politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: Everyone Who Has Ever Worked With Ted Cruz Despises Him according to some dumb broad
Source:
Burnt Orange Report
URL Source: http://www.burntorangereport.com/di ... ked-with-ted-cruz-despises-him
Published: Dec 4, 2015
Author: Katie Singh
Post Date: 2015-12-04 07:49:54 by Willie Green
Keywords: None
Views: 8736
Comments: 70
As the Republican clown car of presidential candidates continues to merrily roll along, there has been an interesting development over the past couple weeks. Ted Cruz is suddenly rising in the polls, inching above Ben Carson and closer to puzzlingly perpetual leader Donald Trump. It’s been so noticeable that some are even warning that the country should prepare for President Cruz.
But before we start preparing for a Cruz presidency and a subsequent move to Cruz’s home country of Canada, let’s take a step back and look at Cruz’s record — and the people who know him best. An excellent piece in yesterday’s New York Times did exactly that.
Frank Bruni’s editorial starts by setting up a hypothetical scenario:
He’s clearly brilliant — maybe smarter than any of the others. He’s a whirlwind of energy. And man oh man can he give a presentation. On any subject, he’s informed, inflamed, precise.
But then you talk with people who’ve worked with him at various stages of his career. They dislike him.
No, scratch that.
They loathe him.
They grant him all of the virtues that you’ve observed, but tell you that he’s the antithesis of a team player. His thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. His arrogance is unalloyed. He actually takes pride in being abrasive, as if a person’s tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness.
Do you hire this applicant?
No way.”
In case you weren’t sure who he was talking about, that loathed colleague is none other than our junior senator, Ted Cruz.
At every level of Cruz’s career, Bruni couldn’t find anyone who would recommend him. But he did find plenty who despise him.
Take, for example, Ted Cruz’s freshman roommate, Craig Mazin, whose disdain knows no bounds:
How about the time Cruz worked on the Bush campaign in 2000? Surely someone must have liked him there. Sadly, no. Says one colleague:
The stories that have emerged from Cruz’s time at the Bush campaign have suggested that his colleagues had good reason to dislike him. According to former staffers, Cruz used to send his colleagues regular updates on his accomplishments, and shoot off late-night work emails so often that people thought he must have programmed them to go out while everyone was speaking. It’s no wonder that Cruz was the only high-level staffer not to get a White House job — instead he was sent off to the Federal Trade Commission, which writers regularly refer to as a sort of Siberian exile.
Even now, his former boss George W. Bush can sum up his feelings for Cruz in a single sentence: “I just don’t like the guy.”
Bruni’s editorial pointed to a recent tweet from former Bush campaign staffer Matthew Dowd, who said that “if truth serum was given to the staff of the 2000 Bush campaign,” an enormous percentage of them “would vote for Trump over Cruz.”
And Cruz’s time in the Senate hasn’t been much better. None of his Congressional colleagues can stand him, as we’ve previously noted. It’s easy to see why they might not like a guy who keeps a life-size oil painting of himself in his Capitol office.
There’s former House Speaker John Boehner, who, when “asked about Cruz at a fund-raiser last spring, …responded by raising a lone finger — the middle one.”
In the Senate, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his fellow Republicans hate Cruz so much that they recently refused to grant him even the most perfunctory procedural vote.
His fellow candidate and Senate colleague Rand Paul, summed up the consensus toward Cruz in the Senate thusly: “He’s pretty much done for and stifled, and it’s really because of personal relationships, or lack of personal relationships, and it is a problem.”
Bruni points out that the negativity toward Ted Cruz has gotten so bad that Cruz has finally been forced to acknowledge it. Cruz “spins it as the price invariably paid by an outsider who challenges the status quo, clings to principle and never backs down.” And yet, the original “maverick” himself, Senator John McCain has said that the attitude toward Cruz “is different than anything I’ve ever seen in my years here.” McCain himself can’t stand Cruz either — he’s denounced Cruz as a “wacko bird.”
