Tea Party Leader Mocks NAACP "Coloreds" In Online Screed

[Serafina]

You still do not get the difference between racism and simple insults, you moronic racist.

Now start addressing the other points, namely
-Why you want taxes lowered below 25'% if they are already below 25%
-Present evidence that lower taxes improve the economy
-Present evidence that Democratic presidents in general are racking up national debt

That's should be a good start. Put up or shut up.

[Einzige]

What you have to understand is that Kalbfus, and those like him, don't base their political views on anything remotely approaching reason. What's more, they themselves don't even believe half the shit they spew, which is why the Tea Party has been so quick to reach rapprochement with the NAACP. Rather, their political 'values' are based wholly on emotion, which is why it's so easy to hammer at the internal contradictions of their logic. You claim to be a radical individualist? Then why your support for Republican military interventionism and Christian social collectivism? You're a good Christian? Then how can you possibly support the dog-eat-dog world of finance capitalism?

They may call themselves 'conservative'; they may actually believe that they are. But they have far more in common with the militaristic, collectivistic philosophy of the Wilsons of the world than with the steady minarchism of the Tafts.

[Tom_Kalbfus]

You still do not get the difference between racism and simple insults, you moronic racist.

That's academic because I don't usually insult people unless severely provoked by people like you, and I do not stop to consider what is a nice way to insult people. I think people like you put too much value in whether something is racist or not and not enough value in whether it is an insult or not. I think racism is perfectly normal and natural and to be expected of people, including people like you, though you won't admit to such with your "holier than thou" attitude. If the Tea Party is racist then so is Germany. I'll bet Germany contains plenty of racist people, and the German government is incapable of getting rid of them all, so how can you expect of a Tea Party what you can't even expect of your country? I not just counting white Germans either, there are plenty of Muslim Germans who are racist against Christians in Germany. Since the German definition of racism also includes that against certain religious groups such as Jews, I'm sure being antichristian also counts as racism in Germany.

Now start addressing the other points, namely
-Why you want taxes lowered below 25'% if they are already below 25%
-Present evidence that lower taxes improve the economy.

The economy grew in the 1980s after the Reagan tax cut, not only that but so did tax revenue.

-Present evidence that Democratic presidents in general are racking up national debt

That's should be a good start. Put up or shut up.

They aren't below 25% for all levels of government combined for all income levels. I think you are only counting Federal Taxes.

[Einzige]

[The economy grew in the 1980s after the Reagan tax cut, not only that but so did tax revenue.

Wrong, asshat. Wrong, wrong, wrong. As I posted elsewhere - and as you purposefully ignored - Ronald Reagan was only able to collect more in taxes by closing "loopholes" that never actually existed. He actually enacted the largest tax hike in history:

Yet raising taxes is exactly what Reagan did. He did not always instigate those hikes or agree to them willingly--but he signed off on them. One year after his massive tax cut, Reagan agreed to a tax increase to reduce the deficit that restored fully one-third of the previous year's reduction. (In a bizarre bit of self-deception, Reagan, who never came to terms with this episode of ideological apostasy, persuaded himself that the three-year, $100 billion tax hike--the largest since World War II--was actually "tax reform" that closed loopholes in his earlier cut and therefore didn't count as raising taxes.)

Faced with looming deficits, Reagan raised taxes again in 1983 with a gasoline tax and once more in 1984, this time by $50 billion over three years, mainly through closing tax loopholes for business. Despite the fact that such increases were anathema to conservatives--and probably cost Reagan's successor, George H.W. Bush, reelection--Reagan raised taxes a grand total of four times just between 1982-84.

This record flummoxes the best efforts of today's Reagan hagiographers to explain away. Peter Wallison, for instance, after proclaiming that Reagan "stayed the course against changes in his economic plan," later dismisses the president's tax increases as "a modest rollback" that "seems to have been the result" of his accepting a Democratic promise to cut spending by twice that amount. (Whatever happened to "Trust, but verify"?)

Reagan continued these "modest rollbacks" in his second term. The historic Tax Reform Act of 1986, though it achieved the supply side goal of lowering individual income tax rates, was a startlingly progressive reform. The plan imposed the largest corporate tax increase in history--an act utterly unimaginable for any conservative to support today. Just two years after declaring, "there is no justification" for taxing corporate income, Reagan raised corporate taxes by $120 billion over five years and closed corporate tax loopholes worth about $300 billion over that same period. In addition to broadening the tax base, the plan increased standard deductions and personal exemptions to the point that no family with an income below the poverty line would have to pay federal income tax. Even at the time, conservatives within Reagan's administration were aghast. According to Wall Street Journal reporters Jeffrey Birnbaum and Alan Murray, whose book Showdown at Gucci Gulch chronicles the 1986 measure, "the conservative president's support for an effort once considered the bastion of liberals carried tremendous symbolic significance." When Reagan's conservative acting chief economic adviser, William Niskanen, was apprised of the plan he replied, "Walter Mondale would have been proud."

