Why Nazis Are Just Copies of Democrats
POSTED BY: JEWELSTAITEFAN
UPDATED: Saturday, August 12, 2023 19:00
VIEWED: 14609
PAGE 7 of 12
Ok, before I answer, let me tell you:
I'm a die-hard Democrat.
I believe in democracy.
Born and raised in the good ol' USA.
My president was JFK (10 when they killed him)
Protested the Vietnam War
Believe in the Death Penalty (especially when it comes to kids and police killed in cold blood)
Yes, believe there are those that cheat the system (from the top to the bottom and back again)
Vets should get a house, health care for free, especially if they lost a limb
Free enterprise should be allowed to run it's course
College should not be for profit
Universal Health Care
I hate bullies
There's nothing wrong with a little cursing every now and then, helps relieve stress
I've been known to use "colorful" language myself. At times, it's to blow off steam, other times it's to make a point. I like to think of myself as a rational human being, but every once in a while I lose my shit.
Sometimes I like to fuck with people (habit of mine with my old friends) but we stay friends at the end. There are times when it's appropriate, and others when it's not. I try not to hold grudges when someone loses their shit, as long as it's done honestly. I think that guys tend to understand that more than women, I don't know why that is.
I despise when people try to insult my intelligence. If you call me out on a particular topic and you make a valid point, I will say so. If you lose your shit and curse me out, then later come back and say "I had a bug up my ass, let's start over." I respect that. We are all here because of the freedom within Firefly. Being ourselves and allowed to speak our minds without fear. Fuck!, everyone has the right to speak their minds and believe what they believe. Sometimes JSF will call me a Libtard (his favorite word), but I know that's his way of saying "you're wrong you asshole" and I'll call him a dickhead and we'll argue our points and views.
I have to admit, sometimes I get steamed, but when I think clearly and calmly, I'll say..."Hell with it, he's just speaking his mind. He's wrong! But he's speaking his mind." I may not respond for a few days, but, in the end, we all have the right to speak our minds. Me, I try not to insult you in the process, but shit happens. Bottom line, we all get angry and lose our shit. But I don't care for the insults and lack of respect for my beliefs and contributions. You could call me a dickhead, sure. I've even gotten use to being called a drunk (thanks Keeks and Sig), I just laugh it off and make some reference to something that comes to my mind in that instant. Helps me to cope with the idiocy of the moment.
But there are times when I respond and it's laser sharp on point. And times when I'm just letting off some steam. I will, at times, not get angry if you go tell me to go fuck myself, or go to hell, I know that is your way of letting off steam. But please know that I think for myself. If I see something that you, or anyone for that matter, makes sense to me...I will go along with it or comment on it in some way. But know this, it is my decision and mine alone. You know this to be true because many times we have agreed....well, maybe not many times, but a few.
So Six, speak your mind. So will I. If we agree, fine, if not, that's fine too.
Just be honest and we'll be cool.
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Hey Six,
I will respond later today. I'm doing so holding the White Flag of Truce, but right now I have a major league headache.
Thanks
SGG
No worries. Take your time.
I should admit that my language has gotten a little "colorful" over the last few days. Let's just say that I'm feeling a little "triggered".
Wolf Blitzer isn't helping things.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't know, but I look at these things this way: You can't go to extreme either way...too conservative or too liberal. Our country is better served when our elected leaders are moderate, either to the left or to the right. It just seems to work that way.
For example: Senator Bob Corker (R) Tennessee
Quote:
"He also recently has not demonstrated that he understands the character of this nation. He has not demonstrated that he understands what has made this nation great and what it is today."
Very true, he doesn't have a clue about the good people of this country.
http://www.npr.org/2017/08/17/544230949/gop-senator-trump-lacking-stab
ility-competence-to-succeed
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by G:Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
Steve Bannon, Controversial Aide to Trump, Leaves White House Staff
https://www.wsj.com/articles/steve-bannon-leaves-white-house-staff-150
3075345
Geezus. Is anyone left? I think I'll just head on over and let myself in, check the fridge for leftovers, maybe grill some Trump steaks and catch some Netflix. Later, hang out with that Miller stooge, get drunk on Trump Scotch and punch his lights out and then pass out in the foyer. Hey - it's my house!
On a serious note... I keep thinking that presidents almost always seem to bend to the will of the people. No how many bad ideas Trump serves up or bad people he hires, the people let him know and eventually he capitulates.
Gorka freak and Miller putz next.
==============================
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Ok, before I answer, let me tell you:
I'm a die-hard Democrat.
I believe in democracy.
Born and raised in the good ol' USA.
My president was JFK (10 when they killed him)
Protested the Vietnam War
Believe in the Death Penalty (especially when it comes to kids and police killed in cold blood)
Yes, believe there are those that cheat the system (from the top to the bottom and back again)
Vets should get a house, health care for free, especially if they lost a limb
Free enterprise should be allowed to run it's course
College should not be for profit
Universal Health Care
I hate bullies
There's nothing wrong with a little cursing every now and then, helps relieve stress
I've been known to use "colorful" language myself. At times, it's to blow off steam, other times it's to make a point. I like to think of myself as a rational human being, but every once in a while I lose my shit.
Sometimes I like to fuck with people (habit of mine with my old friends) but we stay friends at the end. There are times when it's appropriate, and others when it's not. I try not to hold grudges when someone loses their shit, as long as it's done honestly. I think that guys tend to understand that more than women, I don't know why that is.
I despise when people try to insult my intelligence. If you call me out on a particular topic and you make a valid point, I will say so. If you lose your shit and curse me out, then later come back and say "I had a bug up my ass, let's start over." I respect that. We are all here because of the freedom within Firefly. Being ourselves and allowed to speak our minds without fear. Fuck!, everyone has the right to speak their minds and believe what they believe. Sometimes JSF will call me a Libtard (his favorite word), but I know that's his way of saying "you're wrong you asshole" and I'll call him a dickhead and we'll argue our points and views.
I have to admit, sometimes I get steamed, but when I think clearly and calmly, I'll say..."Hell with it, he's just speaking his mind. He's wrong! But he's speaking his mind." I may not respond for a few days, but, in the end, we all have the right to speak our minds. Me, I try not to insult you in the process, but shit happens. Bottom line, we all get angry and lose our shit. But I don't care for the insults and lack of respect for my beliefs and contributions. You could call me a dickhead, sure. I've even gotten use to being called a drunk (thanks Keeks and Sig), I just laugh it off and make some reference to something that comes to my mind in that instant. Helps me to cope with the idiocy of the moment.
But there are times when I respond and it's laser sharp on point. And times when I'm just letting off some steam. I will, at times, not get angry if you go tell me to go fuck myself, or go to hell, I know that is your way of letting off steam. But please know that I think for myself. If I see something that you, or anyone for that matter, makes sense to me...I will go along with it or comment on it in some way. But know this, it is my decision and mine alone. You know this to be true because many times we have agreed....well, maybe not many times, but a few.
So Six, speak your mind. So will I. If we agree, fine, if not, that's fine too.
Just be honest and we'll be cool.
SGGQuote:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Hey Six,
I will respond later today. I'm doing so holding the White Flag of Truce, but right now I have a major league headache.
Thanks
SGG
No worries. Take your time.
I should admit that my language has gotten a little "colorful" over the last few days. Let's just say that I'm feeling a little "triggered".
Wolf Blitzer isn't helping things.
We're pretty much the same on your top li
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Ok, so can we generalize that to: It's bad if ANYONE drives a car into a group pf people, whether they are Nazis, radical jihadists, militant Hindus, or anyone else? If fact, can we make that an even MORE general statement, that killing or injuring anyone for a political cause is bad??? Yup, I think we can. - SIGNY
I am not sure I have seen your outrage over the doctors prescribing these psychotropic drugs to this guy or others. When these doctors are held responsible and thrown in prison for these deaths then we'll have started to make progress. - JSF
Who? Does this have anything to do with Charlottesville and James Fields? Because I haven't seen any suggestion that he was on drugs, or given drugs, by a doctor; just a random quote from a high school teacher (a long time ago!) that he might be "schizophrenic".
-----------
By the way, GSTRING, I predicted your response PERFECTLY
* ... and then you'll say I'm "too wordy". And then you will - as always- refuse to address the pertinent points, and respond with even more lies and even more bullshit personal attacks.*
And voila! Here it is http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=61835&mid=1
035581#1035581
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
To go back to the original topic, this is from a book by Dinesh D'Souza. Here is part of that book.
Don't feel compelled to read the whole thing; I'm just quoting it here for the sake of accuracy but I don't think it's a worthwhile read
Quote:
Contrary to what we learn from progressives in education and the media, the history of the Democratic Party well into the twentieth century is a virtually uninterrupted history of thievery, corruption and bigotry. American history is the story of Democratic malefactors and Republican heroes. Yes, it’s true.
I begin with Andrew Jackson. He—not Thomas Jefferson or FDR—is the true founder of the modern Democratic Party. Progressives today are divided about Jackson. Some, like historian Sean Wilentz, admire him, while others want to remove him from the $20 bill because he was a slaveowner and a vicious Indian fighter. He was, in this view, a very bad American.
I support the debunking of Jackson, but not because he was a bad American—rather, because he was a typical crooked Democrat. Jackson established the Democratic Party as the party of theft. He mastered the art of stealing land from the Indians and then selling it at giveaway prices to white settlers. Jackson’s expectation was that those people would support him politically, as indeed they did. Jackson was indeed a “man of the people,” but his popularity was that of a gang leader who distributes his spoils in exchange for loyalty on the part of those who benefit from his crimes.
Jackson also figured out how to benefit personally from his land-stealing. Like Hillary Clinton, he started out broke and then became one of the richest people in the country. How? Jackson and his partners and cronies made early bids on Indian land, sometimes even before the Indians had been evacuated from that land. They acquired the land for little or nothing and later sold it for a handsome profit. Remarkably, the roots of the Clinton Foundation can be found in the land-stealing policies of America’s first Democratic president.
The Democrats were also the party of slavery, and the slave-owning mentality continues to shape the policies of Democratic leaders today. The point isn’t that the Democrats invented slavery which is an ancient institution that far predates America. Rather, Democrats like Senator John C. Calhoun invented a new justification for slavery, slavery as a “positive good.” For the first time in history, Democrats insisted that slavery wasn’t just beneficial for masters; they said it was also good for the slaves.
Today progressive pundits attempt to conceal Democratic complicity in slavery by blaming slavery on the “South.” These people have spun a whole history that portrays the slavery battle as one between the anti-slavery North and the pro-slavery South. This of course benefits Democrats today, because today the Democratic Party’s main strength is in the north and the Republican Party’s main strength is in the South.
But the slavery battle was not mainly a North-South issue. It was actually a battle between the pro-slavery Democrats and the anti-slavery Republicans. How can I make such an outrageous statement? Let’s begin by recalling that northern Democrats like Stephen Douglas protected slavery, while most southerners didn’t own slaves. (Three fourths of those who fought in the civil war on the confederate side had no slaves and weren’t fighting to protect slavery.)
Republicans, meanwhile, to one degree or another, all opposed slavery. The party itself was founded to stop slavery. Of course there were a range of views among Republicans, from abolitionists who sought immediately to end slavery to Republicans like Abraham Lincoln who recognized that this was both constitutionally and politically impossible and focused on arresting slavery’s extension into the new territories. This was the main platform on which Lincoln won the 1860 election.
The real clash was between the Democrats, north and south, who supported slavery and the Republicans across the countryNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Libtards are as Libtards do.
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:Quote:Ok, before I answer, let me tell you:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:Quote:No worries. Take your time.
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Hey Six,
I will respond later today. I'm doing so holding the White Flag of Truce, but right now I have a major league headache.
Thanks
SGG
I should admit that my language has gotten a little "colorful" over the last few days. Let's just say that I'm feeling a little "triggered".
Wolf Blitzer isn't helping things.
I'm a die-hard Democrat.
I believe in democracy.
Born and raised in the good ol' USA.
