O’Reilly: Media Matters, Huff Post, Daily Kos ‘are fascists’ and anti-American.
O’Reilly: Media Matters, Huff Post, Daily Kos ‘are fascists’ and anti-American.
Last night on his Fox News program, Bill O’Reilly said that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) “doesn’t have anything to do” with progressive blogs because he can’t “control the kind of filth” they produce. “Talk about anti-Americanism,” O’Reilly said referring to blogs, adding: “Media Matters, Huffington Post, DailyKos, I mean, these are fascists. They’re dishonest people.” Watch it:
O’Reilly frequently compares the progressive blogosphere to “fascists.” We escaped O’Reilly’s wrath this time, but he has previously blasted ThinkProgress as “hired guns” who are “paid to smear people.”
Transcript:
O’REILLY: But Barack Obama - and I don’t believe this to be true, I could be wrong - he doesn’t have anything to do with what Media Matters or the DailyKos or any of these people do. I want everybody to be clear about this. None of the candidates can control the kind of filth and — talk about anti-Americanism, I mean these Media Matters –
INGRAHAM: — Yeah, it’s unbelievable. It’s unbelievable –
O’REILLY: — Huffington Post, DailyKos, I mean, these are fascists. They’re dishonest people.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
152 Responses to “O’Reilly: Media Matters, Huff Post, Daily Kos ‘are fascists’ and anti-American.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
He's taking a page from Doughboy Pantload.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:09 pmThis goober is a like a little kid with a chemistry set. He has no idea what fascist means.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:09 pmFASCISTS? NO WE'RE COMMUNISTS.....GEEZ...GET IT STRAIGHT WILL YA?
March 26th, 2008 at 1:11 pmPsssst, Bill, your hair's on fire.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:12 pmBill's a Falafist. I think that's worse than fascist.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:13 pm“paid to smear people.”
Lord, the irony!
March 26th, 2008 at 1:13 pmstewarjt Says: He has no idea what fascist means. March 26th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
That's ok -- 99% of his viewers/listeners don't know what fascist means either. But they're pretty sure it has nothing to do with loofas or homeless vets living under bridges...
March 26th, 2008 at 1:14 pmFascists? WTF, Bildo "the stalker" O'Liely is calling those sites Fascists? Does this pervert even know what Fascism is? If anything it's Bildo who is a fascist, sick little Nazi that he is. Classic projection.
How come he left us out of it? We want your hate too, Bildo Perv Boy.
Go Cheney Yourself Bildo "the stalker" O'Liely.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:14 pmrastaman Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
FASCISTS? NO WE’RE COMMUNISTS…..GEEZ…GET IT STRAIGHT WILL YA?
lol - the word "fascists" must be playing better on the scare-o-meter these days than "commies".
March 26th, 2008 at 1:17 pmWrong again, as usual, Bill. Someone get this doofus a dictionary.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:18 pmHas anyone ever asked O'Reilley on camera for a definition of "fascist". If anything, the pages he referenced seem to be more anarchist - like (in that they criticise big business), perhaps a little communist (in the sense that we like in a common community), but rarely fascist.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:20 pmThere's a big difference between hating people for who they ARE (as most "hate" groups do), and hating what people DO. There is just as big a difference between hatred and anger.
The Nazis hated Jews, non-whites, gays, and people with physical disabilities. The KKK has hated African-Americans and other non-whites, Jews, Catholics, gays, and anyone else who isn't a WASP that shares their views.
I don't hate anyone. I am, however, ENRAGED at many of the actions of this administration. Bill O'Reilly's attempt to paint me as a fascist because of my outrage is just poop-slinging. And pathetic.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:20 pmDarn. ThinkProgress didn't make the cut?!
It's one of these absurd insults, like saying a blog is "gay" or something. it just doesn't make any sense. You're so wizard. No, you're so wizard. Am not. Are too.
Here's the definition of "fascist". Now who might that describe better than the commentators on a left-wing blog?
Fascist - A political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.
http://mw4.m-w.com/dictionary/fascist
March 26th, 2008 at 1:22 pmsaid the kettle.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:24 pmDid Billo sit out the war on Easter this year?
March 26th, 2008 at 1:29 pmMedia Matters dishonest?
Now THAT'S some GOPer comedy!!!!!
But on a more important note, check out what's happening in Pakistan:
New Pakistani Leaders Tell Americans There’s ‘a New Sheriff in Town’
Please pray for peace.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:29 pmYeah, Bildo clearly doesn't know what "fascist" means.
Maybe he got his definition from the Paris Business Review?
March 26th, 2008 at 1:29 pmfas·cist n.
1. often Fascist An advocate or adherent of fascism.
2. A reactionary or dictatorial person.
Um Bill, you seem to have a bit of a problem here....
March 26th, 2008 at 1:31 pmProjection, Thy Name is Bill O'Reilly.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:32 pmFodder for his audience obviously. On the face of it, Bill's comment is inane. Fits the pattern.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:33 pmEven the worst most poorly researched encyclopedia in the world disagrees with O'Reilly
March 26th, 2008 at 1:34 pmhttp://www.conservapedia.com/Fascism
More "big lies" from one of the "big liars." Here's a test compare the blogs and O'Reilly or Bush or McCain on the 14 points of fascism!
March 26th, 2008 at 1:35 pmBildo is projecting. It is he, and his fascist right-wing brethern, who hate the freelance independent thinking nature of liberal blogs. Liberal progressives are running rampant on the internet precisley because authoritarian regressives, like O'Reilly cannot survive in such an atmosphere.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:35 pmPoor guy can't do comedy but he keeps trying. He needs to try out his act on the road and refine it a little. Not a real good schtick.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:37 pmO'Reilly is an ass.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:38 pmFilth? You mean the kind that is (or was) on the Fox site saying that blacks would still be eating bugs somewhere if the white man handn't taken them out of Africa and made them slaves? Or was that a different filth?
