One bomb away

[Lanya]

<<It stands to reason that in a country whose traditions of freedom and liberty go back over two hundred years, nobody is going to switch it to fascism overnight.>>

Pretty near.  The 7-Year Plan is making Glorious Strides on the Way Forward, led by Our Dear Leader, who Creates his own Reality!   

[BT]

Who will you hate when Bush is out of office?

[Lanya]

Did everyone who wanted Clinton impeached suffer from " Clinton Derangement Syndrome"?  Did they all hate him? Or did they have real differences with him?

Bush is a fascist. You don't have to hate something, you just have to know how to identify it ("Common Western Rattlesnake") in order to avoid it, for your own good.

[sirs]

sirs argues that if Bush wanted to bring in a fascist state, he could have gone a lot further in that direction.  Wouldn't have "held back" as it were.  I don't agree.  

Of course not.  It doesn't fit the template, already concretely founded and not to be dare reconsidered.  It's completely illogical for Bush, this Fascist Hitler want to be, NOT to have used his prescious corrupted GOP majority congress to lay the full groundwork for perptual Republican power, before the people had a chance to vote them out of office.

I don't think Bush formulates any of this Patriot Act crap, there are bigger people than Bush, people who have a longer perspective, and they are pretty much attuned to how much they, or a pliant administration, can get away with at any particular time.  They are content to plan for longer periods of time than four-year or eight-year administrations.  They know what building blocks to lay down from A to Z, and they also know that they can't get it done all at once.  Certainly the Bush administration has made giant strides towards a lawless, fascist state and the fact that they didn't go all-out and proclaim a dictatorship does not negate by one bit the progress they have made for fascism.

See?, this is priceless.  Completely nameless and meritless claims of fascist building blocks, but since there's nothing concrete to lay claim to, we're just going to blame Bush for that as well.  WHAT BLOCK TEE??  The Patriot act was authorized by a VAST majority of congress critters, GOP & Dems alike.  It was RE-authorized by a vast majority, and now that the Dems are in the majority have made NO assemblence WHAT-SO-EVER of repealing it, so trying to make this about Bush is so beyond pathetic & transparent.  PLEASE, demonstrate for us these newfound laws (building blocks) that prevent its citizens from doing anything before Bush took office.  Being made to feel bad or uncomforatble because someone dares criticise you isn't implimentation of a fascist state. 

You know, if you want to play this mindless, evidenceless game, I can point to a particular ideological side that absolutely wants things run their way, and apparently have no problem running right over the Constitution, in the process.   Our founding fathers established thru its Declaration of Independence & Constitution, a form of Government that makes every effort to LIMIT Federal power.  Yet decade after decade, the founding fathers intentions keep getting ignored, when not mutated, with the left rationalizing how the Constitution allows for precisely that, the Fed to take care of everything possible.  And the GOP hasn't been innocent in this endeavor either, case in point, the GOP led congress under Bush II.  Point being it's the left that cries for MORE Government intervention in everyone's lives.  How the GOVERNMENT knows best how to raise and educate your children, how the GOVERNMENT knows better how to spend your money.  It's the Left that advocates for Judges to invent new laws helping to perpetuate Government intervention and "oversight", when legialstion has failed or worse, when the people have voted down such efforts. 

And now it's the left looking to abolish the electoral college, because they believe the country has reached a point where simple majority will keep getting them elected Democrat Presidents, since the largest populated locations, all urban, pretty much vote Democrat, with very few exceptions.  Our founders knew better, they knew that the Presdient of the U.S., needs to represent ALL of America, not just the most densely populated urban areas.  Yet the left will argue that the Constitution allows for the people to change it if they wish, whcih it does.  By all means, bring about a Constitutional convention, and let's put our money where our mouth is.  Let's fully debate that issue.  At that time you could also change the 2nd amendment to only allow the Government to own guns, and the 1st amendment, to only allow liberal voices on the radio.  Now, who's advocating fascism again?

It stands to reason that in a country whose traditions of freedom and liberty go back over two hundred years, nobody is going to switch it to fascism overnight.

