Explain what it is that you think is the same between marxism and modern progressivism.




                      Get ready for the Glenn Beck c&p
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by SolomonKane (January 11, 2011 8:14 pm ET)
                      1 1
                      The big problem is that you believe the modern progressives are marxists and they don't. They don't read Marx, they don't quote Marx and they don't attempt to implement Marxism ideology. Mostly what they do is complain and weakly try to obstruct the crazy excesses of this countries right wing policies. Mostly they fail. Every so often they get in an "I told you so".

                      You guys act like playground bullies and this Marxist BS is the grown up equivalent of calling your playground victims "fa gs". We all know it's true.

                      But if you want to play the implication smear game I can top your off the shelf talking points with an original accusation of my own. facts:

                      1. Today's progressives are an outgrowth of Nader's 2000 campaign.

                      2. Conservative GOP operatives funded Nader.

                      If what your saying is true about progressives being Marxists then it's clear by virtue of your GOP alignment that you yourself are probably a Marxist and also a traitor and a liar. See how that works?

                      Consider yourself enlightened.
                      Report Abuse
                • Author by kamrom (January 11, 2011 3:12 am ET)
                  6  
                  In 1984, the party is known as IngSoc; English Socialism. Of course as the book points out, its not socialism. Its just a popular term that was used by the party in their bid for power. Thats kinda what the nazis did. Thats kinda the point of the book; national socialism is no more socialism than IngSoc was.

                  Curiously, now Socialism is being used in the exact opposite manner; the word is confusingly used as an attack on anything not-ultrarightwing. Sadly, this reflects a total lack of knowledge in english. And politics. And politics in america. and really humans in general.
                  Report Abuse
              • Author by papa bear3 (January 11, 2011 10:18 am ET)
                2  
                ...good point, Albert Speer organized the German equivalent of the "Military Industrial Complex" of corporate facists Krupp et al, who made fortunes building the Nazi war machine.

                How many fortunes were built in the Soviet Union?
                Report Abuse
        • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 1:19 pm ET)
          7  
          Reading list of a Palin supporter: Going Rogue, America by Heart, Animal brutality for dummies, the Constitution for idiots.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Media Mumblings (January 10, 2011 5:19 pm ET)
            12
          Yes, It would be like putting the words economically literate and leftist together.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by eweston8542983 (January 10, 2011 6:32 pm ET)
            4  
            So how would cuting the federal payrool in half affect federal spending, expert.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by curiousindependent (January 11, 2011 1:04 am ET)
              5  
              He will probably forget to factor in the impact of all of those newly jobless and their sudden lack of input into the economy and tax base. Then he is going to have to add in the effect of most of them not being able to find a job, since there aren't all that many out there, so that many more folks into an already overloaded homeless population.

              The short answer, eweston, is that it would put us directly into another Great Depression. Except that this one would be massively worse.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by kamrom (January 11, 2011 3:14 am ET)
              6  
              If I were a cynic, I'd say it seems like the republicans are doing everything they can to make not just Obama fail to restore the economy, but to actually make it much, much worse, and all for pety political bickering.

              But thats just crazy talk.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 9:38 am ET)
                2  
                It is crazy talk - they're not doing it for petty political bickering - they're doing it because they want to destroy this country.
                Report Abuse
      • Author by peebs755 (January 10, 2011 1:53 pm ET)
        10  
        Only in right wing bizzaro world would a "lefty" loon want to shoot a Liberal. That's like saying a ditto head wants to shoot limbaugh. But I guess logic isn't one of the rights strong points. (I'm trying to be kind here)
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Media Mumblings (January 10, 2011 4:09 pm ET)
            14
          Last time I checked a lefty loon by the name of Oswald(oddly with a liking for Marx as with this Loughner kid)shot and killed a Democrat president. Have you guys considered that this guy wasn't thinking rationally? Just maybe? It was all about opportunity. He shot a Democrat congressperson because she was the one who represnted his district. No federal Republican official represented his district. He had previously met her (when one of his friends from that period identified his as a liberal)in 2007. She was simply imprinted on his confused mind. You guys are searching for rationality from a mentally deranged individual. This guys political views are all over the map.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by peebs755 (January 10, 2011 8:19 pm ET)
            7  
            The whole point here is the violent rhetoric used eveyday by the major players in the right wing media. They espouse violence, then when it happens they sit there and go Uh-Uh. It's cowardly and sick.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by kamrom (January 11, 2011 3:18 am ET)
            4  
            Sorry, but unless you refute YOUR side, you have no say. There are two of over a dozen recent such events that could lean toward liberal. But every single time, it was the first word out of the right's mouth. Then poof, never mentioned him again once he was shown to be a conservative.

            We TRIED to say that. We TRY to make the case that they're insane every-damn-time. But the republicans just immediatly attack us, call a clearly right wing person a liberal, they dont refute the violent rhetoric, they continue it even the day after this awful event. If you want respect, we've been trying. But your side has shown absolutely NO indication that its going to do that.

            We point out he's insane, you call him a liberal. We point out that he's an insane conservative, you often treat him as a hero. Like Dr. Tiller's murderer. I saw your threads filled with cheering on his assassain. Disgusting.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Jeremy Danials (January 11, 2011 4:12 am ET)
            2  
            Why do you hate America?
            Report Abuse
        • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 10:15 pm ET)
            8
          No, like has been said many times, a lot of you lefties are loons, so it's not surprising that one of your lefty loons would try to take out one of you lefties. You know how off the hook you all get when one fails to toe the party line. I guess she wasn't toeing the line hard enough for that lefty loon.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by Media Mumblings (January 10, 2011 4:15 pm ET)
          12
        Is this how you guys are going to spin his liking of the "Communist Manifesto?" he also liked a book by Rand. His political views were all over the map.

        1)He was an atheist

        2) Liked Marx

        3) Liked Rand (the opposite of Marx)

        4) Tried to join the U.S. military even though he said that the U.S. is a terrorist country.

        5) Favorite video was one whree the Amercian flag was being burned

        6) Friend identified him as a liberal who "wanted to change the world."

        The guys was all over the place. What really disgusted me about the New York Times was the implication that anyone who wants a commodity money instead of paper is automatically a loon. That's just so far beyond the pale that it doesn't even warrant response.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by kamrom (January 11, 2011 3:21 am ET)
          5  
          "He was an atheist" This means nothing. It means as much as "he was a christian" or "he was a jew". Stop pretending like it matters.

          He didnt like Marx, just like you he had no idea what the man was talking about!

          If you wanna talk about them as crazy, STOP COMPARING THEM TO US. Your partisan beliefs are showing, and you attack from MOMENT ONE. even on a list. FIRST ENTRY is totally partisan. We dont take you seriously cause its how you ALWAYS do things. Talk to us like an adult, not someone playing political games and we'd be glad to discuss things.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by Egbert Sous (January 11, 2011 11:58 am ET)
        2  
        Loughner is definitely, 100%, through-and-through a lefty. Such is why he included among his favorite books We The Living by the NeoCon godhead Ayn Rand.

        Let's hear about this particular reading preference from our wingnut pundits. (crickets)
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Egbert Sous (January 11, 2011 11:58 am ET)
        2  
        Loughner is definitely, 100%, through-and-through a lefty. Such is why he included among his favorite books We The Living by the NeoCon godhead Ayn Rand.

        Let's hear about this particular reading preference from our wingnut pundits. (crickets)
        Report Abuse
    • Author by usp (January 10, 2011 11:46 am ET)
      18  
      the people that follow this tripe? THEY are the problem. i believe there are always those who would sell out for a buck (see ALL the speakers above) but the blame lands squarely on the waterheads that follow these nit wits.

      in theory? we are the smartest people ever- we have the internet. every trailer park, every coffee shop, every library. every bit of information ever is on the internet.

      people are so lazy and so needing to feel 'affirmed' and would so much rather not do the physical labor of research and SO much more ready to sit down with a back of chips and watch football, dancing with the stars or whatever else is on tv?

      that's the problem.

      until the populace is educated = this will happen.

      nothing else will fix it.

      nothing.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (January 10, 2011 11:47 am ET)
      16  
      That's pretty repulsive spin. The right is just trying to deflect from the fact that it was a Democratic congresswoman who was shot. In a state full of Republicans why would he go after the Dem if he was a "loony liberal"? I'm not claiming he was a right wing idealogue. I haven't heard enough yet to know that. As far as I'm concerned right now he's just a dangerous nut. As usual the right wing media is trying to spin a tragedy to their political advantage.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by southerngal (January 10, 2011 12:16 pm ET)
        14 1
        It's sickening. Absolutely sickening. If Palin and her ilk don't pony up some reflective introspection on the violent imagery they portray to specific individuals in political campaigns, then they just are not human beings.

        There is has always been "warfare" rhetoric used in politicking but I cannot remember it being used to "target" and name specific candidates.

        Palin and others are not responsible, but a little regret would be the decent thing to do. At least. And clean up their act instead of rushing to take cover and distance themselves as far as possible. Well, they can run and they can hide - but the internet and her disgusting crosshairs images on an American map is about as telling as it gets.

        These people repulse me.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by grmce (January 10, 2011 12:46 pm ET)
          9  
          Palin and others are not responsible,
          That's the whole point and you have put it neatly.

          Taking it out of context aside, you have made the neat distinction between direct responsibility for a specific act as opposed to a culpability for a set of circumstances which have given rise to that specific act.

          This whole episode has demonstrated what a bunch of craven cowards these merchants of hate are.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by southerngal (January 10, 2011 12:52 pm ET)
            17 1
            Politics aside, any human being, any decent human being, who said anything that could possibly incite or trigger someone else into committing violence and did not publicly offer up a sincere and heartfelt admission of regret is just one loathsome individual.

            Human life and tragedy and violence transcend by miles some stupid political advantage or posturing. Have we become so coarse and sunk so low that first we look to make sure we aren't stained politically by such a horrendous tragedy? Incredible.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Adendrools (January 10, 2011 1:09 pm ET)
              8  
              They can't admit it Right ON. If they slide on this and accept any responsibility for this or any other actual act of violence, then they really will be tried for sedition. Right now they're playing the semantics of law to get around that charge. Any actual admission that what they have been spewing could have, in any way, actually influenced this would be a direct admission of guilt to the charge of sedition.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by southerngal (January 10, 2011 1:13 pm ET)
                14 1
                But as I said, I don't hold them directly responsible for this. However, I do hold them to some moral responsibility for the kind of crap they have put out there.

                Shameless.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Adendrools (January 10, 2011 1:18 pm ET)
                  4  
                  Agreed, sigh.....
                  Report Abuse
                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 10:22 pm ET)
                    9
                  right on: the rhetoric from both has been off the hook for years. Your crocodile tears would seem more real if you spent the time acknowledging that. On this thread I have posted over ten different instances where your side calls for violence against someone on the right, so stop with the sanctimonious b.s. Clean up your own house, before you start telling others to clean up theirs.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 10:33 pm ET)
                    7  
                    Poor wittle project21reps! You have been generously answered on all points, and you obdurately refuse to learn.

                    You don't even seem to understand what you're replying to!
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by mescal (January 11, 2011 2:40 am ET)
                    6  
                    Right ON is hardly a member of the left. He is a consistent, long time conservative. He is anything but a member of 'our' side, and if you google his posts on this site, you will see that he has engaged in some pretty lengthy bickering sessions with left wingers here.

                    In fairness to right ON, though, he isn't a member of YOUR side either, as he isn't an idiot.
                    Report Abuse
            • Author by nerzog (January 10, 2011 1:10 pm ET)
              12  
              You're right, of course. The Human thing to do would be to say something like "Gee, I certainly hope that the things I've said didn't contribute to this. If it did, I'm deeply troubled by that".

              Instead, the Teabagging Toads are too busy playing CYA. They've learned that the most effective way to deflect blame from themselves is to preemptively dump it on the Democrats.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 1:19 pm ET)
                12  
                Don't remember Billo owning up to the "Dr. Tiller, the baby killer" quote.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 5:56 pm ET)
                    11
                  How is using a apt discription of a person an incitement to violence? Tiller was a baby killer. I guess you dispute that, do you?
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 6:26 pm ET)
                    9  
                    Show proof that Dr. Tiller killed babies.

                    He aborted fetuses. And saved the lives of the mothers.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by Maimon (January 10, 2011 8:43 pm ET)
                    6  
                    Hmm... I guess it depends when you consider when a baby a baby. Is it the moment of zygot, or is it later in embryonic development. You obviously think it is very early in the womb. I don't.

                    It is funny how all the people on the right seem to care about embryos in the womb, but once they are out the care seems to frop off substantially.

                    -Don't have an abortion but let us execute a prisoner.
                    -Don't have an abortion but lets spend $800 billion/ per year on the military so we can go and kill people.
                    -Don't have an abortion, but let's sell lots of guns.
                    -Don't have an abortion, but let's not feed or educate or kids adequetly.

                    The right is all about freedom as they define it: money, guns, war and G_D.

                    The Nazis were rightwing, corporatists. It is an historical fact. The arguement they tried to use," Well Hitler hated unions but so did Stalin". Wow, Stalin must have been a republican. Hey Hitler wanted every German to own gun...hmmm does that mean the NRA is a Nazis front?

                    Beck is not an historian, Coulter is not an historian and the conclusions are rediculous. But the influence this is having on uninformed, soft minded people is the problem.


