Gingrich's new book compares Democrats to Nazis and Communists

[President Mitt]

People compared Bush to Hitler and got away with it.

I'd disagree that the war protestors who said that phrase got through it unscathed by the media.

EDIT: Woo! 3000 posts!

[pbrower2a]

People compared Bush to Hitler and got away with it.

Dubya was a frontman for the much-more dangerous and insidious Karl Rove, who tried to exercise dictatorial power as Party Boss without being a dictator.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If someone talks and acts like an extremist, then one is likely an extremist.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Now that is extreme and preposterous! You tell me where the Gulag-style camps are. You  name the equivalent of OGPU in America. You tell me how you could survive, let alone your cranky and derogatory stuff can be posted on the Web, if Barack Obama is the equivalent of Josef Stalin. You tell me where our President's picture is reaching parity with those of  George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.  You can explain how we have an opposition party that believes that it can win.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

When the government owns a share in the enterprise it normally exercises powers that any owner would in the ratio of its ownership.

The camps are called public schools. The government has no business owning or running anything in the private sector. Newt Gingrich is not an extremist.

I have taught in public schools as a substitute -- every level K-12, and about every class possible. Rural and urban.  I can assure you that there is no deliberate effort to inculcate one partisan agenda in schools. The only people that I have known to get in trouble in public schools for their beliefs are neo-Nazis. I am very careful to avoid pushing any partisan agenda within a classroom, and I have offered a conservative viewpoint as an alternative when everyone seemed uniformly liberal. That conservative viewpoint is not a stereotype of "we need the right to sacrifice workers to the god Mammon" or ""We need more pollution".

If there is any political uniformity within a school it is because of the neighborhood and not because of the choices of the school administrators. The current youth are decidedly liberal on the whole because of the times -- times in which cutthroat capitalism is all that they know, times in which working parents are unable to exude optimism in the companies for which they work and the management of those companies, times in which business scandals appear monthly on the news, and when economic insecurity is a tool of control.

Nothing so promotes socialist attitudes in youth than does bad capitalism. When people work harder and get lesser pay, when people see story after story of mass layoffs and plant shutdowns, when tycoons and executives wax fat as the result of the suffering that they enforce,  when people come home from work and express contempt for the moral conduct of superiors and ownership after they no longer have the responsibility to show forced smiles... such isn't good for promoting economic conservatism among youth.   Add to that, kids in high school are now born between 1992 and 1996; most of their conscious  childhood has involved a President (George W. Bush) who was a firm exponent of crony capitalism.

[perdedor]

Secular Commie-Nazi?

Obama is a member of the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party?

[Derek]

People compared Bush to Hitler and got away with it. I feel no sympathy for anyone who thinks Gingrich is extreme and if you look at the democrats today there really isn't much different between them and the communists from Russia in the mid 20th century. The nazis? I won't go that far but running Government Motors while it's still somewhat owned privately is a good start down that direction.

Do you actually believe all that???
Really, I consider myself to be a socialist and that anyone could mix up two ideologies as radically opposed as liberalism and socialism (or liberalism and fascism for that matter) is beyond me.
If someone who actually completed highschool would make such a comparison, it would be worrying enough. But when one of the most important spokesmen of the main opposition party in the most powerfull nation on earth starts to sell this kind of crap, it's just plain sickening and/or incredibly cynic.

You aren't taught about the dangers of socialism in school because it's run by the left and I'm not sure what you're getting at with that stupid comment. Liberalism as it is held today is socialism.

[pbrower2a]

People compared Bush to Hitler and got away with it. I feel no sympathy for anyone who thinks Gingrich is extreme and if you look at the democrats today there really isn't much different between them and the communists from Russia in the mid 20th century. The nazis? I won't go that far but running Government Motors while it's still somewhat owned privately is a good start down that direction.

Do you actually believe all that???
Really, I consider myself to be a socialist and that anyone could mix up two ideologies as radically opposed as liberalism and socialism (or liberalism and fascism for that matter) is beyond me.
If someone who actually completed highschool would make such a comparison, it would be worrying enough. But when one of the most important spokesmen of the main opposition party in the most powerfull nation on earth starts to sell this kind of crap, it's just plain sickening and/or incredibly cynic.

You aren't taught about the dangers of socialism in school because it's run by the left and I'm not sure what you're getting at with that stupid comment. Liberalism as it is held today is socialism.

The Right controls  Big Business; the rest of us must either dodge our political beliefs, sell out, or find some other line of work. School teaching is one place in which one can get away with being an overt liberal. Besides, the temperament appropriate for teaching (a certain level of open-mindedness, an even temperament, and intellectual integrity) are compatible for teaching as they aren't in much of Big Business. 

[Derek]

People compared Bush to Hitler and got away with it. I feel no sympathy for anyone who thinks Gingrich is extreme and if you look at the democrats today there really isn't much different between them and the communists from Russia in the mid 20th century. The nazis? I won't go that far but running Government Motors while it's still somewhat owned privately is a good start down that direction.

Do you actually believe all that???
Really, I consider myself to be a socialist and that anyone could mix up two ideologies as radically opposed as liberalism and socialism (or liberalism and fascism for that matter) is beyond me.
If someone who actually completed highschool would make such a comparison, it would be worrying enough. But when one of the most important spokesmen of the main opposition party in the most powerfull nation on earth starts to sell this kind of crap, it's just plain sickening and/or incredibly cynic.

You aren't taught about the dangers of socialism in school because it's run by the left and I'm not sure what you're getting at with that stupid comment. Liberalism as it is held today is socialism.

The Right controls  Big Business; the rest of us must either dodge our political beliefs, sell out, or find some other line of work. School teaching is one place in which one can get away with being an overt liberal. Besides, the temperament appropriate for teaching (a certain level of open-mindedness, an even temperament, and intellectual integrity) are compatible for teaching as they aren't in much of Big Business. 

Yes I hear your violin about your views not being accepted in the work place. The reason your views aren't welcomed at other jobs is because those jobs are real world oriented and not in a school that is close off from reality. Those who are successful tend to vote Republican and are conservative because they know how hard they had to work to get to where they're at today. I'm happy to see that we're finally getting text books that include BOTH SIDES to political issues.

[Insula Dei]

Derek, it's typical for conservative die-hards like yourself to have a distaste for everything that's even vaguely reminiscent of intellectualism since your ideas, obviously, won't last for longer than 5 minutes under any (I repeat that 'ANY', and that includes theoretically thought-trough forms of conservativism and libertarianism) critical form of evaluation.
You say that I've been brainwashed in school by the prevailing liberal bias of teachers. I can guarantee you that most of the teachers I've had in highschool were well to my right on every single issue.
You claim to be directly in touch with something you call 'reality'. The problem is that if in this 'reality' of yours there indeed is no palpable difference between communism and fascismif  and Democrats really adhere to both these 'evils', and if Corporate enterprise really is a force for good in any thinkable circumstances whereas the state can only deliver oppression, than your view of 'reality' transcends forgiveable subjectivity and becomes a dangerous illusion. And this is an illusion you seem to share with many on the america hard-right and one that's eagerily exploited by Big Bussines.

Boy, those guys over at BP and Halliburton must pray to whatever gods they still hold valuable every day to beg that your lot won't start to properly read up on any subject whatsoever rather than blindly following the leaders they have provided you with.

[pbrower2a]

I just took a look at the book; it seems to be an anti-liberal screed throughout.

I didn't have time to read the entire book, but I did look through the index. It is anything but even-handed; it says nothing about any of the questionable figures of the 43rd Administration. All though it calls for a restoration of godly morality (in the guise of a dream for tycoons and executives -- unions gutted, regulations defanged, taxes shifted to the non-rich) it has no references to such persons as Jack Abramoff and Karl Rove.   

Conservatives have no monopoly on morality.

[Derek]

Derek, it's typical for conservative die-hards like yourself to have a distaste for everything that's even vaguely reminiscent of intellectualism since your ideas, obviously, won't last for longer than 5 minutes under any (I repeat that 'ANY', and that includes theoretically thought-trough forms of conservativism and libertarianism) critical form of evaluation.
You say that I've been brainwashed in school by the prevailing liberal bias of teachers. I can guarantee you that most of the teachers I've had in highschool were well to my right on every single issue.
You claim to be directly in touch with something you call 'reality'. The problem is that if in this 'reality' of yours there indeed is no palpable difference between communism and fascismif  and Democrats really adhere to both these 'evils', and if Corporate enterprise really is a force for good in any thinkable circumstances whereas the state can only deliver oppression, than your view of 'reality' transcends forgiveable subjectivity and becomes a dangerous illusion. And this is an illusion you seem to share with many on the america hard-right and one that's eagerily exploited by Big Bussines.