So Ted Cruz is trying to convince the public that no one liking him is a good thing. It mean’s he’s principled, a rabble-rouser who can get things done. But dont be fooled. It’s a very bad thing. He’s unable to work with others, not even those who are supposed to be his closest allies. There’s no way he would be able to get anything done as president. Even if he got a fully Republican Congress, nobody would want to work with him. Look how tough it has been for President Obama to accomplish many of his goals because of the hostile Republican Congress that fights him at every turn — and he’s bent over backwards (sometimes too far) to accomodate them. Fellow Republicans have the same level of hostility toward Cruz, and he’s supposed to be one of their own. And that doesn’t even consider the potential for Cruz’s relationships with foreign leaders. As president, he’d make enemies on an international scale, and that’s downright dangerous for this country.
As Texans, we already know this – he’s done nothing at all for our state. It is up to us to publicize this at every turn until Cruz loses. The stakes are far too high for us to be complacent. We must share the fact that we know all too well with the rest of the nation — that when you Cruz, you lose.
“You’re evaluating candidates for an open job in your company, and you come across one who makes a big impression.
“I would rather have anybody else be the president of the United States. Anyone. I would rather pick somebody from the phone book.”
“Why do people take such an instant dislike to Ted Cruz? It just saves time.”
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-15) not displayed.
.
.
.
#16. To: Willie Green, sneakypete (#12)
You're nutz. Left wingers are always angels and have the purest motives, right Willie? Whether the totalitarianism you seem to have so much admiration for has Left or right wing roots - I doubt it matters to those in the prisons or gulags that always seem to magically appear in these hell-holes. "Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD . . . " ~Psalm 33:12a
Gotta agree with you on that one, Fred. Geeesh . . . "Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD . . . " ~Psalm 33:12a
Yep... it's an impressive display of absolute authority... he's clever beyond comprehension.... it just makes me shit my shorts I tell ya!!!
Beyond the e-commerce initiative, Cruz also reoriented the FTC’s use of antitrust laws. For most of its history, the FTC has focused on private conduct that harms competition, such as (allegedly) anticompetitive mergers. Under Cruz’s leadership, the FTC instead targeted governmental conduct that harms competition. For example, the FTC successfully sued a state dental board to open the dental market to competition from non-dentists. This type of lawsuit primarily helped lower-income individuals, who would get more and cheaper options for basic health care. And all the pundimwits say the Dhimmicrats fear Rubio:) Yes, I used "Dhimmicrats." I encourage all to use it:)
Another thread Willie thought was going well for him. You rained on his parade:)
perfect ! Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Green Willie is mentally ill. A very sick individual. He just hates Cruz because Cruz hasn't performed any abortions.
Good post. Cruz is an honorable good man.
You rained on his parade:) Who watches the watchers ? Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Any taxpayer funded abortions. On a train.
The auto dealers complained that cars were too “sophisticated” for e-commerce, the funeral dealers explained that caskets were a product for “a very sensitive and specific time,” and the lawyers expounded that “we’re talking about something very different when we’re talking about access to the justice system.” Cruz had little patience for anyone who sought to use the government to limit competition. Yeah, but some Lefty Disney screenwriter hack was his frosh roomie so Cruz is a scumbag.
Cruz probably complained about his roommates' boyfriends coming in all the time:)
They're both crap. Only the first two are funny at all. They have the Wayan brothers.
Now you're being silly. It has to be taxpayer-funded abortions on a high-speed train.
Yes. I like Trump. You don't, but he's my favorite. I like Carson, but I don't think he should be president because of his knowledge base. Still, if he were the nominee, I'd vote for him. I'd vote for Cruz too. Trump/Cruz would be a good ticket by me. Rand Paul is at the cusp of what I would have tolerated, but he came after Trump like some member of the Establishment, to try to gain points with people I loathe. So, I WOULD HAVE voted for Paul if he were the nominee, but thanks to his jackassery regarding Trump, I will not vote for him. I would tolerate a Trump/Rubio, or Trump/Whomever ballot for the same reason that I would tolerate a Reagan/Bush ballot. Trump is President, not the GOP-e guy. I wouldn't LIKE it, but I would tolerate it.
Depends. Are they hot?
Anita Hill attacking Clarence Thomas is ... what made Andrew Breitbart --- a conservative !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Market forces --- right wing --- invisible hand Adam Smith ! Left wing ... govt forces --- socialism - big daddy - brother ! If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
You're nutz. No,but you are ignorant of history. The fascists in Germany were allies with the communists in the USSR. Birds of a feather,right up to the point where they invaded the lefts Holy Land. Suddenly,like some sort of miracle,they because "right wingers" in the US media. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
He might be nutz but I still like the guy. No,you guys are the ones that are nuts. Even the Nazi's called themselves socialists. It was the NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY. The prime difference between the Nazi's and the Soviets were the Soviets were internationalists,and the Nazi's were Nationalists. They were allies to the point that Stalin even leased out large tracts in the USSR for the Nazi's to develop their weapons and tactics in prior to the beginning of WW-2. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
No,he is just the product of his environment. He was raised in the northeast,not America. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
Ok. I like Carson, but I don't think he should be president because of his knowledge base. Still, if he were the nominee, I'd vote for him. I'm pretty much in agreement there. I'd vote for Cruz too. I now think I will be voting for him,but of course it is really still too early to stake out territory. Trump/Cruz would be a good ticket by me. And your train just left the track. I still think Trump is going to accept a payoff from the DNC to drop out of the race late and there is too little time for any of the Republican candidates to really get organized. He will then spend the rest of his life bragging about how "I COULD have been president,but decided the job was beneath me." I passed that point a few elections ago when I finally faced the FACT that if you keep voting for shitheads because they are slightly less of a shithead than their opponents,you are still voting for shitheads,and that's all you are going to get to vote for in the future. I am still on record as saying what we need to do is change the primary system so another block is open to fill in,named "None of the Above",and that in any election where "None of the Above" gets the most votes the parties that participated in that election MUST run another election and this time fund it entirely from their own funds. No federal matching funds,and no private contributions allowed. If anything would get us better candidates,it would be that. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
This comes up repeatedly. During the rising tide of the Nazi party from its early years with Hitler ranting at working class crowds, the Nazi street fighters were the Sturmabteilungen. The S.A. The S.A. was always the vanguard of the socialism part of national socialism. The S.S. itself was a branch of S.A. that was separated off and put under Himmler instead of the S.A. leader Ernst Rohm. Roehm, a notorious homosexual was supposedly caught in bed with a teen boy on the Night of the Long Knives. The SA became disempowered after Adolf Hitler ordered the "blood purge" of 1934. This event became known as the Night of the Long Knives. The SA was effectively superseded by the SS, although it was not formally dissolved and banned until after the Third Reich's final capitulation to the Allied powers in 1945. In essence, Hitler wanted power and the German industrialists and military would not accept him until he purged the Nazi party of the S.A. element. Which is what he did. Until 1934, the Nazis had plenty of socialism and could be seen as part of a recurrence centuries-long group of German peasants who had a certain loot-the-rich mentality. You also had a lot of disgruntled military officers from longstanding military families who lost their positions in the military under the restrictions of the small German military under the Treaty of Versailles. So after 1934, the Nazis were just about nationalism. They murdered their socialism, once and for all. And the aim of their nationalism was, ultimately, lebensraum in eastern Europe and Russia. Even Hitler was afraid to execute Rohm, tried to get him to commit suicide instead. So this gives some notion of how much socialism actually was a big part of the political appeal of the Nazi Party before Hitler took full power and instituted a totalitarian regime of nationalism.
Baloney... they signed a nonaggression pact promising not to attack each other... but that didn't make them allies for cripesake... In fact, the Spanish Civil war was essentially a proxy war between Germany & the Soviets; Hitler, Mussolini & Franco were all jack-booted right-wing thugs.
I don't think Trump is a shithead. I've listened to what he says on his campaign, and I agree with almost all of it. That is not true of any other candidate I can think of before.
And the people who realized this fact and decided to go with their conscious and not vote get blamed for schittheads like Obama/Bush I&II/Clinton/FDR etc...etc... being elected... Don't ya just love it... Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Don't ya just love it when Leftards have a falling out and end up trying to eradicate each other... Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Even the Nazi's called themselves socialists. It was the NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY. And a prime part of national socialism was govt control of most every damn thing. True, they wanted the SA purged, but I've never seen it established that it was because the brownshirts were socialists. ---- They were low class thugs, and were unacceptable... Yep, the Nazis were nationalists, --- and they never stopped being socialists. --- And the Germans still are. ---
They were about NATIONAL SOCIALISM. They murdered their socialism, once and for all. Well,they did murder the "useful tools/useful fools" that helped them gain traction once they became "respectable" and those people became an embarrassment to them. IMHO,it had more to do with them being unsophisticate murderers and homoseuxlas than it did with them being socialists. And the aim of their nationalism was, ultimately, lebensraum in eastern Europe and Russia. Yes,they were to become a part of a new and expanded Germany,which fits in with their nationalist beliefs. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
Baloney... they signed a nonaggression pact promising not to attack each other... but that didn't make them allies for cripesake... NOT baloney,but historical fact. As I wrote earlier,Stalin even leased huge tracts of land in the USSR to them so they could develop their weapons and tactics,and they even jointed agreed to invade and divide up Poland. In fact, the Spanish Civil war was essentially a proxy war between Germany & the Soviets; The result of a falling out amongst thieves The fact that they were fighting each other doesn't mean they didn't share philosophies. Hitler looked at sending military aid to Spain as an excellent way to test his new equipment and tactics in a "real life way,as well as to gain combat experience for his army and air force. Stalin,of course,wanted Spain to come under his domination. Nothing but a family fight over who gets the biggest slice of the pie. I repeat,fascism didn't "become" a right-wing political movement until after the fascists invaded the USSR. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
Me too,but I don't think he means a word of it. He's just a salesman saying what he has to say to sell his product. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
Don't ya just love it... You didn't REALLY expect shitheads that voted shitheads because they identify with them to accept the blame for what they did,did you? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
Yup,and I would have loved it better if we hadn't had a commie in the white house,and we had just sat back and let the Nazi's and the Soviets bleed each other dry. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
And a prime part of national socialism was govt control of most every damn thing. Yup,it is the very core of socialism. The government owns or controls everything in the name of the peep-pulls Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
Really? You really believe that?
Willie is the winner. They weren't allies.
Good point Pete. Eli, Eli, nai erchomai Kurios Iesous.
