Top Leaderboard, Site wide
August 22, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates






American Catch


Truthdig Bazaar

Malcolm X: A Life of Reinvention

By Manning Marable
$16.50

more items

 
Arts and Culture

Hitler’s Delusions of Artistic Grandeur

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Aug 26, 2009
Hitler
current.com

It’s well known that Adolf Hitler dabbled in watercolor and that the Führer and his Nazi underlings amassed vast stashes of ill-begotten works of art, but according to art historian Birgit Schwarz, Hitler’s artistic streak ran deeper into the dark zones of his psyche than most people realize.  —KA

Spiegel Online via Arts & Letters Daily:

SPIEGEL: Doesn’t the perception of Hitler as an artist make him seem less evil?

Schwarz: No. In fact, his love of art led directly into the heart of evil. But neither is it the root of everything else. His fanatical pursuit of his own cause, and his self-image as a genius, contributed to his powers of persuasion and, therefore, his success. Art was part of his life until his last hours, even playing a role in his private will, in which he mentions his collections. This was someone who issued the so-called Nero Decree (Ed’s note: Hitler’s Nero Decree, issued in March 1945, ordered the destruction of any infrastructure which could be of use to the Allies.) while at the same time making sure art treasures were rescued. But no one is willing to admit to his obsession with art.

Read more


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 3, 2009 at 7:10 am Link to this comment

Labels as divisive control and manipulations have been used since the dawn of Man (and she), labels or stereotypes are needed to discount the human aspect, as bigots love to use labels.  Many users of labels may not be individuals for they are indoctrinated to prefer to move in packs, herds or flocks, it seems labels help them decided what is to believe all part of the indoctrinations.

Movements from caucuses, to gangs to mass movements seem to work in similar ways. Soon as the individual reaches a certain degree or boiling point, they become part of the group and are no longer the individual.  From politics, religion or the even the local sewing club this may be so.

From what I understand individuals are the first to go when the shit hits the fan, but does this mean being alone?  Can individuals find solace and protection while keeping individuality or do they have to join a movement or group to survive? 

On the ranch where I live,  we used to have elk, their was a heard and who used to roam freely and their was a lone Elk who was kicked out of the heard, he did not last as long as the grand elder elk, nor do I suppose did he ever got lucky. Pecking orders on the farm or ranch and society may be similar, as I feel and like to refer to as the pecking order. So in society their is I and at the top we have the Plutocracy .  The grand order of society is a ladder of pecking orders very similar to those used by animals.

We have McCarthy labeling others true or not or Martha with her labels true or not and even OM referring to the left, one can question as true or not, then I with my references to the Plutocracy,  labels seem important in order to endeavor the order of thought or thoughtlessness, enabling things to settle in ones mind, but does this mean and remove one as an individual, or is their a point of no return when the individual becomes part of the mass?

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, September 3, 2009 at 5:34 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous said: It is curiously interesting that what you have been proposing and the questions you have been pressing, MarthaA, sounds so much like the ones Joe McCarthy crushed at the alleged communists in his 50s witch hunt.  I had the opportunity to watch some of his hearings this evening and it was amazing just how his manner of drilling the witnesses are quite the same as yours.  Wow.

I missed that, would have loved to see it.

As you read the next line remember that i can be annoying with ‘i told you so’:

6 weeks ago I wrote a post explaining that the dynamic between several of the bloggers(including nicer ones like StuartH) and myself was in the spirit of “a witch hunt, an Inquisition, the McCarthy hearings.”

It was very easy for conservatives to slip into a quiet daze when McCarthy was making charges. We should have been saying “Hell no, we dont do that to the political opposition here!”

In the same way, it is easy for the Left to use accusations of Nazi to silence political opposition, and after awhile even nicer Leftists slip into a daze. Over the years this Nazi tag has an effect not just on me, but on yourselves who countenence the charges.

As I have said many times, the posts here dont reach a high level of debate(at least for me) since I must argue not on topic, but merely for a legitimate seat at the table. Among the more benign of you, it is perhaps a joke, a terrific debate trick to tag conservatives as ‘fascists’. But it is far too prevalent, to the point where over time it becomes a prejudice in many if not most of Truthdiggers.

There is a hidden danger to this which I would like to discuss at another time.

Yet, I must say that i am very grateful and proud of the Left when they do so well as Leefeller and Shenonymous have, especially lately. It is the mark of an open mind, and may I say an objective mind, to shake awake and say “Hell no, we dont do that to the political opposition here!”

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 2, 2009 at 10:37 pm Link to this comment

The grand plan cannot let the masses become to uppity, for they will ask for more than what they deserve. Of course who makes these decisions is not I, nor probably anyone I know.

Expecting the plutocracy to give an inch which can potentially become a mile is another long tail for dreamers and believers of fables, status quo is what is wanted, what is seen is what is gotten.

Manipulation, deviousness just some of the tools used to maintain the constant inequities of the world. Change is not on the agenda.

Once the people want more than the trickle downs, it seems the screws start turning, how about starting a war? Create hate and point at people of difference within ones own borders, nothing has changed, history seems to support the idea of repeating itself.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 2, 2009 at 9:27 pm Link to this comment

BTW, in the poster, he STILL looks like Charlie Chaplin’s spoof of him in “The Great Dictator”!

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 2, 2009 at 9:26 pm Link to this comment

I was away so I missed this thread.  It amazes me how few have ANY understanding of Schwartz, where she is brilliant and where she is highly deficient.  And, of course, there’s the usual tangential name-calling that’s totally irrelevant, mostly generated by the persistently annoying (and usually wrong) MarthaA.

It’s impossible to successfully study Adolph Hitler’s motivations without studying his relation to art. Schwartz catches that.  Yes, Hitler flunked the Vienna Art Academy exam twice—the first time because he didn’t have enough figures, although his landscapes and architectural drawings were ok, the second time because his landscapes and architectural drawings were lacking. Is it ANY wonder he hated professors, Vienna, and his home nation of Austria?

Naturally he fancied himself an unappreciated genius.  As Fuhrer he dictated what was “good” and “bad” art. (So did Stalin—amazing that both liked realistic representationalism, with a dollop of messianic holy light.)  He hounded Erich Maria Remarque, author of “All Quiet on the Western Front”, Georg Groz (whom he called degenerate) and all the brilliant thinkers of Weimar explosion of innovation, from the Da-Daists to the Bauhaus.

Schwartz barely mentions Albert Speer, and ignores Speer’s incredibly revealing memoir: “Inside the Third Reich”.  Speer relates how he was not Hitler’s architect as much as his draftsman for Hitler’s big ideas.  There was a dome that would be SO huge that as decoration on top it would have a full size reproduction of the Pantheon.  The dome was so far across it would rival today’s SuperDome, but was far, far higher. And it was solely for NSDAP rallies!  Talk about ego and self-delusion! And Speer went along, creating drawings and models of the Hitler’s forum in Berlin, of which the Dome was the centerpiece.

Hitler’s architectural fantasies continued until near the end, even though Speer was now Minister of Armaments and Production.

Hitler’s perception that he was cheated of his artistic career by back-stabbers were easily paralleled in his mind that Germany and the Central Powers were cheated of THEIR victory by back-stabbers as well.  Since this was loudly and publicly championed by such “heroes” as von Hindenburg and Ludendorf, it’s no surprise that an angry corporal, who had lost the first MEANINGFUL effort of his life, soldiering, would connect that two, at least sub-consciously.  You can almost hear him saying to himself: “See? The world IS out to cheat me, my nation, and my culture out of what rightfully BELONGS to us!”

Like neo-cons refusing to believe that ANYTHING Bush did was wrong, that torture is wrong, that ANYTHING Dems say, whether reasonable or not is evil, so Hitler fooled himself.  And, like the neocons, he fooled others just like he fooled himself.  He tapped their anger and resentment with convenient scapegoats: Jews, Communists, 5th Columnists, Gypsies, Foreignors, non-“Aryans” (Germanics), etc.

Schwartz is bang-on correct that you cannot begin to comprehend Hitler without allowing for his belief that he was a misunderstood artistic genius—and was royally pissed-off about it.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, September 2, 2009 at 7:57 pm Link to this comment

It is curiously interesting that what you have been proposing and the questions you have been pressing, MarthaA, sounds so much like the ones Joe McCarthy crushed at the alleged communists in his 50s witch hunt.  I had the opportunity to watch some of his hearings this evening and it was amazing just how his manner of drilling the witnesses are quite the same as yours.  Wow. 

Here is a trick question for you MarthaA – ARE YOU OR HAVE YOU EVER BEEN A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY?  I don’t really care if you are or not.  So please don’t answer it.  If you were, though, I’d think it was cool.  It is a supremely funny question to ask when all the letters are written as capitals.  It is sooooo capitalistic.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 2, 2009 at 7:52 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

I find it repugnant to be bothered with a kindred spirit to Hitleresque political tactics.

http://www.truthdig.com/
eartotheground/item/20090901_

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, September 2, 2009 at 12:55 pm Link to this comment

Now that I have answered directly, that I disagree, I will swipe the opportunity to explain (as no explanation along with the answer would have been acceptable to the resident Christian communist fascist.  Okay, excuse my digression for just a teenie weenie ssssssecond.  Isn’t it a contradiction in terms to say Christian communist?  Oh well, there are permutations of permutations.  Anyone can parade as a Christian these days.

When I was a child my Democratic family was against Communism vehemently and Nazism just as vehemently.  That is my objective indoctrination.  As a grownup, I studied these points of view (these same but different forms of fascism) and made the subjectively conscious decision that the family teaching was correct.  But my family was equally emotionally charged, intensely passionate, about the freedoms they found in this country they did not have in the Old Country of Italy and Greece!  Freedom of speech became the touchstone.  So I studied that too, thinking surely some people’s speech ought to be inhibited and at the least, prevented.  I learned that to muzzle those with whom I disagreed with, to whatever passion, I censor myself.  It is impossible to know what it is they think covertly.  But overtly I can sense their beliefs.  The only speech I would prosecute is sedition.  It is against Constitutional law to instigate sedition.  So I champion even those with whom I passionately disagree with because for me, freedom of speech is sacred, and it is the highest sacrilege to violate. 

If I am not up to their arguments then I deserve to be subjected to their power.  You might think that a heresy, but then religious people always think in terms of heresy.  I must be as powerful as they and demonstrate my beliefs better.  I do not believe in violence, even though there might be times when it is a necessary evil, when an aggressor would harm my family, my friends, my country, or myself.  There have been atheists throughout history who have used the worst kind of violence to exert their need for power.  Equally violently, theists have been even more savage considering the practice of torture beginning in the 13th century and all the following years of the Inquisitions and the millions of women murdered as witches in the name of religion.  Christianity has not been an immaculate agency.  Particularly “Holy” Roman Catholic agency, not only in Spain and Italy, but in England under the reign of Bloody Queen Mary.  But it is not restricted to the Christian Catholics.  85 Catholics were martyred in England during the Reformation of the16th and 17th centuries.  So no Christian sect has a corner on the persecution market.  We could go around the world to see where Christianity has left its bloody marks, it is staggering.  This is true as well of militant Islamists and intolerant Hindus.  It is in the nature of religion to be violent.  It is merely defensive to deny that.  There are aberrant sects such as the Amish and Quakers who avoid violence, but there are not that many individuals among those groups. 

When you talk about covert advocacy of the overthrow of the US Government, MarthaA, you are saying something very strange indeed.  If it is covert, then no one knows about it.  It is hidden.  And prosecuting for “covert” activity is akin to witch hunting and accusing without any substance.  Once an action becomes known factually, it becomes overt and prosecutable.  This society, the American society obeys the rule of law.  That does not mean there are those who violate the rule of law.  I’ve already gone over that sometimes prosecution takes time and I for one am grateful it is not a reactive, mob mentality that runs this country. 

There is undoubtedly more to say on this topic but this will have to do for now since TD is not my life and I have other things to do.  I may return to this forum later.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, September 2, 2009 at 12:54 pm Link to this comment

No.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, September 2, 2009 at 11:32 am Link to this comment

I was watching TV in the mid 90’s when local TV reporter started an impromptu conversation with Rollins.

Impromptu, you know, as in there was no plan to bring this up or anything, and then in casual conversation and completely spontaneously… I mean its normal on TV to just ask…

The reporter asked Rollins why the Republicans used NAZI techniques at their meetings and demonstrations to which Rollins answered…

And that was Rollins’ mistake. No matter WHAT he answered, or how he answered it, he already lost! The name HITLER got written across his forehead.

Far better is what William F Buckley did when Gore Vidal called him a Nazi. Buckley balled his fist up and said:

I am not a Nazi. My father fought against Nazis. You take that back or I will hit you so hard you will stay plastered.” And then the best part was that Buckley took Vidal to court for slander!

Of course, Gore Vidal thinks that only proves what that Buckley is a Nazi. But at least Buckley didnt grovel or answer stupid “why are you a Nazi” questions like Ed Rollins does.

Now i can tell from years of experience that answering “Why are you a Nazi?”  with denials in a meek and apologetic manner does no good at all. Thats what i tried at first. After my apologetic denial the questioner knew they could tag me with “Nazi” whenever they wanted to on any topic, and I had to drop whatever my point was and sorrowfully deny that i was a Nazi. Which only let the name Nazi be associated with me and i pretty much gave up my right to speak.

No more!!!!

I fight back against LEFT-WING EXTEMIST BULLIES.

How is that working out for you, MarthaA?

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 2, 2009 at 11:01 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

Do you see ORGANIZED pedantic parsing, ORGANIZED Culture of Critical Discourse reflexive obfuscation and the ORGANIZED use of Hitleresque EXTREME sophist propaganda as your First Amendment right of free speech?

Can you tell me the difference between OVERTLY advocating the OVERTHROW of the U. S. Government by violent means and, COVERTLY advocating the OVERTHROW of the U.S. Government by SUBVERSIVE means, such as ORGANIZED pedantic parsing, ORGANIZED Culture of Critical Discourse reflexivity to obfuscate, limit and REFRAME REALITY, and ORGANIZED Hitleresque EXTREME sophist propaganda to overthrow the U. S. Government by SUBVERSIVE means?——Both overt means and covert means advocate OVERTHROW of the U. S. Government; the only difference is one means is direct and the other means is indirect.

Are you saying it should be a crime to OVERTLY advocate OVERTHROW of the U. S. Government, but that it should not be a crime to COVERTLY advocate OVERTHROW of the U. S. Government by SUBVERSIVE means?  Yes or No.

When OVERTHROW of the U. S. Government is advocated by ORGANIZED SUBVERSIVE activity as advocated by Adolph Hitler, this type of SUBVERSIVE activity is just as much or more of a danger to the U. S. Government as an OVERT attack on the U. S. Government; this was the claim of the RIGHT-WINGERS against Communism when I was a child, and if it was true that the Communists were an ORGANIZED SUBVERSIVE threat to the U. S. Government, it is just as true that RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS who engage in ORGANIZED SUBVERSIVE activity that advocates OVERTHROW of the U. S. Government are just as much a threat to the Government of the United States as the Communists were from the 1940’s to the fall of the Berlin Wall;—- Do you agree or disagree?  Yes or No.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, September 2, 2009 at 8:08 am Link to this comment

In reply to the article just cited on the World War II: 70 Years and We’re Still Fighting Forum:
Watch the critics of America yes, because of possible sedition; Stunting freedom of speech, no!  If the overthrow by violence of the government of the United States is advocated, then that breaks the law, Constitutional law, and is prosecutable.  Otherwise to protect your own freedom of speech you cannot truncate the speech of who you despise. 

One must resist hysteria.  Even if I, who am a liberal, have the only voice of reason in the midst of Leftist wolves, and be it known I have no love or affinity with the Republican organized plans to unseat the Democratic majority, the Democratic Party that represents most Americans, I risk being called names as is the habit of the weak of mind.  Nevertheless I slog on…

There is no dearth of accusations that Rollins admits to the Republican Party using nazi tactics, none say the Mein Kampf is their handbook however.  The accusations come in the form of blogger invectives no proof offered however.
Check stuff out for yourself!  Do not believe the sophists.  Use your own powers of reflective judgment about what to believe or what to do.

http://consortiumnews.com/2007/121707.html
Huckabee’s Chairman Hid Payoff Secret - By Robert Parry
December 18, 2007

Not a word about using nazi tactics in this article. 
At the Huffington Post article
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/18/
huckabee-campaign-chairma_n_77286.html
a blogger rabun666wrote the comment abut Rollins impromptu TV interview but does not cite the exact interview or who was the interviewer.  No way to verify the accusation.  Not saying the accusation is true or not true.  But sophism is at work here.  Be on your intellectual guard.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 2, 2009 at 7:28 am Link to this comment

The following post verifies that the Hitler Agenda is being used by the EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS.

***********
By bogi666, September 2 at 8:14 am #

MarthaA, FYI on Nazi SOPHISM and EXTREME PROPAGANDA and their use by the Republican Party admitted by former RNC chairman Ed Rollins. I was watching TV in the mid 90’s when local TV reporter started an impromptu conversation with Rollins. The reporter asked Rollins why the Republicans used NAZI techniques at their meetings and demonstrations to which Rollins answered “if these tactics worked for the Nazi’s they will work for us[the Republican Party]. Why wouldn’t we[the Republican Party]  use them[the same tactics the Nazi’s used]. Now I had been living outside the country for several years and didn’t know Ed Rollins from a turnip. The only reason I even remember his name was because I associated it with Rollins truck rental and was so shocked by what Rollins said as was the then local TV person. I didn’t even remember Rollins 1st name until sometime later when I heard it in conjunction with the Republican Party.

http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/
20090831_gibbs_cheneys_wrong_on_interrogation/

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 1, 2009 at 7:05 pm Link to this comment

Delusions seem apparent, but not only Hitlers. Thuggery seems an important ingredient in the grand scheme of things, for some freedom of speech is what they believe to be, other opinions are not to be, so when one disagrees with another idea or comment it should be banned? So, no freedom of speech.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, September 1, 2009 at 6:54 pm Link to this comment

MarthaA you exhibit Nazi-like muscle to put an answer in my mouth.  You cannot know what I will answer.  It is a ploy to construct a Shenonymous of your own design.  Not the real one.  And there is no default except the one you have created.  You use thuggery to avoid answering the myriad of questions put to you over the course of this forum.  You do the same on other forums.  You may delude yourself that no one notices.  But we all do.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 1, 2009 at 6:47 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

By default, your answer is YES that YOU would support sophism and EXTREMIST propaganda that would enable a Neo-Nazi leader like Adolph Hitler to take power in the United States.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, September 1, 2009 at 6:36 pm Link to this comment

MarthaA insists: Your answer is that you are against legislated Law and Order in the United States, RIGHT. Don’t equivocate, please confirm, Yes or No.

MarthaA is lost. But for the benefit of others I will answer her question from a conservative Christian point of view:

Legislation alone is not the deciding factor of whether a law is good or not. Not in the United States of America. There is a little something called the Constitution. There is a little something called the Bill of Rights.

ANY legislation that suppresses free speech, with the goal of criminalizing dissenters so you can shoot them till they no longer wiggle. would be unconstitutional. 

If MarthaA was a Christian she would understand.

If she was a Christian she would know that the 70% “common majority” doesnt create truth.

MarthaA claims that ultimate objectivity is hers. Ultimate objectivity belongs to only One, and that is the Living God. Not MarthaA.

MarthaA has put herself in God’s place. But that is what Communists do, isnt it? They rid themselves of God and put the State in God’s place.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, September 1, 2009 at 6:26 pm Link to this comment

Here is the deal MarthaA, if you answer all the questions I have put to you in several posts now, I will give you a yes or no answer to your one question.  Do we have a deal?

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 1, 2009 at 5:55 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

The answer is that you, Shenonymous, refuse to answer the question whether or not you would support SOPHISM and EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA that would enable a Neo-Nazi leader like Adolph Hitler to take power in the United States; Why is that, Shenonymous?  By refusing to answer the question with a simple No, it is plain for all to see and draw their own conclusion that YOUR answer is YES.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, September 1, 2009 at 5:35 pm Link to this comment

QED.  Thank you for demonstrating that as a habit you do not answer questions put to you. 

Name the Neo-Nazi leader like Adolph Hitler waiting in the wings.  How about just a rising Neo-Nazi star?

And you apparently did not read my excellent subjectively scatological objective soliloquy.  But if you want to levitate me, okay.  But just let me know if it is a subjective me or an objective I that you are levitating.

You are not able to see ascended beings.  You don’t see me do you?  That is my objective evidence.

“Why are you asking if I “...would support sophism and EXTREMIST propaganda that ....”?  Now you are asking a rhetorical question with the implication that I would so support.  Who is the Sophist now?  Rhetoric is the tool of the Sophist.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 1, 2009 at 5:22 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

Your answer is that you are against legislated Law and Order in the United States, RIGHT. Don’t equivocate, please confirm, Yes or No.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

From what you say you don’t have to use the necessary room, so you don’t have any need for OBJECTIVE toilet paper.  If you are such a higher life form that you do not need toilet paper, what are you doing on this blog?  And why is there no OBJECTIVE evidence of your status as an ascended being in your posts?

Are you saying that you would support sophism and EXTREMIST propaganda that would enable a Neo-Nazi leader like Adolph Hitler to take power in the United States?  Yes or No.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, September 1, 2009 at 4:58 pm Link to this comment

MarthaA defends her idea of shooting conservatives til they no longer wiggle.:

I am for legislated LAW and ORDER.  Are you saying you are against legislated LAW and ORDER?

LAW and ORDER was the promise of the Nazi party. You can go along with it. I dont. I would resist the Nazi Party and any legislation they made. That would make me a criminal against the Nazi state.

Now MarthaA is defending not just the methods of Hitler but now she is defending the cause of Hitler. Because HITLER loved LAW and ORDER and now we find that MarthaA loves LAW and ORDER too. 

Hitler and MarthaA have plenty of rules for the peope who disagree with them. Plenty of nice legislation that criminalizes free speech. Yes, Hitler and MarthaA would give me a ‘fair trial’ and then they would take me out and shoot me til I longer wiggle.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 1, 2009 at 4:53 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

You ran away from discussing YOUR August 30 7:49pm post declaring Hitler’s Nazi’s as innocent, after my posts August 31 03:40pm thru August 31 04:09pm declaring Hitler’s Nazi’s as hostile disrupters and villains.  I will repost your post, so that it can be discussed, because it is necessary to get to the bottom of why you feel Hitler’s Nazi’s were innocent.  Here is your post:

*****

By OzarkMichael, August 30 at 7:49 pm #

Thank you MarthaA. I just didnt see it. Before you declare victory, lets look at the salient points.

On August 5, 2009, National Public Radio reported that RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS were intentionally disrupting Democratic Party meetings at a local level; I have read about this type of POLITICAL ACTIVITY before, and I am aware that the following policy has been effectively used to disrupt legitimate political activity by competing political parties in the past

The intentional disruptions of Democratic Party meetings is the issue. The Disruptors are the Republicans. Agreed? And this sounds so familiar to MarthaA because it is straight from Mein Kampf, where she ‘remembers’ that Nazi gangsters disrupt innocent decent people. agreed so far?

Here is Hitler talking:

For the sole actual result of intervention by the authorities—- that is, the police—- was at best to dissolve, in other words, to CLOSE THE MEETING.  And that was the SOLE AIM and PURPOSE of the hostile DISTURBERS.”

Now it seems MarthaA may have a case. There are the ‘Republican’ disturbers, apparently just like Nazis.

But think for a minute. Mein Kampf was Hitler’s attempt to win the sympathy of the German people for his Nazi cause. He is not going to win any sympathy calling his Nazis ‘hostile disturbers’. But that is what MarthaA thinks Hitler is doing. She defines the Republicans as disturbers

Let us remember that Mein Kampf was written before Hitler came to power. He is trying to sell himself to the German people. He was in jail, and he needed to show that the authorities were wrong to put him there. Please keep that in mind! Here comes the crucial part:

If through some sort of threats it becomes known to the AUTHORITIES that there is danger of a meeting being broken up, they DO NOT ARREST the THREATENERS, but forbid the others, the innocent to hold the meeting,

Ok, there it is. In Mein Kampf Hitler is not playing Walter Cronkite. He is trying to make his side look good and the other side look bad. Agreed? He would never call his opponents innocent that is a word he would reserve for himself, even while he was sitting there in jail. He blames the police.  His book is trying to win sympathy for what he had done, and justify what he hoped to do.

The people holding the meeting are, according to Hitler, the decent people. But Mein Kampf is not the nightly news, it is propaganda to make Nazi party meetings seem like the gathering of innocent decent people and anyone who dared protest Nazi meetings Hitler calls a determined gangster. For Hitler it was always the other guys fault. The people who protested Nazi meetings Hitler calls disturbers.


Now think: Martha A calls the Republican protesters disturbers. Unfortunately for MarthaA this proves that Republican disturbers are the sort of people Hitler really hates!

This also proves that the Democrat party meetings are like Nazi party meetings. Hitler loves Democrats apparently. This further casts Democrat party leader Obama as equivalent to Nazi party leader Hitler.

Now please scroll up and read my satirical post which Martha printed awhile ago. Thank you for your patience.

*******
I have no idea what is going on in your mind, but unless you say what is going on in your mind, I have no way of knowing, but I am certainly of the opinion that neither Hitler nor his Nazi’s were innocent in any way and that they were masters of EXTREME sophist propaganda as objectively described in Adolph Hitler’s “Mein Kampf”.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, September 1, 2009 at 4:28 pm Link to this comment

So we reduce this forum to a matter of scatology.  Okay, but remember I did not start it!  Now my shit would have to be objective in order to use some objective toilet paper.  For some reason I was raised to think my shit was my own, subjective shit.  Hmmmm.  Please explain it all over again.  At what point MarthaA would my subjective shit become objective shit so I could wipe it with objective toilet paper?  Could I watch the transition?  What realy is subjective shit is your dogmatic opinions, uh er, beliefs, about sophism and propaganda.  But once they exit your keyboard keys, they are objective shit.  Right?  Right!  (Question asked and answered)  Precisely at what point does that exchange from subjective shit typing become objective shit computer input?  Truthdig people know it’s objectivized shit when it gets to the forum, for some odd subjectivized reason.

Yes, soliloquies do make assertions and then answer them, and I do soliloquy now and then because you do not answer questions.  You just make accusations.  You cannot defend your shitty positions so you throw shit at everyone else who disagrees with you regardless of their political position, just so it is not yours!  If you are not sending objective shit to us, please show exactly where Mein Kampf is used by your accused, how and in what exact form.  I have asked you to do that. You ignore the request. 

No, it is not all you say that “our” country, The United States, needs law and order to regulate sophism.  What does that mean?  It has no meaning.  The Greeks did not put their sophists to death, they actually paid them.  Now what you are proposing is a tyranny of your own.  You are proposing the destruction of free speech.  And that I find most dangerous and detrimental to the foundations of this country.  I don’t care in the least what Republicans say, even right wing conservative Republicans, nor what Communists say, Socialists say, Liberals say, Conservatives say, Christians say, Hindus say, Jews say, or Islamists say.  Words are just words.  Objective shit.  As long as what they say does not order the destruction of anyone or anything or any country.  Then they must suffer the consequences of the law.  The shitty objective laws created by shitty subjective humans.

So have we had enough shit for today?

If you are for LEGISLATED LAW AND ORDER, why not get your congressmen to legislate what exactly you want?  Here is why you don’t do that.  (Again question asked and answered)  If you tried to get them to pass a law outlawing sophism and propaganda, they would laugh their heads off.  They might cajole and ask you uh, ”what is the penalty you would like imposed if someone breaks your irrational anti-sophistry and propaganda law?”  Then they would laugh again.  And MarthaA would say, “Why take them out and shoot them until they no longer wiggle.”  hahahahahahaha That is so looney that I just have to stop now, I’ll just go check to see if I can wipe my subjective ass with that objective toilet paper and then wash my subjective? objective? hands, because I, subjectively, am objectively sanitary so that my subjective self stays objectively healthy, or is that my objective self that can only stay healthy, gad, my head is spinning more than Linda Blair’s!  It is time to bail out for a spell. Youse guys figure it out.  I (the subjective I) have go unwind my objective head.  Does anyone know a good exorcist of sophism? hahahahahahaha

Hey Leefeller, surely you have something scatologically cute to say?????

I think I will send this forum to Bob Dylan to see if he could write a new song about it.  I almost OD on subjective/objective in this last sentence but I resisted.  I live!  Now is it the subjective me or the objective I?

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 1, 2009 at 3:57 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

I am for legislated LAW and ORDER.  Are you saying you are against legislated LAW and ORDER?

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, September 1, 2009 at 3:26 pm Link to this comment

Martha said to Shenonymous : Belief ? —— the next time you use the necessary room, see whether or not you can take a wipe with belief, or whether or not it takes the objective use of toilet paper.

Shenonymous, I ate too much fiber this morning.  Please pass me some of Martha’s “objectivity” when you are done.

OOOhhhh dear! MarthaA is right. Some sophistry is so bad it really should be illegal!

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, September 1, 2009 at 3:13 pm Link to this comment

MarthaA’s hope for future political discourse: We should have laws passed that make this kind [Hitler Type] of sophism illegal, so that what happened in Nazi Germany cannot happen here in the United States and it won’t if we have laws that criminalize YOUR’S and HITLER’S type of sophism, so that we can give those who practice Hitler’s type of sophism a fair trial ....”

oo! oo! I know the next part, marthaA’s favorite part ...and then take them out and shoot them til they no longer wiggle.


Are you worried you couldn’t make it through a fair trial?  You would be given an attorney if you can’t afford one

What good would an attorney be against LEFT WING LIBERAL EXTREMIST laws? Under your tyranny I would be guilty. I would be unrepentant too.

MarthaA, you know i can expose you so well. Be smart and dont put me on trial, dont give me a chance to talk. Thats the whole point of your stupid laws anyway, isnt it?

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 1, 2009 at 2:55 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

Belief ? —— the next time you use the necessary room, see whether or not you can take a wipe with belief, or whether or not it takes the objective use of toilet paper.

YOU, Shenonymous, are making YOUR OWN assertions, answering them, and then making assertions based upon YOUR OWN answers to YOUR OWN assertions.

If you cannot see SOPHISM and EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA in OzarkMichael’s posts, it is because YOU choose not to, and for reasons of YOUR OWN support what he is doing.

All I am saying is that our country, the United States, needs law and order to regulate SOPHISM and EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA, and that violation of the law must be a punishable offense that can be from imprisonment to death in EXTREME cases. 

If you disagree that HITLERESQUE SOPHISM and EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA is a threat to National Security, what are the reasons for YOUR disagreement?——Do YOU want to enable a NAZI Government in the United States?——Or, what?

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 1, 2009 at 2:39 pm Link to this comment

All or nothing, your with us or against us.  This mentality is simple and supports simplistic, bigoted and all racist hate mental packaging.  So stereotype your alleged enemies, so one can make sure they are really are ones enemies. Hate works better with constant fanning.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 1, 2009 at 1:30 pm Link to this comment

BTW here’s a Truthdig thread that should give you a clue OzarkMichael how many people were killed because of SOPHISM and EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA by the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST NAZI REGIME:  http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/
20090901_world_war_ii_70_years_and_were_still_fighting/

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 1, 2009 at 12:35 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

“We should have laws passed that make this kind [Hitler Type] of sophism illegal, so that what happened in Nazi Germany cannot happen here in the United States and it won’t if we have laws that criminalize YOUR’S and HITLER’S type of sophism, so that we can give those who practice Hitler’s type of sophism a fair trial ....”

Are you worried you couldn’t make it through a fair trial?  You would be given an attorney if you can’t afford one—-nothing personal—- you’re seeking to make your EXTREME sophism and EXTREME PROPAGANDA personal, but I assure you, there is nothing personal.

My dialog on this thread is about sophism and extremist propaganda; NOT about EMOTIONAL ISSUES of a personal nature.

My dialog is about YOUR use and the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT using sophist propaganda to denigrate, accuse, condemn, denounce and kill the LIBERALS.

I do not know you, so I do not have anything against you personally.

However, I think YOUR USE and the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT’S USE of SOPHISM and EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA should be criminalized; this is a serious issue that is separate and apart from YOU personally.

YOU may think YOU are the center of the universe, but YOU are not.

When people are tried and imprisoned for violating law and order it is NOT a personal matter; the person violating law and order made a personal choice to violate law and order and law and order is then enforced in a cold and dispassionate way; SOPHISM and EXTREME PROPAGANDA needs to be criminalized and prosecuted as a violation of law and order in a cold and dispassionate way just like all other crime.

If SOPHISM and EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA is criminalized the choice will be YOURS, don’t do the crime if YOU don’t want to do the time or be executed for the crime—- this is the standard for all law and order and has nothing whatsoever to do with you personally from my perspective.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, September 1, 2009 at 12:21 pm Link to this comment

I will speak only for Shenonymous, not et al…et al will have to stand up for themselves.  However, looking around this forum, et all does not exist.

MarthaA said, “Hitler’s artistic use of sophism and propaganda in “Mein Kampf” was not a delusion of grandeur, it is an OBJECTIVE reality that you can purchase and read; “Mein Kampf” brought Adolph Hitler to power in Germany and enabled the holocaust of World War II that resulted in the loss of millions of innocent lives and is now being used as a handbook by the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS in the United States to bring a RIGHT-WING GOVERNMENT to power in the United States the same way Hitler did.”

I don’t have to purchase Mein Kampf, already having it in my library.  It is not a book I like to even touch, let alone read, but I have browsed it over the years.  I don’t believe it is used as a handbook by Republicans today, nor at any time in the past.  Machiavelli maybe, but not Hitler.  There may be individuals who use Hitler’s manifesto, such as extremists of every skunk stripe, and I highly suspect the militant Islamist are well versed in it as well as Machiavelli.  You do know that the Islamist leaders were highly educated in the West.  At any rate, the population of extremist bigots on the Right, is small in comparison to the general population.  Even if added to them any corporate jokers, with money.  There might even occur occasional events of extreme violence against gays, women rights advocates, non-whites, non-Christians, etc., there are laws in force that will prosecute the perpetrators.  We either believe in the rule of law or we don’t.  I do. 

The fact that there are those who achieve government offices of power that violate that rule of law, eventually the law catches up.  The law is not perfectly enforced, that is true.  That is a function of who is in governmental power at the time.  But it has never failed that eventually the law catches up, even with itself when government and governmental branches break the law.  Society motion is glacial, very slow because of the size of this population, its representational form of government, and the diversity of beliefs that exist.  It is a diversity however for which I would fight to the death.  For without it, we have no “United” States and personally I would not want to live under any other government.  At the very least, Americans have the right and exercise that right to change government policy, however slow it is.  No other country that even approximates this size can boast as much.

Judging all Rightists as sophists or propagandists, is like Hitler judging all Jews as responsible for all the ills of the world.  It is in this sense that I say you might review your own method and line of argument.  There are conservatives who I personally know who are not sophists or propagandists.  And there are Leftists I personally know who are sophists and propagandists, although that fact is outside the argument that all Rightists are, just to put a smidgen of perspective on the dispute.  To talk about killing them is unconscionable and violence incarnate.  It is something Stalin or Mao would do and several of the Socialist heads of government in South America and Fascist tyrants in Africa and the Middle East, and is still done in China and North Korea do actually do. 

All your talk about killing is the height of absurdity, it actually enters the Ring of Insanity.  It is the Leftist equivalent to the KKK, White Supremacists.  It is the equivalent of Nazism.  So what is really going on here MarthaA?

If any one here has used Hitler type sophism and extremist propaganda, please quote it exactly so the rest of us may see it in all its gory.  Else the prize for gory goes to you.  Please do not quote any defense, quote only sophism and propaganda.  Then we, the rest of the residents of TD may judge whether you have a case or not.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, September 1, 2009 at 11:41 am Link to this comment

...YOU, OzarkMichael, and the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST MOVEMENT from the time of Goldwater (1976) through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II to the present…

which is why you need to take all conservatives out and shoot us all til we dont wiggle

I understand you marthaA, you dont have to keep explaining it.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, September 1, 2009 at 11:28 am Link to this comment

Dear Comrade,

I have never thought of killing anyone. It never entered my mind that my political opponents should be dealt with that way. You think about killing alot.

What is more hateful than the way you keep talking about murdering the people who disagree with you?

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 1, 2009 at 11:05 am Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

Dear me, It appears OzarkMichael doesn’t think he would get a NOT GUILTY VERDICT with a FAIR TRIAL, if he was charged and tried for EXTREMIST SOPHISM and EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA.  What can I say, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

The HITLER TYPE SOPHISM AND EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA that OzarkMichael uses is EXTREMELY destructive as demonstrated by World War II.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 1, 2009 at 10:34 am Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

I have clearly demonstrated that YOU, OzarkMichael, and the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST MOVEMENT from the time of Goldwater (1976) through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II to the present have been and continue to use sophism and propaganda of the same type used by Adolph Hitler to overthrow the Weimar Republic in Germany in a continuing effort to gain control of the Government of the United States.

Instead of responding to my posts in an OBJECTIVE MANNER that addresses YOUR continuing use of SOPHISM and EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA and the RIGHT-WING EXTREMIST REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT continuing to use SOPHISM and EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA, you respond with a barrage of SUBJECTIVE assertions that you, no doubt, intend to distract attention from YOUR USE and the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT’S USE of SOPHISM and EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA right out of YOUR Right-Wing Playbook for SOPHISM and EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA, “Mein Kampf” by Adolph Hitler.

If YOU and the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS are proud enough of Adolph Hitler to use Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” for a political playbook, why is it that YOU are not proud enough of Hitler to claim Adolph Hitler as the intellectual underpinning of the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT?

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, September 1, 2009 at 10:20 am Link to this comment

Unfortunately for LEFT WING LIBERAL EXTREMISTS like you, i am still free to speak. Get used to seeing yourself quoted:

We should have laws passed that make this kind of sophism illegal, so that what happened in Nazi Germany cannot happen here in the United States and it won’t if we have laws that criminalize YOUR’S and HITLER’S type of sophism, so that we can give those who practice Hitler’s type of sophism a fair trial and then either imprison them or take them out and shoot them til they no longer wiggle.

What sick mind produced that joyfully murderous imagery?

You are condemned by your own words. I hope you are proud of them because you are going to see them often.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 1, 2009 at 9:08 am Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

Concern yourself with YOUR own sophism and propaganda.  All YOU are capable of is making unsubstantiated assertions and YOUR unsubstantiated assertions are tiresome. 

For YOU, OzarkMichael, who has NOTHING to say, it is best to say NOTHING.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 31, 2009 at 8:10 pm Link to this comment

I asked: “MarthaA, I wonder if you know of any LEFT-WING LIBERAL EXTREMISTS. What sort of things do they believe in? what sort of plan do they have?”

MarthaA answered: Democracy and then she elaborates on the plan: We should have laws passed that make this kind of sophism illegal, so that what happened in Nazi Germany cannot happen here in the United States and it won’t if we have laws that criminalize YOUR’S and HITLER’S type of sophism, so that we can give those who practice Hitler’s type of sophism a fair trial and then either imprison them or take them out and shoot them til they no longer wiggle.

This is not the first time you have threatened me. You continue to accuse me of being a fascist in order to justify violence against me. Interesting… ‘fascist’ is what Stalin called Christians when he gave them a fair trial before he took them out and shot them til they no longer wiggle.

What a coincidence that you used that phrase. So colorful. I wonder, little comrade Martha, where did you pick it up from? Because you are not that creative. You read it in a book somewhere.

Tell me where you got this from: take them out and shoot them til they no longer wiggle.. The Sermon on the Mount? No, the atheist Shenonymous lives and breathes the Sermon of the Mount more than you do.  So what little book did you get such vivid murderous thoughts from?

You really are a LEFT WING LIBERAL EXTREMIST. Not only do you admit it, but you follow the LEFT-WING LIBERAL EXTREMIST PLAYBOOK.

Your desire to suppress free speech is typical of LEFT-WING LIBERAL EXTREMISTS. Because you can’t inact your PLAN while conservatives like me are free to speak out against you. You need to make sure the opposition is either dead or too afraid to speak. That may be the wave of the future. There are signs it is coming. You want to make it happen. You want gullible Leftists here to help you.

You are smart to hate people like me. You are smart to want to kill people like me.

Because people like me are not going to let LEFT-WING LIBERAL EXTREMISTS take freedom away from anyone in America. You can breath all your accusations and threats. You can rage and scream. I will not back down. Never. You really would have to kill me.

And I can tell from how you write, little Marxist MarthaA, that you would kill me.

But it isnt my life that I defend, its all the Christians you are ready to kill, all the people you want to intimidate into silence by passing totalitarian laws, all the Leftists you want to fool into helping you.

The Leftists tolerate you, because they think you have interesting(although a little odd) things to say. Truthdig enables you. Their articles are designed to confirm your worldview, and stir you up, and get you to act. To them you are a useful sort of person. You are the final product, the natural result of their propaganda.

You are hell bent on the LEFT-WING LIBERAL EXTREMIST AGENDA, which includes taking away free speech, and killing people who resist you. It was a mistake for me to let my guard down, or try to befriend you, or explain things to you, or give you a chance.

I thought you might choose to follow the love of Christ instead of the hatred of Mao. You cannot serve two masters. But you made your choice already.

I shake your dust off my feet. But I am not a perfect Christian, so i might not walk away. Instead i will be tempted to expose you again.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 31, 2009 at 7:24 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, et al,

Hitler’s artistic use of sophism and propaganda in “Mein Kampf” was not a delusion of grandeur, it is an OBJECTIVE reality that you can purchase and read; “Mein Kampf” brought Adolph Hitler to power in Germany and enabled the holocaust of World War II that resulted in the loss of millions of innocent lives and is now being used as a handbook by the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS in the United States to bring a RIGHT-WING GOVERNMENT to power in the United States the same way Hitler did.

Since Hitler’s art is what this thread is about, what about Adolph Hitler’s artful use of the language of sophism and propaganda to paint FRAMES of sophism and propaganda to denigrate, accuse, condemn and denounce people in Germany that led to his leadership of Nazi Germany and the ensuing holocaust?  This would be more productive than just Hitler’s paintings.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 31, 2009 at 7:21 pm Link to this comment

MarthaA You and I are like ships passing in the night.  You and OM can fight it out.  I think it is not going anywhere and quite frankly I don’t like pissing contests.  If there was any redeeming value in the exchange it could be interesting.  But it is more like a boxing match.  Pow, pow, goes MarthaA, pow pow goes OM.  There is no referee because I refuse to be it.  I have tried to make it a bit lighter but got name–called for it.  I didn’t like that.  I am being direct.  I tried to bring some rational discussion in and it was for nada.  It is yours and his argument, not mine. 

The winged frog comment was really for both of you as you both invoked my name to explain something to the other.  It just seemed right to say.

How can I change the subject when there is no subject?  There is no object either.  So there goes your whole argument.  And yes I do know the difference between subjective and objective. It has got to be time to call it a day.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 31, 2009 at 6:17 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

Sooooo,—————are you ignoring my post to OzarkMichael, there is plenty of subjective and objective information to discuss there?
————- Or,—————are you trying to change the subject?