1981 was the only year in which he cut taxes, and his insistence on "shadow" hikes set the stage for the damn-near fatal collapse of the late-1980s. Stop bowing at the altar of a false god. There was nothing "minarchist" in the slightest in Ronald Reagan, and any libertarian championing his memory needs a swift kick in the teeth.

[Tom_Kalbfus]

Conservative Republican is definitely a group that you discriminate against with your foul language here on line, and I don't find that substantially different from being Hispanic because one speaks Spanish, or being Muslim for believing in a certain religion.

Ah, so if i say something bad about Nazis in general, i must be a bigot as well - according to your logic, at least.

If you are comparing Republicans to Nazis, then yes that is discrimination. If you say something bad about the Nazis you are telling the truth, but if then say the Republican Party is a bunch of Nazis, that is discrimination

I figure you should practise what you preach. If you are so concerned about blacks being offended because they hear the N-Word at a Tea Party rally, you should stop calling people "Fucktards" or "Shitheads" because that offends just as much, and "shithead" is also a racial slur, because you know what color shit it, a black man hearing you say that can get just as offended as if you used the N-Word.

Yeah, those words can offend anyone.
Which is the reason why they are not offensive to any particular group (unless used to describe that group), they are just generic cursewords.

Don't they? They suffer discrimination from people like you all the time.

Kiddo, you don't KNOW what discrimination is. A person holding an opposing viewpoint to you is NOT discrimination. A person insulting you is NOT discrimination.
I suggest that you get a grip on reality.

And your not racist how exactly as you go around callling people "Fucktards" and "Shitheads"? I really don't think it makes a difference if you offend someone by using the N-Word or you offend somebody by calling them a "Shithead". You think you are better than a racist? You are not!

No. I am, at best, rude. I am attacking you and you alone.
You, however, generalized and stereotyped the whole german population - which IS racist.

Which defines what America is all about, An America under a different political system is unamerican, you speak negatively about our system of government you speak negatively about us. You could perhaps imagine an America where were all a bunch of drones under a communist dictator, but that is not America!

No. Speaking negatively about a government is NOT speaking negatively about the people of that state. And it's definitely not racist.

Aren't you forgetting that our President, Barack Obama, is black? Are you going to call him a shithead?

Another thing, my country and government, which you despise spared yours after World War II, and it has been protecting your country throughout the Cold War. Let me put it another way. More Americans have died for German Freedom than Germans? Germans were singularily unhelpful as we tried to liberate your country from the Nazis and Hitlers denial of your freedoms and arbitrary execution of your citizens among others during World War II. American troops came to deliver freedom and Democracy to Germany, and what did we get in return? aA bunch of ungrateful German soldiers that shot at us, that's what. You see most German soldiers weren't fighting for your freedom, they were fighting for Hitler instead, so you should show a little more appreciation for the American Government, because without it, well perhaps the Germans would have instead got what they deserved after killing so many innocent people in neighboring countries.

[Einzige]

Hey you fucking ingrate, instead of whining like a pissant that someone was mean to you (and, incidentally, if ever I need again to demonstrate the reverse-political correctness of the "conservative" movement, I'll simply point to you), why not try to rebut some of their salient points? Like, say, mine?

[Tom_Kalbfus]

[The economy grew in the 1980s after the Reagan tax cut, not only that but so did tax revenue.

Wrong, asshat. Wrong, wrong, wrong. As I posted elsewhere - and as you purposefully ignored - Ronald Reagan was only able to collect more in taxes by closing "loopholes" that never actually existed. He actually enacted the largest tax hike in history:

It just goes to show you that you are living on the "planet Liberal" instead of in the real World. That planet crumbled at the end of the Cold War, as it was based of Soviet lies, but you and your kind went and built it right up again. Now I really can't argue much with you since you can't agree on basic facts, but Ronald Reagan did lower taxes and I was there, so don't tell me otherwise. Now you tell me, If I take away more of your income, are you going to spend more or less? It is a simple math problem, If you now have less money are you still going to go to that expensive restaurant as you planned to before the thief stole your wallet? You see Liberals have this funny belief that if the government takes away more of its citizen's money, they are going to spend more not less. Well what if a thief steals you wallet, isn't that the same? The government can spend your taken money and stimulate the economy, but then so could the Thief who stole your wallet. Aren't you going to appreciate the Thief for spending your money and creating all those jobs through the multiplier effect?