My president was JFK (10 when they killed him)
Protested the Vietnam War
Believe in the Death Penalty (especially when it comes to kids and police killed in cold blood)
Yes, believe there are those that cheat the system (from the top to the bottom and back again)
Vets should get a house, health care for free, especially if they lost a limb
Free enterprise should be allowed to run it's course
College should not be for profit
Universal Health Care
I hate bullies
There's nothing wrong with a little cursing every now and then, helps relieve stress
I've been known to use "colorful" language myself. At times, it's to blow off steam, other times it's to make a point. I like to think of myself as a rational human being, but every once in a while I lose my shit.
Sometimes I like to fuck with people (habit of mine with my old friends) but we stay friends at the end. There are times when it's appropriate, and others when it's not. I try not to hold grudges when someone loses their shit, as long as it's done honestly. I think that guys tend to understand that more than women, I don't know why that is.
I despise when people try to insult my intelligence. If you call me out on a particular topic and you make a valid point, I will say so. If you lose your shit and curse me out, then later come back and say "I had a bug up my ass, let's start over." I respect that. We are all here because of the freedom within Firefly. Being ourselves and allowed to speak our minds without fear. Fuck!, everyone has the right to speak their minds and believe what they believe. Sometimes JSF will call me a Libtard (his favorite word), but I know that's his way of saying "you're wrong you asshole" and I'll call him a dickhead and we'll argue our points and views.
I have to admit, sometimes I get steamed, but when I think clearly and calmly, I'll say..."Hell with it, he's just speaking his mind. He's wrong! But he's speaking his mind." I may not respond for a few days, but, in the end, we all have the right to speak our minds. Me, I try not to insult you in the process, but shit happens. Bottom line, we all get angry and lose our shit. But I don't care for the insults and lack of respect for my beliefs and contributions. You could call me a dickhead, sure. I've even gotten use to being called a drunk (thanks Keeks and Sig), I just laugh it off and make some reference to something that comes to my mind in that instant. Helps me to cope with the idiocy of the moment.
But there are times when I respond and it's laser sharp on point. And times when I'm just letting off some steam. I will, at times, not get angry if you go tell me to go fuck myself, or go to hell, I know that is your way of letting off steam. But please know that I think for myself. If I see something that you, or anyone for that matter, makes sense to me...I will go along with it or comment on it in some way. But know this, it is my decision and mine alone. You know this to be true because many times we have agreed....well, maybe not many times, but a few.
So Six, speak your mind. So will I. If we agree, fine, if not, that's fine too.
Just be honest and we'll be cool.
SGG
The term only applies to those intent
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yes, this is Fields. Wiemer points out that the long term prescription of psychotropic drugs or "meds" that Fields was on should not be discounted.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Who? Does this have anything to do with Charlottesville and James Fields? Because I haven't seen any suggestion that he was on drugs, or given drugs, by a doctor; just a random quote from a high school teacher (a long time ago!) that he might be "schizophrenic".
Ok, so can we generalize that to: It's bad if ANYONE drives a car into a group pf people, whether they are Nazis, radical jihadists, militant Hindus, or anyone else? If fact, can we make that an even MORE general statement, that killing or injuring anyone for a political cause is bad??? Yup, I think we can. - SIGNY
I am not sure I have seen your outrage over the doctors prescribing these psychotropic drugs to this guy or others. When these doctors are held responsible and thrown in prison for these deaths then we'll have started to make progress. - JSF
I cant make linkies right now but one on
Thedeplorablearmy.com
Was decent.
Fields is much the same in this respect as Adam Lanza, James Holmes, Andreas Lubitz, Susan Smith, Andrea Yates, Elliot Rodger, Dylann Storm Roof, Eric Harris,
many others.
WCPO also reported that was a reason he was not allowed to join the Army.
Also, for those thinking Florence, KY is some hick town, Florence and Covington, KY are the location of the Cincinnati Area Airport for Ohio, hence the FAA code CVG when flying tp Cincinnati.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I did a search on fields+drugs and fields+psychotropic and didn't find anything, so if you can post links it would be much appreciated.
-----------
By the way, GSTRING, I predicted your response PERFECTLY
* ... and then you'll say I'm "too wordy". And then you will - as always- refuse to address the pertinent points, and respond with even more lies and even more bullshit personal attacks.*
And voila! Here it is http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=61835&mid=1
035581#1035581
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here are a couple of thoughts:
1- Why is what FDR did or didn't do so important as to what is going on today?