Fascism A Socialist Leftwing Ideology: Communism, Fascism, Labor Unions, Workers And Students Exploiting ‘Crisis’ “We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” — Adolf Hitler, from speech delivered on May 1, 1927 As I have frequently contended, the fascism of the Nazis (as well as “fascism” in general) was a species of socialism – and socialism, as the belief that a giant government should usurp power to itself and take from individuals to give to other individuals, is inherently leftist. [Here is a longer article another author has written detailing the inherent leftism of fascism and of Hitler]. This is important to understand as we see history repeating itself (“Deja vu all over again!”). Gene Edward Veith, Jr. pointed out many of the elements that communism and fascism held in common: “The influence of Marxist scholarship has severely distorted our understanding of fascism. Communism and fascism were rival brands of socialism. Whereas Marxist socialism is predicated on an international class struggle, fascist national socialism promoted a socialism centered in national unity. [And in fact, Both movements were “revolutionary socialist ideologies.” Going on,] Both communists and fascists opposed the bourgeoisie. Both attacked the conservatives. Both were mass movements, which had special appeal for the intelligentsia, students, and artists, as well as workers. Both favored strong centralized governments and rejected the free economy and the ideals of individual liberty. [And finally,] Fascists saw themselves as being neither of the right nor the left. They believed that they constituted a third force synthesizing the best of both extremes” [Gene Edward Veith, Jr., Modern Fascism: Liquidating the Judeo-Christian Worldview, p. 26]. What did the the communist “U.S.S.R.” stand for? The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics What did “Nazi” stand for? National Socialist German Workers Party Nazis “believed that they constituted a third force synthesizing the best of both extremes” of the right AND the left even as they openly acknowledged that they were socialist. So why have they so frequently been branded as “the extreme right wing”? Because the winner gets to write the history, and in the case of the European theater, the big winner of the war between the Nazis and the communists were the communists. And far too many American writers and intellectuals were significantly influenced by leftist thinking. And these “thinkers” were motivated not by historical accuracy or by truth, but by the desire to create a “right wing bogeyman.” Which they proceeded to do and let the truth be damned. Both fascism and communism clearly and overtly labelled themselves as “socialist” and both claimed that the “worker” was their base. Both rose to power using “workers” as their muscle. And, as I will show, both socialist movements inevitably crushed the worker. Just as all socialist movements invariably do. Now, I have had liberals frequently assert that Nazism/fascism was not actually socialist and they have offered as their “evidence” that Hitler abolished the labor unions. Let’s examine what Adolf Hitler said about labor unions: “I am convinced that we cannot possibly dispense with the trades unions. On the contrary, they are among the most important institutions in the economic life of the nation.” “Before everything else, the trades unions are necessary as building stones for the future economic parliament, which will be made up of chambers representing the various professions and occupations.” “As I have already said, the germ cells of this State must lie in the administrative chambers which will represent the various occupations and professions, therefore first of all in the trades unions. If this subsequent vocational representation and the Central Economic Parliament are to be National Socialist institutions, these important germ cells must be vehicles of the National Socialist concept of life. The institutions of the movement are to be brought over into the State; for the State cannot call into existence all of a sudden and as if by magic those institutions which are necessary to its existence, unless it wishes to have institutions that are bound to remain completely lifeless. Looking at the matter from the highest standpoint, the National Socialist Movement will have to recognize the necessity of adopting its own trade-unionist policy.” “The National Socialist Movement, which aims at establishing the National Socialist People’s State, must always bear steadfastly in mind the principle that every future institution under that State must be rooted in the movement itself.” And so what did Hitler do? He did NOT “abolish” labor unions, as the modern left charges; rather, the Führer – having stated categorically that such unions were essential to his National Socialism – merged labor unions into the apparatus of the State. Hitler created one mega-union that he was able to control: “The National Socialist Trades Union is not an instrument for class warfare, but a representative organ of the various occupations and callings. The National Socialist State recognizes no ‘classes’. But, under the political aspect, it recognizes only citizens with absolutely equal rights and equal obligations corresponding thereto. And, side by side with these, it recognizes subjects of the State who have no political rights whatsoever.” Which is to say that Hitler did