Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::start_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::start_lvl($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 581

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::end_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::end_lvl($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 581

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 581

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::end_el() should be compatible with Walker::end_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 581

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_PageDropdown::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 600

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::start_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::start_lvl($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 699

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::end_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::end_lvl($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 699

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 699

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::end_el() should be compatible with Walker::end_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 699

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_CategoryDropdown::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 724

Strict Standards: Redefining already defined constructor for class wpdb in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 57

Strict Standards: Redefining already defined constructor for class WP_Object_Cache in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/cache.php on line 404
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler » History Keeps Repeating Itself

And, if you’re in doubt, read Ann Coulter’s latest column.

It is a timely, not to mention more than a little bit scary, read now that the notoriously anti-American Dhimmicrats have taken over Congress.

Remember how the late President Ford, may G-d rest his soul, begged and pleaded with the freshly elected Dhimmicrat Congress to at least provide our South Vietnamese allies with the monetary support necessary for them to defend themselves against the genocidal communist hordes of Ho Chi Minh, support that we, the United States, had promised them in return for their acceptance of one of the rottenest “peace deals” in history?

Remember how the Dhimmicrats, fueled by bloodlust and communist fervor, steadfastly refused to do so, rendering the word of the United States forever suspect, if not indeed meaningless?

Remember how the starved South Vietnamese forces, after a heroic and hopeless fight, were defeated by the Dhimmicrats’ faithful communist allies of Hanoi?

Remember the millions of innocent people that were brutally murdered as a result of the Dhimmicrats’ betrayal?

All of those innocents were murdered by the Democrat Party.

And now, just as we’re involved in another war that they desperately want us to lose, they’re back in power.

That is bad news for us, and it is seriously bad news for millions of Iraqis.

Deja vu all over again.

And that is why this world will never be a better place until every last socialist on the surface of it has been exterminated. Just as any other disease, they need to be purged from the body of mankind. Because if they’re not, they’ll keep popping back up, and every time the Socialist death toll will rise.

It is time for the vile, hateful, diseased religion of Karl Marx and all of its pathological mutations to be laid to rest permanently.

Because if we don’t get rid of it, we’ll keep seeing history repeating itself.

100 million murdered by socialism ought to be enough.

It’s time for the cure.

81 Responses to “History Keeps Repeating Itself”
  1. Unregistered Comment by Infidel River Rat

    Maybe they’ll make such idiotic asses of themselves, they’ll get voted out by a comfortable margin in ‘08!

  2. Thresher Comment by Thresher UNITED STATES

    Misha, if a similar thing happens to Iraq, I think it’s time that we exact a price from the Coward’s flesh. I doubt any civillian will have to do it, I could seriously see some returning vet forcing an… early retirement, on the offending politicians.

  3. Ten-Ten Comment by Ten-Ten UNITED STATES

    When the throw away phrase “War never solved anything.” Is taken up as the banner the liberal asses pledge a holy vow upon, why is it that when a sane person reminds them of the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, WWI, WWII and the first Gulf War, their eyes just glaze over and the shout their slogans all the louder?

  4. Unregistered Comment by LC Wes, Imperial Mohel

    By some strange coincidence, my local paper (the Kansas City Star, aka “Pravda on the Prairie”) ran a Tom Toles cartoon that asked sort of the same question. The cartoon featured a reporter asking a Democrat the following question: “Now that you’re in power, how will you deal with the charge that you lost Iraq?”

    The follow-up question dealt with how the Dems would deal with the additional accusation that they would be responsible for creating an “Iraq Syndrome” in American politics and cultural life.

    Mind you, I don’t think that the (unbelievably liberal) Toles was quite trying to make the same point that Ann Coulter was. Toles, after all, is too ideologically blinkered to recognize that the accusations voiced by the reporter in his cartoon are not just partisan brickbats, but the simple truth.

    Still, the commentary was dead-on-target…if not quite the target Toles was likely aiming at.

  5. LC 0311 crunchie Comment by LC 0311 crunchie UNITED STATES

    I loved this line;

    In lieu of the old Democratic Party, which lost wars out of incompetence and naiveté, the new Democratic Party would lose wars on purpose.

    Looks and an acerbic wit. What a combo.

  6. LC 0311 crunchie Comment by LC 0311 crunchie UNITED STATES

    Wes, didn’t you know that Toles is just to nuanced for us reichwingers to understand.

  7. Unregistered Comment by LC Wes, Imperial Mohel

    …By the way, is it just me, or has President Ford’s eulogy lasted longer than his actual term in office?

    Yes, I know, it’s OT, more than a little snarky and possibly in bad taste, but how many funerals does one man need, anyway? Even Ronald Reagan got planted with much less pomp and circumstance…and his Presidency was much more consequential than Ford’s.

    God only knows how much fuss the media will make over Carter and Clinton, when it comes their time to shuffle off this mortal coil…

  8. LC 0311 crunchie Comment by LC 0311 crunchie UNITED STATES

    God only knows how much fuss the media will make over Carter and Clinton, when it comes their time to shuffle off this mortal coil…

    Fuss nothing, the damn revisionists will blow every collective neuron they have working over time to make them seem worthy of something more than an unceremonious
    dump in the bio-hazard bag of history.

  9. juandos Comment by juandos UNITED STATES

    Well these potential actions by the party of the Seditious & Sleazy are hardly suprising… After all the party has a long & sordid history of undercutting the country and its citizens…

    We know the Dhimis lied about Iraqi WMDs even though at one time the same damned Dhimis tried to convince one and all that Saddam had WMDs

    So cutting and running now by the Dhimis won’t be a suprise…

  10. Alan K. Henderson Comment by Alan K. Henderson UNITED STATES

    Never forget South Vietnam.

  11. 1oldleg Comment by 1oldleg UNITED STATES

    Never forget South Vietnam?!
    Fuck a bunch o’ South Vietnam. 58,000 of us died there for NOTHING!!!
    Ask Robert McNamara about Vietnam and how HE and Johnson decided to exclude the American Public from the decision making process of fighting that war. To defend what? A corrupt, incompetent regime that was no better at caring for it’s populace than it was at fighting its own war? Get real, Misha. We got bled white on a policy of gradualism and target selection made by the President. Oh, and by the way, no shooting into Pagodas. Does that sound familiar? Jesus H. Christ, I get sick of hearing the comparisons betwen Iraq and Vietnam. Oh, and by the way, Nixon and Kissinger sold us out in Vietnam. The deal was done long before Ford was sworn in as VP or even President. That deed was sealed in ‘72 at the Paris peace table. Fuck the South Vietnamese, they deserved to lose. They never gave a rat’s ass about their country. Why should we. They aren’t missed.

  12. kwongdzu Comment by kwongdzu UNITED STATES

    I thought you would all find this interesting and informative. But first, credit where it is due: I borrowed it off of someone named LSD who posted it at little green footballs. I suppose I should snopes it just to be proper, though.

    So Keith Ellison is going to use Thomas Jefferson’s Koran … Here’s why Jefferson had a Koran …

    From AMERICAN SPHINX The Character of Thomas Jefferson by Joseph J. Ellis
    “Several muslim countries along the North African coast had established the tradition of plundering the ships of European and American merchants in the western Mediterranean and eastern Atlantic, capturing the crews and then demanding ransom from the respective governments for their release. In a joint message to their superiors in Congress, Adams and Jefferson described the audacity of these terrorist attacks, pirates leaping onto defenseless ships with daggers clenched in their teeth. They had asked the ambassador from Tripoli, Adams and Jefferson explained, on what grounds these outrageous acts of unbridled savagery could be justified: “The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the laws of the prophet, that it was written in their koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their [islams] authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners….”
    This event occured between 1784-1789 while Jefferson was ambassador to France and Adams (2nd president) was ambassador to England.

  13. Unregistered Comment by minorripper UNITED STATES

    And we all know what an authority Ann Coulter is on international affairs, evidenced by this video: http://minor-ripper.blogspot.com/2006/12/ann-coulter-gets-owned.html

  14. cmblake6 Comment by cmblake6

    Remember your oath of enlistment.

  15. Unregistered Pingback by Inoperable Terran » History’s most murderous ideology

    […] Misha says it’s time to end socialism. Indeed. Posted by Ian S. in […]

  16. Unregistered Comment by Lindata UNITED STATES

    Let’s follow this logic. Dictators calling themselves socialist murdered 100 million people, ergo we need to murder every Democrat.

