Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In a Desperate Bid to Take Down Donald Trump, Republicans Are Unleashing the F-Word
Yahoo News ^ | November 25, 2015 | Zeeshan Aleem

Posted on 11/25/2015 3:57:36 PM PST by entropy12

The F-word: CNN's MJ Lee has a useful round-up of Republicans who are deciding to unite around the "fascist" label. As she points out, a number of prominent voices in the Republican race have decided it's an appropriate way to characterize Trump's rhetoric.

One is Max Boot, an adviser to Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida and fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, who tweeted that Trump deserved the label:

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Campaign News; Issues
KEYWORDS: backstabbers; chancellor; elections; gope; gopetreachery; heiltrump; idiocracy; lyingbastards; treacherousgop; trump; trumpwasright
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: entropy12

“fascist”

The vast majority of people have no idea what that word means, so it isn’t going to hurt Trump - not even a little bit.


41 posted on 11/25/2015 4:44:49 PM PST by Marcella (CRUZ (Prepping can save your life today.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SpaceBar

You and I are on exactly the same page. Amazing how many don’t know what fascism is.


42 posted on 11/25/2015 4:48:06 PM PST by xzins (HAVE YOU DONATED TO THE FREEPATHON? https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

It is Romney Redux. Fight nasty in the primary and play softball in the general so we lose.


43 posted on 11/25/2015 5:01:16 PM PST by reaganaut (I'm looking forward to Trump as President. I'm an Evangelical and I vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

The black on black crime facts are not that far off. Watch the First 48 and anyone can see. It is almost always black on black crime


44 posted on 11/25/2015 5:10:21 PM PST by reaganaut (I'm looking forward to Trump as President. I'm an Evangelical and I vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Fascism has come to mean many things but at its base, according to Benito Mussolini, fascism is the sublimation of the individual and the primacy of the state. It is a left wing philosophy despite what idiots at Wiki, Websters and Huff Post claim. Trump is many things but a fascist he is not.


45 posted on 11/25/2015 5:11:46 PM PST by jwalsh07 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA
Fascism is socialism combined with extreme nationalism.

Not how I'd define it. Socialism in the sense that it has centralized government planning and essentially the elimination of civil rights. But it retains private ownership of property but under total government control. In this regard China is more a fascist state than a communist one, in my opinion. The extreme nationalism is an optional component.

Now it's clear that the mainstream democratic party is a fascist party, they will stomp on our civil rights (witness attacks on the 1st ammendment, 2nd ammendment, etc) and they want to regulate business to the point of total control. Hillary is a fascist.

Trump certainly won't move to have the government take over private business or further control it. And he seems to support the 1st and 2nd amendments strongly. Not so sure on the rest of the constitution. But there is simply no evidence that he'd move to restrict the civil liberties of CITIZENS. Illegals, well, they don't come under our law/civil liberties. I'd say he's certainly not even close to a fascist. Period.

46 posted on 11/25/2015 5:16:13 PM PST by pepsi_junkie (The only fiscally sound thing dems ever did: create a state run media they don't have to pay for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: pepsi_junkie

I take my definition directly from Hermann Goering who was a pretty good authority. Extreme nationalism is an essential element. See Italy’s Mussolini, Argentina’s Peron and Spain’s Franco. We use the term too frequently to describe any authoritarian figure. Putin might be seen as a fascist today.


47 posted on 11/25/2015 5:24:33 PM PST by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

It’s left wing, it’s government control, and it’s economic model is a union of elite government and corporate leaders to the point they blend together.


48 posted on 11/25/2015 5:29:26 PM PST by xzins (HAVE YOU DONATED TO THE FREEPATHON? https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

“Max Boot”—return of the neocons. Now that Rubio has been coopted by McCainiac and Grahamnesty on foreign policy, Boot is the perfect advisor. Rubio just needs to add Wolfowitz for a proposed policy of nonstop occupations of hellhole ME countries.


49 posted on 11/25/2015 6:33:00 PM PST by SharpRightTurn (White, black, and red all over--America's affirmative action, metrosexual president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bobalu

I have to give the Gop-E props for such a manic effort to take Trump down.. and creativity— At a secret meeting, I can see them asking each other whether they think they can fool the voters into abandoning Trump by calling him a fascist... and them all agreeing that it is gonna work this time... LOL


50 posted on 11/25/2015 6:33:31 PM PST by freespirit2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA
Well Mussolini invented the term. Let's see how he defined it:
Hmm, nothing about nationalism there. Unless you consider the idea of "the state" to represent extreme nationalism. But what about the obsession with race and racial purity? What did our pal Benito have to say about that?