PRECISELY the same thing that the communist U.S.S.R. did with labor unions: The Communist Party exerted increasing control over trade unions, which even many Communist trade union leaders resisted. By the end of the Civil War a dispute over the role of trade unions occurred within the ruling Communist Party. Leon Trotsky, Nikolay Krestinsky and some others insisted on militarization of trade unions and actually turning them into part of the government apparatus. The Workers’ Opposition (Alexander Shlyapnikov, Alexandra Kollontai) demanded that trade unions manage the economy through an “All-Union Congress of Producers” and that workers comprise a majority of Communist Party members and leaders. There were several other factions. Eventually, all of them were defeated at the 10th Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) by the so-called “Platform of the Ten” headed by Lenin, which called for trade unions to educate workers, under the control of the Communist Party. Since these times Vladimir Lenin‘s saying, “Trade Unions are a School of Communism” become an indisputable slogan. A resolution entitled About the Party Unity dissolved and banned any factions within the Party under the pretext that intra-Party discussions distract from “solving actual practical problems”. This resolution radically shifted the balance in the notion “democratic centralism” from “democratic” to “centralism” and enhanced the groundwork of Joseph Stalin‘s future dictatorship. […] Unlike labor unions in the West, Soviet trade unions were, in fact, actually governmental organizations whose chief aim was not to represent workers but to further the goals of management, government, and the CPSU. As such, they were partners of management in attempting to promote labor discipline, worker morale, and productivity. Unions organized “socialist competitions” and awarded prizes for fulfilling quotas Thus, both fascism and communism were rival brands of socialism (international socialism versus national socialism) which systematically dissolved workers’ rights after making whatever false promises were necessary to secure their cooperation. Both fascism and communism were revolutionary socialist ideologies. Both fascism and communism opposed the bourgeoisie. Both fascism and communism attacked the conservatives. Both fascism and communism were mass movements, which had special appeal for the intelligentsia, students, and artists, as well as workers – which they both forms of socialism continue to have as their bases to this very day. Both fascism and communism fascism and communism favored strong centralized governments and rejected the free economy and the ideals of individual liberty. Both fascism and communism were easily able to become militarized societies. Both fascism and communism were inherently totalitarian and dictatorial. And, yes, both fascism and communism exploited the labor unions the exact same way and then subsequently controlled the labor unions the exact same way. What is most ironic is that the ultimate model the left points to – communism – has been more brutal to the workers than any ideology that has ever existed. Joseph Stalin solved the unemployment problem by declaring unemployed workers indolent and throwing some thirty million of them into slave labor camps to be worked to death. How is THAT kind of treatment for a “workers’ party”? Communism versus Fascism is Coke Versus Pepsi. Both amount to a slightly different version of the exact same thing. And fascism and communism warred so fiercely with one another because both movements were competing for the same base of adherents using substantially the same arguments. Why is this understanding important? Because we’re seeing these same forces that gave us first communism and then fascism banding (perhaps “mobbing” is a better verb) together to produce the same inevitable results. And in fact we have both the Nazis and the Communists joining the labor unions and the intelligentsia, students and artists in their Occupy movement. And we’re seeing this happen on a scale that the world has not seen since the WWI (Soviet communism) and WWII (Nazi fascism) eras. The same categories of people who reared their ugly heads during the worst periods in the history of the human race are rearing their ugly heads again. The base of the Democrat Party is composed from the same base that has ALWAYS gone the most profoundly wrong before in serving as the useful idiots that ushered in totalitarianism. And now they are mobbing together so that we can suffer the results of deja vu all over again. Jonah Goldberg in his great book Liberal Fascism uncovers how liberal societies invariably militarize in their own way before they look to attack external enemies: What comes to mind when you hear the word “fascism” – immediate responses are dictatorship, genocide, anti-Semitism, racism, and (of course) right wing. Delve a little deeper, and you’ll hear a lot about eugenics, social Darwinism, state capitalism, or the sinister rule of big business. War, militarism, and nationalism will also come up a lot… But very few of these things are unique to fascism, and almost none of them are distinctly right-wing or conservative – at least not in the American sense. Consider militarism, which will come up again and again in the course of this book. Militarism was indisputably central to fascism (and communism) in countless countries. But it has a much more