If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Crooks & Liars)   "The secular socialist machine represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did." --Newt Gingrich, the world's smartest Republican   (crooksandliars.com) divider line 199
    More: Dumbass, Nazi Germany, New Right, Joe McCarthy, mr. speaker, Grover Norquist, Howard Kurtz, College Republicans, Jack Abramoff  
•       •       •

1497 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Aug 2010 at 1:36 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



199 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-08-14 10:53:51 AM
tweetshots.com

tweetshots.com

/oblig
 
2010-08-14 10:55:39 AM
well, to his version of america, which doesn't exist outside leave it to beaver re-runs, it probably does.

Now, if you'll excuse me I have to uphold the american way of life my having an affair and then divorcing my cancer stricken wife.
 
2010-08-14 10:56:55 AM
B*tch, please. Shall we ask your former wives about your traditional values when it comes to holy matrimony?
 
2010-08-14 11:01:01 AM
coco ebert: B*tch, please. Shall we ask your former wives about your traditional values when it comes to holy matrimony?

Republicans don't care what their idols do, they only care what they say.
 
2010-08-14 11:01:29 AM
coco ebert: B*tch, please. Shall we ask your former wives about your traditional values when it comes to holy matrimony?

Or, anything else, for that matter: Marianne Gingrich suggested that her ex-husband "believes that what he says in public and how he lives don't have to be connected"
 
2010-08-14 11:02:40 AM
Being the world's smartest Republican is sorta like being the world's tallest midget.
 
2010-08-14 11:03:25 AM
I wish there were a secular socialist machine. I'd join up.
 
2010-08-14 11:07:10 AM
Goddamnitomuch Newt. You're not helping.
 
2010-08-14 11:07:34 AM
Spanky_McFarksalot: well, to his version of america, which doesn't exist outside leave it to beaver re-runs, it probably does.

Do you think Ward ever got a car-beej from a coworker's wife while June was making the pot roast?

/just a guy
//asking questions
 
2010-08-14 11:12:24 AM
Ah, another German calling other people Nazi's.
 
2010-08-14 11:14:00 AM
gameshowhost: Do you think Ward ever got a car-beej from a coworker's wife while June was making the pot roast?

I'm not sayin...I'm just sayin..
 
2010-08-14 11:15:01 AM
Mr. G needs some oxy, like his good buddy Mr. Limbaugh.
 
2010-08-14 11:16:35 AM
Snapper Carr: Being the world's smartest Republican is sorta like being the world's tallest midget.

the smallest giant ever?
 
2010-08-14 11:21:45 AM
games.ea.com
 
2010-08-14 11:27:07 AM
Yes, the secular left presents the same threat to america as the communist worker's party does.
 
2010-08-14 11:29:46 AM

Why is Wallace calling him "Speaker"? He isn't "speaker of anything anymore. He's some guy.

Also:

Gingrich said that he stands by his argument that the "secular-socialist machine" represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union, not in the sense of the immorality of those deadly regimes, but as a "threat to our way of life."


wat
 
2010-08-14 11:31:49 AM
You know, Newt Gingrich may actually be too insane to get the GOP nomination if he keeps this up. And I'm surprised by this because I didn't think that you could be too insane to get the GOP nomination. But does anyone think that kind of flamethrower language will get anything more than 10% of the vote or so?
 
2010-08-14 11:32:21 AM
Well, they represent as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union currently do.
 
2010-08-14 11:32:30 AM
gilgigamesh: Why is Wallace calling him "Speaker"?

The same way we still say President Clinton.
 
2010-08-14 11:33:12 AM
I'm interested in why he refers to such policies as "secular socialism". Would "religious socialism" be any better?

Secularism represents a threat only to religion because it shows a way people can live good lives on their own without any specific direction from a deity on high. However, necessarily having no dictates or dogma, secularism scares the religious for precisely the same reason. If there is no dogma to rely on, then there is no law except what you decide for yourself and thusly end up with a society of lawlessness, or so the thought process goes. They like to call it "secular humanism" because they see the removal of God from peoples' lives as the first step to elevating humans to godhood.

The socialist red herring is trotted out again by Hayek believers. It was a crap argument when he wrote The Road to Serfdom, and it's a crap argument today. First of all, there is simply no proof that halfway measures like universal health coverage will lead to Nazism. Tremendous nationalism, over-wrought victimhood, and borderline evil external pressures probably could create an environment in which an austerity-based political movement could take hold and drive an economy forward, but that doesn't mean such a political movement is itself evil or morally bankrupt.

Socialism requires the governmental ownership and/or control of industries. Despite what the anti-health care people would have you believe, there has been no nationalization of anything. Just a handful of toothless requirements that make it easier for people to get insurance. Their scare tactic of saying that you won't get the treatment you need overlooks the previous situation where you didn't get the treatment you needed anyway. If you have money, you can always get more treatment. If you don't have money, you will only get the minimum basic care. That's not socialism, that's no change at all.

We do need comprehensive health care in this country. The government should, as a basic service, provide a modicum of health coverage. Private industries can and should provide alternative health coverage that has better benefits, lower premiums, or even non-health perks.

We shouldn't think of health insurance as "insurance". Medical service is something that we will eventually need. It is not like auto or home insurance where we don't expect bad things to befall us, it is a given that we will need to get checkups and eventually treatment. Therefore, if we as a modern society can provide such a baseline set of coverage for all citizens, it behooves us to do so.
 
2010-08-14 11:38:24 AM
GAT_00: gilgigamesh: Why is Wallace calling him "Speaker"?

The same way we still say President Clinton.


Oh I thought that rule only applied to presidents.

I actually knew an attorney who served one or two terms in the state legislature some years previously, and insisted on being called "senator". I thought he was just being a pretentious dickweed, but maybe there was something to it.
 
2010-08-14 11:43:34 AM
gilgigamesh: GAT_00: gilgigamesh: Why is Wallace calling him "Speaker"?

The same way we still say President Clinton.

Oh I thought that rule only applied to presidents.

I actually knew an attorney who served one or two terms in the state legislature some years previously, and insisted on being called "senator". I thought he was just being a pretentious dickweed, but maybe there was something to it.


It's just standard etiquette I think. You are always entitled to your highest title.
 
2010-08-14 11:49:02 AM
Do people actually fall for these lines? I find the Nazi and Socialist hyperbole a bit off-putting and ridiculous. Coming from hypocrite "do what I say, not as I do" Gingrich makes it worse.

I think most people would love to have a real discussion about the differences that divide us, minus the vitriol and soundbites.

//I know, I'm dreaming.
 
2010-08-14 11:55:28 AM
Spanky_McFarksalot: his version of america, which doesn't exist outside leave it to beaver re-runs

I haven't been watching the re-runs, and my memories of that show are dim, but did the Cleavers ever actually go to church? For all I know, they could have been sekret muslins.
 
2010-08-14 11:55:36 AM
GAT_00: gilgigamesh: GAT_00: gilgigamesh: Why is Wallace calling him "Speaker"?

The same way we still say President Clinton.

Oh I thought that rule only applied to presidents.

I actually knew an attorney who served one or two terms in the state legislature some years previously, and insisted on being called "senator". I thought he was just being a pretentious dickweed, but maybe there was something to it.

It's just standard etiquette I think. You are always entitled to your highest title.


I think that, likewise, people should also have to tack on their lowest titles, if they've ever done anything stunningly shameful.

"What's your take on this, Prisoner Liddy?"
"Chime in at any time, Colonel Bypasser Of Constitution North."
"Mr. Outed A NOC Rove - did you have a comment?"
 
2010-08-14 11:59:01 AM
oldebayer: Spanky_McFarksalot: his version of america, which doesn't exist outside leave it to beaver re-runs

I haven't been watching the re-runs, and my memories of that show are dim, but did the Cleavers ever actually go to church? For all I know, they could have been sekret muslins.


I never trusted that Haskel farker, or Lumpy for that matter.
 
2010-08-14 11:59:55 AM
oldebayer: I haven't been watching the re-runs, and my memories of that show are dim, but did the Cleavers ever actually go to church? For all I know, they could have been sekret muslins.

Hey come to think of it, maybe Beaver is a terror baby?

Someone sit next to Rep Gohmert on a plane, he needs to know this.
 
2010-08-14 12:03:57 PM
gilgigamesh: I actually knew an attorney who served one or two terms in the state legislature some years previously, and insisted on being called "senator". I thought he was just being a pretentious dickweed, but maybe there was something to it.

There's no reason it can't be both.
 
2010-08-14 12:03:58 PM
BadAnalogyGuy: I'm interested in why he refers to such policies as "secular socialism". Would "religious socialism" be any better?.

To these idiots, the answer is yes. The current batch of morons running the GOP are what used to be referred to as "Christian Socialist" about a century ago.
 
2010-08-14 12:06:23 PM
I am pretty terrifying. RRRAAAWWRRR!
 
2010-08-14 12:14:23 PM
BadAnalogyGuy: I'm interested in why he refers to such policies as "secular socialism". Would "religious socialism" be any better?

Secularism represents a threat only to religion because it shows a way people can live good lives on their own without any specific direction from a deity on high. However, necessarily having no dictates or dogma, secularism scares the religious for precisely the same reason. If there is no dogma to rely on, then there is no law except what you decide for yourself and thusly end up with a society of lawlessness, or so the thought process goes. They like to call it "secular humanism" because they see the removal of God from peoples' lives as the first step to elevating humans to godhood.

The socialist red herring is trotted out again by Hayek believers. It was a crap argument when he wrote The Road to Serfdom, and it's a crap argument today. First of all, there is simply no proof that halfway measures like universal health coverage will lead to Nazism. Tremendous nationalism, over-wrought victimhood, and borderline evil external pressures probably could create an environment in which an austerity-based political movement could take hold and drive an economy forward, but that doesn't mean such a political movement is itself evil or morally bankrupt.

