Sunday, June 08, 2008

Communist Stupidity

Renegade Eye displays how little he knows abut Americans. He declares that I should be a Democrat. This would be true if the Democratic party had not been infiltrated by communists and people who do not belong there like the Moveon crowd.

The Democratic party should have deduced long ago that being soft on communism and allowing fellow travelers into the party was an RX for disaster. They have mutated into a band of unpatriotic internationalist who care more about opinions in faculty lounges or Hollywood cocktail parties than in Walmart parking lots.

Commies like Ren dream of a grand alliance with moderates like myself. This moderate will never allow commies into anything I am involved in . Commies, Anarchists, Jihadis, Nazis, Greens, the KKK and the anti Globalization crowd are the enemies of humanity. I can and do disagree with a Rob Bayn or a Mr B at times but understand the decency from the left to the right. As Americans we want similar things but differ on how to get there. Commies are not American and are part of an internationalist cult that seeks global hegemony.

I am above all other things an American. I do not tolerate genocidal lunatics slandering my country in various degrees of manifesto madness. My social liberalism is secondary to national security and will remain so. Todays Democratic party is too little Scoop Jackson and too much Jesse Jackson.

I want to point out that the natural home of anti-semitism is on the left. One does not have to look too far to find it on the Daily Kos or any other leftist site. The Democratic party needs to clean up its act.


Ducky's here said...

Moveon is a communist organization.

See the thing is, Beak that it's hard to know if you intend this as a comedy site or not.

I try to give you the benefit of the doubt but you may be as delirious as you seem whenever your commie phobia kicks in. You should have it treated.

Ducky's here said...

Tom Delay, indicted Republican: "Unless he proves me wrong, Obama is a Marxist."

Mr. Ducky unindicted (as of now): "Unless he proves me wrong, Tom DeLay is a raging pedophile and sheep-fucker who has more than 500 bodies buried at his estate in Texas and can't get it up unless he sees pics of Mitch McConnell in stiletto heels blowing goats . The goats, too."

beakerkin said...

The infiltration of the Democratic
Party by Commies began under MichaelHarrington. Moveon, Code Pinko, ANSWER are just some of the Communist front groups.

The associations of Obama are facts and he has yet to explain his involvement with terrorist Bill Ayersor his mentor. The Church he belongedto for twenty years is a communist hate cult.

Beamish said...

I think you're unwilling to look into the past, Beakerkin.

FDR didn't have a problem selling munitions and materiel to the Nazis and turning back Jewish refugee ships until Hitler turned on his comrade Stalin.

Justin said...

A quote that makes you wonder just what really lies beneath the facade.

"We live in the greatest nation in the world. And, I need your help to change it."
Barak Obama.

All I can say is hmmmmmmmmm if he thinks its the greatest just why do we need to change it and to what?

I think others should be asking just those questions of him. But will they? Of course not they are caught up in a messanic view of him.

The Pagan Temple said...

I am anti-globalization, and I don't consider myself anti-American, or for that matter "anti-humanity".

I'm just one of these kinds of guys who have this weird, funny idea that America should not involve itself with foreign entanglements, sort of the same way a guy by the name George Washington felt.

These multi-lateral trade regimes are just that-regimes who by their nature requires a leadership that is predominant and not answerable to any people anywhere, American or otherwise.

I don't have a problem with trade pacts or even with defense treaties, so long as they are BI-LATERAL ONLY.


1.When did Hitler declare war on the USSR?

2.When did Roosevelt declare war on Japan

3.When did Germany declare war on the US?

If you look closely, I think you will see all three events occurred in the exact order listed in my questions, and that there was a few years in between the first occasion and the last-when Germany declared war on us, not the other way around.

As far as I'm concerned, Roosevelt did screw up all right. He should have ignored Germany and concentrated on Japan, and then took care of Germany after Japan was dealt with. The likely outcome would have been no USSR by the time the fifties hit.

We paid dearly, and are still paying dearly, for our "good deed".

Anonymous said...



Ducky's here said...

Pagan Temple, Germany was the main act. Roosevelt timed it beautifully so that America would be the last economy standing after the war.

Of course we've managed to screw that up but nonetheless.

No USSR? Unlikely but if that had been the outcome Germany would have been in complete control of Europe, Russia, the Middle East and would have been unbeatable.

Beamish said...


Hitler had already invaded France and was bombing Britain with weapons made from Soviet and American material until June 1940.

It wasn't until Hitler started killing Roosevelt's fellow Communists in the Soviet Union that Roosevelt got upset.

Roosevelt could have acted sooner, but less Americans would have died, which would have jeopardized his position as a Democrat.

The Merry Widow said...

Mr. B.-Tell me about the bombings, Mom was stationed in Ipswich, the buzz bombs flew over her house every night, headed for London.
And she was in London, one steet over from a bomb hitting.
The Battle of Britain was sheer desperation.


Beamish said...


I mispoke above. Russia stopped supplying the Nazis with volatile chemicals and fuel in June 1941.

The Pagan Temple said...

We could have supplied Britain without actually committing large numbers of troops, and concentrated on Japan. We could have taken them out pretty quickly, at least more quickly than we did-maybe a year or more sooner.

By the time we were finished with them, Germany and Russia would have ripped each other to shreds, while we could have supplied Britain just enough to keep them from being overpowered. We could have supplied the USSR as well if it was necessary to keep them going long enough to wreck Hitler.

We could have entered the war against Germany at our leisure and knocked them out pretty quickly. Then, the Soviet Union would not have been in any position to make any kinds of demands as they would have been far too weakened by that point, if not actually destroyed.

This is pretty much the scenario that happened in World War I. That war had been raging for three years by the time we finally entered it. After we became involved, we ended it in a year or maybe a little less than a year. Russia and Germany were both basket cases by then. It was almost like all it took was a little shove, speaking in terms of the actual time we were involved.

It's never good to involve yourself in a two-front war, if there is any conceivable way to avoid it. That was Hitler's main folly, and it was why it took us as long as it did to win it.

Even if the USSR had survived under this scenario, at least there would have been no Warsaw Pact.

Beamish said...


You have to keep in mind that the further left down the political spectrum you go, the smaller the ability of a state military to have battlefield successes against people who will shoot back becomes.

While the Nazis were pretty left-wing, most of their initial territorial gains weren't made against an opposing, organized military defense (Czechoslavakia, France, the Ukraine, etc.) and had the supplies of trade with the Russians and other League of Nations sanctions violators (hiya, America) for over a year. Still, further down the left side of the left-wing were Mussolini's Italy, who managed to get their asses kicked by mostly unarmed Ethiopians; slightly left of that you run into Stalin's Russia, a nation best known in warfare as the nation that got it's navy sunk by the Japanese navy when Japan pretty much had no navy - only to later fail miserably against the "might" of the army of, uh, Finland.

Which of course is the reason why most prudent leftists that have historically come into power have usually restricted the use of their militaries to slaughtering their own people after disarming them and / or attacking perceptibly weaker countries.

Yes, the war would have been shorter had that only America gotten involved in early 1940, but you have to remember at that time the Democratic Party had fought long and hard to get diplomatic recognition for their comrades in Communist Russia, and also we were barely four years out of the Depression caused by loan defaults from European deadbeats in the aftermath of the first World War. Europe is a savage continent that can't go more than 20 years without a war breaking out on their soil. It's been that way since before Phillip of Macedonia strapped on a breastplate. Another war in Europe to settle the barbarians down wasn't exactly a winning economic strategy for Americans, many of whom descend from the European intelligentsia that long ago had moved to America from there to see what civilization looks like.

(One day, America may sit down and take the time to introduce Western Civilization to Europe, but we'll probably have better luck with the Middle East. Just look how well it's taken hold in Japan.)

But the fact of the matter is, Comrade Roosevelt wasn't about to turn America's guns on Hitler without direct orders from the Politburo in Moscow, and Japan was "somebody else's problem." (I'll add here that Russia had signed a peace treaty with Japan, so there was no incentive from Moscow to command Roosevelt to declare war) Especially not when Germany seemed poised to bring about the Marxist dream of a "world without Jews." It was the least Roosevelt could do to send Jewish refugees back to the gas chambers.

By the time America staggered into World War 2, the Nazis had most of Europe and part of Russia under its control - the Nazis couldn't be set aside for a "Japan First" war strategy from America.

Keep in mind when two leftist militaries clash, the less leftist of the two will win.

Nazi Germany would have overrun Russia without America entering the war and propping them up.

The Pagan Temple said...

The Russians held up pretty good in my opinion, especially at the battle of Kirsk. Like I said, we could have supplied them to keep them going, and we could have done the same with Britain. We just should not have sent any large numbers of troops against the Nazis.

How long do you think it would have taken us to defeat Japan had we pursued a Japan first strategy? We might have taken them out in two years.

We might not have even had to wait until Japan was knocked all the way out of the box. We might have had them so weakened after just a year we could have then diverted resources against the Nazis.

Bear in mind, even if the Nazis had overrun the Soviet Union completely, as you say they would have, taking over a country that vastly huge, and that cold in the winter, might be fairly easy compared to actually running and controlling the place afterwards.

It would have been less expensive, would have cost less American lives, and would have taken less time.

I can only think of one downside. We might not have had to use a nuke to finish the job.

Well, you know, there's downsides to everything.

It's nice to know at least I'm not the only person that realizes how barbaric Europeans really are deep down.

Our influence there is the only reason there hasn't been a World War Three centered in the sorry ass place, and probably a World War Four and Five too.

Beamish said...


The Nazis would not have had to overrun Russia from the Ukraine all the way to to Siberia to defeat it.

I think you might be forgetting that Russia was under leftist control in World War 2 - you know, centrally planned economy, government precariously teeteringly upon the viability of being bottlenecked inside a enfortressed capital city.

Russia's actually kinda lucky the Nazis were leftists as well.

Could you imagine if Hitler skipped the leftist behavioral trait of trying to convince rational people that he was mentally retarded, and took out Moscow instead of tilting at Stalingrad because it had Stalin's name on it?

Can you say bye bye Russia?