Archived Story

Obama embodiment of the leftist agitator [UPDATED]

Published 10:30am Monday, February 4, 2013 Updated 12:35pm Monday, February 4, 2013

Machiavelli, in The Prince, wrote that a good man among power seekers was doomed. He said despots, in their dealings “men must either be caressed or else annihilated.” He advocated suppression, dispossession, dominion, vengeance. He spoke of cruelties “being exploited well or badly.”

Barack Obama is a disciple of Saul Alinskey, and Alinskey’s guidebook Rules for Radicals. In that book Alinskey defines the best ways to achieve character assassination; gather a mob, fill it with rage, and aim it at a targeted group (Wall Street Bankers, oil companies, conservatives) to intimidate political opponents.

Barack Obama is ruthless and devious in his public appearances: his words are laden with falsehoods and distortions which are obvious to the well informed, but not visible to the envious, the hopeless, or who are not paying attention. While any one falsehood can be rebutted, not so with a stream of falsehoods, especially so when the adoring media are mute. Obama depends on there not being many who are well informed, or that they are too tainted by smears or too timid to fight back.

We must be aware of what we are up against. Leftist methods have been improved by practice for decades, and Barack Obama is the embodiment of the leftist agitator, cloaked with the ultimate position of power. America is not a Machiavellian principality. We are founded in liberty and our precious independence from tyrants must be defended with all the vigor we can muster. We are a nation of good people, striving to keep would be tyrants within the bounds of the Constitution.

We must not yield to tyranny by those who would undo the greatness of America, and replace it with those who will take all from those who have achieved and accomplished .

 

Bill Schulz

Fergus Falls

 

  • Phaedrus

    And yet, out of this overabundance, this “stream” of falsehoods, you’re unable to find one as an example or illustration?

    That makes you seem like the disciple of Saul Alinskey (as you have him described), the irony is too much for me to not point it out. Do you not realize that your letter is the height of hypocracy? Too funny for someone who likes to tell everyone else how “well informed” they are.

    • holly

      What is the “height of hypocracy”? Are you a cacographer?

      • Phaedrus

        Seriously? A spelling error is all you can come up with? My goodness, I guess I must be a cacographer (although you’ll never know about my penmanship), and you know what else? Sometimes I mean to write “an” but when I reread the post there is “and” instead (and sometimes I find other spelling or grammatical errors). So that must mean I’m a terrible person, for not taking the time to carefully proofread a post, but I can live with that. Thus, it’s up to you to stay on top of , and point out, any spelling or grammatical errors you find.

        But wait, an ad hoc personal attack? You must be a disciple of Saul Alinskey too, like Bill.

  • Walt Henry

    And with the Dow hovering at around 14,000, the highest since 2007, Obama must be the worst leftist, worst socialist in history. Facts matter.

    • Swede

      Unemployment climbed again in January, fuel prices are at a record high for February. GDP actually shrunk the last quarter of 2012, ending with an overall growth rate of 1.5%, which is pathetic for post recession growth. 0bama has refused to submit a budget by yesterday’s legal deadline, but has plenty of time to promote gun control.

      These are only the recent headlines.
      You are correct, facts do matter Larry.

      • Richard Olson

        Those may be the headlines at Fox News Mike, but here is the truth…

        The economy added 157,000 jobs in January, and the unemployment rate basically held steady at 7.9%.

        Fuel prices are not at a record high for February or any other month. The highest gas prices in history were in 2008, when the nationwide average reached $4.11 per gallon, when President George W. Bush was in office. That record still holds.

        The economy shrank from October through December for the first time since the recession ended, hurt by the biggest cut in defense (government spending) spending in 40 years.
        When the government spends money people like Mike Van Horn whine because the government is spending money, when the government cuts back Mike whines because the GDP fell.

        President Obama has not refused to submit a budget. He sent a letter to congress over a month ago saying his budget submission would be late. Which simply means the republican obstructionists won’t get to reject it as soon as they thought.

        Why don’t you tell us Mike, how much time spent on gun safety is too much. And how do you know if it’s too much? You still haven’t had the courage to answer these three questions which I asked you to answer on January 22nd, 15 days ago.

        Do you think anyone should be able to buy a firearm anonymously at a gun show?
        Do you think all restrictions on magazine capacity are Illegal?
        Do you favor background checks for all firearm purchases?

        Before you whine about the Presidents activities on gun safety, get some guts and tell us your views and try it without the parsing and weasel words you use to find Fox headlines.

        • Walt Henry

          Richard–let’s not be too hard on Mike. It’s taken a long time just to get him to accept facts, the number kind. It might be too much to expect he would know what they mean and what might have caused them. If we stay at it long enough I’m confident that will come. (When did the House agree to raise taxes and forestall sequester? Jan. 2?–Rational people might consider those things might have some effect on how quickly the rest of the budget numbers could be generated.) Oil production increasing and prices going up? What’s that about? hmm–a real puzzler. But the scary thing-some believe cutting government spending won’t cause the GDP to drop. Again, facts matter.

        • Swede

          Richard, the unemployment rate was 7.8% in December, it is now 7.9%. That means if there were more jobs lost than added.

