patrick.net

Once again Patrick you are 100,000% on the money. Please Please Please keep it up because most Americans are too shortsighted and dear I say mentally challenged to understand these concepts on their own. Basically you have Logic vs. Emotion and when it comes to the right. They are illogical thinking people whose entire existence has been predicated on the idea of the emotional based myth of "white supremacy" which we have now figured out that it's really about "Green Supremacy". America's voting against people of color has gotten you WHERE: a society in which 90% of the wealth of controled by the top 10% and the avg household has $10K of credit card debt. So that means that 90% of Americans are behind the 8 ball for the betterment of the top 10%. The average American hasn't received a wage increase as it relates to productivity since 1973. But you see you can pull this trickery off without anyone challenging you when you have a thinkless, emotional and partially racist country. Remember, one of the criticisms of President Obama during the presidential campaign was that he was "too professorial" and too smart to relate to the average American who is ....... shall I say, not as smart.

The day that the masses of white Americans realize that minorities and immigrants aren't our enemy the way FOX news and the Right wants you to believe through a version of what I call "terror-rightwing-talkism" from the likes of Beck, Bill O'Riely, Limbaugh, but rather it's the rich elitist corporations that keep us distracted with BS issues as Patrick so eloquently explained, that will be the day that we take our country back. Until then, America will continue to steady it's descent downward.

Good Job Patrick.

I love this quote......... "So we see the bizarre and (to lefties) inexplicable scenes of poor whites turning red in the face screaming “NO! We do not want the financial security of universal health care that all other countries enjoy. We WANT to live one illness away from bankruptcy, all the time, forever! And furthermore, we demand lower taxes on the extra profits corporations make from outsourcing our jobs to China!”

markw51 says

If a so called “socialist” health care system is so bad, why arn’t Europeans demanding an American style health care system?

Actually they are in pretty much every country. Why do you think there aren't any fully run government healthcare systems in Europe? Almost every country has realized that their systems are either bankrupt or cannot support doctor salaries and cover innovation in technology.

Please show me a country in Europe that has purely government run system.

What they eventually wind up with is a basic level of care that all citizens get and then an elite level of care that you need to pay for. We will get there in the US eventually.

Sure, there’s danger of the Democrats selling out to corporate interests just like Republicans

Danger? Did you notice who one of Obama's golf buddies was on that Martha's Vinyard vacation? The golf buddy is Robert Wolf, the head of UBS's American operations. The golf buddy raised $250k for Obama's Senate campaign, and UBS recieved $2 billion laundered through AIG. As you may have heard, USB is the Swiss bank of choice for Americans to hide money from the IRS. I read about that from a left wing columnist, but some info is also here:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/08/24/senior_ubs_official_key_donor.html?wprss=44

Um, huh? Corporatism is the necessity of Fascism, which is in direct opposition to Right Wing principles. Also, the supposed religious aspect presented in that article is in direct opposition to Fascism, as the two prototypical Fascists (Hitler and Mussolini) both devalued religion. Sorry, making up a definition of Fascism to fit the American Right that has nothing in common with historical Fascism is ridiculous. Considering Mussolini created Fascism and dubbed it such, one should look at Mussolini's form of government as what Fascism is. Mussolini did not overvalue the military, in fact, the Italians undervalued the military which is what caused the Italian army to be such a laughingstock in World War II. Military was seen as a precursor to empire, but to claim that the thought of Empire makes one Fascist indicates a belief that all of Europe was Fascist for centuries. Mussolini was consumed with the idea of national works and national infrastructure (such as getting the trains to run on time, his most famous accomplishment, and the taming of the Pontine Marshes, a ridiculous misallocation of resources). He did draw from the military things which it did efficiently, and he exploited Italian history's preoccupation with military manliness, but he was primarily interested in populism. Watch Fellini's Amarcord for a fantastic presentation of Fascist pomp, which has nothing to do with Right Wing politics. As for the opposition to homosexuality and rigid enforcement of gender roles being a hallmark of Fascism, that is just an ignorant statement. Hitler openly encouraged homosexuality until he needed to get rid of a political enemy. Also, the notion that Corporate power is protected is not in keeping with the very nature of Corporatism. In Fascism, all power is taken away from corporations and given to the central government, which makes decisions as to the allocation of resources. The reason Corporate interests were in bed with the Fascists was because they had to be to remain viable, not because it was a great government for them. Perhaps people should read about historical Fascism before making ridiculous statements. These 14 points were not even drawn up until Bush had been in power for 4 years, and all aspects of Fascism that didn't relate were ignored. But honestly, the religion issue alone loses the argument, or requires that we completely ignore Nazi Germany as being Fascist. Please, let's not sling around Fascist charges just because we don't like somebody. One could just as easily prove Obama and the left wing to be Fascists through selective processing of information, but in truth, Fascism is dead and has been for a long time.

What's interesting to me is that the majority of the "angry Americans" recklessly throwing around these labels like Marxist, Fascist, Socialist, and Communist I am 100% sure that they could not define it if they had to. My favorite moronic statement by the "tea-baggers" (which is a joke that they call themselves that in the first place) is .........."Get your government hands off my Medicare" . America please step up your brain game.

Word of the Day
Simpleton - A person who is felt to be deficient in judgment, good sense, or intelligence; a fool. a person lacking in common sense

Republican = Simpleton

Yet in this situation, it is a self-professed liberal throwing around the term Fascist with no understanding of the historical connotations. To paint one party or the other as simpletons is just as ridiculous as calling them Fascists. It refuses to debate the issues and attempts to limit conversation. I would prefer we just debate issues, separate from party affiliation, while recognizing that there are a number of extremely smart people on both sides of the debate, and in both parties. We should be able to disagree without calling names, and should be able to discuss the issues. Pejoratives such as "tea-bagger" make the poster look like a fool, rather than those he is decrying, in the same way that referring to a person on the left as a "commie" doesn't truly confront them on the issues at hand. Is this to say there are no simpletons in the discussion. Of course there are, there are simpletons in every discussion. But the left and right should join together in being amused by representatives of each party that are laughingstocks, instead of ridiculously defending and attacking along party lines.

IMO the poorest whites/non-whites have always been at rock bottom. What's changed is white realization that "race" is in fact class war by the wealthiest against the middle and, it hardly need be added, the poorest. Poor whites have always had more in common with poor blacks in terms of the realities of their lives, but they bought into an illusion that their "whiteness" made them peers to the wealthy. The anger is the shock of realization.

@ ahasuerus99 -

I hear your point, but unfortunately it is your GOP Right Wing "patriots" who have reduced themselves to childish name calling as a substitute for sound reasoning. The fact that they use simple code phrases like "Real American", or "Great American" as they do on Sean Hannity's show is excruciatingly childish and simple. I listen to all media, Randi Rhodes, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Rachel Maddow etc. and the overwhelming majority of those who use pejoratives such as "Marxist, Fascist, Socialist, and Communist...... and tea-bagger (that's a self inflicted pejorative by the Right Wing mind you which I still chuckle at), are your Right Wing media personalities. They rule by a form of "domestic terrorism" by trying to "scare the living daylights" (a Glenn Beck phrase) out of simple minded Americans that they cater to. It was just an observation that I made when I confronted a co-worker who is right leaning in his thinking to define those various forms of government in which he had hard time defining, but such an easy time using the pejoratives.

When held up to sound moral based logic, many conservative positions on issues hold very little weight nor make sense. And last, for most conservatives who are against health care and who claim to be Christians, just ask yourself, what side of the health care debate do you honestly feel that Jesus would be on? On the side of the people, or the side of the insurance companies that deny care?

My observation is that Republicans = Emotional baseless arguments that are void of logically reasoning which often renders them hypocrites by definition.

Just my thoughts.

Universal health care is morally WRONG. It uses the coercive power of government to force people to work for other people. Slavery by any name.

The AMA reports 85% of medical costs are due to behavioral choices; obesity, smoking, drugs, STD's.

If you make good decisions, adopt good behaviors, you are forced to work to put money into a system that returns little or nothing to you. The bad deciders, by contrast, get tremendous benefit for putting in relatively little. The good deciders are forced to support the bad deciders, who society tries to insulate from the consequences of their poor decisions.

By definition, mandatory health care is the use of government force to transfer wealth from healthy people to sick people.

When you insulate people from consequences of behavior, you get more of the behavior. So costs will spiral as people seek more care.

To control costs, coercive behavioral controls will then be implemented throughout society; carrot and sticks. You can see this now in cities banning hamburgers (trans fats), etc.

Behavior control can be only partly effective, so the next step will be health care rationing, where government panels and hidden elites sit down to decide who lives and dies and when. This will also punish good deciders; when they need emergency care, they won't get it because it will be regulated in a cost-control way.

This is not theory. This is what has happened every time and every where it has been tried.

Most on "the right" simply want to be left alone.

The Left is driven by Utopian desires, believing a perfect world can be created if people are just trained to "think" right. Thus they gravitate to education, government, the media, where they can control and shape what people think and do on the march to Utopia.

You can see the Utopian thinking in the original message, the belief that government health care will create "financial security", despite the evidence to the contrary of all of history and every instance where it has been tried.

Conservatives recognize no human action can create Utopia. They advocate decentralized government so corrupt people and institutions cannot unduly influence them.

Fascism and communism are the same thinking with different modes of expression; the communist left are INTERNATIONAL utopians, the fascist "right are NATIONAL utopians (perfect world via my nation, my race, etc. -- still utopianism).

If you don't like what a corporation does, you don't have to buy from them. Corporations are voluntary. If enough people agree, the company dissolves. By contrast, if you don't want to fund what the government does, people with guns called "civil servants" come to your house, take everything you own and put you in jail.

Consequently, you need to be very careful and limited in what you authorize government to do. restricting it to areas where force is appropriate.

Why force would be appropriate in health care, I cannot fathom. If it's good for that, why not have all grocery stores owned and run by the government? Then we can finally get proper prices and financial security and freedom from hunger!

The problem with psychological profiles is they often say more about the researcher than they do the subject. Let's sum up Patrick's analysis of "fascists":

They're working class whites who are ignorant, jealous, angry and most importantly racist therefore they are loony and unworthy of consideration yet they strangely don't seem to welcome the instructions of superior, more caring people who want to enlighten them as to how inferior and bigoted they are and jump under the bus and take one for the team. When told to go commit suicide or to hell if they dare to question the enlightened, caring person they have the nerve to exercise constitutional rights such as free speech and watching news programs of their own choice.

Thank you, Patrick, for this psychological analysis. It's been very revealing.

>If a so called “socialist” health care system is so bad, why arn’t Europeans demanding an American style health care system?

That was called "the fall of the Soviet Union". Otherwise, Europeans come here for treatment if they want. The rest are very submissive and don't know any better. Slave systems can persist for hundreds of years.

Currently though, most European nations are importing huge populations of young Muslims to infuse cash into unsustainable welfare system, so it won't go that long.

@coolcam

Alas, the GOP Right Wing is not mine, I want nothing to do with either political party. Right wing I may be, but I have no use for the GOP. I prefer the political form of free agency, free to logically evaluate positions free from pressure to conform to a party line. And I certainly understand the bad taste left in the mouth of many people by those who self-identify as conservative when in actuality they mean they toe the party line, just as I have little use for people who toe the other party line either. And yes, currently, the right wing is far more likely to use pejoratives, just as when Bush was in power the left wing was more likely to (Fascist being a particular favorite). It seems whichever side has the Presidency, the other side likes to label the President rather than evaluate the issues. I say Bravo to listening to all sides of the media argument; I prefer to listen to none. Though there is great entertainment value in being told by Limbaugh, Hannity, Maddow, Olbermann how I am supposed to think, I prefer to look to both sides to find out who they consider to be experts on the subject, and then go to those sources, evaluating them against each other. I would say that almost all political positions, when held up to sound moral logic, fail. Politics is not a morality play. Take abortion as an issue. The left cannot understand why the right is in favor of limiting a woman's right to choose, when ostensibly opposing big government. The right cannot understand why the left thinks that abortion is an issue of choice, when they consider abortion murder. Until this can be bridged (which it likely cannot) the sides will continue ignoring the central point of the other side. But in actuality, if we could get outside partisan labels, we would discover that abortion can't be boiled down to pro-life and pro-choice. Pro-life encapsulates both those who oppose abortion entirely and those who believe there are situations where abortion is acceptable. Pro-choice runs a larger gamut, from those who support choice in all situations, those who want to limit by trimester, those who think choice should be restricted by age. To limit the debate, as we always do, to two choices is too limiting. Health-care is falling into the same conundrum. Instead of evaluating each aspect of the proposal, it is simplified to the point where it becomes pro-reform vs. anti-reform. My guess is that there are those who are pro Public option, those who are pro Public healthcare for everyone without option, those who are pro status quo, those who oppose even Medicare and Veteran Benefits, those who support universal healthcare for children but not for adults. As to the issue I believe Christ would be on, I believe he would support neither. Christ seems to be, whenever possible, in favor of staying out of state affairs. He would most likely be personally in favor of healthcare, but as he leaves it up to government in matters of government, such as taxes, I think he would do so here as well. Christ was very careful to avoid being a political messiah, in part because there was a belief by many at the time that the Messiah would be political. Certainly Christ would not be in favor of the Insurance companies who deny care and allow people to die. But I tend to think Christ would be in favor of providing for charities as the central method of providing healthcare, welfare, and a variety of other programs. Christ never asked the government to intercede in any situation in favor of the people because he believed the people should care for each other. I avoid bringing religion into political arguments, even as an admitted Christian Conservative, because politics is the realm of logic and compromise, not of religion. Christ Himself avoided invoking religion to defend Himself to the Romans, instead submitting to the Law of the Land. There are a number of logical reasons to support a variety of causes, just as there are plenty on both sides who choose their sides while ignoring all logic.

