Click to see the beacon journal online
Homes   Jobs   Cars   Shopping
All Da King's Men -- Community Blog

Previous post:

Next post:

Leftists Are The Biggest Mass Murderers In History

by Da King on June 15, 2009

in communism,conservatism,liberalism,moonbats,Uncategorized

To all those far left kooks (Keith Olbermann, Paul Krugman, The Reverend) who cling to the absurd idea that Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and conservative free speech in general are somehow responsible for the heinous acts of the murderers James von Brunn and Scott Roeder, I say….

Stop being illiterate and pick up a history book. Almost all the biggest perpetrators of violence in history have come FROM THE LEFT. Here are a few examples.

Joseph Stalin – Communist – murdered 62 million
Mao Tse Tung – Communist – murdered 35 million (estimated)
Pol Pot – Communist – murdered 2 million
Che Guevara and Fidel Castro – Communists – Murdered 12,000, imprisoned 500,000
Adolph Hitler – Socialist (Nazis = National Socialist German Worker's Party) – 21 million killed
Augusto Pinochet – Communist – 3,000 killed
Mengistu Haile Mariam – Socialist Ethiopian dictator from the 1970's – one million starved to death
Slobodan Milosevic – Socialist – 230,000 killed, millions displaced
Maoist rebels in India – killed 10 policemen on June 10, 2009 – have murdered 6,000 in all in their 20-year struggle

Not to mention:

Lee Harvey Oswald – Killed JFK
Sirhan Sirhan – Killed RFK
The Manson Family
Weather Underground
Symbionese Liberation Army
Jim Jones
Kim Jong Il
ELF
James von Brunn (more on him follows)
…and about 100 other violent left-wing groups and/or persons, too numerous to list here.

For all those calling for an end to right-wing free speech over TWO acts of violence, big fat DUH ! You are only outing yourselves as anti-civil rights and anti-american. If right-wing speech should be censored or blamed for acts of violence, well, then left-wing speech must come from the very devil himself !!! About 120 million were killed due to left-wingers in the 20th century alone. You condemning lefties better become self-aware and get off the airwaves and blogs immediately. You're a menace to society, according to all this evidence, and according to your own words condemning the political right. Your condemnations amount to a drop of water in the ocean when compared to all the left-wing violence I've outlined here.

Or, you can all stop the insanity, and allow for the idea that free speech in America is essential, and stop trying to blame an entire wing of politics for the acts of one or two people. That's what sane people would do, even if my friend the Reverend isn't one of them. According to his latest post, which quotes yours truly several times, the Reverend tries to cast me as some type of villain due to the Brunn and Roeder murders, even though I condemn such acts. I haven't advocated anyone's murder for politicial purposes, not that the truth matters much to our dear Reverend. He's hopelessly lost in a partisan daze, I'm sad to say.

Update on James von Brunn, the white supremacist who attacked the Holocaust Museum. To everyone who thinks he was a right winger, you better think again. Brunn was a SOCIALIST, and was anti-Christian. When I wrote previously that Brunn was against Marxism, that was because Karl Marx was a Jew. Brunn favored western socialism and denounced capitalism. Following is an excerpt from Brunn's book, Kill The Best Gentiles:

Yockey, in his suppressed book Imperium, notes that MARXISM is seriously flawed because MARX, being a JEW, could not understand the real differences between CAPITALISM and SOCIALISM, which emanated from the WESTERN CULTURE-ORGANISM. Capitalism and Socialism are how a Nation (Family, People, Race) feels, thinks, and lives, and secondarily are ECONOMIC CONCEPTS. One [capitalism] is past history; the other, WESTERN SOCIALISM, represents the future of the West, and the end of JEWRY on Western soil.

The Age of Reason produced CAPITALISM in the West, the IDEA of rugged individualism: “Every Man for Himself.” Freedom from authority: “Don't tread on me!” At the same time, paradoxically, it was understood, that these rugged individuals should act in the best interest of the Nation-State. To the West ECONOMIC CAPITALISM meant: free trade, no personal income-tax, no state interference in money matters, private ownership, etc. USURY, however, was relegated outside the Pale, and proscribed. Capitalists found no fault with economically defeating, within the law, opposing economic groups. That was considered “healthy competition.” European States, goaded by Bankers, also competed with one another. Often with disastrous results. During WWI it became painfully clear that the IDEA of “rugged individualism” worked against the ARYAN NATION and its individual States.

WESTERN SOCIALISM, unlike Marxism/Communism and Capitalism, emanates not from Reason alone but from the ETHOS OF THE WEST. It expresses the instinctive and Intuitive feelings UNIQUE to the Aryan Nation. Its Idea is the Musketeers' cry: “One for All and All for One!” The ingathering of the White Nation-States into ONE CULTURAL ORGANISM — its own territory and its own State in which to house, protect, and nurture the Nation — precludes Marxist inspired class warfare and hate-struggles between its component parts. The ECONOMY springs from the CULTURE. MONEY becomes merely a tool, a means of exchange, a storage of value — not an ILLUMINATI weapon.” (pp. 143-4). “No intelligent person took MARX seriously. His Old Testament idea that work is evil — and New Testament idea that men and races are equally endowed — opposes Nature and the very Soul of the West.” Marxists, Bolsheviks, Communists denounce “capitalist pigs.” While from behind the scenes — in the on-going battle to implement the PROTOCOLS OF ZION — all wars and revolutions are financed by JEW CAPITALISTS. (pp. 143-5.)

All left-wing accusers can start apologizing as of three, two, one…right now. We will accept your apologies. Of the three recent domestic terrorist attacks, two came from the left, and one from the right. Hardly evidence of right-wingers inciting violence.

  • larry d.

    One has to wonder how such mass slaughters can take place–did they typically start with the demonizing of the opposition, or calls for opposition voices to be silenced? Maybe the head of state singled out a particular opposition voice or two in the media, then all the formerly benign lemmings jumped on board?

  • Da King

    In Hitler's case, it started with the demonization of business interests (those Jews) and a populist appeal to "the people."

    Not that anything like that is happening here :-)

  • angry conserv

    GREAT POST
    This is one of the topics that academia refuses to discuss. It violates their right-religion is bad and left-secular is good. The one thing I learned from way too many years in school is that the facts are never to interfere with the agenda.
    Never in my years of studing China did a Prof. mention that Mao introduced a pilot program in to eliminate indivudual names and assign everyone a number thus improving efficiency Maybe Obama could try that in order to improve the efficiences he contends the government will institute in health care.

  • terje

    nationalism is considered a "right wing" trait.

    so you might want to move some of those millions to your side of the ledger.

  • The Reverend

    Perhaps you can find one sentence of mine that calls for this…

    "For all those calling for an end to right-wing free speech over TWO acts of violence, big fat DUH ! You are only outing yourselves as anti-civil rights and anti-american."

    I said that right wing media, and I gave numerous examples, is inciting violence by their reckless speech. And they are. Never called for the end of free speech for anyone. Instead, I simply echoed what Ari Flesicher told all of America after 9-11….."better watch what you say." Good enough for the goose and all that.

    Then, we have this….

    "Or, you can all stop the insanity, and allow for the idea that free speech in America is essential, and stop trying to blame an entire wing of politics for the acts of one or two people. That's what sane people would do, even if my friend the Reverend isn't one of them. According to his latest post, which quotes yours truly several times, the Reverend tries to cast me as some type of villain due to the Brunn and Roeder murders, even though I condemn such acts."

    Never called for the end of free speech. Simply pointed out the free speech that was spoken and suggested, along with Paul Krugman and Frank Rich, that it was contributing to the insanity witnessed in those violent killings. Think Krugman is insane?

    Finally, I didn't "cast" anyone as anything. Those were your comments, your words. Didn't suggest you were a "villain".

    As I was blog posting over the last four months on this very topic, and more crazy killings took place, you were consistently pooh-poohing revolution-talk and irresponsible speech from Beck, O'Reilly, Rush and others, and telling me I was stifling free speech.

    How many people must be assassinated inside America before conservatives make the connection and conservative a**holes in the media drop the hateful rhetoric?

  • Tory Bug

    Just reading all this really cracks me up… Some people have really dug in their heels that they are absolutely right, so everything you say and everything I've been reading for the past months never happened. "This is not the Reverend you are looking for." Sure, Obi Wan. Many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view.

  • http://anti-marx.blogspot.com/ sunklhammer

    Hey rev, you idiot, the point is that more people have been murdered by those on the left than by those on the right…..a historical fact.

    Those leftists mentioned that claim that the excercise of free speech…and the right to dissent "with this and any administration"…is to incite violence…or "revolution"….are full of crap. Just like you.

    But if you want to talk revolution, the fact is that the illigitimate administration is doing the very things that led to the American Revolution that founded the country, giving you the right to make a fool out of yourself without having to worry about getting a knock on your door at midnight, and finding a group of masked and armed men when you open it, and they drag you away, never to be heard from again.

    And BTW, tory, there are truths that are truths, and they are the truth no matter what one's point of view is.

    Relativism is a method to excuse one's rejection of an inescapable truth that one doesn't like.

  • Da King

    sunkl, old buddy, long time no hear. How are things in the Aloha State ?

  • Da King

    Rev,
    As sunkl pointed out, you missed the entire point (no doubt intentionally).

    If right-wing speech is inciting violence, which of course it is not (the lefties are just trying to demonize their opposition), then it follows that all the killings due to leftist ideology, which FAR outweigh anything comparable on the right, must mean that the lefties are inciting much more violence. Yet, no complaints from you about that. Instead, you remain stuck in the lunatic mindset that it's the right-wing that incites violence, based upon what, ONE murder ? Your argument is laughable on it's face. Do you blame Al Gore for the violent acts of ELF ? Do you blame Obama or the Dems anti-war rhetoric for the shooting of the two military recruiters ? Of course you don't. Somehow, that's "different" to you, when in reality, it isn't different at all.

    And you even admit the whole point of your misguided rants is to get conservatives to stop what you term "hateful rhetoric" (which is really just opposition speech), so yes, you most definitely are anti-free speech, just like those Stalinists and Maoists were.

    If I was like you, which, thank god I'm not, I should be the one asking "how many have to die before left-wing hate speech ends ?" You'd think 120 million dead would be enough.

  • Da King
  • Tory Bug

    sunklhammer, perhaps you missed it. I was quoting Star Wars again, something that seemed to fit the situation, that Rev. is choosing to see things according to his point of view. Don't be offended!

  • Da King

    angryc,
    The reason the progressive professors refuse to discuss the mass slaughter from leftists is because it would out the movement. It's no secret that the progressives of the early and mid-twentieth century were quite impressed with communism, and remain quite impressed with the ideas of Karl Marx today.

  • terje

    in this country nationalism IS a right-wing trait. the department of homeland security backs me up.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_right

    look at the homeland security pdf in footnote #14

    i find the inclusion of milosevic interesting. had he been fighting the mujahadin in the current "war of terror" he would be a hero but since the u.s. backed the jihadists in the 1990's he is a war criminal.

  • walter

    Da King……..you left out the murders of thousands of innocent Iraqis in Bush's war.

    You gotta remember, before the neo-cons attached themselves to the republican party they were all democrats.

  • Da King

    terje,
    As I said before, nationalism can be found in right-wing ideology, but is not exclusive to right-wing ideology, as I already pointed out.

    Your comments about Milosevic seem to indicate that you believe all Middle Easterners are jihadists. I disagree.

  • Da King

    I don't know, walter. I might lose credibility if I tried to pass Bush off as a left-winger.

    But you are correct about neoconservatism springing mainly from disaffected social liberals.

  • walter

    I would tend to think that most reasonable people would view your list as nothing more than a list of your run of the mill dictators. I would also tend to think that most reasonable people would understand that to remain a dictator a system of socialism would make that much easier to manage…..where everything comes to the state and then the state re-distributes it.

    Socialism is to dictatorships as Viagra is to ed. Viagra was first developed to stimulate plant grouth.

  • walter

    Da King sez……."disaffected social liberals"

    that's a hoot

    the neo-cons, by and large were agents for Israel. Couldn't find anyone in the democratic party willing to inact their plan for re-shaping the the ME using the American military.

    Just goes to show…….idealology has nothing to do with the grab for power.

  • larry d.

    Is that according to the Protocols of Zion, walter?

  • The Reverend

    Here's what I find interesting….the discussion is not about Stalin, Mao, or any other historical tyrant. It's not. Talk of those tyrants is simply a distraction away from the issue at hand.

    And that issue is right under everyone's noses. Conservative teevee commentators, O'Reilly, Beck, Rush, Savage, etc. have been purposely riling up the extremist right wing base with revolutionary, violent and hateful language ever since Obama was elected. It's a delegitmization effort. That is a fact, not some call to compare body counts throughout tyrant history.

    Words and actions are either constructive or destructive. I have no problem identifying the words of the far right commentators as destructive. Others disagree. The assassinated are still dead.

    "But you are correct about neoconservatism springing mainly from disaffected social liberals."

    Talk about a hoot.

  • Tory Bug

    I just found this article, which I think is a pretty intelligent discussion of the existence of liberal bigots. As with their right-wing counterparts, they do exist.
    http://veaseyfields.blogspot.com/2009/04/what-hateful-liberal-bigot-looks-like.html

    NPR, for example, is a liberal bastion , and left-wingers just cannot stand it that conservative shows have also been a success, without any government support or listener donations. So, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Beck and others are demonized for their 'hate speech'. I don't know about Limbaugh; I think he's got a personality problem, so I never listen to him. But I know for a fact that Beck and O'Reilly have *never* incited violence in any form. At most, you might get an encouragement to contact your senator, to let him/her know how you feel on a topic, which is basically all you'd get on NPR or the like. Maybe they're 'riling up' folks to write e-mails or letters, or to legally vote, but I don't know how violent any of that is.

    No one can provide me with any examples of someone who murdered as a result of watching The O'Reilly Factor, any more than I can tell you that watching a Michael Moore film has led to anyone shoot up a hospital. Liberals are being ridiculous with their finger-pointing. King is making a good point, which is that more nutzo liberals have acted out and actually incited many deaths. Any viewpoint becomes dangerous when you start believing that your viewpoint is so right, no one has the right to believe differently. Anyone –liberal or conservative or middle-of-the-roader– can go nuts and act out inappropriately. It doesn't matter your political viewpoint if you're crazy. And you folks don't seem to get that *this* is the point King's post makes. Are you so into acting like kindergarteners that you're deliberately missing the point?

  • roysoldboy

    Tory Bug, "deliberately missing the point" is about as good a definition of Rev Red as I have ever seen anyone make. I have been watching him do just that for about 6 years and he has never changed a whole lot in that time.

    King makes too much sense in his attacks on the left for Rev Red to allow him to sail through without trying to muddy the waters and he has some other followers who write here.

    I have become an avid fan of Glenn Beck's TV show because he does what he does so well. He holds liberals' feet to the fire very well and their supporters try to make him out to be the bad guy. The most radical thing I have seen him do, up to now, is his all out support of last spring's Tea Party movement. He has even mentioned the next round of Tea Parties one time the past week. It will get worse in the next three weeks as he gears up for July 4. I think that any violence that results from the next round of Tea Parties will be caused by "muscle" groups like the well known groups from ACORN and maybe some unemployed union workers. ACORN thinks that Beck is damaging them as could easily be seen by the behavior of the stereotypical looking organizer he had on a couple of times who is now an ACORN organizer. He looked just like the union organizers of the movies and TV shows. He even admitted that he had only been employed as a community organizer and a union organizer. You know the hulks that bring the cards around to workers so they can prove their support of the union or their lack of same.

    Left leaners like Rev Red do me a lot of good every time I read them. They are trying to be serious but just manage to make me laugh. Thanks for the description that I saw as so right on, Tory.

  • The Reverend

    This, from Tory, illustrates the problem…

    "But I know for a fact that Beck and O'Reilly have *never* incited violence in any form."

    As roy says, I've been at this awhile…..and the most baffling part of what I've seen ever since Clinton became president is reflected in what Tory said about O'Reilly and Beck. A denial of the extremely obvious.

    Conservatives have clung to an almost entirely fact free narrative for some time now. Empirical evidence is continually rejected by conservatives and replaced with wishful thinking or faith based explanations.

    Beck had a couple of special programs devouted entirely to the upcoming revolution in America because of Obama. And don't forget about the playacting when Beck was pouring gasoline on the guy seated next to him……purely for illustrative purposes, you understand. O'Reilly on numerous occasions told national audiences that Dr. Tiller, "the baby killer", had blood on his hands for conducting his legal profession.

    To any reality-based, fair-minded person, such extremist rhetoric would be acknowledged for what it is….hate-speech meant to pander to the lowest of emotions. But Tory can't see any of it. I wonder if Tory is familiar with the Rwanda genocide aided and abetted by hate-radio?

    Torture, Iraq, illegal spying on Americans, the Plame case, politicizing the Justice Department, censoring embarassing scientific information……and a whole host of other issues…..all have a faux-narrative attached to them by facts-denying conservatives.

    This "inciting violence in conservative media" issue is simply one more to be tossed on the very large reality-denying pile.

    To Tory's silly retort here…

    "Are you so into acting like kindergarteners that you're deliberately missing the point?"

    …I say,….right back at ya'.

    To roy…..thanks for helping me make my point. You take a completely fact-free approach to a voter registration outfit like ACORN, by calling it a "muscle group." It's laughable roy…..and you know it. But that's the fun of it….isn't it?

  • walter

    Da King sez….."I might lose credibility if I tried to pass Bush off as a left-winger." Invading another country for the sole purpose of regime change is just about as leftist as you can get.

    that would make Bush/Cheney/Boehner what? a leftist rightist or an independent rightist leftist?

    Tory Bug……Veasey (wasn't he a drag racer from Wadsworth) sez that those who disagree with Carrie Prejean are bigots. Is that about right? That doesn't seem to me to be much of an intelligent discussion……..but then I guess it's all relative

  • The Reverend

    Two more things.

    Perez Hilton's name calling of the beauty queen shouldn't be confused with inciting violence against her……as O'Reilly and Beck did and are still doing with abortion providers and Obama hating.

    It was interesting to note (in Tory's link) the self-victimization of heteros vis-a-vis marriage equality. Gays marrying have nothing, whatsoever, to do with heteros marrying. One does not affect the other in the least. Yet, the constant, "we are being victimized by gays", screeching continues on.

    The same is going on in the Judge Sotomayor "debate." White conservatives are acting like they're the victims of those terrible minorities. Poor, poor majority class. How absolutely silly.

  • Tory Bug

    *sigh* Still deliberately missing the point, folks? NAME ME ONE TIME THAT BECK OR O'REILLY HAS CALLED FOR VIOLENCE! A tea party is as far from a violent event as you can get. It's about protest. And you are bigoted if you want to deny a woman her right to free speech because you don't agree with what she thinks. Defitition of bigot: a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bigot

    Get over it, folks. You are bigots if you don't want others to have their own opinion. Giving your opinion of why said opinion is wrong is one thing, getting angry at those who believe differently than you do and accusing them of things that they've never done is bigoted.

  • terje

    "Your comments about Milosevic seem to indicate that you believe all Middle Easterners are jihadists. I disagree."

    no, i don't believe that. but if you don't think that the war in bosnia was mainly fought by the mujahadin and other jihadists you're grossly misinformed.

  • Da King

    Tory,
    Of course Beck and O'Reilly have never called for violence. I watch Beck all the time. Violence is the last thing he wants. He just wants to reign in government excesses, as do I.

    But you are trying to argue with the Rev with facts. The Rev doesn't care about facts. The Rev just KNOWS Beck and O'Reilly are inciting violence, because he saw a couple ten second clips on some rabid left-wing site that said so. The Rev doesn't watch Beck. He has no idea where Beck is coming from. The Rev is the textbook example of an irrational hater who promotes hate on his own website, and then has the nerve to accuse others of doing the same, based upon out-of-context soundbytes and lack of knowledge. I've seen every Beck show that the Rev thinks is "inciting violence," and Beck is doing no such thing. Rev is only interested in the demonization of the right, and this time it's all based upon exactly ONE act of right-wing violence, the murder of George Tiller, which all except the extreme fringe nuts condemn. That's why the Rev calls my 120 million examples of left-wing killings irrelevant. If he doesn't like a fact, he just ignores it, as if it doesn't exist, and then keeps up the same kooky narrative he was weaving before the facts got in the way.

  • Da King

    Terje,
    America, President Clinton, and myself are all against Milosevic's ethnic cleansing mass murders.

  • Da King

    Roy,
    Beck doesn't only hold liberals feet to the fire, he holds Republicans feet to the fire also. That's one of the things I like about him. He doesn't accept the bs from either side.

  • Da King

    Rev,
    I know I'm wasting my breath trying to educate you, because you don't want to be educated, but if you think the idea that neoconservatism grew from disaffected liberals is such a hoot, maybe you should read the following link, or any number of political history books.

    http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/3436416.html

  • Da King

    Walter,
    Too confusing, lol. I always thought Bush was a fiscal liberal, but I can't call him a foreign policy leftist. Those neocons did become right wingers after the 60's.

  • The Reverend

    From King's link….

    "An essential characteristic of that political liberalism was its faith that government intervention on a sufficiently large scale could solve, or at least ameliorate, the effects of the social problems of the day, especially poverty and racial discrimination."

    This has nothing, at all, to do with the PNAC neo-conservatives of the 90's. Nothing. The PNAC neo-cons didn't give one sh*t about poverty, social problems or racial discrimination in Iraq. PNAC's white paper states specifically why Iraq should be attacked and occupied with U.S. military bases. The reason: to project American power throughout the middle east region while simultaneously "protecting" Iraq's huge reserve of oil.

    Now, as to Glenn Beck…..first, I'm sorry to hear you watch Beck regularly. That's informative.

    "The Rev is the textbook example of an irrational hater who promotes hate on his own website, and then has the nerve to accuse others of doing the same, based upon out-of-context soundbytes and lack of knowledge."

    If it's irrational to point out the demagogery and dishonesty of opportunistic media blowhards willing to do anything, even incite violence, to spur ratings…..then I'm proud to be called irrational. Naturally, I reject your wild-eyed characterization that I promote hate on BMD.

    Beck was a miserable failure over on CNN, but he's all the rage on Fox. Ever wonder why that is?

  • walter

    Da King sez…….."Those neocons did become right wingers after the 60's."

    HELL NO…….they remained leftists. Their objective remained the same….American interventionism especially when it came to those who Israel wanted to rid themselves of. George Bush was indeed a leftist.

    Tory….Veseay says that disagreeing with someone makes you a bigot….do you suscribe to that idea?

  • terje

    "Terje,
    America, President Clinton, and myself are all against Milosevic's ethnic cleansing mass murders."

    so, i assume you are all in favor of ethnic cleansing done in the name of allah. i am NOT defending the actions of milosevic. however, president clinton and you defend ethnic cleansing (which is a moronic term by the way—it's genocide) done by jihadists. it happened whether you choose to believe it or not.

  • walter

    tory…..I see where the bigot's bigot Donald Trump "fired" Carrie Prejean

    I guess the bigot's bigot didn't want a bigot like Carrie Prejean representing his pagent

  • larry d.

    Speaking of bigotry it looks like 32 percent of Democrats blame "The Jews" for the current economic crisis. Boy that's an ugly statistic!

    http://bostonreview.net/BR34.3/malhotra_margalit.php

  • Da King

    Rev,
    How is it that you responded to my post without addressing the point – that neoconservatism grew from liberals ? I'll take your off topic response as proof that you were proven wrong.

    And for the hundredth time, neither Beck or O'Reilly is inciting violence, not any more than you or I are. They are expressing their opinion.

  • Da King

    larry,
    More proof that anti-semitism comes primarily from the left.

  • Da King

    walter,
    Wouldn't you categorize someone like Bill Kristol as a conservative ?

  • walter

    No…….Kristol and his fellow neocons are first and foremost Israel firsters. Their agenda has and continues to be to use American military force to intervene in the affairs in the ME to reshape it into that which is more friendly to Israel.

    and that's all well and good……..if you're a leftist.

  • Da King

    I think I see where you're coming from. True conservative ideology would then be more in line with, say, Ron Paul ? Non-interventionist foreign policy, along with small government, low taxes, getting rid of the fiat monetary policy, etc ?

  • walter

    I don't think you do………what I'm saying is that you have hung the leftist label on these brutal dictators. These dictators are no more leftist than Bush/Cheney/Boehner are conservative. They were dictators…..murdering is what dictators do.

    as far as the Boston Review poll…….."To evaluate just how large a role, we conducted a study (part of a larger survey of 2,768 American adults….."

    I wonder how many of these identified themselves as republican? Could you choose no party affiliation? If you did say no party affiliation, were you grouped into the democrats or were you considered a republican?

    You know, my statistics instructor at Akron U always said there are lies, there are bigger lies and then there are statistics.

  • larry d.

    I'd guess they were grouped under "no party affiliation" and either not published with the study or not published in the Boston Review article. Your statistics instructor sounds like a genius.

  • walter

    larry….I would guess they would be grouped depending on their answer…..if they answered yes they would be grouped as demos and if they said no they would be grouped as repubs.

    Prove me wrong

  • walter

    why not have a third pie chart showing no party affiliation?

  • larry d.

    I don't know walt but there's zero evidence that folks who said 'no party affiliation' were put into the other categories.

    By the by, my freshman earth science professor once said, "The coldest winter I ever spent was a summer in San Francisco!"

  • walter

    larry…..there's zero evidence that they were grouped under no party affiliation and not used either.

    some of these "surveys" suck. This one sucks real bad.

  • larry d.

    Because it states that 32 percent of you fellows blame "The Jews" for everything? It seems spot on to me.

  • The Reverend

    So, after all this muddying of the material…..is there a consensus that von Brunn was a conservative nut? Conservatives don't particularly care for minorities and efforts to grant minorities anything….Jews make up about 2% of the U.S population, blacks 13%….von Brunn hated them both.

    You can play Twister with this stuff til everyone is totally worn out…..in today's non-wingnut America, being against minorities, and often hatefully so, is identifiable with only one group…..American conservatives.

    The End.

  • walter

    larry…..I was just asking where the no party affiliation people fell in this "survey".

    I'm a conservative. I certainly can't identify with the republicans. It's not that republicans are not conservative enough for me…….it's that republicans are not conservative at all

    to be honest with you larry…..I would tend to think that those that have no party affiliation would be equal to those that identify themselves as republicans.

    look at the polling numbers for the republican party. They are way down. You can't tell me all those people that no longer support the republicans have become democrats.

    that "survey" was nothing more than a setup done by republican operative to cast a bad light on democrats

    what's that old saying…..if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…..it's more than likely to be a duck

  • http://anti-marx.blogspot.com/ sunklhammer

    Hi 'rat. Things here are going OK, if you don't count the fact that I've been one of the unemployment statistics of the bammers economic recovery bills….I'm trying to get work, but everyone I talk to says I'm over-qualified. So I either have to take a minimum wage job and try to pretend that it's as good a paying job as what my 35 years of experience as a skilled tradesman.

    At least I have more time to surf, now!! And it's a good thing that I was able to complete my arsenal of firearms and ammo before work ran out.

    I apologize for not getting over here more often. TG's forum and the GT one keep my hands pretty full, although I've been spending less time on either, to avoid burn-out.

  • http://anti-marx.blogspot.com/ sunklhammer

    Tory..

    I wasn't offended…just wanted to make a point to your point. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

  • http://anti-marx.blogspot.com/ sunklhammer

    **Beck was a miserable failure over on CNN, but he's all the rage on Fox.**, according to the revrund moron.

    Oh really? Got any stats to back that up, revrump? My understanding is that his ratings were going up constantly, which is one of the reasons why Fox approached him with an offer that CNN wouldn't/couldn't match, since their overall ratings have been going south for years.

    ** Ever wonder why that is?**

    It's real easy, revver. All you need to do is have the ability to use some brain matter for more than a second or two……

    The handfull of CNN viewers are liberal idiots like you who like being lied to.

    The constantly growing numbers of Fox viewers appreciate hearing the truths that CNN never talks about.

    As is typical of true-blue, genuine dyed in the wool neo-marxists like you, when your adversary is articulate, using logic and reason in making their points…the ones that expose the lies and the hypocrisy of the left…the SOP is to attack them…Rush, Sean, Glenn, Palin, etc., and to accuse them of what it is that the left is actually guilty of. It's and old stalinist/alinsky tactic.

  • The Reverend

    Still swinging that sledgehammer….

    If work has dried up for ya', hammer…..send a note of thanks to your demi-god, W.

    Democratic presidents…..it's the oddest thing….create jobs.

    Surf on my dude.

  • Da King

    Walter,
    Murdering is what dictators do, which is why I'm a libertarian/fiscal conservative. The more power we give the federal government, the more dictatorial it becomes, by definition.

    But leftists are STILL the biggest mass murderers in history, from Marx forward anyway.

  • Da King

    sunkl,
    Work has dried up for me too. I'm about in the same situation you are.

    But I see the Reverend says Democratic presidents create jobs (2 million jobs lost since the Messiah became prez), so I guess I'll by okay by……oh, say……2013.

  • walter

    King sez……"But leftists are STILL the biggest mass murderers in history, from Marx forward anyway."

    wtf…..how many did Marx kill?

  • walter

    King…..you do make an austute observation tho……that these "leftists" became mass murderers after being exposed to Marx……you know, kinda like todays right wing hate radio and speech

  • Da King

    Make up your mind.

  • http://anti-marx.blogspot.com/ sunklhammer

    You betcha, redrevrum, and I see you're still slinging the same old tired, worn-out leftist bullshit.

    I wasn't happy with Bush's domestic policies, or his falling off the free-market capitalism tree with the first bailout, but the seeds of the economic collapse were planted, watered, and fertilized by the left, starting with the second worst president in US history, so don't even start with me, you ignorant moron.

    **Democratic presidents…..it's the oddest thing….create jobs.**

    What a crock of neo-marxist crap. Even the jobs that FDR "created" didn't do a damn thing to end the Depression. In fact, if you knew your history, you'd know that all the "shovel-ready/make-work jobs" that FDR "created" only served to prolong and exacerbate the situation. Do you remember what FDR's Sec. of the Treas. said about their efforts to "stimulate" the economy?

    Well, your illegitimate, long-legged Mac-daddy, kenyan usurper messyiah is following the same route that FDR took….only now we're talking about TRILLIONS of dollars, instead of millions.

    DemoRAT presidents do what your messyiah is doing….raising taxes, spending money we don't have, printing money like a maniac, putting our children and great grand-children under a burden of debt they will never be able to get out from under, and you sit there with a shit-eating grin on your stupid face , because a Republican is not in the WH….which is all you really care about…the hell with what your Mac-daddy is doing to the country.

    I got the time to surf, now. Why don't you come on over so I can show you how I do off-the-lips on yer face?

  • Carol Hillman

    The people responsible for this website are the ones who need to brush up on their history knowledge. Hitler was a National Socialist which is something far different from a Socialist! General Pinochet was a right-wing dictator who – partly supported by the CIA – staged a coup to unseat a real socialist, Salvador Allende.

    If Leftists are the biggest mass murderers, then I'm next in line for the British throne. Hitler – no leftist at all – murdered six million Jews and many gays and others. Our own U.S. military has been responsible for needless slaughter of innocent civilians in Vietnam and now in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    To be sure, Stalin was responsible for many deaths also but that just makes him reprehensible – not communism!! I am not sure if true communism could ever work but I don't see how anyone could think that a political system designed to give workers control of government and designed to get rid of economic inequity is an evil system – well – unless that person is one of the super-wealthy who has a vested interest in maintaining a system such as that in the U.S. which has a huge economic disparity between the very wealthy and the very poor.

Previous post:

Next post:

 

© The Akron Beacon Journal • 44 E. Exchange Street, Akron, Ohio 44308

Powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).