Socialism requires the governmental ownership and/or control of industries. Despite what the anti-health care people would have you believe, there has been no nationalization of anything. Just a handful of toothless requirements that make it easier for people to get insurance. Their scare tactic of saying that you won't get the treatment you need overlooks the previous situation where you didn't get the treatment you needed anyway. If you have money, you can always get more treatment. If you don't have money, you will only get the minimum basic care. That's not socialism, that's no change at all.

We do need comprehensive health care in this country. The government should, as a basic service, provide a modicum of health coverage. Private industries can and should provide alternative health coverage that has better benefits, lower premiums, or even non-health perks.

We shouldn't think of health insurance as "insurance". Medical service is something that we will eventually need. It is not like auto or home insurance where we don't expect bad things to befall us, it is a given that we will need to get checkups and eventually treatment. Therefore, if we as a modern society can provide such a baseline set of coverage for all citizens, it behooves us to do so.


I like the cut of your jib
 
2010-08-14 12:16:06 PM
Ah. Good to see Newt Gingrich is fully committed to the only principle the GOP values: Bullshiat.
 
2010-08-14 12:26:40 PM
Kimothy: Do people actually fall for these lines?

People fell for "Hope and Change"
 
2010-08-14 12:28:51 PM
gameshowhost: Spanky_McFarksalot: well, to his version of america, which doesn't exist outside leave it to beaver re-runs, it probably does.

Do you think Ward ever got a car-beej from a coworker's wife while June was making the pot roast and Wally and Beaver were waiting outside the car?

/just a guy
//asking questions


FTFY
 
2010-08-14 12:31:08 PM
Dancin_In_Anson: Kimothy: Do people actually fall for these lines?

People fell for "Hope and Change"


"It's morning in America"
 
2010-08-14 12:31:46 PM
2wolves: Dancin_In_Anson: Kimothy: Do people actually fall for these lines?

People fell for "Hope and Change"

"It's morning in America"


"Zattarans - The San Francisco Treat"

/am I not getting the game?
 
2010-08-14 12:32:09 PM
Dancin_In_Anson: Kimothy: Do people actually fall for these lines?

People fell for "Hope and Change"


Yes. Because that's exactly the same. EXACTLY.
 
2010-08-14 12:36:08 PM
My suspicion is that Newt is looking to be the Dick Cheney to Sarah Palin's George W. Bush. That is, he knows full damn well there's no chance he will be elected President on his own, so he wants the same sort of puppetmaster role for Palin.

So the derp and whargaarbl is just an attempt to make himself acceptable to the "Mama Grizzlies".
 
2010-08-14 12:43:42 PM
mitchcumstein1: I never trusted that Haskel farker, or Lumpy for that matter.

You forgot Whitey.

/Racist.
 
2010-08-14 12:44:53 PM
I thought he was some sort of "born again" (Catholic, IIRC).
That makes all this hypocritical bullsh*t OK.
 
2010-08-14 12:46:44 PM
Skleenar: Dancin_In_Anson: Kimothy: Do people actually fall for these lines?

People fell for "Hope and Change"

Yes. Because that's exactly the same. EXACTLY.


Have to agree. The optimism of "Hope and Change" (or cynicism if you see it that way) vs. Obama's a Nazi who's going to kill millions... yeah. Not even close.
 
2010-08-14 12:47:14 PM
Godscrack: Ah, another German calling other people Nazi's.

Nazis what?
 
2010-08-14 01:29:59 PM
Skleenar: Yes. Because that's exactly the same. EXACTLY.

The substance of the statements is not in question. The fact is that you "fell for it". Happens all the time.
 
2010-08-14 01:30:39 PM
unlikely: Snapper Carr: Being the world's smartest Republican is sorta like being the world's tallest midget.

the smallest giant ever?


Everything you've ever said is brilliant!
 
2010-08-14 01:31:08 PM
The dawn of the Tea Party movement has essentially forced Republican candidates to move from the right (or far right) to the extreme right just so that they can win their primaries. This will not help them in the general election insofar as half of America probably doesn't appreciate being called Nazis.
 
2010-08-14 01:41:51 PM
Who is the leader of said machine?
 
2010-08-14 01:45:03 PM
Rip him for his personal failings all you want.

But when you libiots start ripping Gingrich for his intelligence, you're reaching bad.

If Gingrich and Obama ever debated, they'd have to give the president a caddy.
 
2010-08-14 01:47:29 PM
These IRL trolls are getting tiresome.
 
2010-08-14 01:48:25 PM
Dancin_In_Anson: Kimothy: Do people actually fall for these lines?

People fell for "Hope and Change"


You're confused again. This is a "Obama is a secular socialist leftist who's destroying America" thread, not a "Obama isn't doing anything" thread. I'm amazed you still can't keep it straight.
 
2010-08-14 01:49:47 PM
my philosophy is better than yours, but i don't follow my philosophy its too uptight...
 
Displayed 50 of 199 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report