Boy, those guys over at BP and Halliburton must pray to whatever gods they still hold valuable every day to beg that your lot won't start to properly read up on any subject whatsoever rather than blindly following the leaders they have provided you with.

I do not follow blindly and consider myself an intellectual. Intellectualism doesn't belong to one party. I'm tired of being called uneducated or unsophisticated simply because I trust my instinct to know what is what. I do not need a book or a reference to conclude that our government is out of control or know a good teacher when I see one. As for being lumped in with the "hard-right" I'll take that as a compliment because from my point of view that is an honor.

[pbrower2a]

Derek, it's typical for conservative die-hards like yourself to have a distaste for everything that's even vaguely reminiscent of intellectualism since your ideas, obviously, won't last for longer than 5 minutes under any (I repeat that 'ANY', and that includes theoretically thought-trough forms of conservativism and libertarianism) critical form of evaluation.
You say that I've been brainwashed in school by the prevailing liberal bias of teachers. I can guarantee you that most of the teachers I've had in highschool were well to my right on every single issue.
You claim to be directly in touch with something you call 'reality'. The problem is that if in this 'reality' of yours there indeed is no palpable difference between communism and fascismif  and Democrats really adhere to both these 'evils', and if Corporate enterprise really is a force for good in any thinkable circumstances whereas the state can only deliver oppression, than your view of 'reality' transcends forgiveable subjectivity and becomes a dangerous illusion. And this is an illusion you seem to share with many on the america hard-right and one that's eagerily exploited by Big Bussines.

Boy, those guys over at BP and Halliburton must pray to whatever gods they still hold valuable every day to beg that your lot won't start to properly read up on any subject whatsoever rather than blindly following the leaders they have provided you with.

I do not follow blindly and consider myself an intellectual. Intellectualism doesn't belong to one party. I'm tired of being called uneducated or unsophisticated simply because I trust my instinct to know what is what. I do not need a book or a reference to conclude that our government is out of control or know a good teacher when I see one. As for being lumped in with the "hard-right" I'll take that as a compliment because from my point of view that is an honor.

Nobody need call oneself an "intellectual"; so calling oneself is an act of arrogance.

One is not unsophisticated because one is a conservative or even a fascist. But we must recognize which Party has done most to appeal to ignorance, superstition, and fanaticism. 

Instinct is wholly inadequate for determining reality. Instinct is easily deceived. It might be easy to believe that a larger triangle has bigger angles -- which is of course wrong. Instinct told people that the Earth is flat and that heavenly bodies circle the Earth. Instinct tells us that what feels good is good -- even with cocaine.

No person is the ultimate arbiter of truth. Believing that truth is in oneself  is a folly known as solipsism.

[Mr. Morden]

Nobody need call oneself an "intellectual"; so calling oneself is an act of arrogance.

One is not unsophisticated because one is a conservative or even a fascist.

But we must recognize which Party has done most to appeal to ignorance, superstition, and fanaticism.  

Instinct is wholly inadequate for determining reality.

Instinct is easily deceived.

It might be easy to believe that a larger triangle has bigger angles -- which is of course wrong.

Instinct told people that the Earth is flat and that heavenly bodies circle the Earth.

Instinct tells us that what feels good is good -- even with cocaine.

No person is the ultimate arbiter of truth.

Believing that truth is in oneself  is a folly known as solipsism.

Each of those sentences would make an awesome slogan for a fortune cookie.

EDIT: Especially the one about cocaine.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

So this is what we get from the apogee of Republican intellectualism? Nice.

[Insula Dei]

Derek, it's typical for conservative die-hards like yourself to have a distaste for everything that's even vaguely reminiscent of intellectualism since your ideas, obviously, won't last for longer than 5 minutes under any (I repeat that 'ANY', and that includes theoretically thought-trough forms of conservativism and libertarianism) critical form of evaluation.
You say that I've been brainwashed in school by the prevailing liberal bias of teachers. I can guarantee you that most of the teachers I've had in highschool were well to my right on every single issue.
You claim to be directly in touch with something you call 'reality'. The problem is that if in this 'reality' of yours there indeed is no palpable difference between communism and fascismif  and Democrats really adhere to both these 'evils', and if Corporate enterprise really is a force for good in any thinkable circumstances whereas the state can only deliver oppression, than your view of 'reality' transcends forgiveable subjectivity and becomes a dangerous illusion. And this is an illusion you seem to share with many on the america hard-right and one that's eagerily exploited by Big Bussines.

