current hate movements reminding me of the NAZIs.

AspenValley wrote: Years ago, back in college, I was working on a paper for a sociology class having to do with the rise of Facism in Germany. I was very fortunate to have access to original sources - propaganda books, film, articles from the period just before and just as the Nazi party was coming into power.

They may have been a little simplistic by today's standards, but just about any of you who are supporting the Glenn Beck/Tea Party movement would have found the materials extremely familar and comforting. They were all about family values, national pride, hard work, God, and a "return to prosperity and freedom".

It's a big mistake to imagine that facist movements start out by saying "Come join our hate group, we are going to send all those people we are blaming our troubles on to death camps!"

Nope. The photos and text portrayed attractive rural scenes of innocence and plenty, wholesome appearing family activities, and pride and honor in God and country.

I sometimes wish I still had access to those materials because I would like to see them more widely known. Most people have simply NO IDEA how the German people were sold this bill of goods. We know how it turned out, but the people "getting on board" with it back in the 1930s thought they were getting involved in a positive "rebirth" of their country.

It's a total fallacy to imagine that they knew they were signing up for jackbooted thugs to begin a reign of terror and death and depravity.

I like you did a paper on on this. But in High School. Difference was my high school was STUTTGART AMERICAN HS. This was in Ludwigsburg Germany. Alot of my information came straight from someone that was actually there. My grandfather, my grandmother aunts and uncles. One of the places we went to visit as a school field trip was a place that I think actually has more security than the white house. It was the building where all the papers and everything that deals with those that committed the war crimes are kept and the folks there are dedicated to tracking them down and bringing them to justice. My family still has a 2nd edition of Mein Kempf and I still have a German newpaper (original) the day Hitler became Chancellor of Germany. The stories my grandfather who fought in the german army during WWII, had he not had the pictures and documents to back them up, would sound totally unbelieveable..

archer wrote:

navycpo7 wrote: what you are describing is not just republicans doing it, it is both sides. And until people realize this, things will continue. I do not like that they want to build where it is, but I also spent 20 years of my life defending the right for them to do just that. Problem we have is, if we stop them from doing it then what is next!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I do not hear any grips about the fact that since 9/11 there has been daily Muslim plus all others services held at the pentagon non denominational chapel.

You are absolutely right.....I may be a liberal but I have no illusions about how much they care about me, and how much they care about themselves. We are our own worst enemies.....we scream "throw the bums out" then elect clones with a different letter after their name. Instead of letting the pendulum swing naturally we start pushing it to it's limits right and left. Those of us who pretty much sit in the middle, or right and left of middle, are left with no choices at all. And please don't tell me the Tea Party is the middle ground, they just plain scare the hell out of me.

Careful we are agreeing on something is that allowed. Anyway I am a Republican and the Tea Party scares more than just you, there is alot of us out there that think there is more than meets the eye with them. Even scareier is that Sarah Palin is running with them. I will not join them, work with them, etc.

navycpo7 wrote: Careful we are agreeing on something is that allowed. Anyway I am a Republican and the Tea Party scares more than just you, there is alot of us out there that think there is more than meets the eye with them. Even scareier is that Sarah Palin is running with them. I will not join them, work with them, etc.

One of the problems I have here and on other message boards is I cannot fit myself into the niches that have been assigned to me.......I think many of us have more similarities than differences, but now we concentrate on the differences and ignore or deny our similarities. I worked in a 2 woman CPA firm and we were polar opposites on politics, but best of friends and co-workers. We argued, sometimes vehemently, but when we found things getting too heated we took a step back, acknowledged our differences and worked on what we could agree on.....it always worked. Respect for differing views without thinking less of the person for holding them is key, but it HAS to be a two way street. What I lack here, and I find myself as guilty as the next person, is a willingness to agree to disagree on somethings and concentrate on who the other poster really is. We are the sum of ALL our beliefs and prejudices, not the result of one firmly held belief. Life lately has taken some unexpected turns and I am reminded of words of my father...."50 years from now, will it matter that you got the best of that argument? no, but it will matter if you made a friend out of an adversary, or brought a little bit of peace to your or someone elses life"

.....I'm older now, and the time frame is shorter.....so maybe I have to work harder at it.

And I appreciate the sentiment archer, but think of how much better off we'd be right now if 50 years ago the argument against continuing the Social Security Ponzi had prevailed instead of lost. 50 years ago there was a true surplus in the trust, backed up by a currency that was still valued at $37/oz of gold. 50 years ago we had an opportunity to pursue a better path and not pay a devastating financial penalty for doing so. 50 years ago we had an economy where usually income from only one spouse was required to obtain a moderate lifestyle. 50 years ago the new starter home sold for less than $10K, a car was about $2500 and the average wage was around $6500K a year. Now the starter home is nearly $200K, a car somewhere near $20K and the average wage is around $40K. That is quite the loss of buying power for the average family over the last 50 years. While the average wage is pretty close - $6500 in 1960 would be about $38K in 2010, and the car isn't too far off the mark, $2500 in 1960 would be about $18K in 2010, the housing costs are way out of whack. $10K in 1960 would be about $72K in 2010.

In 1960 entitlement spending and interest on the national debt accounted for about 1/3 of the federal budget each year, with the remaining 2/3 going into the "discretionary" columns. Today that has been reversed to 2/3 for entitlement spending and interest on the national debt and 1/3 for the rest of the government.

Winning the argument 50 years ago could have resulted in a lot less pain today, which is why the argument must be decided in favor of smaller government and less entitlements now if we have to hope of having a future at all.

Am I stupid, read your own post? You post here often, have you read my other posts. People may comment that I am a little off the wall, but retaining rights, freedom and wealth are my major themes. That is why I think they should be able to build, do I want them to, honestly no. But that desire is no where near as strong as my desire to preserve property rights. Please reread your post and let me know again specifically what right of yours is being violated? It seems like you feel you have the right to stop the building of this mosque via some other method than buying the land that it is on? What law (the thing that states your right) would be violated if it was built. Below I challenge you to even make a new one if there is not already one. Specifically, if you still do not get where I am coming from read below.

There is a big difference between wanting someone to do something and making them do it. Keeping these two separated is the process of respecting others' rights to me.

Your 1st line, I would not want to give up the right to own just about any object or assembly, like a gun or a cookie or a car.

2nd line, I would not have a drinking age. It would be up to parents until a person was on their own then it would be up to them whether to drink. I generally could care less about safety, that is up to the person.

3rd line, we already have such taxes and they don't make sense to me, in a free country, you should not encourage behavior via taxes, you make things that are beyond control illegal, like rape and murder, with consequences.

4th line, this is the one I really don't get your point on, why include this with the other things you are clearly mocking, gun rights, drinking rights, rights to smoke or otherwise without odd taxes GO WITH the right to build what you want on your property.

Are you making up some mythological right of some opinionated coloradians to tell some new yorkers what they can build on their own land? That would be some odd right you think you are loosing. And the right you are replacing is your right to do some of the few things you are still allowed to do on your land.

If there is so much freaking momentum to stop these people from doing what they want because you cannot do the math on the how the world is connected and what begets violence, why don;t you put up $1 dollar each and one of you big mouths can stop posting here and start collecting all those freaking dollars. Then you can buy the lot at 10x the value and there will be no mosque, then you can collect another dollar from each person and put up the biggest freaking monument in the world, which will move me believe it or not.

Any of you lazy asses step forward and do this, I will pledge $100 if you can raise a measely $10,000...

Taking away someone else's property rights is the new disgusting America, not the real one. You really want to be a part of such a thing or would you rather put you money and time where your mouth is and gathering this apparent support together to actually make a difference.

I expect you will have one big ass monument there is no time. Or will you just call me stupid because you cannot see how out of place your idea of stopping them is with your and most other Americans morals. I guess it is ok because they are muslim, with less rights.

You guys are not cracking skulls and gasing people yet, but if there was no consequence, do you think there would be more beat up or dead mexicans and muslims out there, do you think people would get creative. Do you think that children of parents that comment on how Mexicans and Muslims are ruining America would have an easier time hurting one of these individuals vs. the little white girl next door, would it be more ok? The reason these people are safe is your government keeping the really worked up in check, not because they are just mad and would do nothing out of respect. This is one clear case where no police = people dead.

I know many Jewish people that would be more than happy to kill any Muslim and when I ask how this relates back to the NAZI regime, they say it is completely different, so I can certainly see how many would not get it. As it has been said by those in the know, the NAZIs started via a movement where people just thought they were doing the right thing for their country and god.

How about this, can any of you opposers of property rights via said mosque pen a reasonable regulation that could stop them from building without disrespecting others' rights. A law you would be fine with if they implemented locally...on your land or in town. Perhaps you can show me that there is a reasonable and constitutional way to address this and I can shut up. Or perhaps it already exists and you could just quote it.

Thanks to who ever pointed out the McVey was an agnostic and not associated with the various christian faiths. I stand corrected and will take your comment as true. Sorry for making the ignorant assumption that a clean cut white boy is christian, I should have known better. The point is not lost, though, we all know that in all faiths, there are people that could do such horrible things, but then I guess in most common faiths, they would be sinners or whatever they would be called, thus not really being faithful. From all my years working hand in hand with those that are very religious, and not being so myself...seems like good is good and bad is bad, and we all spend too much time on the details and labels. In my mind people that want to hurt people or take away their rights, especially freedom and property rights, are bad. It seems like this is what you want to do, and justify it using 9-11, but not be really specific in drawing your association with these particular mosque builders.

I really could care less, I am saddened and interested in meaningful debate, which is often why I post in the 1st place.

AV8OR wrote: WoW! When I see posts similar to YOYO,

I think why not give up certain gun ownership rights? After all, it is for the good of keeping innocent men, women and children safe.

I think why not change the legal drinking age to 19, maybe 21? Hmmm, the next thing you know the feds will mandate states change it to 35?

I think why not place a "sin tax" on alcohol and cigerettes? The next thing you know government gets free reign on taxing Big Macs and Freedom Fries.

Why not let them build a MOSQUE near the very spot where so many AMERICANS LOST THEIR LIVES in the interest of allowing terrorists to be FREE?

Hey, using that logic, why not allow them to take out a certain white building and build a mosque? We wouldn't want them to feel that they are repressed from us non-caring and brutal AMERICANS?

WHY NOT ALLOW OUR RIGHTS TO BE DEGRADED? We can call it in the interest of Public Safety. We are looking out for our kids. We re looking out for the poor disadvantaged terrorist (who deserve a right).


NOT!

ARE YOU STUPID?

No idea if this was addressed or not but why do the Liberals equate disagreeing with something or something, and wanting to change it, as a 'hate movement'? So if you don't agree with the left you are either a racist or a NAZI like hater. Interesting.

PrintSmith wrote: And I appreciate the sentiment archer, but think of how much better off we'd be right now if 50 years ago the argument against continuing the Social Security Ponzi had prevailed instead of lost. 50 years ago there was a true surplus in the trust, backed up by a currency that was still valued at $37/oz of gold. future at all.

And who took us off the Gold Standard.....why your good buddy NIXON, a Republican. Thanks for reminding me just how much blame should go to short sighted conservatives who think mostly of today.....hang what happens tomorrow. It's all about them.

Viking, disagreeing with the left always generates hate, towards us. But whenever possible they must call us haters, bigots, racists, etc.

No name calling, just calling it like I see it.