There is no government left but money.

The right/left democrat/republican division no longer has any meaning. If you've been paying attention, the monetary expansion through debt, started by the Reagan administration through military spending, has continued to the present day. Only the "ruling" party affiliations, the debt expansion methods, and some names have changed.

Bernanke and Paulson were running the economic show via the Federal Reserve and the Treasury while Bush was in office. Now they do it while Obama is in office. What better demonstration of the irrelevance of government could you have?

The political "debates" are mere noise. A distraction for the rubes so they won't notice that men behind the curtain, grabbing taxpayer dollars in each fist.

The problem with your theory, as with many others (sheeple) is that you are all still buying into the left-right paradigm. When you come to the realization that that plays right into the elite's hands, which is how they keep and gain even more control of our lives, then you will stop it with the different groups and divisions and group characterizations of us all. It doesn't matter!!! We are not left, right, conservative, or liberal. We are human beings. There is no two-party system, they are all in the same. They are playing you for a fool, and you and all the others continue to fall for it. Good grief! And everyone thinks they are so smart, and so educated - stupid yuppies! They laugh at you everytime they see you say, the democrats this and the republicans that. They are all FRIENDS for goodness sakes!! They only pretend they're not.

And here I thought you were going to write something profound. So disappointed in you Patrick. Not so much in the comments, because I know they've all been dumbed down and are under mind control. But I figured you were not.

The health system that will serve us best is the one mainstream and our so called government "officials" (ha!) refuses to discuss. Hmmm wonder why? Maybe because they and their buddies won't make any money off of us. That's why you never hear about single-payor. And the ones who are yelling about wanting a public option are so darn confused they actually think they're fighting for single payor. Just do a little research people and turn off the television. It's called, google.com, then type "S-I-N-G-L-E space P-A-Y-O-R in the space provided. You'll see...

2ndClassCitizen says

Clever Kevin,
But a more accurate description would be:
First they offered substandard care to the people who sacrificed the most to preserve the fascist government (veterans)
Then the fascist government offered “care” to the elderly, provided they are already so bankrupt they can’t pay for it themselves and the “care” is provided by the lobbyists who got them elected.
Then they offered some more substandard care to the disabled by stealing from those who can work, eventually leading people to claim fake disabilities in order to get benefits.
Then after bankrupting the nation they proposed removing all choice by the citizens in the name of progress and called anyone who opposed it stupid, white, fascist racists.
BTW the fact you make a joke of genocide is proof it can happen again.

The whole "Obama is a nazi and health care is fascism" line is a big fucking joke. You people who use these words have NO IDEA what you mean.

@ wellbodysolutions

Well said. But unfortunately the "unity" that you insist should happen amongst the people will never happen as long as poor and middle class white Americans still believe in the premise of "white supremacy" and the notion that the investor class actually has a seat reserved for them in the castle only if they simply work hard enough. Like inkypenumbra said, "they bought into an illusion that their “whiteness” made them peers to the wealthy." This concept allowed many of them to fight in the civil war with ZERO chance of ever owning a slave, as well as vote republican for the last 40 years. Why would you consistently as Patrick put it "demand lower taxes on the extra profits corporations make from outsourcing our jobs to China!” by way of your vote? It's illogical. Many of the 1,100 people who were recently notified that they were going to loose their jobs at a Whirlpool plant in the Republican leaning state of Indiana probably voted Republican ALL of their lives in the hopes that "master" would protect them by virtue of the whiteness. Sadly at the end of the day, those poor Americans were replaced by cheaper Mexican labor. Green$$$ trumps White. The investor class was looking out for their own pockets. That's the "free market" at it's best. Many of those "conservative" voting laid off workers will probably sing a different tune on universal health care God forbid they get sick and realize that they are in their mid 50's with ZERO health coverage. Not to wish harm on anyone, but it serves them right. Now they get to taste the rotten fruit of their labor/vote that they once believed they were isolated from because of their "whiteness".

As simple as this might sound, this is the primary reason that this country doesn't have health care...... PERIOD. Until the average simple minded white American can divorce themselves from that concept, the investor class will always rule and manipulate the simple minded and easily distracted Americans of the true destroyers of their freedom. Republican vs Democrat, Right Wing Left Wing, Blue State Red State..... blah blah blah... it's all a distraction to keep the average American wage at $31,000 per year while Highly paid employees received nearly $2.1 trillion of the $6.4 trillion in total U.S. pay in 2007, the latest figures available. That's a THIRD. Talk about a transfer wealth. If they can continue to keep your eye of the "immigration ball", the "minority ball", and the "I want my country back ball" then they can continue to pay you less, take more of YOUR EARNINGS and keep it for themselves. Our whiteness is worthless against Green. Remember the most purist form of capitalism as it relates to labor is slavery which is why those poor folks lost their jobs in Indiana.

Patrick keep on educating the masses.

There is a video now being showing to elementary school children features 50 "celebrities" that guides the children through these pledges:

I pledge allegiance to the funk of the united funk of funkadelica.
I pledge to never give anyone the finger when I'm driving again
I pledge to advance stem-cell research
To reduce my use of plastic … use less bottled water … plant 500 trees this year … to be more green … to no
longer use plastic bags at the grocery store
For the environment, I plan to flush only after deuce, never a single
I pledge to sell my obnoxious car and buy a hybrid.
I pledge to be of service to Barack Obama

The video asks viewers to visit Serve.gov and sign up for a community service project.

For a speech to be given to elementary school children Sept 8, worksheets provided by the U.S. Department of Education encourage teachers to ask pre-K through 6th-grade students the following questions:

What is the president trying to tell me to do?
What is the president asking me to do?
What new ideas and actions is the president challenging me to think about?
Students may be asked to write down "key ideas or phrases that are important or personally meaningful, make posters of their goals, create a "supportive community" by sharing those goals with one another.

Junior-high and high-school students may be asked to brainstorm answers to the following questions before the speech:

Why does President Obama want to speak with us today?
How will he inspire us?
How will he challenge us?
What might he say?

i.e. an attempt to bypass parents and instill a radical socialist agenda, glorifying Obama and promoting obedience to a politician (who actually works for us) in small children.

>>“The American far right wing fits the 14 Points Of Fascism well enough that we should call a spade a spade.”
>Have ANY OF YOU on the right bothered to even challenge this premise?

Overall, they are too vague and self-serving to be worth responding to. The fascism in the US (where fascism is the drive to for state control of individual life and freedom) comes from the left.

1. Meaningless smear. There is good reason for patriotism in the US; it's actions throughout history defending and freeing the world, most recently 50 million people in Iraq.

2. Human rights ... the list amounts to policies you disagree with because of your politics. Human rights flow from the understanding that humans were created in the spiritual image of God, thus have intrinsic dignity and worth. This belief exists only on the right. The left believes humans are a chemical accident. How can a bag of chemicals have rights? Who are you to impose that belief on me? This is why the concept of human rights doesn't catch on countries lacking a Christian heritage. The left cannot justify it's belief in human rights, they just dump a grab-bag of politics into it. When it's inconvenient, the left's human right's beliefs go away and you hundreds of millions killed in China, Russia, Germany (yes, Hitler was a leftist .... Nazi refers to National Socialist party in German),

3. Scapegoats ... more dumping ground for leftist politics. There are people in the Obama administration like Van Jones, Holdren, etc., who have advocated subversion and overthrow of the US, infanticide, eugenics, forced abortion, etc. I'm comfortable referring to them as enemies of human freedom and dignity. Part of leftism is lulling people asleep... there are no enemies, just relax and enjoy what we do to you.

4. Military ... one of the few legitimate legal functions of government. "Rural health care", "low-income schools" are not the business of government because all government is is coercive force and legal mandate. So again this is just leftist political preferences.

5. rampant sexism ... interesting to see this now means gay rights. There purpose of state involvement in marriage is because there is an interest in continuing society wih a next generation. Gay marriage is irrelevant to that, but instead a mechanism to force benefits from others (medical care, etc.).

6. Controlled mass media ... now you are just making me laugh. Too easy.

7. National security ... numerous parties have declared their intent to destroy and damage the US. Interestingly, it's often because of liberal policies. The revulsion by Islam is as much due to the left's Playboy magazine as anything else.

It just goes on and on with goofy and boring charges ... the left doesn't even understand itself let alone the right.

Yes, Patrick, those working class whites which you, leftists, consider infinitely exploitable and indirectly blamed for racism or ignorance, how dare they have ideology beyond this theoretically wonderful and demonstrably expensive and poorly working government tax-and-spend backed simulation of healthcare in those other theoretically wonderful countries. Stupid them. Bad news: your desired programs don't work and working class whites are waking up to this. Which you don't like and don't understand it for obvious reason that you still believe in your programs.

Bad newsflash: universal healthcare sucks even in countries like Germany: expensive, long queues, monopolised by the state, operating not that great - a friend of mine who lives in Germany has a cardiologist assigned to her 300 kilometers away from the place where she lives - a good example of German "efficiency", equipped worse in high-tech care in comparison to US, etc. Mind you, I write from Europe -- I don't like American healthcare system, but don't pretend European/Canadian is that great. Can't working class whites realise that?

Another point, perhaps more important one: can't working class whites have ideology that NO, they do not want government powers to expand? You have this silly soviet-like assumption that more government in people's lives is a proper thing to have, that it's always better. Stupid people only do not want more government, e.g. in healthcare, that's what the necessary assumption to your argument is.

Another major thing that sucks in your argumentation is economics - you argue *as if* those were only leftist policies that kept people from being proles in a capitalist system. Your writing smacks of distorted Marx really, the arguments running along the lines that the poor keep getting poorer -- which is opposite of the actual truth of the capitalist system. Those wonderful leftist policies in Europe that Europeans love are actually the worst thing there can be for the poor, because all those leftist policies that cost 60% of GDP or more spent by the government keep the prices on extraordinarily high levels in comparison to US -- what do you think the companies do if not pass their taxes onto customers in form of prices, eh? (Yes, I know the theoretical argument that with fixed supply they are not in position to do that, but a. that has been shown to be empirically wrong even if theoretically right, and b. how many goods in economy are of fixed supply?). Ask any American who visited Europe how expensive Europe is. You think this is good for the poor? I would say European poor are stupider than American poor, because American poor working class whites at least seem to realize this at some level.

Mind you, I'm not American, but I'm certainly sympathetic to working class whites who get disillusioned with the rents that American leftists derive off the regulatory complex. No, Patrick, those are not high taxes and big government spending that keeps middle class in existence. European middle class is like American poorer working class re standard of living. But I have always found European dream to be rather silly.

Geez Patrick........you are so wacked out politically it is amazing !!!!

You do realise that the moment someone starts calling another political group fascists or nazis they have lost whatever argument they were trying to make argument, don't you ?

I know the old rule - call someone a fascist, and all rational debate has ended.

But damn, look at the 14 points of fascism and compare that to what we've got:

http://oldamericancentury.org/14_pts/14ptsGOP.htm

If it's true, it ain't slander.

10caipirinhas says

Geez Patrick……..you are so wacked out politically it is amazing !!!!
You do realise that the moment someone starts calling another political group fascists or nazis they have lost whatever argument they were trying to make argument, don’t you ?

It's the water here in the Bay Area. There is something in it that makes people wacko! LOL. I make sure I boil mine before drinking.

I know the old rule - call someone a fascist, and all rational debate has ended.
But damn, look at the 14 points of fascism and compare that to what we’ve got:
http://oldamericancentury.org/14_pts/14ptsGOP.htm
If it’s true, it ain’t slander.

We have a Constitutionally ineligible socialist in the White House delivering empty speeches to the nation on almost daily basis (as in any socialist dictatorship); more than 40 appointed "Czars" (including a self admitted Marxist); the indoctrination of elementary and high school children will be officially kicked-off on September 8 - and Patrick talks about fascism on the american right!?
Did I mention a call for establishing a national youth "volunteering" service force, which should be funded at the same level as military and equally numbered?

Fear is a hell of thing, especially when mixed with unabashed ignorance as defined by the lack of factual knowledge to the 5th power as illustrated by the many on this board. Thanks for the link Patrick http://oldamericancentury.org/14_pts/14ptsGOP.htm .

My other question to the conservatives on this board is: as it pertains to the preservation of their party/ideology, how do you deal with the "browning" of this country that has this country being populated by more people of color than white Americans in the next 30 or so years? When do you start to communicate with Hispanics, Asians, Blacks in an effort to earn their vote. The likes of Glenn Beck and Mike Savage aren't helping your cause, in fact they are acting as a death nail to the GOP. The hatred and vitriol are essentially guaranteeing GOP party extinction. You guys simply don't have the numbers anymore to perpetuate the ideology. America is no longer "white and southern". Locking them up in prisons, guns on the street, and HIV AIDS aren't enough to control the minority population. What does your party have to offer to the soon majority? When you do form a strategy to reach across the isle to the soon to be majority in order to keep your party alive? It's like the GOP are fighting a futile war that mother nature and evolution is going to win (according to the census).

As a student at a predominately white school, most of my white friends are discussing putting off marriage and having children due to the current recession which will indeed have an "accelerator" effect on the demographic shift in this country in the coming years. How does the Glenn Becks, the Rush Limbaughs, and Michael Savages, and the Tea Baggers deal with that FACT of an inevitable power surge away from their demographic base? YOU HAVE TO ADDRESS THIS...... Could someone answer this issue on the right please.

How is it that now that we have Democrats in firm control of both houses and a Democrat as president, yet everything is still the fault of the "far right"? Does the left do anything else these days besides whine?

Regarding the comment "Have ANY OF YOU on the right bothered to even challenge this premise?"
Why bother. It's so laughably out there, it doesn't warrant a response. By anyone.

Most people here have never lived under anything remotely close to true fascism or a real dictatorship. Anyone that thinks or says otherwise should be shipped off to live in Iran, Sudan or North Korea for a year. I'm sure they would return with a "new perspective" on such things. Perhaps you should talk with someone that lived through Nazi occupation or escaped from one of the above countries before you consider making make such comparisons.

The large majority of America is conservative in some ways and liberal in others and this is a good thing. Unfortunately, both parties think that winning an election gives them some special mandate to trample anyone they disagree with. The silent majority of voters is sick of this. Obama didn't win, Bush lost. He might be astute enough to actually understand this, but his party's leadership is not, thus guaranteeing more ineffective legislation, that most will detest, and a defeat in the next election cycle.

We are the silent majority. We don't consider ourselves Democraps, Republicants, bleeding heart liberals, religion crazed conservatives or any other box you want to dump us into to placate your own ignorance. We think Rush and Ann are just the other side of the coins that have Al and Barney on them. They are equally worthless to us and you can bet on the next election cycle being a bloodbath for the incumbents.

Patrick references the "14 Points of Fascism", sourced from a typical left-wing site as if it was written by some expert on fascism. Its not. It was written by a guy from New York named Laurence Britt who is promoted in a great variety of liberal sites on the internet on as being a doctor of some sort. He isn't. He is retired from Xerox. He is a liberal activist from New York who was on the Executive board of a Local ACLU chapter. A decent websearch shows he has an extremely left-wing ideology and has written a number of articles for 'alternative' media outlets. He has no professional credentials, only a biased aspect to try to make fascism fit. You don't have to be very resourceful to find plenty of sources online that show how many points of fascism fit liberalism AND how many of those points are conveniently left out of this list. Basically, this list of 14 points more closely represents a twisted extrapolation of trying to make a square peg fit a round hole PRODUCED by a square hole.

Those 14 points look about right to me.

I studied in Germany and Austria for a year each, and we got lots of history lessons about the Nazis. All 14 points fit pretty well.

I'm not exactly sure what liberalism is, but how would those 14 points fit it?

Try this; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
It's a more of a real description of what the word fascism means. Please take special note of the last two sentences.

Your ideas of the "right wing" is nothing more than a caricature that was spoon fed to you, no different than a picture of the Folsom St. fair represents who gays are. The question is, will you swallow it as it's fed to you, or will you take the hard road and spend time with these people and find out for yourself?

Poor white people aren't embarrassed by lack of education or angered by their loss of work. They are angry at having 30+% of their meager earnings taken at gunpoint, only to fund grants for art that defames their religion. They are angry at having to pay taxes to bail out Wall St. while they live in poverty. They are tired of the Democrats, the people that told them "we will help you" give them the shaft. They may not understand the complexities of global wage arbitrage, but they know damn well when they have been promised the world and gotten screwed instead.

Recall that the deep south and middle blue-collar America were traditional Democratic strongholds. Not so much these days.

They see the simple truth that both Democrats and Republicans are nothing but bags of hubris that help themselves to others money and play on the misfortunes of others to get re-elected. Their common sense tells them that adding even more of such governance, is not the answer to their problems. Before you condemn them as fascist, perhaps you should spend 6 months or a year living in a rural middle America to get a real perspective on who these people are, and why they so oppose what you support.

Finally, I really enjoy the hate that is spewed at Fox news. For decades, the news media drifted to the left, creating an ever growing drone of slanted opinion-making rather than reporting news. NewsCorp saw there was money to be made, and the other side of the coin was born. They now have over 1/2 of the cable news market share. The days of real news, with intelligent discussion of issues are over. They died with the likes of Walter Cronkite. You have no one to thank for that but yourselves. You decided that being "right" and making yourself feel virtuous was more important than understanding.

Oh, one more thing. Isn't it interesting that conservative, rural America managed to sidestep most of the housing run up and follow on implosion? Maybe their not so ignorant after all...

Artic Cat says

Poor white people aren’t embarrassed by lack of education or angered by their loss of work. They are angry at having 30+% of their meager earnings taken at gunpoint, only to fund grants for art that defames their religion. They are angry at having to pay taxes to bail out Wall St. while they live in poverty.

"Poor whites" (or blacks, or hispanics, or asians) pay so little in taxes that it's laughable for them to complain. If you live below the poverty line, you don't pay a cent in federal taxes, and in most states you won't pay anything either. Even if you make all the way up to the median, you're still paying virtually nothing. The spending that they're bitching about is other people's money -- of which they are the primary beneficiaries. 30%? What a load of bullshit. Federal, State, and payroll taxes COMBINED do not make up even 15% of pay for someone at the median income level, and the combined total is negative (thanks to refundable tax credits like the child tax credits) for those at or below the poverty line.

The only people who really have cause to bitch about their taxes are the middle class. Rich people just pay capital gains, and poor people pay little to nothing. Meanwhile, somebody making a low six figure salary can easily be shelling out 25-30% to the federal government alone.

Artic Cat says

They are tired of the Democrats, the people that told them “we will help you” give them the shaft. They may not understand the complexities of global wage arbitrage, but they know damn well when they have been promised the world and gotten screwed instead.

What "shaft" have they gotten? Please explain this to me. Welfare? Section 8? Food stamps? I'd love to know how you think they're getting "the shaft".

Artic Cat says

Recall that the deep south and middle blue-collar America were traditional Democratic strongholds. Not so much these days.

Yeah, back when the Republicans were "the party of Lincoln". Southern allegiance had a clear and marked shift when the democrats decided to support the civil rights movement. I'm sure that was about economics, though!

Artic Cat says

They see the simple truth that both Democrats and Republicans are nothing but bags of hubris that help themselves to others money and play on the misfortunes of others to get re-elected. Their common sense tells them that adding even more of such governance, is not the answer to their problems. Before you condemn them as fascist, perhaps you should spend 6 months or a year living in a rural middle America to get a real perspective on who these people are, and why they so oppose what you support.

I was born and raised in rural middle America. I have family there. They oppose whatever the Democrats do for essentially 3 reasons:

1. Abortion
2. Homosexuals
3. Minorities

Where I grew up, in the 1990s it was still normal for all black people to be referred to as "Nigger" -- not just as an epitaph, but as a synonym for "black". That's still true for the most part, though at least nobody says it in public.

Now, I wouldn't call the poor whites fascists. For the most part, they're just ignorant people who are being manipulated by evil people. History is full of them.

Quite frankly, if the democrats could spin their messages a little differently, most of the poor whites would be on their side.

Artic Cat says

Oh, one more thing. Isn’t it interesting that conservative, rural America managed to sidestep most of the housing run up and follow on implosion? Maybe their not so ignorant after all…

All unpopulated areas sidestepped the housing run up. Know why? Because there isn't demand. Demand in cities is high (that's why it's a million+ for a studio apartment in manhattan). Demand in the country is low ($100k will buy you a giant home with acreage). Take a look at any of the mini metros throughout the midwest, though, and you'll find the exact same housing stupidity that you found in California.

nosf41 says

What is the price of your freedom: A socialist health care system?
If Obamacare was such a good plan - it would be easy to defend it.
There are better solutions to health care reform than single payer government health care.
Why are you bothered by the Fox News?
The time of Walter Cronkite and few people controlling the news delivered to US public is over. At least there is one TV news organization that cannot be counted as cheerleaders for Obama. Even better, we have Internet (You Tube) to get information from various sources.
Dems have really “helped” the working class. They have been in charge of Congress for much longer period than GOP in the last 50 years. During that time the working class position in the society has declined.
I will not vote for Democrats until they change the following policies:
a) Support for ever increasing taxes on “middle class”
b) Support for illegal immigration
c) Continuing support of teachers’ unions, bad performing schools and spending on wasteful education programs.
d) Continuous support for able bodied “welfare queens”
e) Support for affirmative action programs (reverse racism)
f) Promotion of socialist agenda (it is real; not an imaginary “evil enemy”)

Holy Hanna, where to start...
First off, do you even know what the definition of "Socialism" is? Without looking it up, write it down here for us please.
"What is the price of your freedom?" What does that even mean? And how does having a partially gov sponsored healthcare system erode your freedoms, whatever you may perceive them as being? If you want to attack gov for a reason related to freedom then go scream about AT&T spying, or what happened to J Padilla, or why the banks are being 'rewarded' for failing and shit up about healthcare and let them do something that will help people for a change.
"If Obamacare was such a good plan - it would be easy to defend it."... Lets be honest here, Any plan Obama came up with would be attacked by the GOP, most of them have said as much or said so plainly. The GOP sees breaking Obama's healthcare plan as a political victory and the motivation for attacking it has very much less to do with the actual substance of the plan than with political maneuvering, which to me makes their position all the more cynical and disgusting. And again, do you even know what the plan is?
"There are better solutions to health care reform than single payer government health care." And those would be?... The system we have in place now is terrible, its expensive, limiting, bureaucratic, and it kills for profit, Thats what its designed to do - Its a FOR PROFIT system which means its going to put the profit margin ahead of your gradma's kidney, how much worse could that be? A gov sponsored plan is intended to be not for profit, meaning its closer to an altruistic system BY DESIGN. I would have thought that much would be plainly obvious. ...And why is it that the USA is the ONLY industrialized nation that does not have some form of gov heath system, aside from for the Elderly?
I'm bothered by Fox news because they seem more interested in flinging partisan oriented inflammatory poo than providing credible news and context. Everybody can have their own opinions but they can't have their own facts, and it seems to me that one of the key goals of Fox News is not to provides facts and context but to OBSCURE it, to rally party faithful to an attack, whichever attack happens to be the cause of the day for the GOP party. C Krauthammer admitted so much in an interview last year.
JHC, I'm not calling you an idiot, but you sure sound like one.

kentm says

Holy Hanna, where to start…
First off, do you even know what the definition of “Socialism” is? Without looking it up, write it down here for us please.

I grew up in a socialist/comunist country: The government controlled the economy, health care, education, media...
The health care was affordable, but treatment options were limited. Very often there were shortages of medications. Even basic things like pain medications were rationed. Not enough hospital beds led to overcrowding. When she was a child, my wife spent few days in a hospital - sharing a bed with another kid.
I could go on and on with stories illustrating the point that central planning and government monopoly does not work well.

“If Obamacare was such a good plan - it would be easy to defend it.”… Lets be honest here, Any plan Obama came up with would be attacked by the GOP, most of them have said as much or said so plainly.

Obama is on the record that his ultimate goal is a single payer system where government is the sole provider of health care services. I do not want a "dear leader" and his "czars" deciding who gets treated. In a socialist system, doctor could make a mistake and you had no recourse whatsoever. A bad or a mediocre doctor was protected - it was almost impossible to be fired, just like public school teachers in the USA.
A thousand page health care reform bill is not the way to go. Even members of Congress admitted that they did not read the bill and still willing to support it.
I have posted on another forum (http://patrick.net/?p=16740&cc=58) several ideas about changing the US health care system.

Yea, nosf41 - our current system is awesome and people always receive the best available treatment:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-insure4-2009sep04,0,4503502.story

HMO claims-rejection rates trigger state investigation
The increased attention also comes on the heels of a first-of-its-kind report issued this week that said the California health insurers reject 1 in 5 medical claims.

Six of the state's largest insurers rejected 45.7 million claims for medical care, or 22% of all claims, from 2002 to June 30, 2009, according to the California Nurses Assn.'s analysis of data submitted to regulators by the companies.

The rejection rates ranged from a high of 39.6% for PacifiCare to 6.5% for Aetna for the first half of 2009. Cigna denied 33%, and Health Net 30%.

Anthem Blue Cross, the state's largest for-profit health plan, and Kaiser, the state's largest nonprofit plan, each rejected 28% of claims.
------------------------------
FYI, denial of payment usually means denial of treatment. Denial of treatment, even for minor ailments, often results in death.

"I could go on and on with stories illustrating the point that central planning and government monopoly does not work well."

No thankyou - we already have enough stories here about central planning and non-government monopoly that doesn't work well. Your home country's system sucked, I get it. But our system, where medications are plentiful yet people are either denied them or can't afford them is horrible and doesn't work - unless you're not sick. Money equals treatment.

Healthcare should not be an option. No matter what country you're in at the time.

"I grew up in a socialist/communist country". I grew up in a partially socialized system too, Canada, and I'm proud of what the gov there was able to accomplish and provide for its citizens. Is it perfect? Of course not but its a better system for people than one designed to put human welfare behind its bottom line, and is more wasteful by multiple factors - did you know that the current US health care industry spends roughly 25 percent of its $ on beaurocracy while Medicare spends a little over 5? And if you want to trade stories about deficiencies in either system I suppose we could do that until our fingers fall off, but I can guarantee you this: a system thats designed to deny services and withhold medication IN ORDER TO PROFIT BY IT will always seem more horrific to me. ...but we could start it off by me asking you this: How much do you think you are worth? How much for your left leg? How about your right eye?

Aside - Whats your opinion of the police/fire/military systems in the US? I'd bet you don't have any problems with those government monopolizations.

"Obama is on the record that his ultimate goal is a single payer system where government is the sole provider of health care" They have never said anything other than they want to introduce single payer as an option and keep the rest of the current set up intact. If you're not capable of stating facts here please don't post.

kentm says

“I grew up in a socialist/communist country”. I grew up in a partially socialized system too, Canada, and I’m proud of what the gov there was able to accomplish and provide for its citizens. Is it perfect? Of course not but its a better system for people than one designed to put human welfare behind its bottom line, and is more wasteful by multiple factors - did you know that the current US health care industry spends roughly 25 percent of its $ on beaurocracy while Medicare spends a little over 5? And if you want to trade stories about deficiencies in either system I suppose we could do that until our fingers fall off, but I can guarantee you this: a system thats designed to deny services and withhold medication IN ORDER TO PROFIT BY IT will always seem more horrific to me. …but we could start it off by me asking you this: How much do you think you are worth? How much for your left leg? How about your right eye?
Aside - Whats your opinion of the police/fire/military systems in the US? I’d bet you don’t have any problems with those government monopolizations.
“Obama is on the record that his ultimate goal is a single payer system where government is the sole provider of health care” They have never said anything other than they want to introduce single payer as an option and keep the rest of the current set up intact. If you’re not capable of stating facts here please
don’t post.

Sorry to tell you, Obama did say such thing. Search You Tube and you will find the speech on his ultimate goal for the health care reform. He said it few years ago. Current health care reform proposal is the FIRST step towards that goal.
I would like to see a change in the US health care system. We need increased competition. Any regulation preventing insurance companies from offering their service across state boundaries should be removed. In a competitive industry, overhead costs will be minimized. Costs should be transparent and people using health care services should pay a portion of their bill out of pocket and the rest should be paid by the insurance (when dealing with major health issues). The ordinary (preventive) care should be paid 100% out of pocket - just like car maintenance. We do not use insurance to cover tire replacement, oil change or minor fixes.

Budgets for fire/police/military are too big. We do not need hundreds of military basis throughout the world. Whenever fire/police departments announce a job vacancy, there are hundreds of applicants for each position. Their benefits (overtime and pensions) could be slashed without any fear of not having enough people qualified to do the job.
Do you live in the USA?

"Sorry to tell you"...

(www.healthreform.gov)
the administration's plan lists eight goals that must be achieved to address the millions of Americans who do not have health insurance as well as rising health care costs.
1.) to reduce long-term growth of health care costs for businesses and government;
2.) to protect families from bankruptcy or debt because of health care costs;
3.) to guarantee choice of doctors and health plans;
4.) to invest in prevention and wellness;
5.) to improve patient safety and quality of care;
6.) to assure affordable, quality health coverage for all Americans;
7.) to maintain coverage when you change or lose your job;
8.) to end barriers to coverage for people with pre-existing medical conditions.

"In a competitive industry, overhead costs will be minimized". The current system is competitive. Why have costs skyrocketed at the same time profits are surging? Why are heath care levels declining? Why do parts of the US now have health stats on par with some third world countries?

One of the stated goals of the current reform push is to INCREASE competition by providing another option. So... thast a good thing, right?

My point on the fire & police is that you don't complain that they're a socialized nightmare. And an aside - So you actually want to slash the wages of the people who keep us safe?

kentm says

“Sorry to tell you”…
(www.healthreform.gov)
the administration’s plan lists eight goals that must be achieved to address the millions of Americans who do not have health insurance as well as rising health care costs.
1.) to reduce long-term growth of health care costs for businesses and government;
2.) to protect families from bankruptcy or debt because of health care costs;
3.) to guarantee choice of doctors and health plans;
4.) to invest in prevention and wellness;
5.) to improve patient safety and quality of care;
6.) to assure affordable, quality health coverage for all Americans;
7.) to maintain coverage when you change or lose your job;
8.) to end barriers to coverage for people with pre-existing medical conditions.
“In a competitive industry, overhead costs will be minimized”. The current system is competitive. Why have costs skyrocketed at the same time profits are surging? Why are heath care levels declining? Why do parts of the US now have health stats on par with some third world countries?
One of the stated goals of the current reform push is to INCREASE competition by providing another option. So… thast a good thing, right?
My point on the fire & police is that you don’t complain that they’re a socialized nightmare. And an aside - So you actually want to slash the wages of the people who keep us safe?

Increased health care costs are the proof that there is NOT enough competition. Cosmetic surgery costs, lasik eye surgeries have decreased in the past few years. That is what increased competition does.
In my industry, the software costs have been significantly reduced in the past decade. We have to bid competitively in order to win jobs.

I do not fall for the government propaganda. It is one thing to have nice goals - the current proposal will not result in achieving those goals. 1000 page bills that nobody can completely understand is not the way to go.
Obama does not want increased competition in the health care - he wants a government takeover. At least that is what he promised to his supporters long time ago.

Something is wrong when cities are going bankrupt because of the costs of fire/police and public employee benefits. As long as there are hundreds of applicants for those jobs - you will not persuade me that they are not overpaid for their service. There has to be a balance. They should be well paid - but not overpaid when compared to the rest of the society.

Kevin says: "Yeah, back when the Republicans were “the party of Lincoln”. Southern allegiance had a clear and marked shift when the democrats decided to support the civil rights movement. I’m sure that was about economics, though!"

Actually, Kevin, it's the other way around: The civil rights movement actually shifted towards the democrats (and marxism) and the left tossed their working white constituency under the bus. Consider that Martin Luther King, Jr. was a REVEREND using his CHURCH to spread leftist, marxist ideas but the left doesn't mind it when religion and politics mix in that case. When you generalize about working class whites as a bunch of ignorant racists being manipulated by "evil" people, consider what the so-called civil rights movement has done for black men for the past 40 years: Pushed them out of the home and into prisons via the welfare state and affirmative action that benefitted mostly middle class white women.

I sat on a Los Angeles jury 5 years ago when a Hispanic man was being railroaded with an assault and kidnapping charge. He had apparently struck back at his mother-in-law and ex-wife when they attacked him and took his daughter that he was scheduled to be with that day after they had capriciously refused to release her as per court order. Minority women on the jury said that a man had no right to attack a woman even in self-defense and the woman judge didn't dismiss them for cause. I was the only white on that jury that stood up and defended him (and it really annoyed the woman judge too, she dismissed me which was ok since I was an alternate.)

