In three short weeks, on January 8th, 2008, the world will be changed forever. Jonah Goldberg’s epic will hit the liberal establishment in the face and expose to to all what the left really is: a vile pack of fascists, carrying on the proud tradition of Mussolini and Hitler. This bombshell will forever change how people think about liberalism and, indeed, the modern history of fascism, a uniquely leftist -ism.
Somehow the weirdos and hippies over at Sadly No obtained an advance copy and they have been leaking excerpts of this fascinating book a sentence or two at a time ever since. But, thankfully, they did release the table of contents in its entirety. Unless this is some elaborate joke, this appears to be the real thing. At nearly 500 pages, this will certainly be a fascinating and paradigm changing book.
Introduction: Everything You Know About Fascism Is Wrong
- Mussolini: The Father of Fascism
- Adolph Hitler: Man of the Left
- Woodrow Wilson and the Birth of Liberal Fascism
- Franklin Roosevelt’s Fascist New Deal
- The 1960s: Fascism Takes to the Streets
- From Kennedy’s Myth to Johnson’s Dream: Liberal Fascism and the Cult of the State
- Liberal Racism: The Eugenic Ghost in the Fascist Machine
- Liberal Fascist Economics
- Brave New Village: Hillary Clinton and the Meaning of Liberal Fascism
- The New Age: We’re All Fascists Now
Afterword: The Tempting of Conservatism
Acknowledgments
Appendix: The Nazi Party Platform
Notes
Index
B4B is working to get an advance review copy of our own, but I’m sure the line is quite long and, due to the explosive and revelatory content of the book, the publishers are being very selective who they grant access to Jonah’s masterpiece. Cross your fingers, friends, and hope for a Christmas miracle. I think we might just have a chance.
You can order your very own copy at Amazon and other fine booksellers.
— Psycheout
Blogs 4 Brownback 
Sounds like a good read but lets be honest, its pretty much what we already know.
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 8:43 am |
This topic is a complete projection of Conservative ideals but erroniosly claiming Fscism is a Liberal concept. Why is it that the KKK, Arian Brotherhood, Skinheads and Nazi’s ALWAYS throw their support at Republican Conservatives and never Democrats?
I’d post links proving my point but Psychewad and Ed ASSnote will delete them.
[Ed Note: Not if you embed them, like a good boy. See the Rules page.]
Comment by Spacebrother — December 18, 2007 @ 9:08 am |
Well I can think of only one other book that packs this much wallop! This is going to spank those liebrals silly.
I think I can rig up a clockwork-orange type reading experience for our commo-libral-atheist friends. This will be fun.
Comment by Marty McPain — December 18, 2007 @ 9:18 am |
Spacebrother…The KKK has always thrown their support to the Republican Party? Really? Wow… I guess you chose only to concern yourself with only historical evidence that supports your crackpot theories, in the typical liberal manner. Historically the Democratic party has always been the party of the Racist, I suggest you look into the term “Dixiecrat”. Furthermore, the Democratic Party today is based on racism. Look at their support of affirmative action. It assumes that minorities have no chance to achieve any success on their own. Even worse, any success achieved by them is tainted by the assumption that their success is achieved through a government handout. I suggest that anyone who thinks the polices of the Democrats isn’t racist, feel free to visit my home city of Baltimore. For the last 40 years, democrats have been in charge as the illegal drug trade killed generations of young black men and destroyed the black family structure, the schools system has completely broken and damned children to a life of petty crime, and a complete flight from the city of any small business owners ensuring little of no economic hope for youth other than selling drugs or somehow becoming a sports star. The Democratic Party does nothing to improve the lives of minorities other than paying them cheap lip service as Democrats know as long as they keep them ignorant, they’ll keep voting democrat. Show me one city that the democrats have held control of for decades and have improved the lives of its people other than cities with huge, economically powerful white populations like San Fransisco. I’m not saying there aren’t racists republicans, but at least the Republican Party isn’t based on exploiting large portions of our society. But you’ll ignore this and respond with some snappy reply that only makes sense to you and your commie friends, completely ignoring the suffering caused by your racist ideals. I will pray for you…
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 10:19 am |
First, Goldberg’s argument is an old, old saw. Whether one agrees or disagrees, there’s nothing new there. Go troll usenet in the 1990s if you don’t believe me.
