Oh my the sky is falling

Yup, has been since the corporate puppet, Reagan.  How's KITT running these days?

I thought this review of the 2018 CPAC was interesting....it's from the standpoint of a conservative who's attended these since 2010 and finds this year's freak show unusually freakish and indicative of the steady decline of the GOP.

Today’s Republican Party is foreign to me. And I think a lot of people who considered themselves a part of the conservative movement feel like in the past decade their party has been hijacked by an extremist nationalistic agenda.

nbcnews

.

Of course from the perspective of most sane people the GOP started going off the rails when the New Deal was passed, and it really jumped the tracks after the Civil Rights Act was passed.   It was shortly after the CRA that the GOP married the Christofascist right wing, something even the 1964 GOP candidate for prez knew was a huge mistake.

The funny thing is, is that they keep winning elections, including the upcoming midterms, and the dopey Dems have to no idea how to counteract that.

LOL.   So you're claiming wins in elections which haven't yet been held?

Plus you're wrong:

washingtonpost

.

Heck....even conservative Republicans have been advising that  Republicans  vote a straight Dem ticket if they want America to survive the Trump regime.

theatlantic

What are the Democrats running on this time by the way?  Putting this country's economy back on the left track?  Accepting ISIS will be with us for many years to come and teaching us to learn to live with it?  Income Redistribution?  What is it?  Taking American's guns away?  Especially during this dangerous time when we have a Hitler in office?  Reversing Trump's decision to finally move our embassy to Jerusalem?  Get back on track with Obama's dream of fundamentally transforming the country?  Wonder what it is?  I haven't heard them say anything about what they will be running on.

The funny thing is, is that they keep winning elections, includin g the upcoming midterms,

So basically you're saying that they're doing something that they haven't done yet? 

TIME WARP!!!

CPAC is one example of why the once Grand Old Party of Abe Lincoln is now known merely as, "the gop"...

Greedy Old Pervs?

Greedy Orange Plutocrats?

I wasn’t aware fascism was going to drastically cut taxes and allow more freedom for businesses with reductions in government regulations. It is far better than I thought it was going to be. 

I'm going to give you the most widely accepted definition of modern fascism by Professor Robert Paxton of Columbia University. If read with an open mind, the parallels to the Trump administration are startling.

Perhaps the best definition comes from Robert Paxton, professor emeritus at Columbia University and holder of the Legion d’Honneur, despite all the books he has written on wartime France’s pro-Nazi Vichy regime. Paxton’s The Anatomy of Fascism analyzes the stages by which 20th century fascisms rose and fell. It should be essential reading for any student of fascist movements, and especially for anyone thinking of founding one.

Fascism, Paxton says, is a dynamic process, rather than a fixed ideology like socialism or communism. There are five steps on Paxton’s road to hell, and not all fascist parties made it past the second step:

1.    Ideological formation and the creation of a party with quasi-military cadres. Talk of national humiliation, lost vigor, and the failures of liberalism and democracy.
2.    Entry of the party into national politics. Intimidation of rivals, and planned acts of “redemptive violence” against suspect minorities and radical rivals.
3.    Arrival in government, often in alliance with conservatives.
4.    Exercise of power, in concert with institutions and business. The regime expands its control at home: restricting the press and democratic processes, corporatizing business, and collectivizing the people. Abroad, it asserts itself militarily.
5.    Radicalization or entropy: Some fascists go down in a Götterdämmerung, but most die of boredom.

In many ways we are in the fourth stage of Paxton's process. That, in itself, is frightening, since most nations rebel against the leader's fascist nature before this point.

one problem

todays liberals are not the liberals of the past -(old school liberal here)

todays progressive liberals are the fascists who are trying to be seen as patriots.

and no one is buying that BS anymore

Cheers

Last week, the liberal talking point was that Trump was an arch libertarian. Now, he's a "fascist." The sad part is many don't see the contradiction. 

Here's the cliff notes version: 

Fascism favors collectivist rights and ideology. It defines people not as individuals, but as parts of their group to which they owe loyalty. Thus, when someone accuses someone of being an "Uncle Tom" they are acting like a fascist, because they believe the individual has no right to act for themselves, but must subvert themselves to the group.

Those who favor the rights of the individual over the state are the opposite of  fascists. Usually the left is accusing Trump of being an arch individualist, except, of coruse,  when they want to throw out the meaningless "fascist" slur, which the modern progressive has redefined to mean anyone who doesn't blindly support the progressive agenda. 

Where in the hell did you get that crapola? Pulled it right out of ye olde behind did ya? Well, it just ain't so...

Last week, the liberal talking point was that Trump was an arch libertarian.

Citation please.   Feel free to support your moronic claim with facts.

.

Now, he's a "fascist."

Trump has all the traits of a wannabe dictator.    He doesn't even seem to understand that the US president isn't a king, but he sure does admire fascists and authoritarians around the world, including Putin, Duterte, Erdogan and Marion Le Pen.

Here's the military parade Trump really wants to fluff his ego:

Feel free to support your moronic claim with facts.

nymag

Ouch! Learn to operate the google machine.

Trump has all the traits of a wannabe dictator. 

yes, rolling back executive orders, deferring to Congress on DACA, submitting to obviously flawed judicial decisions. Those sure are the things a dictator does!

You should probably think before you post things. 

Doesn't it make you laugh that whenever you answer one of the Trump supporters with a response that has some academic heft, the choice is to ignore the post and either fall back into ad hominem arguments or throw out some lame brained counter without any support. Just once, I'd like to get into a discussion with a Trump supporter where the driving factor is fact and logic and not red meat vitriol against liberals. My discussion was about the de-evolution of policy in favor of a pseudo-fascist approach in conservative politics. There doesn't seem to be much desire among Trump supporters to discuss anything that even resembles policy issues.

Thanks for that definition. If we are at the fourth stage wouldn’t this push for gun control fall under collectivising the people? I’m not sure exactly what that encompasses. 

The gross level of cognitive dissonance required to toe Trump's line any longer must be mentally debilitating...

Just once I'd like to have a discussion with a left winger who actually understood the terms they used. For instance, if they cited an opinion by Justice Scalia, it would be nice if the author actually had a basic understanding of what Scalia wrote rather then mangling Scalia's words to suit a a partisan screed. Or a liberal who understood a term like fascism at a level deeper than the wikipedia result they hastily looked up.

It's doubly amsuing that your dource with  academic heft agrees with me.

Here's left wing Vox citing Paxton:

"This runs in sharp contrast to the fascist tradition, which, while emphasizing cults of personality for leaders, is nonetheless fundamentally concerned with the collective, with the state being redeemed and the fascist political organization being built to redeem it. That aspect is foreign not just to Trump but to 21st century American society in general. "People are extremely individualistic. No one would dream of putting them in identically colored shirts and putting them in regimented youth movements, action squads," Paxton says. "If someone were proposing that I'd take the parallel more seriously."

But, diogenes like,  I will wander the world of Newstalkers, looking for an intellectually honest liberal. 

with

Yes,  Soviet Communism follows Dr. Paxton's  "five stages" of fascism quite well.

nymag

LOL.    So......just one random columnist who is arguably liberal, ie not the " the liberal talking point " you claimed.

Plus you obviously didn't read or comprehend the article since it was claiming that the Koch brothers are "libertarians" and that they're using Trump for their own purposes.   It definitely never made the claim you made, quite the opposite in fact since it states that Trump is a ruthless autocrat:

You would think a libertarian might have some deep-seated qualms about leaving untrammeled executive power in the hands of an obviously ruthless and autocratic leader like Trump. The only practical way to restrain Trump’s efforts to carry out massive personal corruption and turn federal law enforcement into a political weapon under his control would be to help Democrats regain one or more chambers of Congress, so they could conduct oversight and act as a check on the executive branch. But the Kochs are committed to doing just the opposite: The highest priority of their political action this year is maintaining Republican control of Congress, which will enable Trump to escape meaningful oversight.

.

Next you made this erroneous claim:

rolling back executive orders, deferring to Congress on DACA, submitting to obviously flawed judicial decisions. Those sure are the things a dictator does!

????   Trump killed the last bipartisan agreement Congressional leaders had designed.    And while he has no choice but to follow court rulings it's clear that he doesn't understand why he has to do so, and doesn't understand why he can't issue unconstitutional orders.    And while all administrations issue EOs to get their work done, it's clear that Trump thinks his tiny hands will grow bigger if he unwinds everything Obama accomplished......even if it hurts minorities and the poor or increases health care costs for everyone.

If you don't like Pastor's definition,a more encompassing definition is given by Dr. Paul Johnson of Auburn University, gives an even more chilling and comparative definition of  fascism in the"Trump" mode in his work on definitions of political and economic fascism.

What does hold up in every definition is that fascism is a conservative, corporatist, anti-socialist, pro authoritarian movement.

We're waiting for your well researched opinion on why you think this is so.

Very good.  I didn't see it before I commented above, but I guess I'm more Libertarian than I thought.  Not Fascist or Right Wing.  Maybe a little Conservative and liberal in the sense I really don't care what you do as long as you are held responsible and I don't have to be a part of it or pay for it unless I want to.  But I'm using the world liberal as it was before it was hijacked by the Left.  I'm still tolerant of others who don't think like me as long as they don't infringe on my rights.

ust one random columnist who is arguably liberal, ie not the "the liberal talking point" you claimed

Here's more:

theintercept

salon

usatoday

thehill

motherjones

corporatepresidency

There's more. All of them focusing on the close ties between the libertarian bogeymen Koch Brothers and Trump.  The left ricchots between their two favorite bogeymen,  tarring Trump as a "fasist" while simultaneously claiming he's doing the work of the the libertarian Koch brothers. Those are incompatible arguments  and demonstrate the incoherence of the left's attack.  This isn't new, of course, for this entire century they've held up the Republicans as being owned by the Koch brothers while at the same time claiming President Bush was a fascist as well.  

ump killed the last bipartisan agreement Congressional leaders had designed

I don't think you get how it works. What bill did Trump kill?   Congress couldn't even pass a bill and Trump and has the legal right to veto a bill even if they did. If Congress passes a bill, overrides a Trump veto and then Trump refuses to enforce the bill, then you can start talking about authoritarianism. 

hile he has no choice but to follow court rulings i

Here's the thing, authoritarian and fascists don't follow court rulings they don't like. Thanks for conceding that Trump submitted to the Rule of Law! That's giving away the game, whether you know it or not. 

 it's clear that Trump thinks his tiny hands will grow bigger if he unwinds everything Obama accomplished.

Great, we agree again that Trump is divesting the Presidency of autocratic powers and restoring the rule of law. You are making my argument for me.

The dissonance of the left is something to behold. On the one hand, they attack him for not accomplishing things he campaigned on, like building a wall or repealing Obamacare. He hasn't, because he's been following the Constitution and working to achieve his goals through the Democratic process. The day after they ridicule him for not accomplishing anything, the same people will claim Trump is a fascist, ruling as an authoritarian. It's amusing, if nothing else.  

If you don't like Pastor's definition,

I'm  fine with your chosen expert, as he agrees with me about the focus on the rights of the collective, as opposed to the individual, as a defining characteristic of a  fascist regime.

every definition is that fascism is a conservative

Not at all. This is basic stuff. A perusal of a surface level sources like wikipedia demonstrates that scholars, with the intellectual heft of which you are so beloved, define fascism as anti-conservative. Its a revolutionary movement, how could it possibly be conservative? 

looking for an intellectually honest liberal.

Or looking for liberals with any honest intellectualism at all.

Comment removed for CoC violation [ph]

There's more. All of them focusing on the close ties between the libertarian bogeymen Koch Brothers and Trump.

So are you admitting you lied about your original claim?     It seems all of your citations are calling the Koch brothers "libertarians" but none call Trump that.    If anything that just gives libertarians a bad name but all it really means is that the economic interests of one oligarch align with the interests of another, or just that the Kochs understand how to get what they want from Trump much like Putin understands how to manipulate him.    By your logic that would make Trump a KGB officer.

And as I noted your original citation actually called Trump an "obviously ruthless and autocratic leader".    So either you lied or you didn't even read your own citation.    LOL.

todays progressive liberals are the fascists who are trying to be seen as patriots.

Link?

Link?

over 50 yrs of watching in the real world... no link required

I wasn’t aware fascism was going to drastically cut taxes and allow more freedom for businesses with reductions in government regulations. It is far better than I thought it was going to be.

Isn't it great!!!  But I don't think it is Fascism, Nazism, Socialism or even Communism.  With all of those you have to have a Totalitarian Government and we're reducing the power of the government over the citizenry for a change.  Centering our attention on Individualism is exactly opposite of Collectivism which is included in all those types of government.

Just glad it isn't Fascism.  With Fascism we'd have people destroying and  burning things down.  People would have to accept whatever the government decided to pay them for their services.  Corruption within the government would be running rampant.  Oh wait a minute.

From a CPAC panelist:

I’m Glad I Got Booed at CPAC

I’ve been a conservative my entire life. I fell hard for William F. Buckley as a teenager and my first job was as editorial assistant at Buckley’s National Review, followed by stints writing speeches for first lady Nancy Reagan and then working for the Gipper himself. Looking toward the 1988 race, Vice President George H.W. Bush wasn’t conservative enough for me. I went to work as a speechwriter for Representative Jack Kemp in 1986.

So you’d think that the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, would be a natural fit. It once was. But on Saturday, after speaking to this year’s gathering, I had to be escorted from the premises by several guards who seemed genuinely concerned for my safety.

Like the Republican Party, CPAC has become heavily Trumpified. Last year, they invited alt-right provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos (and withdrew the invitation only after lewd tapes surfaced). This year, in addition to the president and vice president, CPAC invited Marion Maréchal-Le Pen, granddaughter of Jean-Marie Le Pen and niece of National Front leader Marine Le Pen.

Matt Schlapp, CPAC’s chairman, described her as a “classical liberal” on Twitter. This is utter nonsense. Ms. Maréchal-Le Pen is a member of the National Front party, and far from distancing herself from her Holocaust-denying, anti-Semitic and racist grandfather, she has offered him a more full-throated endorsement than her aunt has. “I am the political heir of Jean-Marie Le Pen,” Maréchal-Le Pen told the Washington Post last year. “He was a visionary. He was right about a lot of things.”

So it has come to this: a conservative group whose worst fault in years past may have been excessive flat tax enthusiasm now opens its doors to the blood and soil nationalists of Europe.

...... How can the two coasts be demonized and separated from the rest of America when it comes to hot button issues such as gun control, militias, abortion, etc.

that one is easy. the lunatic left has taken over the coasts but this is nothing new.

what is new?

washingtontimes

the 7 million obama voters who bailed on the democrats and elected trump are tired of the lunatic lefts BS also.

( who knew obama was supported by so many rightwing fascists? LOL )

I am so pleased that those of you on the far right have fallen into the same trap that liberals and the rest of the normal voting public fell into last year. We became complacent with the certainty that Donald Trump was the worst candidate we had ever seen and that we would be able to skirt to victory even though the winner of the Democratic nomination was significantly flawed herself. That, paired with a terrible campaign, poor planning, an FBI investigation that went all over the place, and a volatile international situation, led to a presidential election in which Mr. Trump lost the popular vote by over 3,000.000 but won the states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania by a total of 82,000 votes to win the electoral college. The truth is, he won, and the majority of Americans lost.

What those of you on the right don't understand is that Trump started with an approval rating of about 48 which translated into his percentage of votes. His current approval rating is down around 35, which means that most of the waverers who voted for him have determined that it was a mistake and are realigning their votes. We are seeing it in election after election. We will see it next when Lamb beats Saccone in Pennsylvania. As long as the far right thinks that what this madman is doing for this country is positive, the scope of wave that will envelop him and what is left of the republican party will be epic.

and the rest of the normal voting public fell into last year.

starting in 2010 the progressives started losing power... first the house, then the senate and finally the whitehouse for a total of well over 1000 seats in govt lost across this nation  = laughable considering there are only 50 states in which to lose so many seats of power

and all you see is the one year? too funny.. seriously

all that happened "last year" was your bs narrative got left behind "again" and your going to have to face the fact that there is no come back for progressives any time soon (not in any of our lifetimes)

 higher taxes, shit trade deals and open borders are not american traditions and will NOT be normalized.

Y'all simply suck at predicting.

I won't predict who will win the 2020 election, but I predict Trump will be in plenty of legal trouble that will likely keep him from running.  And by then the damage of the cuts and deficits will be too obvious to hide.  In 2018 I'm hopeful the trend will be clear though.

The truth is, he won, and the majority of Americans lost.

Doc Phil, should I assume you think the President of the United States should be elected by the Popular Vote instead of the Electoral College?

Only until his chosen candidate loses the popular vote but wins the electoral votes. Then watch how fast his "mind" changes. 

I won't predict who will win the 2020 election, but I predict Trump will be in plenty of legal trouble that will likely keep him from running.

I agree. I believe that by 2020 it will be President Pence running for re-election. Or Trump just not running if he makes it that far.

I heard they'd be running on higher taxes in 2020.  Not a one of them voted for lower taxes, so they can't run on that.

Did I say that?  No! What I am saying is that there never was this type of discrepancy between the two. I do believe that the right electoral college is a bit of our history that is no longer in in play. It was designed to give greater power to slave owner states . That extra 3/5 per slave make the electoral college a bit of an anachronism. Given that, it's still the law of the land.

I heard they'd be running

they are fixin to be running... LOL

 buzzfeed lawsuit

slate

inspector generals report

usatoday

As long as the far right thinks that what this madman is doing for this country is positive, the scope of wave that will envelop him and what is left of the republican party will be epic.

Keep believing that, that's how we planned it. The early polls are not looking good for the Democrats. There will be no Democrat wave this year, or ever.

CPAC a conservative event?  LePen and the rest of them.  Conservatism is dead.  Supply Side Economics corrupted it and fear forced its weak underpinnings to embrace it.  It's solid foundation of idealism has collapsed under the weight of the gun and the fractious solace it can not deliver.

The rise of Nationalism will only free the elite and subjugate the many who support it.  LePen and the rest of them envy the success of Putin who will not yield.  The Ku Kluxers are fading away, shedding their 'purist of white robes,' exchanging them for the traditional khaki.   

How do I know if I’m one of the elites? Are all successful business people considered to be the elites? 

"All successful business people are elites?"  No.  The cadre will be exclusive for many and inclusive for few.

So what happens to the businesses? What if we refuse to supply them with the goods and services they require? If the businesses are not profitable they will fail and the doors will close. I just don’t see any of this as reality. 

Wow.  I assume you think you will still have a choice.  And this too.  A Nationalist, Oligarchy or Fascist government will take the guns too.  No way in holy hell will they permit the 'under privileged' to be armed.  You will have pledge allegiance to the ruling class and bear arms for their protection only.  You know, private armies and all of that.  Reference Franco, Tito, Mussolini, Stalin and now Putin.  Hell, throw in Kim Jung Un too.  Same ole' same ole'.

I’m not seeing any of that happening. I’m still free to pick the work I choose to do no pledge required. 

I was reading under fascism the taxpayer gets stuck covering the losses of businesses and the businesses get to keep the profit. That sounds more like what we saw with Obama and the auto bailouts than what I’m seeing right now. 

thebalance

Never mind.  Save your seed.

The 'green door' is straight ahead.  It is the door painted green with the knob in the center.  The window is also painted green.  You can't miss it.

What’s got me scratching my head it that the same people that believe Trump is a fascist dictator are the same ones that are pushing for the ban on some weapons. It doesn’t make any sense to me. Why would they strip themselves of the power to overthrow a fascist dictator? 

From the perspective of a gun owner, I understand your point.Unfortunately the debate isn't black or white . It is textured. I,for one value our second amendment but I don't think it is absolute. I believe that the right to own firearms is tempered by the good of the people. Certain weaponry has greater use as a weapon of offense than as a hunting,recreational,or defense weapon. I also don't believe that if we are facing a government bent on the destruction of it's people.,standard weaponry will be useless. If I am going to err on this issue, it will always be on the side of the defenseless. 

I would imagine it would be pretty similar to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan where they are armed with little more than Ak47’s and homemade bombs. The government has been fighting them for years and has not won. Wouldn’t the people here be able to put up a better fight than they are?  Additionally the government gets its weapons from us. Would they bomb Boeing, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics and destroy their own source of weapons?

If this is really fascism and Trump is a dictator why would he allow a free election to vote him out of power as you indicate will happen? Wouldn’t a real fascist dictator prevent that from happening? I would think it would take an armed uprising to overthrow a real fascist regime. 

Either someone has a right or they don’t, it’s a simple as that.

That's naive.   SCOTUS has already found that the states and localities are generally free to regulate gun ownership, much like Congress did when it passed the assault weapons ban.

I cant resist this, exactly what did the 94 AWB , actually ban?

it grandfathered a lot of things , but what did it actually ban that wasn't worked around using the laws own internal definitions?

Imperfect legislation isn't a reason to give up trying.

since you WONT answer the question , I will answer it for you , the ban banned exactly NOTHING , everything it was suppose to ban was still commercially available as long as it conformed to the definition contained in the law , even all the military inspired attatchments/ features were still available commercially separately.
 And it only passed with what 1-2 votes AFTER a sunset provision was included... 

SCOTUS has already found that the states and localities are generally free to regulate gun ownership,

And several already have:

The Supreme Court has rejected challenges to  assault weapons  bans in Connecticut and New York, in the aftermath of the shooting attack on a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida, that left 50 people dead.

The Supreme Court has  repeatedly turned away challenges to gun restrictions  since two landmark decisions that spelled out the right to a handgun to defend one's own home.

Seven states and the District of Columbia have enacted laws banning assault weapons. The others are California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts and New Jersey, according to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

In addition, Minnesota and Virginia regulate assault weapons, the center said.

Or, someone has a responsibility or they don't? 

How about this.  When The Soviet Union collapsed the police nor the Army turned their weapons on the protesting public.  They just could not shoot their brothers, sisters, parents and friends. 

Unfortunately it didn't work out so well.  A lyric.  "Lay down my gun, pick up my guitar and pray I don't get fooled again."

I still don't see why they continue to call it the "Conservative Political Action Committee" when there were no Conservatives there? Just hard far right wingers. White Nationalists. Isolationists. Massive Debt/Deficit Creators. Huge Spenders. No one Buckley or Goldwater or Ford or Reagan or even either Bush would recognize or even want to be associated with...or even be in the same room with.

It's the party of Trump now. Climb aboard the Trump Train now or get left behind.

So it's not the Republican Party any longer? It's not a Party of Conservative values any longer? It's not the Party of Goldwater or Ford or Reagan any longer? It's the Party of FOX and Info-wars and white nationalism and isolationism and racism and huge deficits and give away's to the rich and screw the poor and middle-class? A Party where real Republicans are no longer welcome and are booed? A Party that only welcomes those who are enthralled by the "Dear Leader" Trump and who fall down to worship him and Trumpism? Is the real GOP now dead?

I'm trying to wrap my head around this new republican party.  I hoped that the traditional republican platform would rise up and reassert itself.  Unfortunately that has not happened.  The country seems to be driven by personal greed and special interests.  The new conservative seems to be a resurrection of old.  One that the country used to be ashamed of.  Now it's a badge of honor .........and a red hat.  (shrug)

Maybe this is what the country needed - A reminder of who we were when we were at our worst.  A step back in order to take three steps forward.  I guess we will have to wait and see.

When they dragged off Mona Charen for speaking her mind to the Republican Party and only saying what was true, it proves that right wing arguments about free speech are a total crock of BS.

They whine about how certain white nationalists have been barred from speaking at colleges, but this was a Republican woman.

A Republican who was asked to speak, a Republican who told the truth, a Republican who stands for conservative values, and the minute she spoke outside right wing talking points, she is denied her rights to free speech in her own venue. Dragged out like a witch that needed to be burned at the stake, going after one of their own.

So it doesn't matter how much right wing nuts whine about liberals having free speech, they don't even want their own minions to have free speech.

It has become a club, a team mentality that only the team members who "rah, rah, rah," the party line talking points can be admitted. Party line over America, party line over the Constitution, party line over all else.

They are a bunch of hypocrites!