nuanced relationship with fascism than one might suppose… But for far more people, militarism was a pragmatic expedient: the highest, best means for organizing society in productive ways. Inspired by ideas like those in William James’ famous essay “The Moral Equivalent of War,” militarism seemed to provide a workable and sensible model for achieving desirable ends. Mussolini, who openly admired and invoked James, used this logic for his famous “Battle of the Grains” and other sweeping social initiatives. Such ideas had an immense following in the United States, with many leading progressives championing the use of “industrial armies” to create the ideal workers’ democracy. Later, Franklin Roosevelt’s Civilian Conservation Corps – as militaristic a social program as one can imagine – borrowed from these ideas, as did JFK’s Peace Corps. This trope has hardly been purged from contemporary liberalism. Every day we hear about the “war on cancer,” the “war on drugs,” the “War on poverty,” and exhortations to make this or that social challenge the “moral equivalent of war.” From health care to gun control to global warming, liberals insist that we need to “get beyond politics” and “put ideological differences behind us” in order to “do the people’s business.” The experts and scientists know what to do, we are told; therefore the time for debate is over. This, albeit in a nicer and more benign form, is the logic of fascism – and it was on ample display in the administrations of Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and yes, even John F. Kennedy. [Jonah Goldberg, Liberal Fascism, pp. 5-6] The Occupy movement is using the moral equivalent of war even as it uses outright war to accomplish its fascist ends. As are the labor unions. As are the students. Of that group Adolf Hitler said: “Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf Hitler, 1930 The same people are up to the same antics. It’s deja vu all over again. The left is also constantly demagoguing the sense of crisis to continue to ram home their increasingly failing policies. Goldberg again: “The utility of terror was multifaceted, but among its chief benefits was its tendency to maintain a permanent sense of crisis. Crisis is routinely identified as a core mechanism of fascism because it short-circuits debate and democratic deliberation. Hence all fascistic movements commit considerable energy to prolonging a heightened state of emergency.” [Goldberg, Liberal Fascism, p. 42] And of course we have the infamous words still echoing: “Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before.” – Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, November 2008. And: “Never waste a good crisis … Don’t waste it..” — Obama Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, March 6, 2009. The left is plunging out into the very same dark and violent waters of class warfare that it has carried the world into before. Allow me to re-submit the Hitler quote I began with: “We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” What is frightening is that, apart from the admission “We are socialists,” it is a quote that could have come out of the mouth of Barack Obama. Think about it. Jesus said to us, “Behold, I stand at the door and knock” (Revelation 3:20) to a world that is rejecting him. But the left is demanding in more and more shrill terms that we open the door wide for the coming of Antichrist. The beast is coming. Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Really? You really believe that? Yes. He is a salesman,a con artist,and a professional liar. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
You mean the Soviets didn't lease land in the USSR to the Nazi's so they could develop weapons and tactics,and that they didn't agree to invade and divide Poland? Gee,who knew? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
He is; think again. Think P.T. Barnum. I do enjoy his entertainment value in this election process.
Comments (57 - 70) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestFascism is a LEFT-WING idealogy
#17. To: Fred Mertz (#15)
(Edited)
And folks wonder why almost no women post here.
#18. To: Fred Mertz (#15)
Pebbles strikes again on the headline.
#19. To: tomder55 (#5)
After the conference, Cruz testified at a hearing supporting the online sales of contact lenses and pushed the FTC to file an amicus brief supporting online casket vendors. Cruz also initiated a comprehensive study of the wine industry, which found that online competition lowered prices without increasing underage drinking. The study’s findings were ultimately embraced by the Supreme Court and by state legislatures around the country, who opened an entire industry to online competition and new small businesses.
#20. To: tomder55 (#5)
#21. To: redleghunter (#19)
Dhimmicrats
#22. To: redleghunter (#20)
Another thread Willie thought was going well for him.
#23. To: tomder55 (#5)
#24. To: redleghunter (#20)
Another thread Willie thought was going well for him.
#25. To: A K A Stone (#22)
He just hates Cruz because Cruz hasn't performed any abortions.
#26. To: tomder55, Willie Green (#5)
Instead, like taxi cab drivers in New York or “green” energy companies demanding subsidies, every special interest argued that his particular industry uniquely required protection from competition.
#27. To: TooConservative (#26)
Yeah, but some Lefty Disney screenwriter hack was his frosh roomie so Cruz is a scumbag.