2- Speaking of Isolationists; isn't that exactly what Trump wants to do now?
Isn't it part of the of the MAGA movement and how Trump was "elected" president - because of what he promised - also; isn't that what your comrades are against - Globalization? Wasn't it Trump who famously declared,
"I'm the president of Pittsburgh, not Paris."
Just wondering!
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:methinks you rememberfy incorrectly.
Originally posted by Riverlove:Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I also neglected to mention the Anti-Semitic actions of Democraps such as FDR when he sent back to Europe Jewish refugees from Nazis, aboard SS St Louis.
At least 250 of them died as a result.
https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005267
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27373131
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/us-government-turned-away-thousa
nds-jewish-refugees-fearing-they-were-nazi-spies-180957324/
The St. Louis is a tragic story, but in 1939 FDR's administration could not have possibly foreseen or even imagined the scope of the mass exterminations that would take place years later. Eisenhower himself was on hand in 1945 when American troops stumbled upon Ohrdruf and Birkenau death camps and he couldn't believe or comprehend what he saw there.
I remember FDR and his Democrats as the Party that supported Churchill during England's darkest days when they alone stood against Hitler. The Republicans were isolationists. They argued against Lend/Lease and wanted no part of the fight against Germany.
FDR campaigned very clearly as isolationist in 1940 election. That was why he needed to sacrifice Pearl Harbor and the Battleship Navy, to not violate his campaign promise.
Crystal Night had already occurred in November 1938, and was no big secret. The Times of London reported it the next day.
The Isolationist and Nonintervention policies codified in Neutrality Acts of 1935, 1936, 1937, and 1939 were all passed with Democrap majorities in both houses of Congress, and Supermajorities in both houses from 1935 - 1938.
The darkhorse candidate Wilkie in 1940 for GOP did end up an Isolationist but Republicans considered that to be a negative in the race.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:If you quit the siphoning straw supplying your MSM Fake News, you might hear that more progress is being made in the Middle East by military forces than in the past 8 years.
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:Quote:Here are a couple of thoughts:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:methinks you rememberfy incorrectly.
Originally posted by Riverlove:Quote:The St. Louis is a tragic story, but in 1939 FDR's administration could not have possibly foreseen or even imagined the scope of the mass exterminations that would take place years later. Eisenhower himself was on hand in 1945 when American troops stumbled upon Ohrdruf and Birkenau death camps and he couldn't believe or comprehend what he saw there.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I also neglected to mention the Anti-Semitic actions of Democraps such as FDR when he sent back to Europe Jewish refugees from Nazis, aboard SS St Louis.
At least 250 of them died as a result.
I remember FDR and his Democrats as the Party that supported Churchill during England's darkest days when they alone stood against Hitler. The Republicans were isolationists. They argued against Lend/Lease and wanted no part of the fight against Germany.
FDR campaigned very clearly as isolationist in 1940 election. That was why he needed to sacrifice Pearl Harbor and the Battleship Navy, to not violate his campaign promise.
Crystal Night had already occurred in November 1938, and was no big secret. The Times of London reported it the next day.
The Isolationist and Nonintervention policies codified in Neutrality Acts of 1935, 1936, 1937, and 1939 were all passed with Democrap majorities in both houses of Congress, and Supermajorities in both houses from 1935 - 1938.
The darkhorse candidate Wilkie in 1940 for GOP did end up an Isolationist but Republicans considered that to be a negative in the race.
1- Why is what FDR did or didn't do so important as to what is going on today?
2- Speaking of Isolationists; isn't that exactly what Trump wants to do now?
Isn't it part of the of the MAGA movement and how Trump was "elected" president - because of what he promised - also; isn't that what your comrades are against - Globalization? Wasn't it Trump who famously declared,
"I'm the president of Pittsburgh, not Paris."
Just wondering!
SGG
FDR's Isolationist practices would have done the opposite, just like Bobo, Slick Willie, and Jiminy Cotta.
And the point of The Big Lie that Nazis are copies of some group OTHER than Democraps is this thread topic.
Do you really believe there is no difference between the intermingling and corruption of Free Market, Enterprise - and the defense of liberty, freedom, and democratic Republics?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME