Fire the Neocons

Umm, not quite so fast there, poncho.

While it may be fairly accurate to identify "Modern fascism" as "corporatism", this is by no menas complete or accurate.

What is the real difference between any of the above? All are advocating some 'elite' group who supposedly know what is best for the rest. All are in total opposition to personal liberty and freedom, hence some flavor of "social" control. That is where the word socialism comes from. "Nazi" in fact, is
national socialist"; communist is, in fact, "common socialist"; socialist is an all inclusive term for social control, and fascist is a double first cousin of all the above.

All of these stand in stark opposition to democracy, and free enterprise. All must be authoritarian in some manner to exist, save among a few individuals. All are predicated on failure to meet some supposed "common good."

Winston Churchill had it exactly right! And I'll tack on a little bit to his quote, afterwards.

My own version, with special thanks to John Crowe and Dr. James Martin: "Socialism is the philosophy of failure; the creed of ignorance; the gospel of envy; and the practice of collective greed. It's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. It stands in direct opposition to freedom, capitalism, and free enterprise, whose inherent vice is the unequal sharing of blessings. The modus operandi of all 'socialism', and its first principle, is theft. 'Socialism' has never created anything; it only takes what someone else has created, and appropriates it for some supposed benefit.

Tyranny is tyranny, whether it be controlled by one man, one 'elite' group, one party, one religion, or a 51% democracy. The United States is the only nation in the history of the world, to be founded on the principle of freedom, a a government of law, with majority rule, and safeguards for the minority. (We were the first nation, of any appreciable size, in history that was a Constitutional republic.) I don't want the government to put a floor put under me, for that automatically puts a ceiling over my head. I am for freedom under God.

I believe in separation of church and state. I do not believe in separation of God and country.

That, in a nutshell, is what I believe. And that, in a nutshell, is what all forms of socialism hate, regardless of the particular name they apply to themselves.

I am not for "socialism", under any label. And that includes any "Americanized" version of the same, even though I have to live under some of it or move from the United States. But all the other choices I would have are much worse, IMO. That does not make me a 'libertarian', either, for I am a "Constitutionalist".

One more thing, modern "liberalism" is tyranny, in itself, as well.

You do have one thing exactly, absolutely, and specifically right. The question is "exercising control"! And for Benito Mussolini, "the state" meant himself, as the dictator. That is "state socialism".

So I stand by my statement. In the final analysis, "A fascist is a socialist."

Ed

 

I suggested, shortly after 9/11, that maybe the United States should bomb Afghanistan and the Taliban "forward" into the Stone Age. I thought that Afghanistan would make an excellent place to grow barley, as barley is about the first crop one can plant and get a return from, after almost complete destruction.

Had some ideas about Iraq and Ol' Sad'm, as well, around the time both the Gulf and Iraqi "Wars" started, but they were never anywhere close to being followed.

Ed

 

Ed! You're my hero! You know how long I've waited for someone to come along that actually knows one "ism" from another? And thank you, I really appreciate those last posts.

If you had to pick one or even a mixture of "isms" to describe both major parties, democrat and republic which would they be and why? If you don't mind me asking.

 

I don't mind you asking. I'll sum it up this way. There is a basic difference in the two parties, at least at the highest levels.

Generally speaking (There are a few exceptions, but not many!), the difference can be described this way: (I'll only speak in the male gender, for this illustration, although there are some female pols, who are the equals of any males, as well.)

The Republicans want to take whatever they can amass, and fatten their own, and their friends wallets!

The Democrats want to take whatever they can amass, and fatten their own, and their friends wallets!

But the similarity stops, at that point! Why, and How, you ask? A Republican carries his wallet in his right rear pocket, while a Democrat carries his wallet in his left rear pocket!

Get it, now??

The every-day guiding principle of both the "Republocrats" and the "Demopublicans" is that of pork-ism or money-ism, another name for socialism, as well, and 'populism', whether stated or not!

One needs to understand one thing, and this is vital. What is claimed to be and passing for "liberal", today, is, in fact, socialist. There has not been anyone close to a true, well-known "liberal" in the US Senate in the Democratic Party since the retirement of Sen. Sam Nunn (GA). Before his retirement, the next to last one was the late Sen. Henry "Scoop" Jackson (WA).