Second, from what we’ve seen so far, he’s recirculating the interesting and provocative arguments advanced by Hayek in THE ROAD TO SERFDOM and cloaking them in some really poor analysis of continuities between Social Democratic thought and Fascism. But no one who studies these issues seriously believes that there aren’t continuities, because Fascism was an offshoot of the social-democratic movement. But it changed markedly in its process of divergence. This is not particularly distinctive from the observation that modern conservativism shares a great deal with its intellectual predecessors. But no one would confuse these overlaps with a persuasive argument that modern conservativism is, for example, patriarchal monarchism of the kind articulated by Filmer.
Comment by Daniel Nexon — December 18, 2007 @ 10:51 am |
quote:
“blah blah blah.. I hate America and Jesus…..blah blah blah…”
Comment by Daniel Nexon — December 18, 2007 @ 10:51 am
Comment by Marty McPain — December 18, 2007 @ 11:16 am |
Why isn’t Joseph Stalin in this list of the great liberal Fascists? He should be right up with the list of the most infamous fascist dictators; Woodrow Wilson, Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter and the Clintons. All of enemies of Freedom.
Diablo Look at their support of affirmative action. It assumes that minorities have no chance to achieve any success on their own. Even worse, any success achieved by them is tainted by the assumption that their success is achieved through a government handout. I suggest that anyone who thinks the polices of the Democrats isn’t racist, feel free to visit my home city of Baltimore.
Good point Diablo, The left was behind slavery, when the conservatives stood up to slavery as un-American the left tried segregation (that right Moonbats; segregation was Woodrow Wilson’s idea) and then when the right had enough with the Civil Rights movement in the ‘60s the left has now got their affirmative action program.
This is all because of the Left’s Social Darwinist philosophy; the weak must fall by the wayside for Darwinism to work so the Liberals artificially hamstring minorities with affirmative action so the liberals can get ahead. The minorities should be made free people, free of any handouts and nanny programs that hold them down. That way the worthy of them will move ahead in the American Christian system and the unworthy will fail, like Social Justice demands!
Comment by BJ Tabor — December 18, 2007 @ 11:30 am |
blah blah bigotry blah racist blah blah zenophobe blah
Bigotry by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 10:19 am
The last time I looked, all the Dixie states were Republican Red States.
There are more Hispanics, Blacks, Native Americans and generally or more culturally diverse make-up of the Democrats than the good ‘ol boy almost entirely white Republicans.
Comment by Spacebrother — December 18, 2007 @ 11:52 am |
“Good point Diablo, The left was behind slavery, when the conservatives stood up to slavery as un-American the left tried segregation (that right Moonbats; segregation was Woodrow Wilson’s idea) and then when the right had enough with the Civil Rights movement in the ‘60s the left has now got their affirmative action program.”
Then during the 1940s and 1950s, the Right wing Democrats became Republicans and the Left Wing Republicans became Democrats.
“This is all because of the Left’s Social Darwinist philosophy; the weak must fall by the wayside for Darwinism to work so the Liberals artificially hamstring minorities with affirmative action so the liberals can get ahead. The minorities should be made free people, free of any handouts and nanny programs that hold them down. That way the worthy of them will move ahead in the American Christian system and the unworthy will fail, like Social Justice demands!”
Ignorant Drivel by BJ ‘GointoHell’ Tabor — December 18, 2007 @ 11:30 am
….and equality in schools, equality in pay.
Vote for Obama.
Comment by Spacebrother — December 18, 2007 @ 11:57 am |
Danial Nexon is right.
Comment by Spacebrother — December 18, 2007 @ 11:58 am |
One book will revolutionize the entire political system? Only time that ever worked was Common Sense by Thomas Paine.
Comment by Elephant Bones — December 18, 2007 @ 12:15 pm |
Then it’s time for the next book. Believe me, this one will be a blockbuster.
Comment by Psycheout — December 18, 2007 @ 12:35 pm |
Spacebrother- I wouldn’t call the democrats hold on the Hispanic vote a lock at all. Correct that… The Law Abiding Hispanic Vote, ie Hispanics with legal residency. And if you really want to look at the horror a nanny state can have on a people, visit an Indian Reservation. Thanks to federal oversight, Native Americans lead the country in alcoholism, unemployment, and illiteracy. I’m not saying that the democratic party doesn’t include minorities, but rather its like an good ol’ boys country club that allows a few token minorities and hirers the rest as the help. There is no way in the world you can possible defend the position that the Democratic Party cares about the average adult African American. If they did, they would do something about violent crime or the crippling effect drugs are having in our cities. Next you’ll try to say the Dems actually care about union jobs being exported over seas. And what exactly did I say previously or even now that warrants the bigotry label?
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 2:42 pm |
“And what exactly did I say previously or even now that warrants the bigotry label?”
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 2:42 pm
“…..the illegal drug trade killed generations of young black men and destroyed the black family structure…..”
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 10:19 am
Thats OK, alzheimers can strike people of all ages.
About Native Americans…….
The Federal Government is the sole cause of every problem plaguing the tribal communities.
Comment by Spacebrother — December 18, 2007 @ 3:20 pm |
So your saying that the Drug trade has not affected the African American community at all?!?!? Are you insane? I’m not saying they are more effected due to race at all. I am just pointing out that African Americans, living on the poverty line, have been hit the hardest. You may not know many people outside your particular demographic, but I have worked with many through the navy, from all across this country. The common denominator I have noticed is that family structure is very important to the development of an adult. Drugs have destroyed millions of families. But you know, you are right. Not just poor blacks but also poor Whites, Hispanics, Asians, everyone on the poverty line, have been heavily effected by the drug trade. And all of them have been exploited by the Democrats to keep them poor and ignorant. I guess it doesn’t matter at all as long as Hill-dog gets elected. See…this is what happens when you don’t have the Honorable Senator Brownback in your heart.
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 3:37 pm |
Once again Lost in Space proves his absolute ignorance.
That statement is absolutely true.
Ha ha, I see that Diablo responded at the same time as I did. Diablo, don’t mind SB and don’t take him too seriously. Nobody else does. He’s B4B’s resident village idiot. He supports Ron Paul. ’nuff said.
Comment by Psycheout — December 18, 2007 @ 3:37 pm |
Pyschout Diablo, don’t mind SB and don’t take him too seriously. Nobody else does. He’s B4B’s resident village idiot. He supports Ron Paul. ’nuff said.
I’m impressed that Lost-in-Spacebrother found the wits to post something besides “you’re all going to hell NAZIS!” two hundred times. A momentary laps on his part I am sure.
I am sorry you are going threw this Diablo but these kinds of viscous personal attacks are the true face of Liberalism. Truth talking like you are doing Diablo threatens the whole
welfare-entertainment complex the left has created since the 30s when FDR used the a temporary economic challenge as an excuse to try to make America a communist country. Would Jesus have seen fit to guide General Smedley D. Butler to do the right with the American Legion and spare us this turmoil.
Comment by BJ Tabor — December 18, 2007 @ 4:43 pm |
And Diablo still worships a politician, nothing spacebro could ever do could possibly come close to being as stupid as that. “Have the honorable senator brownback in your heart”. Now there’s idolotry of the worst and stupidest kind, idolotry of another flawed human being. (and when I say flawed, I mean, like really flawed)
Comment by Arn — December 18, 2007 @ 5:27 pm |
I don’t worship the Honorable Senator Brownback. Thats silly. I simply ask myself “What would the Honorable Senator Brownback do?” or WWHSBD for short, every time I face a decision. I guess I could be a socialist like you and just worship myself but I don’t feel like burning throughout eternity. Look, we can’t all be ignorant fools like yourself, otherwise the world would consume itself in an orgy of immoral destruction. But hey, keep on doing what you want to do…just brings on the righteous end of times that much sooner. Even though you refuse to acknowledge it, Baby Jesus and the Honorable Senator Brownback love you:)
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 5:49 pm |
OK Diablo, you are a certified idiot. You have no means of judging me, you don’t know a thing about me, and doesn’t your bible teach against judging others? Not that you really follow the teachings of the bible. But I put it to you that you are a liar. In another thread you said you pray to Brownback, but in this one you say you don’t worship him (to pray to is to worship) so in which thread were you lying? Also, you said that to question Brownback was blasphemey, that, too, shows that you look at him as a God, just as you did with your comparing Gods testing people’s faith, and Brownback also testing people’s gfaith in him. Sounds to me like you worship him. By the way, you do realise that he’s a failure don’t you?