Simple common sense, I don't need to prove that tax cuts stimulate the economy because it is already quite obvious.

[Tom_Kalbfus]

Hey you fucking ingrate, instead of whining like a pissant that someone was mean to you (and, incidentally, if ever I need again to demonstrate the reverse-political correctness of the "conservative" movement, I'll simply point to you), why not try to rebut some of their salient points? Like, say, mine?

Calm down! I was responding to her post first and now I'm responding to yours, don't be so impatient like a child!

[Einzige]

[The economy grew in the 1980s after the Reagan tax cut, not only that but so did tax revenue.

Wrong, asshat. Wrong, wrong, wrong. As I posted elsewhere - and as you purposefully ignored - Ronald Reagan was only able to collect more in taxes by closing "loopholes" that never actually existed. He actually enacted the largest tax hike in history:

It just goes to show you that you are living on the "planet Liberal" instead of in the real World. That planet crumbled at the end of the Cold War, as it was based of Soviet lies, but you and your kind went and built it right up again. Now I really can't argue much with you since you can't agree on basic facts, but Ronald Reagan did lower taxes and I was there, so don't tell me otherwise. Now you tell me, If I take away more of your income, are you going to spend more or less? It is a simple math problem, If you now have less money are you still going to go to that expensive restaurant as you planned to before the thief stole your wallet? You see Liberals have this funny belief that if the government takes away more of its citizen's money, they are going to spend more not less. Well what if a thief steals you wallet, isn't that the same? The government can spend your taken money and stimulate the economy, but then so could the Thief who stole your wallet. Aren't you going to appreciate the Thief for spending your money and creating all those jobs through the multiplier effect?

Simple common sense, I don't need to prove that tax cuts stimulate the economy because it is already quite obvious.

Wow. Holy fuck. Holy fucking shit. The "special" schools must have let out early for the summer.

Does the Barry Goldwater quote in my signature not tip you off to the fact that I am not a liberal? I mean, you know who Barry Goldwater was, right? They called him "Mr. Conservative"? Then again, I doubt a redneck fuckwit like yourself would consider him conservative at all today; he didn't think the government should be so large as to dictate sexual mores to individuals.

Moreover, does the presence of Max Stirner in my avatar not indicate to you that I oppose all forms of government? And, if you're too ignorant to know who he was, doesn't the fact that I was bitching about Reagan being a Statist stooge do the same? If you were in my presence and said I'm living on "planet liberal" I'd probably break your worthless goddamn nose.

Now address my points, you smarmy sack of shit. How can you even remotely claim that Reagan "lowered taxes" when he objectively did not? How can you say he was a 'fiscal conservative' when he massively bloated the deficit?

[The Yosemite Bear]

REAL FUCKING WORLD???

excuse me, I work for a living, and these teapers are fucking nuts, what that giving extra free money to the millionaires who don't really need it, is going to improve anything? no, they have been fucking over the majority of us, for the upperclass, they've been selling out the jobs to slave labour, cheating on everything, and taking advantage of all the pervious generations contributions. The current neo-con movement and all of Randism is completly morally bankrupt, and have made the whole lot of us Bankrupt-Bankrupt.

[Einzige]

Hey fuckass, I'll accept your apology for calling me a "liberal" now.

[Thanas]

Another thing, my country and government, which you despise spared yours after World War II, and it has been protecting your country throughout the Cold War. Let me put it another way. More Americans have died for German Freedom than Germans? Germans were singularily unhelpful as we tried to liberate your country from the Nazis and Hitlers denial of your freedoms and arbitrary execution of your citizens among others during World War II. American troops came to deliver freedom and Democracy to Germany,

Horse manure. The Americans did not invade Germany to liberate it. Witness Eisenhowers address that american troops were not entering Germany as liberators but as victors, see also Directive JCS 1067 to the Allied Commander in Europe:

Germany will not be occupied for the purpose of liberation but as a defeated enemy nation. Your aim is not oppression but to occupy Germany for the purpose of realizing certain important Allied objectives. In the conduct of your occupation and administration you should be just but firm and aloof. You will strongly discourage fraternization with the German officials and population.

You see most German soldiers weren't fighting for your freedom, they were fighting for Hitler instead, so you should show a little more appreciation for the American Government, because without it, well perhaps the Germans would have instead got what they deserved after killing so many innocent people in neighboring countries.

I guess history does not work that way. Oh, btw, what did Germany deserve in your opinion?

[Dalton]

Simple common sense, I don't need to prove that tax cuts stimulate the economy because it is already quite obvious.