          “Last week the national average price of a gallon of gas rose 17 cents to $3.50 a gallon. This was the highest price ever for this early in February.” ~Kimberly Amadeo, That story is all over the web, genius.

          Apparently in Richard’s mind, economic growth = government spending. Karl Marx may agree, but even John Maynard Keynes would find that hard to swallow.

          I didn’t realize 0bama warned congress he planned to violate the law, prior to his nationwide campaign against the second amendment. Glad you pointed that out, Richard.

          • Richard Olson

            guess if you put those many qualifiers in a sentence you can make yourself believe anything to sooth your hatred of the President. That may work at tea party meetings, but in the real world most people prefer actual facts.
            I’m not even going to try explain the difference in the “rate” of increase and actual number of jobs created. It would be a waste of my time and you wouldn’t grasp it anyway. Plus your head would explode.

            So Obama is a flop because he’s kept the price of gas below what your hero Bush did? It’s February 5th Genius! So what! I don’t remember you praising Obama a month or so ago when gas was below $3.00 a gallon. Now you come here with some junk calculation that Obama is a failure because you chose to measure the cost THIS EARLY IN FEBRUARY, I’ve heard about grasping at straws but your grasping is pathetic. Do you or any of the scientists you hang around with ever remember hearing anything about something called the “Winter formulation of Fuels” and it’s effect on the price of gasoline around this time of year?

            You are the one who was whining about the decline in GDP, I told you why it declined and now you pout some dog whistle code words about Karl Marx as if that makes what I said wrong. You weren’t complaining about economic growth, you were whining about GDP…that means Gross Domestic Product Mike and government spending is a big part of Gross Domestic Product. Even in Elbow Lake. So when the government cancel’s a few submarines or fighter jets or aircraft carriers it make a big dent in Gross Domestic Spending.

            Apparently there is quite a bit you don’t know Mike but that doesn’t stop you does it. You just shoot your mouth off and assume everyone listening is as stupid as that guy “Skitter” at your last tea bag meeting.

            Also, why don’t you have the same confidence in your answers to my gun safety questions, as you have in your grasp of the Gross Domestic Product? Huh?

          • Walt Henry

            One of the mouth pieces of the unthinking right once read a story of a drunk driver who hit and killed someone. It was not a story about the victim and effect of his death on the hearts of his loved ones, it was not a story about the plague of drunk driving. No, this leader of the “No Spin” minions added the words illegal immigrant to qualify the drunk driver and it became a story of the evils of illegal immigration. Mike, why February is important to you escapes me unless you are inferring that if gas prices are high now just wait until the economy picks up. And you are right, if demand increases so will the price–but does that mean you are promoting increased spending on alternative energy sources so our economy will not be so battered by the ups in oil based products in times of economic boom? If that is your opinion say so.
            Setting aside the qualifiers and the distraction they create, let’s stick to GDP. GDP is an equation of economic activity. It is equal to the value of G+B+C+(E-I). Give each of these letters a numeric value. Example give the (E-I) the value of -1 as the value of imports often exceed the value of exports. (Let’s keep that value constant for this discussion) If G=2, B=2 and C=2 then the value of GDP would be 6-1=5. If G=1, B=0 and C=0 then the value of GDP=0 Use whatever values you wish and play with the numbers a bit. Anything that causes one of the letter values to go down, no matter if it is political will, or business activity or consumer confidence,there will be a drop in GDP unless the remaining factors increase by at least as much as the one decreased. Now remember Mike, you posted the number; the value of GDP as 1.5. This is a fact you supplied; without qualifiers. There is no room for spin here. If government spending decreases without an increase in business spending or an increase in consumer spending there will be a drop in GDP. (Yes, the economist who is a purist will say value is not the same word as spending but I suggest the value of something is best determined by what someone will pay for it, i.e., spend on it, not an arbitrary value assigned by an economist in Washington.)

          • Swede

            Larry, I assume your statement that the “Dow hovering at around 14,000, the highest since 2007″ was to use satire to indicate that 0bama must be performing well. President Bush was incessantly attacked by democrats when gas prices were high, so I assume turnabout is fair play.

            Yes, Larry, government spending is part of the GDP calculation. Defense spending reductions did reduce GDP 0.1% . Does this excuse the GDP growth rate of 1.5% ? Other areas of the economy also contracted. GDP growth averages 3.28%, post WW2, and is higher following recessions.

            Gee Larry, yous purdy good wit dem numbers, and yer drunk drivn storys are a hoot!

      • Walt Henry

        Mike,, if it is difficult to comprehend what the facts mean follow the lead of those who have money.

  • Walt Henry

    BTW–anyone notice Karl Rove has launched a new fund raising effort called Conservative Victory Project? It’s mission–to destroy the Tea Party as a political force.

  • Richard Olson

    But…but…but…most of all he’s Black!

    • J Mullins

      Richard/Acker/Chipmunk/Curly , how deft of you to spout the emetic partyspeak of the socialist drone, that any criticism of the Supreme Leader for Life Barack Hussein 0bama (mmm, mmm, mmm) is solely and necessarily a sign of racism. May we follow your logic and conclude that anyone who criticizes Paul Ryan is anti-Catholic, a critic of Mitt Romney is anti-Mormon, one who questions Janet Napolitano is mysoginistic AND anti-Italian/American?