BTW, I liked your 8/29 1:18am copious notes post to OzarkMichael explaining that “If a frog had wings it wouldn’t bump its ass,”  Forgot to tell you.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 31, 2009 at 3:06 pm Link to this comment

MarthaA, perhaps you are not a Biblical literalist, or maybe you are?  Where in the Bible does it say “of course the Bible is talking about both sons and daughters when it talks about man, which shortened word usage down considerably.”  I do not think so.  I have read the bible many times and always the same kind of nausea happens when I read certain scriptures that I get when I read the Qu’ran, also read many times, about the status of women.  I don’t want to start quoting here as it will really take this forum way off course, for a very long time. Except to say that Hitler had no respect for women. 

Cindy Sheehan is a spirited woman who has more reason than most for hating war, having lost her son to it.  I don’t know if she is expert at anything else, though.  I listen to her when I’ve tuned in to a program where she is interviewed as I tend to like her and her spunk.  I happen to think Afghanistan is the place where the Bush Administration should have gone in the first place, not Iraq.  Subjectively I was against the war effort in Iraq and I am now as well.  Those people are not grateful the Americans went in there.  Objectively speaking, the murder of millions of Iraqis by both the West and Islamists is unspeakable.  Subjectively I do not think Cheney is right about the CIA business, even though I believe all war is obscene, objectively I believe at times it is a necessary evil.  With no proof, except for history books, so I guess it is objective, torture and murder in war is a male tradition.  Try the Inquisition for only one example.  Try the decapitation or dismemberment by the Islamists of anyone who opposes them also for example.  Why is not the methods of torture of the Islamist not glamorized as much as the methods of the West?  That was a subjective question.  Objectively I think methods of torture do not have to be humane, why would they be?  It is absurd to speak of humane torture.  There is no other way to gain valuable defensive information many times.  Torture for other reasons, like forcing one into a religion, or for heresy or apostasy, now that is inhumane.  For war, subjectively, I don’t believe it is.  Men decide to go to war, they must suffer the consequences, and unfortunately so does everyone else!  With all due objectivity, the only way to end it is to get rid of the warring men, all of them.

In all objectivity, Cheney is defensive because he has a legacy to justify and protect, the one where he ran the country for eight years and made all the decisions.  I do not have any proof of this except when I look at him and see his churled upper lip I subjectively feel it is true.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 31, 2009 at 2:36 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

We are not talking here about anything other than what YOU did.

We should have laws passed that make this kind of sophism illegal, so that what happened in Nazi Germany cannot happen here in the United States and it won’t if we have laws that criminalize YOUR’S and HITLER’S type of sophism, so that we can give those who practice Hitler’s type of sophism a fair trial and then either imprison them or take them out and shoot them til they no longer wiggle.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 31, 2009 at 2:21 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

Democracy.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 31, 2009 at 2:18 pm Link to this comment

MarthaA, I wonder if you know of any LEFT-WING LIBERAL EXTREMISTS. What sort of things do they believe in? what sort of plan do they have?

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 31, 2009 at 1:15 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

My computer was really messing up on me so it was difficult to get these posts in.

I sent 4 pages, and Page 2 shows of 2, but was suppose to be of 4—(Page 2 of 4)

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 31, 2009 at 1:09 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

(Page 1 of 4)

It is no accident that the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS are doing the exact same thing that is in Hitler’s book Mein Kampf, the RIGHT-WING EXTREMISTS are using Mein Kampf as a handbook, just like the RIGHT-WING EXTREMIST NAZIS did.  OzarkMichael’s sophistry advocates Adolph Hitler’s tactics.

All the words in Mein Kampf were written by Hitler to CREATE a FRAME that could be used by Hitler and his RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT that was in the minority at the time, and framed HITLER’S RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT successfully as RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE underdogs and innocents, and cast the LIBERALS as the villains, and when Hitler’s RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT got into power Hitler’s RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT started killing the LIBERALS and the rest is history, and currently the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT in the United States is working on the same plan.


OzarkMichael said:  “But think for a minute.  Mein Kampf was Hitler’s attempt to win sympathy of the German people for his Nazi cause.  He is not going to win any sympathy calling his Nazis ‘hostile disturbers’.  But that is what MarthaA thinks Hitler is doing.  She defines the Republicans as disturbers”

MarthaA’s answer:  This is OzarkMichael’s assertion that has absolutely nothing to do with what MarthaA thinks or what Hitler was doing.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 31, 2009 at 1:07 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

(Page 1 of 4)

OzarkMichael,

It is no accident that the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS are doing the exact same thing that is in Hitler’s book Mein Kampf, the RIGHT-WING EXTREMISTS are using Mein Kampf as a handbook, just like the RIGHT-WING EXTREMIST NAZIS did.  OzarkMichael’s sophistry advocates Adolph Hitler’s tactics.

All the words in Mein Kampf were written by Hitler to CREATE a FRAME that could be used by Hitler and his RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT that was in the minority at the time, and framed HITLER’S RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT successfully as RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE underdogs and innocents, and cast the LIBERALS as the villains, and when Hitler’s RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT got into power Hitler’s RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT started killing the LIBERALS and the rest is history, and currently the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT in the United States is working on the same plan.


OzarkMichael said:  “But think for a minute.  Mein Kampf was Hitler’s attempt to win sympathy of the German people for his Nazi cause.  He is not going to win any sympathy calling his Nazis ‘hostile disturbers’.  But that is what MarthaA thinks Hitler is doing.  She defines the Republicans as disturbers”

MarthaA’s answer:  This is OzarkMichael’s assertion that has absolutely nothing to do with what MarthaA thinks or what Hitler was doing.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 31, 2009 at 1:05 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

(Page 2 of 2)

Mein Kampf was Hitler’s Right-Wing FRAME to try to gain power for his own political party by winning the sympathy of the German people, as Hitler was the leader of his own political party, the National Socialist German Workers Party, the Nazi Party, which continued to grow during his time in prison.  Hitler was very careful when writing his book in prison not to specify in his Mein Kampf anything specific about his plans, other than denegrations, accusations, condemnations, and denunciation of the Political Left, the Trade Unions, the Communists, the Jews and everyone else that were not of Aryan Gothic descent; ALL were denounced in the name of National Socialism, as Hitler claimed the Political Left, the Trade Unions, the Communists, the Jews and everyone else that was not of Aryan Gothic descent was the cause of the nation’s misery, but Hitler felt it was strictly up to the people to figure out what he was really up to for themselves, and on the basis of his propaganda in his book, Mein Kampf, FRAMED his political opposition as disturbers and villains when in fact his National Socialist German Workers Party members were the actual disturbers and villains, and the LIBERALS were the innocent victims of the Right-Wing EXTREMIST disturbers and villains.  Hitler was careful not to let the people know what his intentions were as ‘hostile disturbers’ and no one ever figured it out, and kept trying to cooperate with Hitler.  If Hitler had explained his hostile plan, he wouldn’t have been able to get away with his hostile plan at all, and in the end be appointed as Chancellor of Germany by and old and sick President Paul Von Hindenburg.  Mein Kampf was unexplained Right-Wing EXTREMIST FRAMING and deceit and is still a handbook for unexplained Right-Wing EXTREMIST FRAMING and deceit.  Those who choose to see, can see plainly now what it was in Germany, and those who choose to see in the United States can see that the RIGHT-WING EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS are the disturbers.

OzarkMichael said:  “Let us remember that Mein Kampf was written before Hitler came to power.  He is trying to sell himself to the German people.  He was in jail, and he needed to show that the authorities were wrong to put him there.  Please keep that in mind! Here comes the crucial part:”

MarthaA’s answer:  Mein Kampf was written while Hitler was in prison, but he had a growing active Nazi Party waiting for him when he got out of prison.  Hitler’s Mein Kampf FRAME was to set the Gothic Aryan people against ALL those who were NOT Gothic Aryan people.  Hitler FRAMED Socialism to exclude Socialism in the name of Socialism.  If people had realized they were not going to be included in Hitler’s RIGHT-WING EXTREME SOCIALISM, they may have stood up better, but Hitler’s Mein Kampf was written to fool the LIBERALS into thinking Hitler meant well for the LIBERALS as a whole, as the LIBERALS were in power, but the LIBERALS had no idea what so ever how power hungry and cruel Hitler really was, and had no idea what Hitler actually meant in Mein Kampf, as like Reagan, Hitler was just too nice to do anything wrong or cruel.  Hitler did sell himself to the LIBERALS, and all the German people, similar to the way OzarkMichael is trying to do here on the Truthdig blog, but Mein Kampf was the new RIGHT-WING HITLER NAZI MOVEMENT handbook.  Nazi’s political power over the government was non-existant, except in Hitler’s mind, at the time Hitler wrote Mein Kampf in prison.

Hitler did not specify anything in his book that would cause suspicion as to who was who, except in the form of propagandistic FRAMING, therefore, only Hitler’s own Nazi Movement were all that knew what the real plan was.


OzarkMichael said:  “If through some sort of threats it becomes known to the AUTHORITIES that there is danger of a meeting being broken up, they DO NOT ARREST the THREATENERS, but forbid the others, the

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 31, 2009 at 12:52 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

(Page 3 of 4)

OzarkMichael said (cont.)

innocent to hold the meeting,”

MarthaA’s answer:  This was Adolph Hitler’s FRAME in Mein Kampf of the disturbers and threateners being the innocents and the innocents being the disturbers and threateners. Hitler’s FRAME was the opposite of reality. The THREATENERS in Hitler’s FRAME would be the LIBERALS, and the INNOCENTS in Hitler’s FRAME would be the disturbers and threateners, the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST NAZIS.  Hitler was careful not to specify who the THREATENERS were except by his FRAMES, and no one understood those FRAMES, except Hitler’s inner circle, and everyone else wanted to accept that the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREME that appeared to represent the best interest of the German people, could not do anything ghastly against the people, but history shows that Hitler’s RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST MOVEMENT resulted in a holocaust not only for the German people, but for the world. 


OzarkMichael said:  “Ok, there it is.  In Mein Kampf Hitler is not playing Walter Cronkite.  He is trying to make his side look good and the other side look bad. Agreed? He would never call his opponents innocent that is a word he would reserve for himself, even while he was sitting there in jail.  He blames the police.  His book is trying to win sympathy for what he had done, and justify what he hoped to do.”

MarthaA’s answer:  NO.  It is NOT agreed, absolutely NOT agreed.  Mein Kampf is not GOOD Hitler against BAD Hitler, Mein Kampf is ALL Hitler, and Hitler’s enabling FRAMES that Hitler CREATED in Mein Kampf that were used by Hitler’s RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE NAZI MOVEMENT that Hitler CREATED.  Hitler was at the time in Mein Kampf writing FRAMES for his movement to present himself and his RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE NAZI MOVEMENT as underdogs and innocents, the same way the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS are using Mein Kampf in the United States today, trying to RE-CREATE and DUPLICATE what Hitler did, that started with GOLDWATER in 1976 through REAGAN, BUSH I and BUSH II, as the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVES ALL cast the LIBERALS as villains to denegrate, accuse, condemn, denounce and kill the same way as Hitler did, as Hitler’s Mein Kampf has been being used and is working in the United States the same way Hitler’s Plan worked for Hitler.  The people [the LIBERALS] are waking up somewhat to the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVES PLAN, but the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMISTS REPUBLICANS are, never the less, still at executing their Right-Wing supposed innocent plan as outlined in Hitler’s Mein Kampf.


OzarkMichael said:  “The people holding the meeting are, according to Hitler, the decent people.  But Mein Kampf is not the nightly news, it is propaganda to make Nazi party meetings seem like the gathering of innocent decent people and anyone who dared protest Nazi meeting Hitler calls a determined gangster.  For Hitler it was always the other guys fault.  The people who protested Nazi meetings Hitler calls disturbers.”

MarthaA’s answer:  The DETERMINED GANGSTERS is a FRAME.  The DECENT PEOPLE is a FRAME.  In reality the determined gangsters were the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST NAZIS and the decent people were the determined gangsters.  This is the same old opposite of reality FRAME.  OzarkMichael is parsing what Hitler said as if it wasn’t a FRAME, but it was a FRAME and it is a FRAME and it is the same FRAME that the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS are using today to denigrate, accuse, condemn, denounce and in the end if they can kill the LIBERALS, just like Hitler did. 


OzarkMichael:  “Now think: MarthaA calls the Republican protesters disturbers.  Unfortunately for MarthaA this proves that Republican disturbers are the sort of people Hitler really hates!”

MarthaA’s answer:  In Hitler’s FRAME the innocents were the subjective disturbers and the Republican protesters are the objective disturbers, the villains.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 31, 2009 at 12:40 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

(Page 4 of 4)
MarthaA’s answer (cont.)

What OzarkMichael says is that he either does not know the difference between SUBJECTIVE disturbers that are innocents and OBJECTIVE disturbers that are villains or that for reasons of sophism OzarkMichael does not choose to know the difference between SUBJECTIVE disturbers that are innocents and OBJECTIVE disturbers that are villains.


OzarkMichael said:  “This also proves that the Democrat party meetings are like Nazi party meetings.  Hitler loves Democrats apparently.  This further casts Democrat party leader Obama as equivalent to nazi party leader Hitler.”

MarthaA’s answer:  NO, it doesn’t.  This is again the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICAN SUBJECTIVE FRAMES and OBJECTIVE FRAMES being used by OzarkMichael in the same manner as Adolph Hitler to cast the innocents as the villains and the villains as the innocents, which is really sad that our government allows this type of sophistry to be used against the people of the common population.


OzarkMichael said:  “Now please scroll up and read my satirical post which Martha printed awhile ago.  Thank you for your patience.”

MarthaA’s answer:  OzarkMichael is trying to paint the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST PLAN of Adolph Hitler in his book Mein Kampf as innocent, but Mein Kampf was used to carry out Hitler’s plan to take over the government of Germany.  When in prison, what Hitler wrote in his book was the heist plans, NOT what had already happened, but what he was intending to happen, his RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST PLAN was to be carried out by his Nazi’s, and WAS carried out by his Nazis.
.
.
Adolph Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” was written using subjective and objective FRAMING to FRAME the innocents as the villains and FRAME the villains as the innocents in the following excerpts from “Mein Kampf”:

“At that time I [Adolph Hitler] adopted the standpoint:  It makes no difference whatever, whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again, and that we gradually in the eyes of the workers themselves APPEAR to be the ONLY POWER that anyone reckons with at the moment.  What we really are and what we really want, we will show the wolves of the Jewish press when the time comes.”
.
.
In the following two paragraphs from Adolph Hitler’s, “Mein Kampf” both subjective and objective FRAMING was used by Adolph Hitler to FRAME the innocent as disturbers and the villains as the innocent; the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE NAZIS were the objective disturbers portrayed in Hitler’s propaganda as the innocents and the LIBERALS were the subjective disturbers portrayed in Hitler’s propaganda as the villains.

