Although various pistonless rotary engine designs have attempted to compete with the conventional piston and crankshaft design, only

Some vehicle manufacturers are producing cars with devices that also measure the proximity to obstacles and other vehicles in front

[17] Increasing costs of oil-based fuels and tightening environmental law and restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions are propelling work

Comment by Rick #61

Sick Rick,

…and you really should see a professional about all that angst…

You mean where the government spies on its citizens without court oversight, and anyone who criticizes the President is branded a traitor?

God forbid!

Ah, so typical of the left – always rooting for defeat.

Comment by Rick — June 3, 2006 @ 7:53 pm ”

If you didn’t go to a place you don’t belong to kill people you have no right to kill, you wouldn’t have to tolerate my intolerable comments. If you feel you have the right to follow bush into his war based on lies and kill thousands of innocent Iraqis then I would like to think you are pinned down by some Iraqi gunmen while you are responding to these posts…..but not for long.

It’s interesting to note that many leftists hate the word liberal, and prefer “progressive”. That’s understandable though considering that there’s nothing liberal about leftism. But “Progressive” can mean anything; it can be progressing to a N.Korean or Cuban style state. For once, the left is being honest about themselves.

Buchanan says “since my discovery of the actual documents, many of which were only declassified and approved for public release on September 14 (four days before I got to the archives) virtually every major news organization in the U.S. has refused to investigate the Bush-Nazi story or even examine the documents. The list includes The New York Times, ABC News, Washington Post, Knight-Ridder Newspapers, Miami Herald, CNN, The Wall Street Journal and USA Today.”

Clif, just what is the motivation of the Bush hating MSM to refuse to “investigate the Bush-Nazi story or even examine the documents”? Buchanan’s report proves just one thing, that humans are capable of boundless imagination when they so desperately want to discredit their adversaries. Eventually, Dan Rathergate paid a hefty price when he became so incensed to smear Bush that he eventually succumbed to the temptation of using made-up trash like Buchanan’s. If you are naive enough to think the MSM wouldn’t jump all over Buchanan’s hallucinations if there were ANY validity to it, I’m afraid you are in worse shape than Ricky.

Comment by Rick — June 3, 2006 @ 7:58 pm

This coming from a deranged mental midget as he has proved here tonight…..

Hitler was a leftist?….Please get some help if not for you for the rest of us….

Ricky is your life that bad that you have to repost somebody elses delusions…can ya even have some of your own?

http://www.fff.org/comment/ed0200c.asp

Come on Ricky give credit for this slop where it is due…stop trying to convince us you are really this stupid

The Psychology of Modern Leftism
6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.

7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, “politically correct” types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by “leftism” will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)

8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn’t seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do here is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th centuries.

9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call “feelings of inferiority” and “oversocialization.” Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.

this is from the Unabomber Manifesto good company you keep there ricky

Yes he didn’t have the SA terrorising the populace…he didn’t burn the capital building to become a dictator….he didn’t intentionally rearm the country with the specific intent of pre-emptivly attacking other countries..(like GWB did march 2003)..

Comment by Rick — June 4, 2006 @ 3:24 am

One of the mainstreams of the repugs in DC now, they were the ones switching parties since 1948 with Strom…the pedophliia …..hide the daughter because it might look bad as a leader….

Were Hitler’s economic policies in the 1930s, however, significantly different from those of Roosevelt, his counterpart in the United States? On the contrary, there was a striking similarity between FDR’s New Deal and the methods that Hitler used to get Germany out of the Depression. Both FDR and Hitler instituted massive government spending campaigns, including public-works programs, to bring full employment to their countries. In the United States, for example, there was the Hoover Dam. In Germany, there was the national autobahn system.

The Nazis also imposed an extensive system of governmental control over German businesses. Was Roosevelt’s approach any different? Consider FDR’s pride and joy, his National Recovery Act, which was characterized by the infamous Blue Eagle. With the NRA, the U.S. government required entire industries to combine into government-protected cartels, and directed them to fix wages and prices in their respective industries. If a businessman refused to go along, he faced prosecution and punishment, not to mention protest demonstrations from Blue Eagle supporters. (The Supreme Court ultimately declared the NRA unconstitutional.)

Let’s also not forget the important paternalistic elements of Hitler’s national socialism: Social Security, national health care, public schooling, and unemployment compensation. Sound familiar?

Hitler himself showed keen insight into this matter. In his biography Adolf Hitler, John Toland writes, “Hitler had genuine admiration for the decisive manner in which the President had taken over the reins of government. ‘I have sympathy for Mr. Roosevelt,’ he told a correspondent for the New York Times two months later, ‘because he marches straight toward his objectives over Congress, lobbies and bureaucracy.’ Hitler went on to note that he was the sole leader in Europe who expressed ‘understanding of the methods and motives of President Roosevelt

A remaining issue is the nationalistic and imperialistic nature of Mussolini’s Fascism and Hitler’s Nazism. Was that prefigured in the American Progressives too? Yes. Unlike the American Leftists of today, the Progressives were in fact thoroughly patriotic, and Croly — arguably the leading light of Progressivism — was certainly explicitly nationalist. And one of Croly’s disciples was both vastly influential and a remarkably exact model for Mussolini’s imperialistic nationalism. The disciple concerned? Yet another American President: Theodore Roosevelt. To know anything of American history of the early 20th century is to know of TR’s strident American nationalism and militarism and his key role in the conquest of the Spanish empire in Cuba and the Philippines on quite shallow pretexts. TR did of course start out as a Republican but he later broke with the Republicans and formed — wait for it: The Progressive party (better known by its nickname: The Bull Moose Party). From very early-on, however, he was reform-minded and anti-big-business. And even whilst a Republican President he was notable for his worker-welfare and environmentalist initiatives — setting up national parks in particular. And in good Progressive fashion he stretched his Presidential authority to the limit in some of those initiatives. At the risk of stating the obvious, it must be noted that it is only in very recent times that the two major American political parties have become clearly delineated as Leftist and Rightist (how can we ever forget the conservative Southern Democrats?) and so the Progressives were an influence that could and did operate within both major parties of that time. And before his break with the Republicans it was the progressive wing of the Republican party that TR was identified with. But certainly in war-glorifying, militaristic, nationalistic, action-worshipping and big-government ideas TR very strongly anticipated Mussolini. And TR, of course, “entirely” agreed that as a race negroes are “altogether inferior to the whites.” There is a good article on Progressivism generally which shows how profoundly Leftist TR was here.

So 20th century Fascism was in fact an American invention, or more precisely an invention of the American Left. Like many American ideas to this day, however, it proved immensely popular in Europe and it was only in Europe that it was put fully into practice. As it does today, American conservatism kept the American Left in some check in the first half of the 20th century so it was only in Europe that their ideas could come into full bloom.