Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page 1, 2  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:47 am    Post subject: Ron Paul: Christians are Facists Reply with quote

Not as big of a fan as I used to be.


Link
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey, who hasn't been called a fascist at least once in their life? Paul Wells has it right, the establishment candidate always wins in the end.
SFrank85





Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2269
Reputation: 59.8
votes: 4
Location: Toronto - Scarborough Southwest

PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He is a nut.
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 4:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SFrank85 wrote:
He is a nut.


He is a nutcase... This guy has no difference with Dennis Kucinich...
Lar_drewstar





Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 34
Reputation: 19.8Reputation: 19.8
Location: Winnipeg Manitoba

PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 4:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the title of this post is misleading, Paul did not say 'Christians are Fascists' but that Fascism if it were to arise in America would be wrapped in the flag carrying the cross. There is a huge difference. I think hes just trying to point out that religion can be used in fascist like ways which is true as we can look through the history texts for proof of that analysis to be correct.
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lar_drewstar wrote:
I think the title of this post is misleading, Paul did not say 'Christians are Fascists' but that Fascism if it were to arise in America would be wrapped in the flag carrying the cross. There is a huge difference. I think hes just trying to point out that religion can be used in fascist like ways which is true as we can look through the history texts for proof of that analysis to be correct.


Whitewashing a nutcase doesn't solve the initial problem.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just so we're clear on this...

Ron Paul quoted an American author, Sinclair Lewis, from his 1935 semi-satirical cautionary tale "It Can't Happen Here" (which addressed the danger of Nazism) to clearly represent his (Paul's) position on the necessity of the separation between church and state as is articulated in the American constitution.

While that quote might not be familiar to most Canadians (it certainly wasn't to me) it's not surprising it would be familiar to Paul whose political philosophy is diametrically opposed to fascism.

I would like to think anyone of you could have done the 5 minutes of research it took to plumb out these facts like I did but instead you let the word "fascism" freeze your brains. You shouldn't do that.

As Paul quoted from the book, "When facism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." since that is the kind of disguise it would take to lull Americans into a false sense of security so they would blindly follow the leader until all liberties were gone.

Canada, as I've always maintained, is remarkably different than the USA. How do you think fascism would arrive in Canada? I would say it would be wrapped in Trudeaumania, carrying a banner which said "A Just Society" and we don't truly know how close Trudeau came...

-Mac
JaneBella
Guest








PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Winston2004 wrote:
SFrank85 wrote:
He is a nut.


He is a nutcase... This guy has no difference with Dennis Kucinich...


So lets see if I have this 'RIGHT' here

It is OK to call these people a nut , a nut case, but when I refer to a right wing ICONS like Hugh Hewitt and Bill O'Reilly as crazy and a loonie, that is considered to be NAME CALLING (a lazy name-caller)and I am told to grow up.
Do I detect a double standard here?
Vicki





Joined: 22 Sep 2007
Posts: 92
Reputation: 24Reputation: 24
votes: 2
Location: West Vancouver

PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac wrote:
Just so we're clear on this...

Ron Paul quoted an American author, Sinclair Lewis, from his 1935 semi-satirical cautionary tale "It Can't Happen Here" (which addressed the danger of Nazism) to clearly represent his (Paul's) position on the necessity of the separation between church and state as is articulated in the American constitution.

As Paul quoted from the book, "When facism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." since that is the kind of disguise it would take to lull Americans into a false sense of security so they would blindly follow the leader until all liberties were gone.
.....................................................................................

Canada, as I've always maintained, is remarkably different than the USA. How do you think fascism would arrive in Canada? I would say it would be wrapped in Trudeaumania, carrying a banner which said "A Just Society" and we don't truly know how close Trudeau came...

