RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

lockedaway -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 7:51:54 PM)

Why do you keep bringing up the East Germans???  They were trying to fence people (their own citizens) in as much, if not more, that trying to fence the rest of the world out.  We aren't even trying to fence the world out, we let them come in by the bushel.....legally.



farglebargle -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 7:58:44 PM)

The fences didn't work.

The guards didn't work.

The concentration camps didn't work.

The gas chambers and ovens didn't work.

Now, I'm aware that I'm combining genres here... Post WW Communist Germany with Nazi Germany, but the essential point is that you cannot really "Control" human beings. They're really, really smart and tenacious.

Hitler did his best to destroy my people, and my family. He failed. As will all people who try to control other people. Whatever the supposed goal.

Think of it this way. Whatever guards you hire, the people trying to get around them are more motivated. And if they're better financed, they just buy the guard's boss a new H2, and the guards get themselves a few grand....

Yes. Very much so... Substitute "Illegal Worker Trade" for "Drug Trade", and you have essentially the same business model.

How's that war on drugs going? Well, the War on Illegal Workers will go EXACTLY the same way.

If you're worried about jobs, tax Chinese imports 40 percent and rebuild a manufacturing base here.




Sanity -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 7:59:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: selfbnd411
Buchanan is saying that America will be destroyed if it loses its "white" racial purity.  Argue semantics if you like, but the kernel is the same.


That's a strawman argument, Buchanan isn't saying anything of the sort. Just so you know - when you change and twist someones' words around so that it's easier for you to make them look bad in a debate, it says a lot about your character.



farglebargle -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:00:12 PM)

I wonder, is there any essential difference between "Racial Purity" and "Cultural Purity"?

I need to go read whatever Pat wrote this time... BRB.. Checking WND.




luckydog1 -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:03:13 PM)

So you want to be good socialist, and have good, strong borders, like any good East German citizen?   Again the East Germans shot people trying to flee, totaly different than controlling our national borders, as the Congress constitutionally decided we needed to, long before Bush

New York has borders. Canada to the north ( Damn Kaybuckkers... ) Vermont to the East, Mass to the East, CT, the Long Island Sound, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Lake Erie, and our friends in Ontario.

America is this tiny spot of land between Maryland and Virginia. And us New Yorkers have ceded some few parcels to the Federal Government, but nothing worth mentioning except in passing.  

Farg you again show your hatred (or is it ignorance) for the Constitution.  Try reading Article VI

"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."   The Feds controll international commerce and borders not the states.  Federal law supercedes state and Local law, every single time.

The right of Congress to controll Migration is covered in Article I section 9.  It is long past 1808.

Section 9. The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.



Sanity -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:04:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

I wonder, is there any essential difference between "Racial Purity" and "Cultural Purity"?

There are differences between nations of men, and those differences are nothing to be ashamed of (if that's what you're getting at). Are you ashamed of America, farglebargle? Is that why you want it destroyed? Because you're ashamed?



luckydog1 -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:11:49 PM)

Selfbnd, did you even read the Buchanon article?  I hate to defend the guy but he said in it,
"In 1960, 18 million black Americans, 10 percent of the nation, were not fully integrated into society, but they had been assimilated into our culture. They worshiped the same God, spoke the same language, had endured the same Depression and war, watched the same TV shows on the same four channels, laughed at the same comedians, went to the same movies, ate the same foods, read the same newspapers and went to schools where, even when segregated, we learned the same history and literature and shared the same holidays: Christmas, New Year's, Washington's Birthday, Easter, Memorial Day, July 4, Labor Day, Columbus Day. Segregation existed, but black folks were as American as apple pie, having lived in this land longer than almost every other group save the Native Americans.
"That cultural unity, that sense that we were one people, is gone."
Today's immigrants exceed in number anything any nation has ever known. They now come from cultures and countries whose people have never before been assimilated by any First World country. Not only is the Melting Pot broken, it is rejected by our elites. Minorities are urged to hold onto their own language, customs, traditions. Identity politics is in. And the largest cohort, Mexicans, comes from a country with a historic grievance and a claim on the territory they are entering.
Moreover, since the cultural revolution of the 1960s"

He is not talking about white purity.  It seems you have to twist what he is saying to make your point.

But bluntly do you agree or disagree with the legislation that Buchanon hates so much (Bushes immigration plan?).  I think it is pretty reasonable



farglebargle -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:15:59 PM)

Wow, that's wild. You cite the Slave Importation Tax Clause to support your claim.

