On Jun 2, 7:01*am, Mike wrote:
On Jun 1, 8:00*pm, wrote:



NO IT IS NOT! *Fascism has its historical roots firmly and solidly
planted in the Leftist Socialist phenomenon - PERIOD.
Always was and always will be!

Read a book you imbicilic propaganda lieing peice of sheit!


- Yeah, Hitler was a leftist - - -.

Fascist {Leftist} Socialist

- that's why he killed 25 million Soviets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wo...Casualties.svg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

Communist {Leftist} Socialist
* Mao's Peacetime Deaths in China 70 Million
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_The_Unknown_Story
* Stalin's Peacetime Deaths in the USSR 40 Million
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin

Mussolini was also a leftist,

Fascist {Centralist} Socialist

- it's all over the history books.

history like reality - sucks ~ RHF
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm

~ RHF wrote:

.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_...nited_States_2


n the United States, the party system wasn't developed based on strong
ideological differences, for example, the Democrats of the South have
traditionally been right wing, while northern Democrats are
traditionally left wing, although particularly since the 1970s the
Democrats in general have tended more to the left and Republicans to the
right. Ideologically, all major US parties are Liberal and always have
been. Essentially they follow classic liberalism, merging
constitutionalism with free markets and centering the differences on the
influences of social liberalism.[3]

Social liberalism may also refer, as it usually does in North American
media, simply to support for educational reform, civil rights, human
rights, and civil liberties. In this sense, one could be socially
liberal and economically conservative (often referred to as economic
liberalism), as is the case with those called variously classical
liberals, neoliberals, libertarians, and conservative liberals/liberal
conservatives.

Presently, the agendas of European social liberals and modern American
liberals tend to be very similar, with both taking a distinctly
left-of-center stance on social issues, whilst taking a more centrist
stance on economic issues.[30] Since the ideological center of the
United States lies further to the right than that of Western Europe,
policies considered centrist, or even right-wing, in Europe may be
considered left-of-center in the U.S. Universal single-payer health
care, for example, is considered a largely centrist policy in Europe but
distinctly center-left in the U.S. Social democrats and socialists may
also be labeled as "liberal" in the U.S. but constitute only a small
minority of the American left. Liberals in the U.S. constitute roughly
19% to 26% of the population and form circa 46% of the Democratic base.[31]

Like European social liberals, most modern American liberals advocate
cultural pluralism, diplomacy over military action, stem-cell research,
the legalization of same-sex marriage, secular government, environmental
protection laws and access to abortion.
-wikipedia

On Jun 3, 12:20*am, "~ RHF" wrote:
[: To Liberal-Fascist Name Calling :]
ROTFL - You Know When You Are Winning An Argument :
When a Super-Smart 'Enlightened" Liberal Starts Name Calling*.
* They Lose Their Ability To Think And Get Emotional - rotfl ~

Here's the thing. I will resort to name calling when I think it
effective.
This isn't about losing my ability to think and getting emotional.
There are modalities of thought and indicators of them. For instance
if one uses the phrase "I see what you are saying" they are indicating
the visual nature of their thoughts. By understanding the way people
think about things and how they make choices one can target one's
communications in a way to achieve one's goals.

Is winning an argument all that important?
I find getting to the truth of the matter more interesting.

Sometimes I will respond to an article without intending
to influence the writer at all. My intent is a bit like pointing
to a pile on the sidewalk and asking: "OK, who didn't curb
their dog?"

Facism is about authority and this is decidedly a right wing
corner stone even if the motif is community. Many right wing
groups will usurp the language of the left. Just consider
Libertarianism. The separation of right and left isn't social
concern but something else.

FEMA POISIONED Trailers for sale.
www.governmentauctions.org/fematrailers.asp

$5 or less.Don't buy any of those trailers!!! even if they offer them
for free!!! Chinese plywood LOADED with ARSENIC!!! A lot of people got
SICK!!! inside of those FEMA POISIONED trailers!!!
cuhulin

Gary Forbis wrote:


Facism is about authority and this is decidedly a right wing
corner stone even if the motif is community. Many right wing
groups will usurp the language of the left. Just consider
Libertarianism. The separation of right and left isn't social
concern but something else.

Conservatives do not believe most people are incapable of running the
world. They believe that they are anointed by God to lead the unwashed
masses.

Alberto Gonzalez wrote:
"~ RHF" wrote in news:bb66ddf2-d575-4518-
:

On Jun 2, 7:01 am, Mike wrote:
On Jun 1, 8:00 pm, wrote:



NO IT IS NOT! Fascism has its historical roots firmly and solidly
planted in the Leftist Socialist phenomenon - PERIOD.
Always was and always will be!
Read a book you imbicilic propaganda lieing peice of sheit!
- Yeah, Hitler was a leftist - - -.

Fascist {Leftist} Socialist

Fascist Leftist.
Fascist = rightist.



You two are continuing the "anybody whose politics I don't like is a
fascist" nonsense. You're both wrong.

It's false to claim that either fascism in the narrow sense (Italian
Fascism and the MSI) _or_ fascism in the broad sense (as in the
Roman ideals and those of their successors) is strictly a "leftist"
or "rightist" phenomenon, however that vague spectrum is understood.

See:

http://www.kevinalfredstrom.com/2009...a-fascist-now/

It's also good to remember that the "left-right spectrum" doesn't
describe reality very well. If a racial-nationalist wants to reduce
the size of the military, regulate industrial outsourcing to keep
wages high, adopt strict environmental protection rules, and
encourage rational contraception use to keep the human population at
a sustainable level, yet repeals all taxes on small family-owned
businesses and drastically reduces the power of the government in
most areas of life, is he a man of the "right" or of the "left"?
Meaningless!


With every good wish,



Kevin.
--
http://kevinalfredstrom.com/

Kevin Alfred Strom wrote:



You two are continuing the "anybody whose politics I don't like is a
fascist" nonsense. You're both wrong.

It's false to claim that either fascism in the narrow sense (Italian
Fascism and the MSI) _or_ fascism in the broad sense (as in the Roman
ideals and those of their successors) is strictly a "leftist" or
"rightist" phenomenon, however that vague spectrum is understood.


As the Italians are still with us, I must assume that the Italian
manifestation of fascismo is the most valid model and analog to what
happens when right-wingers start fake wars and start waving the flag.

Italy has a Socialist govt, I think.
cuhulin

On Jun 3, 5:39*am, dave wrote:
~ RHF wrote:
*.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_...nited_States_2

n the United States, the party system wasn't developed based on strong
ideological differences, for example, the Democrats of the South have
traditionally been right wing, while northern Democrats are
traditionally left wing, although particularly since the 1970s the
Democrats in general have tended more to the left and Republicans to the
right. Ideologically, all major US parties are Liberal and always have
been. Essentially they follow classic liberalism, merging
constitutionalism with free markets and centering the differences on the
influences of social liberalism.[3]

Social liberalism may also refer, as it usually does in North American
media, simply to support for educational reform, civil rights, human
rights, and civil liberties. In this sense, one could be socially
liberal and economically conservative (often referred to as economic
liberalism), as is the case with those called variously classical
liberals, neoliberals, libertarians, and conservative liberals/liberal
conservatives.

Presently, the agendas of European social liberals and modern American
liberals tend to be very similar, with both taking a distinctly
left-of-center stance on social issues, whilst taking a more centrist
stance on economic issues.[30] Since the ideological center of the
United States lies further to the right than that of Western Europe,
policies considered centrist, or even right-wing, in Europe may be
considered left-of-center in the U.S. Universal single-payer health
care, for example, is considered a largely centrist policy in Europe but
distinctly center-left in the U.S. Social democrats and socialists may
also be labeled as "liberal" in the U.S. but constitute only a small
minority of the American left. Liberals in the U.S. constitute roughly
19% to 26% of the population and form circa 46% of the Democratic base.[31]

- Like European social liberals, most modern American liberals
advocate
- cultural pluralism, diplomacy over military action, stem-cell
research,
- the legalization of same-sex marriage, secular government,
environmental
- protection laws and access to abortion.
- -wikipedia

First they ask the question of Americans :
Do You Consider Yourself a Liberal or Moderate
or Conservative ?

All of the above statements are solely based
on those who answer 'Liberal' ~ 30%
-which- Excludes the 45% who answer 'Moderate'
and the 25% who answered 'Conservative'.

dave - slant, Slant. SLANT ! that information ~ RHF

On Jun 3, 6:13*am, Gary Forbis wrote:
On Jun 3, 12:20*am, "~ RHF" wrote:

[: To Liberal-Fascist Name Calling :]
ROTFL - You Know When You Are Winning An Argument :
When a Super-Smart 'Enlightened" Liberal Starts Name Calling*.
* They Lose Their Ability To Think And Get Emotional - rotfl ~

Here's the thing. *I will resort to name calling when I think it
effective.
This isn't about losing my ability to think and getting emotional.
There are modalities of thought and indicators of them. *For instance
if one uses the phrase "I see what you are saying" they are indicating
the visual nature of their thoughts. *By understanding the way people
think about things and how they make choices one can target one's
communications in a way to achieve one's goals.

Is winning an argument all that important?
I find getting to the truth of the matter more interesting.

Sometimes I will respond to an article without intending
to influence the writer at all. *My intent is a bit like pointing
to a pile on the sidewalk and asking: "OK, who didn't curb
their dog?"

Facism is about authority and this is decidedly a right wing
corner stone even if the motif is community. *Many right wing
groups will usurp the language of the left. *Just consider
Libertarianism. *The separation of right and left isn't social
concern but something else.

Yeah Fascist send their ACORN Thugs by the
Bus Load to Intimidate the AIG Executives in
their Homes.

ACORN Thugs = Democrats

ACORN Thugs = Obama-Regime©

ACORN Thugs = Liberal-Fascist In Action = Obamascist©