    “And that is why this world will never be a better place until every last socialist on the surface of it has been exterminated…100 million murdered by socialism ought to be enough.

    It’s time for the cure.”

    Eliminationism doesn’t work. The Soviets couldn’t do it, Mao couldn’t do it. Hitler couldn’t do it. And you won’t be able to do it either. You’ll just become the horror you are supposedly fighting.

    Wake up a see the world in color instead of black and white. Black and white vision forces one into the kind of blind projection you are exhibiting here.

  17. Emperor Misha I Comment by Emperor Misha I UNITED STATES

    Let’s follow this logic. Dictators calling themselves socialist murdered 100 million people, ergo we need to murder every Democrat.

    Is “exterminating” too harsh? Perhaps it is but, then again, what else would you suggest doing to rid the world of a hateful, soul-killing ideology that is directly responsible for the extermination of 100+ million innocent people since it was thought up by a failed, bitter old man about a little over a century ago?

    What did we do to the Nazis (who, by the way, were socialists too)? Coddle them and try to understand their “legitimate grievances” against the Jooos, eschewing the “black and white” of simple observation?

    No, we didn’t exterminate all of them (perhaps we should have), but we achieved the goal of rendering them impotent and removing them, once and for all, from the levers of power.

    That would be good enough for me with regard to all the other evil metastasized tumors of socialism currently infesting the body politic. So no, wholesale execution isn’t the only option. They just need to be thrown on the dung heap of history along with Pol Pot, Stalin, Adolf Hitler and every other socialist murderer ever to pop up. Dead or alive makes no difference, as long as they’re forever ostracized from civilized society as the murderous, tyrannical parasites that they, demonstrably and provably, are.

    Oh, and don’t give me the “calling themselves socialist” nonsense. That’s not how it works. You don’t get to say “socialists aren’t really socialists if they fail.” If that were the case, then there would be NO socialists at all, since they have never, not once, succeeded. Some of the strains of the killer virus have survived longer than others, but all of them have been miserable failures.

    Eliminationism doesn’t work. The Soviets couldn’t do it, Mao couldn’t do it. Hitler couldn’t do it.

    All socialists, by the way, and thus by definition failures from the beginning. Only Mao has left anything behind still standing, and it doesn’t look like it’s doing too well, at least not the socialist part of it. It is only in the areas where they’ve left socialism behind out of necessity (think trade and capitalism) that they’ve shown any sort of success.

    Socialists ARE failures by definition, so what in the name of Karl Marx’s lice-infested beard would you EXPECT them to do other than fail (helped along, thank G-d, by the sacrifice of millions who gave all to defeat their insane ideology)?

    You’ll just become the horror you are supposedly fighting.

    Do you have anything to offer that isn’t a tired, vapid, meaningless liberal shibboleth? So the intended victim of murder, choosing to live by killing the would-be murderer instead, is no better than the murderer? He or she “has become the horror” that would take his or her life?

    You get one thing wrong: The murderer is already a murderer and will, absent a lead injection, remain a murderer forever more. The victim killing the parasite off before he can murder again will go right back to being a peaceful citizen once the necessary vermin extermination has been done.

    Dealing with a threat doesn’t turn you into the threat anymore than putting out a fire turns a firefighter into a burning house.

  18. MegaTroopX Comment by MegaTroopX

    You could get singed, getting too close to the Imperial Flamethrower O’ Dooooom! (pat pend)

    Felt that sucker from here.

  19. LC 0311 crunchie Comment by LC 0311 crunchie UNITED STATES

    That was beautiful Misha! Truly. So much so in fact I’m stealing it and calling it my own :devil_tb:

  20. Unregistered Comment by Lindata UNITED STATES

    As I remember Hitler was fighting the communists. He did use the word Socialist in the name of his party but that was to distinguish them from the communists.

    You did a neat little shuffle there identifying with us as the victors over the Nazi’s as opposed to the Nazi’s failure to eliminate the Jews. Actually, lots of people see the WWII as following directly from the harsh treatment dealt the Germans after WWI. After WWI we set out to “[achieve] the goal of rendering them impotent and removing them, once and for all, from the levers of power.” That really didn’t work very well. After WWII we attempted the goal of fostering good governance and welcoming the Germans into the circle of nations. That approach worked because we were looking at reality in full color instaed of the balck and white attempted after WWI.

    As socialist as I am, I am not working to murder you, why do you keep talking about murdering me?

  21. LC 0311 crunchie Comment by LC 0311 crunchie UNITED STATES

    Lindata
    Hitler was a socialist, through and through.
    http://russp.org/nazis.htm

    As socialist as I am, I am not working to murder you, why do you keep talking about murdering me?

    Your ideology, when implemented does murder. Are we, or Misha, going to murder you as an individual? No. Do we want the death of your ideology? Yes. If socialists achieve power and begin murdering, as must happen for socialism to “succeed”, will we advocate killing them and any who try and support them? Absolutely. Force only knows force, and can only be stopped with force. As soon as socialism either A) Dies a long over due death, or B) Stops using the murder of it’s opponents as a tool of it’s power, then it will be defended against with every tool available to free men.

  22. Unregistered Comment by Lindata UNITED STATES

    Define socialism.

  23. Unregistered Comment by fearlessfreep CANADA

    When you fanatics come to dispose of socialists like me, I know some decent Canadians who’ll hide me.

  24. Unregistered Comment by Lord Spatula I, King & Tyrant UNITED STATES

    Define socialism.

    Communism without a military to back it up.

    As socialist as I am, I am not working to murder you, why do you keep talking about murdering me?

    Because you want to force me to live the way you live, and I’m not going to let you do that.

    When you fanatics come to dispose of socialists like me, I know some decent Canadians who’ll hide me.

    Then we’ll dispose of them, too.

  25. juandos Comment by juandos UNITED STATES

    The murderer is already a murderer and will, absent a lead injection, remain a murderer forever more

    Hmmm, here’s a hypodermic that might help decontaminate the planet of libtards… :lol_wp:

    Lindata and fearlessfreep as socialists do you take pride in the following: Communist Democide 1900 - 1987?

  26. Unregistered Comment by dailypundit UNITED STATES

    Remember how the late President Ford, may G-d rest his soul, begged and pleaded with the freshly elected Dhimmicrat Congress

    Yeah. Unfortunately I also remember that Ford was the first president to outlaw CIA assassination tactics. Think those might come in handy these days?

  27. Emperor Misha I Comment by Emperor Misha I UNITED STATES

    Define socialism.

    They taught you well, comrade.

    I see the techniques haven’t changed one bit since I learned the catechism some 25 years ago. Some things just never change, do they?

    And why would they? Most people fall for it and, as a result, you get to nitpick endlessly about how the poor capitalist running dog lackeys just don’t understand what it’s really all about which, again, means that you won’t have to spend your time defending your pathological ideology.

    But, instead of playing that game, why don’t you define socialism to the rest of us?

    When you fanatics come to dispose of socialists like me, I know some decent Canadians who’ll hide me.

    Good. They can have you. I just don’t want you anywhere near me or mine.

  28. Unregistered Comment by doctorrick

    I must say that is the most literate Ann Coulter column I have ever read.
    She is really improving her writing:
    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18768 (from the start of this column)
    Bravo Ann!

  29. Unregistered Comment by R. Mutt UNITED STATES

    Jesus H. Christ, Misha. You and your butt-sniffing doggie pals are the ones who keep repeating history, ad infinitum, ad nauseum, by spewing the same mindless, crypto- John Bircher, commie-socialist menace drivel that has contaminated and poisoned American political discourse for nearly 4 decades. If you had any ideological consistency beyond the comical rantings you post here ( excuse me, if the analogous experience of watching pus ooze out of an infected wound is what you could call comical) ), and if you were realy worried about socialist-cum-totalitarians, you’d be advocating for all out war with communist China- which, for your information, is still a very centrally planned and controlled economy. The Party still arrests, imprisons and executes people for mere social deviance and civil dissent, strictly restricts travel in and out of the country for its citizens and even limits how many children you can have. They are patrons to North Korea. In all likelihood, it’s China that will pose in the near future the most significant economic strangle-hold and armed threat to US dominance. But then, they make most of the s**t sitting in your house/apartment/mobile-home/van parked down by the river, whatever. I guess they’re good commies. No, it’s those obnoxious home-grown milquetoast Demo-rats and the gay-rights, tree-hugging, elite, holier-than-thou ultra-liberals, who are ideologically equivalent to a european conservative, that are, in your view, DANGEROUS MARXISTS-STALINISTS bent on destroying American-Multinational-Corporate -Welfare-Neo-Gilded Age-Uber-Capitalism and subjugating true, terrorist-fightin, socialist-slaying patriots, like yourself, into a taxed-to-death, soul-robbing servitude to the state. Oh, and I forgot, slaughtering their fellow citizens by the millions.( Isn’t that part of Pelosi’s legislative package for the first 100 hours of Congress? Uh Oh, better start cleaning and oiling the assault rifle. The commie-femi-nazi Nancy Brigade is comin’ to git ya!)

    To put it simply, I believe you are like your wingnut love-object, Ann Coulter, a big wanking phony, or undoubtably certifiably insane. And for the record, look up National Socialist Party on Wikipedia. Nazi Germany was not Marxist or Socialist. Politically and ideologically, it was similar enough to Mussolini’s corporate fascism in Italy, that historians classify them, along with Franco’s Spain, as fascist states. Geez, if in reality you were right, just think how lucky we all are the Soviets didn’t know they were fighting their Marxist-Socialist comrades at the Battle of Stalingrad. WWII might have turned out a bit differently.

    But, for all our disagreement, believe me when I tell you: even though I’m only a little bit liberal, and because I’m a lazy pot-smoking ex-hippie who hasn’t saved up enough for retirement (now, don’t be phukking with my S.S!) But, even if I was a liberal, a real pinko Nancy Pelosi-Ted Kennedy lovin’, soul-robbing little socialist, I’d still go to my death fighting for your right to write about how you feel a vital manly need to exterminate, eradicate and generally disinfect me and my ideology from the face of the earth-for the good of mankind, of course! I’d do it because I love this country and it’s freedoms. Even for certifiably insane or phony conservative folk like you. As that great American Billy Joel sang: “don’t go changing to try to please me. I love you just the way you are.” (even if you don’t love me…and want to kill me)

    R. Mutt

  30. LC 0311 crunchie Comment by LC 0311 crunchie UNITED STATES

    Nazi Germany was not Marxist or Socialist.

    Here ya go R.Mutt in their own words.

    Why Are We Socialists?
    by Joseph Goebbels

    We are socialists because we see in socialism, that is the union of all citizens, the only chance to maintain our racial inheritance and to regain our political freedom and renew our German state.

    Socialism is the doctrine of liberation for the working class. It promotes the rise of the fourth class and its incorporation in the political organism of our Fatherland, and is inextricably bound to breaking the present slavery and the regaining of German freedom. Socialism therefore is not merely a matter of the oppressed class, but a matter for everyone, for freeing the German people from slavery is the goal of contemporary policy. Socialism gains its true form only through a total combat brotherhood with the forward-striving energies of a newly awakened nationalism. Without nationalism it is nothing, a phantom, a mere theory, a castle in the sky, a book. With it it is everything, the future, freedom, the Fatherland!

    The sin of liberal thinking was to overlook socialism’s nation-building strengths, thereby allowing its energies to go in anti-national directions. The sin of Marxism was to degrade socialism into a question of wages and the stomach, putting it in conflict with the state and its national existence. An understanding of both these facts leads us to a new sense of socialism, which sees its nature as nationalistic, state-building, liberating and constructive.

    The bourgeois is about to leave the historical stage. In its place will come the class of productive workers, the working class, that has been up until today oppressed. It is beginning to fulfill its political mission. It is involved in a hard and bitter struggle for political power as it seeks to become part of the national organism. The battle began in the economic realm; it will finish in the political. It is not merely a matter of pay, not only a matter of the number of hours worked in a day-though we may never forget that these are an essential, perhaps even the most significant part of the socialist platform-but it is much more a matter of incorporating a powerful and responsible class in the state, perhaps even to make it the dominant force in the future politics of the Fatherland. The bourgeois does not want to recognize the strength of the working class. Marxism has forced it into a straitjacket that will ruin it. While the working class gradually disintegrates in the Marxist front, bleeding itself dry, the bourgeois and Marxism have agreed on the general lines of capitalism, and see their task now to protect and defend it in various ways, often concealed.

    We are socialists because we see the social question as a matter of necessity and justice for the very existence of a state for our people, not a question of cheap pity or insulting sentimentality. The worker has a claim to a living standard that corresponds to what he produces. We have no intention of begging for that right. Incorporating him in the state organism is not only a critical matter for him, but for the whole nation. The question is larger than the eight-hour day. It is a matter of forming a new state consciousness that includes every productive citizen. Since the political powers of the day are neither willing nor able to create such a situation, socialism must be fought for. It is a fighting slogan both inwardly and outwardly. It is aimed domestically at the bourgeois parties and Marxism at the same time, because both are sworn enemies of the coming workers’ state. It is directed abroad at all powers that threaten our national existence and thereby the possibility of the coming socialist national state.

    Socialism is possible only in a state that is united domestically and free internationally. The bourgeois and Marxism are responsible for failing to reach both goals, domestic unity and international freedom. No matter how national and social these two forces present themselves, they are the sworn enemies of a socialist national state.

    We must therefore break both groups politically. The lines of German socialism are sharp, and our path is clear.

    We are against the political bourgeois, and for genuine nationalism!

    We are against Marxism, but for true socialism!

    We are for the first German national state of a socialist nature!

    We are for the National Socialist German Workers Party!

  31. JJSoCal Comment by JJSoCal

    Amen Misha. BTW, my first post ever.

  32. LC 0311 crunchie Comment by LC 0311 crunchie UNITED STATES

    A hearty welcome to the Rott JJSoCal! Glad to have ya aboard. :drunk_tb: :clap_tb:

  33. Unregistered Comment by Lord Spatula I, King & Tyrant UNITED STATES

    I’d still go to my death fighting

    Fighting?  You???  A liberal chickenshit pussy who hides behind his daddy’s skirt while spewing methane???

    BWAHHHH-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA…!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

  34. LC RobertHuntingdon Comment by LC RobertHuntingdon UNITED STATES

    Oh man, is it possible for more errors in a single post without kb’s verbal diarreha of 5000+ words per post?

    As I remember Hitler was fighting the communists.

    Hmm, that would explain why he allied with them first, conquered poland with them in a joint operation, conquered belgium and france and denmark and multiple other countries, began attempting to bomb the crap out of england, attacked areas in africa and I think also the mid-east… and only THEN turned on his former allies the communists. It was all a clever distraction from his real goal of defeating world communism!

    He did use the word Socialist in the name of his party but that was to distinguish them from the communists.

    And the fact that his party idiology was based on the same principles of socialism/communism (which are all but identical in every way) as russia had nothing to do with it. Riiiiight.

    You did a neat little shuffle there identifying with us as the victors over the Nazi’s as opposed to the Nazi’s failure to eliminate the Jews.

    You did a great job of being a leftist idiot by attempting to equate defeating nazism with murdering jews. Then again that’s not a huge surprise, we’ve come to expect such lunacy from retards like you.

    Actually, lots of people see the WWII as following directly from the harsh treatment dealt the Germans after WWI.

    The only factual statement in your entire post. Not that lots of people believing something automatically makes it true. See the Flat Earth Society, for starters.

    After WWI we set out to “[achieve] the goal of rendering them impotent and removing them, once and for all, from the levers of power.” That really didn’t work very well.

    Actually, no. WE didn’t set out to do jack squat. The US actually was snubbed badly by France (primarily) and others in the treaty negotiations. What France and company set out to do was PUNISH Germany for having the temerity to start the war. While understandable to some degree, considering the economic scorched-earth warfare the Germans had employed in WWI, this combined with the pacifist war-weary retards running Brittain and France at the time caused WWII to become more or less inevitable.

    And yes it did too work out quite well. The goal was accomplished, Germany was punished severely. The short-sighted foolishness of such a goal did not mean the goal was not successfully met.

    After WWII we attempted the goal of fostering good governance and welcoming the Germans into the circle of nations.

    Actually, no, we IMPOSED good government on them. And we fought the propaganda war only after the enemy had been BEATEN. And we spent billions of dollars on rebuilding their country as well, and billions more on defending it for them until we got to the point where we could trust them to assist us with that.

    That approach worked because we were looking at reality in full color instaed (sic) of the balck (sic) and white attempted after WWI.

    Nope, wrong again. In WWI France was looking at the fact that they wanted revenge, pretty black and white true, but after WWII we were looking at the black and white issue that Nazism must never be allowed to rise again. So far at least we’ve succeeded in that just as well as France managed to punish Germany after WWI. The fact that one approach proved better for the world as a whole changed nothing about the colors or lack thereof involved.

    The only mistake we made was we forgot to outlaw all forms of socialism instead of merely the national socialist version. That was primarily because the demoncrap party in the USA had already turned into socialists (more or less) as well by that point, and they couldn’t exactly outlaw themselves (though I’d be delighted if somebody would)…

    RH

  35. Emperor Misha I Comment by Emperor Misha I UNITED STATES

    You and your butt-sniffing doggie pals are the ones who keep repeating history, ad infinitum, ad nauseum, by spewing the same mindless, crypto- John Bircher, commie-socialist menace drivel that has contaminated and poisoned American political discourse for nearly 4 decades.

    I know. It’s damn annoying how we keep dragging you totalitarian cockroaches out into the light rather than just letting you slip back into the shadows, isn’t it?

    Flattery will get you nowhere around here.

    As to the ChiComs, you would know, if you had been anything other than a drive-by socialist troll, that it has always been my policy that we should start out by cutting off all trade relations with that odious fossil of totalitarianism, then impose a blockade on them and, finally, watch them starve to death and fall apart.

    Is that “consistent” enough for you, my sadly deranged little troll-boy?

    And for the record, look up National Socialist Party on Wikipedia. Nazi Germany was not Marxist or Socialist.

    Wikipedia? You mean, Truth by Majority Vote™?

    If it were printed out on paper, I wouldn’t wipe my arse with it.

    Try this one.

    Geez, if in reality you were right, just think how lucky we all are the Soviets didn’t know they were fighting their Marxist-Socialist comrades at the Battle of Stalingrad. WWII might have turned out a bit differently.

    Because never in the history of man have two countries with the same core ideology gone to war with one another.

    Do you have any idea what a pathetic lightweight you are?

    But, even if I was a liberal, a real pinko Nancy Pelosi-Ted Kennedy lovin’, soul-robbing little socialist, I’d still go to my death fighting for your right to write about how you feel a vital manly need to exterminate, eradicate and generally disinfect me and my ideology from the face of the earth-for the good of mankind, of course!

    Of course you would.

    That would explain perfectly why there is not a single socialist country on the planet that does NOT have laws against what you can and cannot say.

    Pathetic. Just pathetic.

    Try coming back when you have some actual material.

  36. LC Guido Cabrone Comment by LC Guido Cabrone UNITED STATES

    Amen Misha. BTW, my first post ever.

    Welcome to the Rott, JJSoCal!

    Just keep one simple, rule in mind. If BC posts a link to you, do not, under ANY circumstances, click on it.

    Trust me on this. Your mind will thank you.

  37. LC 0311 crunchie Comment by LC 0311 crunchie UNITED STATES

    Just keep one simple, rule in mind. If BC posts a link to you, do not, under ANY circumstances, click on it.

    I’ll second Guido on that one JJSoCal. And he will try and lure you in with a nice one first. Just remember, he runs the Imperial Game Room and is a master at his craft!

  38. LC Guido Cabrone Comment by LC Guido Cabrone UNITED STATES

    Oh man, is it possible for more errors in a single post without kb’s verbal diarreha of 5000+ words per post?

    In a word, no.

    The only factual statement in your entire post.

    Clear case of broken clock syndrome.

    Not that lots of people believing something automatically makes it true. See the Flat Earth Society, for starters.

    Or the University of California at Berzerkley?

  39. juandos Comment by juandos UNITED STATES

    Real stone libtard here on a rant:

    Jesus H. Christ, Misha. You and your butt-sniffing doggie pals are the ones who keep repeating history, ad infinitum, ad nauseum, by spewing the same mindless, crypto- John Bircher, commie-socialist menace drivel that has contaminated and poisoned American political discourse for nearly 4 decades

    What’s next? A discourse on how Sen. Joe McCarthy was a bad, bad man?… :lol_wp:

    Typical of a clueless libtard the fool keeps on whining witlessly:

    Isn’t that part of Pelosi’s legislative package for the first 100 hours of Congress?

    Try this instead: Pelosi’s Tuition Pledge Could Hurt More Than Help

    To put it simply, I believe you are like your wingnut love-object, Ann Coulter, a big wanking phony, or undoubtably certifiably insane. And for the record, look up National Socialist Party on Wikipedia. Nazi Germany was not Marxist or Socialist. Politically and ideologically, it was similar enough to Mussolini’s corporate fascism in Italy, that historians classify them, along with Franco’s Spain, as fascist states

    Well damn if that doesn’t sound EXACTLY like the planks of the party of the Seditious & Sleazy

    Got to hand it to you Mutt, you liberals just don’t have a bit of shame when it comes to babbling like complete fools…

    Thanks for playing… :wink_wp:

  40. Wild-Eyed Charlie Comment by Wild-Eyed Charlie UNITED STATES

    The Democrats now promise “A New Direction for America - Vote Democratic”

    The stock market is at a new all-time high and America ’s 401 K’s are back.
    A new direction from there means, what?

    Unemployment is at 25 year lows.
    A new direction from there means, what?

    Oil prices are plummeting.
    A new direction from there means, what?

    Taxes are at 20 year lows.
    A new direction from there means, what?

    Federal tax revenues are at all-time highs.
    A new direction from there means, what?

    The Federal deficit is down almost 50%, just as predicted over last year.
    A new direction from there means. what?

    Home valuations are up 200% over the past 3.5 years.
    A new direction from there means, what?

    Inflation is in check, hovering at 20 year lows.
    A new direction from there means, what?

    Not a single terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11/01.
    A new direction from there means, what?

    Osama bin Laden is living under a rock in a dark cave, having not surfaced
    in years, if he’s alive at all, while 95% of Al Queda’s top dogs are either
    dead or in custody, cooperating with US Intel.
    A new direction from there means, what?

    Several major terrorist attacks already thwarted by US and British Intel,
    including the recent planned attack involving 10 Jumbo Jets being exploded
    in mid-air over major US cities in order to celebrate the anniversary of the
    9/11/01 attacks.
    A new direction from there means, what?

    Just as President Bush foretold us on a number of occasions, Iraq was to be
    made “ground zero” for the war on terrorism — and just as President Bush
    said they would, terrorist cells from all over the region are arriving from
    the shadows of their hiding places and flooding into Iraq in order to get
    their faces blown off by US Marines rather than boarding planes and heading
    to the United States to wage war on us here.
    A new direction from there means, what?

    Now let me see, do I have this right? I can expect:

    a.. The economy to go South
    b.. Illegals to go North
    c.. Taxes to go Up
    d.. Employment to go Down
    e.. Terrorism to come In
    f.. Tax breaks to go Out
    g.. Social Security to go away
    h.. Health Care to go the same way gas prices have gone

    But what the heck! I can gain comfort by knowing that Nancy Pelosi, Hillary
    Clinton, John Kerry, Edward Kennedy, Howard Dean, Harry Reid, and Barak
    Obama have worked hard to create a comprehensive National Security Plan,
    Health Care Plan, Immigration Reform Plan, Gay Rights Plan, Same Sex
    Marriage Plan, Abortion On Demand Plan, Tolerance of Everyone and Everything
    Plan, How to Return all Troops to the U.S. in The Next Six Months Plan, A
    Get Tough Plan, adapted from the French Plan by the same name and a How
    Everyone Can Become as Wealthy as We Are Plan. ; I forgot the No More
    Katrina Storm Plan.

    Now I know why I feel good after the elections. I am going to be able to
    sleep soooooo much better at nights knowing these dedicated politicians
    are thinking of me and my welfare.

  41. Unregistered Comment by Lindata UNITED STATES

    Well, it’s clear you guys don’t want to talk. Flame on Doggies!!!

  42. LC Guido Cabrone Comment by LC Guido Cabrone UNITED STATES

    Lindata

    Well, it’s clear you guys don’t want to talk.

    Misha asked you a simple question.

    Define socialism.

    It’s your claimed political belief system, surely you can do that? If you want to talk to people here, it’s really pretty easy.
    Talk.

    You make your points, we make ours, we argue a bit, maybe some information gets exchanged.

    It’s how The Imperial Tech Wizard does it, and, although massive amounts of abuse are exchanged, information is also.

    It’s what we call “fun”.

  43. juandos Comment by juandos UNITED STATES

    Well, it’s clear you guys don’t want to talk. Flame on Doggies!!!

    Sadly its obvious Lindata you have nothing even remotely intelligent to contribute…

    I mean just take a look at the excellent comment by Wild-Eyed Charlie and consider how it is in context with the reality most people who have some working gray matter remember how it was when the leftist sleaze ran the game…

    Not to worry though Lindata, George W Bush is one of your type…

    From the Washington Times: An agreement the Bush administration reached with Mexico on Social Security benefits would allow illegal aliens granted amnesty in the future to claim credit for the time they worked illegally.

    The deal was reached in 2004 but never released publicly because it hasn’t been submitted to Congress. The TREA Senior Citizens League, a Social Security advocacy group, recently obtained the document through a Freedom of Information Act, and said it confirms the group’s worst fears.
    The document is a jumble of definitions and legal language, but a spokesman for the group said what’s important is what’s not in the text: It does nothing to prevent undocumented aliens who later get legal status from receiving benefits for the time they worked illegally. And that comes as the Social Security system’s finances are about to be put under greater strain by the retirement of baby boomers.

  44. Unregistered Comment by Lord Spatula I, King & Tyrant UNITED STATES

    Well, it’s clear you guys don’t want to talk. Flame on Doggies!!!

    What’s clear is that you don’t like the answers we gave you, so you piss and moan, whine and bitch.

    Shut up and go bake me some cookies, Linda, you stupid slut.

  45. kwongdzu Comment by kwongdzu UNITED STATES

    Excellent, Charlie!

  46. JJSoCal Comment by JJSoCal UNITED STATES

    MMMMM cookies! :lol_wp:

  47. Unregistered Comment by Lindata UNITED STATES

    In my mind, what you guys are flaming against is totalitarianism. Wiki: “Totalitarianism is a term employed by political scientists, especially those in the field of comparative politics, to describe modern regimes in which the state regulates nearly every aspect of public and private behavior.”

    I am not in favor of totaitarianism even though I am wil to be more sociaist than you guys. So pony up, what IS your definition of socialism?

  48. Blackiswhite, Imperial Agent Provocateur Comment by Blackiswhite, Imperial Agent Provocateur UNITED STATES

    As socialist as I am, I am not working to murder you, why do you keep talking about murdering me?

    Because we can confront you head-on right now, or we can get stabbed in the back later. It really isn’t a hard choice.

    “A world where all is free. It just couldn’t be, and only a fool would say that.”
    -Steely Dan

  49. LC RobertHuntingdon Comment by LC RobertHuntingdon UNITED STATES

    Well, it’s clear you guys don’t want to talk.

    No we love to talk. What we don’t have any interest in doing is allowing your idiotic and factless “points” to stand without rebuttal.

    A conversation generally involves more than one person talking and rarely if ever involves complete agreement between ANY of the people involved, much less all of them. Around here if you are a libtard (like yourself) it usually goes something like this: the libtard says something, another proves she’s full of crap, and a third agrees with some points of the second and disputes others, the first attempts a reubuttal and falls flat on her face giving all the rest a good laugh and more fodder for their own rebuttals… repeat as necessary.

    Or you can take your marbles and go home like a spoiled whiny baby and cry in mommie’s apron.

    Your choice.

    RH

  50. LC Guido Cabrone Comment by LC Guido Cabrone UNITED STATES

    So pony up, what IS your definition of socialism?

    Spats gave you his. Mine involves any system in which the government/or society attempts to control what it’s members do in their lives. (The classic, “from each according to ability, to each according to need.”)

    There, you have mine. Now, pony up! What is yours?

    I’ll check back either in the morning, or tomorrow evening. It’s late, and 0400 wake-ups suck.

  51. Unregistered Comment by Lindata UNITED STATES

    Okay, I am a liberal - not a socialist. Although you puppies would put me clearly in the socialist camp. The difference to me is that liberals believe that human beings can reason together to find mutually satisfying ways of self-governance that preserve the commons, and the common good, without sacrificing the individual to society. Socialists, in my view, would put greater value on the general welfare than on the individual.

    This is a distinction that you might not be willing to discuss rationallly.

    But go ahead, tear me apart.

  52. Unregistered Comment by Lindata UNITED STATES

    Sorry about the three l’s my keyboard is sticking. Too many lllunches over it.

  53. Ten-Ten Comment by Ten-Ten

    Why, in the name of all that is holy, would a supposedly intelligent individual rely on a Wikipedia definition to augment their argument? Could it be that an actual reference volume wouldn’t offer the same skewed information necessary to make their point?

  54. Ten-Ten Comment by Ten-Ten

    The liberals don’t want to reason together, they want to save us backward conservatives from ourselves. And if they have to take away all that we hold dear, it’s for our own good. The liberals, whose war cry is tolerance, are the most intolerant sons of Darwin ever to come down the evolutionary pike.

  55. LC 0311 crunchie Comment by LC 0311 crunchie UNITED STATES

    Socialists, in my view, would put greater value on the general welfare than on the individual.

    True Lindata. The problem is that liberal policies are at best socialist lite, well on the way to full fledged socialism.

    We do discuss very rationally here, just with a rough and tumble flair. Hell we tear each other apart, keeps the talk interesting. Thats why we are called Rotties, not poodles. If ya have a tough skin and can bite back, within bounds, have fun. And we still make our debating points amidst all the carnage. Quite fun actually.

    Two pieces of advice though.
    1. Never, ever, EVER, open a link from BC the Imperial Torturer.
    2. Don’t outright disrespect or hurl invectives at the troops. That immediately pisses of the Emperor, and his wrath is terrible and vicious.

    Otherwise pretty much anything goes.

  56. Unregistered Comment by Lindata UNITED STATES

    OK…what don’t you like about te wikipedia definition?

    As I said before…pony up.

    You against the government limiting birth control? You think they should be able to listen in on our international phone conversations, read our snail mail, break into our psychitrists’ offices?

    Tell me anything I have said that is intolerant.

    Flame-upon-flame.

  57. Unregistered Comment by Lindata UNITED STATES

    Socialist lite…I agree. I think that ok because I distrust the extremist ends of the bell curve. When it comes to politics and the general welfare I am all for policies within one standard deviation. Otherwise you end up with the Taliban or Pol Pot. Where do you place yourselves?

  58. Unregistered Comment by Lindata UNITED STATES

    I been banned?

  59. JJSoCal Comment by JJSoCal UNITED STATES

    I want to thank everyone for their warm welcomes. Thanks.

    As for Socialism and its many pseudonyms; collectivism, communism, Marxism etc. these ideologies all lead to the same place; a lack of personal freedom.

    And when you threatnen my personal freedom, this doggie bites back.

  60. LC 0311 crunchie Comment by LC 0311 crunchie UNITED STATES

    And when you threatnen my personal freedom, this doggie bites back.

    That pretty much says it all JJSoCal.

  61. Emperor Misha I Comment by Emperor Misha I UNITED STATES

    I been banned?

    Nope, Lindata.

    It was the spamfilter freaking out. New commenter, lots of comments in a short time, spamfilter puts comments in moderation.

    I’ve spanked the spamfilter now and recovered your comments, so hopefully it has learned now that you’re OK.

    I do apologize for the inconvenience.

  62. Emperor Misha I Comment by Emperor Misha I UNITED STATES

    Okay, I am a liberal - not a socialist. Although you puppies would put me clearly in the socialist camp. The difference to me is that liberals believe that human beings can reason together to find mutually satisfying ways of self-governance that preserve the commons, and the common good, without sacrificing the individual to society.

    That’s impossible.

    You cannot “preserve the common good” (at least not as it is known to the meddling liberal side of spectrum) without sacrificing individual liberties, anymore than you can have water that is hot and cold at the same time.

    The “common good” is an invention made by people who envy other people their success and feel that they’re somehow “entitled” to a share of something that they haven’t earned.

    The only REAL common good, if we must use that term, that a society is obliged to look after is to make sure that society functions, that laws are enforced and that society is defended against foreign invasion.

    Anything above that is meddling, robbing Jack to pay Paul in order to ensure an unnatural “equality of outcome” that is as lethal to private enterprise and freedom of thought, deed and speech as outright totalitarianism.

    Indeed it IS totalitarianism. You have no more right to tell me what is best for me than I have to tell you the same, and I shall resist any attempts to do so by any means at my disposal.

    That is not because I dislike you or wish you ill, it’s because I resent and abhor the dictatorship, soft or hard, that you’re trying to impose on me.

    You mind your own business and I’ll mind mine, and we’ll all get along fabulously.

  63. Michael Comment by Michael UNITED STATES

    OK…what don’t you like about te wikipedia definition?

    Tell me, Would you Honestly take anything seriously from a encyclopedia where ANYONE could just come in and edit it?

    Personally- I wouldn’t.

    You against the government limiting birth control?

    And which bills were introduced into Congress? Please I am inquiring.

    You think they should be able to listen in on our international phone conversations, read our snail mail, break into our psychitrists’ offices?

    Appearantly you don’t know anything about the NSA program. Have you even read the USC code where you claim it violates the law?

    this is where it can be found

    All the inteligence gathering is On foerign side only. The US side cannot be used. But whats more is you haven’t bitched about Echelon which was far more invasive.

    But hey its nice to see you would sacrifice millions for the Greater good of the Terrorist who is plotting attacks.

    Tell me anything I have said that is intolerant.

    Other than you are willing to cripple inteligence efforts that do help Police and Military in the GWoT. I don’t know.

  64. juandos Comment by juandos UNITED STATES

    Okay, I am a liberal - not a socialist. Although you puppies would put me clearly in the socialist camp

    Hmmm, well there’s damn little to differniate a liberal from a socialist…

    A liberal just wants someone else’s money to finance their insanely stupid ideas…

    I mean look at what an expensive but totally useless joke Social Welfare is….

  65. LC RobertHuntingdon Comment by LC RobertHuntingdon

    Hmm, emperor, I just got around to reading a bit more of that nice dissertation you were so kind as to provide on Nazism. I knew of course the name of their party, but I never quite put two and two together… that the Nazi’s gained power by a clever blending of not-quite-ultra-extreme leftist goals with an emotional appeal to the nationalism of the right. So while in most ways Hitler was a pretty extreme leftist, he was also mildly centrist too.

    Kinda makes you wonder about the wisdom of trying to be centrist, doesn’t it?

    Also makes you laugh at the leftist retards who scream about “Bu$hitler!” and crap like that… I mean, isn’t that just utterly hilarious that they are condemning bush for being LIKE THEMSELVES!?!?!

    BWHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAH!!!!

    RH

  66. LC RobertHuntingdon Comment by LC RobertHuntingdon

    Doh, forgot one bit…

    So with his strong leftism and mild centrist/rightist leanings, does that mean that Hitler was a RINO???

    Heh!

    RH

  67. Unregistered Comment by Lindata UNITED STATES

    Tell me, Would you Honestly take anything seriously from a encyclopedia where ANYONE could just come in and edit it?

    OK…but what don’t you like about the Wikipedia definition?

    And which bills were introduced into Congress? Please I am inquiring.

    See 109th HR1539 and S809 which would have legislated that licensed pharmacists be required to fill legal prescriptions. Admittedly this limits the freedom of the pharmacist to impose his or her morality on other free citizens, but why is it his or her business in the first place. The bill was largely sponsered by Dimmocrats and tabled by the elephants.

    You think they should be able to listen in on our international phone conversations, read our snail mail, break into our psychitrists’ offices?

    Appearantly you don’t know anything about the NSA program. Have you even read the USC code where you claim it violates the law?

    All I ask is a warrant or other significant judicial review. Otherwise, you are taking the lying leader’s word for what he and his are doing. He just wrote that signing statement reserving the right to read your mail. Why not listen in on your phone calls? I figure he made up a new name for the Total Information idea and is going for it. Don’t you? Will you be as comfortable with no judicial review when Hillary has the Oval Office?

    But hey its nice to see you would sacrifice millions for the Greater good of the Terrorist who is plotting attacks.

    I am disgusted that this administration is doing so little to secure Soviet weapons, question Kahn about who he told/sold what to, and support the IAEC. I am equally disgusted that this administration ratchets up the hated and fear of the world at large toward us thus giving more power to that plotting Terrorist.

    Tell me anything I have said that is intolerant.

    Other than you are willing to cripple inteligence efforts that do help Police and Military in the GWoT. I don’t know.

    “Crippling intelligence efforts” (which I don’t want to do) has nothing to do with intolerance. Try again.

  68. juandos Comment by juandos UNITED STATES

    Well Lindata despite your massive flow of verbiage there is no reason to tolerate you or your kind…

    You think they should be able to listen in on our international phone conversations, read our snail mail, break into our psychitrists’ offices?

    Well yes when liberals have a track record at least some seventy years long of being seditious swine…

    People like you are what’s wrong in this country…

    I am disgusted that this administration is doing so little to secure Soviet weapons

    Let me guess, you don’t remember the whining by the liberals during the Reagan administration when his administration was trying to do something about Soviet weapons, right?

    Your liberals seem to think all history started the last morning you woke up…

  69. CiSSnarl5.7 Comment by CiSSnarl5.7 KUWAIT

    All I ask is a warrant or other significant judicial review.

    Flowery talk and rhetroic does not fight the enemy we have at the gates.

    As someone with many years in military operations I can tell you in “Information age 2007″ we do not have the luxury nor the time to do legal gymnastics jumping thru ever smaller hoops imposed by “judical reviews”, based on some hysterical perception that “civil rights” are at stake, and some poor 80 year grandmother is getting her mail read by some nefarious trench coat wearing “supersekretsquill double agent man”

    If you doubt the time critical aspect of my stance..take one gander at the flag next to my screen name…I am over 7,000 miles away, I’m writing you right this second from the heart of the Middle East, the Persian gulf…were I a terrorist communicating with an operative inside the US…I could say “carry out the attack now”..push the “submit comment” button and have my orders transmitted in a split second, received, down-loaded and erased from the ether in a matter of a few minutes…and POOF….buh bye Lindata, and maybe a few hunderd thousand of her nieghbors, friends, family, and loved ones…Now Lindata do YOU STILL want that warrant, or do you want to live another day to spend in the country called…America.

  70. Unregistered Comment by fiskhus_jim UNITED STATES

    Ann Coulter is a traitor to the United States - and so are you.

    Anyone who suggests that support for the President (whoever is in office) is more important than support for the Constitution is a traitor.

    Anyone who suggests that it is acceptable for the rich to fatten themselves at the Pentagon trough while decent hard-working Americans starve in poverty is a traitor.

    Anyone who suggests that business should have more voice in politics than the people is a traitor.

    And you are a traitor.

    You do not deserve to live in this Great Republic for the simple reason thqat you do not support the supreme law of the land, our God-given Constitution.

    You remind me of the ancient tribe of Habiru (Hebrews, for the ignorant) who rejected God’s judges (a clear example of a government of laws and not of men) and demanded for themselves a king whom they could obey blindly and without thought or effort.

    Naming a king was the beginning of the end for the Habiru for then they became subject to other, greater kings and empires. And destroying the Constitution (as all members of the Republic Party truly wish to do) would be the beginning of the destruction of the United States, too - for our greatness lies in our devotion and commitment to the rule of law, something the Republic Party can never understand since the Republic Party is only focussed on how much taxpayer’s money they can steal.

  71. Michael Comment by Michael UNITED STATES

    OK…but what don’t you like about the Wikipedia definition?

    Why do I even have to repeat my self- In a debate it helps to use sources whose Credibalty is not lacking. I won’t accept it due to the fact it came from a questionable source.

    Try again.

    See 109th HR1539 and S809 which would have legislated that licensed pharmacists be required to fill legal prescriptions. Admittedly this limits the freedom of the pharmacist to impose his or her morality on other free citizens, but why is it his or her business in the first place. The bill was largely sponsered by Dimmocrats and tabled by the elephants.

    Damn that little thing called Morality. Its so much easier to kill a human being because the stupid couple could’t have have the mental capicity to think about using contraceptives before hand.

    The Abortion pill RU486 is not Birth control. Its abortion and you actually hit a nerve. I can’t stand people who think of abortion as birth control. If women are going to be stupid to open thier legs and men stupid enough to stick it in, they deserve all the consequences of thier stupidity. What you think of “birth control” I call escaping your responcibility.

    If you want to use a comdom or pill or whatever- thats fine. But to call abortion birth control- shows how much you don’t value life.

    Oh and a Pharmacy the last time I checked is a private buiness- All buinesses have the right to not serve a customer. You know the whole “No shirt, No shoes, No service” sign.

    All I ask is a warrant or other significant judicial review. Otherwise, you are taking the lying leader’s word for what he and his are doing. He just wrote that signing statement reserving the right to read your mail. Why not listen in on your phone calls? I figure he made up a new name for the Total Information idea and is going for it. Don’t you? Will you be as comfortable with no judicial review when Hillary has the Oval Office?

    There is Judicial Review and congressional overview as the President makes a report to the Inteligence Committie who the last time I checked Rep Jane Hartman among others were fine with the inteligence programs.

    and: HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH. Yeah keep dreaming, Hillary will fall flat on her face.

    Oh and if they want to read my e-mail thats fine with me. I have no expectation of Privacy on the net.

    Also you do need to read up on RICO and see how that could be Missused. Yet no one complain how it could be used by the McChimpyhaliburtonoilChenyrove to invade your privacy!!!!!!111oneoneoneeleven. Oh wait. Thats because RICO so far has worked to Cripple the Mob and on Street gangs.

    I am disgusted that this administration is doing so little to secure Soviet weapons, question Kahn about who he told/sold what to, and support the IAEC.

    Do you know we spend our Money to secure Soviet Stockpiles? Hell we are helping CHINA secure its nukes as well.

    http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htchem/articles/20060716.aspx

    I am equally disgusted that this administration ratchets up the hated and fear of the world at large toward us thus giving more power to that plotting Terrorist

    Right- Thats why the USS Cole was bombed on clintons watch, and the First WTC attack, and the Beirut Bombing, and the Attack on the an Italian Cruise liner that resulted in an american being murdered, the Iranian Hostage crisis, Oh and this little thing Done by the PLO

    http://jewishworldreview.com/0107/glick010207.php3

    Yeah. They really Loved us Before the Iraq war. And Note it goes through the Dem and the Rep adminstrations.

    “Crippling intelligence efforts” (which I don’t want to do) has nothing to do with intolerance. Try again.

    Hey you asked what we could not tolerate. And I answered, because you are advocating to taking a stratgey that Puts millions in risk and brings the war back to the us instead of being on an offensive.

  72. Radical Redneck Comment by Radical Redneck

    Looks like Mikey Moore had a huge Ex-Lax™ flavored plate of baked beans and is excreting here!


    Anyone who suggests that support for the President (whoever is in office) is more important than support for the Constitution is a traitor.

    President active in national security = Constitution gone? Check!


    Anyone who suggests that it is acceptable for the rich to fatten themselves at the Pentagon trough while decent hard-working Americans starve in poverty is a traitor.

    Rich get all the taxpayer money straight from the gubmint, middle class and everyone else starves? Check! (you are supposed to just scream Halliburton dumbass! Mikey won’t give you a reacharound now).

    Anyone who suggests that business should have more voice in politics than the people is a traitor.

    EEEEEEVIIIIIIL Big Business™ runs the entire world, the people (commie shitbag term) are powerless? Check!

    for our greatness lies in our devotion and commitment to the rule of law, something the Republic Party can never understand since the Republic Party is only focussed on how much taxpayer’s money they can steal.

    EEEEVIIIIL Repukes stealing everything due to The People™? Check!

    Someone please tell me this is a script from The Simpsons;n no 3-dimensional bag of skin could be this Stooooooopid? Right?

  73. Unregistered Comment by fiskhus_jim UNITED STATES

    A Real American is the only “bag of skin” who could demand that the Republic Party actually observe the Constitution of this Great Republic rather than just giving it a lip job.

    Since you do not demand that the President subordinate hiumself to the supreme law of this country, we can only assume you are a traitor.

    Oh, and by the way, since you expressed your contampt for the “commie shit bag” term, “the people”, I suppose you also feel that a term like the “General Welfare” is a commie term, too? The only problem with your ignoranvce is that the duty to promote the general welfare (that means “making things better for EVERYBODY, not just the already rich) is enshrined in the Constitution as an American ideal, value and goal.

    Of course, you Republics believe that our God-given Constitution is a commie plot.

  74. Emperor Misha I Comment by Emperor Misha I UNITED STATES

    Ann Coulter is a traitor to the United States - and so are you. [rest of unsubstantiated, delirious, frothy, incoherent rant snipped for brevity — Emp.M]

    Damn, it would appear that the Retard Filter™ needs re-calibrating. It’s not supposed to let anybody with an IQ below their shoe size through.

  75. juandos Comment by juandos UNITED STATES

    Anyone who suggests that support for the President (whoever is in office) is more important than support for the Constitution is a traitor.

    Anyone who suggests that it is acceptable for the rich to fatten themselves at the Pentagon trough while decent hard-working Americans starve in poverty is a traitor.

    When the facts won’t support a libtard’s point of view then resorting to lying is the next best thing…

    Well the one thing that really had me laughing was the, “decent hard-working Americans starve in poverty” since how can a starving person work hard? Is that person working hard to starve?

    Obviously this half-wit hasn’t ever read anything by Coulter and I for one question this clown’s ability to read and comprehnd in the first place…

  76. Radical Redneck Comment by Radical Redneck

    A quick google check of the above retard produced this gem.

    Does child abuse cause crime? Yes…And Republican and Evangelical ideologies cause child abuse…Posted by: fiskhus_jim | Dec 21, 2006 3:05:14 PM

    Given such an impeccable argument style - I guess Bill Buckley can finally retire. :laugh_tb: :lol_tb: :dunce_tb:

  77. kwongdzu Comment by kwongdzu UNITED STATES

    Of course, you Republics believe that our God-given Constitution is a commie plot.

    WTF? Even assuming we did, since Marx postdates the Constitution by nearly a century that is pretty obviously illogical.

  78. Unregistered Comment by jdm UNITED STATES

    Michael @ 72 said:

    Do you know we spend our Money to secure Soviet Stockpiles?

    Bush killed that program (Gore’s) within months of 1st innaugeration. Specifically, it was designed/purposed/tasked w/destroying Russian chem/hio stores which are/were the largest, most sophisticated on the planet. Of most concern was these things, due to lack of $$ (and will) were virtually unguarded.

    There is no doubt this stuff was sold on rogue market before W’ reinstituted that program in ‘04, albeit on much smaller scale.

    Hell we are helping CHINA secure its nukes as well.
    http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htchem/articles/20060716.aspx

    That’s not what that link says.

  79. Unregistered Comment by Sci-Fi Wasabi

    To the self-described “emperor” of this website:

    Liberals and social democrats and radicals are three different kinds of people. Do not confuse yourself. You either don’t understand much about U.S. politics, or you pretend not to so that you might make your sweeping statements and threats.

    LIBERALS

    Liberals are capitalists. They don’t want to hand over control of workplaces to the people who work in them because these liberals either own those workplaces (and make money off of them) or they manage them. If regular people were allowed to run things, the wealthy liberal owners would lose their unearned wealth and the managers would themselves become regular employees. Can you really see a Bill Gates or the manager of the local Applebee’s giving up that kind of power?

    The historical origins of liberalism are *built on* the economic system called capitalism, with its privately-owned businesses managed by well-rewarded trained agents. Some people in the center of the U.S. political spectrum want to make tiny adjustments to the details of some parts of this economic system, be it out of a desire for fairness or a desire for votes. But they are light-years away from even contemplating a reassessment of the fundamental principles of economic life (let alone considering the replacement of capitalism altogether). As they see it, minor reforms even reinforce capitalism by showing that it can be made nicer and is worth keeping.

    Their favored strategy is based on mass, national, electoral party politics (with a large base of campaign donations often from wealthy funders) and standard lobbying.

    Examples of liberals include the Democratic Leadership Council, and Bill Clinton.

    I should add that liberals such as Lyndon Johnson escalated the U.S. war against the communist forces in Vietnam during the 1960’s. His administration also supported the government of Indonesia at the same time that it was massacring local communists. At least 100,000 people were killed in 1965 and 1966. (Source: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB52/ ) It is not true that liberals are communist-sympathizers, and in some cases they have even used the massive force against communists that you favor.

    SOCIAL DEMOCRATS

    Moving away from the center of American politics and into “the left” side of the political spectrum, we find social democrats. Social democrats want more reform of capitalism than do liberals, but they still want to preserve the key elements of that economic system.

    On the right end of this faction we see 1930’s New Dealers with their Social Security and alphabet agencies. They regulated privately-owned business, but didn’t go anywhere near eliminating it. They also regulated the formation and conduct of labor unions. However, in the U.S., this mild social democratic tendency has rarely held office, and even more-rarely implemented its policies. There are some social democrats among the grassroots in this country, but their political dreams are almost always frustrated. It seems to me that most Americans who think this way call themselves “progressives” to distinguish themselves from liberals.

    Social democracy has had more success in Western Europe through the election of social democrats to various parliaments there. They didn’t win power by revolutions, but by votes. It’s all been pretty mundane, really. Results include the policies that allow French and Germans (for example) to have more paid vacation time than we Americans. A more significant change was implemented in Sweden decades ago when factory workers were included in management meetings. (Although I don’t know how widespread or long-lasting that practice was.) These kinds of reforms are deeper than what U.S. liberals would want, but it is still a long way from replacing capitalism.

    Their favored strategies include grassroots electoral campaigns on the conservative end, to the mobilization of mass movements and pressure groups on the more radical end. They are often channeled into electoral campaigns or lobbying, but not always.

    Examples of American social democrats include the Green Party of the United States, and Dennis Kucinich.

    RADICALS

    Farther on the left are the radicals, where we do find people who want to replace capitalism. I would venture to guess that they make up less then 5% of the U.S. population. Also, they are divided between two main strands, and some even question if one of those strands really wants to do away with capitalism.

    On the one hand, there are the authoritarian socialists. These are the closest you will find to living, breathing Marxist-Leninists, people who form political parties and try to gain enough followers to force a revolution. I would say that the word “communist”, as it is understood by most Americans, has its closest match here. Their goal is to put their party in charge of the economy, the political system, and basically everything else. Since they want power for themselves and a small clique of like-minded ideologues, that makes them authoritarians.

    And it might make them capitalists, too, of a different sort than usual. Critics of the vanguard parties call them “state socialists”, in that private ownership and management of workplaces is replaced with government ownership and management by approved party hacks. This isn’t really different from the current economic system, and it is no wonder that most people aren’t interested. The authoritarian socialists are certainly obnoxious, but fortunately they are also a tiny, tiny, minority in the U.S. They aren’t a real threat to your power, but I do understand why you want to use them as a rhetorical whipping boy.

    Their favored strategy is “building the party” (whichever splinter party they happen to find themselves in) and the eventual takeover of government functions in a sudden, massive, 19th century style insurrectional revolution.

    Examples of authoritarian socialists include the Workers World Party, and Bob Avakian.

    On the other hand are the libertarian socialists. That is not an oxymoron! These people oppose domination by both capitalist owners and party bosses, and instead favor employees owning and managing their workplaces themselves. This kind of socialism does not centralize ownership or management in the government. In fact, in the case of the worker-controlled factories in Argentina they have had to fight against the government trying to kick them out. Examples of workplace self-management can be found in the United States as well, today and historically. These ideas not only preceded Marx, he even argued against his libertarian socialist contemporaries.

    With everyone participating as equals (or in proportion to how much work they put in), no one can horde all of the profits or call all the shots. This is socialism, and I can see why you and your readers are threatened by it. It doesn’t allow you inordinate amounts of power over the lives of others.

    Libertarian socialists’ favored strategy is self-organizing in the present day to live the methods they advocate, both as individuals and as organized movements. With enough people participating in various libertarian workplaces, union organizing campaigns, and other anti-authoritarian efforts, society continues to change in a libertarian direction (as it has for a long time now). The more the ideas and practices spread, the more people adopt them, until the old system is replaced.

    Examples of libertarian socialists include the Industrial Workers of the World, and Noam Chomsky.

    CONCLUSION

    Liberals, social democrats, and radicals are three different kinds of people. Do not confuse yourself. Of course, you do know the difference but deception is part of your strategy. You can promote your personal political agenda by falsely describing these three political factions as one and the same. Then, by accusing them all of the foreign, historical crimes of only a small, fringe faction, you can try to tar your more-significant, more-immediate partisan adversaries.

    What I don’t understand is why you think this misdirected rage will work. There isn’t much of a genuine threat to your power from the tiny factions of authoritarian socialists with historical ties to the mass-murdering communist regimes of the last century. If they took power, they’d be trouble, but they aren’t going to take power. Meanwhile, the more immediate challenge to the scope of your power is the body of Democratic Party politicians in office, who actually have a role in legislation (unlike all of the radicals and almost all of the social democrats). Unlike the authoritarian socialists, the liberals have the means to enact policy, but the changes they want to make are so very minor, I can’t understand the degree of your rhetoric. I can understand your opposition, but increasing the minimum wage or some other miniscule reform doesn’t warrant comparisons with Pol Pot’s killing fields. Discuss the issue on its merits; stop making these leaps.

    Look, if you really want to stop the reds under your bed, use the existing laws of this country. Participating in a war-crime or a mass murder is illegal. If you truly believe that the membership of the Democratic Party has done these things, use the law against them. Treason, sedition, and subversive activities are still illegal, too. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sup_01_18_10_I_20_115.html

    Use the law. Call the appropriate District Attorney or the FBI (or whomever) and bring your enemies up on charges! If all the Democrats are committing treason, don’t commit misprision of treason yourself. Turn them in! (They aren’t hard to find.) Defend the legal process defined by the Constitution. If you don’t, and throw it away in favor of vigilante massacres, you surrender your claim to being a conservative. You become something else entirely. (Maybe you already are, but have not yet acted on it.)

    Fortunately, your readership has (so far) demonstrated its understanding and restraint by not leaping to these unfounded conclusions, and by not following your advice to commit conspiracy to murder ( http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00001117—-000-.html ), first-degree murder ( http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00001111—-000-.html ), and domestic terrorism ( http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002331—-000-.html ). It is too bad that these regular readers do not take the further step of defending the rule of law and condemning your promotion of terrorism. Well, at least I am here to do that, even though I am not one of your comrades.

    Until you take these ideas and their consequences seriously, and discuss them with your readers seriously, you are not worth taking seriously.

  80. LC RobertHuntingdon Comment by LC RobertHuntingdon

    To the long-winded retard known as “Sci-Fi Wasabi”

    Until you can learn to tell the difference between somebody who CALLS themselves a liberal, and somebody who actually IS a liberal according to what the word actually means rather than what it has been perverted into by the american left, you are not worth taking seriously.

    Actually even then you still won’t be worth taking seriously, but at least you will have taken a small step towards sanity.

    RH

  81. Apollyon Comment by Apollyon UNITED STATES

    Comment by Sci-Fi Wasabi

    Simply unadulterated tripe.

    Liberals are about as capitalistic as Castro. The mere fact that liberals live to tax shows they’re not capitalists, they are socialists and unapologetic ones to boot. They want the govt to take care of them from cradle to grave. There’s absolutely nothing capitalistic about that.

    Here in LA I heard this liberal idiot [redundancy] call in to Al Rantel’s show on KABC 790 and this liberal moron tried to justify that socialism should be the economic system in America. This blithering idiot went on to say as a liberal if he wanted to spend his life counting seashells or playing backgammon then as an American it should be his right and “The Rich™” should subsidize his lifestyle.

    If it weren’t so pathetic these liberal idiots [redundancy] would be comic relief.

    Some memorable quotes from Clintonista:

    “We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans…”

    January 20, 1999, Bill Clinton was asked why not a tax cut if we have a surplus. Clinton’s response: “We could give it all back to you and hope you spend it right… But … if you don’t spend it right, here’s what’s going to happen.”

    I love that last one. He has the unmitigated gal to tell Americans you were capable of making your money but you’re too stupid to spend it properly.