What next? Gonna cite Dred Scott.


What does THIS mean?

"The Congress shall have power …To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

Right. That the only laws Congress may pass are those which are:

1) Necessary

and

2) Proper

for *only* those authorities delegated by The People and The States.

That's why the 9th and 10th Amendments were by some, considered superfluous, but it seems the we did need to explicitly state those reservations.

So. If you're looking at a law, first ask. What *explicitly* delegated authority is this law both Necessary and Proper to ensure it's execution.

The "Liberals" and "Hamiltonians" will both use your interpretation of the Supremacy Clause, but their motives are obvious to the most casual observer.




farglebargle -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:18:00 PM)

quote:

Are you ashamed of America


You're kidding, right? The America which contrived to deprive people of both Due Process *and* Equal Protection of the Laws?

Damn Right I'm Ashamed. Anyone with any sense of morals couldn't help feeling otherwise.

There is nothing to be proud of in the intentional, planned rape and murder of 14 year old girls, like Abeer Qasim Hamza al-Janabi and her family.




dcnovice -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:19:34 PM)

quote:

"That cultural unity, that sense that we were one people, is gone."


I wonder if it was ever as real as Buchanan imagines, though.



selfbnd411 -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:20:18 PM)

Nope, I'm not twisting anything around:

Quoting again from the article:

"According to the Census Bureau, from mid-2005 to mid-2006, the U.S. minority population rose 2.4 million, to exceed 100 million. Hispanics, 1 percent of the population in 1950, are now 14.4 percent. Their total number has soared 25 percent since 2000 alone. The Asian population has also grown by 25 percent since 2000."

...

"The "Anglo" population of the Golden State is down to 43 percent and falling fast. White folks are now a minority in Texas and New Mexico. In Arizona, Hispanics account for over half the population under 20."

There is a very clear argument here: Buchanan believes that America is a white nation.  Nonwhite races are tolerable so long as they don't adulterate white blood or threaten to overwhelm white dominance.

Buchanan himself has said several times that he's not a racist; he just wants to go back to the 1950s when "everyone looked like him."  (yes, that's a quote, but I can't cite it; it was on Hardball w/ Chris Matthews).  Matthews asked him if by going back to the 1950s he meant he wanted to undo the civil rights movement, and had him stammering.



farglebargle -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:25:41 PM)

I wonder if Buchannan has read even Richard Wright?




luckydog1 -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:27:59 PM)

No Dredd Scott was a court case that has been overturned.  Article VI section 9 gives congress the explicit right to controll Both migration and the importation of slaves.  Both things Farg, not just one.  And yes, I will use the text of the Constitution to back up my arguments about the Constituion.  The existance of international Borders and the right of the Feds to regulate are explicit in the constitution.

It means what it says, not what you want it to say.



dcnovice -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:29:08 PM)

quote:

No Dred Scott was a court case that has been overturned. 


Was it actually ever overturned, or did the Civil War make it irrelevant?



JohnSteed1967 -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:29:55 PM)

Pat vs. Adolf??????  I know I know!!!

I would actually vote to put Adolf into power! He couldn't be much worse than an America ruled by Pat, and Jerry Fawell and Pat Robertson and then rest



selfbnd411 -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:33:00 PM)

From the horse's mouth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEO1yqJVXEU

I'd be surprised if people had a hard time decoding what he meant by the story.  He "couldn't recognize the people?"  Why?  Were they 20 feet tall and 2 feet wide?

edit to add:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olGZoODksvs&NR=1

WOW!  Pat Buchanan got WORKED!  Hahah!



luckydog1 -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:35:17 PM)

You got me DC.  It was not overturned.  The 13th and 14th amendments to the Constitution were passed eliminating it as a valid ruling.  See its not hard to admit when one is shown to be wrong.



farglebargle -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:36:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

No Dred Scott was a court case that has been overturned.


Was it actually ever overturned, or did the Civil War make it irrelevant?


The Civil War pretty much made the whole Constitution null and void.

Any resemblance of the current government to a Federal Republic under the Constitution is merely the mistaken understanding of the untutored.




dcnovice -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:39:41 PM)

quote:

See its not hard to admit when one is shown to be wrong.


Oh, I do it on a regular basis! Good for one's humility.



Sanity -> RE: Pat Buchanan vs Adolf Hitler (5/22/2007 8:40:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle
The Civil War pretty much made the whole Constitution null and void.


Well then, why do you bring up ****THE CONSTITUTION**** in 3/4ths of your posts



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.711914E-02