Can we call them fascists yet?

[Lexicus]

Are you going to say Republicans are guilty by association because of these guys? Democrats have a bunch of hardcore Latino Catholics. How do you like them now?

The Republicans aren't guilty by association, they're guilty in fact. You know, because the Republican Party is a white supremacist (and, particularly in the era of Trump, quasi-fascist) party.

 

[AppleDumplingHead]

The Republicans aren't guilty by association, they're guilty in fact. You know, because the Republican Party is a white supremacist (and, particularly in the era of Trump, quasi-fascist) party.

Nonsense. You get no other answer (to that).

edit: I really want to link articles explicitly tying the Klan to the Democrat party, but I'll save that for some other conversation. You need to take off those rose-tinted modern media goggles.

 

[onejayhawk]

The Republicans aren't guilty by association, they're guilty in fact. You know, because the Republican Party is a white supremacist (and, particularly in the era of Trump, quasi-fascist) party.

It's a pity you aren't trying for humor because you finally managed it.

J

 

[Farm Boy]

JFK was more of a republican than I am by today's standards

Doesn't say a lot, JFK was to Nixon's right in his own day.

As an aside, though, I really did like the term 'regressive left'. It was a useful description. It quickly spiraled into a pejorative. But it's a good term, in that it exists and is a bad thing.

I think that's fair.

It was destined to immediately be pejorative though. It's as if I was having an argument with a Christian over a matter of morality and decreed they're acting upon the pride of the Morning Star. It might be entirely accurate. The accuracy makes it hurt more, and be rejected harder, than if it was just a glancing blow.

 

[Lexicus]

Doesn't say a lot, JFK was to Nixon's right in his own day.

Not really though.

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, on the issue where the most people would come to die, yes. But sure, definitely not on all of them.

 

[Lexicus]

Well, on the issue where the most people would come to die, yes. But sure, definitely not on all of them.

JFK was planning a withdrawal from Vietnam by the end of 1965 when he was assassinated. I tend to doubt these things are unrelated.

 

[jackelgull]

JFK was planning a withdrawal from Vietnam by the end of 1965 when he was assassinated. I tend to doubt these things are unrelated.

If you're imagining a government conspiracy to kill JFK, that probably didn't happen, but someone's made a convincing case that one of his secret service security guards ended up shooting him by accident when trying to kill the would be assassin.

 

[Farm Boy]

What JFK planned to do was what JFK planned to do. What JFK did was run to the right of Nixon and win, then start screwing things up by acting like he ran to the right of Nixon and won. I am entirely open to the possibility that if he hadn't been murdered he'd have wound up better than LBJ or Nixon. I mean, he's good enough to quote in signatures, right?

 

[AdrienIer]

Heck, what's "left" in Europe today is more akin to the USA "right". Our "left" today, in any other era, might have been called the "what the hell are you saying" side.

This is one of the most profoundly ignorant post I've seen on this forum. And that says a lot.

Moderator Action: Please be civil and constructive when you disagree. For example: what about this post do you think is incorrect? Why do you think that? Can you prove some evidence? Posting bald value judgements like this doesn't move the conversation anywhere.

FP

 

[Lexicus]

If you're imagining a government conspiracy to kill JFK

Government as a whole, certainly not. Elements of the government? Can't rule it out.