Yet, you'd think after 7yrs there'd be SOMETHING tangible, SOMETHING to lay claim as Nazi-like.  Yet.........................................nothing, but empty hyperbolic rhetoric

[Michael Tee]

sirs is obviously confusing an activist government with a tyrannical government.  Minimalist government might have been appropriate in the 18th century, it certainly was not appropriate in the 20th, and the Constitution was certainly broad enough to accommodate both kinds.  Hence, the Supreme Court was NOT able to roll back what sirs likes to think of as Constitutional abuses.  A deprivation of freedoms and liberties such as the Bush administration has forced on the country, albeit in small steps far from completion, IS in fact a creeping nullification of the Constitution.  How can you equate freedom of speech, freedom from arbitrary arrest, etc. with "freedom" from activist government seeking the enforcement of equality rights? 

I don't say the Democrats are innocent in this either.  Bush forced this fascism-by-small-steps on the country and the Democrats rolled over.  But the initiative in all of this, including torture, is mainly on the Republican side.  Clinton's administration took some early steps in that direction, but the Republicans not only failed completely to roll them back, they advanced them by leaps and bounds.

[sirs]

sirs is obviously confusing an activist government with a tyrannical government. 

Cute.  When it's Republicans, its a tyrannical government.  (minus of course any factual evidence of such), and when it's the Left and hard core Dems, it's simply "activist government".  Priceless   

[Michael Tee]

<<Cute.  When it's Republicans, its a tyrannical government.  (minus of course any factual evidence of such), and when it's the Left and hard core Dems, it's simply "activist government".  Priceless    Cheesy>>

Well, when it's the Democrats, their interventions are to end Jim Crow, fund development in the inner cities, improve public health, regulate unsafe consumer products, etc. - - THAT kind of activism.

When it's the Republicans, it's to authorize or legitimize torture, wiretap citizen telephones, imprison without trial, try without legal safeguards, etc.  THAT kind of tyranny.

Only a right-wing fruitbat would equate the "freedom" to bar blacks from the polling stations, to live a life of poverty without adequate public assistance, to poison the public air and water and to produce medicines that cause brain damage with freedom of speech, freedom from arbitrary arrest, freedom from arbitrary, cruel and unusual punishment, etc. 

Only to a Republican screwball is an infringement of one kind of freedom the exact equivalent of an infringement of the other kind of freedom.

Cute.  Priceless.  Cheesey.

[sirs]

<<Cute.  When it's Republicans, its a tyrannical government.  (minus of course any factual evidence of such), and when it's the Left and hard core Dems, it's simply "activist government".  Priceless    Cheesy>>

Well, when it's the Democrats, their interventions are to end Jim Crow, fund development in the inner cities, improve public health, regulate unsafe consumer products, etc. - - THAT kind of activism.  When it's the Republicans, it's to authorize or legitimize torture, wiretap citizen telephones, imprison without trial, try without legal safeguards, etc.  THAT kind of tyranny.

Nice revisionist history, when not out and out lying.  Especially egregious would be the supposed legitimizing torture (where the left gets to define torture) and apparently wiretapping anyone they want. (I'm assuming you're trying to reference the wiretapping of suspected foreign terrorists' calls coming into this country, correct?  Baldfaced, hyperbolic, Tee.  Just rolls off the tongue.  No need to go into the myriad of leftists' end arounds of the constitution, like trying to repeal the Electoral College, frequent attacks on the 2nd amendment, and selective application of the 1st.  And we won't even delve into imminent domain or the support in murdering of the unborn.  Suffice to say, the points were already made in my prior post(s), the active, nearly zealous, effort to expand Government into every aspect of a person's life, in the complete polar opposite of what our founding fathers had intended.  Yet it's the Republicans who are this supposedly tyrannical fascist movement......minus of course any actual examples of such, just more of the asanine hyperbole we've all come to know and love....Tee

[Plane]

Well, when it's the Democrats, their interventions are to end Jim Crow,

Jim Crow was a Democrat.

All of his opponnts were Republicans untill 1963 , during that year all of the Democrats exchanged personaliys with Republicans.

[Michael Tee]

<<Nice revisionist history, when not out and out lying.  Especially egregious would be the supposed legitimizing torture (where the left gets to define torture) . . . >>

Well, I think you've got THAT one turned around 180 degrees.  Perhaps you forgot that the "President," when finally forced to renounce torture, reserved unto HIMSELF (not the left) the right to define torture.

<< . . . and apparently wiretapping anyone they want. (I'm assuming you're trying to reference the wiretapping of suspected foreign terrorists' calls coming into this country, correct?>>

Uh, not exactly.  The wiretapping of Americans is being stripped of its legal safeguards and becoming easier to effect.

<<  Baldfaced, hyperbolic, Tee.  Just rolls off the tongue.  No need to go into the myriad of leftists' end arounds of the constitution, like trying to repeal the Electoral College, >>

Well, we all know why you crypto-fascists LOVE the electoral college.  How else could a man with half a million less votes than his opponent WIN the Presidential election?

<<frequent attacks on the 2nd amendment>>

Hilarious.  Some of those "frequent attacks" on the 2nd amendment are supported by such "leftists" as the national association of chiefs of police.

<< . .  and selective application of the 1st.  >>

Who ever favoured selective application of the First Amendment?  I hope you don't think anyone violates Don Imus' First Amerndment rights by cancelling his show?  He's still as free to speak as Noam Chomsky (only difference being, Chomsky'd never GET a show in the first place.)

<<And we won't even delve into imminent domain . . . >>

Better not.  It's got nothing to do with any freedom other than property rights and the guy who loses the property gets an equivalent amount of a different kind of property (cash,) so there's no real deprivation at all

<< or the support in murdering of the unborn.  >>

Nice try, next try to rope the sperm of the masturbator into your definitions of murder victims.  They're potential humans too.  Do you realize how many "unborn" are lost every time a wanker flushes his load down the toilet?  Why stop at abortion?  Get those fucking jerk-off artists too, while you're at it.  "Masturbation is murder!"

<<Suffice to say, the points were already made in my prior post(s), the active, nearly zealous, effort to expand Government into every aspect of a person's life, in the complete polar opposite of what our founding fathers had intended.  >>

Yeah, they intended you to keep the life-styles of the 18th century alive in the 21st.  Funny though how all the increasing government interventionist power in consumer protection, health and safety, etc., has all been deemed consistent with the Constitution by the SCOTUS?  Oh well, what do those ignoramuses know, really?  Pretty soon, Bush will have it packed with legal "scholars" of a less "activist" frame of mind.  Maybe they can roll back all the product-safety and consumer-protection legislation of the last 75 years.  Caveat emptor!  It's a free market ain't it?

<<Yet it's the Republicans who are this supposedly tyrannical fascist movement......minus of course any actual examples of such, just more of the asanine hyperbole we've all come to know and love....Tee>>

Oh.  Examples.  You mean like, Patriot Act?  Torture?  Detention without charges or trial?  Denial of habeas corpus?  Constitutional amendments to deny gay people their constitutional rights?  Attempted federal interference in the Florida State Court's rulings in the Schiavo case?  Lying with impunity to lead the country into war?  THOSE kind of examples?  I think I've given quite a few over time.

[sirs]

<<Nice revisionist history, when not out and out lying.  Especially egregious would be the supposed legitimizing torture (where the left gets to define torture) . . . >>

Well, I think you've got THAT one turned around 180 degrees. 

Naaaa, got it right the 1st time.  Your consistent effort to distort, exaggerate, and lie about what the Right has supposedly done, along with your rationalizations of how it's ok for the left to be "activist" pretty much was right on target.

Well, we all know why you crypto-fascists LOVE the electoral college.  

Yea, those fascist founders of this country....what were they thinking?   

Who ever favoured selective application of the First Amendment?

Those who support the idea of the "Fairness" doctrine

<<And we won't even delve into imminent domain . . . >>

Better not.  It's got nothing to do with any freedom other than property rights and the guy who loses the property gets an equivalent amount of a different kind of property (cash,) so there's no real deprivation at all

Outside of his being TAKEN his personal property, and now with it being able to be given to those corporate contruction folk that you supposedly rail against.  Well, so long as it's the left that advicates it, it's ok.  Gotta stick with that template.  I so enjoy how you keep making my point. 

<< or the support in murdering of the unborn.  >>

Nice try, next try to rope the sperm of the masturbator into your definitions of murder victims.  They're potential humans too.  

Boy, when you get desperate, you really fall off the deep end.  You'll let us know when a case is brought forth charging a man for murdering his unborn sperm analogus to when someone is charged for the murder of 2, when a pregnant woman has been killed.  We'll all wait patiently.

<<Yet it's the Republicans who are this supposedly tyrannical fascist movement......minus of course any actual examples of such, just more of the asanine hyperbole we've all come to know and love....Tee>>

Oh.  Examples.  You mean like, Patriot Act? 

You mean, the same act authroized by a majority of Dems, and RE-athorized under current Dem majority rule??  Those fascists?

Torture?  

With the examples of our torturing prisoners and getting a high five atta boy being..................?  Again, we'll wait patiently

Detention without charges or trial? 

You mean the same "charges" and "trials" applied to prisoners during WWII?, Korea?, Vietnam?, Iraq I??  Want a do over?

Denial of habeas corpus? 

Your example(s) being?

Constitutional amendments to deny gay people their constitutional rights? 

You mean all those Dems, including Clinton are tyranical fascists, closet Republicans for supporting DoMA as well?? 
 

Attempted federal interference in the Florida State Court's rulings in the Schiavo case? 

WOW, we might actually have 1 example finally.  WOW, 1 example that makes the case that Bush Co is a tyranical Hitler want-to be     

Lying with impunity to lead the country into war?  THOSE kind of examples?  I think I've given quite a few over time.

Well, considering how adnauseum that's been exposed as a lie itself, provides us with a grand total of examples for the GOP being a Tyranical Fascist arm of the Government, led by Heir Bush as....................................1.  Wow, way to go Tee.  Slam dunk case you got there

[Mr_Perceptive]

Who will you hate when Bush is out of office?

Good point. I have never understood this. I have killed many in the Serivce of my country and yet I didn't hate them. If that is the case, why would I hate someone as remote as a President? I didn't agree with much of what Preisdent Clintn did even though I voted for him, but I didn't hate him.

Isn't this somewhat infantile?

[Mr_Perceptive]

<<Oh?   Who got his phone tapped?>>

Guess we'll have to wait for Goldsmith's book to find out:

<<Goldsmith, now a Harvard Law Professor, has just written a book, to be released this month, criticizing and, in some cases, exposing for the first time, many of Bush's executive power abuses. He is donating all the proceeds from the book to charity to prevent the standard integrity attacks which Bush followers launch at any ex-officials who commit such blasphemy. In a lengthy profile in The New York Times Magazine, Jeffrey Rosen profiles Goldsmith and highlights some of the book's key revelations.>>

sirs argues that if Bush wanted to bring in a fascist state, he could have gone a lot further in that direction.  Wouldn't have "held back" as it were.  I don't agree.  I don't think Bush formulates any of this Patriot Act crap, there are bigger people than Bush, people who have a longer perspective, and they are pretty much attuned to how much they, or a pliant administration, can get away with at any particular time.  They are content to plan for longer periods of time than four-year or eight-year administrations.  They know what building blocks to lay down from A to Z, and they also know that they can't get it done all at once.  Certainly the Bush administration has made giant strides towards a lawless, fascist state and the fact that they didn't go all-out and proclaim a dictatorship does not negate by one bit the progress they have made for fascism.

It stands to reason that in a country whose traditions of freedom and liberty go back over two hundred years, nobody is going to switch it to fascism overnight.

O, a conspiracy theorist!

Skull and Crossbones or some other group?

[sirs]

O, a conspiracy theorist!  Skull and Crossbones or some other group?

Oh good gravy Mr P, you have no idea how big Tee, Brass, and larry when he's around are regarding their pet conspiracy theories.  Tee's incredible, since so many are validated (to him at least) by the lack of evidence/facts.  Demonstrates how great the Bush cabal are at keeping a lid on things, and of course reinforcing just how evil and sinsiter they are.    And we won't even get into Brass's "no jet hit the Pentagon" theory   

[Michael Tee]

<<Skull and Crossbones or some other group?>>

Skull & Bones represent a class of people.  If you want to know what particular interests would be pushing fascism, it's basically the same kind of folks who pushed it in Germany, the wealthy inheritors who stood behind the Nazi Party, backed their rise to powerand let them play their Nazi games as long as they kept Communist hands off their inherited wealth.

"The Power Elite" by Professor C. Wright Mills gives a pretty good description of this group and their power in America, they don't change all that much over time.