That's not the way it works here, dipshit. Back up your claims or get the fuck out. I already have enough to kick your ass out of here for being an evasive bigot.

[bobalot]

Simple common sense, I don't need to prove that tax cuts stimulate the economy because it is already quite obvious.

That's not the way it works here, dipshit. Back up your claims or get the fuck out. I already have enough to kick your ass out of here for being an evasive bigot.

Fat Chance, I'm still waiting for him to produce evidence for his numerous claims against the NAACP.

[Serafina]

If you are comparing Republicans to Nazis, then yes that is discrimination. If you say something bad about the Nazis you are telling the truth, but if then say the Republican Party is a bunch of Nazis, that is discrimination

No, it's not. You do not even know what discrimination is.
I am making a statement about the Tea Party in general, mostly it's policies. I am NOT making a broad statement about all of it's members. There is a difference between the two - learn it.

Aren't you forgetting that our President, Barack Obama, is black? Are you going to call him a shithead?

Of course i would if he messes something up and is an incredible jackass about it (so far he has avoided the latter part IMO).
Would that be racist? No, because i would not attack him for being black, i would attack him for messing up.

Another thing, my country and government, which you despise spared yours after World War II, and it has been protecting your country throughout the Cold War. Let me put it another way. More Americans have died for German Freedom than Germans? Germans were singularily unhelpful as we tried to liberate your country from the Nazis and Hitlers denial of your freedoms and arbitrary execution of your citizens among others during World War II. American troops came to deliver freedom and Democracy to Germany, and what did we get in return? aA bunch of ungrateful German soldiers that shot at us, that's what. You see most German soldiers weren't fighting for your freedom, they were fighting for Hitler instead, so you should show a little more appreciation for the American Government, because without it, well perhaps the Germans would have instead got what they deserved after killing so many innocent people in neighboring countries.

What a laughable argument.
Why do Americans always think that they are "fighting for democracy"? Because you are not and never have been since your war of Independence, you are fighting for your own interests. Which is what ever other nation is doing as well, you are just dishonest about it.
Put simply - you would NOT have fought against the third reich if it had not attacked your allies. You don't give a damn if a countries population is oppressed, you only use that as an excuse if you go to war anyway. And your morals to hold every single citizen of a country fully accountable for that nations war crimes is quite deplorable.

Even if the above wasn't total BS, you still got a lot out of it. A very strong allied country which produces very important goods for you (machine tools etc.). And of course a first line of defense against your new enemy, the USSR.
But of course you are too narrow-sighted to see that, just like you are too narrow-sighted to see that your political opinion is based on lies rather than facts.

Now go answer the points of other people.

[PeZook]

They aren't below 25% for all levels of government combined for all income levels. I think you are only counting Federal Taxes.

You think? How about "my research shows that...?"

Total state tax revenues in 2009 were 715.2 billion, or 4.9% GDP. Census link

Added to total federal government revenue, it's still 19.5% GDP! Which means the federal government could tax an additional 5% GDP and you would still not be able to complain!

Funny thing...rememer that Forbes document I posted? This one? It would be nice if you noticed the dates when the data was compiled. Question to you: which president was in office then, when the US taxed people 5% more than it does today?

And you wonder why everybody here holds you in such low regard? It took me five minutes to gather that information from pulically available sources. Am I just so awesome? It would be nice to think yes, but I'm not an idiot. Unlike you, apparently.

Another thing, my country and government, which you despise spared yours after World War II, and it has been protecting your country throughout the Cold War. Let me put it another way. More Americans have died for German Freedom than Germans? Germans were singularily unhelpful as we tried to liberate your country from the Nazis and Hitlers denial of your freedoms and arbitrary execution of your citizens among others during World War II. American troops came to deliver freedom and Democracy to Germany, and what did we get in return? aA bunch of ungrateful German soldiers that shot at us, that's what. You see most German soldiers weren't fighting for your freedom, they were fighting for Hitler instead, so you should show a little more appreciation for the American Government, because without it, well perhaps the Germans would have instead got what they deserved after killing so many innocent people in neighboring countries.

In other words, if your government did something great and awesome more than a half century ago, it's beyond reproach today?

Okay, I claim Poland should forever and ever get a tithe from Austria, and Austria is not allowed to criticize us ever because in 1529, we saved them from conquest!

Alternatively, if a mass murderer today did something nice at any point in his life, he's not to be imprisoned.

EDIT: Not to mention you Americans fought for democracy so hard that you let half of Germany and all eastern european states fall under Soviet influence! Truly, WWII was about freedom, rather than defeating the Nazis!

[PeZook]

Ghetto edit: I got the two battles of vienna mixed up, the one I was talking about was the 1683 siege by the Ottomans, of course.

[Akhlut]

If you are comparing Republicans to Nazis, then yes that is discrimination. If you say something bad about the Nazis you are telling the truth, but if then say the Republican Party is a bunch of Nazis, that is discrimination

"That word, I don't think it means what you think it means."

Discrimination is not so simple as name-calling, mang. While name-calling is a part of it, there are other, more salient features to it, such as denial of rights, prevention of hiring, physical threats, and treatment as a second class citizen. People comparing Republicans to Nazis isn't discrimination, as there isn't much in the way of denial or rights or physical threats going on. Comparing black people to monkeys, however, is a different situation due to past discrimination using those very same terms and a strong thread of dehumanization. For instance, most people who compare Republicans to Nazis understand that Republicans are still humans and deserving of all the same rights, benefits, and so forth guaranteed by law; most people who compare black people to monkeys, though, usually want to exclude black people from civil society, if not wanting to kill them outright.

You have an inability to see things other than in pure black and white terms. For instance, either Einzige is a conservative Republican or he's a liberal, he cannot possibly be a small-L libertarian because you have no room for such an ideology in your view of the world.

So, you have to understand: people insulting you or comparing your ideology to Nazis is not discrimantory in the same manner as racism, if it is really discrimination at all. Being called a shithead doesn't carry 3 centuries' worth of racial stigma with it; being compared to a Nazi for a chosen ideology doesn't carry the same weight as being judged as a sub-human piece of filth worthy only for extermination or slave labor. There are vast differences between the two.

Let me put it another way. More Americans have died for German Freedom than Germans?

Well, if you're going by that metric, more Russians died for German freedoms than Germans and Americans combined.

[Tom_Kalbfus]

If you are comparing Republicans to Nazis, then yes that is discrimination. If you say something bad about the Nazis you are telling the truth, but if then say the Republican Party is a bunch of Nazis, that is discrimination

"That word, I don't think it means what you think it means."

Discrimination is not so simple as name-calling, mang. While name-calling is a part of it, there are other, more salient features to it, such as denial of rights, prevention of hiring, physical threats, and treatment as a second class citizen. People comparing Republicans to Nazis isn't discrimination, as there isn't much in the way of denial or rights or physical threats going on.

It is hate mongering. Most people don't hate monkeys, comparing the entire Republican Party, about half the population of the United States and saying they are Nazis is discrimination, it is stereotyping a whole group of people, and its not calling them monkeys its calling them Nazis, it encourages someone to maybe murder somebody because of his party affiliation with that Nazi comparison, and one should not throw it around carelessly because there are real Nazis out there. Some people might come to believe that being a Nazi is no big deal as rude liberals are comparing Republicans to them. Do you want to swell the ranks of the real Nazis?

Comparing black people to monkeys, however, is a different situation due to past discrimination using those very same terms and a strong thread of dehumanization. For instance, most people who compare Republicans to Nazis understand that Republicans are still humans and deserving of all the same rights, benefits, and so forth guaranteed by law; most people who compare black people to monkeys, though, usually want to exclude black people from civil society, if not wanting to kill them outright.

Monkeys don't usually commit genocide, I'd say comparing republicans to Nazis is worse than comparing blacks to monkeys. Calling somebody a monkey is only name calling, the things the Nazis did was much worse. I believe most black people can survive getting their egos bruised, for the Jews, getting gassed and cremated by the Nazis was much worse. I'd be more inclided to tollerate someone calling someone a "dumb animal" than calling a legitimate political party with differences of opinion "Evil" which is what comparing them to the Nazis basically is.

You have an inability to see things other than in pure black and white terms. For instance, either Einzige is a conservative Republican or he's a liberal, he cannot possibly be a small-L libertarian because you have no room for such an ideology in your view of the world.

He said, "Wrong, asshat. Wrong, wrong, wrong. As I posted elsewhere - and as you purposefully ignored - Ronald Reagan was only able to collect more in taxes by closing "loopholes" that never actually existed. He actually enacted the largest tax hike in history:"
He is rude, and that colors my judgement of him right off the bat. Maybe I would be more polite to him if he would be more polite to me. Its possible to disagree about politics while remaining civil about it, but that doesn't seem to have occured to him or Serafina, she comes off to me as a boorish German of the left-wing persuasion. There is a saying, "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones." I believe Germans live in a "glass house" when it comes to racism, because of their history with the Holocaust. I just can't get worked up about some German accusing me of racism, coming from "Hitler country" as she does. Besides when you get down to it, calling someone a name is a far cry from murdering them, and Germany embodies the more extreme case or racism and White Supreamicy than just calling a black person an insensitive name - and also I don't like her trying to smear and American Political movement as racist, coming as she does from Germany. If she says all Tea Partiers are racist, by that logic, I can say that if Hitler was a Nazi and is German then Germany is a racist country, and there is certainly more evidence for that than there is of racism in the Tea Party.

So, you have to understand: people insulting you or comparing your ideology to Nazis is not discrimantory in the same manner as racism, if it is really discrimination at all. Being called a shithead doesn't carry 3 centuries' worth of racial stigma with it; being compared to a Nazi for a chosen ideology doesn't carry the same weight as being judged as a sub-human piece of filth worthy only for extermination or slave labor. There are vast differences between the two.

Actually Nazis are subhuman, their actions in the Holocaust betray them as such, murdering, human experimentation, skinning humans, taning their skin and making boots and lamp shades out of it, reducing human body fat to bars of soap, injecting people with typhus, killing women and children, working them to death in labor camps, that sort of thing. If would be nice if Serafine would try to rise above some of her countries past Germanic outrages instead of being a boorish rude German girl.

Let me put it another way. More Americans have died for German Freedom than Germans?

Well, if you're going by that metric, more Russians died for German freedoms than Germans and Americans combined.

The Germans under Russian rule were not free. One of the first things the Russians did after taking Berlin was to rape women. Germans were shot and killed for trying to cross over from East Germany to West Germany. The Russians didn't die for German freedom, they only died to take land. You see unlike the Russians, the United States wasn't in World War II to expand our empire, it wasn't in it to shift European borders around the way the Russians were.

[SirNitram]

Tom, if you're here to be a part of the discussion, please consult Link and start obeying them, particularly the bit about 'not using someone being rude as a reason to ignore their arguments, and providing evidence for your claims.

If not, I assume you're a troll, and I have no doubt the public shaming will begin, as it does for ALL trolls.

[Thanas]

*snip*

I love how you ignore the Joint Chiefs of Staff directive just because you do not like it for it destroys the American=liberators image.

[Tom_Kalbfus]

If you are comparing Republicans to Nazis, then yes that is discrimination. If you say something bad about the Nazis you are telling the truth, but if then say the Republican Party is a bunch of Nazis, that is discrimination

No, it's not. You do not even know what discrimination is.
I am making a statement about the Tea Party in general, mostly it's policies. I am NOT making a broad statement about all of it's members. There is a difference between the two - learn it.

Why should it chase shadows conjured up by its democratic opponents? the charges of racism are all heresay and unsubstantiated, just because someone said something doesn't mean its true. The racism charge is just a distraction because the Democrats don't have any real accomplishments they can talk about, so out comes the racism charges, it is all lies.

Aren't you forgetting that our President, Barack Obama, is black? Are you going to call him a shithead?

Of course i would if he messes something up and is an incredible jackass about it (so far he has avoided the latter part IMO).

Interesting then that you don't like my government but you do like him, isn't he the head of the United States Government, so if you call the US Government Imperialist, as head of that government, you are calling him an Imperialist, for example.

Would that be racist? No, because i would not attack him for being black, i would attack him for messing up.

Another thing, my country and government, which you despise spared yours after World War II, and it has been protecting your country throughout the Cold War. Let me put it another way. More Americans have died for German Freedom than Germans? Germans were singularily unhelpful as we tried to liberate your country from the Nazis and Hitlers denial of your freedoms and arbitrary execution of your citizens among others during World War II. American troops came to deliver freedom and Democracy to Germany, and what did we get in return? aA bunch of ungrateful German soldiers that shot at us, that's what. You see most German soldiers weren't fighting for your freedom, they were fighting for Hitler instead, so you should show a little more appreciation for the American Government, because without it, well perhaps the Germans would have instead got what they deserved after killing so many innocent people in neighboring countries.

What a laughable argument.
Why do Americans always think that they are "fighting for democracy"? Because you are not and never have been since your war of Independence, you are fighting for your own interests. Which is what ever other nation is doing as well, you are just dishonest about it.
Put simply - you would NOT have fought against the third reich if it had not attacked your allies. You don't give a damn if a countries population is oppressed, you only use that as an excuse if you go to war anyway. And your morals to hold every single citizen of a country fully accountable for that nations war crimes is quite deplorable.

Likewise for you calling the Tea Party a racist organization based on alledged racist incidents in its midst, the Nazi Party was a racist organization, and its actions weren't alleged and they weren't heresay.

The United States didn't have allies at the time, it was officially a neutral country, FDR worked to change that neutrality, so if you are vilifying anyone, you are villifying FDR.
Oh by the way, the Germans didn't bomb Pearl Harbor. And Oh yes, we cared if a country's population was being oppressed, Albert Einstein was one such refuge from an oppressed German Population, also Albert Einstein wasn't as rude as you, he didn't go around calling people shitheads, even if he did disagree with them.

Even if the above wasn't total BS, you still got a lot out of it. A very strong allied country which produces very important goods for you (machine tools etc.). And of course a first line of defense against your new enemy, the USSR.
But of course you are too narrow-sighted to see that, just like you are too narrow-sighted to see that your political opinion is based on lies rather than facts.

As you lie and try to smear the Tea Party with unsustantianted "facts", no photographic evidence was ever produced about any of those black congressmen being harassed. And compare those black congressmen to Jews getting their skulls beaten in by mad German crowds during "Krystal nought".

Now go answer the points of other people.

[Tom_Kalbfus]

Tom, if you're here to be a part of the discussion, please consult Link and start obeying them, particularly the bit about 'not using someone being rude as a reason to ignore their arguments, and providing evidence for your claims.

If not, I assume you're a troll, and I have no doubt the public shaming will begin, as it does for ALL trolls.

I don't think rudeness is a part of civil discourse. Some people think that because they are on the internet, they can be as rude as they damn well please, point of fact if that same person were to be as rude in person, fights would ensue.

A person's rudeness indicates that such a person has already formed his opinion, and that it would be a waste of time trying to prove anything to him as he is not going to listen. It is possible to have well reasoned arguments without resorting to words like "fucktard" and "shithead", that is actually trolling, because the person who uses such words is trying to solicit an emotional response! It is kind of distracting when people start throwing out words like that, because it doesn't contribute to the argument, and it also reveals what sort of person they are, they are boorish, rude, and immature, if they want to be taken seriously, if I'm going to spend any time trying to prove anything to them, they should stop the name calling, and stop making everything personal. You can argue with my ideas, but if you descend into name calling you are degrading only yourself.

[Tom_Kalbfus]

*snip*

I love how you ignore the Joint Chiefs of Staff directive just because you do not like it for it destroys the American=liberators image.

If we wanted, we could have destroyed Germany, we tried to rebuild the place instead, we kept 80% of the Germans free while the other 20% fell under the thumb of the Russians. We allowed democracy and free elections in Germany, while the Germans chose to walk away from such in 1933, and their Russian masters chose to oppress them after 1945. Those truths remain, whatever the Joint Chiefs of Staff said or did. We could have been alot worse and more vengeful, we could have done the same to the Russians.

[Akhlut]

If you are comparing Republicans to Nazis, then yes that is discrimination. If you say something bad about the Nazis you are telling the truth, but if then say the Republican Party is a bunch of Nazis, that is discrimination

"That word, I don't think it means what you think it means."

Discrimination is not so simple as name-calling, mang. While name-calling is a part of it, there are other, more salient features to it, such as denial of rights, prevention of hiring, physical threats, and treatment as a second class citizen. People comparing Republicans to Nazis isn't discrimination, as there isn't much in the way of denial or rights or physical threats going on.

It is hate mongering. Most people don't hate monkeys, comparing the entire Republican Party, about half the population of the United States and saying they are Nazis is discrimination, it is stereotyping a whole group of people, and its not calling them monkeys its calling them Nazis, it encourages someone to maybe murder somebody because of his party affiliation with that Nazi comparison, and one should not throw it around carelessly because there are real Nazis out there. Some people might come to believe that being a Nazi is no big deal as rude liberals are comparing Republicans to them. Do you want to swell the ranks of the real Nazis?

You're completely ignorant of history. How old are you, out of curiosity? Are you seriously completely unfamiliar with the history behind comparing black people to monkeys, and of the known terrorism inflicted on black people for decades? In comparison, there is not a single, solitary instance of a Republican being killed over being compared to a Nazi. You have some serious inability to comprehend differences of scale.

Comparing black people to monkeys, however, is a different situation due to past discrimination using those very same terms and a strong thread of dehumanization. For instance, most people who compare Republicans to Nazis understand that Republicans are still humans and deserving of all the same rights, benefits, and so forth guaranteed by law; most people who compare black people to monkeys, though, usually want to exclude black people from civil society, if not wanting to kill them outright.

Monkeys don't usually commit genocide, I'd say comparing republicans to Nazis is worse than comparing blacks to monkeys. Calling somebody a monkey is only name calling, the things the Nazis did was much worse. I believe most black people can survive getting their egos bruised, for the Jews, getting gassed and cremated by the Nazis was much worse. I'd be more inclided to tollerate someone calling someone a "dumb animal" than calling a legitimate political party with differences of opinion "Evil" which is what comparing them to the Nazis basically is.

Again, you're stupid. No Republican has ever been brutally murdered in spite of such comparisons; plenty of black people have been murdered. In fact, back in the 1920s, a black neighborhood in Tulsa, OK, was BOMBED by airplanes due to a race riot.

So, get some perspective.

You have an inability to see things other than in pure black and white terms. For instance, either Einzige is a conservative Republican or he's a liberal, he cannot possibly be a small-L libertarian because you have no room for such an ideology in your view of the world.

He said, "Wrong, asshat. Wrong, wrong, wrong. As I posted elsewhere - and as you purposefully ignored - Ronald Reagan was only able to collect more in taxes by closing "loopholes" that never actually existed. He actually enacted the largest tax hike in history:"
He is rude, and that colors my judgement of him right off the bat. Maybe I would be more polite to him if he would be more polite to me. Its possible to disagree about politics while remaining civil about it, but that doesn't seem to have occured to him or Serafina, she comes off to me as a boorish German of the left-wing persuasion. There is a saying, "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones." I believe Germans live in a "glass house" when it comes to racism, because of their history with the Holocaust. I just can't get worked up about some German accusing me of racism, coming from "Hitler country" as she does. Besides when you get down to it, calling someone a name is a far cry from murdering them, and Germany embodies the more extreme case or racism and White Supreamicy than just calling a black person an insensitive name - and also I don't like her trying to smear and American Political movement as racist, coming as she does from Germany. If she says all Tea Partiers are racist, by that logic, I can say that if Hitler was a Nazi and is German then Germany is a racist country, and there is certainly more evidence for that than there is of racism in the Tea Party.

First off: politeness is not a requisite here. You are arguing people based on the merits of their arguments, not on how much cussing and insults are in them. If you don't like it, be the bigger man and ignore the insults and SHOW people they're wrong, don't ignore them when they post evidence that goes against your worldview (as Einzige, Thanas, and Serafina have all done).

Secondly: You cannot really adequately assert that Germany is currently a racist country in general, given it freely allows immigration from Turkey, allows Jews in Israel passports if they can prove descent from a Jew who used to live in Germany until the Nazi regime took power, and has otherwise done a lot to further racial harmony. Furthermore, one sees a great deal less racist sentiment on the political left than on the political right, and when the Tea Party has people shouting 'nigger' at Congressmenand writing the letter as seen in the OP, one can easily deduce that there are a number of Teabaggers who are racist.

So, you have to understand: people insulting you or comparing your ideology to Nazis is not discrimantory in the same manner as racism, if it is really discrimination at all. Being called a shithead doesn't carry 3 centuries' worth of racial stigma with it; being compared to a Nazi for a chosen ideology doesn't carry the same weight as being judged as a sub-human piece of filth worthy only for extermination or slave labor. There are vast differences between the two.

Actually Nazis are subhuman, their actions in the Holocaust betray them as such, murdering, human experimentation, skinning humans, taning their skin and making boots and lamp shades out of it, reducing human body fat to bars of soap, injecting people with typhus, killing women and children, working them to death in labor camps, that sort of thing. If would be nice if Serafine would try to rise above some of her countries past Germanic outrages instead of being a boorish rude German girl.[/quote]

By insisting that Nazis are subhuman, you are engaging in dangerous thought. They are certainly atrocious and engaged in horrific actions, but they were always human. To forget that makes it much easier to fall prey to the same traps as they did. Remember, a great deal of Nazis were average German citizens and were mostly regular people who wanted to get Germany back into its 'place in the sun.'

Plus, you seem to forget that the US did do similar things to blacks as the Nazis did to Jews and the mentally disabled. For instance, the US government injected black people with syphillis to see what it did, engaged in a campaign of terror to deprive black people of civil rights, and gave de facto allowance for white people to kill black people at will. So, glass houses and throwing stones, eh?

Let me put it another way. More Americans have died for German Freedom than Germans?

Well, if you're going by that metric, more Russians died for German freedoms than Germans and Americans combined.

The Germans under Russian rule were not free. One of the first things the Russians did after taking Berlin was to rape women. Germans were shot and killed for trying to cross over from East Germany to West Germany. The Russians didn't die for German freedom, they only died to take land. You see unlike the Russians, the United States wasn't in World War II to expand our empire, it wasn't in it to shift European borders around the way the Russians were.[/quote]

Had the Russians not been responsible for over 70% of German casualities, do you think we could have made it to Berlin without experiencing hundreds of thousands, if not millions, more casualities ourselves? Things aren't black and white, remember.

Edit: Fixed quote tags.