“One can never count on protection on the part of the authorities; ON THE CONTRARY, experience shows that it ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY benefits the DISTURBERS.  For the sole actual result of intervention by the authorities—- that is, the police—- was at best to dissolve, in other words, to CLOSE THE MEETING.  And that was the SOLE AIM and PURPOSE of the hostile DISTURBERS.”

“If through some sort of threats it becomes known to the AUTHORITIES that there is danger of a meeting being broken up, they DO NOT ARREST the THREATENERS, but forbid the others, to hold the meeting, and what is more, the run-of-mill police mind is MIGHTY PROUD of such wisdom.  They call this a ‘precautionary measure for the prevention of an illegal act.’  Thus, the DETERMINED GANGSTER is always in a position to make political activity and efforts IMPOSSIBLE for decent people.  In the name of Law and Order, the State Authority gives it to the GANGSTER and requests the others please not to provoke him.”


Every time Hitler says disturbers, it is subjective disturbers, it is not actual disturbers.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 31, 2009 at 2:50 am Link to this comment

So thank you OM for joining the ranks of those who call me names!  Thanks for making a liar out of me.  Now the Contingent will be even better friends with you and let you partake of their joy (name-calling is the only joy they are ever able to offer).  Nice trade.  Enjoy it!  Blessed are the name-called, as their index shall eternally increase and be known throughout time. Keep calling others names and maybe your new friends will stop calling you names.  It is a weak weapon.  Passing out popcorn is a far better thing to do. Amen.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 30, 2009 at 6:01 pm Link to this comment

http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=YQq3ZQER7_w

Bible Thumper/Solid Gold
When I awoke in the morning
I found a wasp in my room,
Buzzing with the ceiling fan
But he’s too tired to sing

And with weapon in hand
I start thinking about love,
And things I wish I never said
I was cornered in the ring
But what’s life, it don’t mean anything

Woah woah
Baby what you trying to be?

When I awoke from the fight
In the middle of the night
With hands that smell like gasoline
But I’m too cold to burn

While in my head, how something she said
“You mean more than anything”
Will I ever learn?
Ain’t my time, I gotta wait my turn

Woah woah
Baby what you trying to be?
You mean more than anything


Are we having fun yet?

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 30, 2009 at 5:31 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

Re-posting your same post that you denied, after I have found it and re-posted it only can mean that you are not a repentant liar, which is what sophists do.  Your post is far from being satire or irony, which is a false flag you are trying to hide behind.  You are making it plain that you are a confirmed CONSERVATIVE RIGHT-WING EXTREMIST REPUBLICAN HATER of the Liberal Left, which is good to know, since you are trying to hide behind Christianity as well.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 30, 2009 at 5:16 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, you are a such a Bible thumper.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 30, 2009 at 5:04 pm Link to this comment

Also, Rachel Maddow: The Growing Threat Posed by Gun-Strapped Right-Wingers at Obama’s Townhalls
http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness
/142150/rachel_maddow:
_the_growing_threat_posed_by_gun-strapped_
right-wingers_at_obama’s_townhalls/

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 30, 2009 at 4:54 pm Link to this comment

Here is my golden oldie:

Martha, I was overjoyed when I read your Mein Kampf post. Maybe we are on the same side, fighting for the same thing.

The last two Mein Kampf quotes are Hitler complaining about Nazi meetings being disturbed by protestors. The Nazis are the “innocents”, the “decent” people, and if you read it carefully you see the Nazis are the ones holding the meeting. The people who Hitler calls DISTURBERS, THREATENING GANGSTERS, and THUGS are the people protesting! They are the good people protesting the Nazi meeting.

So in your analogy the good guys are the people protesting the healthcare meetings, which are run by the Nazi bad guys. I was so happy to read this that I almost cried.

Because yesterday my congressman had a meeting. When he said that the Obama healthplan would pay for itself, since it was such a bald-faced lie I laughed out loud and right away many of the people were laughing. The congressman didnt like that. Later I felt bad, like maybe I was impolite.

But after reading your post I realize for sure that I did the right thing.

Since everyone here is concerned about fascism, please find out where your local Obama Healthcare meeting is so you can protest the stupid things they say. Just laugh out loud, and dont feel bad at all.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 30, 2009 at 4:54 pm Link to this comment

HATE RADIO’S Vitriol against the LIBERALS and the LEFT is being brought back,

“As If Limbaugh and Beck Weren’t Bad Enough, the Granddaddy of HATE RADIO Is Back on the Air”,

which means the Right IS still trying to do what Hitler did.

As If Limbaugh and Beck Aren’t Bad Enough, the Granddaddy of HATE RADIO Should NOT Be Back on the Air.

http://www.alternet.org/media/142149/
as_if_limbaugh_and_beck_weren’t_bad_enough,
_the_granddaddy_of_hate_radio_is_back
_on_the_air/?page=entire

Per Alexander Zaitchik of AlterNet, “Bob Grant taught a generation of CONSERVATIVE talkers how to channel white rage, until a listener boycott helped push him off the air. Now he’s back.”  The country should be getting rid of the HATE SPEECH and all those that teach/taught HATE SPEECH against the LIBERALS and the LEFT, instead of bringing back the original HATE SPEECH teacher that started the whole ungodly CONSERVATIVE HATE CAMPAIGN against the LIBERALS and the LEFT.

Not only are the RIGHT-WING RIOTS the same as Hitler, but the following excerpt shows that the RIGHT-WING HATE SPEECH CAMPAIGN is the same as Hitler used in Germany in 1939, which includes Limbaugh, the student of Bob Grant’s RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE HATE SPEECH.  Excerpts from Alexander Zaitchik AlterNet post dated August 24, 2009: 

“...a January 1995 cover story in FAIR’s bimonthly magazine published fresh quotes to ballast the case that ABC’s flagship radio station was daily broadcasting a show that sounded like something produced by German state radio in 1939. The article, entitled “50,000 Watts of HATE,” quoted Grant wishing Magic Johnson would develop full-blown AIDS—along with the entire population of Haiti. It quoted Grant denying a caller’s charge of racism in 1993, saying, “If they did allow it, the thugs, the savages, the refugees from the Kalahari would tear the place apart. But I guess our group has evolved too far. I guess that’s the price we pay for being a little higher up on the evolutionary scale.”

Finally, on April 3, 1996, Grant hanged himself when he expressed hope that Commerce Secretary Ron Brown had died in a just-announced plane crash. Two weeks later, following a renewed media campaign led by USA Today, Grant was fired from WABC. Grant’s faithful media ally the New York Post dutifully marked the day of infamy with the full-page headline: “Grant’s Tomb.”

But the campaign’s victory was Pyrrhic. Grant was immediately snapped up by WOR, the city’s #2 talk station, which promptly plopped Grant into his old afternoon-drive slot. Still, the campaign had demonstrated that the scope for what is acceptable on public airwaves had narrowed. Grant mellowed somewhat after the demonstration of liberal power.

For years his openly racist and incendiary calls for “action” had been a source of chuckles in CONSERVATIVE New York circles. On YouTube, there survives a clip from a September 15, 1991 Friar’s Club roast in honor of Grant, years before his public unmasking and condemnation. Among those in attendance are Al D’Amato and Joe Piscapo. In the clip, Grant protégé Rush Limbaugh delivers the keynote, which includes some good-natured ribbing about Grant’s well-known racial views. “To protest Apartheid, when he does his laundry, Bob Grant doesn’t separate the colors from the whites,” jokes Limbaugh. “I’m not saying Bob is a racist, but he wanted to go see Boyz in the Hood because he thought it was a KKK training film.”

Behind Limbaugh hangs a giant banner, on which are emblazoned the words revived this summer by Glenn Beck in his not-so-subtle homage to Grant: “Get off my phone!”

To which progressives have the right to respond, “GET OFF MY PUBLIC AIRWAVES.” As the encouraging early results of the colorofchange.org campaign indicate, this needn’t always be an idle threat.’

http://www.alternet.org/media/142149/
as_if_limbaugh_and_beck_weren’t_bad_enough,
_the_granddaddy_of_hate_radio_is_back_on_the_air/

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 30, 2009 at 4:49 pm Link to this comment

Thank you MarthaA. I just didnt see it. Before you declare victory, lets look at the salient points.

On August 5, 2009, National Public Radio reported that RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS were intentionally disrupting Democratic Party meetings at a local level; I have read about this type of POLITICAL ACTIVITY before, and I am aware that the following policy has been effectively used to disrupt legitimate political activity by competing political parties in the past

The intentional disruptions of Democratic Party meetings is the issue. The Disruptors are the Republicans. Agreed? And this sounds so familiar to MarthaA because it is straight from Mein Kampf, where she ‘remembers’ that Nazi gangsters disrupt innocent decent people. agreed so far?

Here is Hitler talking:

For the sole actual result of intervention by the authorities—- that is, the police—- was at best to dissolve, in other words, to CLOSE THE MEETING.  And that was the SOLE AIM and PURPOSE of the hostile DISTURBERS.”

Now it seems MarthaA may have a case. There are the ‘Republican’ disturbers, apparently just like Nazis.

But think for a minute. Mein Kampf was Hitler’s attempt to win the sympathy of the German people for his Nazi cause. He is not going to win any sympathy calling his Nazis ‘hostile disturbers’. But that is what MarthaA thinks Hitler is doing. She defines the Republicans as disturbers

Let us remember that Mein Kampf was written before Hitler came to power. He is trying to sell himself to the German people. He was in jail, and he needed to show that the authorities were wrong to put him there. Please keep that in mind! Here comes the crucial part:

If through some sort of threats it becomes known to the AUTHORITIES that there is danger of a meeting being broken up, they DO NOT ARREST the THREATENERS, but forbid the others, the innocent to hold the meeting,

Ok, there it is. In Mein Kampf Hitler is not playing Walter Cronkite. He is trying to make his side look good and the other side look bad. Agreed? He would never call his opponents innocent that is a word he would reserve for himself, even while he was sitting there in jail. He blames the police.  His book is trying to win sympathy for what he had done, and justify what he hoped to do.

The people holding the meeting are, according to Hitler, the decent people. But Mein Kampf is not the nightly news, it is propaganda to make Nazi party meetings seem like the gathering of innocent decent people and anyone who dared protest Nazi meetings Hitler calls a determined gangster. For Hitler it was always the other guys fault. The people who protested Nazi meetings Hitler calls disturbers.


Now think: Martha A calls the Republican protesters disturbers. Unfortunately for MarthaA this proves that Republican disturbers are the sort of people Hitler really hates!

This also proves that the Democrat party meetings are like Nazi party meetings. Hitler loves Democrats apparently. This further casts Democrat party leader Obama as equivalent to Nazi party leader Hitler.

Now please scroll up and read my satirical post which Martha printed awhile ago. Thank you for your patience.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 30, 2009 at 2:20 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

Peacemakers need to turn out at Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts on Chappaquiddick Island South of Cape Cod to help Cindy Sheehan in the peace process to get the United States out as a warring faction overseas and bring the troops home from Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan; instead of sending more troop to continue fighting.  There may be reasons to continue this fighting, but none have been verbalized that are sufficient to continue the loss of American life.

Jesus as a man was a Priest, a Jewish Rabbi, and of course there is a God, the Bible says only the fool says there is no God, and of course the Bible is talking about both sons and daughters when it talks about man, which shortened word usage down considerably.

Unenlightened, crude, rude and socially unacceptable men do have a tendency to think that because women aren’t mentioned specifically that God means for women to be under man’s thumb, but not so, God had made Adam an extra rib, so when he took that rib and made Eve it made men and women equal with twelve ribs each; with the exception that most women are physically weaker, women and men are equal.

http://biology.clc.uc.edu/Courses/bio105/ribs.htm

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 30, 2009 at 12:52 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

Original Mein Kampf Post:

(Page 1 of 2)

Here is the one and only original “Mein Kampf” post to Shenonymous that used Hitler’s own words, and there was no other post about “Mein Kampf” prior to this post to anyone.  OzarkMichael answered this post to Shenonymous, all the words in the three quoted paragraphs are Adolph Hitler’s words:

*******

By MarthaA, August 6 at 5:51 pm #

Shenonymous,

(Part 1 of 2)

When I read you post, I cried, not from being unhappy, but because I saw truth in your post. Have you read “Mein Kampf” by Adolph Hitler?  If you haven’t read it, I hope you will, because it is the handbook of the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT.  My answer to ITW on another post, also fits well here, so I will re-post it to you as well.
*********************

CONSERVATIVE RIGHT-WING EXTREMIST attacks on Democratic Party Meetings, the Obama birth certificate sophistry, the sophistry of Rush Limbaugh and all CONSERVATIVE RIGHT-WING EXTREMIST attack media is a plan.

On August 5, 2009, National Public Radio reported that RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS were intentionally disrupting Democratic Party meetings at a local level; I have read about this type of POLITICAL ACTIVITY before, and I am aware that the following policy has been effectively used to disrupt legitimate political activity by competing political parties in the past:

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 30, 2009 at 12:48 pm Link to this comment

“It makes no difference whatever, whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again, and that we gradually in the eyes of the workers themselves APPEAR to be the ONLY POWER that anyone reckons with at the moment.”

“One can never count on protection on the part of the authorities; on the contrary, experience shows that it ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY
benefits the DISTURBERS.  For the sole actual result of intervention by the authorities—- that is, the police—- was at best to dissolve, in other words, to CLOSE THE MEETING.  And that was the SOLE AIM and PURPOSE of the hostile DISTURBERS.”

“If through some sort of threats it becomes known to the AUTHORITIES that there is danger of a meeting being broken up, they DO NOT ARREST the THREATENERS, but forbid the others, the innocent, to hold the meeting, and what is more, the run-of-mill police mind is MIGHTY PROUD of such wisdom.  They call this a ‘precautionary measure for the prevention of an illegal act.’  Thus, the DETERMINED GANGSTER is always in a position to make political activity and efforts IMPOSSIBLE for decent people.  In the name of Law and Order, the State Authority gives it to the GANGSTER and requests the others please not to provoke him.”

******* END OF August 6, 2009 05:51 POST

You wish “all the posts scrolled off the page a long time ago”, but they didn’t, there are four pages total of this entire Truthdig thread on the web and NONE of the posts have been removed or “scrolled off the page” as you say; the posts in question can easily be found on page 2 of the Truthdig - Time For A Second Revolution thread at http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/20090708_time_for_a_second_revolution/P100/

OzarkMichael said:  “Do you want to settle this or do you want to stay mad at me?”