-Mac


Mac - I have sitting beside me as I write my copy of Eric Hoffer's The True Believer, which I began rereading a couple of hours ago. (More about that in a minute.) You are dead right about why he would be familiar with Sinclair Lewis. However, I do think it was
taken out of context. Have we reached the stage where sitting in front of a window is perceived to have some sort of hidden message? Does anyone seriously think Mike Huckabee was communicating some sort of secret message to his supporters?
This is precisely the sort of paranoid thinking that will be the end of us. At some point we have to stand up for ourselves and refuse to examine any more ink blots futilely searching for even more political enemies to our way of life.
I started reading Eric Hoffer again this afternoon because it occurred to me The True Believer was published round about the Suez Crisis. (Oh yeah, for all you Liberals out there, Mike Pearson won the Nobel Prize because he opted to go against our traditional ally of the day, Britain, and was roundly criticized for it in spite of it being the right thing to do in our national interests. But I digress.) Sorry. ...reason for reading book...
I thought it would be interesting to go back and revisit it, both in the context of the rise of pan-Arabism, but contemporary Islamism as well. (It appears I have way too much free time.) I also wasn't entirely satisfied with my reply to you, either. But I do thank you, it really did get me thinking about it further.
This has actually been a very interesting thread throughout.

As for Canada, S.E. Finer thought we were more likely fodder for a military coup d'etat, but he originally stated that during the early years of the FLQ. This comes from one of his lesser works that was just revised this year by a professor at UBC. Haven't got it yet and not familiar with the new introduction, can't find the original, can't state this with authority, but did want to get the point across that you are absolutely right again about Canada, just maybe not share my view of the "how."
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JaneBella wrote:
Winston2004 wrote:
SFrank85 wrote:
He is a nut.


He is a nutcase... This guy has no difference with Dennis Kucinich...


So lets see if I have this 'RIGHT' here

It is OK to call these people a nut , a nut case, but when I refer to a right wing ICONS like Hugh Hewitt and Bill O'Reilly as crazy and a loonie, that is considered to be NAME CALLING (a lazy name-caller)and I am told to grow up.
Do I detect a double standard here?


Do you ever listen to Hugh Hewitt show? You've no right to call him a loony when you dont even listen to his show that is 100% full of intellectual stuff and have guests from all over the political spectrum. Yes, Ron Paul is a nutcase for things he says and his loony supporters but Mr. Hewitt is not one. Get your facts straight before posting here.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 12:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Vicki wrote:
This is precisely the sort of paranoid thinking that will be the end of us. At some point we have to stand up for ourselves and refuse to examine any more ink blots futilely searching for even more political enemies to our way of life.

I'm going to have to find an excuse to drive to West Van one of these days and have a coffee with Vicki. Maybe we can discuss ink blots... :lol:

Most people aren't paranoid. Most are self-absorbed and rather oblivious to what goes on around them. A bit more paranoia and vigilance for the average citizen might be a good thing.

While I don't recommend hyper-vigilance for average citizens, police officers stay alive and are more effective investigators if they are somewhat paranoid and cynical. Hyper-vigilance heightened our senses and allows us to react more quickly... but it can make us a bit unpleasant at times... and some officers can't always "switch off" which makes their home life rather rocky. Then there's that whole "emotional over-investment" thing... how cops often put their job before everthing else because they invest so much emotion catching criminals, they have little or nothing left for their families... but I digress...

ANYWAY, back on topic, I can only surmise why Paul chose that quote but I suspect he was responding to the journalist's question literally, rather than offering an opinion on Huckabee's ad.

The journalist's question, after all the setup, was "We had a guest a little while ago who said he felt it was inappropriate to be using religion for political purposes. Congressman, I'm just curious what you think."

From what I've read and seen of him, I suspect Paul's choice of quote might be more aimed at G. W. Bush than at Huckabee. In searching up that quote, I found it mentioned a couple of times regarding the extreme polarization around Dubya... particularly around Republicans burning Dixie Chicks CDs in response to their anti-Dubya comments. Blind followers are a frightening lot.

Dubya represented a socially conservative sect of Republicans and Dubya might not have succeeded in two terms if he hadn't attracted the "religious right" to him but that particular sect has fallen out of favour (to say the least) and Paul needs to make sure average Republicans and potential swing voters realize he's not going to follow Bush's way.

Another point is Paul is fighting an uphill battle against candidates who have better name and face recognition, particularly McCain, Giuliani and even Thompson. The media have all but dismissed his candidacy. Paul cannot win by being, for lack of a better word, conservative. He has to take chances, attract attention and be remarkably different... Different than his fellow candidates and different than anything the Democrats can muster. In his case, Paul needs only be true to himself and his record as a Congressman.

-Mac

ps: Vicki, it's much nicer having a thread which makes one think. Thank you!
Vicki





Joined: 22 Sep 2007
Posts: 92
Reputation: 24Reputation: 24
votes: 2
Location: West Vancouver

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 12:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
..... I can only surmise why Paul chose that quote but I suspect he was responding to the journalist's question literally, rather than offering an opinion on Huckabee's ad.

The journalist's question, after all the setup, was "We had a guest a little while ago who said he felt it was inappropriate to be using religion for political purposes. Congressman, I'm just curious what you think."


Thank you for providing the context. That changes my perception of his remark somewhat. I would interpret the choice of quote from the viewpoint of political realism: He is presenting a blunt statement of warning, yes, but to whom? It suggests to me that he is stating that there needs to be greater, not less, separation of "church" and state. In other words, if America were ever to fall victim to fascism, it would be because the state had allowed religious values rather than the citizens' bests interests determine public policy. A thoroughly libertarian sentiment with which I happen to agree.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It would appear the journalist didn't expect a literal answer either. I expect he was hoping for Paul to kick some sand at Huckabee before they moved onto Paul's incredible success at fund raising which has shocked everyone but especially the media.

It's funny how the journalist reacted when his brain got frozen by the word 'fascism', isn't it? I expect he's more accustomed to using that kind of language behind people's backs.

Governments can be secular without wiping out all references to God and elected officials should seek counsel with God privately in their hearts, not publicly in the Parliament. How's that for a nuanced statement?

-Mac
don muntean





Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 2262
Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9
votes: 8
Location: Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If America was going to become fascist - it would have happened long ago - when the European nations were becoming that way - and 60 years ago there were MORE adherents to the Christian faith in America. I wonder what faith group ron paul belongs to...
don muntean





Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 2262
Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9
votes: 8
Location: Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac wrote:
Just so we're clear on this...

Ron Paul quoted an American author, Sinclair Lewis, from his 1935 semi-satirical cautionary tale "It Can't Happen Here" (which addressed the danger of Nazism) to clearly represent his (Paul's) position on the necessity of the separation between church and state as is articulated in the American constitution.

While that quote might not be familiar to most Canadians (it certainly wasn't to me) it's not surprising it would be familiar to Paul whose political philosophy is diametrically opposed to fascism.

I would like to think anyone of you could have done the 5 minutes of research it took to plumb out these facts like I did but instead you let the word "fascism" freeze your brains. You shouldn't do that.

As Paul quoted from the book, "When facism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." since that is the kind of disguise it would take to lull Americans into a false sense of security so they would blindly follow the leader until all liberties were gone.

Canada, as I've always maintained, is remarkably different than the USA. How do you think fascism would arrive in Canada? I would say it would be wrapped in Trudeaumania, carrying a banner which said "A Just Society" and we don't truly know how close Trudeau came...

-Mac


You're right about the homework point!

I think that fascism could come to Canada wrapped in socialism - in fact - there already are fascists in Canadian politics - we know them as the NDP!

The NDP is a political group that builds over-reaching socialist infrastructures - guised in 'for the people programs' - their kernel policy is to install an 'authoritarian hierarchical government' - in the form of a top heavy civil service.

Of course - I have come to understand that Liberals are not much different - thus your 'Trudeaumania' point is a good point - Trudeau and that opportunistic Tommy Douglas are always made into the poster boys for this subtle generational makeover of Canada...
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2

Goto page 1, 2  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Ron Paul: Christians are Facists

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB