people need to be more civil in political discussion.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

[Lunar]

You can't end bomb-throwing

If anyone gets out of line PERSONAL level, simply report the post and I'll intervene on the merits of the post.  

I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish here.  I'll let the thread stand because I think it could potentially be a broader critique of the media and our larger political discourse, I just wish you had fleshed out your argument more so there would be more to discuss.  

Obviously political messages that are inflammatory to the point of inaccuracy are the ones that will get you the most fundraising dollars and national attention, while the media channels that are the most aggressive will be getting the most viewers (who wants to watch wimpy reporting?  Is it any wonder why CNN hired Erick Erickson?).

[Free Palestine]

So, you have renounced your libertarian-hating ways?

[Torie]

I give some of the hyperbole here a pass, because after all, most of it is put up by teenagers. Gosh, I would have probably been worse than many at that age! 

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

So, you have renounced your libertarian-hating ways?

pretty much, and i apologize.

[Mint]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist.

The first is way more loaded than the second which isn't really an insult in most of the world.

[Lunar]

Wasn't there a Socialist Party and a Jewish community in Germany at the time, anyway?  In many of those cases, Hitler would have been right that people were Jewish or professed socialists..?

[Associate Justice PiT]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist.

The first is way more loaded than the second which isn't really an insult in most of the world.

     In the world at large, yes, but in most of the United States "socialist" is a pretty nasty thing to call someone.

     Nevertheless, that does go to prove the point that how good or bad any ideology is has to do with your own ideology & your own culture. Part of the reason that calling somebody a fascist or a socialist is not an effective means of arguing is that those claims do not address their arguments, but rather just play on some emotionalistic disdain for people who adhere to "subversive" or "backwards" ideologies.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Wasn't there a Socialist Party and a Jewish community in Germany at the time, anyway?  In many of those cases, Hitler would have been right that people were Jewish or professed socialists..?

yeah hitler would call people socialists, communists and so forth.

[Torie]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

Is this an example of a post that you find inappropriate, Mr. Hoffman?

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

Is this an example of a post that you find inappropriate, Mr. Hoffman?

I didn't back up my claim, and I probably shouldn't have said that.

Basically one of the first things to look for when it comes to fascism revolves around the idea of using name calling against an opponent in order to gain support. For example Hitler used to call everyone who opposed him either a socialist,communist, or supporter of the jewish conspiracy. In the end i do think that Conservatives are starting to use this tactic more frequently, but if the fascist element takes charge I know where to get the guns I need.

[Torie]

Well Mr. Hoffman, I hope and expect that this will be the last time that you ask anyone else for civility. Tossing around the word "fascism" like that is well, at once inaccurate and instigating.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

Hmm.

But wasn't Hitler the leader of the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP)?

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Well Mr. Hoffman, I hope and expect that this will be the last time that you ask anyone else for civility. Tossing around the word "fascism" like that is well, at once inaccurate and instigating.

you dont seem to be a fascist so its not a big deal for you.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

lol Republicans are turning into fascists.

um... ok

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

Hmm.

But wasn't Hitler the leader of the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP)?

yes, but that is aside the point. Attaching your opponent in a hateful manner is what one of the signals that tells me the person has an authoritarian personality.

[Torie]

Well Mr. Hoffman, I hope and expect that this will be the last time that you ask anyone else for civility. Tossing around the word "fascism" like that is well, at once inaccurate and instigating.

you dont seem to be a fascist so its not a big deal for you.

Thanks for letting me off the hook. That is most generous of you.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Well Mr. Hoffman, I hope and expect that this will be the last time that you ask anyone else for civility. Tossing around the word "fascism" like that is well, at once inaccurate and instigating.

you dont seem to be a fascist so its not a big deal for you.

Thanks for letting me off the hook. That is most generous of you.

No problem, and I am sure most conservatives are good people who do not engage in the name calling and so forth.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

Hmm.

But wasn't Hitler the leader of the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP)?

yes, but that is aside the point. Attaching your opponent in a hateful manner is what one of the signals that tells me the person has an authoritarian personality.

Mr. Hoffman,

First, you gave a specific example in your initial post on this thread (hitler calling someone a socialist), which lead to my specific question.

What I was hoping to point out to you is that Hitler would not necessarily have considered the term an epithet.  More broadly, there are many avowedly socialist parties (and governments )around the globe.  Indeed, one of the Senators from Vermont admits to being a socialist.  So, the term is NOT "name-calling" per se.

Second, the term is a precis description of a pattern of public policy preferences.  Bernie Sanders is a socialist.  However, even though I disagree with him as to the bulk of public policy, I have approvingly quoted him in his critique of the Federal Reserve Board and its chairman.

So, my identifying Sen. Sanders as a socialist is not "hateful," but rather an accurate shorthand description of his policies.

Finally, let me suggest that it might be better to look at the substance of the comments (if there are any), rather than seeking "signals" for personality analysis.


 

[Ban my account ffs!]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

Hmm.

But wasn't Hitler the leader of the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP)?

yes, but that is aside the point. Attaching your opponent in a hateful manner is what one of the signals that tells me the person has an authoritarian personality.

Mr. Hoffman,

First, you gave a specific example in your initial post on this thread (hitler calling someone a socialist), which lead to my specific question.

What I was hoping to point out to you is that Hitler would not necessarily have considered the term an epithet.  More broadly, there are many avowedly socialist parties (and governments )around the globe.  Indeed, one of the Senators from Vermont admits to being a socialist.  So, the term is NOT "name-calling" per se.

Second, the term is a precis description of a pattern of public policy preferences.  Bernie Sanders is a socialist.  However, even though I disagree with him as to the bulk of public policy, I have approvingly quoted him in his critique of the Federal Reserve Board and its chairman.

So, my identifying Sen. Sanders as a socialist is not "hateful," but rather an accurate shorthand description of his policies.

Finally, let me suggest that it might be better to look at the substance of the comments (if there are any), rather than seeking "signals" for personality analysis.


 

I'd just ask that you not label people socialist, who aren't socialist.  You can call me a socialist since I'm more or less a Democratic Socialist (just like Sanders... though that doesn't mean a whole lot)... but Obama is not one.  Just because he promotes socialization of some programs does not mean he wants to dismantle the "free" market or private capital.

[Meeker]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

Hmm.

But wasn't Hitler the leader of the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP)?

Haha

Oh CARL. You're too much.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

Hmm.

But wasn't Hitler the leader of the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP)?

yes, but that is aside the point. Attaching your opponent in a hateful manner is what one of the signals that tells me the person has an authoritarian personality.

Mr. Hoffman,

First, you gave a specific example in your initial post on this thread (hitler calling someone a socialist), which lead to my specific question.

What I was hoping to point out to you is that Hitler would not necessarily have considered the term an epithet.  More broadly, there are many avowedly socialist parties (and governments )around the globe.  Indeed, one of the Senators from Vermont admits to being a socialist.  So, the term is NOT "name-calling" per se.

Second, the term is a precis description of a pattern of public policy preferences.  Bernie Sanders is a socialist.  However, even though I disagree with him as to the bulk of public policy, I have approvingly quoted him in his critique of the Federal Reserve Board and its chairman.

So, my identifying Sen. Sanders as a socialist is not "hateful," but rather an accurate shorthand description of his policies.

Finally, let me suggest that it might be better to look at the substance of the comments (if there are any), rather than seeking "signals" for personality analysis.


 

I'd just ask that you not label people socialist, who aren't socialist.  You can call me a socialist since I'm more or less a Democratic Socialist (just like Sanders... though that doesn't mean a whole lot)... but Obama is not one.  Just because he promotes socialization of some programs does not mean he wants to dismantle the "free" market or private capital.

