Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

As I understand your mail, you have detached yourself from the fascism theories that were prominent in the 1960s and 1970s.

Surely the fascist movements of the interwar period have more in common with each other than they differ from each other.
What they all have in common is a radically nationalist, expansionist ideology glorifying violence and war, the fascist negations - i.e. anti-liberalism, anti-communism and anti-conservatism - and a political style that includes the mobilisation of the masses, the militarisation and aestheticisation of politics, the glorification of youth and a charismatically legitimised power of command.

That's just paraphrased my unskilled understanding (leaving out the various stadiums of fascism).
I honestly would be interested to get your "perfect understanding of fascism", since my old age is messing with my memory as well. (But I do - or did, as you might think - know a bit from later authors than Ernst Nolte’s classic The Three Faces of Fascism.)

I've not seen concrete details regarding Canada's new gun law, but usually when progressives use the term "assault weapon" they are not talking about actual assault weapons, but rather long guns with a pistol grip on them.

Laws against pistol grips have nothing whatsoever to do with trying to curb gun violence. If they outlawed pistol grips, Canada's only purpose was to abuse their serfs.

I've not seen any untrue statements in Baldimo's posts.

Your poor vision, and your lack of understanding are a matter of indifference to me.

I do not suffer from poor vision. And I definitely do not suffer from a lack of understanding.

In fact, you do. Your expressed opinions here reveal a shallow and a narrow mind.

My lack of an open mind when it comes to progressive atrocities does not mean that I lack vision or understanding.

It merely means that my ethics and morality are superior to those who do keep an open mind when progressives commit atrocities.

The only problem being that "progressives" are not committing atrocities.

Deliberately violating people's civil liberties is an atrocity. Americans aren't serfs to be abused like the Canadians are. We actually have rights here, and it is wrong for progressives to violate them.

It was also an atrocity when progressives framed Scooter Libby for an imaginary crime.

Yup . . . you're deluded. No surprise there.

Nope. You can't point out a single untrue statement in my post. No surprise there.

You just posted one. Again.

Wrong again. You cannot point out any untrue statement in that post, or in any other post of mine.

It would be instructive to anyone trying to make sense of these repeated statements of truthiness by Oralloy to remember that Oralloy also challenges anyone to “point to” anything that’s wrong about Trump’s administration.

It’s like trying to direct a man to the forest when he’s standing in the deep woods.

Where have I ever said anything even remotely like that?



Funny how you can't actually point out any errors in my posts then.

Sure you do, if it was a race to being childish, you win.


I'll state it again, I do. The problem is you support fascism in all it's forms and are so twisted in your beliefs that you think you support Constitution and believe it gives the power to the govt over the people, when in reality the Constitution gives the power to the people and not the govt, you leftists always have it backwards. The Constitution limits the power of govt.


Yep, weak and childish.


Your response on this thread to people you disagree with is exactly that, stifling debate. Making incorrect claims from almost 15 years ago is the same thing. We try to post here, but most of the time is spent either defending myself from bogus claims or sifting though pages of personal attacks for actual comments on subjects. The constant call of liars and racist is actually stifling debate.


That isn't what happened at all, I've gone back and found that thread and it seems my original post was deleted because you were being a little bitch even back then and reported the post, the only way I know what was said is because someone else rephrased what I said. I was wondering why one racial term for one group is ok to say and the other one isn't, it was related to the N word in rap music and the use of it. Here's the rephrase as written by another member:

Yes, fascist is the best way to describe people who want things removed from public view that hurt their own sensibilities. You then lie about what happened to elevate your own view and degrade someone else's.


Once again, taking what what said out of context, classic leftist tactic. I said when dealing with racists like the KKK and neo-Nazi's that Italians were not seen as white people, I never considered myself a white person, for over 30 years I've been putting "human" as my race on all forms. Take your claims of racism and stuff them where the sun don't shine.


I can only assume you are lying again about the exchange as I've never claimed my ex-wife was Latina, I might have said she looked Latina because she does, but she is black and my now grown children are of mixed race. You are one of those people who looks for the easy moral high ground and then standing upon it heaping hate on those you don't agree with. Once again, it's a typical leftist tactic used to discredit people.


I've never lied about anything on this site, it's people like you who change the context of what is being discussed to prevent debate, as I noted before, you are a fascist and always have been. Silence those you don't agree with and defame them to prevent an opposing point of view. You are the ones who spread ethnic and racial hatred. If I don't agree with you, that makes me a racist... you guys have been screaming this lie for decades.


Nope, you are lying again, I never claimed she was Latina, she has always been the same person and race. It's you has been lying all these years about me.


I have a hard time believing this, it's likely you have said as much but wouldn't admit it if you did. I've already proven your a liar and have been for at least 15 years, you change the context of what is being discussed and stifle debate.


Why are you changing the subject to Oralloy and his claims? This is between me and you and about you being a fascist and not knowing anything about the Constitution.


Wrong buddy, you are the totalitarian and the fascist, rolled into one. You lie about your opponents and use those lies to get others to ignore them. You also use those lies to try and validate you lack of courage to actually debate someone on a subject, like the fact you don't understand the Constitution. I fail to see how you are held in such regard on this site, you claim to be an intellectual, but really aren't, you use fancy words and repeat things you read in books, that isn't intellectual, that's being an automaton.


That has got to be one of the funniest things you've said yet. I actually love the Constitution and respect it, I love the ideal of small govt and a majority of control being at the state level and not the Federal level. We could debate the Constitution but you like to hide behind your pretend "moral high ground" and not debate people. Go ahead, use spelling and grammar errors to keep from discussing things, it shows exactly how weak your claims actually are.

You're utterly full of ****. You have demonstrated no knowledge of the constitution. You clearly don't know what fascism entails, so you must make childish insults and attempt to smear me for the fascism which I suspect is much closer to your hopes for right-wing government in the United States. Piss off.

Well, it appears that I did report your post. That is certainly not something to be ashamed of.

Since you have "a perfect understanding of fascism", I ask again (I would be pleased, if you answered my previous question, but ... never mind): what are those "forms"?
I do know that the fascist movements display significant differences on various subjects, but acceptance of racism and particularly anti-Semitism is to be found in nearly all - openly.

Can you list those "all forms of fascim" Set supports? Racial inferiority? Holocaust? Defender of Christianity? Lebensraum through military conquest of other states?