MarthaA’s answer:  I am not mad at you OzarkMichael or Shenonymous, disappointed but not mad, mad doesn’t solve anything, or explain anything. Telling an intentional untruth is a lie, which is sophistry.  Lying is a weakness from which it may appear for a time one is winning, but never does lying be of benefit to the liar in the long run.  Realizing that you are following a RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREME REPUBLICAN AGENDA doesn’t make me mad, but it is imperative that I know the agenda of the person I am talking with, if at all possible.  In Congress Democrats know when they are talking to Republicans and vice versa, as the Republican CONSERVATIVE EXTREME AGENDA is not a Democratic LIBERAL AGENDA.  Realizing people are sophistly trying to deceive is disappointing, and perhaps you are right, there are more doing the same thing, time will tell.  Republicans are well versed in the outright deceit of sophistry.

Even Jesus as a man said, why callest thou me good? —therefore trying to make oneself appear good, while lying, is definitely not of God.  Although no one is perfect, as Christians, we are to pursue perfection as best we can.  Lying is not a Christian trait in pursuit of perfection and requires admittance along with repentance, and if you decide to repent, also repent for the deliberate use of Christianity as a tool to make yourself appear good.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 30, 2009 at 12:47 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael

Original Mein Kampf Post:

(Page 2 of 2)

“It makes no difference whatever, whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again, and that we gradually in the eyes of the workers themselves APPEAR to be the ONLY POWER that anyone reckons with at the moment.”

“One can never count on protection on the part of the authorities; on the contrary, experience shows that it ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY
benefits the DISTURBERS.  For the sole actual result of intervention by the authorities—- that is, the police—- was at best to dissolve, in other words, to CLOSE THE MEETING.  And that was the SOLE AIM and PURPOSE of the hostile DISTURBERS.”

“If through some sort of threats it becomes known to the AUTHORITIES that there is danger of a meeting being broken up, they DO NOT ARREST the THREATENERS, but forbid the others, the innocent, to hold the meeting, and what is more, the run-of-mill police mind is MIGHTY PROUD of such wisdom.  They call this a ‘precautionary measure for the prevention of an illegal act.’  Thus, the DETERMINED GANGSTER is always in a position to make political activity and efforts IMPOSSIBLE for decent people.  In the name of Law and Order, the State Authority gives it to the GANGSTER and requests the others please not to provoke him.”

******* END OF August 6, 2009 05:51 POST

You wish “all the posts scrolled off the page a long time ago”, but they didn’t, there are four pages total of this entire Truthdig thread on the web and NONE of the posts have been removed or “scrolled off the page” as you say; the posts in question can easily be found on page 2 of the Truthdig - Time For A Second Revolution thread at
http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/
item/20090708_time_for_a_second_revolution/P100/

OzarkMichael said:  “Do you want to settle this or do you want to stay mad at me?”

MarthaA’s answer:  I am not mad at you OzarkMichael or Shenonymous, disappointed but not mad, mad doesn’t solve anything, or explain anything. Telling an intentional untruth is a lie, which is sophistry.  Lying is a weakness from which it may appear for a time one is winning, but never does lying be of benefit to the liar in the long run.  Realizing that you are following a RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREME REPUBLICAN AGENDA doesn’t make me mad, but it is imperative that I know the agenda of the person I am talking with, if at all possible.  In Congress Democrats know when they are talking to Republicans and vice versa, as the Republican CONSERVATIVE EXTREME AGENDA is not a Democratic LIBERAL AGENDA.  Realizing people are sophistly trying to deceive is disappointing, and perhaps you are right, there are more doing the same thing, time will tell.  Republicans are well versed in the outright deceit of sophistry.

Even Jesus as a man said, why callest thou me good? —therefore trying to make oneself appear good, while lying, is definitely not of God.  Although no one is perfect, as Christians, we are to pursue perfection as best we can.  Lying is not a Christian trait in pursuit of perfection and requires admittance along with repentance, and if you decide to repent, also repent for the deliberate use of Christianity as a tool to make yourself appear good.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 30, 2009 at 12:47 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael,

Original Mein Kampf Post:

(Page 2 of 2)

“It makes no difference whatever, whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again, and that we gradually in the eyes of the workers themselves APPEAR to be the ONLY POWER that anyone reckons with at the moment.”

“One can never count on protection on the part of the authorities; on the contrary, experience shows that it ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY
benefits the DISTURBERS.  For the sole actual result of intervention by the authorities—- that is, the police—- was at best to dissolve, in other words, to CLOSE THE MEETING.  And that was the SOLE AIM and PURPOSE of the hostile DISTURBERS.”

“If through some sort of threats it becomes known to the AUTHORITIES that there is danger of a meeting being broken up, they DO NOT ARREST the THREATENERS, but forbid the others, the innocent, to hold the meeting, and what is more, the run-of-mill police mind is MIGHTY PROUD of such wisdom.  They call this a ‘precautionary measure for the prevention of an illegal act.’  Thus, the DETERMINED GANGSTER is always in a position to make political activity and efforts IMPOSSIBLE for decent people.  In the name of Law and Order, the State Authority gives it to the GANGSTER and requests the others please not to provoke him.”

******* END OF August 6, 2009 05:51 POST

You wish “all the posts scrolled off the page a long time ago”, but they didn’t, there are four pages total of this entire Truthdig thread on the web and NONE of the posts have been removed or “scrolled off the page” as you say; the posts in question can easily be found on page 2 of the Truthdig - Time For A Second Revolution thread at
http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/
item/20090708_time_for_a_second_revolution/P100/

OzarkMichael said:  “Do you want to settle this or do you want to stay mad at me?”

MarthaA’s answer:  I am not mad at you OzarkMichael or Shenonymous, disappointed but not mad, mad doesn’t solve anything, or explain anything. Telling an intentional untruth is a lie, which is sophistry.  Lying is a weakness from which it may appear for a time one is winning, but never does lying be of benefit to the liar in the long run.  Realizing that you are following a RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREME REPUBLICAN AGENDA doesn’t make me mad, but it is imperative that I know the agenda of the person I am talking with, if at all possible.  In Congress Democrats know when they are talking to Republicans and vice versa, as the Republican CONSERVATIVE EXTREME AGENDA is not a Democratic LIBERAL AGENDA.  Realizing people are sophistly trying to deceive is disappointing, and perhaps you are right, there are more doing the same thing, time will tell.  Republicans are well versed in the outright deceit of sophistry.

Even Jesus as a man said, why callest thou me good? —therefore trying to make oneself appear good, while lying, is definitely not of God.  Although no one is perfect, as Christians, we are to pursue perfection as best we can.  Lying is not a Christian trait in pursuit of perfection and requires admittance along with repentance, and if you decide to repent, also repent for the deliberate use of Christianity as a tool to make yourself appear good.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 30, 2009 at 11:37 am Link to this comment

Isaiah 32:16-18
“16. Then justice will dwell in the wilderness, and righteousness abide in the fruitful field.
17. And the effect of righteousness will be peace, and the result will be peace, and the result of righteousness, quietness and trust for ever. 
18. My people will abide in a peaceful habitation, in secure dwellings, and in quiet resting places.
19. And the forest will utterly go down, and the city will be utterly laid low.”

Of course my favorite is the Beatitude: 
Matthew 5:9
“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.” 

Except I would revise it to say “sons and daughters” as I would hope if there is a God, nekeiwe would not be left out!  It is a matter of translation, I’m sure the word is there.  Women are better peacemakers anyway.  Right?  Well…this is Judaism (you recall that Jesus was a Jew), and look what happened to Eve and Lilith.  Oh oh.  I’m sure to have stepped in it this time on both forums.  Yikes!  Got ta watch m’step here and there.

I accidentally posted the above comments on the forum How Bad Things Might Have Been.  So some who are posting here and there will be seeing double. No matter, the content is relevant to both, in different ways of course and besides we always have Lenscrafters.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 30, 2009 at 9:15 am Link to this comment

Unfortunately all our posts scrolled off the page a long time ago. I am only going from memory. Obviously you save them, marthaA, since you were able to reproduce mine. If you have your Hitler post, and perhaps a few more of your posts prior to mine then please reproduce them here so we can then settle the matter.

Now you are mad at Shenonymous too? She is trying to make peace between us, apparently for Christ’s sake. I mean She is practically quoting the Bible at us.

Arent you a little ashamed to have an atheist remind us of our obligation to each other? I am.

Shenonymous is a strange, rare creature. I have called her a “Christian Atheist” as a compliment but it gets her mad. I have tried several times to help her realize how dangerously close She is to becoming a Christian. She resists, sometimes in a fury and sometimes calmly. In a few months I try again. It tests our friendship. She does her share of testing as well. Yes, we are friends after 2 years of Truthdig arguments and more to come.

But it isnt just Shenonymous. Leefeller is in the mix when he wants to be. He flashes his own red cape at me and sometimes i fall for it. Inherit The Wind is becoming a friend too. Maybe Anarcissie. Maybe ardee too I am making friends here with people who disagree with me. My circle is not closed to anyone.

I never save old posts so stop accusing me of withholding something I dont have. Shenonymous can usually dig old posts up if you cant find it.

Do you want to settle this or do you want to stay mad at me?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 30, 2009 at 8:45 am Link to this comment

I vork viss novun.

I read your posts, MarthaA so I wouldn’t like to see the space here taken up with re-posting.  We could just go to that forum.  Explications are better for my understanding than reading esoteric posts. 

Besides I have to get the popcorn bits out of my teeth.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 30, 2009 at 8:13 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, OzarkMichael,

There was NO prior alluding or explaining the MarthaA “Mein Kampf” post by MarthaA, if as you say there was a MarthaA post alluding to or explaining the “Mein Kampf” post DATED PRIOR to the 8/6/09 08:19pm date of the OzarkMichael sophist explanation of what the “Mein Kampf” post meant, PLEASE post the original MarthaA post along with the original date of the ORIGINAL post from Truthdig “Time For a Second Revolution”, otherwise I will have to recognize that you are BOTH working together, each doing your part to advance a sophist agenda.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 30, 2009 at 8:10 am Link to this comment

Lenscrafter could not help me cross eyes, which in a bibicl sense may mean someting most relgious, but for me it usualy means I sometimes throw the popcorn over my sholders.

OM, sometimes your Irony excapates me! (Maybe most times as Irony my sarcastic comments excpates others, in writing it is very hard to pass on tone or expressions of emotions to unsuspecting minds, such as mine). If one looks below the reflection, TD could be all Irony!

My only nanosecond of respect for Hitler would be, simply he evaded the loonybin and became topdog of a so sad version of loonytoons history!

Now, to take some time to get my popcorn off the floor!

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 30, 2009 at 7:16 am Link to this comment

My point is MarthaA, and I hope it is a final one, with your protocol, your framing, you might be running around in circles on your own island, which is exactly opposite to what you seem to be intending to do.  I fully respect your wish to “enlighten” the rest of us.  But you make the categorical mistake that the rest of us are completely blind.  We aren’t.  We have been to Lenscrafters of the Mind.  We just come away with different prescriptions towards 20/20.  But who is to say what perfect vision is?  We evaluate as much as you do, and based on our own histories, we come to our own conclusions. It is inevitable there will be differences of perceptions of the way the “ought to be.”  We must argue for our own points, and by doing that we argue implicatively against others.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 30, 2009 at 7:02 am Link to this comment

Good Sunday morning.  Hello MarthaA.  Yes, I had seen the “complete OzarkMichael Post from Truthdig,” the day it was posted.  And I saw your comments made prior to it.  And after it.  It looked to me like a great piece of drama and I wanted only to be in the gallery.  I will respond to your 9:00pm post to me about it because I think everyone deserves respect, everyone except Hitler that is.

It immediately appeared to me that OM was involved in some hyperbole and The Great Red-Caped Conservative One was in his often mocking mode.  Not to say that fascist impulses do not exist today, that would be a case of ostrichism, but Mein Kampf is so far out of it in contemporary times, it has been vetted by the best, and criticized by the best, and seen for its preposterous insanities by the best.  Hitler is a persona non grata.  How after 60 years could anyone be compared to that utter miscreant.  Unless it be an Adi Amin or Robert Mugabe, who had control over millions of people.  Except for these last two, unlike Hitler, or OzarkMichel who only makes TD comments, they did not do any writing, or if they did, it was of no consequence.  If Hitler had a religious or artistic belief, they were false beliefs.  He was destitute of conscience.  Nietzsche claimed to be immoral.  Hitler was amoral beyond belief.  This in no way shape or form describes OM.  At least the OM I’ve scrimmaged with for more than two years.  He has always been respectful to my atheism, accepted me and my beliefs which are completely counter to his own.  I find that honorable.  And we have had fun over the years.  One can have fun even in opposition, vehement opposition, you know like boxers.  The one thing I take from his and my interaction is that we have never ever called each other names!  (And to you I apologize for calling you a sophist, although it was a good blow you must admit.)  OM and I have had arduous arguments. I have no doubt OM has deep Christian faith.  Militant atheists do not understand it.  And obviously a Christian such as yourself does not understand it either.  And it is this part that I do not understand.  As I thought for Christians, Christ united you all.  I have read OM say that, but to no avail, since he is criticized up the YingYang.

The thing I feel about argument, and to each his own opinion of course (and that is a philosophy of mine as well, and Night-Gaunt’s), is that for self-reflective adults it must be against the principles not the person.  I have not really seen your argument against OM’s principles.  His sometimes undomesticated defenses have usually been reactive to the accusations of verisimilitude with Hitler and Nazism, which is absurd.  I really don’t blame him, though, for he is a man.  I just read his riposte (as in fencing, a quick return thrust made after parrying a lunge by one’s opponent).  He characterizes his comments sharply.  He is not above bombast, that is true.  But after awhile one becomes inured to it.  He showed you the irony of your own accusations.  Not to say he isn’t guilty of that himself sometimes.  We all are!  But with respect to the “cosmic” argument waged between you two, as a spectator I only see blistering war of words between Christians.  Copious quotes are of no use to the rest of us unless they are explained as pertinent to the argument. 

That is why I quip that it is theater, and the rest of us are the ticketholders, the audience.  Leefeller always has some gem of a comment about what is going on.  He is the one who passes out the popcorn.

Personally I find it quite entertaining and hope to watch more of it.  Although, OM has gone rational on us, boo hoo.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 30, 2009 at 6:03 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

If we are lions, we should strive to be children and as children we should not set the camels and the lions against each other.  I have my own journey to make to Jesus on the other shore and running up, down, around and about this shore will not get me over the bridge to the other shore; therefore, I have no more to say on this subject.

Those who have eyes to see and ears to hear will understand what I am saying; those who do not will continue to run up, down, around and about this shore looking to have what I have explained to them.

If everyone on this blog is going to run up and down, around, and about this shore, don’t whine, because one has to make ones own choice and it is up to that one that makes the choice to live with it.