#28. To: Roscoe (#14)
(Edited)
Scary Movie 3 and Scary Movie 4.
#29. To: Roscoe (#25)
Any taxpayer funded abortions. On a train.
#30. To: sneakypete (#10)
#31. To: tomder55 (#24)
Who watches the watchers ?
#32. To: Willie Green (#0)
#33. To: Willie Green (#12)
Fascism is a LEFT-WING idealogy
#34. To: Willie Green (#12)
Fascism is a LEFT-WING idealogy
#35. To: Fred Mertz, Willie Green (#13)
an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
#36. To: A K A Stone (#22)
Green Willie is mentally ill. A very sick individual.
#37. To: Vicomte13 (#30)
I like Trump. You don't, but he's my favorite.
#38. To: sneakypete, Fred Mertz, Willie Green (#35)
Even the Nazi's called themselves socialists. It was the NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY.
The SA have been known in contemporary times as "Brownshirts" from the color of their uniform shirts, similar to Benito Mussolini's blackshirts. The SA developed pseudo-military titles for its members. The SA ranks were adopted by several other Nazi Party groups, chief amongst them the Schutzstaffel (SS), which originated as a branch of the SA before being separated. Brown-coloured shirts were chosen as the SA uniform because a large batch of them were cheaply available after World War I, having originally been ordered during the war for colonial troops posted to Germany's former African colonies.[1]
#39. To: sneakypete (#34)
The fascists in Germany were allies with the communists in the USSR.
#40. To: sneakypete (#37)
#41. To: sneakypete, Vicomte13, And voters for the lesser of 2 evils... (#37)
I passed that point a few elections ago when I finally faced the FACT that if you keep voting for shitheads because they are slightly less of a shithead than their opponents,you are still voting for shitheads,and that's all you are going to get to vote for in the future.
#42. To: sneakypete (#34)
The fascists in Germany were allies with the communists in the USSR.
#43. To: TooConservative, sneakypete, y'all (#38)
(Edited)
sneakypete, ---
TC--- The S.A. was always the vanguard of the socialism part of national socialism. ---- In essence, Hitler wanted power and the German industrialists and military would not accept him until he purged the Nazi party of the S.A. element. Which is what he did.
Until 1934, the Nazis had plenty of socialism and could be seen as part of a recurrence centuries-long group of German peasants who had a certain loot-the-rich mentality. ---- So after 1934, the Nazis were just about nationalism.
#44. To: TooConservative (#38)
So after 1934, the Nazis were just about nationalism.
#45. To: Willie Green (#39)
The fascists in Germany were allies with the communists in the USSR.
#46. To: Vicomte13 (#40)
I've listened to what he says on his campaign, and I agree with almost all of it.
#47. To: CZ82 (#41)
And the people who realized this fact and decided to go with their conscious and not vote get blamed for schittheads like Obama/Bush I&II/Clinton/FDR etc...etc... being elected...
#48. To: CZ82 (#42)
Don't ya just love it when Leftards have a falling out and end up trying to eradicate each other...
#49. To: tpaine (#43)
Even the Nazi's called themselves socialists. It was the NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY.
#50. To: sneakypete (#37)
I still think Trump is going to accept a payoff from the DNC
#51. To: Willie Green, sneakypete (#39)
The fascists in Germany were allies with the communists in the USSR. Baloney... they signed a nonaggression pact promising not to attack each other... but that didn't make them allies for cripesake...
#52. To: sneakypete (#11)
Which means it also speaks for the RNC.
#53. To: sneakypete, Willie Green (#6)
Fascism is a LEFT-WING idealogy,and more in line with the DNC,today's GOP, and the Donald.
#54. To: A K A Stone (#50)
I still think Trump is going to accept a payoff from the DNC
#55. To: A K A Stone (#51)
Willie is the winner. They weren't allies.
#56. To: Vicomte13 (#40)
I don't think Trump is a shithead.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]