The Right Side of the News

During WWII both Italy and Germany were fascist. From Nazism - Wikipedia:

quote:

---

Nazism is a form of fascism and showed that ideology's disdain for liberal democracy and the parliamentary system,...
...
Fascism was a major influence on Nazism. The seizure of power by Italian Fascist leader Benito Mussolini in the March on Rome in 1922 drew admiration by Hitler, who less than a month later had begun to model himself and the Nazi Party upon Mussolini and the Fascists. Hitler presented the Nazis as a form of German fascism.

---

You have a vivid imagination. Faith keeps calling liberals fascist, hence the attempts to help her understand that fascism is conservatism's relative, not liberalism's. Fascism is antithetical to liberalism.No one here is calling US conservatism fascist, but Trump does have a very strong authoritarian streak.--Percy

That sounds very strange. When I enter "conservative" in to Google or Bing every returned search item is related to conservatives or conservatism.Most search engines customize search results according to the person's interests, but it's hard to see how that could cause "conservative" to return results about Democrats. I'd like to investigate your problem. Could you provide the first five or ten search results you're getting? Please also tell me which search engine you're using. Overuse of pronouns can get confusing (underuse can sound repetitive and is more typing but is a lot less confusing). The "they" in PaulK's sentence refers to social media. He's referring to the problems experienced by social media providers in dealing with right-wing provocateurs, for example Alex Jones and other white supremacists. You're making up an economic problem that doesn't exist. There is no "leftist assault on the economy." After the 2008 recession the Obama years were ones of continuous growth. The Trump administration has provided enormous economic incentives in the form of regulatory gifts and tax giveaways, but this hasn't resulted in greater growth than under Obama. Yeah, sure. And extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. That's why everyone would believe Trump if he declared he was really just defending liberty when he declared himself dictator.--Percy

How is the impeachment a sham?Anyway, glad to hear you agree that the primary motivation for the assassination was to distract public attention from the impeachment.By the way, Trump is claiming that Iraq's military response (https://www.washingtonpost.com/...13-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html) caused no American casualties. A dozen ballistic missiles fired at American military bases and no American casualties - it's a miracle! It's not impossible, but given the source of the information, the same person who claimed the largest inauguration crowd in American history that images prove false and who denied knowledge of hush money he was later proved to know all about and who claimed a perfect phone call with Zelensky, I'll await reliable evidence. It won't surprise me if reports of American casualties leak out in the days ahead. Assassinating foreign political and military leaders is illegal under international law unless a threat is imminent. That requirement is why the Trump administration is claiming the threat was imminent. The absence of any information or evidence of this imminent threat makes it likely the administration is lying again, something it does far more often than telling the truth.Another problem is that if we're right that it's okay for us to do it them, then of course it must be okay for them to do it to us. Given the large and varied assortment of American military assets in the region Iran could always claim an imminent threat. This is why international law makes such assassinations illegal. Perhaps you missed the "etc." (Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace also focused on Iran instead of impeachment). Pompeo appeared on ABC's This Week, NBC's Meet the Press, and Fox New's Sunday, pushing impeachment focused figures off the airwaves, such as Schumer, McConnell, Pelosi, Nunes, etc. I think you are playing dumb and missing the point on purpose. These moves to protect people and assets became necessary only after Trump had Soleimani assassinated. The figure the administration keeps citing is hundreds, and this administration has long had only a distant relationship with truth and accuracy. No one doubts that Soleimani was a bad player, but how many American deaths he is responsible for remains an unknown. This terrorist was also the highest ranking military official of Iran. If it's okay for us to assassinate him, then it's okay for Iran to assassinate General Mark A. Milley (chairmen, Joint Chiefs of Staff), General Martin Dempsey (highest ranking military officer), Mark Esper (Secretary of Defense), or even Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, since aggressiveness against Iran is his baby. Osama bin Laden and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi were stateless terrorists. Soleimani, again, was Iran's highest ranking military official. Iran is and has been engaged in state sponsored terrorism, and Soleimani was a key figure in its implementation, but he was still an official of a recognized state. That means our problem is with Iran, not with the Iranian individuals carrying out Iranian policy. Legitimization of lethal action against military personnel requires a declaration of war. Apparently we didn't have to wait long. If those dozen ballistic missiles really caused no American casualties it wasn't because Iran didn't try.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Change title.

It seems that more and more Trumpists are following his example. Instead of dealing with the substance they instead accuse people of doing what they just did.--Percy

Reagan said, "If Fascism Ever Comes to America, It Will Come in the Name of Liberalism." It made no sense then and makes no sense now. If you can provide a rational explanation you'll be the first. Saying you're using the term as Reagan used it only means you're speaking the same nonsense he did.I liked Reagan, voted for him twice, but he did say some crazy things. For example he claimed trees cause more pollution than cars. His USDA classified ketchup as a vegetable, with the result that a school cafeteria could claim it had served a vegetable if it provided ketchup with the hot dogs and hamburgers.--Percy

People are paying a great deal of attention to you. Probably thousands of words have been written in response to your claims of liberal fascism, which are rejected because they're nonsense. That you had to create your own special definition of fascism is proof all by itself.The real reason you're so determined to hold fast to your liberal fascism claim is not because it makes any sense but because false denigration is the only weapon in your arsenal. Name calling all by itself is a strong indicator of an empty quiver of facts, but when name calling is all you have then I guess that's what you do.--Percy

There's no substance in this rubber/glue argument. That's what the conservatives have told you, and you've fallen for it hook, line and sinker. If conservatives were really for freedom then they would be for the freedom to make one's own choices. If they were against forcing things on people then they wouldn't be trying to force unwanted pregnancies on women. Society is richer when it has true freedom and variety and tolerance with full and fair electoral participation and a level economic playing field, something conservatives have had increasing problems with and Trumpists especially. To borrow some phrasing from Reagan: I didn't leave the conservatives; they left me. Which words would you like to use that liberals are preventing you from using?--Percy

What does it mean to be "in every facet an American." There is enormous variety among native born Americans and one has to expect even greater variety among recent citizens. When you're over a certain age, it might be 50, you don't even have to know English to become an American. There are financial aid packages for those granted asylum or refugee status. A refugee can get $325/month for each adult and $200/month for each child for eight months, and other benefits for longer. Those granted asylum can get food stamps and Medicaid and other benefits. Is that what you're talking about? What is your objection to these programs?Look at it this way. How well do most people do in life who were raised in poverty? How well do most people do who were raised in households with average incomes? With very good incomes? In rich families?The answers are obvious. The better start one has as a child the more successful one is likely one to be as an adult. The same is true of immigrants. Providing assistance gives them a boost at beginning careers and assimilating. Regions like Puerto Rico (actually a territory) or Syria or Afghanistan seems like good reasons for emigration. We don't have any serious immigration problems today. We just have people like Trump firing up anti-immigration fears. The real problem is too little immigration. The "free stuff" is at most around $5000 over the course of around a year for refugees and asylum grantees. Hopefully that tiny amount helps enough for them to become familiar and productive and living real lives in their new country. And you know this how? Anyone purposefully starting brushfires during an exceptionally hot and dry period, especially after all the fire risk warnings, should be arrested, and apparently 24 have. There's nothing to be "delighted" about here. Climate warming has led to Australia experiencing its greater fire risks ever. Anyone trying to dramatize or bring increased attention to climate change by starting dangerous fires should be condemned by everyone, not to mention arrested and tried. Hint: 1) You've never identified this corruption. 2) Every type of human endeavor get touched by corruption at at least some point. Trump was corrupt with his charity. Does that mean we should cease all human endeavors? Fear might not be the right word, but we should be very concerned about climate change because of the dramatic impact it will have on the world. We're already seeing the effects in increased numbers of severe weather events and in increased sea levels. Many parts of the world are already experiencing the effects of rising sea levels, such as Woodbridge, NJ, Venice, Italy, and coastal Bangladesh, to mention just a few. Many coastal US cities will be severely affected by rising sea levels, New Orleans and Miami to mention just two. The arctic is melting and becoming navigable in the warmer months, and nations are beginning to ready their claims on arctic resources. Regions with permafrost find it is melting and causing sinkholes and coastal collapse. Again, if you've got any evidence of this corruption, let's hear it. You've said this in previous posts, been challenged on it, and have been unable to name anything. Name the corruption this time, else we'll know you're just making it up. It depends upon how imminent the threat. Personally I'm at about 480 feet above sea level. I'll never be directly affected by rising sea levels. But our local climate has definitely changed. Seasons change at different times than they used to, we get different amounts of rain and snow than we used to, temperatures are more moderate than they used to be, and generally things are wetter. For example, in the fall I never used to have any trouble finding a time to blow the leaves when they were dry and could be blown easily. Now falls are so wet that the leaves never really dry out. And in the last few years moss has started growing where it has never grown before, like down my asphalt driveway which also happens to get the most sun of any spot on my property.For the sake of discussion let's consider that climate change is not man-made and merely reflects natural variation. The course of change has become so relentless that we must still do everything we can to minimize our own contributions to its effects because they'll be catastrophic within a half century. It's imperative that we reach a point where carbon levels in the atmosphere are decreasing. We must stop all methane leaks from oil drilling, pipe lines and such. Here's a graph of atmospheric carbon levels over the past 10,000 years: And here's a graph of atmospheric carbon levels since 1980: This wasn't in the Vox article you cited. I think you're making things up again. AOC was not making up information. She presented the best evidence from climate change research which says that within not too many years we'll reach a tipping point beyond which nothing much we do will help. The time to act is now. I agree that it is difficult to convince people to make sacrifices for climate events that are still years off and that the current administration disputes. This is where the Trump administration has abdicated its responsibilities. They should be accepting the best science and doing their best to help people see the seriousness of the problem so that we can begin changing how we do things as quickly as possible. I don't know how long you expect to live, but I'll take that bet. How much you willing to put up?--Percy

This makes no sense. There is no ultranationalism among the Democrats. If you think there is then please explain where you see it.Neither is there any authoritarianism. I think you're equating authoritarianism to advocacy of any policy you disagree with. You are buying into a false right wing narrative. That liberals are labeling conservatives fascists is just something David Limbaugh is making it up so he can compose a "no we're not, you are" piece. No one believes everything Democrats say. The opposition to your ideas stems from their obvious invalidity. The Democrats and Republicans in Washington and in statehouses across the county are all politicians. Everything they say should be scrutinized and fact checked. Uh, given that both Democrats and Republicans are human, isn't it kind of a stretch to level this charge solely at Democrats? Bettering oneself and building wealth is an American tradition that both Democrats and Republicans enthusiastically accept. And most of the time Republicans accept that some ways of building wealth, such as monopolies and fraud and pyramid schemes and lobbying for tax benefits or special industry advantages and so forth, is bad and that watchdog and oversight agencies are necessary. The Boeing 737 Max is a recent example of how DoT dropped the ball on oversight of the airline industry and let Boeing in effect certify its own airplanes. Republican repeal of Glass-Steagall made the 2008 financial meltdown possible. More safeguards were put in place under Obama, but they were repealed when Republicans took over both the House and Senate.The rural poor who support Trump and Republicans in disproportionate numbers are those most likely to suffer under their policies. The much better health coverage than Obamacare that Trump promised has yet to materialize as even a proposal. The cancelling of many coal mining regulations means that the people of coal mining regions like West Virginia will suffer with increasingly poor water quality, often to unsafe levels. Rolling back clean air regulations means we'll all breath dirtier air. And a rockin' economy doesn't really boost rural areas much but does greatly benefit those already making a great deal of money in urban areas. This is a cynical as saying the Republicans only want to use government to make the rich richer (though the 2017 tax cuts give the Republicans a black eye on this). If the politicians and prognosticators want to stoop to these levels I don't suppose we can stop them, but there's no reason we have to buy into such nonsense. You have yet to explain, despite at least a couple inquiries, how trading carbon credits causes money to flow into Democratic coffers. The big fallacy here is that officials are elected to serve the people who voted for them and not their entire constituency. Certainly it is true that Trump believes he is the president of those who voted for and support him, and screw everyone else, but Trump's ethical and moral compass has been adrift since long before his election. This is not the way a working democracy functions. Those elected, especially to statewide or national office, serve all their people and must take as a fundamental obligation being a unifying rather than divisive force. Trump doesn't seek to win over those who disagree with him. He seeks to delegitimize and disenfranchise them. Which of these do you see as selfish desires: Decent healthcare? Security in old age? A clean environment? National Parks that aren't sliced up for resource exploitation? Addressing climate change? Safe food and drugs? Fair labor practices? Decent housing? Affordable public transportation? Meaningful oversight of industry? Green energy? Affordable higher education?Both parties should favor policies that benefit the general public, not just the rich. The current Republican cover story under Trump is a flim-flam, a bait and switch, and those supporting the Republican agenda are buying the sham hook, line and sinker. Seriously? You think the driving force is jealousy of Republicans? Really? You just said that Republican voters are hard working and personally responsible, while Democratic voters are idle. This is almost repugnantly cynical.I hope candidate for office, Democrat or Republican, would draw few votes if they truly believed such things about the opposition's supporters. Hurricanes, tornados, droughts, floods, forest fires and rising sea levels affect Democrat and Republican alike. Why do you feel moved to say such absurd things? You began this screed referring to "average Democratic voters," but now it sounds like you're talking about the poor. As a group Democrats are not poor, but assuming you're referring to the poor, the gutting of social safety net programs began during the Clinton administration and has continued ever since. It isn't because they expect money to be taxed from the rich and given to them that those in the lowest quintile of income tend to support Democrats over Republicans. That ship sailed long ago, and your conception of it never existed anyway. They tend more toward Democratic candidates because they believe they'll be able to help their district or state more than Republicans. Again, you must be talking about the poor, not your "average Democratic voter." Of course the poor often cannot afford to buy. The Democrats have no monopoly on poor people. Are you claiming there's a movement among Republican homeowners (who don't typically accept that climate change is caused by humans) toward more climate friendly heating systems? Is this truly your view of the average Democratic voter? If so, where are you getting your information from? You're again not making any sense. Your average employee anywhere, Republican or Democrat, would have a difficult time effecting business practice changes that would impact climate change. Just try getting better light shades on the windows where you work to get a measure of how difficult it is influencing your employer to do things outside your purview. You're making things up again. The deficit in the last year of the Obama administration was around $600 billion, and by last year it had risen to about $1 trillion. Under Trump the rich have conducted a raid on government coffers to the tune of about $400 billion per year. Usually deficits decrease in a robust economy, but under Trump they have increased substantially because he is giving so much money away to the rich. True. Possibly true for you personally, but certainly far from true generally. We're all in favor of less government meddling and more free markets, but most of us are also against monopolies and pollution and unsafe food or drugs and having to bail out banks. A healthy economy requires some sufficient amount of government "meddling" in the form of regulation and oversight to prevent abuse.--Percy