Boy, those guys over at BP and Halliburton must pray to whatever gods they still hold valuable every day to beg that your lot won't start to properly read up on any subject whatsoever rather than blindly following the leaders they have provided you with.

Derek is a troll, but if you're seriously asserting that conservative/libertarian thought won't hold up under critical evaluation, then you might want to consider opening a book for once, preferably one not written by Karl Marx.

Funnily enough the point I tried to make is that Derek's ideas made no sense even when looked at from a conservative/libertarian angle. I'm sorry that if I failed to make myself clear but I was certainly NOT implying that conservativism or libertarianism didn't make any sense.

[Derek]

Derek, it's typical for conservative die-hards like yourself to have a distaste for everything that's even vaguely reminiscent of intellectualism since your ideas, obviously, won't last for longer than 5 minutes under any (I repeat that 'ANY', and that includes theoretically thought-trough forms of conservativism and libertarianism) critical form of evaluation.
You say that I've been brainwashed in school by the prevailing liberal bias of teachers. I can guarantee you that most of the teachers I've had in highschool were well to my right on every single issue.
You claim to be directly in touch with something you call 'reality'. The problem is that if in this 'reality' of yours there indeed is no palpable difference between communism and fascismif  and Democrats really adhere to both these 'evils', and if Corporate enterprise really is a force for good in any thinkable circumstances whereas the state can only deliver oppression, than your view of 'reality' transcends forgiveable subjectivity and becomes a dangerous illusion. And this is an illusion you seem to share with many on the america hard-right and one that's eagerily exploited by Big Bussines.

Boy, those guys over at BP and Halliburton must pray to whatever gods they still hold valuable every day to beg that your lot won't start to properly read up on any subject whatsoever rather than blindly following the leaders they have provided you with.

Derek is a troll, but if you're seriously asserting that conservative/libertarian thought won't hold up under critical evaluation, then you might want to consider opening a book for once, preferably one not written by Karl Marx.

Funnily enough the point I tried to make is that Derek's ideas made no sense even when looked at from a conservative/libertarian angle. I'm sorry that if I failed to make myself clear but I was certainly NOT implying that conservativism or libertarianism didn't make any sense.

I am my own individual with my own views so if I didn't make sense as a right winger, then it's because I'm not. DUH

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I haven't read the book, so I don't know the full context, but that quote didn't mention "Democrats" - just saying.

[Derek]

I haven't read the book, so I don't know the full context, but that quote didn't mention "Democrats" - just saying.

Yep leave it to the left to replace words and read between the lines.

[Mr. Morden]

I haven't read the book, so I don't know the full context, but that quote didn't mention "Democrats" - just saying.

The subtitle of the book is "Stopping Obama's secular-socialist machine", and Gingrich has made repeated statements to indicate that when he talks about "the secular-socialist machine", he's referring to either Democrats in general or the group of people in Obama's inner circle.  See for example:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/16/gingrich-democrats-want-impose-secular-socialist-machine

[Lunar]

Gingrich's use of the word "Secular" reminds me of Beck attacking the word "Progressive"

[pbrower2a]

I haven't read the book, so I don't know the full context, but that quote didn't mention "Democrats" - just saying.

The subtitle of the book is "Stopping Obama's secular-socialist machine", and Gingrich has made repeated statements to indicate that when he talks about "the secular-socialist machine", he's referring to either Democrats in general or the group of people in Obama's inner circle.  See for example:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/16/gingrich-democrats-want-impose-secular-socialist-machine

In Gingrich-World, plutocracy prevails and intertwines itself with cranky Christian fundamentalism. It is the conjunction of people of unrestrained rapaciousness with people who believe that material gain is a detriment to reaching a Heavenly reward for acquiescence in one's own exploitation and degradation.  "Secular socialists" are any people who oppose such an ideal. He'd like to call them "Marxists", but that is too obvious a falsehood as a smear.

In all seriousness, Christianity must face secular challenges that include formal logic and objective science. 

[Derek]

So he is a conservative and traditional man who views things that way. Get over it.

[pbrower2a]

So he is a conservative and traditional man who views things that way. Get over it.

Conservatives and traditionalists need to find something more worthy of preservation than inequity and superstition.

Gingrich has shown himself  as just another right-wing demagogue.  That he is more sophisticated than Sarah Palin  is obvious. What he says won't hold up in 2012 in the general election. If he is the last man standing in the GOP in 2012, he gets the GOP nomination, only to lose on about the same scale as Adlai Stevenson in 1952 or 1956.