I am not a socialist, and your thinking so is just another aspect of your incompetent attempts at judging others (you really aren’t any good at it so you should quit). And as for calling me ignorant, I will tell you the same as all these other jokers on here, if you ever care to compare knowledge, feel free. If your writing is any indication of your intelligence, then you are way down on the educational ladder. By the way, that bible of yours also warns about declaring “thou fool”, something you seem to like doing. When a fool sees a fool, he is usually looking in a mirror.
Comment by Arn — December 18, 2007 @ 7:06 pm |
Diablo, BJ Tabor, and Psycheout have all said excellent comments on Fascism. Mussolini was originally a socialist, but eventually switched to fascism, essentially communism without the government handouts but with all the other ideas. He and Hitler were both atheists and men of science and Social Darwinism, too. There is a strong link between Darwinism (the left’s favorite theory) and Social Darwinism, and only the retarded fail to see it. The only incorrect theory on the right is libertarianism, and they are correct on economics but wrong on pot and sex.
Diablo, we all know that you are a Christian. Sometimes, it is more practical to ask what Brownback would do, because we couldn’t do what Jesus would do. Ann Coulter was right when she said that Republicans want the black vote, while Democrats need the black vote. Blacks make excellent citizens, except the Democrat Party is constantly trying to brainwash them. I think the least we could do is make Democrats slaves to their black landowners.
Comment by bobcorker — December 18, 2007 @ 7:10 pm |
“Mussolini was originally a socialist, but eventually switched to fascism”
True
“Essentially communism without the government handouts but with all the other ideas”
False on both fronts. Fascism did involve active state intervention and social welfare provision (this is actually one of the best arguments about the connections between fascism, social democracy, and New Deal liberalism), but it rejected the most important components of communism, including the notion that class struggle represented the primary motor of history.
“He and Hitler were both atheists…”
I think this was true of Mussolini, but it wasn’t true of Hitler.
“There is a strong link between Darwinism (the left’s favorite theory) and Social Darwinism, and only the retarded fail to see it.”
Agreed, without Darwin there could be no Social Darwinism. The problem, of course, is that Social Darwinism was bad evolutionary theory.
“The only incorrect theory on the right is libertarianism, and they are correct on economics but wrong on pot and sex.”
This is somewhat ironic, since the best arguments for the “social democrats and fascists and communists are all roughly similar” proposition derives from libertarian criticisms of statist impulses in both the economic and social arenas.
Anyway, gotta get back to hating “America and Jesus.”
Comment by Daniel Nexon — December 18, 2007 @ 7:23 pm |
“False on both fronts. Fascism did involve active state intervention and social welfare provision (this is actually one of the best arguments about the connections between fascism, social democracy, and New Deal liberalism), but it rejected the most important components of communism, including the notion that class struggle represented the primary motor of history.”
Good point, the fascists based everything on race and honoring the nation, even over religion if necessary. But social democracy and New Deal liberalism are basically the same thing, except with Kenyesian economics applied to the New Deal rather than socialism (under Kenyesianism there is no welfare, but the government still spends excessively).
Comment by bobcorker — December 18, 2007 @ 7:30 pm |
I just find it interesting that instead of discussing my points, certain people just find little aspects of my personality to attack and label me an idiot and a nutjob. I guess I should be sorry for not being an exact carbon copy as everyone else. So you want to compare knowledge? Arnie, can I call you that or do you want to remain formal on our conversations? Anyway, Arnie, have you ever looked into the Eugenics movement in the US? Who lead that movement??? Gee I wonder what party they belonged to….Or maybe the development of our school system and how it is based on the Prussian model; that is to create class after class of low educated, factory workers? How about Kennedy voting down the Equal Rights amendment in ’67? There was a reason he needed Johnson to get into the White House as his daddy couldn’t buy him Illinois AND the South. Or even better, once Kennedy was in the White House, he waited two years to desegregate federal housing even though that was one of his main platforms and all it required was a single presidential signature. And yet President Kennedy is portrayed as a Civil Rights Leader. Another example of the whitewash of US history. I don’t care if what you vote, but don’t act like the Democratic Party is the answer to any issue.