First, let me suggest that your views are NOT definitive. 

Second, its nice of you to recognize that obama "promotes socialization of some programs."

Third, I suggest you go back in the multitude of statements made by Obama in the past, and you will find where he has stated his objectives, which fit the generic definition of socialism.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

Hmm.

But wasn't Hitler the leader of the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP)?

yes, but that is aside the point. Attaching your opponent in a hateful manner is what one of the signals that tells me the person has an authoritarian personality.

Mr. Hoffman,

First, you gave a specific example in your initial post on this thread (hitler calling someone a socialist), which lead to my specific question.

What I was hoping to point out to you is that Hitler would not necessarily have considered the term an epithet.  More broadly, there are many avowedly socialist parties (and governments )around the globe.  Indeed, one of the Senators from Vermont admits to being a socialist.  So, the term is NOT "name-calling" per se.

Second, the term is a precis description of a pattern of public policy preferences.  Bernie Sanders is a socialist.  However, even though I disagree with him as to the bulk of public policy, I have approvingly quoted him in his critique of the Federal Reserve Board and its chairman.

So, my identifying Sen. Sanders as a socialist is not "hateful," but rather an accurate shorthand description of his policies.

Finally, let me suggest that it might be better to look at the substance of the comments (if there are any), rather than seeking "signals" for personality analysis.


 

I'd just ask that you not label people socialist, who aren't socialist.  You can call me a socialist since I'm more or less a Democratic Socialist (just like Sanders... though that doesn't mean a whole lot)... but Obama is not one.  Just because he promotes socialization of some programs does not mean he wants to dismantle the "free" market or private capital.

First, let me suggest that your views are NOT definitive. 

Second, its nice of you to recognize that obama "promotes socialization of some programs."

Third, I suggest you go back in the multitude of statements made by Obama in the past, and you will find where he has stated his objectives, which fit the generic definition of socialism.

A generic view of socialism would be much more than government bailouts for corporations that are deemed "too big to fail" (by the corporations themselves, no less) and laws that make it easier for poor people to get medical insurance.  That's not socialism.  I don't even know what that is... watered down corporate centrism?

You want socialism?  How about a completely government run medical system.  The government opens up hospitals and clinics and employs doctors and nurses.. and care is rationed out based mostly on need but no one person is subject to higher quality care than anyone else.  And people pay into this system based on their ability to pay.

That is socialized medicine.  Obama has never proposed such a system.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

lol Republicans are turning into fascists.

um... ok

^^^^

The Democrats should start with themselves.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Honestly calling george bush a fascist or obama a socialist reminds me of how hitler would simply call people a jew or a socialist. I really cant respect people who engage in name calling, and its just better to discuss policy on a more pragmatic level.

Hmm.

But wasn't Hitler the leader of the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP)?

yes, but that is aside the point. Attaching your opponent in a hateful manner is what one of the signals that tells me the person has an authoritarian personality.

Mr. Hoffman,

First, you gave a specific example in your initial post on this thread (hitler calling someone a socialist), which lead to my specific question.

What I was hoping to point out to you is that Hitler would not necessarily have considered the term an epithet.  More broadly, there are many avowedly socialist parties (and governments )around the globe.  Indeed, one of the Senators from Vermont admits to being a socialist.  So, the term is NOT "name-calling" per se.

Second, the term is a precis description of a pattern of public policy preferences.  Bernie Sanders is a socialist.  However, even though I disagree with him as to the bulk of public policy, I have approvingly quoted him in his critique of the Federal Reserve Board and its chairman.

So, my identifying Sen. Sanders as a socialist is not "hateful," but rather an accurate shorthand description of his policies.

Finally, let me suggest that it might be better to look at the substance of the comments (if there are any), rather than seeking "signals" for personality analysis.


 

I am talking about when the word is being used in derogatory sense in order gain support. Just think about how McCarthyism was often compared to the salem witch hunts.