While we have to take Kevin's word for it that he heard the dreaded N word uttered by middle American whites, the seething racism directed towards working class whites by leftists is obvious to all, except, well, leftists themselves. That brings us to his other point: That the poor don't pay high taxes (well, Federal taxes at least). It's a cute generalization by the left that not only are non-white-hating, non-leftist whites all racist, ignorant, etc. but also poor. Actually, it's the opposite: Most leftists are non-white and have not graduated from college with a minority having Harvard degrees in law, economics and philosophy (and look at what good that has done society!) It's the right that has whites, granted, but also middle and working class of all races who build neighborhoods that, well, the white leftists secretly move to (and drive internal combustion engines) instead of riding the bus and living in more "diverse" crime-ridden inner cities... that brings us to:

Gays, homosexuals, feminists, policy wonk government workers, etc. There's an obvious problem with these core, elite white leftists: They tend to not have many children (much like Old Europe.) This is why they literally have to import voters from non-white countries in the hopes of keeping their dream alive to make America become a copy of... white Sweden! (And they don't see how that isn't going to work either...) Falling birthrates isn't necessarily a problem, really. As societies become more advanced there is less need for illiterate menial labor. The problem is that the socialist pension ponzi schemes along with voter demographics are failing so, like Hitler in his bunker or Heaven's gate cultists drinking special vodka martinis, they would rather go to their deaths (and take as much of society as they can with them) than admit they're wrong. Yet... even as they refuse to admit that there's a SLIGHT possibility that they might be mistaken, they find it unreasonable that others shouldn't change their minds after being told how stupid, racist, ignorant, poor, etc. they are. Hmmm, kind of like a religious bigot (but enough about "fascist" Jeremiah Wright!)

I love how one of the points of fascism was spreading fear. Yeah, leftists never do that! "EEEK! The sky is falling because of global warming, er climate change! Quick! We have to do something NOW otherwise in a century the temperature of the world will rise a half degree!" or even Patrick saying that not going along with his plan means we'll all be bankrupt and dead. Yeah, real cogent argument there.

Seriously: it's hard to get people to change their minds (look at all the messages they put on packs of cigarettes) but perhaps one of the few things that might work is the "scared straight" program. Show a bunch of kids the typical cigarette smoker (low class) and they might think twice before heading down that road. I have a number of leftist friends and relatives I grew up with and most are single and living in their mothers' attics. Yes, I am NOT making that up!

Just thought I'd comment on the new link that was added from the Huffington Post to the patrick.net home page this morning. They scream about how a Republican fighting against the current healthcare bill is a hypocrite because he used the services of Bethesda Naval Hospital, which they hold up as a shining example of government run medicine.

They seem to think that socialized healthcare will grant them access to a flagship research center / military hospital that is (surprise!) only open to high level politicians. Yea, and social security will grant us all the same pension benefits that congress has generously voted for themselves.

As the previous poster noted, all the whining, crying or laws in the world won't stop the inevitable collapse of such "I want it all and I want someone else to pay for it" systems, nor will they stop the demographic shifts that will tilt the USA ever more to the right.

"Increased healthcare costs are the proof that there is NOT enough competition" So more competition is good. Excellent, I agree with you! As a public option will be only one more player and the larger healthcare industry as it stands will be left alone this is a good thing, right? Done. Argument over. So, again - shut up about healthcare reform and let the gov do something good for people. Cosmetic surgeries are exactly the reference that has no bearing on this discussion as its an entirely elective luxury, as opposed to general healthcare decisions such as, say, your grandma's last kidney/life. I think its distasteful that you'd try to introduce that as a balance point against real healthcare issues.

"In my industry, the software costs have been significantly reduced in the past decade" There's no comparrison, why you even make that one here is beyond me. In software dev two factors are responsible for reduced costs: Outsourcing and a more mature, better trained, larger workforce. So... in what way would you apply this formula to healthcare? And here's a rebuttal of a similar nature: heathcare costs are up because apples are more red this year.

"I do not fall for the government propaganda." Indeed, you seem very selective about what propaganda you fall for.

"Something is wrong when cities are going bankrupt" Cities were not going bankrupt three years ago when the housing industry and investment industry appeared more solid. These issues cropping up now has little directly to do with fire/police dept costs, as opposed to the investments gone bad that were supporting them and the monies borrowed against the apparent certainties they represent. and anyway this issue is sidetracking from the original point - I made the reference to point out that your attacks on gov run services was selective, as you - aside from wanting the people who do these jobs to be screwed over as much as the average person with health insurance is - don't seem to have any problems benefiting from their services.

And anyway, you're arguing in circles, pulling in selective and irrelevant facts. This isn't that productive of a discussion, I don't want to continue with it. But to close out I'd just really encourage you to look into these issues that you seem to be reacting against from a selfish and entirely knee-jerk position, to form opinions based on the facts and a consideration of the larger picture and not the 'hot button talking points' that are fed via Fox etc. I think you're focusing on this issue as a proxy for other, deeper gov trangressions.

...and, to bring it back to patrick's original topic, I'll point out that using "hot button" issues and "talking points" are a key method of controlling and directing people who are inclined toward an authoritarian/fascist mindset.

PolishKnight says

Actually, Kevin, it’s the other way around: The civil rights movement actually shifted towards the democrats (and marxism) and the left tossed their working white constituency under the bus. Consider that Martin Luther King, Jr. was a REVEREND using his CHURCH to spread leftist, marxist ideas but the left doesn’t mind it when religion and politics mix in that case. When you generalize about working class whites as a bunch of ignorant racists being manipulated by “evil” people, consider what the so-called civil rights movement has done for black men for the past 40 years: Pushed them out of the home and into prisons via the welfare state and affirmative action that benefitted mostly middle class white women.

Why are you conflating religion and the civil rights movement, or even the feminist movement? Or welfare? These are completely distinct issues.

The whites stopped voting democrat because they supported civil rights, period. The party's basic policies didn't change one bit (social safety nets, protectionism, etc. -- the same exact platform that they had been riding on since FDR). Democrats didn't care about minorities before the civil rights movement because, well, the minorities were rarely able to vote in the first place.

PolishKnight says

While we have to take Kevin’s word for it that he heard the dreaded N word uttered by middle American whites, the seething racism directed towards working class whites by leftists is obvious to all, except, well, leftists themselves. That brings us to his other point: That the poor don’t pay high taxes (well, Federal taxes at least). It’s a cute generalization by the left that not only are non-white-hating, non-leftist whites all racist, ignorant, etc. but also poor. Actually, it’s the opposite: Most leftists are non-white and have not graduated from college with a minority having Harvard degrees in law, economics and philosophy (and look at what good that has done society!) It’s the right that has whites, granted, but also middle and working class of all races who build neighborhoods that, well, the white leftists secretly move to (and drive internal combustion engines) instead of riding the bus and living in more “diverse” crime-ridden inner cities… that brings us to:

This is a weird, incoherent rambling bit with a few distinct arguments. The original subject was that poor, working class whites turned against the left for no logical reason.

I never said that all racists are poor or that all poor people are racists -- I just said that poor, ignorant white people are generally racist, and that is God's honest truth -- and those people overwhelmingly support the "right" (well, Republicans anyway).

Poor, ignorant black people also tend to be racist, but they support the democrats because when they look at Republicans they see poor ignorant white people.

"Inner cities" -- have you been to a major city in the last 20 years? "Inner cities" are generally the most desirable in big cities, and poor people can't afford to live there and are instead forced out to the long exurb commutes.

The rest of your post makes even less sense. I love that you think Hitler was a leftist.