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 8:37 pm |
Once again Diablo, you are not any good at judging people, so you should just give it up. Where the hell did you ever get the idea I was a Democrat? Wrong again. Just ask anyone on this site, even the members like Sisy and Psyche, or other commenters that are in agreement with you like bob and marty, they can all tell you by now that I am not a Democrat. Democrats and Republicans are just opposing sides in an unwinnable battle, neither of them are completely right or completely wrong, but both are driven more by greed and power than by any real desire to help the citizens of this country. Even the most news coverage given to the candidates is based on who can con the most money out of people for their campaigns. So, no, I’m not Democrat, but feel free to keep guessing.
Comment by Arn — December 18, 2007 @ 8:48 pm |
Your a person that makes snappy comments of people on the internet to try and build up a sense of superiority to make up for a lack of love from mommy and daddy? Is that close?
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 8:54 pm |
That was meant to be a joke, so I hope you aren’t writing your opus of “witty” insults just for me. One thing though, you said you wanted to compare knowledge and yet when I mention some interesting aspects of American history to discuss, you run immediately to insults. What the deal bra?
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 9:02 pm |
By the way, bringing up past history of either party is just grasping for straws that are already sinking. I could go through many years of history and show you changes and contradictions through time with both parties, and for every thing you can find wrong with one, I could find the same thing with the other. And I’m guessing you’re probably about half my age, so I’ve lived through more of history than most people on this site have even read about.
And just what is all this?
“How about Kennedy voting down the Equal Rights amendment in ‘67? There was a reason he needed Johnson to get into the White House as his daddy couldn’t buy him Illinois AND the South. Or even better, once Kennedy was in the White House, he waited two years to desegregate ”
First, one person can’t vote down anything, that’s why it’s called a vote. And just which Kennedy are you referring to? There was no vote on the equal rights ammendment in 1967. And John Kennedy died in 1963, so it couldn’t have been him. And a reason he needed Johnson to get into the whitehouse,, uh, who needed him in the whitehouse? Kennedy? He was Kennedy’s vice president, all it took for him to get into the whitehouse was a bullet in Kennedy. I don’t know for sure if you are just sequentially confused, or if you really have no idea what you’re talking about.
Comment by Arn — December 18, 2007 @ 9:10 pm |
Arn you are correct, I was mistaken with the date and wasn’t clear enough on my point. It was John F Kennedy when he was a senator and it Eisenhower’s 1957 Civil Rights Act he voted against. You missed my point about Johnson on the ticket. Johnson was needed for two reasons, bring in the South votes and for his work with Civil Rights. Kennedy had pretty much alienated huge sections of the voting public and his election was far from sure. All of his has been ignored historically and Kennedy, instead of Johnson, is portrayed as the Civil Rights hero when he wasn’t. A clear example of…You know what, never mind. You don’t care. All you are going to do is make smart ass comments and add nothing to the conversation. Its like banging my head against a freaking wall. All I got to ask is why? Isn’t there some porn you could be downloading instead? You have successfully derailed this entire thread for your your pathetic games. Do you feel big now? Are you allowed to be on a computer this late? Mommy might get mad….
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 9:30 pm |
Arn… I’m sorry. Its just… you can be so exhausting. But I need to realize that it isn’t your fault that you are the way you are. Liberalism is a mental disorder and I shouldn’t be forcing you to try and rationalize you diseased thoughts. I’m sorry and I will pray for you.
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 9:41 pm |
My pathetic games? You started the pathetic games when you assumed you could judge me, you’re no good at judging people. You insulted me and didn’t have the slightest idea who or what I was.
And didn’t you catch the part where I said you’re probably about half my age? I don’t need mommy’s permission. Where were you when all these things took place, I can tell you exactly where I was when the ammendment was voted on in 57 and exactly where I was when Kennedy was shot (and what we watched on TV for the next three months on all three networks, can you even remember when there were only three networks?) You really shouldn’t try to outdo anyone on memory of events unless you can actually remember those events, not remember reading about them.
Comment by Arn — December 18, 2007 @ 9:44 pm |
Damn, would you just give it up already! Wrong again,, I am not a liberal.
Perhaps you should ask psyche or someone you trust for a little background on me before trying again, that was what four wrong out of four tries. I told you, you’re no good at the judging thing. Please don’t keep trying, it’s not helping your image any.
Comment by Arn — December 18, 2007 @ 9:51 pm |
Arn, I chose to ignore your age because it is utter hearsay. You say your such age, I counter with a different one, and it becomes a childish mess, doesn’t it. Do you want to compare personal history now? You wonder why I think your a teenager, yet you get all offended over silly things. This is all because I assumed you were a democrat. You realize that right? Spending all this time to prove your point (THAT I JUDGED YOU), for what? I’m sorry that you acted out like a child over something trivial. I’m sorry your going to find some little problem with this apology. And I’m sorry you are spending all your free time, acting like a child, to prove you aren’t a child. Are we good now? Can we be friends?
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 9:57 pm |
Nope, just pointing out that you shouldn’t judge people, you are wrong more often than right by doing that. I haven’t gotten offended by anything you said yet. Had I actually been a democrat or liberal then perhaps I would have been offended, I was merely disappointed that you could make that many guesses and not get it right even once. But just to set you on the right path with my political standings, I don’t believe in politics period. They are a 6000 year old mistake, no form of government ever has or ever will work, and they have all been doomed to failure, ours is no different, it has survived for 200 years, but it is on its way out too. Any attempt to let a few lead the rest can only cause disorder on a massive scale, it always has and always will. Politics is mankinds worst and longest running mistake.
Comment by Arn — December 18, 2007 @ 10:10 pm |
Arn, do you read what you write at all???? First you say I shouldn’t judge you, than you add “I was merely disappointed that you could make that many guesses and not get it right even once”. So I’m not supposed to judge you in any way, but guess exactly whatever ethnic/political/social group you are solely by the utter nonsense you type. I have never interacted with a person that has rambled for so long without saying a darn thing. But hey, as long as your happy trying to act smart, more power to ya kid. Some people need to seriously hit reality….
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 10:35 pm |
Your article is the best piece of satire I ever read.
Unless, of course, you were serious.
I have read some of that book–it seems to follow the “Hitler was a vegetarian, therefore vegetarians are Fascists” line of thinking.
Comment by Anni — December 18, 2007 @ 11:48 pm |
“So your saying that the Drug trade has not affected the African American community at all?!?!? Are you insane? I’m not saying they are more effected due to race at all. I am just pointing out that African Americans, living on the poverty line, have been hit the hardest. You may not know many people outside your particular demographic, but I have worked with many through the navy, from all across this country. The common denominator I have noticed is that family structure is very important to the development of an adult. Drugs have destroyed millions of families. But you know, you are right. Not just poor blacks but also poor Whites, Hispanics, Asians, everyone on the poverty line, have been heavily effected by the drug trade. And all of them have been exploited by the Democrats to keep them poor and ignorant. I guess it doesn’t matter at all as long as Hill-dog gets elected. See…this is what happens when you don’t have the Honorable Senator Brownback in your heart.”
Comment by Diablo — December 18, 2007 @ 3:37 pm
You’ve answered your own question. Actually, Republicans benefit from the illegal drug trade. Crack started during the Reagan years. Meth started during the Bush years. If Hillary gets elected, it will be exactly as if a Republican won. She’s more Conservative than the entire Republican field.
Comment by Spacebrother — December 19, 2007 @ 3:13 pm |
Spacebro- I agree that some of the Republican candidates would be just as bad as Hill-dog. Mitt got away with negligent homicide over his refusal to provide oversight in the building of the “Big Dig” I-90 ceiling collapse not to mention receive huge kick backs from Continental Construction which built the tunnel system, McCain only pretends to be conservative when its election season, Rudy is the least family oriented candidate among both Repubs and Dems, Ron Paul…well Ron Paul is Ron Paul. His message and platform is a complete mess, his public image is one of a crazed old man, and its fairly obvious that his base supporters, nutjob conspiracy theorists, are more of a hindrance than a help. I think this nation really needs to clean house and get elected officials that stand for their beliefs and those of this Christian, conservative nation. That is why the Honorable Senator Brownback is the best choice. Have members of the Republican party benefited and ignored the effects of drugs on our society? Yes and its a shameful sin they will burn in hell for. But they aren’t true conservatives. Not like the Honorable Senator Brownback. He’ll fix us good!!!!
Comment by Diablo — December 19, 2007 @ 9:50 pm |
Whatever helps you sleep at night, Diablo
Comment by Elephant Bones — December 19, 2007 @ 10:51 pm |
What helps me sleep at night? Warm milk in my belly, Baby Jesus in my heart, and a tape deck playing the words of the Honorable Senator Brownback in my ears as I drift of to sleepy land….