      Your assertion that anyone who criticizes or questions the actions of a president is acting only from racial or ethnic or gender animus is would be laughable if it were not so pathetically ignorant.

      • Richard Olson

        Gee alias Jerome, what should I conclude when Bill’s monthly hysterically paranoid and conspiracy laden tirade, can not, as Phaedrus said, provide even 1 example of the so-called villainous conduct of the worst Socialist in history.

        Everything is up, that should be up and everything is down that should be down. And that’s what really bothers you and Bill. But instead of admitting that, we get a monthly pabulum feed from what looks like a Rush Limbaugh fortune cookie. And just as nourishing.

        • J. Anderson

          Phaedrus, Larry and Richard, do you guys hold hands when you drink the left wing coolaid and kiss the Almighty Obama’s ass. The racist card AGAIN? Come on, come up with something that is actually legitimate and true. The talking points of the libs aren’t even close to true and you know it. Apparently EVERYBODY that disagrees with Obama or you guys is a racist. Petty and small minded of you. Skin color is irrelevant, his ideology and policies are what people don’t like. I know you guys can think for yourselves.

          • Phaedrus

            I’ve never said anything about racism, or used it in an argument, so I’m not sure what you’re talking about Jeff.

            On the other hand, if you want to compare talking points for either side, I’d be happy to engage in that conversation, since “talking points” are rarely, if ever, true. By the time one reduces the complexity of issues to “sound bites” they’ve already lost my interest. They’re like bumper-stickers, sometimes amusing or clever, but almost never “true” because they ignore reality.

          • Richard Olson

            Jeff Anderson, you’ve come to this argument late so I’ll explain it again, slowly……….

            Step 1. George Bush likes policy “A” and idea “B”.
            Step 2. Conservatives liked policy “A” and idea “B” when George Bush liked them.
            Step 3. Barrack Obama likes the same policy “A” and idea “B” as George Bush and the conservatives liked.
            Step 4. Conservatives now hate policy “A” and idea “B” when Barrack Obama liked them.

            What has changed? The policies are the same and the ideas are the same, so what has changed?
            The only thing that changed is the color of the Presidents skin and that Jeff Anderson is racism.

            Oh, by the way did anyone notice that Mike Van Horn still refuses to answer these three simple questions?

            Do you think anyone should be able to buy a firearm anonymously at a gun show?
            Do you think all restrictions on magazine capacity are Illegal?
            Do you favor background checks for all firearm purchases?

            How about you Willie? Care to take a crack at answering them?

  • camobabe

    Curly, Larry, Moe, aka Richard, Larry/Walt, and Phadman..
    I don’t believe you hold hands. It is more like you are sitting in your underwear in your mommy’s basement and giggling at how you can spout your idiocies without anyone learning who and where you are. I have teenagers who read your drivel and slap their foreheads and ask, “Is this the best that the socialist Democrats can come up with? Hatred, Envy, Anger, Lies?”

    Phadman, you demand that examples of 0bama’s treacheries be given, but there is not enough space on all the pages of a Sunday edition to list them all, and you are whistling in the darkness of your basement if you think that people can’t name dozens of such cases. This and other newspapers do have limitations on how many words are allowed in letters to the editor, and listing all of 0bam’s crimes would be as pointless as giving a thirty minute explanation of the solar system to justify saying that the sun appears in the east in the morning.

    • Phaedrus

      So Camo-Toe, your response is, “There are no real examples to us, but I have plenty in my imagination”? I guess that’s to be expected. So why are you wasting time saying nothing?

    • Richard Olson

      Willie says….”I have teenagers who read your drivel and slap their foreheads and ask, “Is this the best that the socialist Democrats can come up with? Hatred, Envy, Anger, Lies?”

      Willie, I think you should start watching the “700 Club” or “Focus on The Family”, because what you describe sounds like a parenting problem to me. Have you considered the ramifications of allowing your impressionable minors unfettered access to liberal ideas and thought? If you continue on this devil may care path sooner or later one or more of your offspring may start to think for him/her self. Then you will be placed in the unenviable position of explaining why you told them certain things earlier in life, like where storks come from and that superman belonged to the tea party, and that wonder woman dressed like a floozy because she was trying to infiltrate the parties Barrack Obama was secretly holding in the Whitehouse basement. Stop while you can!

  • Walt Henry

    Let’s back up for a moment for something amazing has happened with Mike and I talking about facts. We have agreed, and no one has disputed, a decrease in government spending contributed to a decrease in GDP. In the short term this always is true–if government spends less economic activity decreases. Now consider the other two big parts of GDP–B is for business and business likes certainty; certainty for lots of reasons is in short supply at this moment. (The thing Henry Ford most admired about the far right economic policy of Nazi Germany was the certainty it created though he was blasted later for the costs to personal liberties imposed by the far right.) The other big part of GDP is C for consumers. People tend to believe what they are told even if it is not the truth if they are told it over and over again. Until the last election when other voices were finally heard it was the voice of conservatives condemning everything with the potential for good that people heard. Call it a self-fulfilling prophesy if you wish but saying things are terrible will make what you say become true.
    In the letter above Mr. Smith “his words are laden with falsehoods and distortions which are obvious to the well informed, but not visible to the envious, the hopeless, or who are not paying attention.” Mike and others like him are not bad people; they state facts but don’t support the reasons for the facts which are obvious to the well informed but not to those who don’t really pay attention or those whose fear blind them.

    • Swede

      “he (Henry Ford) was blasted later for the costs to personal liberties imposed by the far right”.

      Larry, Nazi is an acronym for “National Socialist German Workers’ Party”. Nazis are self-proclaimed socialists, practicing leftist ideologies. Your lack of knowledge of history is remarkable.

      “his words are laden with falsehoods and distortions which are obvious to the well informed”. It is funny that you made this accusation, noting the above falsehood you submitted about the Nazi Party.

      • Phaedrus

        “ACRONYM: a word (as NATO, radar, or laser) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term; also : an abbreviation (as FBI) formed from initial letters : initialism”

        So how do you get “NAZI” from “NSGWP”? But other than being wrong about the acronym, it does stand for National Socialist, but the presence of the term “socialist” doesn’t automatically mean “left”. Any group with members can use the term “social”. The difference between the left and right is that those on the left think everyone should be treated equally, and those on the right think that people can be treated differently based on some arbitrary characteristic (like being gay, or Jewish, or poor) So Swede, your naiveté (or ignorance, or ideologically blinding faith) is staggering.

        “Far-right politics commonly includes authoritarianism, anti-communism, and nativism. Often, the term “far right” is applied to fascists and neo-Nazis, and major elements of fascism have been deemed clearly far right, such as its belief that supposedly superior people have the right to dominate society while purging allegedly inferior elements, and — in the case of Nazism — genocide of people deemed to be inferior. Claims that superior people should proportionally have greater rights than inferior people are sometimes associated with the far right”

        Here’s a list of sources (or at least a bunch of people who have been educated in the area we’re talking about so they don’t have to rely simply on “what they believe to be the case”):
        Carlisle, Rodney P., ed., The Encyclopedia of Politics: The Left and the Right, Volume 2: The Right (Thousand Oaks, California, United States; London, England; New Delhi, India: Sage Publications, 2005) p. 694.
        Horst, Junginger, “The Study of Religion Under the Impact of Fascism” in Numen Book Series, vol. 117 (Brill, 2008) p. 273.
        Griffin, Roger: “The Palingenetic Core of Fascism”, Che cos’è il fascismo? Interpretazioni e prospettive di ricerche, Ideazione editrice, Rome, 2003 AH.Brookes.ac.uk
        Stackleberg, Rodney Hitler’s Germany, Routeledge, 1999, pp. 3-5
        Eatwell, Roger: “A ‘Spectral-Syncretic Approach to Fascism’, The Fascism Reader, Routledge, 2003 pp 71–80 Books.google.com
        Woshinsky, Oliver H., Explaining Politics: Culture, Institutions, and Political Behavior (Oxon, England; New York City, United States: Routledge, 2008) p. 155-156.

        Of course, that explains Holly’s defense of a “two-tiered” tax system that treats one group of citizens differently than another group of citizens.

        • Swede

          Pardon me, “abbreviation” of Nationalsozialist.

          In Hitler’s own words, “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.”

          The majority of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (the Bolsheviks) had a similar result in Russia to that of Nazi Germany.

          Mussolini was a socialist. The nickname Il Duce was given to him when he was a member of Italy’s Socialist Party.

          Phaedrus, you can name authors and split hair all day long about right and left wing, but the government that socialists desire requires national central planning of society. This is an anathema to liberty. Man has proven throughout history that he is unable to promote liberty when given authority over others. The Founding Fathers of this country created a government with the intention that it not control us. The line, “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed” is the embodiment of this ideal.

          • Walt Henry

            Glen Beck?

          • Phaedrus

            The only people who think that the Nazi’s are part of the political left are those on the political right trying to distance themselves from their history. You know the same people who believe that the earth is 6000 years old, that women’s bodies have self-defense systems in their uterus, that climate change is a myth, etc. In other words, no one with any credibility (the same kind of self-righteous people who “think their leavings don’t smell”). It’s akin to the church distancing itself from the inquisition and priest behavior, the US distancing itself from atrocities against native Americans, Japanese internment and the Tuskegee experiment, etc. As I’ve said before, believing something (even with every fiber of your being) isn’t enough to make it true. It’s like saying that “tree huggers” and the Sierra club are on the political right because they are “conservationists”, such broad generalizations from simple word association is, quite frankly, foolish.

      • Richard Olson

        Mike Van Horn said (what amounts to) the Nazi’s said they were Socialists so they must be socialists. I suppose because as we all know Nazi’s wouldn’t lie. Just remember Karl Rove said he was Bush’s brain also……..well OK, that one might actually be true.

  • Walt Henry

    Readers–I don’t know Mike. He and I are not deluding you with some sort of crack pot conspiracy where he throws me fast balls right over the plate so I can impress the world with my vast knowledge and wisdom. I’m tired today and Phaedrus has explained the connection between the Nazi’s and their anti-communist beliefs well enough. Let me add this bit of history–when Hitler got out of prison, he was jailed for attempting to overthrow the duly elected German government he knew he had to broaden the attractiveness of his political base. (More later)

    • camobabe

      I can’t wait. I am holding my breath waiting to read your words of wisdom. Please hurry before I faint of oxygen deprivation.

      • Walt Henry

        I see by your comments (2/11@2pm)with the usual name calling and opinion without basis you couldn’t wait.
        Facts and history should matter to those who haven’t been starved of oxygen.

  • Walt Henry

    The Social Democrats and the Hitler’s NSDAP (Nazi’s)were the two largest political parties in Germany in 1931 and often worked together to make government work. On October 11, 1931 Hitler joined political forces with the DNVP (the party of big business) and the Stahlhelm party (the party of the militant and radical far right.) This was too much for the left leaning Social Democrats and in May of 1932 even the leader of the Center Party left office; Germany’s future in the hands of the hard right. What followed as a further consolidation of power, the outlawing of rival political parties and the jailing of their leaders. What these actions have in common with socialism, an economic system, I don’t know. As has been mentioned earlier this is the stuff of an authoritarian government not one where the people make choices.
    I hope this helps. Facts matter–fantasies are nice but facts matter. Going, going, gone. Mike, keep pitching and I’ll keep swinging but would much rather you take the time to do some research.

    • Swede

      Hitler was named “Man of the Year” in 1938 by Time Magazine. They noted Hitler’s anti-capitalistic economic policies:

      “Most cruel joke of all, however, has been played by Hitler & Co. on those German capitalists and small businessmen who once backed National Socialism as a means of saving Germany’s bourgeois economic structure from radicalism. The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on other what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for food- stuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism.”
      (Source: Time Magazine; Jaunuary 2, 1939.)

      Keep on slinging, Larry!

      • Richard Olson

        Mike

        You’re joking right? You can’t not possibly be that naïve. Do your comments go into a résumé you intend to offer at some future tea party meeting to prove you are not a “reading” elite? If my grasp of history was as willfully ham-fisted as your’s my third grade teacher would hang herself out of shame.

      • Walt Henry

        Mike–the Minnesota Twins used to have a pitcher named Terry Felton; I see some similarities here. It’s too late tonight but if you check back tomorrow I’ll explain how the year 1938 comes after the year 1931 and a few of the changes in German politics that occurred between those years. I’ll take it easy on you and use a lighter bat and swing slow enough for you to follow. :)

      • Swede

        The comment source is here: constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitler-leftist/id10.html

        • Walt Henry

          A Monarch butterfly and a Viceroy butterfly might look quite a bit alike but they are not. The Monarch eats milkweed and is poisonous to birds while the Viceroy does not and is not. To a five year old they might be the same thing.
          The November 6, elections of 1932 saw the National Socialists (Nazi party)lose 2million votes in national elections. The communists gained 600,000 votes reaching 100 seats in the Reichstag. If both were the same they could not win and lose simultaneously. February 27, 1933 the Reichstag burns to the ground. Hitler as head of the largest voting block in government is appointed chancellor and given almost absolute power. Hitler, pushing the propaganda that the fire was the work of communists suggests all communists be captured and shot this very night. Seems to me there was quite a bit of difference between the Nazi’s and the Communists in 1933 Germany.
          I noticed some would make a differentiation between Bolsheviks and Communists. Whether Bolsheviks or Communists, National Socialists or just plain NAZI’s they all ended the same place in the 1930′s, authoritarian totalitarianisms. But like butterflies, just because they look alike doesn’t mean they are the same.
          Try to find in a truly socialist government controlled economic system people like like Friedrich Flick, Alfried Krupp, Ferdinand Porsche, Messerschmitt–capitalists all profited as much. And what did Hitler say about the Bolsheviks–they were the puppets of Jews? And we all know what that means, right?

          • Walt Henry

            Mike–for facts you cite a blogger? Do a decent source analysis once and awhile. Geez!

          • Walt Henry

            Mike–for facts you cite a blogger? Do a decent source analysis once and awhile.

          • Swede

            The source where I first read the statement by TIME Magazine, was at the blog site maintained by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) — former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party. So I gave attribution where it is due.

            In Hitler’s early political career he was a socialist. Near the end of Nazi Germany, TIME Magazine states he is a socialist. Somewhere in between, Larry believes he was not a socialist, thus he is not a socialist?

            I do need to thank you, Larry, for this discussion. If not for this discussion, I may have never found this author. More from John J. Ray, Ph.D.:

            MESSAGE to Leftists: Even if you killed all conservatives tomorrow, you would just end up in another Soviet Union. Conservatives are all that stand between you and that dismal fate. And you may not even survive at all. Stalin killed off all the old Bolsheviks.

  • Richard Olson

    The Nazis most resoundingly were NOT socialists by the only valid definition extant, and the verifiable evidence is absolutely unanimous and overwhelming.

    William L. Shirer in THE RISE AND FALL OF THE THIRD REICH noted that there was little or no socialism in “National Socialism”.

    Thyssen (I PAID HITLER and many others) pointed out that the “marriage” of business and the National Socialist Party, despite Hitler’s contempt for aristocracy and business in general, guaranteed high profits for businesses. Ironically, his steel company was seized over what amounted to a personal hassle with the hierarchy, and handed over for administration and profit to Krupp/von Bohlen, rather than being “nationalized” in the pure sense, which is what would’ve happened in a left wing state.

    Albert Speer, the Third Reich’s last Armaments Minister, in INSIDE THE THIRD REICH makes clear that he had great difficulty controlling fiefdoms and bailiwicks of various private firms well into 1944, when the war was already going to pieces. He also notes the privatization of all the formerly state-owned arsenals, even the huge ones at Suhl, Spandau, and Amberg (13 in all!).

    Public education, of course, had been one of the key features of all organized states since Roman times. And National Public Health in Germany was enacted 1871-83, before Hitler was BORN, by the Bismarck government.

    Hitler’s state enacted NO new welfare programs, and eliminated many, sending former “loafers” to the death or work camps. Almost none qualified for military service, as the Weimar Republic had always claimed.

    Hitler, of course, much like today’s conservatives, attacked the Weimar government as “intrusive” and “socialist”, and he HATED “Bolshevism” and “social democrats” (socialists), and proclaimed it loudly on almost every page of MEIN KAMPF.

    Bullock, Toland, Heisler, and hundreds of others verify that there was no nationalization in Nazi Germany, and indeed, the general trend was in the other direction. Railroads were amalgamated and standardized for military purposes, but this had been a plan for at least 80 years!

    Himmler, well before the Wannsee Conference, and after the “Night of the Long Knives”, which eventuated the disposal of any and all left-sympathizing party members, including Ernst Roehm, about 1938, enunciated to a mass meeting of the SchutzStaffel (S.S.): “We are of the right and of order. We shall sweep away Jews, Bolsheviks, and liberal democracies as one sweeps away flies.”

    Here’s the deal: You can hear LOTS of things, especially if listening to clowns. But every scholar clearly identifies the Nazis with the right wing, and no one serious does NOT identify them with the reactionary right wing. All the historians agree.

    The inclusion of the “s” word was a clumsy but sometimes convenient leftover from a merger well described in the literature. They even used it, short term, through tracts written by the Strasser brothers, to con working men into acquiescing to the movement. For their leftist-sounding pamphlets, the Strassers were murdered. And anyone who suggested in Germany, once they took power, that Nazis were “progressive” or “leftists” would’ve been killed for his statement.

    It’s the scholarship that counts. Drunks in bars and idiots spewing madness in chat rooms are not sources of ANY kind! And the same applied to uncredentialed and unportfolioed so-called “pundits” who claim Nazis were “progressive” or “liberal”, which is a huge, undocumented, insidious, and criminal lie.

    No, Hitler and the Nazis were about as far from “socialists” as it is possible to be.
    Source(s):
    All the valid sources, to include the witnesses, participants, victims, scholars, observers, and anyone who has actually studied the subject matter.

    Attribution unknown

  • Richard Olson

    I’ve reworded and replaced the order of paragraphs of a comment I made on this subject some days ago but because I must have used the wrong word or combination of words it is caught in the journals filter. If I/we knew what causes that I/we could take steps to avoid the filter. Since we don’t any comment regardless its content is a crap shoot. Below is my restructured comment.

    It’s the scholarship that counts. Drunks in bars and idiots spewing madness in chat rooms are not sources of ANY kind! And the same applied to uncredentialed and unportfolioed so-called “pundits” who claim Nazis were “progressive” or “liberal”, which is a huge, undocumented, insidious, and criminal lie.

    No, Hitler and the Nazis were about as far from “socialists” as it is possible to be.
    Source(s):
    All the valid sources, to include the witnesses, participants, victims, scholars, observers, and anyone who has actually studied the subject matter.

    Here’s the deal: You can hear LOTS of things, especially if listening to clowns. But every scholar clearly identifies the Nazis with the right wing, and no one serious does NOT identify them with the reactionary right wing. All the historians agree.

    Himmler, well before the Wannsee Conference, and after the “Night of the Long Knives”, which eventuated the disposal of any and all left-sympathizing party members, including Ernst Roehm, about 1938, enunciated to a mass meeting of the SchutzStaffel (S.S.): “We are of the right and of order. We shall sweep away Jews, Bolsheviks, and liberal democracies as one sweeps away flies.”

    Hitler’s state enacted NO new welfare programs, and eliminated many, sending former “loafers” to the death or work camps. Almost none qualified for military service, as the Weimar Republic had always claimed.

    Hitler, of course, much like today’s conservatives, attacked the Weimar government as “intrusive” and “socialist”, and he HATED “Bolshevism” and “social democrats” (socialists), and proclaimed it loudly on almost every page of MEIN KAMPF.

    Albert Speer, the Third Reich’s last Armaments Minister, in INSIDE THE THIRD REICH makes clear that he had great difficulty controlling fiefdoms and bailiwicks of various private firms well into 1944, when the war was already going to pieces. He also notes the privatization of all the formerly state-owned arsenals, even the huge ones at Suhl, Spandau, and Amberg (13 in all!).

    William L. Shirer in THE RISE AND FALL OF THE THIRD REICH noted that there was little or no socialism in “National Socialism”.

    Thyssen (I PAID HITLER and many others) pointed out that the “marriage” of business and the National Socialist Party, despite Hitler’s contempt for aristocracy and business in general, guaranteed high profits for businesses. Ironically, his steel company was seized over what amounted to a personal hassle with the hierarchy, and handed over for administration and profit to Krupp/von Bohlen, rather than being “nationalized” in the pure sense, which is what would’ve happened in a left wing state.

    The Nazis most resoundingly were NOT socialists by the only valid definition extant, and the verifiable evidence is absolutely unanimous and overwhelming.

  • Walt Henry

    In the clutter of conversation this bit of reality is too important to let go without clarity– on October 11, 1931 Hitler formed a governing alliance with the DNVP (the party of job creators) and the Stahlhelm party (the racial purists, promoters of citizen restrictions and “morality guarantors”. History notes with the consolidation of his power he kept those loyal to him. Does this in anyway remind you of one of our political parties today?

  • Swede

    “We must not yield to tyranny by those who would undo the greatness of America, and replace it with those who will take all from those who have achieved and accomplished.”
    ~Bill Schulz

    Current American patriots obviously would not support a socialist tyranny if it was presented as “Nazism” or “communism”, but the societies that did were not aware of the end result of socialism as it was presented. Patriots must understand what happened in those societies to prevent it from happening here. The government that socialists desire requires national central planning of society, which may begin as a democracy with mob rule, but ends as a tyranny as history has proven.

    • Richard Olson

      Mike, it’s your right to quote Bill Schulz if that’s what you really want to do. But selective quotes don’t tell the whole story.

      Let’s remember that Bill Schulz, the sage of the Wal-Mart parking lot also said that 8 O’clock coffee was the figment of the imagination of East coast liberals.
      Bill also said that Moe Larry and Curly were not the three stooges.
      William Schulz also said the Obama voter are responsible for the nest terrorist attack, not the terrorists mind you but Obama voters, If you can’t get a job, that’s also the fault of Obama voters.

      Guess who’s fault it is if you can’t get a home loan or need to go on food stamps….of course, the Obama voters. There’s more but you get the idea.

      You said Hitler was a socialist, Bill Schulz says Obama is a Socialist, he appoints one wall street hack after another but he’s a Socialist. Obama bombs Muslim countries left and right but Bill Schulz swears Obama is a Muslim.

      So quote William Bill Schulz all you want, it’s like asking Clarabelle the clown to explain the first rule of thermo-dynamics to a mouse with its tail in a trap in Braille Latin.

    • Walt Henry

      Mike–again we agree on something. The terrible cost of human suffering imposed on the world by the radical right wing of German politics didn’t happen over night or by a single election. It was a slow progression. That is why it is so important to join with the majority of Americans and stop the slip to the right that has taken us to the brink years past 30 years. When Ronald Reagan signed the Omnibus bill that said every American must receive medical treatment regardless of their willingness or ability to pay he did a noble thing, a moral thing, but left the details of how that would be accomplished to those of us who could pay or were willing to pay. We have taken steps to pay for that health care in a more honest and open way. W took us to war without finding the funds to pay for war should we now think it is our responsibility to break the promises we made to our elderly or our children to balance the books? We have elected leaders who are looking for funding to pay for those wars and to still keep our promises to our peoples. We need to return to the center and that is not accomplished by going farther to the right for as you noted there is great danger there.
      BTW–your argument will leave a greater impression if you cite the original data, which is possible now with the “net” (Hitler’s speeches are there, election returns from German elections are there, a time line of historical events are there) rather than quoting someone who just says the same things as you. What value would my arguments have if I quoted Krugman or Reich?

  • camobabe

    Curly/Acker/Richard/Chipmunk, a few corrections to your misrepresentations of what I remember Bill saying.

    8 Oclock coffee? My recollection is that you were having an 8 oclock coffee (while you were posing as Acker). Bill questioned whether radlib Democrats were even up at 8 o’clock. You, as Acker went on a rant that Bil didn’t know there was a BRAND of coffee with 8 O’clock name, thereby proving without a doubt that Bill is an idiot and nothing he says is worthy of consideration. Typical radical baloney, which you are still spewing four or more years later.

    Curly.Larry and Moe? Bill didn’t deny these as names as the three stooges, he only aptly applied those to you,Acker/Richard Chipmunk as Curly…Larry Erickson aka
    Walt Henry and others, is Larry… and the Oracle Phaedrus is Moe. This leftist trinity is appropriately labeled Curly, Larry, and Moe.

    This foolish argument you offer that just becaise Hitler said he was a socialist doesn’t mean he really was, is your defense of your own Socialist/communist statist ideology, a rhetorical trick to portray your own warped worldview as valid and commendable. I have read history, studying many viewpoints (even those of your fellow Marxian socialists who spread the false message that Hitler was just trying to defame the communists by claiming to be a socialist) and I am inclined to believe that WWII in Europe was actually a power struggle between two Marxist socialist dictators, Hitler and Stalin, to be ruler of the world. Little did either care how many millions had to be murdered and enslaved to impose their dictatorial statist socialist dreams on the human race.

    Do you actually believe that once 0bama has totally wrecked our constitutionally based government and has imposed his ruthless dictatorship over the survivors of his actions, that he will share power and dominion over the people with people like yourself who have helped him in his schemes? Read history and learn that people who topple their governments and become dictators have generally rounded up their supporters and eliminated them. The dictator reasons that if those supporters were willing to assist him in destroying their government, they could be persuaded to overthrow the new dictator.
    This 0bama is ruthless and unyielding in imposing his totalitarian plans upon us, and will work to accomplish his ends by, in his own words, “whatever means necessary”.

    • Richard Olson

      Wrong again Camilla/Ginny/Willie, and on every count. I know exactly what Bill said and the context. Because I have screen captures of all of it and more. Bill is a mine of inane comments that I have preserved for posterity, because without written proof no one would believe me. I have preserved other low hanging fruit like your December 13th 2012 letter “The new majority’s plans” wherein you hysterically pant all the evils about to befall us from all conspiracies great and small. In the future I’ll compare your hyper-frenzied histrionics with what actually happened…..so far it doesn’t look too good for your powers of prognostication. As a matter of fact so far you’re batting a big fat zero. As in “complete failure”.

      • camobabe

        As you said earlier in this thread, criticisms of Marxists such as yourself and Master 0bama are criminal. Now you admit that you have been “saving” comments by Bill and myself through the years. No doubt so you can turn them over to the 0bama thought police when he suspends first amendment rights to help him hunt us down and exact punishment for “criminal” statements about him.

        In your dreams.

        • Richard Olson

          Yes Camilla/Ginny/Willie, the entire government of the United States sits on the edge of their collective seats waiting for the next utterance from you. Entire government agencies have been formed just to glean your hysterical panic-stricken rants, because just as you see yourself, they see you as the center of the universe. I know for myself the moment I awaken I run to my computer to see if you have made some earth shaking comment overnight. I long to start my day with those little pearls of wisdom you evolve with such little effort. Yes Camilla you are the very center of the universe, the sun, the moon and all the planets revolve around you. Everything is about you.

      • Swede

        “Because I have screen captures of all of it and more.” ~Richard Olson

        That is just plain weird, Richard.

        • Richard Olson

          No it’s simply called “keeping track”. With your crowd of conservatives it’s necessary because you guys are in a constant state of denial.

          What’s weird is you guys saying something then denying you ever said it a month later because you thought no one could prove you wrong.

          An excellent example of what I’m talking about is the loony off the wall skitzo stuff from the person using the alias Camilla Ryan, see her post at 4:30 pm where she says…”As you said earlier in this thread, criticisms of Marxists such as yourself and Master 0bama are criminal.” Really Camilla?
          Show me, show me where I said that, you can’t. You cant’ because I didn’t say it. It’s just another lie that Camilla will deny she wrote a week from now.

          So if you and Camilla and Jerome, Bill and others are embarrassed by the wacko stuff you write, start telling the truth, stop accusing every other person on earth of conspiring to take your liberty and freedom away. Really you guys are worse than that crazy guy even Fox had the sense to fire.

          • Walt Henry

            Richard–Radical right wing conservatives have a streak of paranoia in their psychological makeup. Probably don’t want to expose this too forcefully. There is no motivating force greater to these people than their fears. (It is odd they would be so in favor of sharing all their private information so they could vote but seem to wish to refuse to share that information to buy a gun. In the good old days of MY GOP we were against sharing information with the government of any personal sort for any reason. But those were the days we admired education and intelligence. Now the GOP just has fears.)

          • Richard Olson

            A “streak of paranoia”? Larry you are either excessively diplomatic or exceedingly kind and generous. Probably both. Never the less grossly under-estimated.
            Without paranoia today’s tea bagger would cease to exist, she would be as a vampire without teeth.
            Without paranoia, fear and conspiracies she would stay in bed and wither away, there would be no reason to get up, no reason to stir from dreams of gloom and doom.

            Hey did you notice that CamillaGinny still can’t find my alleged statement? Even after 22hours. That’s why the locals have learned to take anything from the mouth of CamillaGinny with a grain of salt.

          • Richard Olson

            Three days and Camilla still can’t find her proof. And she’s not honorable enough to apologize.

Editor's Picks

LRH names new President, VP: Hospital cites growth as reason [UPDATED]

Due to continued growth of the organization, Larry Schulz, CEO of Lake Region Healthcare, announced two additions to the leadership team. Paul Wilson has been ... Read more

M State instructor scores big in 48 Hour Horror Film Project

Another project competing  in Hollywood’s Filmapalooza Minnesota State Community and Technical College instructor and composer Michael Trosvig scored big when his work was chosen as ... Read more

School board approves 4 of 11 bids for facility upgrades

The Fergus Falls school board approved four out of the 11 Facility Bond Referendum bids in its Monday evening meeting. The approved bids were for ... Read more

Balance of power makes GOP, Democrats wary

ST. PAUL — The Minnesota Legislature doesn’t begin its new session for another six weeks, but some lawmakers are already speculating about the potential for ... Read more

vehicles