Sat Dec 22, 2012, 06:24 AM
PCIntern (16,198 posts)
Wayne LaPierre has Hitler Hair...
Whilst watching this fool, I was reminded of that photo of that courtroom full of Nazis at Nuremberg. He has that same
Visage: ferret-like, angry, coldly explaining his solution to problems which involves extreme violence for the good of the country. This man and his minions are the Illinois Nazis immortalized in the Blues Brothers film, except that this isn't a joke or fiction. These people are real, and he is the face of evil and death. It is pure sociopathy which lives behind those dead eyes, but fear not...
We are coming to take our country back from these radicals.
13 replies, 2733 views
Wayne LaPierre has Hitler Hair... (Original post)
|Fawke Em||Dec 2012||#11|
Response to dballance (Reply #3)
Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:19 AM
PCIntern (16,198 posts)
I said, if you recall, that he has Hitler Hair. I believe that I am quite able to make any reference which I deem fit...last I looked it was still a country in which free speech is allowed, and the fact of the matter is that this fascist bastard is supporting the placement of weapons wholesale in schools. That is about as Hitlerian a recommendation as you can have at this stage.
So thank you for allowing me to amplify my relatively benign comment, and double down like the RW fascisti do when confronted with their words.
DU rules forbid me to continue this reply...
Response to PCIntern (Reply #8)
Sat Dec 22, 2012, 11:56 AM
dballance (5,756 posts)
10. Actually, You Have NO 1st Amendment Rights on DU
The 1st Amendment protects you from government intrusion into your free speech. You have absolutely no 1st Amendment protections on social media like Twitter or Facebook. No protections on Yahoo, Google, or any other privately owned site like DU or any of the many newspaper and magazine sites that let people post comments. They are all perfectly free to abridge your speech. Just as DU does with moderators and the jury system.
Yes, you said he "has Hitler Hair." Yes, you are quite able to make any reference which you deem fit. Just as I am able to criticize any reference you make on a public site like DU. You have enough posts here to know that not every one of your posts is going to be accepted by everyone. I know that about mine and accept it when people respond in what I think is a negative way.
Keep posting any reference you deem fit. If some one finds it sufficiently inappropriate they will alert on it. But don't get your back up so much when someone simply responds with a post you don't like.
Response to dballance (Reply #10)
Sat Dec 22, 2012, 01:39 PM
PCIntern (16,198 posts)
12. Yeah, well,
as long as people refuse to introduce the existence of Nazi-worshipping extremists in this country, we are doomed to repeat the genocides. If you think that a reference to Hitler is offensive, that's your right. If you also believe that no one is capable of such atrocities, you had best better think again.
Perhaps if people would understand that there is such a thing as a slippery slope, then references to Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, etc. in their early years, are most appropriate. I stand by the reference and the post.
I believe firmly that the modern-day equivalent of Nazism is quite possible and would be well-tolerated by many many individuals in this country. If one changed the cover of Mein Kampf and updated certain passages a bit, it would receive high acclaim from a fair percentage of folk including many in the MSM.
Response to PCIntern (Reply #12)
Sun Dec 23, 2012, 12:53 AM
dballance (5,756 posts)
13. Oh, I Firmly Agree With You They're Fascist Pigs
Last edited Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:09 AM - Edit history (1)
We're well on our way down the hill to some sort of new Nazism. And I don't mean the skin-head Neo-Nazis shouting about white pride/power.
When we've arrived at the point where a Democrat President has a secret "kill list" and any male of a certain age in range of one of our armed drones is fair game we're screwed. Benghazi is never going to be a reason for impeachment. Quite frankly though, the "kill list" and orders to strike and assassinate US citizens with armed drones without any public due process oversight should be. But since war is profitable to the GOP corporate benefactors in the MIC I doubt we'll ever see the GOP question the President on this. Not to mention they want to preserve the ability of the President to do these things for when they get the next GOP candidate in office.
Just wait for the upcoming battle on re-authorizing the amendments to FISA that allow for the warrantless wire-tapping the NSA has been doing. The Dems may put up a faux fight but they'll roll over because they want it just as bad as the GOP.
I've been reading just how pervasive drone surveillance is becoming over US skies and it scares the hell out of me. Sure, I can see deploying drones on our southern border to fill in gaps where we just can't have the manpower instead. It's a long border and lots of drugs and human trafficking happen there. So using some technology to augment border patrol agents makes sense to me. But the drones are starting to creep out into the rest of the continent through local law enforcement.
It's not just the NRA. Our entire government is trudging, not all that slowly, towards fascism. The military-industrial complex and the lifetime-appointed generals/admirals are quite a force in our government. I've posted before that they have become a de facto fourth branch of our government. One of the fears of our Founding Fathers was a standing military becoming too powerful and too influential. Seems like they were right.
Add on to that the private prison-industrial complex so entangled with law enforcement and state legislatures at the local level. States are being asked by the PIC to keep the occupancy of prisons at 90% as part of the contracts they sign with these private corrections corporations. What kind of behavior do we think that will incentives among law enforcement?
You realize it, I realize it, but most people just continue in deep denial and want to believe their elected representatives are still representing them when they clearly are not.
I should read Mein Kampf. I have no doubt you are correct in your assessment that just changing the cover and updating some passages would see it finding wide acceptance today. Hell, I can take passages from the Bible and show them to "Christians" and they don't have a freaking clue the passages are from that book they think is inerrant and literally true. So I'm sure you're right.
Response to PCIntern (Original post)
Sat Dec 22, 2012, 09:25 AM
HillWilliam (3,305 posts)
9. Looks like Suthren Babdiss Preachah up and down to me
the very type who has learned to peddle bullshit so as to lead a work-free, sweat-free and probably tax-free existence across the backs of mentally-deficient fools who are willing to throw time and money to support his lazy lifestyle.
LaPierre, Pat Robertson, Falwell, et all only prove to me that the adage attributed to PT Barnum is probably weighted with more than a bit of truth.