Rand Paul Supporters Assault MoveOn.com Member

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually the Nazi's were the National German Socialist Workers Party...a left wing group that believed in socialism..centralized control...hated anything resembling the Constitution always pushed for the state over the individual...hated things like Fox News and Gun rights...hated religion. Sound like anyone we know?

There are left wing democracies and right wing totalitarian states. You seem to misunderstand this. Your novel categorization of the Nazis as left wing is humorous and naive. Find a real historian who agrees with you.

[Anonymous]

since when was Hitler against centralized control? Nice try . Just remember national SOCIALIST WORKERS party. And it means what it says. Centralized control is the beginning of the end because people can't be trusted with that much power since we are all corruptable. The framers of the constitution were geniuses. Obama and leftists believe in the regressive centralized corruptable and dangerous model. We progressives believe in the supremacy of the individual, the breakup of political power as well as the wealth engine of free market capitalism. Not to mention the right to bear arms in case you need to shoot any communists or Nazi regressive trying to screw with the freedom our country struggled for.

[Anonymous]

Nazi Germany, china, USSR, north Korea, Cuba, left wing totalitarian states.

[Anonymous]

Who do you think would be more useful for Hitler and national german socialist workers party? The SEIU or the unruly tea party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:since when was Hitler against centralized control? Nice try . Just remember national SOCIALIST WORKERS party. And it means what it says. Centralized control is the beginning of the end because people can't be trusted with that much power since we are all corruptable. The framers of the constitution were geniuses. Obama and leftists believe in the regressive centralized corruptable and dangerous model. We progressives believe in the supremacy of the individual, the breakup of political power as well as the wealth engine of free market capitalism. Not to mention the right to bear arms in case you need to shoot any communists or Nazi regressive trying to screw with the freedom our country struggled for.

The term "right" does not, historically, equate to individual liberty. In political terms, the term "right" corresponds to preserving the existing social order. And left meant overthrowing the existing order. That's why in the French Revolution the monarchists were called "rightists", even though they were defending a society in which one person had absolute control. South Africa in the Afrikaner days is considered rightist because it fought to preserve a white-led society - even though they nationalized their key industries of the day. Nazism is correctly placed on the right because its goal was to preserve and spread the Aryan nation to the exclusion of inferior, non-aryan people. Marxism was placed on the left because Marxism sought to overturn the existing social structure (both monarchy and class). Zaire's Mobutu was a right wing dictator and dedicated anti-communist / friend of America. But guess what? He nationalized industries, consolidated unions into one national union answerable to him, he headed the sole legal party, the "Popular Movement of the Revolution",and he exerted tight control over the media.

Individual liberty can be threatened from the extreme left (through communism) and the right (through dictatorship and monarchy).

Even in our country, "right" does not equal "supremacy of the individual". If it did, the political right would be a bunch of pure libertarians. But instead your ranks include a large number of social conservatives who feel it is necessary for the state to intrude in personal matters: birth control, abortion, censorship, homosexuality and gay marriage, stem cell research, warrantless domestic surveillance, medical marijuana, to name a few.

I can see why some might think of left and right as communism vs. democracy. But it isn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who do you think would be more useful for Hitler and national german socialist workers party? The SEIU or the unruly tea party.

I'm going to have to say that the demographics of the SEIU would make it really, really hard for them to support an ideology of a "master race". You can answer for the tea party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:since when was Hitler against centralized control? Nice try . Just remember national SOCIALIST WORKERS party. And it means what it says. Centralized control is the beginning of the end because people can't be trusted with that much power since we are all corruptable. The framers of the constitution were geniuses. Obama and leftists believe in the regressive centralized corruptable and dangerous model. We progressives believe in the supremacy of the individual, the breakup of political power as well as the wealth engine of free market capitalism. Not to mention the right to bear arms in case you need to shoot any communists or Nazi regressive trying to screw with the freedom our country struggled for.

1. Yes, those framers were geniuses - they got everything right. Especially counting blacks as 3/5 of a person and denying women the vote - boy, they were infallible. And the slaves! Don't forget the slaves.

2. Wait, the Tea Party is now marketing itself as PROGRESSIVE?!?!?!?! Urk.

3. Your perception of history is . . . interesting, to say the least.

[Anonymous]

Free market capitalism is a great thing. But when has it ever been tried in a pure form?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a reason sane people despise both you guys. You self proclaimed liberals and conservatives are all fucking idiots.

I'm going to assume you're a fucking idiot until you can show an equivalent tendency towards violence among "liberals". Best of luck with that. I know some anonymous contest entrant once called Bush a Nazi. Perhaps start there.

I find it ironic that the same people who will defend to the death that is is only a few bad apples in the Muslim community that are bent on violence/jihad and in the next breath condemn the entire tea party movement for the actions of 3 (or 4 if you count the woman who attempted to charge the candidate with some offending sign). 19 Islamic terrorists who killed 3000 of our fellow citizens don't represent Islam (despite their assertions that the did) and three political volunteers somehow represent the "violent tendencies" of all tea party members/sympathizers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Free market capitalism is a great thing. But when has it ever been tried in a pure form?

Including privatized police, fire, and education?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a reason sane people despise both you guys. You self proclaimed liberals and conservatives are all fucking idiots.

I'm going to assume you're a fucking idiot until you can show an equivalent tendency towards violence among "liberals". Best of luck with that. I know some anonymous contest entrant once called Bush a Nazi. Perhaps start there.

I find it ironic that the same people who will defend to the death that is is only a few bad apples in the Muslim community that are bent on violence/jihad and in the next breath condemn the entire tea party movement for the actions of 3 (or 4 if you count the woman who attempted to charge the candidate with some offending sign). 19 Islamic terrorists who killed 3000 of our fellow citizens don't represent Islam (despite their assertions that the did) and three political volunteers somehow represent the "violent tendencies" of all tea party members/sympathizers?

I saw no post here that condemned the entire tea party movement. But there are several posts that make generalizations about liberals. I would never say that the tea party is paranoid. Just you.

[Anonymous]

The tea party is really a libertarian party. There are no social issures on their platform. The platform is Defund and Decentralize.... totally progressive

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:since when was Hitler against centralized control? Nice try . Just remember national SOCIALIST WORKERS party. And it means what it says. Centralized control is the beginning of the end because people can't be trusted with that much power since we are all corruptable. The framers of the constitution were geniuses. Obama and leftists believe in the regressive centralized corruptable and dangerous model. We progressives believe in the supremacy of the individual, the breakup of political power as well as the wealth engine of free market capitalism. Not to mention the right to bear arms in case you need to shoot any communists or Nazi regressive trying to screw with the freedom our country struggled for.

1. Yes, those framers were geniuses - they got everything right. Especially counting blacks as 3/5 of a person and denying women the vote - boy, they were infallible. And the slaves! Don't forget the slaves.

2. Wait, the Tea Party is now marketing itself as PROGRESSIVE?!?!?!?! Urk.

3. Your perception of history is . . . interesting, to say the least.

The southern democrats demanded slavery much like the modern democrats consider the unborn 0/5 of a person even while he/she is being born. There is nothing democrats won't do out of selfishness. Decentralize....and give everybody a gun so we can all be real polite and mind our own business and affairs.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:The tea party is really a libertarian party. There are no social issures on their platform. The platform is Defund and Decentralize.... totally progressive

Well, according to the founder of one Tea Party organization, there is at least one social issue: you can't be Muslim.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/27/AR2010102705118.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The tea party is really a libertarian party. There are no social issures on their platform. The platform is Defund and Decentralize.... totally progressive

Good grief. The founder of Tea Party Nation, Judson Phillips, advocates voting against Muslim members of Congress BECAUSE THEY ARE MUSLIM. Where is the fiscal, "defund and decentralize" component to that? That's just one example of the many social issues on which the tea party takes extreme positions.

I have a question for you - the original tea party (the one on Boston) was based on a simple complaint - taxation without representation. So - do you support the bill introduced by Representative Louie Gohmert to exempt the residents of the District of Columbia from federal income taxes on income earned in DC?