                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 10:28 pm ET)
                        9
                      Teller killed babies. He got rich aborting viable human life. That's a fact. He performed abortions, not because the woman's life was in jeopardy, but because the baby would negatively impact the woman's life. Sixty minutes did a very telling segment about this guy. I don't condone him being shot, and the person who shot him deserves the full extent of the law, but defending Teller is just plain sick.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 10:54 pm ET)
                        7  
                        Teller killed babies.

                        No, he didn't.

                        He got rich aborting viable human life.

                        No, he didn't.

                        not because the woman's life was in jeopardy, but because the baby would negatively impact the woman's life.

                        Liar.

                        But then again, I'm a lefty, so I support abortion on demand, drive-thru abortion clinics, and discount abortions at Wal-mart.

                        Man, I just love abortions!! If I was a woman, I'd get pregnant on purpose just so I could get me some abortions.
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by Maimon (January 11, 2011 12:40 am ET)
                        7  
                        That is your opinion about abortion. I don't see it that way. Abortion has a long history, it is nothing new. Also, partial birth abortion, is not a medical term. It is a made up term by the right. You don't get to choose for others.

                        You may choose to have a baby, but that doesn't mean I have to have one. Maybe if we taught kids how to use condoms, we wouldn't be in this situation. Instead we lie to them and say " Hey don't have sex".

                        Not everyone is a Christian, not everyone sees the world the way you want them to.

                        I find it morally reprehensible that we allow kids to starve, and lead lives of despair. But we do it everyday.

                        I find it morally reprehensible that we killed Iraqis in the second Gulf war. Not becasue they attacked us, but because we saw an oppurtunity for financial gain.

                        I find it morally reprehensible that we have people who take advantage of people and exploit them for profit.

                        I find it morrally reprehensible that we have Mega-churches where pastor make millions, while so many die in poverty.

                        I find it sad that we have so much and kill other for more.

                        I find it morally reprehensible that people are executed by a system that is biased by race and money.

                        I find it sad that we lie to our kids and tell them dying in war is glorious. We fill their heads with lies of patriotism and glory.

                        We pollute and lie to ourselves about it.

                        Worry about the living for once.
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 11, 2011 2:29 pm ET)
                        2  
                        Well, then projectdork, this should be an easy one for you. If Tiller was "killing babies" and not "aborting fetuses" then you should have wholeheartedly supported his assassination. Surely you would be for killing a man in defense of the baby he was killing, right? I would love to hear your Becker logic twist its way from that one.
                        Report Abuse
                  • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (January 11, 2011 4:09 am ET)
                    7 1
                    Tiller was a baby killer. I guess you dispute that, do you?

                    YES, you moron!

                    IF Dr. Tiller was actually "killing babies" he would have been arrested and charged with murder. Instead, another right-wing loony took the law into his own hands and KILLED Dr. Tiller.

                    ABORTION is LEGAL procedure!

                    And Dr. Tiller performed LEGAL abortions.

                    Dr. Tiller did not drag woman off the street into his clinic, women came to him of their own FREE will!

                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by Jeremy Danials (January 11, 2011 4:15 am ET)
                    3  
                    You wanna claim a fetus is a baby? Have a funeral after a miscarriage.

                    Otherwise, clamp it. You have no case, middle-schooler.
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by Media Mumblings (January 10, 2011 5:33 pm ET)
                  13
                I agree. All the hateful things that have been said against conservatives/libertarians by hate-spewing leftists (especially on this site and MSNBC) should be apologized for. When President Obama employed violent rhetoric in 2008 by saying, "If they bring a kinfe, we'll bring a gun" he no doubt encouraged this deranged individual. Has he apologized yet for his violent rhetoric?
                Report Abuse
                • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 5:43 pm ET)
                  11  
                  Please read up on the context of Obama's statement and then get back to us.

                  By the way, that line was taken from a MOVIE.

                  But here's what ya gotta remember, MM: While the left may be guilty of some, in comparison, minor league hateful rhetoric, it is the right that has the weapons and the proclivity to act on the hateful rhetoric against liberals.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 10:32 pm ET)
                      7
                    foggy: don't you ever get tired of being wrong? By the way, since when have you ever taken anything in context? And minor league transgressions. I posted some of those minor league transgression for all to see, earlier today. I'm sure your the only one that see's them as minor transgressions.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 10:56 pm ET)
                      7  
                      don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

                      Have you stopped beating your wife?
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by Jeremy Danials (January 11, 2011 4:18 am ET)
                        3  
                        You assume this troll is of legal age to marry. Middle-schoolers are never that old, unless they are relatives of W.
                        Report Abuse
            • Author by kamrom (January 11, 2011 3:23 am ET)
              4  
              This is why we have such trouble taking your side seriously at times. Its not because you dont have real concerns, and its not like we believe your views are utterly without merit..But when it comes in full with the sort of people who spout violent rhetoric...You can see how we might have trouble hearing what you're trying to say.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 11, 2011 2:26 pm ET)
              3  
              I agree completely. There is no legal culpability here. The shooter himself is responsible for his actions. Just like when an abortion doctor was murdered after O'Reilly claimed that anyone who did not stop him has blood on their hands.

              But, moral culpability is a different thing. If you say things like "anyone who does not stop him has blood on his hands" and then the man is murdered for political reasons, you have to feel some regret morally. If you use gun targets to point out someone you want out of office and someone murders that person for political reasons, you have to feel some regret morally. If you do not, then you are an amoral person. And, in the end, I actually feel sorry for people like O'Reilly and Palin who seem incapable of regret and learning from past mistakes.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by southerngal (January 10, 2011 1:03 pm ET)
            9 1
            And if this isn't eerie enough....
            Report Abuse
        • Author by Media Mumblings (January 10, 2011 4:04 pm ET)
            16
          I seem to remember the curent president saying in 2008 that, "If they bring a knife, we'll bring a gun." I imagine that he'll get a pass by the socialists at MMFA because this is just an idiom and not a dastardly metaphor as with Palin's "crosshairs." It is you people that are replusive.

          Are we about done with the Beck/Palin "Two Minutes of Hate?" today?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by southerngal (January 10, 2011 4:10 pm ET)
            13 1
            Abstract political references are one thing, however targeting specific people with stupid rhetorical violent imagery is quite another.

            For Palin, it's all about Palin. Even her ridiculous rantings via Glenn Beck today in reaction to this shooting illustrate that. The woman is a sham and if this doesn't open up some eyes to her, nothing will. As is Beck. They deserve what they get, it's their own fault. Sorry, I shed no sympathy tears for either.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Media Mumblings (January 10, 2011 5:36 pm ET)
                13
              Abstract references? What kind of sophistry is this? It was a specific refernce of an actual event. Nothing abstract about it moron. Some of the words that used to post those idotic sentences above were abstractions. You are pathetic. Pot meet kettle.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by southerngal (January 10, 2011 5:40 pm ET)
                9 2
                Abstract in the sense that there wasn't a specific individual referenced as in the crosshairs from Palin.

                If you can't see the difference then you deserve Palin.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by Jeremy Danials (January 11, 2011 4:19 am ET)
                4  
                What kind of sophistry is this?


                I see someone is using their thesaurus function in Word to the hilt!
                Report Abuse
          • Author by CoolSlaw (January 10, 2011 4:55 pm ET)
            11  
            Media Mumblings, great little bit of distraction, but we both know that a movie quote President Obama once used in a speech is NOT the same thing as what we're talking about here.

            Complete dishonesty on your part. You and I both know you're doing nothing but taking a single passing movie quote out of context and twisting and blowing it out of proportion to try and create the most absurd false equivalence I've ever seen.

            I've never been able to get behind this right wing philosophy of self delusion and "ends always justify the means" mentality. I guess you have to resort to this kind of tactic to delude yourself into remaining faithful to a group that has become morally bankrupt and shameless.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Media Mumblings (January 10, 2011 5:39 pm ET)
                11
              Oh, it's just a movie quote. How many movies have had the phrase "in the crosshairs" in the script? You are spinnning like a top.

              You aguys only wantto use this event to try to win a political argument. That's all it is. If you think non-socialists are just going to roll over and take this propaganda coming out of hate sites like this one then you are mistaken.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 5:45 pm ET)
                10  
                You are spinnning like a top.

                Projection.

                I want to use this event to stop the hate speech. But you can sleep safely in your bed because hate radio/fox will not stop the hate - in fact, it'll likely get worse.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (January 11, 2011 4:29 am ET)
                4 1
                How many movies have had the phrase "in the crosshairs" in the script?

                Just imagine, Keith Ellison, Muslim U.S. Congressman from Minnesota, puts out a hit list Republicans he wants to unseat and he includes the rifle crosshairs to make his point.

                And then some guy goes out and shoots in the head one of those Republican Congressman on Ellison's list. He also kills 6 other people, including one 9 year old child and wounds 14 others.


                I can ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE, Fox Noise, Beck, Palin, Hannity O'Reilly, Rush and EVERY OTHER RIGHT-WING NUT would be screaming from the roof tops and forming at the mouth, 24/7.

                There is NO excuse, especially for someone who wanted to become the Vice President of the United States, to do something so disturbing and disgusting, PERIOD, end of subject!

                *The credit for the scenario involving Congressman Ellison belongs to Bill Maher.
                Report Abuse
            • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 5:42 pm ET)
                11
              Now you are trying to define what is acceptable heated rhetoric and what is not, and obviously slanting it so that whatever your side says is not nearly as bad as what the other side said. Please. You lefties spent eight years hurling hate and vitriole against Bush.Now you act as if those eight years didn't happen.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 5:46 pm ET)
                13  
                False Equivalency Alert!!!

                The left hated Bush for what HE DID, while the right hates Obama and liberals for WHO THEY ARE.

                Make a note of it, chief.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 10:38 pm ET)
                    8
                  Wrong. The right doesn't hate Onama or liberals. That's just your spin. The right do not like his policies. By the way, I am glad to see you admit to hating the opposition, and also stating that it is indeed your side who hates. I am a conservative. I don't hate liberals. I think liberals are well intentioned but misguided. That's basically how most of my conservative friends feel also. As to progressives, well, we certainly don't trust you, because you lie so much. We think it has something to do with your DNA,but it may go even deeper than that. But, no, we don't hate you.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 10:59 pm ET)
                    8  
                    The right doesn't hate Onama or liberals.

                    Now you've jumped the shark.

                    We think it has something to do with your DNA

                    Now that's projection. You know a study was just released that showed the conservative brain was more susceptible to fear-based arguments and tended to believe worst-case scenarios?

                    So yes, it does have something to do with DNA.
                    Report Abuse
          • Author by kamrom (January 11, 2011 3:25 am ET)
            3  
            Four Hours. Beck and Palin have four hours devoted to their hateful rhetoric every night. 2 Minutes is SO 1980s. Although to be fair three of those beck hours are radio commercials.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by sambo (January 10, 2011 12:23 pm ET)
        6  
        That's their nature...no matter how low
        Report Abuse
      • Author by stefiz (January 10, 2011 1:02 pm ET)
        8  
        my husband was talking about it with a coworker...they refused to believe Giffords was a democrat...
        Report Abuse
        • Author by bilbo_dies (January 10, 2011 1:58 pm ET)
          11  
          my husband was talking about it with a coworker...they refused to believe Giffords was a democrat...

          Well, she was a reformed Republican and called herself a "Blue dog Democrat". Give the right some time, they are already working on the "LEFTIST LUNATIC" meme pretty heavey, next thing you know Giffords we be a Republican.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 11:09 pm ET)
            3  
            next thing you know Giffords we be a Republican.

            Coming soon to a Fox & Friends chryon.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by BigJay (January 10, 2011 11:47 am ET)
      11  
      They state it as if it is fact, with zero actual proof to prove their point...

      Because if they had to try to prove their point, they would find that Hitler was actually EXTREMELY conservative and that would debunk their point entirely...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by NoTrueScotsman (January 10, 2011 11:50 am ET)
      12  
      TL;DR: Hitler was bad, this guy claims to have read a few books, Media Right claims shooter is essentially Nancy Pelosi in a clever disguise.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by curiousindependent (January 10, 2011 11:55 am ET)
      11  
      Considering how often Beck and his loony cohorts have labelled President Obama and Democrats as "Nazis", this isn't all that surprising.

      I wonder what they would glean from my having read The Lord of the Rings something on the order of 20 times, and that my favorite movie is Independence Day.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by teh.stoopid.lib (January 10, 2011 12:07 pm ET)
        9  
        I KNEW IT! You're a Hobbit from outer space aren't you?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 1:40 pm ET)
          16
        No, for the most part, they label obama a socialist or communist. It was Bush who some called a nazi. Oh, wait, that was your side who called Bush and his crew, nazi's.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by yoiksaway (January 10, 2011 1:53 pm ET)
          2  
          3....2...1...
          Report Abuse
        • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 2:00 pm ET)
          9  
          Bush did employ Nazi tactics, though, so he was correctly called a Nazi.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:33 pm ET)
              12
            No he didn't.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 2:58 pm ET)
              8  
              You exceed yourself with your proofs and detailed arguments. What's the matter, your google break down?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 4:03 pm ET)
                  10
                Your side makes absurd statements without proof, I say they are absurd, and you ask me to proof they are absurd? How about the original poster proving his absurd statements, first? Seems only fair. You know, the one making the original statement should have to prove the statement to be true. When that starts to occure around here, I will then prove my rebuttals. Until then, I will just rebut your sides statement with a statement. It's only fair, don't you think? You know, requiring the same proof from everyone, not just the opposition?
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 4:18 pm ET)
                  9  
                  I beg you: read that aloud and see how juvenile and petty it really is.

                  Okay, let me help you. What would mean "Nazi tactics" to you? That established, we can discover if Bush used them or not.

                  But gosh, you have no idea how comical you are.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 4:58 pm ET)
                      12
                    Yawn. You are a petty sob, aren't you?
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by CoolSlaw (January 10, 2011 5:11 pm ET)
                      10  
                      You're the best kind of chew toy, project21reps, and I mean that with all sincerity. You think if you just get batted around and gnawed on enough, the cat's and dogs will get bored or tired, and you'll have somehow won.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 5:26 pm ET)
                      3  
                      You are a petty sob, aren't you?

                      Are you quite sure i'm an sob and not just a b?
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 5:36 pm ET)
                          11
                        So, your confused about your gender I see.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 5:40 pm ET)
                          5  
                          Not me, child, you. Think before you type.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 6:02 pm ET)
                              10
                            I said nothing regarding your gender. SOB=sow of a bitch.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 6:13 pm ET)
                              8  
                              laughable. you seem to aspire to ever greater levels of stupid.
                              Report Abuse
                            • Author by Old_Benjamin (January 10, 2011 6:17 pm ET)
                              8  
                              I said nothing regarding your gender. SOB=sow of a bitch.


                              Priceless! When cornered - it tries to be funny and posts this!

                              Pssst two of the four words in sow of a bitch reference gender!

                              Way to go you lying pos a-hole!
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 10:05 am ET)
                                4  
                                Projectile Vomit has asked me before why I have mentioned his lack of spelling and grammar abilities (and I have replied), and yesterday another Con hassled me on this issue (and I replied also).

                                And my reply is very simple...
                                I don't care so much about simple typos (I made one myself up above), or the occasional grammar mistake.

                                But when it is abundantly clear that the mistakes are part of a lack of comprehension allied with the lack of spelling and grammar abilities, and especially the wonderful ability to come up with completely different words, like above with 'sow', and the other day with him saying "demonetization" instead of "demonization", that's were ProjVom (and any other Con rat) needs to be called out.

                                I'm just sorry I was elsewhere, and didn't get in my licks earlier.

                                Thanks to all of you who started the skewering. I suspect PrjVom's nearly ready for the pit!
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 10:10 am ET)
                                  2  
                                  Addendum:

                                  One could maybe excuse this is if were merely a typo. But look at your keyboard, all. On a QWERTY keyboard 'N' and 'W' are not that close to each other - I use a different hand for the two letters.

                                  Yup, ProjVom is a moron, not a (just) a typo master...
                                  Report Abuse
                            • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 6:25 pm ET)
                              6  
                              so female dogs can give birth to female pigs?
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by Andy Kreiss (January 10, 2011 9:33 pm ET)
                                6  
                                It's those Porcine/canine hybrids we were warned about !!!

                                Bless the wingnuts for showing up here and putting on the big floppy shoes for our entertainment.
                                Report Abuse
            • Author by HRN (January 10, 2011 3:31 pm ET)
              5  
              Did SO!
              Report Abuse
            • Author by magnolialover (January 10, 2011 3:45 pm ET)
              9  
              I don't think Bush did either, although I did not appreciate his leadership of our country, and didn't believe in him as President.

              That being said, the difference being that the people from the left who were calling Bush a Nazi were NOT the people from the media. We didn't hear it on a daily basis on news networks how he was a Nazi, or how America was turning into the Weimar Republic in the 30's.

              That didn't happen.

              Who called Bush a Nazi? A bunch of individuals, and protesters. Nobody wrote a book called Conservative Fascism during Bush's years in office. Nobody from the left wing media ever called Bush out as a Nazi. You folks FAIL to see the differences there.

              Protesters v Newscasters and pundits on TV and radio on a daily basis.

              BIG difference.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 4:22 pm ET)
                3  
                Actually, magnolialover, i'm not sure i agree with foghornleghorn either. And i would have liked to know what s/he meant. It all depends on what you call "Nazi tactics". If you put the Patriot Act in that category, then maybe.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 4:53 pm ET)
                  10  
                  A couple "Nazi tactics" come immediately to mind.

                  1) The big lie, promoted by propaganda. Sometime paid propaganda (Armstrong Williams).

                  2) Detention without trial.

                  3) Unitary executive (ok, that's kind of a stretch, but Bush DID say it would be much easier to govern in a dictatorship, as long as he was the dictator)
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 5:11 pm ET)
                    2  
                    Well alright then.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by grmce (January 10, 2011 5:13 pm ET)
                    7  
                    foggy, point 1) above is game set and match when applying the "Nazi tactics" accusation to W. Bush (AKA George 3rd, following Washington and G.H.W.).

                    The Bush-Cheney administration could be defined by its application of The Big Lie, whether it be Defence, Foreign or Economic Policy, all were governed by big lies.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by CoolSlaw (January 10, 2011 5:21 pm ET)
                    8  
                    You forgot:

                    4) warrant-less wiretapping and massive information gathering projects

                    5) monitoring and sending infiltrators to spy on anti-war groups...like the QUAKERS who are constitutionally guaranteed the right to follow a pacifist theology.

                    6) to your point #3, the over-reach of executive power in general

                    7) creating an enemy out of religious or ethnic groups to make it easier to convince the American people to go to war
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by Jeremy Danials (January 11, 2011 4:26 am ET)
                    4  
                    Another one that was used was the Young Republicans mixing in with protesters in front of TV cameras to make it seem as if they were all SUPPORTERS.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 10:13 am ET)
                      4  
                      I will admit to being one who did call Bush and Chaney Nazis, and I will NOT apoligise for it.
                      And Reagan was a borderline Nazi.

                      There!
                      Report Abuse
    • Author by revcocoa (January 10, 2011 11:56 am ET)
      12 11
      I don't know, MM, the claim strikes me as a little tenuous. If you're going to accuse the right of something so outlandish as calling Nazism leftist, at least provide some evidence.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (January 10, 2011 1:05 pm ET)
        8  
        Umm, there is an entire book called Liberal Fascism that is a whitewash of the history of, fascism calling it a left wing ideology.

        If you were being sarcastic (which I think is highly possible), I apologize.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by revcocoa (January 10, 2011 2:01 pm ET)
          6  
          Yeah, it was sarcastic. No need to apologize. Fault lies with me.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:11 pm ET)
            15
          I have read the book. It is not a whitewash of history as you claim. I believe you are attempting to whitewash history with your post.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 2:20 pm ET)
            7  
            Okay, we have your opinion. How about some substance?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 4:10 pm ET)
                11
              Excuse me, but I only responded to someone who made the claim that a book was a whitewash of history. I suggest you ask him to provide something of substance to support his allegations.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 4:35 pm ET)
                10  
                Did the book call fascism "a left wing ideology"? If it did, then magnolialover's comment is right on point, your opinion notwithstanding.

                Now dry your eyes and stop stamping your little foot.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 6:03 pm ET)
                    10
                  And the book proves its contention.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 6:15 pm ET)
                    5  
                    The same contention you have been clinging to despite every clear example that discounts it. Your tenacity is impressive, but useless.
                    Report Abuse
    • Author by AB-001 (January 10, 2011 11:56 am ET)
      18  
      The vast majority of American Jews have consistently voted on the "liberal" side since the 1920s: Jewish Liberal Voting patterns

      And you know how devoted Jews are to that liberal leader Hitler
      Report Abuse
    • Author by disposable15129 (January 10, 2011 11:59 am ET)
      3  
      How the right ever spins the Nazis as being anything near liberalism or progressivism is beyond me.
      1) The Nazi regime was based on a philosophy of racial purity, just as the American neo-Nazis are today. This concept goes against what most Americans, especially liberals, believe.
      2) Although called the "National Socialistic" party, the NAZIs were not for trade unions and did not nationalize much of anything, for all intents and purposes. Huge companies like Krupp were still privately held, and, although more than cooperative with the NAZI regime, did so more out of an interest in making money than political zeal. Definitely not socialism.
      3) While the right claims that "liberals, socialists, and communists" were at the heart of the NAZI movement, any examination of the facts shows that all these groups were the victims of the Pograms that were instituted when the NAZIs came to power.

      The NAZIs, and especially Adolph himself, were power hungry megolomaniacs, who were more interested in domination and control than in some unified political theory. Just as Stalin was not, for all intents and purposes, a Marxist, but another personality of the same type as Adolph. People need to understand that the actions of these two madmen had little to do with some great concept, but instead only their own desire for absolute power.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Scousegit (January 10, 2011 12:10 pm ET)
      2  
      "Hardly The Reading List Of A Palin Supporter." I have to agree with this statement as I feel the reading list of the average Palin supporter is printed on thick cardboard and possibly with lift-up flaps.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 12:15 pm ET)
      8  
      Pretty extensive, MMfA ... at least now we know what the staff was doing on the weekend.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 12:17 pm ET)
      19  
      I like the Gateway Pundit's irrefutable proof that he isn't a teabagger or Republican: he volunteered at a book festival.

      Apparently, neither teabaggers nor Republicans would ever be caught anywhere near a book or volunteering.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by n'est-ce pas (January 10, 2011 12:23 pm ET)
        6  
        Well, that is pretty damning.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by CoolSlaw (January 10, 2011 5:25 pm ET)
          5  
          Only if it was to sell copies of right wing authored books, but you know how right wingers refuse to read anything that doesn't support their preconceived ideas.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by Luckhunter (January 10, 2011 12:21 pm ET)
      2  
      [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/European-political-spectrum.png]

      Now, where is fascism on that chart again?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by bootyprof (January 10, 2011 12:24 pm ET)
      11 2
      This is where MMFA fails sometimes. Of course there are hundreds of Nazi references put forth by Faux News... Documenting those references is easy! What We need is for MMFA to put those Nazi references into context!!! Provide some sort of counter-argument to the right-wing noise machine!

      Why is it a false assumption to tie Nazism to left-wing American politics? Why is Nazism considered a "right-wing" movement historically? Where is Beck/Hannity/Goldberg wrong exactly? Why is it that reading Mein-Kampf is NOT indicative of left-wing politics?

      We know that Faux compares Nazis to Progressives, but why exactly are they wrong for doing so? This is when we need MMFA!!!

      Report Abuse
      • Author by BigJay (January 10, 2011 12:37 pm ET)
        4 2
        This is the point I was trying to make with my post... I really hope that MMFA posts something refuting their actual argument that Nazis are leftists... Heck, even an excerpt from a book proving Hitler was a conservative will do...
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 12:42 pm ET)
          14  
          It doesn't matter what proof or evidence is given, the people who have convinced themselves that Hitler was a liberal will dismiss any evidence or proof you show them.

          Belief can be stronger than truth.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 1:33 pm ET)
              15
            imbecile: maybe if what is provided actually refuted the rights claims that nazism was a right of center belief, than it wouldn't be dismissed. Fact is, the party that Hitler was leader of was actually the National Socialist German Workers Party.

            Now, I know that the Socialism in the title of the group Hitler was the leader of, really refers to something other than socialism, at least according to you progressives big brother lovers, but I have to take accept the dictionary difinition as to what the word means in the real world.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by BassVirus (January 10, 2011 1:40 pm ET)
              10  
              So in your world the Peoples Republic of Korea is in a fact a democratic republic?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 1:54 pm ET)
                5  
                I don't think we'll get an answer. That kind of cognitive dissonance has been known to cause a condition in Republicans which prevents them from answering truthfully, if at all.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:13 pm ET)
                    10
                  When are you gonna provide proof of your position that the word socialism in the nazi name means they were conservatives?
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by JoeSixpack (January 10, 2011 2:45 pm ET)
                    6  
                    Why prove a contention that was never made? Show me where anyone said "the word socialism in the nazi name means they were conservatives."
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 2:45 pm ET)
                    4  
                    the word socialism in the nazi name means they were conservatives

                    I defy you to point out where someone said that.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 5:02 pm ET)
                    6  
                    When you provide proof of your position that the word Democratic in their names means they are a Democracy?
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 11, 2011 4:53 pm ET)
                    1  
                    Yes, clearly projectdork does in fact believe that the Peoples Republic of Korea is, in fact, a peoples' republic. Actually, he does not believe anything about any subject until Beck tells him exactly what to believe. He is a hopeless Becker.
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 1:57 pm ET)
                  13
                Apples and Oranges, chief. Fact is, your wrong, we are right. Nazism was a spawn of the left, not of the right.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 1:58 pm ET)
                  7  
                  I'd call you a liar, but based on your previous posts, I'm not entirely convinced you know what that phrase means. Hell, I'm not even entirely convinced you even know what apples and oranges are.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 2:02 pm ET)
                    12  
                    Dork believes that since socialist is in the Nazi party name, and he believes the Democrats are, in fact, socialists, so he comes to the inevitable conclusion that the Nazi's were leftists.

                    Dork is a fraud. And a revisionist history guy.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:29 pm ET)
                        12
                      Its funny how you believe that what one calls themselves is not indicative of their beliefs. They were socialist, by there own words, and deeds. By the way, I don't believe democrats to be socialists, just because they are democrats. You are lying about my position. Why do you have to lie, if your position is true?
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by teh.stoopid.lib (January 10, 2011 2:35 pm ET)
                        8  
                        They were 'socialists' by their DEEDS? Horsesh!t! You are a lying sack and you can not possibly believe this crap that you are putting out here. You are sick in the head.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:38 pm ET)
                            11
                          Just like the other socialist of his time, he murdered his own citizens. Do you dispute that?
                          Report Abuse
                      • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 5:10 pm ET)
                        7  
                        The NAZI party did start out with socialists amongst them, but Hitler purged them from the party in 1921 when he became the leader of the party. You need to to educate yourself on real history and not believe a book put out by a wingnut idiot.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by mescal (January 11, 2011 2:44 am ET)
                          3  
                          The problem with Projectdork educating himself is that ignorance is all he has.
                          Report Abuse
                  • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:07 pm ET)
                      12
                    He was a leader of the germans socialist party. What don't you understand about that? You have not shown that hitler was the leader of any conservative movement in or out of germany. You make a statement that he was not left leaning, then call people names when they don't believe you know what you are talking about. What proof do you have that he was a conservative, and not a liberal? By the way, wasn't hitler doing the same thing other socialists/communist where doing at the time? You know, killing off its own citizens? Hitler joined a long line of prominate liberals when he started doing so, did he not?
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 2:28 pm ET)
                      6  
                      Sigh. project21reps, socialism isn't defined by how many people you kill, or even who you kill. Murder is committed by all political stripes, even pacifists.

                      You're so handy with the google; why not establish in your own mind what "left" and "right" are all about. For instance, what center are they "left" or "right" from?

                      Do as your master Beck says: think for yourself!
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:40 pm ET)
                          10
                        Murdering your own citizens is not done by every political stripes as you claim. It is done by socialists and communists. That is the history of those ideologies.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 2:48 pm ET)
                          7  
                          Okay, now you're just running scared because you think your overlords want you to defend them. Take a deep breath and think before you type.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 4:57 pm ET)
                              11
                            porky: It is you who is attempting to defend the indefensible, chief. Your left wing ideology is a murderous one, as history has shown. By the way, there are no overlords in my life, nor do I defend any overlord. I just happen to believe that you progressives are dangerous lying people and who must be opposed.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 5:49 pm ET)
                              7  
                              Your left wing ideology is a murderous one

                              Are you quite sure i'm not an open-minded conservative?

                              you progressives are dangerous lying people

                              Everyone lies. Even one's friends.

                              there are no overlords in my life, nor do I defend any overlord

                              Spoken like a slave in denial.

                              attempting to defend the indefensible

                              Where and when. Do show.
                              Report Abuse
                        • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 5:58 pm ET)
                          7  
                          So Pinnochet, Franco, Noriega, and Saddam Hussein were socialists or communists?
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 6:09 pm ET)
                              11
                            No, but they were left wing loons, just as you are.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 6:19 pm ET)
                              3  
                              Sancta Simplicitas!
                              Report Abuse
                            • Author by Old_Benjamin (January 10, 2011 6:32 pm ET)
                              5  
                              So Pinnochet, Franco, Noriega, and Saddam Hussein were socialists or communists?


                              LOL! The lying pos thinks everyone deemed to be bad is from the left.

                              Hey a-hole, why not tell us what mad Agusto Pinochet a "left wing loon"? Or Franco for that matter.
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 6:47 pm ET)
                                3  
                                everyone deemed to be bad is from the left

                                "Four legs good! Two legs bad!"
                                Report Abuse
                            • Author by jeverfritz (January 12, 2011 11:51 am ET)
                                 
                              The American education system rears its ugly head...where'd you get your information, sir? From tha back of a cereal box?
                              Report Abuse
                    • Author by The_Cat (January 10, 2011 2:31 pm ET)
                      8  
                      So, you're really going to argue that Hitler was a hippy, then? A peacenik, anti-war, anti-big business, pro-equality guy? Really?
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:36 pm ET)
                          11
                        No, he was a socialist. And he was the leader of the german socialist people's party.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 5:25 pm ET)
                          7  
                          He was neither. The ONLY socialistic thing Hitler did was to move the the Social Welfare administration from the Church to the state. That was IT. Hitler purged all the Socialists out of the party in 1921, and had many killed during the "Night of the Long Knives."

                          Report Abuse
                    • Author by tman418 (January 10, 2011 2:35 pm ET)
                      4  
                      project21,

                      "Killing off your own people" is not a part of any political ideology. Pinochet can hardly be called leftist, and he killed a lot of his own people. Killing your own people is simply the result of being power hungry, a trait which transcends all ideologies.

                      By the way, he hated communists, you know.

                      Did Hitler support abortion, gay rights, equal rights for all regardless of religion and race and sexuality? Was he not a nationalist? What about the strong militarism?

                      Hitler was nothing more than just a power hungry white supremacist. Neither liberal nor conservative.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:54 pm ET)
                          13
                        I will concede your point, that hitler was not of the right, and that he was nothing more than a power hungry white supremacist. Sounds like he may have been a democrat of that era though. You know, the power hungry white supremacist thing sounds a lot like what the democratic party was enabling at the time, in the south.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 2:59 pm ET)
                          12  
                          Well, i guess you can't fix stupid.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 3:05 pm ET)
                            9  
                            projector/dork is a fake black man, probably still in high school, who thinks MLK was a conservative republican and Malcolm X would be a teabagger today and doesn't believe that Hiler was a fascist.

                            He is so beyond stupid that he must be a fraud. Either he's 12 years old or he's doing this on purpose.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 4:37 pm ET)
                              5  
                              Limited vocabulary too, foghornleghorn. Political analysis goes no farther than "four legs good! two legs bad!"
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 5:10 pm ET)
                                  12
                                One knows when one wins an argument with the progressive big brother lovers. They turn to insults when they find their idiotic arguments can't be supported by facts. I see you and foggy concede the fact that hitler was one of you guys.
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 5:50 pm ET)
                                  7  
                                  big brother lovers.

                                  Drink!!!

                                  <belch>
                                  Report Abuse
                                • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 5:52 pm ET)
                                  6  
                                  progressive big brother lovers...turn to insults

                                  O dear. Why don't you reflect on what you're saying? Are you deliberately trying to make me laugh?
                                  Report Abuse
                              • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 10:25 am ET)
                                4  
                                No, it goes a tad further, He also says...

                                What's good for the bitch is good for the sow
                                Report Abuse
                          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 7:13 pm ET)
                              8
                            And you are a prime example of that, aren't you, porky?
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 9:36 pm ET)
                              4  
                              a prime example of that

                              Of what? Deliberately trying to make me laugh? Read over before you hit "save" you'll be glad you did.
                              Report Abuse
                        • Author by smalljaws (January 10, 2011 6:54 pm ET)
                          4  
                          And all those bigots of the solid south changed their party affiliation after LBJ oversaw the passage of the civil rights act.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 7:19 pm ET)
                              8
                            Only After they were told to leave their sheets behind, by the republicans. That is why the klan, etc went on the decline. You know, after the democratic party abandoned them. They lost democratic support, found no support within the republican party, and pretty much faded from the political scene, except in liberal areas of the north, such as oregon and Ohio, where I hear they still thrive.
                            Report Abuse
                      • Author by CoolSlaw (January 10, 2011 5:32 pm ET)
                        7  
                        Project21reps is a perfect case study of the new right wing mentality. He must believe what he is told, and he must believe everything about the "opposition" is bad. He doesn't know history, he doesn't understand ideological differences. He will not take one moment to examine his own behavior or beliefs. He just knows it feels good to be told he is always right by overpaid talking heads and shock jocks who found that doing politics for the willfully ignorant pays better then fart jokes.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 5:58 pm ET)
                          4  
                          project/dork is a fake and a fraud. That's all you need to know.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by bilbo_dies (January 10, 2011 8:19 pm ET)
                            4  
                            I vote "performance artist".

                            I have to give him credit too, he is locked tight in character. I sure hope he actually takes a break from time to time. Staying in this character too long could be detrimental to his mental health.
                            Report Abuse
                    • Author by classicliberal2 (January 10, 2011 5:15 pm ET)
                      7  
                      He was a leader of the germans socialist party. What don't you understand about that? You have not shown that hitler was the leader of any conservative movement in or out of germany.

                      Hitler was not the "leader of the Germans' socialist party." The socialist party in Germany was the Social Democratic party. It was the biggest party in the democracy Hitler's fascists overthrew. Germany had a much smaller Communist party, and various liberal and moderate parties. The Nazis absorbed the conservative parties in their rise to power, forming a close alliance with the Nationalist People's party, and draining most of the votes from the People's party. Their rise was financed by Germany's politically reactionary industrialists--a fact which, alone, disposes of the "socialist" accusation--and Hitler made these already-wealthy men and groups even more fantastically wealthy (crushing their political and labor opposition along the way). Hitler's use of socialist rhetoric and slogans, on the other hand, was never anything more than a vote-gathering ploy, and those who bought into it were liquidated almost immediately.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 5:17 pm ET)
                      5  
                      Hitler was not the leader of the German's socialist party, he was a the leader of the NAZI party. The Socialist Democratic Party was the Socialist party of Germany, the KPD was the communist party there as well. Both parties were banned after Hitler became chancelor and the SPD was the ONLY party in Germany to oppose the "enabling act" that gave Hitler absolute power in Germany.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 6:00 pm ET)
                        7  
                        Historical facts are kryptonite to Revisionist History Guy, aka Dork/projector.
                        Report Abuse
                    • Author by smalljaws (January 10, 2011 6:50 pm ET)
                      2  
                      Totalitarianism is not about left or right,its about absolute power.
                      Report Abuse
                • Author by BassVirus (January 10, 2011 2:01 pm ET)
                  3  
                  Compelling argument... I should have expected the "NO U!" defense.

                  Also define "we" if you would be so kind.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:25 pm ET)
                      7
                    Bass: do you own or have access to a dictionary?
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by BassVirus (January 10, 2011 2:36 pm ET)
                      7  
                      Yes, oddly enough "socialism" and "national socialism" have their own entries.

                      To clarify on my "we" question what i meant was
                      "What do you mean we? Got a t*** in your pocket?".

                      P.S. Is it not standard practice to teach logical fallacies/rhetorical appeals (at least the common ones) in english 101 anymore?
                      Report Abuse
                • Author by smalljaws (January 10, 2011 5:10 pm ET)
                  5  
                  Mr.21 if you believe that the nazis were of the left than you're a fool. The nazis were anti-union (similar to todays gop) They sent out the brown shirts to intimidate labor(similar to coal and steel barons at turn of century) The biggest threat to the fascist takeover of power was the left. Their greatest enemy was the communists. Beckerheads have no sense of historical accuracy or the political continuum.
                  Report Abuse
              • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 10:21 am ET)
                3  
                slight correction, BassVirus

                They call themselves the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea.

                (I know that's what you meant to say)
                Report Abuse
            • Author by teh.stoopid.lib (January 10, 2011 2:00 pm ET)
              9 1
              Nazis were FASCISTS idiot.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:20 pm ET)
                  13
                They where socialists, as evidenced by the name they called themselves. By the way, the murdered their own citizens, just like the other socialists did during that time.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by teh.stoopid.lib (January 10, 2011 2:29 pm ET)
                  9  
                  Sooooo.... you're saying the DEMOCRATIC People's REPUBLIC of Korea is, in fact, a democratic republic. You should really consider giving up this flight path projector. You are making a fool of yourself.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:42 pm ET)
                      10
                    What does one have to do with the other? Because n korea isn't very democratic doesn't mean germany wasn't socialist.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by teh.stoopid.lib (January 10, 2011 2:52 pm ET)
                      8  
                      YOU contend that since 'Socialist' is part of Nazi, there is NO WAY they weren't Socialists. So by YOUR OWN 'logic' North Korea MUST be a Democratic Republic. It's right there in their name after all. It couldn't possibly be a marketing gimmick could it?
                      There are none so blind as those that will not see.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 4:12 pm ET)
                          11
                        You have to prove they are not socialists, chief. It is in their name for a reason. If it is not discriptive of their ideology, as you claim, then the proof is on you, not me.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by teh.stoopid.lib (January 10, 2011 4:22 pm ET)
                          6  
                          Holy sh!t! READ A HISTORY BOOK! Hell, do a Google search, go to Wikipedia, ANYTHING! You contend they WERE Socialists. YOU prove it. They were SINO.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 5:34 pm ET)
                              11
                            Realamerica: it is your side who is trying to link hitler/nazis with the right. So far, nothing you or any other progressive who supports that linkage have failed to establish the link. Probably because you can't.
                            Report Abuse
                        • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 4:24 pm ET)
                          7  
                          chief

                          Drink!!!
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by CoolSlaw (January 10, 2011 5:39 pm ET)
                            9  
                            wow this proect21reps is so foolish it's frightening.

                            I mean, realamerica just utterly turned his idiotic and ill-informed point about the name being proof right around on him, and he just keeps insisting. His argument boils down to "my example is right because I said so, and yours is wrong because it makes me look like an even bigger fool".

                            Small children argue this way because they don't know better, but when they do it, it's cute because they are small children. When project21reps does it, it's just really sad.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 6:08 pm ET)
                                10
                              In the absence of evidence to the contrary, one must use the name one calls oneself, when defining that enity. They called themselves socialists. Absent anything concrete to the contrary, I take them at their word. You seem to believe they weren't socialists, but have provided nothing in support of your contention except to say that N Korea is a not democracy. As such, that means to you, for some unknown reason, that nazi germany wasn't following a left wing ideology under hitler.
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 6:18 pm ET)
                                7  
                                There is, however, MUCH evidence to the contrary. You just choose to ignore it.
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 7:21 pm ET)
                                    8
                                  If that is so, Radda, then provide it. Just saying it's so, doesn't make it so. Hitler's ideology was most certainly left leaning.
                                  Report Abuse
                              • Author by Old_Benjamin (January 10, 2011 6:35 pm ET)
                                4  
                                I take them at their word.


                                As you should. I mean the world knows we have to take nazis at their word. Worked well for Stalin.
                                Report Abuse
                        • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 10:35 am ET)
                          3  
                          Now you are just getting me really mad!

                          You can't have it both ways. The word 'Democratic' is in N. Korea's official name because they are LIARS! And the word 'Socialist' is in the Nazi party's official name is because they were also LIARS!

                          But by your logic, the Nazis must be honest, truth-telling people, because in your opinion, they were socialists, and told the truth about that.

                          And furthermore, using your logic, then YOU must be a NAZI. Case closed...
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by project21reps (January 11, 2011 12:35 pm ET)
                               
                            DD: NO, I don't beleive the Nazis are honest. What I am saying is that your side has not proved they were not socialists, as reflected by the name they called themselves. Just because they are liars, does not mean they lied about their name. You have to prove they lied, not just assume they did, which is what your sides arguement seems to consist of. Assumptions that they were lying about being socialists. One thing the nazis, communists and progressives of that time had in common was the belief in the superiortity of the white race. See my earlier post in this regard.
                            Report Abuse
                  • Author by JoeSixpack (January 10, 2011 2:43 pm ET)
                    4  
                    I always love that line of argument from the wingnuts:

                    Golly gee, it MUST be true! It's right there in the name and everything!!!

                    Yeah, and China is also a "people's republic." And communist East Germany really was a "democratic republic."

                    I could call myself the King of England - it doesn't make it so.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by HRN (January 10, 2011 3:39 pm ET)
                      5  
                      Your Majesty, when you're quite done with your "surfing", there are papers to sign, and someone named "France" wishes to speak to you...
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by CoolSlaw (January 10, 2011 5:43 pm ET)
                      6  
                      Hey! We're onto something here. I'm going to start a progressive advocacy group and call it the "conservative libertarian idea furthering foundation"(CLIFF), and people like project21reps will no doubt contribute because regardless of what we stand for or do...by golly the name means they MUST be conservative!
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 10:39 am ET)
                        2  
                        And Elvis Costello once had album called "King of America" with him pictured on the front cover in a crown and ermine vestments.

                        Just think how different this comment board would be if ProjVom saw that album!
                        Report Abuse
              • Author by Lito1120 (January 10, 2011 4:08 pm ET)
                3  
                National Socialist Party of Germnay.

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi
                Report Abuse
            • Author by grmce (January 10, 2011 5:31 pm ET)
              6  
              The N.D.S.S. that Hitler joined had a socialist element - there was, at the time, a schism between national socialism and international socialism. Hitler, however, purged the more socialist members from the party as he took control.

              Rather than the bottom-up model of socialism (which is democratic in nature) Hitler chose a top-down model consisting of a collaboration between a totalitarian dictatorship and large business corporations. This is the essence of fascism which could be described as the mutant pervert cousin of socialism and has more in common with absolute monarchy than with the Social Democracy that grew out of the Industrial Revolution.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 1:53 pm ET)
              14
            It doesn't matter what proof or evidence is given, the people who have convinced themselves that Hitler was a not liberal will dismiss any evidence or proof you show them.


            There, fixed it for you chief.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 1:57 pm ET)
              15  
              Typical Republican. Altering text and history to fit your agenda.

              It just kills you to own Hitler as a fellow ideologue, doesn't it?

              See, liberals don't attempt to deny that Stalin was an extreme leftist. We're mature enough to own our crazies and do what we can to prevent them from attaining that kind of power ever again. Republicans, on the other hand, prefer to live in a state of abject denial, instead attempting to blame everyone else for their ills. Strange isn't it? Coming from the party of personal responsibility?
              Report Abuse
            • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 2:04 pm ET)
              7  
              will dismiss any evidence or proof you show them.

              We need more proof other than having the word "socialist" in the party name, Chief Fraudulent.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by nicholjm (January 10, 2011 4:26 pm ET)
              7  
              Just google it at a minimum, any definition of Nazi will tell you it a far right wing ideology, hyper nationalism, anti communist, anti Jewish, anti intellectual, ani trade union, militaristic.........

              What it was not, was "socialist" Wikki actually has quite a good section on it (I hate wikki but in this case the info is rather good). Please read somethingt other than the Blaze and stop being a complete dingaling.
              Report Abuse
        • Author by donwelty (January 10, 2011 6:02 pm ET)
          6  
          Normally, anyone making an assertion should provide evidence of its veracity. And the more outrageous the assertion the more solid the evidence must be. Some people are so enamored with their ideas, no contrary evidence is sufficient to change their minds. By calling up inflammatory Nazi comparisons, the Fox does not wish to investigate issues and engage alternate opinions, it wants to inflame. The people at Fox making the comparisons see superficial similarities and--presto--they have broadcast material.

          To debunk the Nazi assertions, MMFA and other organizations have to lay a meticulous framework--only to convince some of the people who are interested in getting to the facts. Nazi comments are only part of what Fox does--Fox's goal is to inflame, not usually to inform.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by Andy Kreiss (January 10, 2011 12:25 pm ET)
      19  
      This is one of those arguments, I've learned the hard way, that you just don't want to get into with a wingnut. If somebody has accepted the idea that the Nazi were not right wing, there's nothing you can do to straighten them out.

      Coincidentally, last night after seeing some of these mentions of Mein Kampf, I watched part of a doc on TV, I believe it was called The Nazi Occult Conspiracy.

      Pretty good account of Hitler's rise after WWI. It covered his employment by the government to infiltrate left-wing organizations, his stumbling onto the prototype Nazis ( which Hitler really liked because they were actually very right wing, undercover as leftists), the hijacking of Norse religions in place of Christianity as a unique Aryan faith ( contrary to the "Hitler was an Atheist" right wing BS).

      It's interesting to watch a sober historical account like this, and be reminded that there are people who believe a completely different history. It's the same sort of disconnect I get when watching a science program that is working on the assumption that the viewer understands established science, then remembering that a significant number of Americans don't accept a lot of that reality.

      BTW, this documentary was on The Military Channel. I'm sure there's at least one wingnut loony enough to call that station part of the librul media.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 12:33 pm ET)
        11  
        People's willingness to believe something, whether right or wrong, can be quite strong even in the face of overwhelming evidence that their belief is erroneous.

        We've seen this demonstrated for centuries.

        You're right that trying to argue with someone who chooses to believe that Hitler was a leftist is wholly futile.

        However, sometimes, asking the right questions can sow a seed in their minds that might get them to question what they believe. Not always, but sometimes.

        One simple question would be: if Stalin and Hitler both shared an ideology, then why did they fight so bitterly against each other in WW2? Another could be: if he was a liberal, why did he choose to exterminate the very people liberals seek to protect: gays, handicapped, non-whites, etc?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by FGFM (January 10, 2011 12:45 pm ET)
          4  
          I've heard people claim that the Hitler/Stalin conflict was a factional dispute, but I've never heard anyone say that Hirohito was a left-winger!
          Report Abuse
        • Author by bootyprof (January 10, 2011 12:59 pm ET)
          9  
          Excellent strategy! This is what I've started doing with my in-laws that are Beck zombies. Ask basic questions that call upon simple logic.

          They were calling Obama a Marxist Communist and I calmly replied: How can Obama be for a revolutionary working-class movement when he bails out Bank of America? How can corporate profits in America be at their highest level? How does he have have a 15% lower upper income tax bracket than Nixon or Reagan? Why did Obamacare help preserve the private insurance system? Believing in business regulations is not the same as eliminating private businesses altogether. The notion that that Obama is a radical Marxist Communist is ludicrous. He is a liberal but he is no Marxist... Not even close.

          They are pretty much speechless after that and have to admit that the Communist rhetoric is hyperbole and does not reflect reality!
          Report Abuse
          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:02 pm ET)
              16
            He did not bail out bank of america, the american people did. corporate profits where not caused by obama. Because of Bush, re the tax thing. It didn't preserve anything. He is a socialist with communist leanings. Read his books.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 2:05 pm ET)
              3  
              He did not bail out bank of america, the american people did.


              Beck's not an American?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Maimon (January 12, 2011 10:13 pm ET)
                   

                Bush tax cuts were s stupid idea. Ask an economist if you should cut taxes during a war. The answer is NO. Ask an economist if you should cut taxes during two wars. The answer is NO. When you lose 8 million jobs and do nothing to stop it you are not going to be remembered for your failed economic plan.

                When you allow derivative trading to go unchecked and it creates a housing bubble that nearly collapses the world's economy, you should not boast about your failed economic plan.

                I"m not sure you really know what a communist is or a socialist. You keep using those terms as if they represent anything the current administration has done. You never cite anything, you just repeat it.

                Report Abuse
            • Author by bootyprof (January 10, 2011 2:21 pm ET)
              8  
              "Because of Bush"

              "It didn't preserve anything"

              "He is a Socialist with Communist leanings"

              This type of monosyllabic Neanderthal grunting is exactly why Beck zombies lose the Obama = Marxist argument. There is no rational leg to stand on! I have read his books and he is by all accounts a pragmatic liberal that rejects the radical leanings of his deceased father!
              Report Abuse
            • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 2:31 pm ET)
              5  
              He did not bail out bank of america, the american people did. corporate profits where not caused by obama. Because of Bush, re the tax thing. It didn't preserve anything. He is a socialist with communist leanings. Read his books.

              You realize, of course, that your remark almost exactly proves the point bootyprof was making?
              Report Abuse
        • Author by Andy Kreiss (January 10, 2011 1:06 pm ET)
          9  
          sometimes, asking the right questions can sow a seed in their minds


          I agree, Imbecile, it's worth a try sometimes, assuming there's any fertile ground there.

          Unfortunately, a lot of peoples' thought processes have been corrupted beyond the point of no return. They can't make the logical connections in defining things with facts or proper definitions.

          They've been trained that Conservative=Good and Liberal= Bad. Hitler was bad, so he must go in the "liberal" column. That reflex overrides any facts about Hitler's actual right wing ideology.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 1:36 pm ET)
            8  
            By your logic, then, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a democratic republic, since that's what their name says.

            Are you really that obtuse?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 1:50 pm ET)
              3  
              Sorry, Andy. That was meant for project21reps. It seems his comment was removed.

              Basically it was a copy and paste of the entire wikipedia timeline of the Nazi Party.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 1:51 pm ET)
                14
              Explain the use of the term socialist in their name. Pointing to North Korea doens't explain anything. You seem to believe someone to be obtuse because they don't see the connection you are trying to make? What exactly does N. Korea have to do with the National Socialist German Workers Party?

              Parties on the left have a long history of brutilizing the people of the countries they control. Why do you think hitler would be any differant? How was hitler any differant than Lenin, Pot, Stalin, Mao, Amin, etc?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 2:02 pm ET)
                12  
                Simple question, project21reps. Do you believe that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a democratic republic?

                What's so difficult about simply saying yes or no?
                Report Abuse
                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:55 pm ET)
                    11
                  Because its a loaded question, that has nothing to do with the nazis having the word socialism in their name.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by teh.stoopid.lib (January 10, 2011 3:02 pm ET)
                    8  
                    It has to do with YOUR contention that because the word is in the name then it MUST be what they are. It's only a loaded question if you are unwilling to admit you are wrong in your original contention.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 3:49 pm ET)
                        11
                      Nope, you are wrong, and trying to link the use of the term socialism by hitler and the use of the translated term democratic that korea uses is assinine. They are separate countries, with differant beliefs and reasons for doing what they do. Hitler used the term socialist in the name of his group. It is up to you to prove he didn't really mean to say his group was socialists.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by teh.stoopid.lib (January 10, 2011 4:02 pm ET)
                        9  
                        Sorry fool, this is YOUR revision of history, not mine. I don't have ANYTHING to prove, especially to you. Tell yourself whatever you want to tell yourself if it makes you feel good. You're schtick is really boring and I am not really interested playing your game but, by all means, continue to post YOUR asinine assertions and continue to show everyone that you are a fool.
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by Bob Stanley (January 10, 2011 4:45 pm ET)
                        12  
                        Is the Tea Party about drinking tea at parties?
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 7:35 pm ET)
                            8
                          Taxed Enough Already. Get it?
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by Andy Kreiss (January 10, 2011 9:40 pm ET)
                            5  
                            Then why did they get so hysterical after Obama lowered taxes? ( And, no, nobody believes those mouth breathing, Wal-Mart sweat pants wearing rubes are in the top 5% of earners)
                            Report Abuse
                      • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 5:38 pm ET)
                        7  
                        Hitler did not found the NAZI party, so he didn't use the term to begin with. Damn, you no nothing of history do you?
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by mescal (January 11, 2011 3:06 am ET)
                          5  
                          Projectdork Knows LESS than nothing, raddave. If he simply knew nothing, then he could be educated. Instead, he is hopelessly wedded to the flawed revisionist lie that Hitler was a liberal, and no amount of historical facts and logical reasoning will ever move him off this big fetid pile of historical bullsh!t that he is clinging so desperately to.
                          Report Abuse
                  • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 3:10 pm ET)
                    8  
                    Because its a loaded question, that has nothing to do with the nazis having the word socialism in their name.