The news media controls who the FBI, CIA and DoJ investigate now? Who knew! You just cited an opinion piece. What corruption did Hunter Biden commit that requires investigation? Please be specific and precise. That the Russians interfered in the 2016 election was the finding of all US intelligence agencies, not the Democrats. The people testifying to the facts before the House Intelligence Committee that led to Trump's impeachment were all members of the Trump administration. You have a million excuses. I have a great idea for you. If you don't have facts behind what you say, don't say it. The offer stands should you ever want to take it up.--Percy

Obama and all the Democratic candidates are more fiscally sane than Trump. Only Obama and Trump have a record as president that we can point to, so here's a chart of the Obama and Trump deficits. The above chart shows that during the eight years of the Obama's presidency the deficit increased only twice, once during the first year of his presidency marked by the mortgage security financial collapse, and again during the last year of his presidency. During Trump's presidency the deficit has increased every year. You're doing free association again. A strong defense was not one of the four core conservative values I listed that Trump has abandoned. Once again they were free trade, fiscal responsibility, cozying up to dictators, and character. If you're still talking about national defense then Russia has the 5th largest military in the world, Iran the 8th, about 60% the size of Russia's. If you're talking about terrorism then Iran is worse and has been for quite some time, not just right now. Yes, they're very fundamental, but Trump has abandoned those, too. He's doesn't promote individual freedom, for example being against a woman's right to control her own body. He has no sense of personal responsibility, never accepting responsibility for anything. Everything is someone else's fault. Rather than reducing the power and reach of the federal government he is consolidating power into the executive branch. An example is building the wall and taking land by eminent domain, mostly from Republicans in Texas. And Trump doesn't even give lip service to traditional Judeo Christian morals. The alliance between Trump and evangelicals is one of convenience, to the everlasting shame of evangelicals. You are a master of understatement. More understatement. It takes great effort to increase the deficit by such huge amounts during a booming economy. I don't know what is with you Trumpists and Obama and Hillary and McCain and all the rest. It's like you have to have bogeymen to rail against. Give it a break and stop being led around by the nose. Trump rallies his supporters against every enemy old and new, which includes anyone who doesn't agree with him or do his bidding, and you Trumpists just go right along with it, whether it's true or not, makes sense or not, or even is consistent with what he said last week or not. Do even you know what you meant to say? Again, except for the part about requiring the English language, I think most people would agree, both liberals and conservatives. I don't think there's any significant problem with people illegally becoming citizens. Perhaps you were trying to say that Roosevelt was speaking of legal immigrants who become citizens, but that's not worth a mention since naturalization is only possible for legal immigrants. Doing the opposite of free trade, fiscal sanity, standing up to the world's bad players, and having character cannot be labeled trying "something slightly different." Republicans have apparently given up on free trade, fiscal sanity, standing up to the world's bad players, and character. There were plenty of jobs and a good economy before Trump became president. The economy improved the last seven years of the Obama presidency. The economic improvement has continued under Trump. Do you even care about facts? Once again when challenged on a claim you admit you cannot support it. That doesn't even make any sense, Forrest. You still need a better approach than just ignoring the testimony of all the Trump administration witnesses who testified before the House Intelligence Committee. I think everyone likes a strong economy. When Republicans regain their sanity they'll see the inadvisability of assassinating the military of any country with whom we're not at war, because if it's okay for us to do it to them then guess what?--Percy

I think you're making things up again. Why don't you list a few of these local news stories that deserved attention from all the national media but that only Fox News reported? Can I guess that once again you don't have the time to back up your claims? If you're referring to news outlets, this charge of bias is yet another claim that you've never been able to support. Why don't you tell us yet another fable about bias on ABC World News Tonight.--Percy

I never noticed that. Is that why Faith is making the opposite but nonsensical claim that liberalism is fascist?Fascism has a specific definition. Conservatives are not fascists. But it is fair to give voice to fears about Trump's authoritarian impulses and inclinations. Trump's ruthless attacks on any who displease him have turned his administration and Republicans in Congress into a fawning and compliant mass reminiscent of dictatorships. Witness Defense Secretary Esper's tortured explanations of how his words that contradicted Trump's claims of four additional embassies being threatened actually agreed with him (this past Sunday's Face the Nation). Esper did that knowing that failure to do so would cost him his job. He wasn't alone. All Trump administration officials who appeared on the Sunday morning programs struggled.--Percy

And as the US descended into dictatorship and debt God responded, "I sent you viable candidates who could have prevented this."--Percy

It's less an argument and more just food for thought. Where does one draw the line between the services government should provide and those that should remain in the private sector. Is public garbage pickup socialism? Public schools? A social safety net? Shelters? Food kitchens? Vehicle emission standards? Clean air requirements? Equal pay for equal work laws (ERA issues)? Minimum wage? Healthcare?One major difference between conservatives and liberals is that the conservatives list of essential services is much shorter than the liberal. You recently mentioned the cost of healthcare, making it seem like you think it should be a service government is involved in providing in some way or to some degree.Another of your favorite themes is an overintrusive government. In urban areas water and sewer is provided by the city, but in the country it's provided by each individual home owner. When the government inspects your well and shuts it down because of unsafe arsenic levels, is that an overbearing government or a lifesaving one? You listening, West Virginia? Hope you're happy about your loosened coal industry environmental regulations.--Percy