Saturday, February 06, 2010


Remember that Hitler's rise to power was supported in no small part by his promise — which he kept — to put the German people back to work.

If the right-wing and Republican party can successfully merge the eliminationist narrative of purity — we must purge the corruption of liberalism and socialism and restore our pure American values — with the story that the Republicans can succeed in putting America back to work where the Democrats have failed, they will win handily in 2010 and 2012. The Republicans await only the emergence of a leader as disciplined, focused, and most importantly pitiless as Hitler. They lack only the will, not the opportunity.

Remember too that Hitler did not have a majority of popular support, but his minority was, like him, disciplined, focused and ready to do what was necessary. The Christian fascists are just as disciplined, just as focused, and just as ready to do the job, however dirty. They lack only leadership.


  1. The Christian fascists are just as disciplined, just as focused, and just as ready to do the job, however dirty. They lack only leadership.

    I disagree. Their *leadership* may be disciplined, focused, and dirty, but the vast bulk of the christianist rank and file are lazy, stupid, physically decrepit morons.

  2. I think you're wrong, CPP: the rank and file will show up to vote, and they'll definitely show up en masse when it comes time for torches and pitchforks.

    Most importantly, they're not going to fracture their support for their mainstream leadership. The christianist "splinter groups" are small, and they are working far better with their own "mainstream" than the leftists are.

  3. You mean, lazy like rallying around an election to put a dirtbag republican into a senate position that had been held by a democrat for 50 years?

    Or how about stupid like being intellectually dishonest, like faux news, fooling the general and ACTUAL stupid public into thinking that the left is the devil, communist, socialist (which are contradictions) and succeeding at it?

    Or physically decrepit like any number of brainless jarheads that could break you or myself like a twig if we ever crossed paths?

    Um, you seriously underestimate the other side and that's very dangerous.


Please pick a handle or moniker for your comment. It's much easier to address someone by a name or pseudonym than simply "hey you". I have the option of requiring a "hard" identity, but I don't want to turn that on... yet.

With few exceptions, I will not respond or reply to anonymous comments, and I may delete them. I keep a copy of all comments; if you want the text of your comment to repost with something vaguely resembling an identity, email me.

No spam, pr0n, commercial advertising, insanity, lies, repetition or off-topic comments. Creationists, Global Warming deniers, anti-vaxers, Randians, and Libertarians are automatically presumed to be idiots; Christians and Muslims might get the benefit of the doubt, if I'm in a good mood.

See the Debate Flowchart for some basic rules.

Sourced factual corrections are always published and acknowledged.

I will respond or not respond to comments as the mood takes me. See my latest comment policy for details. I am not a pseudonomous-American: my real name is Larry.

Comments may be moderated from time to time. When I do moderate comments, anonymous comments are far more likely to be rejected.

I've already answered some typical comments.

I have jqMath enabled for the blog. If you have a dollar sign (\$) in your comment, put a \\ in front of it: \\\$, unless you want to include a formula in your comment.