                    That's the topper right there, Mr. Fake Black Man. You can retire now. You've reached the pinnacle of trolldom. Congratulations!!!
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 2:33 pm ET)
                4  
                Explain the use of the term socialist in their name

                Nobody's arguing that they operate as socialists. Why don't you explain the use of the terms "democratic" and "republic" in their name?
                Report Abuse
                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 3:58 pm ET)
                    12
                  What does explaining why the nuts over in n korea call themselves something have to do with why the nuts in germany called themselves something? In both cases, the nut job leaders of both countries derived their heinious beliefs from left wing ideology, not right wing ideology, as evidenced by their actions.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 4:44 pm ET)
                    8  
                    explaining why the nuts over in n korea call themselves something have to do with why the nuts in germany called themselves something

                    Because your contention is that "socialist" in name means "socialist" in nature. Or, perhaps that murderer = socialist. You have asserted both.

                    By your logic, the Byzantine Emperors who murdered their opponents were socialists, and Napoleon (Emperor of the French) was interested in democracy.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 11, 2011 4:59 pm ET)
                      2  
                      He really does not understand this stuff. Projectdork should probably be pitied more than anything else. I suspect he is actually a teenager. And not an educated teenager either. At least I hope so. If he is fully grown, then his life is a very sad one.
                      Report Abuse
          • Author by RKAllen (January 10, 2011 1:38 pm ET)
            7  
            Hitler was a left wing ideologue
            Only if you assume that the entire spectrum of political thought falls only on one of two sides.

            just like those progressive big brother lovers are on this site.
            Obey!
            Report Abuse
            • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 4:07 pm ET)
                11
              He was a left wing ideologue, if anything, not a right wing ideologue. Does that make it easier for you to understand?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by CoolSlaw (January 10, 2011 5:53 pm ET)
                9  
                Nope, it's difficult to understand a bunch of revisionist distortions by well paid talking heads that utterly fail in the face of overwhelming historical evidence.

                It's also clear that you believe what some TV con man tells you over the written records of thousands of historians from all over the world over the last 60 years.

                Sucks to be you I guess?
                Report Abuse
      • Author by stefiz (January 10, 2011 1:09 pm ET)
        5  
        I have been watching a lot of the Military channel lately!
        ww2 in color is excellent!
        Report Abuse
      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 1:45 pm ET)
          15
        Andy: Please explain the socialism part of the title the group used when they elected Hitler to lead them? By the way, weren't the Nazi's also heavily involved with the german unions, also?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Old_Benjamin (January 10, 2011 2:27 pm ET)
          13  
          By the way, weren't the Nazi's also heavily involved with the german unions, also?


          You mean involvement like when they banned them and imprisoned or murdered their leaders?

          During the era of the Holocaust, German authorities also targeted other groups because of their perceived "racial inferiority": Roma (Gypsies), the disabled, and some of the Slavic peoples (Poles, Russians, and others). Other groups were persecuted on political, ideological, and behavioral grounds, among them Communists, Socialists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and homosexuals.


          As Nazi tyranny spread across Europe, the Germans and their collaborators persecuted and murdered millions of other people. Between two and three million Soviet prisoners of war were murdered or died of starvation, disease, neglect, or maltreatment. The Germans targeted the non-Jewish Polish intelligentsia for killing, and deported millions of Polish and Soviet civilians for forced labor in Germany or in occupied Poland, where these individuals worked and often died under deplorable conditions. From the earliest years of the Nazi regime, German authorities persecuted homosexuals and others whose behavior did not match prescribed social norms. German police officials targeted thousands of political opponents (including Communists, Socialists, and trade unionists) and religious dissidents (such as Jehovah's Witnesses). Many of these individuals died as a result of incarceration and maltreatment.


          From the US Holocaust Museum

          You lying POS.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:34 pm ET)
              17
            It was the unions who helped get hitler elected. Just because he turned on them later, doesn't change that fact, you lying pos.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Old_Benjamin (January 10, 2011 2:43 pm ET)
              13  
              Change what fact? That he murdered socialists communists and trade unionists? This proves the nazis were socialist?

              And what have I lied about ahole? You are the one that lied about me (southern strategy?). Why don't f o so the adults can discuss very important issues that you can't comprehend?

              Oh and when you keep noting the word "socialists" was party of the nazi party name as proof they were socialists yet you pretend to not understand that just because they used it doesn't mean that's what they were. Just as Democratic People's Republic of Korea is NOT DEMOCRATIC - nazis were not socialists just because they used that word in their name.

              And now that we have clearly established hitler was of the right. And so are you. Hitler committed suicide. Now...
              Report Abuse
              • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 10:44 pm ET)
                  7
                Hey, lefties take out lefties all the time. Fact is, eugenics is the common denominator.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 11, 2011 5:01 pm ET)
                2  
                "so the adults can discuss very important issues that you can't comprehend?" - old ben

                That really is the problem. Projectdork really cannot comprehend anything other than what Beck tells him. He is very, very sad.
                Report Abuse
            • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 5:34 pm ET)
              9  
              Hitler was never elected to begin with, so that just shows you don't know WTF you are talking about.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 10:45 pm ET)
                  8
                Picking nits I see.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by mescal (January 11, 2011 3:15 am ET)
                  4  
                  You claim that the German unions helped to get Hitler elected. That was the argument that YOU JUST MADE. When it's pointed out that Hitler was NEVER elected, you dismiss that point as nitpicking.

                  And yet you wonder why your posts are being dismissed here as the childish ravings of an idiot and an ignoramus.

                  It's a wonder that you still know how to breathe.*







                  *Courtesy of Bob Dylan
                  Report Abuse
                • Author by Old_Benjamin (January 11, 2011 2:51 pm ET)
                  2  
                  Picking nits I see.


                  That's all your posts are you lying POS a-hole.
                  Report Abuse
                • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 11, 2011 5:07 pm ET)
                  3  
                  See, projectdork really does not understand. He claims that a group (the unions) helped Hitler get elected. It is very clear. He wrote it. It was his claim and no one else's. And a claim he made in order to support an already debunked argument.

                  Then it is pointed out to projectdork that Hitler was not, in fact, even elected. The very point he was using in a flailing attempt to keep alive a debunked argument is proven clearly, undeniably, smack-in-the-face factually incorrect. Provably false. And what is his response? To dismiss it as picking nits. Proving his supporting claim factually incorrect is picking nits to this one. And, he truly believes that.

                  He does not know or understand anything more complex than Velcro. This is why he needs Beck to tell him what to believe and how to think. This is why even his easily proven false arguments are usually cut and pasted from other people. He cannot even keep the arguments he is spoon fed by his masters straight. His case is a very, very sad one. And, I am afraid it is not a fixable one.
                  Report Abuse
            • Author by classicliberal2 (January 10, 2011 5:43 pm ET)
              9  
              It was the unions who helped get hitler elected. Just because he turned on them later

              You're just ranting, and don't have a clue what you're talking about. The Social Democratic party was the party of organized labor in Germany, and it fought Hitler right up to the end, voting as a block against the Enabling Act, even as such a vote condemned them to death.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by CoolSlaw (January 10, 2011 5:58 pm ET)
                9  
                Project21reps picked up this outright lie that the unions in Germany helped Hitler get elected and he won't let go of it, no matter how ridiculous and how easily it can be disproven. His view of the world depends on him continuing to believe the most absurd lies.

                When he first posted that about the unions helping Hitler, my jaw dropped and for a moment I thought he was maybe some comic genius trying to mess with us, but nope, he really is that poorly educated and willfully ignorant.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 11, 2011 3:31 pm ET)
                2  
                You will never get a rational or informed opinion of projectdork. He only knows about Hitler what he knows about every other subject he has ever poston on. And that is only what Beck tells him to believe. And, he is proud of his ignorance.
                Report Abuse
        • Author by shaggles (January 10, 2011 3:16 pm ET)
          7  
          National Socialism is not the same thing as Socialism. Stop focusing on the socialist aspect of it and think about who are the rabid nationists in the US today.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 5:12 pm ET)
              14
            Yep, your right. the rapid nationists of today are you progressive big brother lovers. Who, by the way, are socialists.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 5:45 pm ET)
              12  
              So, it's the progressives that are pushing Amerian exceptionalism? The idea that the country has the moral obligation to spread democracy and American values throughout the world, and accuse the wingnuts of hating this country?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by CoolSlaw (January 10, 2011 6:00 pm ET)
                9  
                Yipes, project21reps is just lashing out at this point. I don't think he even cares what he's posting anymore.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Andy Kreiss (January 10, 2011 9:49 pm ET)
                  3  
                  your[sic,again] right. the rapid nationists of today are you progressive big brother lovers


                  I gotta admit, that's a new one. I've never been called a rapid nationist before.

                  What does it mean ? People who aren't as slow as Proj? And...ummm... live in a nation ?
                  Report Abuse
              • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 6:50 pm ET)
                  9
                No, it is they who are punishing American exceptionalism. You know, this country has the moral obligation to apoligize for being America
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Old_Benjamin (January 10, 2011 6:54 pm ET)
                  5  
                  lying pos -
                  Yep, your right. the rapid nationists of today are you progressive big brother lovers.


                  to which raddave responds with -

                  So, it's the progressives that are pushing Amerian exceptionalism?


                  to which the lying pos posts -

                  No, it is they who are punishing American exceptionalism.


                  Whose got whiplash?

                  Well played you lying pos a-hole!


                  Report Abuse
                • Author by shaggles (January 10, 2011 7:04 pm ET)
                  6  
                  You clearly don't know what American exceptionalism means.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 10:47 pm ET)
                      8
                    You clearly don't know if you believe you, obama or progressives are pushing it.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 11:19 pm ET)
                      5  
                      O project21reps, your posts give more and more of less and less.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by shaggles (January 11, 2011 11:36 am ET)
                      2  
                      When did I or anyone else say I, Obama or Progressives were pushing American Exceptionalism?
                      Report Abuse
            • Author by shaggles (January 10, 2011 7:00 pm ET)
              4  
              You clearly do not know what the phrase rabid nationalist means.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 10:48 pm ET)
                  8
                I don't see RAPID nationalism occurring. Obviously you don't know what the phrase means if you think it is happening here.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 11:20 pm ET)
                  5  
                  you're defending your mistake? or is that sarcasm?
                  Report Abuse
                • Author by shaggles (January 11, 2011 11:31 am ET)
                  2  
                  I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that RAPID was just a typo on your part. I guess you were really just avoiding the question. And yeah, you're right, I have no idea what the phrase rapid nationalism could possibly mean. That's probably why I never used it.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Old_Benjamin (January 11, 2011 11:59 am ET)
                    3  
                    I have no idea what the phrase rapid nationalism could possibly mean.


                    Singing God Bless America in double time?
                    Report Abuse
            • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 7:07 pm ET)
              5  
              big brother lovers

              Drink!!!
              Report Abuse
        • Author by Andy Kreiss (January 10, 2011 9:45 pm ET)
          4  
          Hi Proj-

          Sorry, was out all day, but Old Benjamin gave you a good start on educating yourself.

          I've just read over your complete confusion at making the connection between two groups who gave themselves names that weren't fitting, so I'm going to stop here and avoid getting you any more baffled.

          Good luck with everything.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by grmce (January 10, 2011 12:25 pm ET)
      6  
      I can only assume that these characters have someone else put their shoes on for them.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 11:04 am ET)
        2  
        What shoes? They probably think shoes are part of a 'socialist' plot to help feed and clothe the people...
        Report Abuse
    • Author by princeofwheels (January 10, 2011 12:30 pm ET)
      9  
      Listening to Limpy, SeannietheThief and Harrasser Billo battle Liberals, they seem to know an awful lot about Mein K and the Manifesto.

      Just wondering if any of them or maybe Reagan or BushI read those books..are they Nazis? I don't think so.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 1:08 pm ET)
        1 15
        "A spoiled child (Bush) is telling us our Social Security isn't safe anymore, so he is going to fix it for us. Well, here's your answer, you ungrateful whelp: [audio sound of 4 gunshots being fired.] Just try it, you little b*stard. [audio of gun being cocked]." -- A "humor bit" from the Randi Rhodes Show
        Report Abuse
        • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 1:13 pm ET)
          1 19
          "F*** God D**ned Joe the God D**ned Motherf**king plumber! I want Motherf**king Joe the plumber dead." -- Liberal talk show host Charles Karel Bouley on the air.

          "Republicans don't believe in the imagination, partly because so few of them have one, but mostly because it gets in the way of their chosen work, which is to destroy the human race and the planet. Human beings, who have imaginations, can see a recipe for disaster in the making; Republicans, whose goal in life is to profit from disaster and who don't give a hoot about human beings, either can't or won't. Which is why I personally think they should be exterminated before they cause any more harm." -- The Village Voice's Michael Feingold, in a theater review of all places
          Report Abuse
          • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 1:23 pm ET)
            15 1
            The use of the google is strong with this one.

            But, Dork, you've again fallen into the false equivalency trap. Google that term and then get back to us.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by seasealya (January 10, 2011 12:44 pm ET)
      14  
      Interesting that no one in the right-wing media noticed that Ayn Rand's We the Living was on Loughner's reading list. How could Geller have missed that??? But since it doesn't fit in with the narrative they are trying to create they simply overlook it.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Panic Man (January 10, 2011 1:08 pm ET)
        13  
        That fits in more with what I've been telling people - this guy's a spoiled-brat lolbertarian who went over the edge. His rhetoric sounds just like one - screaming about the gold standard and government takeover sounds an awful lot like the BeckJones crowd.
        Report Abuse
                        • Author by Andy Kreiss (January 10, 2011 1:32 pm ET)
                          16 1
                          Do you ever get tired of making a fool of yourself, Proj? You're looking very desperate and hysterical.
                          Report Abuse
                            • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 2:41 pm ET)
                              12  
                              What are you? 7? What adult resorts to the copycat method of arguing with someone?
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:43 pm ET)
                                  14
                                Copy cat? Hummmm, I guess you didn't get the sarcasm.
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 2:52 pm ET)
                                  11  
                                  Imbecile, i don't think project21reps knows what sarcasm means. S/he's a proponent of the "O yeah, well yo mamma" school of debate.
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 6:48 pm ET)
                                      8
                                    No, but I am well versed in the "dozens"
                                    Report Abuse
                                    • Author by teh.stoopid.lib (January 10, 2011 8:12 pm ET)
                                      4  
                                      Of course you are. After all you have told us all how 'black' you are. And everybody knows that any good 'black' man is 'well versed in the dozens'. Jeezus you are a pathetic disgusting sack.
                                      Report Abuse
                                      • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 11:23 pm ET)
                                        4  
                                        Neither black, nor a man, nor, from all appearances, good.

                                        But very, very funny, and the provider of a great many shots. Of drink, of course.
                                        Report Abuse
                                    • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 11:07 am ET)
                                      2  
                                      Yo mama so stupid, when you were born, she thought she gave birth to a POS!

                                      Oh wait, she was RIGHT!
                                      Report Abuse
                                • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 3:08 pm ET)
                                  10  
                                  Copy cat? Hummmm, I guess you didn't get the sarcasm.


                                  I get that you're incredibly immature, possibly under the age of 18, highly defensive, poorly educated, and prone to outbursts of nonsense.

                                  I try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt and have been pleasantly surprised by a few of the Republican posters here who don't mind admitting when they're wrong. But you? You go into the pile of Republicans who will get nothing from me but mockery.
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 5:38 pm ET)
                                      14
                                    What exactly am I wrong about, imbicile? That the left engages in heated rhetoric, just as the right is? Or that hitler's ideology was more akin to the left than to the right?
                                    Report Abuse
                              • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 3:12 pm ET)
                                9  
                                What are you? 7? What adult resorts to the copycat method of arguing with someone?

                                projector/dork is still in high school. He's admitted to not voting. He's a fraud.
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 4:05 pm ET)
                                    14
                                  And you sir, are a racist, bigot who lies all the time. By the way, I never said I didn't vote. I said I rarely vote for democrats or republicans.
                                  Report Abuse
                    • Author by wookie (January 10, 2011 1:44 pm ET)
                      10  
                      While we are on the subject of fragging.Coulter
                      Report Abuse
          • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 1:23 pm ET)
            9 1
            Busy little bee! What's your point, project21reps?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 1:35 pm ET)
                19
              My point is that violent rhetoric really is coming from the left, not the right as you claim. Both sides engage in this type of rhetoric, but your side is really way off the hook when it comes to violent rhetoric.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by southerngal (January 10, 2011 1:38 pm ET)
                16  
                project,

                Most of what you reprinted is pretty sick as well, but it does not stem from a former vice presidential candidate targeting Democrats that she disagrees with.

                I see no left wing comparison that sinks to that depth.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:24 pm ET)
                    17
                  I disagree. What palin posted could in no way be taken as a call to violence, except in the heads of those who dislike her, and want to minimize her by casting aspersions.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by teh.stoopid.lib (January 10, 2011 2:32 pm ET)
                    11  
                    There are none so blind as those that will not see.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 2:36 pm ET)
                    8  
                    What palin posted could in no way be taken as a call to violence

                    It's a gunsight, project21reps, her flunky's protestations notwithstanding. Gun = shoot = kill. Not violent?
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 7:37 pm ET)
                        7
                      Its called political rhetoric. One "targets" the opposition with rhetoric. Get it now? Only you violent lefties see it as a call to arms. No one else does.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 9:41 pm ET)
                        3  
                        Gunsight = gun = shoot = kill. I suggest you look up the word "rhetoric".
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by project21reps (January 11, 2011 9:54 pm ET)
                            1
                          What she posted was very similar to what the DNC posted, as well as other democrats. Can anyone say: Selective outrage?
                          Report Abuse
                  • Author by southerngal (January 10, 2011 2:40 pm ET)
                    13  
                    If you don't think fanning the flames of rhetorical violence by putting specific candidates in the crosshairs of a gun during a political campaign is only being criticized by people who "dislike" Sarah Palin, then we strongly disagree.

                    The woman constantly talks about responsibility, well she ought to own up to some of her own. Not only is she an incredible phony, but a miserable human being.
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 1:42 pm ET)
                7  
                You're making a lot of assumptions there, little bee. Your post isn't even internally consistent: "not the right", but "both sides".

                And, if the point was even valid, how does that help, except to assuage your poisoned conscience?
                Report Abuse
              • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (January 10, 2011 2:21 pm ET)
                11  
                My point is that violent rhetoric really is coming from the left, not the right as you claim. Both sides engage in this type of rhetoric, but your side is really way off the hook when it comes to violent rhetoric.

                YOU don't have "a point". just empty ranting from a child.

                A former VP candidate putting the opposing party in the cross hairs of a rifle is BEYOND acceptable, PERIOD!

                And NOTHING you've wasted our time posting compares, NOTHING!



                Report Abuse
            • Author by riverdog (January 10, 2011 1:46 pm ET)
                4
              it seems pork that he is listing the other side that the left says does not exist like so many have asked for here.
              Report Abuse
      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 1:38 pm ET)
          19
        The guy was a left wing loon, just like some of you progressive big brother lovers are who post on this site. I hear that Media Matters was his favorite blog.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by bilbo_dies (January 10, 2011 2:10 pm ET)
          12  
          I hear that Media Matters was his favorite blog.

          Some people say you are an idiot. It must be true.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 7:44 pm ET)
              6
            Only to those who are leftist. To those who are not leftist, I am an proud black man, who stands up to the lies, deceit, and distortions that define the progressive movement in this country.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by teh.stoopid.lib (January 10, 2011 2:10 pm ET)
          9  
          YOU spend a lot of time on Media Matters projector. YOU are a left wing loon!
          Report Abuse
        • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 3:15 pm ET)
          8  
          big brother lovers

          Drink!!!
          Report Abuse
          • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 11:38 am ET)
            3  
            You know, foghornleghorn, like the Elks and Moose and VFW before us, I think we need to incorporate into a lodge...

            The Loyal Big Brother Lovers of MMFA!

            Only problem is we'd have very little time to do any community outreach because of ProjVom.

            All we'd be able to do is sit around and drink all the time...
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Andy Kreiss (January 11, 2011 11:46 am ET)
              2  
              I'd like to be involved in the local chapter. Do we get cool hats ?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 11:49 am ET)
                3  
                Yes, with pins on top to remind us of our inspiration, the pinhead ProjVom!
                Report Abuse
                • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 12:15 pm ET)
                  3  
                  And we should get a picture of ProjVom to put on the wall in our lodge. My guess is it'd look like a tabula rasa with Beck, Palin, and other assorted Cons' fingerprints all over it...
                  Report Abuse
    • Author by RedandWhite Guerilla (January 10, 2011 1:25 pm ET)
      9  
      I would love to know how someone this unstable got his hands on a gun. Better gun control is supposed to prevent incidents like this and keep individuals like this from procuring deadly firearms. Is this the "Second Amendment solution" the Tea-Party keeps talking about?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by wookie (January 10, 2011 1:41 pm ET)
        5  
        They like to say that arming everyone else will solve it but Loughner was tackled pretty quick and still killed a bunch of people.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by wookie (January 10, 2011 1:38 pm ET)
      12  
      Somebody really should have explained all of this to Hitler since Mein Kampf repeated complains about "the Jewish doctrine of Marxism". Also the wingnuts predictably overlook that Loughner is an Ayn Rand fan.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:30 pm ET)
          13
        Actually, he dispised Ayn Rand. He loved Marx, though.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 6:55 pm ET)
          6
        Soooooo, you've read the book. I see.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 9:46 pm ET)
          6  
          Soooooo, you've read the book. I see.

          And your great discovery is what? wookie is a Nazi for reading Mein Kampf? What if s/he's also read Quotations of Mao-Zedong, the Bible and the Harry Potter books? Is s/he therefore a Nazi-communist-saint-witch? Honestly, you need to examine what you say. Mere defensiveness makes a poor argument.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by wookie294 (January 10, 2011 2:10 pm ET)
      5  
      So, it's okay to call "libs" Nazis, but it's not okay to call conservatives Nazis. Ten four!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:32 pm ET)
          13
        Well, nazis where socialist. Thats what they called themselves, you know. On the other hand, conservatives have never refered to themselves as nazis, or socialists. Maybe that is why its not ok to call them nazis.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by jeverfritz (January 10, 2011 2:39 pm ET)
          10  
          But your typical lunatic conservative is a frothing nationalist (or exceptionalist, vis a vis Dick Cheney). The Nazis were nationalists first and foremost; the "socialist" component was not in the oft-misinterpreted communist sense. The Nazis put Communists in concentration camps and murdered them, just like the Jews, Gypsies, and homosexuals. Thus, historically, it's much more fitting to refer to some tenets and practices of the contemporary conservative movement in the US as fascism.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 3:04 pm ET)
            10  
            You're wasting your time and breath with this one, jeverfritz. You'll get more reasoned responses if you go outside and start yelling at a brick wall.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 5:43 pm ET)
              11
            And the communists put jews gypsies homosexuals in gulags, as well as any nazis they could find. they are both the same side of the same coin.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by CoolSlaw (January 10, 2011 6:05 pm ET)
              5  
              What?
              Report Abuse
            • Author by raddave43 (January 10, 2011 6:09 pm ET)
              6  
              No the communists did not put jews, gypsies and homosexuals in the gulags, that is so damned stupid.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 6:51 pm ET)
                  8
                Oh, they didn't? do tell. Tell me, who exactly where these gulags for?
                Report Abuse
              • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 6:53 pm ET)
                  7
                You may be right. After giving it some more thought, maybe they didn't put jews gypsies and homosexuals in gulags, they killed them. I stand corrected
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 10:08 pm ET)
                  3  
                  Wrong again. Communists assimilate diversity. What they kill is unorthodoxy.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 10:58 pm ET)
                      6
                    No they don't. they kill what they don't like. That is the history of that country under both lenin and stalin. They got rid of those they considered deviant.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 11:25 pm ET)
                      3  
                      Wrong again, kid. Look it up.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by project21reps (January 11, 2011 12:39 pm ET)
                           
                        I have, chief. Lenin, stalin and hitler where very similiar in the way they treated their own countrymen. Just as FDR shared some of their traits, such as interning our own citizens. The similiarities between the four are staggering.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by Maimon (January 12, 2011 10:03 pm ET)
                             
                          Yes I"m sure if I looked hard enough I could say, " Ghandhi was a totalitarian. bent on Hindu world domination".

                          I wonder if I looked at any world leaders if could find similarities???

                          Wow, yes I see it now; Stalin and Ronald Reagan were nearly identical. Both crushed dissent in their own parties, both acted against the interest of their citizens and both spent massive amounts of money on defence.

                          Wow you've opened my eyes Project 21!!!

                          I really hope you don't have a history degree.
                          Report Abuse
            • Author by Maimon (January 11, 2011 12:02 am ET)
              4  
              Hmm...funny alot of Jews were leaders in the communist movement. Prior to that Jews were forced to live in what was called " The Pale of Settlements" in Russia. I think you should examine the history of anti-semitism in both those countries before you claim they were imprisoned for "party" reasons.

              Nazis executed all " commisars" taken prisoner.

              And no, communism and nazism are not the same thing, not even close. I think you should actually study the two movements. The rightwing has always tried to claim that, but it is not factual or historical. That is like claimng oranges and bananas are the same thing because they fruit.

              I love how anything you see as bad is liberal and only conservative things are good. The world is gray, only the extremes are black or white.

              You should know the right is using all the Sol Alinsky ideas now, that should make him a new hero to you.

              Report Abuse
          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 7:41 pm ET)
              7
            I know lots of conservatives and not one of them froth at the mouth, nor are they frothing nationalists. So, by the tone of your post, I guess you are anti-american? I know you don't support america, as you aren't frothing, or are you?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by bilbo_dies (January 10, 2011 9:46 pm ET)
              5  
              I know lots of conservatives and not one of them froth at the mouth, mostly we stand around a lot a go "you so smart, no you so smart. Good thing we no librul".
              Report Abuse
            • Author by Maimon (January 10, 2011 11:50 pm ET)
              4  
              Sigh...how come dissent always leads to " You don't love America" or that you are not patriotic.

              I love America like a mature adult. I know she is not perfect . I know she has good points and bad points. I love her all the same. That is how mature love transpires.

              I do not love America like a 4 year old child loves his mum. A 4 year old never admits his mum can do anything wrong. A 4 year old gets mad when mommy is criticized. A 4 year old blindly follows what mommy says and does not question.

              This blind obedience is great when you are 4, but you need to grow.

              Blind patriotism is not a good quality. It leads to citizens who become zealots and aren't we fighting zealots?

              Report Abuse
        • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 2:39 pm ET)
          6  
          I am sure you understand that regimes use names to mask their intent, as, for instance, the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by cst (January 10, 2011 2:49 pm ET)
          6  
          So, by that logic, The People's Republic of China is just like Sarah Palin.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by JoeSixpack (January 10, 2011 2:52 pm ET)
          5  
          I am the all-being, master of time, space and dimension. That's what I call myself, so it must be true.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Maimon (January 11, 2011 9:13 am ET)
          2  
          Man...you are too funny to listen to. Blinded by ideology, enslaved by dogma. I've yet to see an original thought.

          Your historical analysis is so flawed and riddled with factual errors and formultaed by preconceived ideas.

          I'm sure you would claim Orwell as a conservative.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by project21reps (January 11, 2011 9:56 pm ET)
              2
            Well orwell did write a book condemning communism, did he not?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Old_Benjamin (January 12, 2011 12:13 pm ET)
              1  
              Well orwell did write a book condemning communism, did he not?


              Which book are you referring to?

              Well Orwell also fought with the leftists against Franco in the Spanish Civil war. You know for whom? The Workers' Party of Marxist Unification! That has Marxist right in the name! You are a pos lying a-hole. But I enjoy mocking you - so thanks.

              Report Abuse
    • Author by jeverfritz (January 10, 2011 2:34 pm ET)
      9  
      Cal Thomas noted on WTOP this morning that his hair-dye was in dire need of changing when he referred to the Nazi movement as basically a liberal ideology. You'd think someone old enough to have played with Hilter himself, would have a better intellectual handle on history.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 2:37 pm ET)
          17
        Thomas is right your wrong.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 2:42 pm ET)
          10  
          Bravo! What a deep and well-researched argument! Well, in the same analytical fashion, i am forced to say: No he's not.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by jeverfritz (January 10, 2011 2:43 pm ET)
          11 1
          Thomas is an idiot. Anyone who thinks he's right is one, as well. And it's "you're" not "your." Learn to speak and write in proper English before you embarrass yourself further.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Lito1120 (January 10, 2011 4:11 pm ET)
            2  
            What if Thomas is a foreigner and hasn't mastered the language yet? Pretty mean rhetoric for a progressive thinker, right?
            Report Abuse
        • Author by cst (January 10, 2011 2:45 pm ET)
          6  
          ...said the guy with no grasp of spelling or punctuation.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by motorcity (January 10, 2011 4:30 pm ET)
          8  
          Nuh-uh times infinity. Plus one.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by MilitantMNMan (January 10, 2011 5:31 pm ET)
          6  
          You're a buffoon, and you don't know anything substantial about fascism/nazism.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by grmce (January 10, 2011 5:52 pm ET)
          6  
          project21reps, you really should include more fibre in your diet - it should help to ease your discomfort.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 5:55 pm ET)
            2  
            more fibre in your diet

            then s/he'd have nothing to pull out of his/her butt.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by fantagor (January 10, 2011 3:18 pm ET)
      10  
      They could just paint him as a liberal by saying he reads books and leave it at that.

      Randy
      Report Abuse
    • Author by sam from california (January 10, 2011 3:59 pm ET)
      6  
      Right, because the guy who thought communism was an international evil conspiracy run by jews (Hitler) was a leftist. Basically, anything which uses the name "socialist" becomes "leftist", no matter what values they put their socialism towards or how they view corporate power.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Lito1120 (January 10, 2011 4:03 pm ET)
        4
      Let's please be resaonalbe people and not use this tragedy as an opportunity to play politics and incite more hateful rhetoric amongst one another. Hate and incendiary comments are commonly used by both sides.

      Would the following quote be considered "vitriol"

      “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun!”

      If so, Obama said it in '08.

      Also, as far as this nut job's political affiliations:

      http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2011/01/jared_loughner_alleged_shooter.php

      Also, let us not forget this:

      http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/29/palin.noose/

      There wasn't much denouncement of this act.

      So, let's be a bit more reasonable and objective in our thoughts.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by bonvechioc (January 10, 2011 4:22 pm ET)
      8  
      I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that the conservatives will be able to convince the general public that this guy was some crazy liberal. Reality or facts are meaningless when you control so much of the media outlets.
      Remember when John Kerry who volunteered twice for service and was decorated, this man was labeled a coward while Bush was some tough guy?? After that I gave up any hope on truth prevailing. In fact I guessed right away they would twist this into being some liberal plot. It's like Bizarro world except no one sees how crazy it is they just agree like lemmings to whatever rantings they here on Fox or Right wing radio
      Report Abuse
    • Author by outsiderdude (January 10, 2011 6:36 pm ET)
      5  
      But I thought it was those stupid libs that were politicising this and trying to make it look like a tea partier's fault. Is it true that in the constitution it says "a right winger shall not be called a hypocrite no matter how hypocritical said right winger is" and "As long as you didn't physically pull the trigger, it will never be a right wingers fault".
      Report Abuse
        • Author by teh.stoopid.lib (January 10, 2011 8:16 pm ET)
          8  
          Need a cigarette?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Imbecile (January 10, 2011 9:18 pm ET)
            6  
            Probably not. Copying and pasting isn't too difficult. At least, not for normal people.

            On second thought, maybe he does need a cigarette.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Andy Kreiss (January 11, 2011 1:54 am ET)
              3  
              One of my favorite wingnut debate tactics.

              1. Make ridiculous claim

              2. Have others explain to you why your claim is ridiculous.

              3. Link to/ copy & paste opinion piece by right wing nut who agrees with your ridiculous claim.
              Report Abuse
        • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 8:19 pm ET)
          6  
          Off-topic, stolen, and flagged.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 11:03 pm ET)
              4
            It right on point. It was credited, and you foggy either can't read, or are just a out and out liar. Which is it?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by foghornleghorn (January 10, 2011 11:34 pm ET)
              3  
              I googled the author, and nothing came up. So it is either made up, stolen, or both.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by outsiderdude (January 11, 2011 12:52 am ET)
                4  
                I googled it too and found the article he lifted and what do you know, he conveniently left out the rest of the story about how Hitler was elected without a majority via a ruling from the courts and backed by big corporations. Sound like anyone you know?
                Report Abuse
        • Author by outsiderdude (January 10, 2011 9:08 pm ET)
          3  
          In your own words now!!!
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Maimon (January 10, 2011 9:38 pm ET)
          6  
          I guess you know that a name doesn't always mean what it says. Look at the Bolsheviks( Majority in Russian) and the Mensheviks( Minority in Russian). Lenin did not control the majority but took the name Bolshevik to imply he had the majority.

          Historically speaking, the Nazis were corporatists who were opposed to Marxist/Communist ideas and ideals. They were rightwing, ultra nationalists. They actually crushed the German Socialist Party. The ramblings of a member of the Foreign Services have little to do with actual history or reality.

          Also, terms are not static they evolve and change just like the mores of political parties:
          -Dixie-crats were racists, now the Republican party is host to that belief.
          -Republicans use to believe in individual freedom, now they tell people they can't marry and are not entitled to their rights.
          -Republicans believed in freedom of speech, but now you have to agree with them or you are "unpatriotic".
          -Wilson was a segragationist...Einsenhower was a progresive. Neither would be allowed in their parties today.
          -Nixon had antisemites in his entourage were anti-semitic eventhough Nixon trusted Kissenger.

          Eugenics was followed by many, not just so called "Progressives".I think you shoudl go back and see who else beleived in eugenics you might be surprised.

          And Mr Pages attempt to say " America was forced into war" is rediculous. I lived, worked and consulted( IDF/Shin Bet) in the Middle-East for many years myself, he failed to mention:

          -Ronald Reagan funded the Mujahadin that later became the Taliban and Al-Queda.
          -Ronald Reagan funded the aforementioned groups via the Pakistani ISI, who helped keep the Taliban in power
          -Alot of this money also helped the Pakistani nuclear program under Zia and at the direction of A Q Khan.
          -Ronald Raegan also funded Saddam Hussein and did nothing when he gased the Kurds.
          -The US funded thecoup in Iran in 1953. This is not forgotten by those the Shah tortured and had put to death.
          -US funding of the Saudis who spread wahabism and salafist ideologies
          -We are fighting a fake war in Iraq that only destabilized teh region and allowed Iran to reise as a regional power.

          I am a staunch zionist , but I am not blind to the situation of the Palestinians. Sadly most "settlers" in Yisrael are not native born and many are fundamentalists. They are blind ideologues, most do not serve in the army and often instigate problems.

          I am also not blind to the history of Yisreal. The Hagannah, the Irgun and the Lehi "Stern Gang" were groups that the British labeled terrorist. The bombing of the King David Hotel is an example. Also, the assasinations of Lord Moyne and the Bernadotte Folke are otehr example. Yitzak Shamir, former Yisraeli prime minister was a member of the Leh'i.

          It is funny how he said " anti-americanism" was the twin of progressivism. I guess dissent is anti-american? That is so funny think about it...LMAO
          Report Abuse
        • Author by wookie (January 11, 2011 9:36 am ET)
          3  
          Get your money back from Beck U. Hitler actually said that he was inspired by how we created a "proud white nation" by repressing Indians and blacks. You know, all of that stuff that the right tells us to ignore now because it makes the white man feel guilty. Guess who was promoting the Bell Curve in the 1990's? Guess who says that Affirmative Action is all about putting the lazy and the stupid in jobs that should go to whites? When it comes to social Darwinism, he who smelt it dealt it.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by as promised (January 10, 2011 8:41 pm ET)
      3  
      So what? Almost all whack-jobs will list books like those as their favs. That is meaningless. It really is.
      By the way it was very cordial of the T.P. Express to be calling the left 'despicable' on Fox this morning.
      Obviously this whole thing is entirely over his head.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by SolomonKane (January 10, 2011 9:18 pm ET)
      5  
      I see that Beck & Goldberg's reality distortion field is in full effect today. As along with blaming the assassin's right wing rhetoric and choice of target on the left we're now also trying to convince the world that Hitler was a leftist again. Really...really...he was!

      One question that you revisionists really need to start asking yourselves is if this is true then why did it take 60 years for someone like Goldberg to come along and realize it? Also why did such a large portion of the "old right" in America align itself with Hitler and in even more often just a general fascist viewpoint? Charles Lindberg and Henry Ford are some names you should look into. Are we to believe that the entire right wing of American politics up to the recent rise of neoconservatism was actually the left? That's an unavoidable consequence of what is being promoted here.

      Personally I think that the parallels between today's right and the Nazi's are striking:

      1. Entering into voluntary wars of conquest based on lies.
      2. Intolerence for any opposing point of view.
      3. Complete and shameless domination of media and incessant propagandizing.
      4. The pervasive threat of violence in public political forums.
      5. Notion of a strong government based on a nationalistic racial-religous understanding in service of "exceptionalism" and the security state.
      6. Incessant scapegoating and demonizing of "unpopular" political groups to cover for your own political-policy failures.

      The match is not exact but it's close enough for anyone safely to say..you modern conservatives have a very, very big problem right now.

      Here's a poem written by an X-conservative you Beck fans should ponder:

      In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.

      Notice that lack of a verse that says "then they came for the conservatives". Given that this was written by a conservative who got sent to the concentration camp you all should think long and hard as to why that's not in there.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by project21reps (January 10, 2011 11:07 pm ET)
          6
        Hummmmmm, his friends called him a left wing nut, or so I've heard.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Porkeater (January 10, 2011 11:34 pm ET)
          3  
          and what?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Maimon (January 11, 2011 1:39 am ET)
          5  
          Books found in my house:

          -Mein Kamf
          -Communist Manifesto
          -Turner Diaries
          -Protocols of the Elders of Zion
          -Qur'an
          -Talmud
          -Catcher in the Rye
          -Atlas Shrugged
          -Fountainhead
          -The Republic
          -On War
          -Race over Grace
          -Religion of the Racist Right

          And thousands more. My friends have called me many things. It doesn't mean anything.

          The facts are: he shot a Democratic Congresswoman and up to 10 other citizens. I am sure we will find out why he acted. Most likely he is a broken person. We seem to produce alot of those.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by DDB9000 (January 11, 2011 11:54 am ET)
            4  
            Why you damned dirty Nazi-Commie-White Supremacist-AntiSemite-Muslim-Jew-etc-etc-etc ape!

            (sorry, I got stuck at "Catcher in the Rye")
            Report Abuse
        • Author by mikehuck1976 (January 11, 2011 5:10 pm ET)
          2  
          Claiming to be a friend of his now, projectdork? Your delusions are getting ever stranger yet.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by St1kyFinguz (January 10, 2011 9:50 pm ET)
        7
      Am I wrong in seeing the fallacy of Media Matters and the supposed Right Wing Media having a custody battle over Jared Loughner's psychosis?

      How pointless is it when both sides are pointing at each other screaming "It's all YOUR FAULT!!"
      Report Abuse
    • Author by larryroth (January 11, 2011 6:11 pm ET)
      1  
      Interesting that right wingers would claim similarities between Obama and Hitler. Hitler, like right wing extremists, disliked blacks too.
      Report Abuse
The Fox Effect
Media Matters Connect

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.

Most Popular Tags

Feed IconRSS Feeds

Get personalized rss or email alerts

Connect & Share

Facebook Twitter Digg YouTube Reddit