Comment by Diablo — December 19, 2007 @ 11:04 pm |
“What helps me sleep at night? Warm milk in my belly, Baby Jesus in my heart, and a tape deck playing the words of the Honorable Senator Brownback in my ears as I drift of to sleepy land….”
Wonderful. I just learned something new today!
Comment by Elephant Bones — December 19, 2007 @ 11:40 pm |
Not like the Honorable Senator Brownback. He’ll fix us good!!!!
Comment by Diablo — December 19, 2007 @ 9:50 pm
He’s already fixed himself good. Isn’t it kinda hard on your backside riding a dead horse?
Comment by Arn — December 20, 2007 @ 5:49 am |
[…] President Bush has done more to spread democracy and thwart terrorism in the world than anyone else in history. But he’s not even given consideration by the communists at Time Magazine. All in a day’s work for the liberal fascists. […]
Pingback by Time Hates America « Blogs 4 Brownback — December 20, 2007 @ 8:21 am |
“Spacebro- I agree that some of the Republican candidates would be just as bad as Hill-dog. Mitt got away with negligent homicide over his refusal to provide oversight in the building of the “Big Dig” I-90 ceiling collapse not to mention receive huge kick backs from Continental Construction which built the tunnel system, McCain only pretends to be conservative when its election season, Rudy is the least family oriented candidate among both Repubs and Dems, Ron Paul…well Ron Paul is Ron Paul. His message and platform is a complete mess, his public image is one of a crazed old man, and its fairly obvious that his base supporters, nutjob conspiracy theorists, are more of a hindrance than a help. I think this nation really needs to clean house and get elected officials that stand for their beliefs and those of this Christian, conservative nation. That is why the Honorable Senator Brownback is the best choice. Have members of the Republican party benefited and ignored the effects of drugs on our society? Yes and its a shameful sin they will burn in hell for. But they aren’t true conservatives. Not like the Honorable Senator Brownback. He’ll fix us good!!!!
Comment by Diablo — December 19, 2007 @ 9:50 pm
Actually, Ron Paul is the only good Republican candidate. The rest support NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO and open borders. Brownbacks toast and America does’nt need to become a Fascist Theocracy like a Christain version of the Middle East. People really need to stop politicizing religion. It’s NOT what God or Jesus want.
People who politicize Christianity are like little Bin Ladens. The Christian Right is wrong, the Christain Coalition is a fascist organization, the 700 Club is Nazi propaganda, Televangelists are crooks.
Comment by Spacebrother — December 20, 2007 @ 10:03 am |
“Good point Diablo, The left was behind slavery, when the conservatives stood up to slavery as un-American”
Hold the phone, here, BJ. You do remember that the Republicans advocating Reconstruction were referred to as “Radical Republicans,” right? Radical means far left. The truth of the matter is, about the time of Howard Taft, the two parties did a bit of a switcharound. Re-read your history books.
“Ann Coulter was right when she said that Republicans want the black vote, while Democrats need the black vote.”
*gasp* Ann Coulter was right about something? This is important news indeed!
I tend not to trust anyone who says that all of her own gender is stupid. Unless my suspicions are correct and she was once a man, and is now preaching against women to atone for the “operation…”
And this, by the way, is from a newspaper article about Ron Paul, whose ratings have indeed slipped down to about 5%.
“Mitt Romney’s percentage jumped from 32% to 34% from the beginning to middle of December, with the endorsement of the Manchester Union-Leader and Boston Globe John McCain increased from 19% to 22%, Rudy Giuliani fell from 19% to 16% and Mike Huckabee went from 9% to 10%.”
Wow. Romney’s still in the lead. Your prize horse Huckabee is dead last thus far, and even McCain has little chance of catching up to Romney at this point. And that article was published just yesterday.
Comment by L — December 20, 2007 @ 1:05 pm |
Without a link, L, your comment is worthless. That sounds to me like the New Hampshire primary numbers or a mishmash of cherry picked numbers. Either way, I can’t be sure since you didn’t cite your source.
Here’s a current Rasmussen poll:
Dead last? How honest of you!
Comment by Psycheout — December 20, 2007 @ 1:24 pm |
“* Mike Huckabee 21%
* John McCain 15%
* Mitt Romney 15%
* Rudy Giuliani 13%
* Fred Thompson 12%
* Ron Paul 6%
Dead last? How honest of you!”