The last anywhere near true liberal in the Senate from the Republican Party was the late Sen. Kenneth Keating (NY), although the late Sen. John Sherman Cooper (KY) was close. The only other prominent (former) Republican, that I would consider anywhere near a true liberal is former Rep. John B. Anderson (IL).

There are a few Republicans (and even a handful of Democrats) that are some shades of conservative, although most, such as the late President Ronald Reagan, would be much better described as 'populist/conservative'. As to a more true conservatives, the late Sen. Barry Goldwater (AZ), former Sens. Steve Symms (ID), the maligned Jesse Helms (NC) and former Rep. Philip Crane (IL) come to mind. On the Democratic side, the most visible, as well as most conservative and most anti-communist, was the late Rep. Lawrence Macdonald (GA), who died when KAL-007 was shot down by the Soviet Union, allegedly for entering Soviet air-space. Another is former Rep. Carroll Hubbard (KY). I have my own doubts about KAL-007, but will not go into detail in this post.

That is just a few with these characterizations, IMO. Long past bed-time. G'nite, all.

Ed

 

What's the difference between a dictator and a unitary decider Ed?

 

I'm no sure this is really going anywhere, but ask what exactly do you mean by a "unitary decider"? I've never heard such a phrase employed before, so have no idea exactly what you mean.

Ed

 

You've never heard of the "unitary executive doctrine" ? Don't feel bad, most folks hadn't heard of it before the Bush administration neo-conned consevratives and Christians either. He (G.W.) also claims to be "the decider".

Put the two together and we get the "unitary decider". What's the difference between a unitary decidership and a dictatorship?

 

pssst Ed, you're supposed to say "there's no difference!"

 

But it was the Neocons that got us into this war, not 9/11. They argued that we should invade Iraq ten years before 9/11.

 

"There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm's way, and that is for Saddam Hussein to disarm, and I have absolutely no belief that he will. I have to say that this is something I have followed for more than a decade. " Hillary Clinton

"Saddam Hussein certainly has chemical and biological weapons. There's no question about that." - Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, 2003

"I come to this debate, Mr. Speaker, as one at the end of 10 years in office on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where stopping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction was one of my top priorities. I applaud the President on focusing on this issue and on taking the lead to disarm Saddam Hussein." - Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, 2002

"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons." – President Clinton, 2003

"We stopped the fighting [in 1991] on an agreement that Iraq would take steps to assure the world that it would not engage in further aggression and that it would destroy its weapons of mass destruction. It has refused to take those steps. That refusal constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict." – Senator Harry Reid, 2002

 

That's not what I believe at all Carpro. What I do believe is that you and others like you have to keep turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to a massive amount of information in order to keep feeling good about your "government's" hypocrisy, corruption and crimes through out our whole history.

Being an American is no excuse for consistantly denying the reality of all that. Being an American means standing up for what is right for everyone, not just yer favored few who have constantly lied and conived your own people, and not what's popular. Be a man and do whats right for your country and it's citizens for a change instead of trying to be a tough guy "we're gonna whup the world and mold it in our image" neocon. Be a patriot.

 

Being Paranoid is thinking that "They are out to get You"
Being Patriotic is "Knowing that they want to get You"and being willing to do what it takes to defend yourself ,your family,friends,and even Carpo a guy you've never met "Because its the right thing to do " for God and Country.
Please Carpo ,try looking to history openly,and honestly,and then draw conclusions based on the truth rather than on a pre-determined opinion.
Don't believe me,believe what your own intellect tells you,hopefully after carefull
consideration.
After all we have warning of things to come in the Bible.
If you have children,grandchildren or a wife are you not concerned ?what kind of a world will you leave them?presuming you die before they do.

 

Always remember this-

Just because you're paraniod, doesn't mean everyone is not out to get you!

Ed

 

Thirteen months to go to 'hire' a new President.

Thirteen months to go to fire 34 Senators, 435 Representatives, and several governors, state Legislatures, etc.

Or not, as we choose!

And only one month to go before we Kentuckians get to hire and/or fire our State Constitutional officers!

"Okay! Bring enough poles, tar, and feathers for the whole Frankfort Crowd, in both parties there, folks!"

Well, everybody but Richie Farmer! As a former UK basketball star, he gets the only free pass, here! :laugh:

Ed