For those than can see, OzarkMichael’s sophistry has caught him, as he has stated that I explained what my “Mein Kampf” post meant when I posted it, I did not.  I just posted Hitler’s words from “Mein Kampf” and thought Hitler’s words would stand on their own merit.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 30, 2009 at 12:06 am Link to this comment

One month ago MarthaA’ posted four Mein Kampf quotes.  The purpose of her Mein Kampf quotes was to cast all the healthcare protestors as fascists, but the true meaning of what Hitler said was “poor innocent me, we hold Nazi meetings but protestors interrupt us all the time.”

If you follow the analogy correctly it matches Hitler to Obama. Which I thought was a funny mistake for MarthaA to make. So i wrote my satirical response which MarthaA reposted here and you can read.

And by the way, posting my satire without her own Hitler quotes was unfair. Its like posting a punchline without the set-up. But I am not mad at her because I am pretty sure she didnt get the point then nor will she get it now.

Many dramatic elements in my satire were borrowed from things she had said. I reflected it all back at her in theatrical irony. This means there were two audiences: one group of people(Shenonymous was one of them) who get the joke and get the hidden point.  The other group just gets really mad, and decides I am an easy target. Which entices them to charge. Like bulls angrily chasing after a red cape. A really artful post will result in two angry bulls who crash into each other as i pull the cape away.

The really strange thing is sometimes i am not ironic at all, I am very honest when people ask me honest questions. I climb out of the theatre and into my real clothes, but for some reason the bulls keep churning away. I have to confess that this puzzles me. My own fault I guess.

Keirkegaard said it best: “What I offered with my left hand(irony) they took with their right(as seriousness). What i offered with my right hand(seriousness) they took with their left(as if it was still irony).”

It is hard to explain the concept of irony. Kierkegaard wrote a whole book by that title.

Seriousness: I dont think that Obama is Hitler! I dont think anyone today is Hitler! I do not like Hitler! He wouldnt like me!

But MarthaA’s Mein Kampf quote cast Obama as Hitler. She accidently made the healthcare protestors into the good guys too, which maybe they are. So i ran with it. Instead of laughing at her own mistake she has hated me for it ever since.

You can all insist that the protestors are fascists if you want to, just use a different quote from Mein Kampf to ‘prove’ it.

Better yet, here is helpful advice: drop the fascist accusations. Unless you want to lunge into this red cape again…

Ole!

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 29, 2009 at 10:55 pm Link to this comment

Leefeller, probably you are pulling my leg. But in case you arent: the ‘laughter’ was only a dramatic element, a reflection of something MarthaA had said. The whole thing was Irony, and made up of many elements from her prior posts, woven together into a story. When i wrote the part about ‘I was so happy to read your post i almost cried’ that was a direct quote from MarthaA to Shenonymous. 

That means I never went to a meeting. But if my Senator said that the healthcare plan would pay for itself, it would be hard not to laugh.

Wouldnt you at least roll your eyes?

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 29, 2009 at 8:01 pm Link to this comment

OM,

Why do you feel a public option for medical care is something to laugh at, or you laughing at something else during the town hall meeting?

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 29, 2009 at 3:00 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

Page 1 of 2)

The following is the complete OzarkMichael Post from Truthdig - “Time For A Second Revolution,” Page 2,  where OzarkMichael described and claimed the Nazis were innocent and decent people, which was exactly the opposite of reality, the same as the Right-Wing CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST harassers disrupting democratic meetings today.  OzarkMichael’s claim made it plain to me that OzarkMichael is a sophist Nazi sympathizer who is a part of the Right-Wing sophistry against the Left that is going on today: 

*******

“By OzarkMichael, August 6 at 8:19 pm #

“Martha, I was overjoyed when I read your Mein Kampf post. Maybe we are on the same side, fighting for the same thing.”

“The last two Mein Kampf quotes are Hitler complaining about Nazi meetings being disturbed by protestors. The Nazis are the “innocents”, the “decent” people, and if you read it carefully you see the Nazis are the ones holding the meeting. The people who Hitler calls DISTURBERS, THREATENING GANGSTERS, and THUGS are the people protesting! They are the good people protesting the Nazi meeting.”

“So in your analogy the good guys are the people protesting the healthcare meetings, which are run by the Nazi bad guys. I was so happy to read this that I almost cried.”

“Because yesterday my congressman had a meeting. When he said that the Obama healthplan would pay for itself, since it was such a bald-faced lie I laughed out loud and right away many of the people were laughing. The congressman didnt like that. Later I felt bad, like maybe I was impolite.”

“But after reading your post I realize for sure that I did the right thing.”

“Since everyone here is concerned about fascism, please find out where your local Obama Healthcare meeting is so you can protest the stupid things they say. Just laugh out loud, and dont feel bad at all.”

END OF QUOTE

******

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 29, 2009 at 2:58 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

Page 2 of 2)

OzarkMichael was trying to frame my position as a Nazi sympathizer, while I was trying to notify people that what is going on today with the Right-Wing harassing disrupters is the EXACT same process that Hitler used, which I could not allow or I would never have posted Hitler’s words from his book “Mein Kampf” in the first place, and from what OzarkMichael said in the above post, I have taken OzarkMichael at his word to be a Nazi sympathizer.  Sophists will always deny their own sophistry, but this was plain enough to me.

Hitler represented and led a RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST MOVEMENT in Germany and in the United States we have a RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST MOVEMENT trying to emerge with the fascist power of Adolph Hitler.

It seems counter productive to me to personally accuse, condemn and denounce a singular dead man.  It is more productive to realize that there were many villains on both sides of the conflict, the villains that created conditions that spawned Hitler and the villains that benefited from the conflict, as well as the villainy of Hitler, himself.  It does no one any long term good to exclude and dismiss all of the other villains and concentrate on blaming everything upon Hitler. 

We must recognize all of the villians in the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST MOVEMENT in the United States and all of the villains that benefit from the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST MOVEMENT in the United States, as well as all of the toadies that support the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST MOVEMENT in the United States in order to do something about it, blaming one person as an individual, whether it is Adolph Hitler, Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, H.W. Bush or W. Bush is non-productive, we must concentrate on the destructive effect of all that are a part of the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST MOVEMENT and not fixate upon one leader like Adolph Hitler, Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, H.W. Bush or W. Bush, to scape goat one person as a villain and ignore all of the other villains.

Understanding why someone became a villain is in no way love, as OzarkMichael was doing when he was turning my words around for his sophist meaning.  MarthaA has no love at all for Hitler or the despicable things done under the Hitler administration, which must be avoided at all cost in the United States.

From Hitler’s standpoint he was an Aryan, Goth, the people in Germany and Austria were Aryan, Goths, as well as many other people throughout Europe were Aryan, Goths, and this same racist attitude is alive and well in the United States, which is the reason for the Armed Movement of Hitler-type harassers being raised up and nurtured by the RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE EXTREMIST MOVEMENT against the Left and guns being brought to political meetings.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 29, 2009 at 12:56 pm Link to this comment

You betcha! and big kisses to YOU OM!  You are the most evolved conservative I’ve ever known, even amongst my beloved Republican relatives!  And even if you have your TD critics that’d like to boil you alive!  Well we won’t let that happen.  Yeah, we be at it for a very long time now, you be the dog and I be the cat! 

Now we opposites must help out both Leefeller with moral cornedbeef hash and Virginia777 who is into numerology (thar’s magic in them thar numbus).  I’m afraid I am just a pisser-offer.  Cain’t hep it frum where’s auhm frum, youse knowsdat… academia.  Aw, she’s a good kid, I know it.  You gave her very good advice.  I hope she can forgive the trollingest but most beloved troll on TD.  A trolling we will go, a trolling we will go, heigh ho a Truthdigging we will go, a trolling we will go. 

Here’s another awesome BD just for all youse guys, ah…er…lyrics somewhat modified, uh you know, She’s a bit creative Most Of The Time

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnhV-LcVvUc

Most of the time
This liberal is clear focused all around,
Most of the time
She can keep both feet on the ground,
She can follow the path, She can read the signs,
Stay right with it, when the road unwinds,
She can handle whatever She stumbles upon,
She don’t even notice when anyone is gone,
Most of the time.

Most of the time
It’s well understood,
Most of the time
She wouldn’t change it if She could,
Try as hard as She can,
She can’t make it all match up, She can hold Her own,
She can deal with the situation right down to the bone,
She can survive, She can endure
And She don’t even think about all the troubles of the world
Most of the time.

Most of the time
he head is on straight,
Most of the time
She strong enough not to hate, even when others hate Her.
She don’t build up illusion ‘till it makes Her sick,
She ain’t afraid of confusion no matter how thick
She can smile in the face of mankind.
Don’t even remember what lips felt like, don’t even remember
Most of the time.

Most of the time
Ain’t forgotten madness in the world,
She wouldn’t know a conservative from a liberal
Most of the time.
She’s that far behind.
Most of the time
She can’t even be sure
If She ever understood
What makes man kill another…
But most of the time, it just makes her sad.

Most of the time
She’s halfway content,
Most of the time
She knows exactly where She went,
She don’t cheat on Herself, She don’t run and hide,
Hide from the feelings, that are buried inside,
She don’t compromise and She don’t pretend,
She don’t even care if She never sees misery again,
Most of the time.

Okay, and now to go and finish the compost bin. Gator later.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 29, 2009 at 11:14 am Link to this comment

Dear Virginia777,

Let us be discern the difference between someone who disagrees with us(Shenonymous) and someone who disagrees with our existence(MarthaA)

One of them would sacrifice herself if need be so we could keep our right to free speech. The other would sacrifice us so that the 70% common morality can manifest its ‘objectivity’.

Let us not make the same mistake as MarthaA, who cannot tell the difference between a conservative and a fascist.

We must therefore discern the difference between a liberal and a communist.  We can debate a liberal, we can reach a compromise with a liberal, we can even learn from a liberal. Best of all, we can totally disagree with a liberal and still be Americans together.

We could even be friends. Here, i will give you an example right before your eyes:

Shenonymous! you are liberal atheist, and I am a conservative Christian: we fight like cats and dogs some times.

You love me anyway, dont you?

Admit it…

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 29, 2009 at 10:58 am Link to this comment

Ozark Michael,

Some of us as I recall, a while back on another thread, spent great detail hashing out and discussing morality or Ozark Michael’s concept or idea of general misanthropic morality, declined, deviated or (I got it, controversial morality, knew it would come to me)  I had almost forgotten?  OM, you may prefer to bring Virgina777 up to speed and refresh me at the same time? 

If I recall, Shester was more involved than I, so we have have a great opportunity to rehash the moral delimabean mixed with a mad dash of Hitlers delusions?

Report this
Virginia777's avatar

By Virginia777, August 29, 2009 at 9:49 am Link to this comment

to OzarkMichael:

MarthaA (and Shenonymous) are a tiresome trolls, and you are right to call them and their outrageous behavior out.

They work for thought manipulation on blogs like Truthdig, and by sheer presence and force (and spitefulness) they often do crowd out Reason on threads.

(mission accomplished!)

I like how you stand up to and mock them, that is exactly what one should do.

And as to Principles, there have to be “first” principles, those which include Morality. (something these troll know nothing of)

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 29, 2009 at 8:27 am Link to this comment

How funny, the first line of my comment went missing.  Oh well, thank you for your indulgence.  I post again.

That is one way we are different MarthaA I celebrate very noisily, often indulging in drinking, and have uproarious festivities in my head over the death of Hitler.  (Way…ell, the drinking mostly consists of Diet RC Cola)

Thinking of “what could have been” is often a fruitless imbibement (from my drinking metaphor).  A fruitless imbibement is an inebriation from a liquid such as made from hops, rye, barley, and such. 

The fact is, and it is most best to think of facts, Hitler was not a “more diverse thinker,” as his thinking extended only to the end of his own body.  He was stunted psychologically, his bravery the military did earn him Iron Crosses but was never advanced beyond Unterofizier, a non-commissioned officer (NCO) uh, a private first class because the BRR did not think he was of “leadership” quality and probably because he was not German.  He worked while in the military as a cartoonist for the military newspaper.  Falling to an episode of hysteria, he deluded into thinking voices (from where exactly he never mentions, God, Gawd, or da debble, we will nevah know) had him evacuate, probably more than one way.  He thought he was saved so that he could save the world from the degenrates which included everyone except the Aryans and did include explicitly in exterminating Jews.  You can exonerate him, for me….  F’him.

Even if he heard voices too, at least George W. was cuter than Adolf sans middle name.  And George had to brave the more intelligent conservatives for eight years.  If either man is to be assigned bravery, but given the choice of two evils, I would give it to Geroge (much as it is repugnant to me).

MarthaAyou say, and some apologist historians would as well, that Hitler had concern for the German people, is sardonic.  It was the ultimate conceit since he had not a drop of German blood and he took on that saviorship because of his hallucinatory megalomania.

So it appears that it isn’t OzarkMichael who loves the Nazis, but MarthaA.  The cosmic battle between the extreme Leftist and Rightist Christians continues for our entertainment.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 29, 2009 at 8:25 am Link to this comment

often indulging in drinking, and have uproarious festivities in my head over the death of Hitler.  (Way…ell, the drinking mostly consists of Diet RC Cola)

Thinking of “what could have been” is often a fruitless imbibement (from my drinking metaphor).  A fruitless imbibement is an inebriation from a liquid such as made from hops, rye, barley, and such. 

The fact is, and it is most best to think of facts, Hitler was not a “more diverse thinker,” as his thinking extended only to the end of his own body.  He was stunted psychologically, his bravery the military did earn him Iron Crosses but was never advanced beyond Unterofizier, a non-commissioned officer (NCO) uh, a private first class because the BRR did not think he was of “leadership” quality and probably because he was not German.  He worked while in the military as a cartoonist for the military newspaper.  Falling to an episode of hysteria, he deluded into thinking voices (from where exactly he never mentions, God, Gawd, or da debble, we will nevah know) had him evacuate, probably more than one way.  He thought he was saved so that he could save the world from the degenrates which included everyone except the Aryans and did include explicitly in exterminating Jews.  You can exonerate him, for me….  F’him.

Even if he heard voices too, at least George W. was cuter than Adolf sans middle name.  And George had to brave the more intelligent conservatives for eight years.  If either man is to be assigned bravery, but given the choice of two evils, I would give it to Geroge (much as it is repugnant to me).

MarthaAyou say, and some apologist historians would as well, that Hitler had concern for the German people, is sardonic.  It was the ultimate conceit since he had not a drop of German blood and he took on that saviorship because of his hallucinatory megalomania.

So it appears that it isn’t OzarkMichael who loves Hitler, But MarthaA. The cosmic battle between the extreme Leftist and Rightist Christians continues for our entertainment.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 29, 2009 at 7:15 am Link to this comment

Daily Rant:

Taking issue with the title again, quickly, delusions and Grandeur seems redundant, if anyone fancies themselves as being what they are not or believing in something that may not be, then they filling themselves with delusions. It seems religion and politics are prime circumstances for delusions, the grandeur seems a qualifier of degree so may not really be redundant. 

Seems our nation has many delusions and even some of grandeur, for instance simple Simon says, we are the greatest nation in the world, some people really believe this is so, well looking at the real picture the grandeur becomes apparent when looking at how things like the bailout were promoted, must get back to business as usual, only to repeat itself.

So, as the Bileout turns and the upchuck spews let the delusions of Grandeur manifest into the sickness of reality, perceived by imbeciles running or should I say manpipulating, the promoted greatist country in the world.

If Hitler really was an artist he would have been known though his greatness, not his smallness and bile enhancing divisiveness manifesting itself, promoting hate.  By the way, hate we still see around us today, in this so called great nation.  Hitlers smallness of vision as politicians today, means things really have not changed, as History should be our teacher but is not.
Power motivates a certain kind of mental makeup, for these simple deluded ones, fighting and manipulation their way to the alleged top of the heap as King Rats, it seems these power manipulators are very much as Hitler, full of profound delusions of grandeur, or just full of themselves?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 28, 2009 at 10:18 pm Link to this comment

Oh oh, the class bell has rung!  O.K. jeder… hören oben. Lassen Sie uns an eine wichtige Lektion unten gelangen. Der Lehrer ist hier anzuweisen. .  Now taking my cue from both my mother (long deceased) whose, nevertheless, never-fail sagacity always helped me in a pinch, and Leefeller (quite the live wire), I have only one sort of dogmatic hypothetical biology lesson to offer:

Please take copious notes, there will be a popquiz tomorrow.

If a frog had wings, it wouldn’t bump its ass.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 28, 2009 at 6:30 pm Link to this comment

MarthaA said:

Shenonymous,

I do not revel in Hitler’s death. It is sad what happened to Hitler when you think what could have been if he had been a more diverse thinker relative to who should live and who should die.

And now I say:

Shenonymous,

You are an academic. Please explain to me what MarthaA meant by the above, since it makes almost no sense at all, and what little I do understand of it has the creepiest meaning.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 28, 2009 at 6:17 pm Link to this comment

eheheh. Very funny, Leefeller.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 28, 2009 at 4:52 pm Link to this comment

Ozark Michael,

I must have missed it, again-why do you like Hitler so much?

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 28, 2009 at 4:51 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

“MarthaA knows “existence is full of misery, misery originates from within ourselves, misery can be eliminated and MarthaA is on the way to eliminating the misery of existence””

You are an academic, perhaps you can explain the meaning of the above to OzarkMichael, as he has no idea what it means, he apparently thinks I’m talking about eliminating someone’s existence.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 28, 2009 at 4:22 pm Link to this comment

Reading this from MarthaA, especially after she keeps accusing me of loving Hitler, struck me as odd:

Unlike George W. Bush, Hitler was not a coward in life, he served Germany gallantly in the military on the battlefield. The Treaty of Versailles and the break up of the Austro-Hungarian Empire was what made Hitler.  The Treaty of Versailles put war reparations on Germany that the German people couldn’t really afford to pay and denied Germany a standing army to protect the nation.

Hitler’s concern was for Germany and the German people becoming extinct or doing without at the expense of other races and invoked a process to rid Germany of all excess baggage, which is exactly what the Right-Wing EXTREME in both the United States and Israel, with the same warped spirit of patriotism to themselves, is trying to do.

Basically MarthaA likes Hitler better than President George Bush, because Hitler had more good points.

That is just sick.

Right now I am not so fond of our current President Barack Obama. But I would never dream of preferring Hitler to Obama. It would never occur to me to say that Barack is worse than Hitler. This line of thinking creeps me out.


MarthaA knows “existence is full of misery, misery originates from within ourselves, misery can be eliminated and MarthaA is on the way to eliminating the misery of existence”

The only person who has the power to change that tune is MarthaA.  It would be far better to do something kind to someone than to eliminate their existence or be eliminated.

Real forgiveness lets love grow, it doesnt eliminate anyone. Real forgiveness brings forth life.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 28, 2009 at 3:29 pm Link to this comment

MarthaA shall address what CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN EXTREMIST Hitler loving OzarkMichael, that is speaking as an unauthorized sophist surrogate for Congressman Barney Frank, says; rather than OzarkMichael, because OzarkMichael can only talk behind ones back, as OzarkMichael can’t sustain defense of OzarkMichael’s own sophism in the bright light of day and must recluse to OzarkMichael’s cold dark pit and speak from within:
 
OzarkMichael made the following long sophist rant to Virginia 777 August 28 2:24pm against MarthaA using tropes and subjective assertions to accuse, condemn and denounce MarthaA:


“Otherwise we fall into the same trap that MarthaA is caught in. She defines any disagreement with her own principles as amoral. She claims to be so Moral that she considers herself to be in possession of perfect objectivity, and then with that objectivity gazes cooly at the prospect of heads being lopped off for daring to oppose her “70% Common” “objectivity”.”

“She has rhapsodized about the utility of the guillotine here on Truthdig. The only time her posts had a glimmer of tranquility was when when she spoke about the deaths from the French Revolution. She is a want-to-be Robespierre.”

“She crosses the line to that dangerous place where disagreement with her becomes criminality. Which in her mind deserves to be punished with death. Now that is very bad, because thats how Lenin and Stalin and even Hitler operated.”

“Instead of just a few thousand (the guillotine was slow) these modern Robespierres have modern means of slaughter. Mass production of death. I wonder what percent of the population MarthaA would like to liquidate? 10%? 20%? Maybe. It might even be 30%! Thats where her “70%” “objectivity” takes her.”

“Oh, how easy it is for people to become the very thing they claim to hate. MarthaA claims to be fighting a Hitler, but she wants to attain the actuality which Lenin and Stalin, and even Hitler accomplished. Which is the power to criminalize dissent, and to punish opposition with death.”

“Fortunately, MarthaA has no power over anyone, all she can do is write long rants with false accusations.”


OzarkMichael made the above long sophist rant against MarthaA to Virginia 777 from the deepest pit of OzarkMichael’s sophism; MarthaA knows “existence is full of misery, misery originates from within ourselves, misery can be eliminated and MarthaA is on the way to eliminating the misery of existence”  therefore, MarthaA forgives OzarkMichael because MarthaA knows that OzarkMichael is a WORLDLING.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 28, 2009 at 3:27 pm Link to this comment

MarthaA shall address what CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN EXTREMIST Hitler loving OzarkMichael,  that is speaking as an unauthorized sophist surrogate for Congressman Barney Frank, says; rather than OzarkMichael, because OzarkMichael can only talk behind ones back, as OzarkMichael can’t sustain defense of OzarkMichael’s own sophism in the bright light of day and must recluse to OzarkMichael’s cold dark pit and speak from within:
 
OzarkMichael made the following long sophist rant to Virginia 777 August 28 2:24pm against MarthaA using tropes and subjective assertions to accuse, condemn and denounce MarthaA:


“Otherwise we fall into the same trap that MarthaA is caught in. She defines any disagreement with her own principles as amoral. She claims to be so Moral that she considers herself to be in possession of perfect objectivity, and then with that objectivity gazes cooly at the prospect of heads being lopped off for daring to oppose her “70% Common” “objectivity”.”

“She has rhapsodized about the utility of the guillotine here on Truthdig. The only time her posts had a glimmer of tranquility was when when she spoke about the deaths from the French Revolution. She is a want-to-be Robespierre.”

“She crosses the line to that dangerous place where disagreement with her becomes criminality. Which in her mind deserves to be punished with death. Now that is very bad, because thats how Lenin and Stalin and even Hitler operated.”

“Instead of just a few thousand (the guillotine was slow) these modern Robespierres have modern means of slaughter. Mass production of death. I wonder what percent of the population MarthaA would like to liquidate? 10%? 20%? Maybe. It might even be 30%! Thats where her “70%” “objectivity” takes her.”

“Oh, how easy it is for people to become the very thing they claim to hate. MarthaA claims to be fighting a Hitler, but she wants to attain the actuality which Lenin and Stalin, and even Hitler accomplished. Which is the power to criminalize dissent, and to punish opposition with death.”

“Fortunately, MarthaA has no power over anyone, all she can do is write long rants with false accusations.”


OzarkMichael made the above long sophist rant against MarthaA to Virginia 777 from the deepest pit of OzarkMichael’s sophism; MarthaA knows “existence is full of misery, misery originates from within ourselves, misery can be eliminated and MarthaA is on the way to eliminating the misery of existence”  therefore, MarthaA forgives OzarkMichael because MarthaA knows that OzarkMichael is a WORLDLING.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 28, 2009 at 11:56 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

I do not revel in Hitler’s death. It is sad what happened to Hitler when you think what could have been if he had been a more diverse thinker relative to who should live and who should die.

Unlike George W. Bush, Hitler was not a coward in life, he served Germany gallantly in the military on the battlefield. The Treaty of Versailles and the break up of the Austro-Hungarian Empire was what made Hitler.  The Treaty of Versailles put war reparations on Germany that the German people couldn’t really afford to pay and denied Germany a standing army to protect the nation.

Hitler’s concern was for Germany and the German people becoming extinct or doing without at the expense of other races and invoked a process to rid Germany of all excess baggage, which is exactly what the Right-Wing EXTREME in both the United States and Israel, with the same warped spirit of patriotism to themselves, is trying to do.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, August 28, 2009 at 11:24 am Link to this comment

Virginia777 said: My point was that and Principles I would call “principles”, personally, would HAVE to be Moral.

OK, I understand what you mean. But we have to allow that people who disagree with our principles might be Moral. Furthermore, and just as important: we might be amoral in spite of our principles. Let us always be aware of our own weakness and our own faults. 

Otherwise we fall into the same trap that MarthaA is caught in. She defines any disagreement with her own principles as amoral. She claims to be so Moral that she considers herself to be in possession of perfect objectivity, and then with that objectivity gazes cooly at the prospect of heads being lopped off for daring to oppose her “70% Common” “objectivity”.

She has rhapsodized about the utility of the guillotine here on Truthdig. The only time her posts had a glimmer of tranquility was when when she spoke about the deaths from the French Revolution. She is a want-to-be Robespierre.

She crosses the line to that dangerous place where disagreement with her becomes criminality. Which in her mind deserves to be punished with death. Now that is very bad, because thats how Lenin and Stalin and even Hitler operated.

Instead of just a few thousand (the guillotine was slow) these modern Robespierres have modern means of slaughter. Mass production of death. I wonder what percent of the population MarthaA would like to liquidate? 10%? 20%? Maybe. It might even be 30%! Thats where her “70%” “objectivity” takes her.

Oh, how easy it is for people to become the very thing they claim to hate. MarthaA claims to be fighting a Hitler, but she wants to attain the actuality which Lenin and Stalin, and even Hitler accomplished. Which is the power to criminalize dissent, and to punish opposition with death.

Fortunately, MarthaA has no power over anyone, all she can do is write long rants with false accusations.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 28, 2009 at 9:01 am Link to this comment

Thank you MarthaA for that clarification. In the final analysis it doesn’t matter how Hitler died, whether by his own hand, or at the hands of others.  What does matter is that he died and it was a gift to humanity that he did.  The gift should have been given years before.  And as a few others have noted, it does not matter if Hitler had a strong sense of the aesthetic.  It was a prostituted sense of aesthetic, unfortunately that psychopaths too often have.

While I applaud his death, and celebrate it, that does not mean I applaud assigning death as a general remedy, but I do think it is a prescription for the atrocities perpetrated on humans.  There is some justice in Lex Talionis.  It has to be argued when and under what circumstances.  Life is quite an accidental affair for all species including humans.  Death is the reason all species propagate.  Without death there would be no reason to procreate.  Death is part of the process of existence not only for humanity but for the entire universe.  For me, there are individuals who forfeit their right to life when they assume they have the right to take the life of others in any way it has been manifested, whether it be for power, religious oppression, economic oppression, sexual oppression, territorial oppression, for any reason at all including subjecting psychological death.  I am not against a death penalty precisely because I value human life.  It is a value I have reasoned to believe through conscious effort. And that means while I think it is a last resort, there are instances when killing is exonerated.  Defensive war, and cases of abortion.  That latter is bound to bring on wailing criticism, so be it.  I quite understand that it is in this confluence where the arguments for and against abortion exist.  I qualify my advocacy of imposing a death penalty, penalty meaning the assignment of death, that there be no question of guilt.  It is just as much a violation of humanity to execute an innocent, and there are degrees of guilt and degrees of innocence which is where problems enter. This is the conundrum for humans to work out best they can within the scope of their moral intelligence.

Someone said something I find extremely odd.  The notion that Hitler was a monster from the day he was born.  As a newborn what is proposed that his mother could have intuited her son would be the scourge of the world? The implication that she should have committed infanticide?  Were life that occult.  No crystal balls on who will or will not be a monster.  Some one else mentioned Grendel, from the Beowulf stories.  It was a apt metaphor.  There was a film from the 50’s I think, The Bad Seed, which is also a paradigm for a pre-birth psychological monstrosity.  These imaginations are heinous in themselves.  But there is nothing short of cultish mysticism where any particular sperm or ovum will produce monstrous minded indivduals.  Monsterism comes through nurture not nature.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, August 28, 2009 at 8:19 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

Here is a history report of the death of Hitler:

“Hitler and his wife then went back into their private quarters while Bormann and Goebbels remained quietly nearby. Several moments later a gunshot was heard. After waiting a few moments, at 3:30 p.m., Bormann and Goebbels entered and found the body of Hitler sprawled on the sofa, dripping with blood from a gunshot to his right temple. Eva Braun had died from swallowing poison.

http://www.historyplace.com
/worldwar2/holocaust/h-death.htm

Report this
Virginia777's avatar

By Virginia777, August 28, 2009 at 6:59 am Link to this comment

make that “any principles” I would call a Principle, has to be Moral

Report this
Virginia777's avatar

By Virginia777, August 28, 2009 at 6:56 am Link to this comment

to OzarkMichael:

I do see you point, you are so right!!

My point was that and Principles I would call “principles”, personally, would HAVE to be Moral.

But of course, others don’t see it that way.

And yes, I do agree with your point about MarthaA, I agree that what they are ceaselessly pressing (have you noticed how often they comment?)

is a Tyranny of thought manipulation, and I love how you put it:

“a new type of tyranny, which i mock and will resist at every opportunity”

Report this

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.