Just checking.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:38 pmBill O’Reilly said that Faux news can’t “control the kind of filth” they produce.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:39 pmThe Hitler Youth alum is projecting again.
We are commies, tree-hugging hippies, NOT fascists.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:39 pmWow, glamud, I'd have never thought to look at conservapedia for a definition of fascism.
Thanks for that link. I wonder how long before such lines as "Fascism is at the extreme right of the political spectrum." and "Fascists believe that all actions should be done for the good of the state (rather than classical liberalism, which focuses on the good of the individual)." will be edited out?
March 26th, 2008 at 1:40 pmZooey Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Did Billo sit out the war on Easter this year?
Add Karma Recommend (1) |
Ha, I wondered the same thing at one point!
Maybe it was because George W. came out on the WH balcony this year, instead of Laura.
And his escort, the Easter Bunny, was a rather matronly bunny, who bore a strange resemblance to Babs.
Perhaps Bill O'Reilly considered this the ultimate victory and figured he'd won the war.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:40 pmDildo O'Lielly is a typical GOP backing nitwit ; talking of others as being "Anti-American" (as if he's the model of what a "real American" is) , along with claims of others being "dishonest" , while there isn't an iota of honesty or fact ever tumbling out of his stupid mouth.
What a Grade-A jackass this bald-headed turd is...........
March 26th, 2008 at 1:42 pm30 - That describes the reichwing exactly, trollie.
And your point is ...?
March 26th, 2008 at 1:42 pmFascist hun.
What the GOP supports.
Illegally Spying on there Citizens
Bush and Hitler did it. The GOP supports it.
Torture, Kidnapping, Illegal Renditions
Bush and Hitler did it. The GOP supports it.
Illegal Invasion
Bush Check. Hitler Check. The GOP check.
Illegal War
Bush and Hitler got that covered. The GOP supports it.
Pass Laws that forgive lawbreakers. There lawbreakers that is.
Hitler did it. Bush did it for Scooby and wants to do it for the telecoms. Low and behold The GOP supports it.
Label and demonize a minority in there country.
The GOP have Mexicans Hitler had the Jews.
Participate in a Genocide.
Bush and Hitler are both in that club and the GOP supports it.
Can't make it in to the Fascist club with out mass death.
Run a campaign of fear requesting the Govt be given more control and the citizens less rights.
Bush Yup. Hitler Yup. GOP, Count them in.
Who you calling a stinkin fascist you stinkin fascist.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:43 pmLet's ask Andrea Mackris who the dishonest people are.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:44 pm"Columbia University Professor Robert O. Paxton Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion"
Excellent, the GOP all wrapped up.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:45 pmNevar
March 26th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Ick.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:46 pmL. Hussein Annie Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
30 - That describes the reichwing exactly, trollie.
And your point is …?
Ralph's not a trollie!
March 26th, 2008 at 1:47 pmSo anyway I'd be rubbing your big boobs and getting your nipples really hard, kinda kissing your neck from behind... then I would take the other hand with the falafel thing and put it on your [****] but you'd have to do it really light, just kind of a tease business...</em>
So yeah, O'Reilly said what?
March 26th, 2008 at 1:47 pmZooey Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Ralph’s not a trollie!
Thanks, Zooey. I'm pretty sure Annie knows that. Either she totally misread my post, or she was referring to a different comment.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:49 pmBill, if they are fascists, have them on your show. Expose them for what they are. Confront them with their words.
But that's not the way you do it, is it? Too many years into the Limbaugh era, it's just enough to call people names, make unsupported assertions. You have the microphone, after all. That makes you immune. You don't have to support your accusations! Your immunity will be supported by all the other people given microphones!
I just have one question for you:
WHERE'S MY ICED TEA, MF'ER?
March 26th, 2008 at 1:49 pmBildo hates us for our Freedoms
March 26th, 2008 at 1:50 pmMost traditional media sources are concerned now about the rise of blogs. Television is not what it used to be to these networks,because they lost their control on peoples' minds by losing viewers to computers.
These days people can access easily and get the story faster and more accurate than what they used to get from television networks by using their computers.
Blogs allow the average guy to express his opinion that he shares with others ,something the average guy has been denied by most television nightly shows like O'Reilly's show.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:52 pmOther shows on other networks accepted these facts and tried to adjust, O'Reilly instead resorted to slandering and name calling.
Fascists? Us? Um, no.
"Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion."
(from "The Anatomy of Fascism" by Robert O. Paxton, 2005.)
Now, just who are the fascists again? Methinks that the definition fits O'Reilly pretty well.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:52 pm38 - caredman1's foolish comment (the quote from that alleged Columbia professor) was originally at #30. Got yanked.
Sorry, Ralph! Annie knows you're so not a trollie. ;o)
March 26th, 2008 at 1:54 pmL. Hussein Annie Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
38 - caredman1’s foolish comment (the quote from that alleged Columbia professor) was originally at #30. Got yanked.
Ahh, that makes sense.
For a moment there, I thought caredtroll had actually contributed something useful to the discussion.
I guess I didn't figure that even a troll could be that oblivious.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:05 pmO'rally is clearly unfamiliar w/ the concept of "Irony"...
March 26th, 2008 at 2:13 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Yeah, Bildo clearly doesn’t know what “fascist” means.
Maybe he got his definition from the Paris Business Review?
____________
Catch of the Day™ to ya, Ralph... that's hysterical. I wonder... has Bildo caught on... yet??? Prolly not... back to you, Ralph.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:16 pmOreilly said it...
March 26th, 2008 at 2:24 pmso it must be true.
Oh darn, I hope he starts to call "comedianforpresident.com" a smear merchant site also soon.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:25 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Yeah, Bildo clearly doesn’t know what “fascist” means.
Exactly. He just uses that term because it makes him sound and look tough. He's a pussy. Here's a recent example of what fascism looks like in America.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:27 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JMqoyNaudc
O'Reilly has fellow conservative Laura Ingram as a guest on his show. Where is the opposing viewpoint on Fox's "fair and balanced" program? Apparently it is much easier to rant than it is to intelligently discuss an issue.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:35 pmO'Racist is yet another reich-winger that fails to understand the definition of "fascism".
March 26th, 2008 at 2:36 pmThe Demonization Channel.
First everyones a communist, then they are pagans, then they are fascists, then they are un-American..rinse and repeat.
Get a new tactic BORe your boring.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:37 pmBut he works for a tabloid. How credible is he?
March 26th, 2008 at 2:37 pmHopefully here's the song O'Rielly might be singing soon!
March 26th, 2008 at 2:39 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWBf6ZjX12g
Dr. Demento's "Your coming to take me away"
March 26th, 2008 at 2:40 pmFascism wouldn't really be the slur that it is if it weren't for Hitler.
Here's from wikipedia:
To me, the word is so vague, it doesn't have much meaning (except for the obvious slur; tie in to Nazis)
I wish Bill O'Reilly and anyone who else who wants to overuse the mostly meaningless word, would try a little harder to find more significant labels. It's so vague, you could apply it to almost anyone.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:43 pmbackup Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
I wish Bill O’Reilly and anyone who else who wants to overuse the mostly meaningless word, would try a little harder to find more significant labels. It’s so vague, you could apply it to almost anyone.
_____________________________________
The word "fascist" is joining a whole collection of terms whose literal meanings are becoming lost to the ages. Instead, they are coming to mean "unspecified insult meaning this is a really, really, really bad person."
When I was a kid, the word that fell in this category the most was "Communist" (or more often, "Commie" or "Pinko"). Nowadays, meaningless words and phrases carrying negative overtones include "liberal", "socialist", and "fascist". The terms "racist" and "anti-semitic" are quickly joining the pack, as they are rapidly being applied like a shotgun blast to everybody and everything.
On the flip side, meaningless phrases can be used to indicate vague positive things, too. Example: "family values"
March 26th, 2008 at 2:59 pmYou rightwingers should proudly embrace your fascism. That's what we've been trying to tell you. All your beliefs are fascist.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:04 pmLet's settle the question once and for all. Knuckleheads like Bill O'Reilly and Jonah Goldberg do not get to define fascism. The man who invented fascism gets to define it. Let's see how the father of fascism defined his own ideology.
Benito Mussolini, 1932
In 1932 Mussolini wrote (with the help of Giovanni Gentile) and entry for the Italian Encyclopedia on the definition of fascism.
...Fascism [is] the complete opposite of Marxian Socialism...
And above all Fascism denies that class-war can be the preponderant force in the transformation of society....
After Socialism, Fascism combats the whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it...
Given that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism, of Liberalism, and of Democracy, it does not necessarily follow that the twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy: political doctrines pass, but humanity remains, and it may rather be expected that this will be a century of authority...a century of Fascism.
...For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence. Peoples which are rising, or rising again after a period of decadence, are always imperialist...
March 26th, 2008 at 3:05 pmSometime I would like to hear someone ask Billo just exactly what a fascist is. I'm betting he won't be able to give an accurate answer. He uses the term fascist like I would use the term a$$hole.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:08 pmLOL! Oh... BillO. Still trying to pay off his 10 million dollar sexual harrassment from the same crapola spin of attack. Business must be slow of reporting real news.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:10 pmHey Bill, Fascism is a RIGHT WING political philosophy. Just stick to what you know something about, like sexual harassment.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:13 pm38 - caredman1’s foolish comment (the quote from that alleged Columbia professor) was originally at #30. Got yanked.
Sorry, Ralph! Annie knows you’re so not a trollie. ;o)
Why do they keep yanking it's posts and not ban it from posting?
March 26th, 2008 at 3:15 pm#60-Misshusseinmolly
You may be interested in a current book which echoes the main thrust of what you are saying, entitled The Age of Unamerican Reason by Susan Jacoby. Ms. Jacoby discusses how so many Americans today take the easy way out by not engaging in critical thinking and, in your example, may use the word fascist [ or a comparable word] to describe a person which is totally inaccurate regarding what that particular person is all about. As Ms. Jacoby relates in her book, things such as television, religion, video games, so-called hip jargon, etc., all contribute to the dumbing down of today's American culture.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:20 pmmissmolly. I agree absolutely.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:26 pmWhat's scary is many of these lunatics like O'Reilly truly believe the drivel they spew.
I'm not sure which is worse, these true believers, or the ones only in it for the money.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:33 pmCrap. No mention of TP or the Zoo. Damn.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:36 pmIs O'Biley's mom dead? If not, she must be so damned embarassed...
March 26th, 2008 at 3:38 pmBill O'reilly hates free speech and the constitution. He is an alarmist carnival man selling snake oil to the retards that bother to watch this America hater spew his filth.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:47 pmOrally is a disgrace to his profession. If I were a judge, I'd sentence him to a remedial English class.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:48 pmDon't hate in Bill, he's still recovering from the shock when he saw that black people can go to a restaurant and act like civilized human beings.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:52 pmbackup Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
To me, the word is so vague, it doesn’t have much meaning (except for the obvious slur; tie in to Nazis)
I wish Bill O’Reilly and anyone who else who wants to overuse the mostly meaningless word, would try a little harder to find more significant labels. It’s so vague, you could apply it to almost anyone.
Fascism has a fairly precise meaning. It only seems vague because O'Lielly, the Doughy Pantload, et. al. refuse to recognize its academic definition and instead use it carelessly, simply because it sounds "bad".
If one pays attention to the formal definition of "fascism" then the absurdity of labeling islamic extremists as "fascists" becomes clear, as does the absurdity of labeling liberals as fascists.
Of course, this depends on one who cares about words and what they mean. O'Lielly and his ilk only care about words and how they can be used as weapons.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:55 pmWhat a freekin moron
March 26th, 2008 at 4:03 pmYawn.
Like what Falafel man says means anything.
Yawn again.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:04 pmThe Age of Unamerican Reason. This sounds pertinent for Americans today. I'll keep an eye out for it.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:12 pmralph. How's it going?
If we use this definition of fascism:
you could make arguments that (depending on the issues) each political party strays towards fascism.
In regards to the national defense, republican's might be considered more fascist.
In regards to taxation and social programs, democrats might be considered more fascist.
Republican's fight for the rights of individual's to own guns (at the expense of state control).
Democrat's fight for women's individual reproductive rights (at the expense of the state's control).
Like many issues, I'm not sure the 'fascist' label can be applied that definitively. I also stand by my contention that the word wouldn't be so inciteful, if it weren't for it's champions of the 1930's.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:22 pmAnother couple of examples:
Democrats champion environmentalism (climate change policy) at the expense of individual liberty.
Republican's want to empower the state to limit the liberty of homosexuals with a constitutional ammendment banning gay marriage.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:26 pmbackup, if we choose the definition that best suits our argument, a case can be made that Bush and Nixon are/were liberal and JFK was conservative. Does that categorization make sense? No, but it can be advanced, if the terms are manipulated with proper precision.
The definition you chose is so simplistic that it ceases to be useful, which I guess serves your purpose. It ignores the widely accepted features of fascism that provide a useful working sense of the term and the philosophy it describes. Thus your contention that "fascism" is so vague a term as to be essentially meaningless is perfectly understandable only if you define it as you have done above.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:34 pmI think we should all send dictionary print outs of the definition of "fascism" to Bill-O.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:39 pmbackup is making this much more complicated than it really is.
Socialism and fascism are mutually exclusive.
Socialism holds that the state exists only to serve and protect the people.
Fascism holds that people exist only to serve and protect the state.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:40 pmDo fascist progressive bloggers make the trains run on time?
March 26th, 2008 at 4:42 pmI am willing to consider any other generally accepted definitions of fascism.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:45 pmKennedy was a good president, but consider his words against this (as an example of the grayness of this idea):
March 26th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
backup Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
I am willing to consider any other generally accepted definitions of fascism.
Several have been offered or linked to in this thread alone.
Here's one that fletc3her linked to:
a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
Doc Rock offered the 14 points of Fascism.
galmud provided my favorite link, to conservapedia
Give some of those resources a shot and then see if the term "fascism" is still so vague as to be meaningless.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:52 pmYou are twisting Kennedy's words. He did not mean for the people to exist only to serve the state. He was asking Americans to pull together to make a better country for all of us.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:54 pmbackup Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Kennedy was a good president, but consider his words against this (as an example of the grayness of this idea):
Fascism holds that people exist only to serve and protect the state.
Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.
jesus h tapdancing christ -- this is exactly my point. You take a purposely vague and indistinct definition and apply it to a noble statesmanlike calling, and you draw a clearly absurd implication that Kennedy was a fascist. The problem with your argument is still the same: you choose to define the term "fascism" in as broad and flabby a way possible.
If you only take the definition as seriously as that, then you have no business trying to make a serious point.
Fascism is a well-defined political philosophy, with several key features that distinguish it from other political philosophies.
It's not simply a call to sacrifice one's own comfort for the good of the State.
You show a very limited ability to reason.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:59 pmralph. here's from your link:
I am only suggesting that, at times, both parties suffer cronyism, corruption, rigged elections and a general disdain for (albeit, different) human rights.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:06 pmIt's absurd to suggest that "fascism" is fuzzy. Here is the Oxford English Dictionary, which is the authoritative English language source.
Fascist: One of a body of Italian nationalists, which was organized in 1919 to oppose communism in Italy, and, as the partito nazionale fascista, under the leadership of Benito Mussolini (1883-1945), controlled that country from 1922 to 1943; also transf. applied to the members of similar organizations in other countries. Also, a person having Fascist sympathies or convictions; (loosely) a person of right-wing authoritarian views. Hence as adj., of, pertaining to, or characteristic of Fascism or Fascists.
(emphasis added). Notice: "right-wing authoritarian".
March 26th, 2008 at 5:11 pmbackup Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
ralph. here’s from your link:
The fourteen characteristics of fascism also include rampant cronyism and corruption, as well as rigged elections and a general disdain for human rights
I am only suggesting that, at times, both parties suffer cronyism, corruption, rigged elections and a general disdain for (albeit, different) human rights.
You need to take a course in logic. Chevrolets and Fords both have wheels, engines and seats. That does not make a Ford a Chevrolet. And yes, both are cars, just as both liberal and conservative are both ideologies.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:13 pmralph. I think Kennedy was a good guy/ not a fascist. My point is that fascism is only a ideology (like communism, socialism, capitalism, etc). The term has become devisive due to its association with Hitler and Mussolini.
I suggest that no party is completely socialist or capitalist or communist; no one party is completely fascist. More likely a particular position might seem fascist.
They are ideas on a political spectrum. More or less appropriate (and dynamic) based on a particular situation or current circumstance.
I don't think the term is being used correctly, in most cases.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:15 pmI don't think O'Reilly is using it correctly.
59. backup,
Ooooh. So if fascism is characterized by patriotism, that means that the DailyKos is the patriotic blog. And as O'Reilley isn't the fascist, then O'Reilley isn't the patriotic one.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:16 pmbackup Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
ralph. here’s from your link:
The fourteen characteristics of fascism also include rampant cronyism and corruption, as well as rigged elections and a general disdain for human rights
I am only suggesting that, at times, both parties suffer cronyism, corruption, rigged elections and a general disdain for (albeit, different) human rights.
So what? How does that observation add anything to the question? How does pulling individual features, holding them up to the light and saying "oh, both parties do this" help form a coherent view of the question?
You seem intent on obscuring the meaning of the term "fascism" by focusing on isolated features of it and dismissing them because they correspond to parts of human nature.
That's a pretty effective strategy for obscuring. For understanding, not so much.
I'm beginning to think that obscuring is what you're after.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:17 pmbackup Says:
I suggest that no party is completely socialist or capitalist or communist; no one party is completely fascist. More likely a particular position might seem fascist.
Yep. Your purpose is obscuring. You seek a dilution of meaning.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:18 pmAnother point to consider is the use of the term "anti-American" (or "unamerican") as an insult to hurl at anyone with a dissenting viewpoint.
Exercise of free speech and expression of one's opinions is one of the most American things there is -- whether that expression is coming from a liberal, a conservative, a progressive, a reactionary, a Democrat, or a Republican. Or any other American.
It's just yet another term in O'Reilly's arsenal that, translated, means "you don't agree with me, so therefore you're an a$$hole." I don't see it making anybody look anti-American as I see it making O'Reilly look like an arrogant jerk.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:21 pmI guess if my party were the ones throwing around a term like "fascist" as a means of demonizing others, all the while displaying rampant fascistic tendencies and got called on it, I'd probably try to obscure the meaning of the term, too.
In that situation, pretending that it has no real meaning is probably the best strategy (as long as you don't care about words and what they mean).
March 26th, 2008 at 5:22 pmralph. I don't think my purpose is to obsure anything. (I don't understand the preoccupation). I could characterize some Bush policies as somewhat fascist. I could characterize some progressive positions as somewhat fascist. I'm not sure that if you compare definitions, that you could make the argument that fascism is a worse form of government than communism, socialism, capitalism, etc.
Let's make it simple: People often throw around the label 'fascist'. Most of the time, it's not the appropriate label.
I promise, no secret agenda. If you disagree, I understand.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:30 pmbackup - March 26th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
The term has become devisive due to its association with Hitler and Mussolini.
Uh... could it be that the term is associated with Mussolini because he coined the term fascism?
Could it be because he used that term in reference to the political movement he led, back in the 1920s?
Ya think that might have something to do with it? No?
March 26th, 2008 at 5:33 pmmissmolly.
Sometimes, I agree with every word of your posts. This is one of those post. Very nice.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:33 pmGregor. I may be confused, because when I look up definitions of facsism, I just see another ideology.
I wouldn't want a dictator, but their have been communist dictators, not just fascist ones. Nationalism can be a good thing, but it can also be perverted. Some initiatives scream out for a unified, centrally directed effort. Sometimes, individuals acting in their own self interest produce the best results.
Is it possible that the ideologies aren't inherently good or bad, but more the execution of the ideology (or its appropriateness to a given situation)that is either good or bad?
March 26th, 2008 at 5:41 pmDENIS KUCINICH DENNIS KUCINICH ........THIS COUNTY IS CORRUPT ..THE ZIONIST RUN THINGS NOT THE PEOPLE ...THE ZIONIST G.E. WOULDNTY LET DENNIS KUCINICH DEBATE IN NEVEADA ....THE JEWS ARE RUNNING THIS COUNTRY ....ASK MEL GIBSON...AND MEL GIBSON JUST WARNED SPEARS WHAT THE HOLLYWOOD ZIONISTS ARE DOING TO HER USING HER DRUGGING HER TO GET THE PEOPLES MIND OFF THIS ILLEGAL WAR OF BUSH AND CHENEY! DENNIS KUCINICH ...KUCINICH JUST LOOK AT YOUTUBE AND SEE WHAT THEY DID TO HIM ...THIS COUNTRY IS NAZI AND KILLING 300 AMERICANS EACH AND EVERYDAY IN THIS SO CALLED WONDERFUL COUNTRY ...IF I HAD THE M0NEY I WOULD MOVE OUT OF THIS ZIONIST COUNTRY ...WE THE PEOPLE ARE SHIT IN THIS COUNTRY ...ALL OF US JUST LET THE ZIONIST PICK THE CANDIDATES ...NOT ONE OF YOU OR ME PICKED JACK SHIT ..THIS COUNTRY HAS WENT TO SHIT WITH BUSH AND DICK ...THE LOW INTEREST LOANS THE BIG TAX BREAKS FOR BUYING BIG SUV'S GO AND LOOK AT GENERAL MOTORS ...THE WONDERFUL TAX BREAKS FOR BUYING A BIG TANK OF A SUV ...$25,000 INCENTIVE ...JUST LIKE THE LOW INTEREST RATES AND ZERO DOWN WHAT A SCAM AND THEY GOT AMERICANS AGAIN ...WITH THE WAR AND GAS AND MILLIONS DEAD AND 4,000 TROOPS DEAD FOR BUSH AND OIL ...NOTHING TO DO WITH OSAMA BIN LADEN ...ABOSOLUTLY NOTHING ...THATS WHAT THIS GOV IS WORTHLESS AND SO ARE EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN WHO DIES FOR NOTHING 300 AMERICANS DIED TODAY FOR NOT HAVING HEALTH CARE AND 300 TOMORROW THATS 16,000 A YEAR THAT WE KILL ...A 10 YEAR OLD BOY ...MOTHER ON WELFARE ...TOOK HIM TO DCS AND THEY TOLD HER WE DONT PAY FOR DENTAL....HE DIED ...A 10 YEAR OLD LITTLE BOY FROM A ROTTEN TOOTH ...ALL THOSE DCS PEOPLE NEED PRISON TIME ...THEY COULDNT COME UP IN A OFFICE POOL TO CHIP IN TO PAY FOR THIS LITTLE BOYS TOOTH ? WE SUCK AS A COUNTRY SUCK THE BIG ONE ...WE SUCK WE SUCK WE SUCK !REMEMBER DENNIS KUCINICH AND THE HR676 HE WAS TRYING TO GET ALL AMERICANS HEALTH CARE LOOK IT UP HR676 ....HEALTH CARE FOR ALL NOT JUST A FEW CHOOSEN ....CONYERS / KUCINCH BILL HR676 .....LOOK IT UP AND EAT SHIT AMERICA !
March 26th, 2008 at 5:43 pmbackup Says:
Let’s make it simple: People often throw around the label ‘fascist’. Most of the time, it’s not the appropriate label.
Yeah, that's a little TOO simple. Which is my whole point.
You simplify a complex concept, you destroy it, render it meaningless -- the very phenomenon of which you were complaining.
Oh, and the only way you could seriously characterize "some progressive positions as fascist" is if you embraced simplistic understandings of both the positions and "fascism". This doesn't seem to be a problem for you.
Your "most of the time" dismissal does nothing to determine what times it IS appropriate, something you seem uninterested in.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:46 pmI've heard some call backup "Captain". He can't be Cap'n Mantastic, can he? I got more sense from the Cap'n than I'm getting from this commenter.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:47 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
I’ve heard some call backup “Captain”. He can’t be Cap’n Mantastic, can he? I got more sense from the Cap’n than I’m getting from this commenter.
___________________________________
Yes, "backup" and "CaptainMantastic" are one and the same person. He's been pretty open about that.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:50 pmmisshusseinmolly Says:
Yes, “backup” and “CaptainMantastic” are one and the same person. He’s been pretty open about that.
What happened to him? He used to be a little sharper than this.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:53 pmbackup Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Gregor. I may be confused, because when I look up definitions of facsism, I just see another ideology.
I wouldn’t want a dictator, but their have been communist dictators, not just fascist ones. Nationalism can be a good thing, but it can also be perverted. Some initiatives scream out for a unified, centrally directed effort. Sometimes, individuals acting in their own self interest produce the best results.
Is it possible that the ideologies aren’t inherently good or bad, but more the execution of the ideology (or its appropriateness to a given situation)that is either good or bad?
Fascism is, by definition, totalitarian. There is nothing inherently good, only inherently bad, to totalitarianism.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:00 pmralph. Yes, it's CaptainMantastic. I'm thinking about going with captain backup. Sorry for any confusion, it wasn't my intention.
The point I was trying to make isn't that important. Let's water it down to this. Bill O'Reilly is using the wrong label when he describes (what he sees) as hate speech as fascist behavior. And it is my opinion that the term is overused, and often incorrectly used, as an insult. I respect your opinion, if you disagree.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:01 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
misshusseinmolly Says:
Yes, “backup” and “CaptainMantastic” are one and the same person. He’s been pretty open about that.
What happened to him? He used to be a little sharper than this.
Really? This seems about right to me: obfuscatory and sophomoric. "Yeah, but what if the spiders had wheels? What then?"
March 26th, 2008 at 6:02 pmbackup - March 26th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Gregor. I may be confused, because when I look up definitions of facsism, I just see another ideology.
Yes, you are confused. Fascism is not "just" another ideology. It has very well defined characteristics, and no amount of pussyfooting around it will ever change that fact.
Here, from the wikipedia:
Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers the individual subordinate to the interests of the state, party or society as a whole. Fascists seek to forge a type of national unity, usually based on (but not limited to) ethnic, cultural, racial, and/or religious attributes.
[...]
The term fascismo was coined by the Italian Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini and Hegelian philosopher Giovanni Gentile.
Fascism
Stop being so obtuse about it already.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:03 pmHere is more on the origins of the word fascism or you, backup:
As dictator of Italy, Mussolini's foremost priority was the subjugation of the minds of the Italian people and the use of propaganda to do so [...] Press, radio, education, films — all were carefully supervised to create the illusion that fascism was the doctrine of the twentieth century, replacing liberalism and democracy.
The principles of this doctrine were laid down in the article on fascism, written by Giovanni Gentile and signed by Mussolini that appeared in 1932 in the Enciclopedia Italiana.
Benito Mussolini
It took me about 5 mins to find this information on the web. Your ignorance on the origins of the term, and its actual meaning, is self-imposed.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:12 pmOkay, I understand I'm not communicating this well. I am a huge fan of liberty.
Imagine talking to a conservative friend that tries to convince you the ideology of communism is evil.
Okay, you say that Stalin and his application was evil, but what about Castro's.
Your friend says 'No'. It's communism, it's inherently and absolutely evil.
Is the ideology inherently evil, or the application?
I quit. Got to go. See ya.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:14 pmSee? Sophomoric.
Ideologies aren't "evil" but totalitarian states of any kind have evil results -- except, of course, if you happen to be part of the power structure. Then they're just dandy. For you.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:21 pmCaptain, you are trying to compare nationalism with patriotism.
You can be a patriot and believe that your country is wrong about something.....a nationalist(facism) is not allowed that freedom.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:21 pmBackup, I am not sure it's worth my time to explain anything to you, given that you were trying to redefine the word fascism even though its meaning and origin are well documented. Not to mention readily available.
It seems facts are optional to you.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:27 pmgummitch Says:
Really? This seems about right to me: obfuscatory and sophomoric.
(sigh) I guess you're right, gum. I have had some enjoyable discussions with the Cap'n in the past, but I guess I was glossing over this behavior of his. You pretty well summed up this performance of the Cap'n with those two words.
It pains me to admit this.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:29 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
gummitch Says:
Really? This seems about right to me: obfuscatory and sophomoric.
(sigh) I guess you’re right, gum. I have had some enjoyable discussions with the Cap’n in the past, but I guess I was glossing over this behavior of his. You pretty well summed up this performance of the Cap’n with those two words.
It pains me to admit this.
It was fun to do that at 2 a.m., when I was 19 and the answers never really mattered. I'm invested a lot more heavily in reality these days.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:33 pmgummitch Says:
It was fun to do that at 2 a.m., when I was 19 and the answers never really mattered. I’m invested a lot more heavily in reality these days.
Understood.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:45 pmHey, back again.
ralph. sorry to waste you time.
Gregor. Hey, you found a different definition than I did.
Here's the one I posted earlier:
March 26th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers the individual subordinate to the interests of the state, party or society as a whole.
I'll listen to someone that promotes climate change policy. Maybe thats the best idea. But, look at the definition. If you limit individual carbon emissions aren't you subordinating the interest of the individual to the interests of the state (or the globe, for that matter).
March 26th, 2008 at 7:31 pmand this:
I'll have to find it, but I believe Obama has said in speeches - something to the effect, that we are not african americans, italian americans, asian americans , etc; but americans. And isn't he trying to use our cultural identity as americans to unite us to change the atmoshpere of partisanship?
March 26th, 2008 at 7:36 pmCapn' you really, really disappoint me.
You really don't see the difference between an ideology that elevates all of those principles you listed (many of which, like patriotism, populism, and collectivism have strong positive attributes) at the expense of principles like individuality, education and artistic freedom, and an individual expression of one of those component principles in positive form?
I really thought you were smarter than this. Either you're playing around, which is uncool, or you're really not very bright, which is sad.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:45 pmand lastly this:
Some of these elements aren't that divisive:
patriotism? nationalism? populism? collectivism?
Again, I suggest that these elements and the ideology of fascism in general (which, I admit has been throughly demonized due to the association with the central powers of wwii) aren't inherently wrong or right.
It is the application of the ideologies and/or their appropriateness for a given situation. (Just as Castro's communism may not be evil, although Stalin's was).
I'm no cheerleader for fascism, I think the government should have less control. My point was that the word is often misused (case in point, Bill O'Reilly) and the ideology wouldn't have the serious negative connotations without the Hitler/Mussolini association, that is the real basis for it's abuse, and misuse, as a slur.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:47 pmObviously, Kilo skipped all of the earlier posts in which the term "fascist" and its definition were discussed.
It seems to think that an appropriate use of "fascist" renders the user ineligible to comment on an inappropriate use. Even more bizarre, it seems to think this conclusion is self-evident.
Weird.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:49 pmralph. I respect you. Don't take it the wrong way, but I don't care if you're disappointed in me. (I doubt you would care if I was disappointed in you).
I'm not saying my idea is right. I'm throwing it out there. Let's have a discussion. If you make a strong case, it will change my mind and I'll be better off for it.
Sometimes, I think if we limit ourselves to only talking about what everyone already believes anyway, we might be missing an opportunity expand our ideas.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:53 pmCaptain, we can agree that certain elements of fascism have value-neutral character, and can be good or bad.
But when you put all of the elements together, as fascism does (indeed, this is the defining character of fascism -- that it puts all of these elements together) then you have an ideology with definite characteristics, and those characteristics tend toward violent control of populations by militantly nationalistic dictators.
I have a difficult time envisioning a benevolent fascist regime. You see, I value individuality, education, freedom of expression and the arts, among other principles that fascists see as a danger to the state, and so I have no problem labeling that ideology as evil.
Please describe a benevolent fascist regime.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:57 pmKilo - March 26th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Once again, your posts make sense only to you.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:07 pmbackup - March 26th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
Some of these elements aren’t that divisive
Unfortunately for you, in a totalitarian state you don't get to choose what "non divisive" elements will apply to you, your family, or friends.
You get the whole package, which includes totalitarianism, militarism, and autocracy, among other things.
For someone who claims not to be a cheerleader for fascism, you certainly are bent on finding the gold nugget in the pile of cow dung. Good luck finding it.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:25 pmConservatives have been using this tactic for years, and it's been quite effective.
You simply accuse your opponent of exactly what you are already doing. The trick is that you have to accuse first.
Then when the opponent accuses you, it appears that they are just mimicking you, instead of making a very real accusation.
The liberals are not very good at playing this game. The same tricks work against them time and again, and they just never learn.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:45 pmralph.
I can't do it. The only fascist regimes I can think of are Hitler's and Mussolini's. Not a good track record.
It may not be ground breaking for you, but I believe that I am moving away from the idea that there is one and only one best ideology for every situation we have (as a nation or global community).
I am, more and more, considering; instead of only either pure capitalism, or pure communism, or pure socialism; as the world's curealls; maybe a dynamic blend of mechanisms, dependant on local, national, and global conditions or across individual issues.
For me, I'm thinking less that one party, or one ideology deserves a total acceptance or patronage.
I also cannot think of a situation that might be best handled by fascism (even if you consider the tenants separate from the association of Hitler and Mussolini).
But, it's an ideology. Would it ever be an appropriate system for a state. Probably not. Are there portions that offer a contribution to some issue or extreme situation. I don't know.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:49 pmBackup at #79
My apologies. The name of that book that I cited is actually titled [ as I view it in front of me ] The Age of American Unreason by Susan Jacoby. In it, Ms, Jacoby examines why the United States, unlike its European counterparts, has drifted away from the principles of the Enlightenmment and has instead embraced the dogma of fundamentalist religion, the crutch of television, the lack of a stellar educational system, and junk science in place of free thinking and rational thought.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:52 pmErrol. Sounds good. I hope to find it at the library. Otherwise, I'll have to pay for it. :(
I'm onboard with the idea of fundamentalist religion as an impediment to Enlightenment.
March 26th, 2008 at 9:14 pmBackup
Fundamentalist religion, as Ms Jacoby correctly points out in her book, believes that preconceived notions such as the Earth being created 6,000 years ago should be taught in high schools over the precepts of what is understood by free thinkers and science and evolution. Is this what you are seriously in favor of?
March 26th, 2008 at 9:22 pmdoes the fact that the media, this administration, our congressman (to some extent) the crushing corporations, being against us, that it is time to step up and shut them down completely?? Time to rebuild??
March 26th, 2008 at 9:43 pmbackup Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
ralph.
Please describe a benevolent fascist regime.
I can’t do it. The only fascist regimes I can think of are Hitler’s and Mussolini’s. Not a good track record.
Franco in Spain, was one of the first classical fascists. South America has for most of the lasts century had several. Both Mussolini and Franco could in my humble opinion be better examples of pure fascism than Hitler, who was more the dictator than idealogist.
I think that O'Reilly in his patented slovenly way of speaking, really means to say that the blogs he named use fascist tactics, not that they are literally fascists by the several definitions above. Far be it from me to put words in his mouth, but there is a difference.
March 26th, 2008 at 9:53 pmCap'n, I didn't ask you to name a benevolent fascist regime. I asked you to describe one. As in, what would one look like.
Your crux-of-the-matter description of a cafeteria of ideologies is fine, and in fact in my opinion is the only really workable approach to governance among real human beings.
But it doesn't explain your earlier befuddlement at the "vagueness" of the term "fascism", when the term actually has fairly precise definitions. You dismissed O'Reilly's false use of the term, yes, but you also all but dismissed any other possible use of it as well. That's what I had a problem with.
March 26th, 2008 at 9:56 pmHighPlainsJoker Says:
I think that O’Reilly in his patented slovenly way of speaking, really means to say that the blogs he named use fascist tactics, not that they are literally fascists by the several definitions above. Far be it from me to put words in his mouth, but there is a difference.
Thanks for the input, but could explain what "fascist tactics" one mighy accurately observe on the blogs O'Reilly is whining about?
I'm willing to consider your point, but I don't see the fascism in the blogs.
March 26th, 2008 at 9:59 pmSouthern Man Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
The Zoo?
Yes?
March 26th, 2008 at 10:01 pmZooey, the proper answer is
YES!
March 26th, 2008 at 10:08 pmralph.
That's cool.
The vagueness only comes from the definition that I was working off of. I mean come on:
Covers so much, it becomes vague.
March 26th, 2008 at 10:27 pmThanks High Plains.
March 26th, 2008 at 10:58 pmErrol.
I'm an agnostic, quickly running out of excuses why I'm not an atheist.
Here's a book I would recommend: The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins - blew me away.
People I don't find Enlightened:
bin Laden
Pastor Wright
Hagee, Haggard, Robertson, Dobson
The Pope
and George Bush (when he tries to marry U.S. policy to God's providence).
Yes, I am on board with the idea of fundamentalism impeding Enlightenment.
March 26th, 2008 at 11:10 pmbackup Says:
The vagueness only comes from the definition that I was working off of. I mean come on:
Various scholars attribute different characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually seen as its integral parts: patriotism, nationalism, statism, militarism, totalitarianism, anti-communism, corporatism, populism, collectivism, autocracy and opposition to political and economic liberalism.
Covers so much, it becomes vague.
Yeah, but you're seeing them as individual elements, rather than as characteristics of a whole.
Patriotism is not fascistic. Combine it with militarism, though, and you're tending that direction. Add totalitarianism and you've taken another giant step. Throw corporatism into the mix and you're nearly there. Add opposition to political and economic liberalism and you're a fascist, my friend.
March 26th, 2008 at 11:10 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
March 26th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Zooey, the proper answer is
YES!
Of course, YES!!
March 26th, 2008 at 11:35 pmKilo - March 26th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
Put down the bong, Kilo, put down the bong...
March 26th, 2008 at 11:35 pmKinda curious how all the trolls are hanging on O'Reilly's thread... some we haven't seen for ages... they all come out for Bill-O...
March 27th, 2008 at 12:45 amKilo - March 27th, 2008 at 12:31 am
Seriously, Kilo. Don't drink and blog.
And don't project your innermost sexual fantasies on me.
March 27th, 2008 at 1:19 amKilo - March 27th, 2008 at 1:25 am
Funny. I could tell you the same exact thing.
After all, it's you who decided to reply to my post waaay up in the thread. And you keep replying....
March 27th, 2008 at 1:48 amBillo stoops to Ingraham on his show to agree with him over how, Narrow minded elitist they can be on the airwaves.
Billo can't just disagree with someone. He has to be a immature adult that never grew up and learned that people have differences.
But the minds that watch his show and think they are like Billo and don't live in a gated community like Billo.
They are truely the children left behind.
And for Billo, how did that million dollar settlement for sexual harrassment work out for him?
March 27th, 2008 at 2:32 amRalph: It was 0400 my time when I left nr 144 and your response #146.
I am not supporting O'Reilly. I am not looking for fascist blogs, he is. My point was that there is a possible misconception here about what he said and what he meant.
March 27th, 2008 at 8:04 amWhen one supports a nationalist socialist form of government, as O'Reilly, Ailes, and Murdoch do, it is difficult to hide one's true ideological makeup-even while accusing others of what they are themselves. For a reincarnation of the Tass News Agency and Pravda, go directly to FOX.
Preemptive accusation is the fascist's only defense against an informed society. In an Internet reality, totalitarianism gets instantly busted. Sorry FOX.
http://www.light-to-dark.com/preemption.html
March 27th, 2008 at 3:44 pmBillo stoops to Ingraham on his show to agree with him over how, Narrow minded elitist they can be on the airwaves.
Billo can’t just disagree with someone. He has to be a immature adult that never grew up and learned that people have differences.
But the minds that watch his show and clevo 2800 battery,clevo d220s battery think they are like Billo and don’t live in a gated community like Billo.
October 15th, 2008 at 4:18 amThey are truely the children left behind.
Just like the cold war when everyone who didn’t agree with the U.S. was either a communist or a communist sympathizer. toki This poor crazy guy spent half a decade being tortured because a bunch of stupid politicians araç sorgulama were sure the NVA was in bed with the Russians (minimal help) and/or the Chinese (ancient enemy of the vietnamese). ssk sorgulama You would think he would have learned from others’ mistakes. Guess not. Republicans need an enemy. key ödemeleri This century it apparently will be all Muslims, health all of whom must be alQaeda operatives.
March 1st, 2009 at 1:37 pm