Sloppy Leftist Intellectualism
Zealously Published Wishful Lefty Thinking
Leftist Attempts at Subliminal Manipulation- Arguing on False Precepts Responses from the Right: the Other Side of the Fence
Although fascism no longer exists Wrong. The Baath Parties of Saddam and Syria are directly linked to Hitler's Nazi Germany, and were formulated during the same period..
here are fourteen common threads that link them in recognizable patterns of national behavior and abuse of power: Oh, I know where this is going- the Liberal's favorite deception- that Bush is abusing his power. Sounds more like the Democratic Party today.
Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. Now this ties in with Liberal US-ophobia, where they go well beyond a healthy critical eye to an obsessive-compulsive national hate and destruction. This more describes the lefties' atrocious self-cheerleading behavior at Paul Wellstone's funeral!

Now the other side of our lefty statement is that we should not be patriotic,not have catchy slogans, not have pride in the military, and not strive for unity. Anybody seeing the cracked logic of Mr. Lefty here? This is a good example of Mr. Lefty trying to manipulate our values, which is fine, but from the wrong side of the fence- Mr. Marxy has failed his history lessons and does not know that Marxism in all it's forms and in all it's attempts has utterly and horribly failed many times already.
Disdain for the importance of human rights. More like the Left's persecution of religion,  personal economic success, and heterosexual tendencies! I suppose Mr. Lefty here is going to suggest that terrorists, militant Muslims, and the Sunni Mafia are covered under the Geneva Convention, alluding to the liberal protests of US prisoner treatment in the War on Terror, when they are not, due to the following Geneva Convention Rules:
Prisoners of war are persons belonging to one of the following categories
(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) That of carrying arms openly;
(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

The US treats them according to the Geneva Convention regardless, according to it's own civilized customs.
This statement is most likely also an allusion to the Patriot Act, which, though our lib friends won't admit it, has done a remarkable job so far.
Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. Now this obviously alludes to Bush in Iraq- where liberal blindly deny Iraq was a part of the terrorist problem.
Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Now this is becoming sick an twisted. Let me tell you who were the 'targeting' and not the 'targeted': the 'targeting' are subliminally weaved in here in a devious attempt to undermine the US war on terror, namely the Communists, liberals, ethnics, and especially terrorists, no need of quotes here around terrorists for anyone with a clear grasp on reality. Funny how the author weaves 'homosexuals' in here, as if they were a significant factor in anything. I would venture that the author is gay or an overly gay sympathizer.
The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, The author unwittingly leaves the US out here, even though it is being set up to attack the US- because the US has an all-volunteer military. Such are our insulated liberal friends.
and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite. I'd like to see the author try to weave that in to Bush's administration. Yea, Haiti really increased the power and prestige of those in Washington (sarcasm)!
Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. Now wait a minute, how can the author tie in anti-abortion and homosexuality with sexism? If these are, they are extremely mild cases with the opposing factors overwhelming, such as not having such a mentally ill society.
Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, A typical liberal attack on Religious organization. In fact, communism banned religion, they had no sexist policies, and yet were and are the most horrible governments of recent history. So much for this 'one of fourteen' common points. The author is beginning to blow hot air.
A controlled mass media. Doesn't exist in the US. Even the left-leaning major broadcast, cable, and print medias in the US are left-leaning due to a wayward cultural choice rather than government control, and who routinely try to eradicate any pockets of conservative media that spring up.
Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. Unfortunately the author does not realize that the liberal President Clinton and his administration were an active proponent of these measures.
Obsession with national security. This sounds like the Democratic Party plank in the last election. It couldn't be alluding to the Patriot Act!
Religion and ruling elite tied together. I suppose our liberal terrorist sympathizer wants us to believe that Bush can overrule the liberal courts that are continually messing up the country with leftist activism? Complete nonsense. You have to look no farther that the court ruling for gay marriages in Massachusetts. Bush tried to amend the Constitution and failed. The ruling went to the people for votes, and it was voted down in every state it came up in. Still the author clings to his alternate fantasies of Bush and the Church reigning terror on homos and innocent terrorists.
the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The author is either erroneously proposing that the government should have a hand in all corporate affairs, thus preventing another Enron scandal, or at the other extreme that the Enron incidents will go unchecked. The author is wrong on both counts.
By the way, where are all the examples here? So far what we have here is a liberal attempting to manipulate our minds without and against the face of reality and facts.
the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens. Now we get down to the crux of the author's problem- he is still stuck in 19th century Marxism which was a violent reaction to the equally violent 19th century Monarchical European industrialism, and he is mistakenly trying to make it fit on 21st century America. The two could not be more dissimilar. There are no permanent 'have nots' in America, much to the embarrassment of liberals who've been brainwashed into believing this hogwash. Just say the words 'rags to riches' or 'the American dream' to wake yourself up out of this archaic leftist stupor..
Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Well, that definitely is not the US, where unions are the strongest in the world, and they show no signs of stopping. The only areas unions are being beat back is in their creation of corporate inefficiencies, abuses of power, wanting of guarantees when the corporation has no marketing guarantee, and internal corruption, often tied to the mob.
Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. If the author is referring to 'pee in a bottle', that is not government disdain, that is the healthy disdain of the general population, who then puts pressure on the government not to fun such twisted filth.
Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes That definitely is not occurring in the US, where NPR spews out erroneous liberal and anti-Bush propaganda under the false guise of intellectualism, and they are even government funded! Why doesn't Bush cut them off? Maybe he realized liberals should be responded to and not silenced. Since Washington does not respond to every wild lefty accusation out there, it is left to the rest of us to expose this leftist hype.
Universities were tightly controlled Oh man! This has liberal tyranny all over it! Talk about despotic control over the universities in the Western world, and you'll find it controlled by liberals! Jeeze, how can the author even go there if his aim here is to undermine Bush's War on Terror? The author just shot himself in his deception-weaving foot!
art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist. Well, that rules out Western civilization! Def-Jam attests to that!
Obsession with crime and punishment. This leads credence to my assertion that a liberal is a criminal's best friend.
Fraudulent elections. OK, this is obviously designed to make us think of the 2004 election where liberals screamed that Bush tried to steal the election when it was the other way around. Liberals think that if they yell loud enough the rest of us won't be able to see the truth.
Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite. This is a limp-wristed attempt to paint the 2000 Presidential election's Democrats stealing Florida fiasco as Bush being a fascist!
Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. What historical comparisons? All I saw was the devious manipulations of popular events into anti-Bushisms without one example or comparison to an actual event! This entire article was a good example of a liberal deluding himself and attempting to delude others through the manipulation and twisting of the facts surrounding widely known issues and events.
So, in conclusion, what our author is implying is that the US, capitalism, religion, and Bush are the bad guys, terrorists, Marxists, and homos are the good guys. Right! (sarcasm).

more by wbiro