Oh yes, that's one of the reasons I'm filing it away, should come in
useful around election time in a couple of years.

Jeff DeWitt

billy ray wrote:
> Look at Hitler's quote carefully and see if its words remind you of the
> actions of any current day politicians....
>
>
> "Jeff DeWitt" <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:r1Ofg.32614$Lg.29490@tornado.southeast.rr.com ...
>
>>Thanks Billy, that's a great quote, I'm saving it to use later!
>>
>>Jeff DeWitt
>>
>>billy ray wrote:
>>
>>>Everybody now knows how evil **** eugenics were: How all sorts of people
>>>were exterminated not because of anything they had done but simply
>>>because of the way they had been born. And we have all heard how
>>>disastrous were the **** efforts to build up the "master race" through
>>>selective breeding of SS men with the best of German women -- the
>>>"Lebensborn" project. Good leftists today recoil in horror from all that
>>>of course and use their "Hitler was a conservative" mantra to load those
>>>evils onto conservatives. But Hitler was a socialist. As he himself said:
>>>
>>>"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic
>>>system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair
>>>salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to
>>>wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are
>>>all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." (Speech of
>>>May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@nospamverizon.net> wrote in message
>>>news:Xns97D5D80CA6BA6malmros@130.81.64.196...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in news:0kKfg.11712$Qg.4920
>>>>@tornado.southeast.rr.com:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>The ****'s were the "National Socialist German Workers Party", which is
>>>>>hardly far right!
>>>>
>>>>Right is as right does, Jeff; learn your history. The ***** were not in
>>>>the least socialist, no matter what their name says; in fact, socialists
>>>>and other leftists were very much a persecuted group under the ****
>>>>regime.
>>>
>>>
>

 

Oh yes, that's one of the reasons I'm filing it away, should come in
useful around election time in a couple of years.

Jeff DeWitt

billy ray wrote:
> Look at Hitler's quote carefully and see if its words remind you of the
> actions of any current day politicians....
>
>
> "Jeff DeWitt" <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:r1Ofg.32614$Lg.29490@tornado.southeast.rr.com ...
>
>>Thanks Billy, that's a great quote, I'm saving it to use later!
>>
>>Jeff DeWitt
>>
>>billy ray wrote:
>>
>>>Everybody now knows how evil **** eugenics were: How all sorts of people
>>>were exterminated not because of anything they had done but simply
>>>because of the way they had been born. And we have all heard how
>>>disastrous were the **** efforts to build up the "master race" through
>>>selective breeding of SS men with the best of German women -- the
>>>"Lebensborn" project. Good leftists today recoil in horror from all that
>>>of course and use their "Hitler was a conservative" mantra to load those
>>>evils onto conservatives. But Hitler was a socialist. As he himself said:
>>>
>>>"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic
>>>system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair
>>>salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to
>>>wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are
>>>all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." (Speech of
>>>May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@nospamverizon.net> wrote in message
>>>news:Xns97D5D80CA6BA6malmros@130.81.64.196...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in news:0kKfg.11712$Qg.4920
>>>>@tornado.southeast.rr.com:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>The ****'s were the "National Socialist German Workers Party", which is
>>>>>hardly far right!
>>>>
>>>>Right is as right does, Jeff; learn your history. The ***** were not in
>>>>the least socialist, no matter what their name says; in fact, socialists
>>>>and other leftists were very much a persecuted group under the ****
>>>>regime.
>>>
>>>
>

 

Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in
news:3sOfg.11919$Qg.8563@tornado.southeast.rr.com:

> Oh yes, that's one of the reasons I'm filing it away, should come in
> useful around election time in a couple of years.

No need, son; George W. Bush has had his two terms and can't run for a
third.

 

Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in
news:3sOfg.11919$Qg.8563@tornado.southeast.rr.com:

> Oh yes, that's one of the reasons I'm filing it away, should come in
> useful around election time in a couple of years.

No need, son; George W. Bush has had his two terms and can't run for a
third.

 

Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in
news:3sOfg.11919$Qg.8563@tornado.southeast.rr.com:

> Oh yes, that's one of the reasons I'm filing it away, should come in
> useful around election time in a couple of years.

No need, son; George W. Bush has had his two terms and can't run for a
third.

 

Mary Malmros wrote:
> Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in
> news:H2Nfg.18873$JW5.10044@southeast.rr.com:
>
>
>>Oh boy are we getting way off topic however...
>>
>>I don't claim to be an expert on the *****, but among other unsavory
>>things they were they WERE socialists.
>>
>>A few points, ****'s promoted the limiting of profits, abolishment of
>>rent and increasing social benefits, all socialist ideas.
>>
>>There is an excellent essay from Nobel Prize winner Friedrich A. Hayek
>>titled "The Socialist Roots of Nazism"
>>
>>http://lamar.colostate.edu/~grjan/hayeknaziism.html
>>
>>I suspect that the reason that it's commonly accepted that Nazism
>>isn't really socialism is because the Socialists are (correctly)
>>terrified to be connected with Nazism in any way and react very
>>strongly to any suggestion that Nazism was socialist.
>
>
> I don't suppose the large number of socialists who were killed by *****
> could possibly have anything to do with it...no, no way...

No, they weren't the right sort of socialists... to use the modern term
they weren't politically correct by the ****'s standards. Stalin had a
lot of "good" Communists purged too, not because they weren't
Communists, but because he saw them as a threat to his power. (I put
"good" in quotes because "good Communist" is an oxymoron).
>
>
>>In other words it's not politically correct to link the two... but
>>then I'm not politically correct!
>
>
> Yes, another bold independent thinker proudly proclaiming himself to be
> "politically incorrect". Question: is thinking still truly independent if
> it's also intellectually dishonest? Characterizing distortion of history
> as "political incorrectness" is like calling propaganda truth.

What's intellectually dishonest about disagreeing with what seems to be
the accepted thought, that the ****'s weren't socialists? Show me where
I'm wrong instead of just attacking me... or even more to the point show
were Dr. Hayek, who WAS an expert, is wrong.

Jeff DeWitt

 

Mary Malmros wrote:
> Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in
> news:H2Nfg.18873$JW5.10044@southeast.rr.com:
>
>
>>Oh boy are we getting way off topic however...
>>
>>I don't claim to be an expert on the *****, but among other unsavory
>>things they were they WERE socialists.
>>
>>A few points, ****'s promoted the limiting of profits, abolishment of
>>rent and increasing social benefits, all socialist ideas.
>>
>>There is an excellent essay from Nobel Prize winner Friedrich A. Hayek
>>titled "The Socialist Roots of Nazism"
>>
>>http://lamar.colostate.edu/~grjan/hayeknaziism.html
>>
>>I suspect that the reason that it's commonly accepted that Nazism
>>isn't really socialism is because the Socialists are (correctly)
>>terrified to be connected with Nazism in any way and react very
>>strongly to any suggestion that Nazism was socialist.
>
>
> I don't suppose the large number of socialists who were killed by *****
> could possibly have anything to do with it...no, no way...

No, they weren't the right sort of socialists... to use the modern term
they weren't politically correct by the ****'s standards. Stalin had a
lot of "good" Communists purged too, not because they weren't
Communists, but because he saw them as a threat to his power. (I put
"good" in quotes because "good Communist" is an oxymoron).
>
>
>>In other words it's not politically correct to link the two... but
>>then I'm not politically correct!
>
>
> Yes, another bold independent thinker proudly proclaiming himself to be
> "politically incorrect". Question: is thinking still truly independent if
> it's also intellectually dishonest? Characterizing distortion of history
> as "political incorrectness" is like calling propaganda truth.

What's intellectually dishonest about disagreeing with what seems to be
the accepted thought, that the ****'s weren't socialists? Show me where
I'm wrong instead of just attacking me... or even more to the point show
were Dr. Hayek, who WAS an expert, is wrong.

Jeff DeWitt

 

Mary Malmros wrote:
> Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in
> news:H2Nfg.18873$JW5.10044@southeast.rr.com:
>
>
>>Oh boy are we getting way off topic however...
>>
>>I don't claim to be an expert on the *****, but among other unsavory
>>things they were they WERE socialists.
>>
>>A few points, ****'s promoted the limiting of profits, abolishment of
>>rent and increasing social benefits, all socialist ideas.
>>
>>There is an excellent essay from Nobel Prize winner Friedrich A. Hayek
>>titled "The Socialist Roots of Nazism"
>>
>>http://lamar.colostate.edu/~grjan/hayeknaziism.html
>>
>>I suspect that the reason that it's commonly accepted that Nazism
>>isn't really socialism is because the Socialists are (correctly)
>>terrified to be connected with Nazism in any way and react very
>>strongly to any suggestion that Nazism was socialist.
>
>
> I don't suppose the large number of socialists who were killed by *****
> could possibly have anything to do with it...no, no way...

No, they weren't the right sort of socialists... to use the modern term
they weren't politically correct by the ****'s standards. Stalin had a
lot of "good" Communists purged too, not because they weren't
Communists, but because he saw them as a threat to his power. (I put
"good" in quotes because "good Communist" is an oxymoron).
>
>
>>In other words it's not politically correct to link the two... but
>>then I'm not politically correct!
>
>
> Yes, another bold independent thinker proudly proclaiming himself to be
> "politically incorrect". Question: is thinking still truly independent if
> it's also intellectually dishonest? Characterizing distortion of history
> as "political incorrectness" is like calling propaganda truth.

What's intellectually dishonest about disagreeing with what seems to be
the accepted thought, that the ****'s weren't socialists? Show me where
I'm wrong instead of just attacking me... or even more to the point show
were Dr. Hayek, who WAS an expert, is wrong.

Jeff DeWitt

 

Oh there will be plenty of need, 2008 is coming and no doubt the
Democrats will come up with another nutcase lefty to run, someone I can
use that quote against. I just hope to God the Republicans come up with
someone good to run against him (or her).

Jeff DeWitt

Mary Malmros wrote:
> Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in
> news:3sOfg.11919$Qg.8563@tornado.southeast.rr.com:
>
>
>>Oh yes, that's one of the reasons I'm filing it away, should come in
>>useful around election time in a couple of years.
>
>
> No need, son; George W. Bush has had his two terms and can't run for a
> third.

 

Oh there will be plenty of need, 2008 is coming and no doubt the
Democrats will come up with another nutcase lefty to run, someone I can
use that quote against. I just hope to God the Republicans come up with
someone good to run against him (or her).

Jeff DeWitt

Mary Malmros wrote:
> Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in
> news:3sOfg.11919$Qg.8563@tornado.southeast.rr.com:
>
>
>>Oh yes, that's one of the reasons I'm filing it away, should come in
>>useful around election time in a couple of years.
>
>
> No need, son; George W. Bush has had his two terms and can't run for a
> third.