Misinformation by Psycheout — December 20, 2007 @ 1:24 pm
You’re numbers are way off Psycheout.
Romney Way Ahead in all New Hampshire Polls
Comment by Spacebrother — December 20, 2007 @ 1:43 pm |
whoops, wrong link……
[Psycheout sez: Try again and I’ll fix it for you. But I didn’t post disinformation. I linked to the latest national poll. I already stated, or at least tried to say, that Huck is not doing well in New Hampshire compared to Romney. Big deal. Using a NH poll to say Huckabee is doing poorly in general is dishonest as hell.]
Comment by Spacebrother — December 20, 2007 @ 1:43 pm |
Romney Way Ahead in all New Hampshire Polls.
[Psycheout sez: You messed up the link by including two pairs of quotes. Fixed. Thanks for trying to embed your links.]
Comment by Spacebrother — December 20, 2007 @ 1:46 pm |
^^^^^
This is the correct link.
Comment by Spacebrother — December 20, 2007 @ 1:47 pm |
Duh, SB. NH is an outlier. Romney’s been ahead there for some time. I’m not disputing that. I posted a national poll, which shows Huckabee leading. That’s not misinformation. It’s fact.
Romney’s ahead in NH. Wow. Last time I checked, Huck was ahead of Romney, leading in fact, in IA, SC and FL. But things are still fluid. It’s anybody’s race, excluding Paul, Hunter, Cox, Keyes and Tancredo (who might well drop out today).
Citing a NH poll to somehow claim that Romney is leaving everyone in the dust is misleading. In fact, it’s dishonest as hell. But I’ve come to expect that sort of thing from the commentariot here.
Comment by Psycheout — December 20, 2007 @ 1:58 pm |
“Dead last? How honest of you!”
If Ron Paul’s a Republican, I’m the Queen of England. The man disagrees with almost your entire platform.
And you can easily find the article by asking Google. Just remember to put that excerpt in quotation marks, and it should find it rather quickly.
Comment by L — December 20, 2007 @ 1:59 pm |
I have a better idea. If you’re going to make claims based on articles that you copy and paste from, provide a link.
Comment by Psycheout — December 20, 2007 @ 2:03 pm |
I’m honored that you read our site, your highness. Ron Paul is a Republican. His party affiliation is Republican. He is the Republican congressman representing the 14th district of the state of Texas. That’s in the United States, your majesty.
Comment by Psycheout — December 20, 2007 @ 2:06 pm |
I am aware of the location of the state of Texas, smart alec. And that still doesn’t change the fact that the only issue on which Ron Paul agrees with the GOP is the poorly-thought-out “border fence.”
Comment by L — December 20, 2007 @ 2:13 pm |
Ron Paul is’nt perfect, but he’s still the best choice amongst the Republicans.
Comment by Spacebrother — December 20, 2007 @ 4:06 pm |
You can say that again, Spambrother. But next time put the apostrophe in the right place.
Comment by Psycheout — December 20, 2007 @ 4:09 pm |
“You can say that again, Spambrother. But next time put the apostrophe in the right place.”
Comment by Psykkkeout — December 20, 2007 @ 4:09 pm
The apostrophe Nazi doth protest too much.
Comment by Spacebrother — December 20, 2007 @ 4:24 pm |
Adolph Hitler: Man of the Left
WTF? Sorry boys, but old Adolf was never a leftie. Quite contrary, he hated them like the plague. Right after the commies and jews, members of left-wing parties were the most likely people to end up in a concentration camp.
Hell, the premise shown in a pic in one of your links basically points out the real differrence between liberalism and fascism. Liberalism doesn´t promote violence against dissenters and supports democracy.
The best qoute: The quintessential liberal fascist isn’t an SS storm trooper; it is a female grade-school teacher with an education degree from Brown or Swarthmore.
How can people read THIS [scheisse]?
And then he claims that the KKK despised fascism. Now people, I could dig up dozens of pics of KKKer´s together with american brownshirts doing a “Heil Hitler”…
Hell, by that Goldberg´s opinion, JESUS was a freakin´ fascist. He, after all, believed in helping the poor.
Comment by PG — December 22, 2007 @ 8:43 am |