So he wasn't at all interested in the idea of racial purity, and fascism to him was primary an economic system where the state is supreme yet within the context of some level of private ownership of industry (i.e. corporations). Well, he did say this:

Now of course Mussolini was a huge nationalist, a subscriber to the Italian irredntism movement. Recall that Italy was an infant nation cobbled together from previously autonomous states. Just a few decades before there was no such think as "Italy". Hence Nationalism in this context was to say that Italy as a state was legitimate and powerful. Viewed through this lens, the nationalism of Mussolini and Franco were both driven by the circumstances of their specific situations: new nations that were still being established. Nationalism then is an appeal to unity where one might otherwise see the state fracture. It made sense if you wanted to be a dictator of a nation that you must first support the idea that there was in fact ONE nation here to rule.

But does that makes sense in the case of established states like, say, China or (should it rise here) the USA or France? Would an appeal to national unity be necessary to consolidate power as it was in Italy and Spain? I say no. If you have all the other characteristics but not the overt nationalism, you have a fascist state.

51 posted on 11/25/2015 6:43:19 PM PST by pepsi_junkie (The only fiscally sound thing dems ever did: create a state run media they don't have to pay for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

wow, if the GOPe dopes want to open up this line of attack, they are clueless about their own hypocrisy.


52 posted on 11/25/2015 6:53:18 PM PST by Vision Thing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

The RNC should be careful that they don’t end up “peroting” themselves and the American people by dividing the vote to three parties and electing Hillary. Not sure any of us have the will to survive what should be an avoidable fate, as long as the RNC holds their noses supports the people’s candidate. Many of us did exactly that when we voted for their last two candidates.


53 posted on 11/25/2015 6:55:17 PM PST by This I Wonder32460 (Ideas have consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepsi_junkie
What other than nationalism separates Italy from the Soviet Union. The inheritance of Roman power vs the internationalist credo of the soviets. The Internationale! .
54 posted on 11/25/2015 6:58:10 PM PST by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA
What other than nationalism separates Italy from the Soviet Union

Private ownership of industry, which Italy and Spain and Germany all had, yet the Soviets did not.

Anyway do you contend that the Soviet Union, which referred to WWII as "the great patriotic war" was not nationalistic? I say they were, every bit as much as Spain and Italy and for the same reason: they dictators in charge needed to create a mythology around their nations in order to justify that their state was legitimate and strong so they could hold onto power. Indeed, the first thing that happened when the soviets collapsed was the splintering of the Soviet Union into its component parts.

As I've said though, the thing that set the Soviet Union apart from the fascist states of Italy, Spain, and Germany was the private ownership of industry.

55 posted on 11/25/2015 7:15:48 PM PST by pepsi_junkie (The only fiscally sound thing dems ever did: create a state run media they don't have to pay for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: freespirit2012

Sad really. How about putting forth some ideas to counter Trumps? They will not and can not do that. They are in the tank for Hillary—that’s why.


56 posted on 11/25/2015 7:51:06 PM PST by Forward the Light Brigade (Into the Jaws of H*ll Onward! Ride to the sound of the guns!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

They would not do this to hillary...if they had the chance to run against her. But they won’t have that chance. They are like spoiled children - mad as heck.


57 posted on 11/25/2015 8:13:17 PM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SharpRightTurn

Right on the mark comment!


58 posted on 11/25/2015 8:15:52 PM PST by entropy12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: pepsi_junkie

The biggest reason why Soviet empire collapsed is because there was no freedom to get rich through entrepreneurship. That stifled innovation and productivity. It was central planning all the way.

That is the same reason why Nehru’s India remained mired in poverty. Central planning and control of industry. Only when Nehru’s congress party lost to BJP, India began its march towards prosperity.


59 posted on 11/25/2015 8:22:47 PM PST by entropy12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: pepsi_junkie

Simply put, the Soviets planed to conquer the world. In the Soviet Union, they incorporated numerous ethnicities.


60 posted on 11/25/2015 8:24:24 PM PST by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson