Are you reading my posts? In which alternate universe did I say anything about an "impending theocratic dictatorship"?
Try to focus, Tom, please.
The Republican goal is crystal clear, as articulated by many party leaders, and, for example, at great length by Hugh Hewitt in "Painting the Map Red: The Fight to Create a Permanent Republican Majority", published by Ragnarok Press. The glowing reviews call it the Republican playbook for the next election, which is why I actually purchased a copy and read it. This is straight from the horse's ass.
The goal of the Republican Party is to install itself permanently in power, to ensure that the Democrats and all who support them are permanently disenfranchised.
In a hate-drenched diatribe disturbingly reminiscent of Mein Kampf in its relentless scapegoating of Democrats as the cause of all the nation's woes, Hewit rationalizes the institution of one-party rule as necessary to protect the nation from the evil Democrats hell-bent on destroying America. Sounds so tragically familiar, doesn't it?
For the third time, Tom, please explain how the goal of permanent Republican rule does not involve the destruction of democracy in America. How do you and your colleagues reconcile the notion of a one-party state with your flag-draped protestations of reverence for democracy?
I probably give you too much wiggle room by trying to cover too much ground in one post, letting you cherry pick what you address. So I'll stop. This is it. This is the one question I want you to answer: Do you support the goal of establishing permanent Republican Party rule and giving up on democracy in America?
Flame » in reply to Give me a break...
"impending theocratic dictatorship"?
The whole thread (74 posts)
- A nature sighting from the California Government Commie Preserve
- Okay, fine.
- A nature sighting from the RNC McCarthyite Preserve
- Gawd, it's getting hot in here.....
- The point, which continously escapes people here...
- The points which escape you...
- "Soft" Marxism.
- That pic was from Sweden, right? (n/t)
- Sweden isn't Marxist, and you know it.
- re: I don't
- You're being obtuse, and you know it.
- re: obtuse
- obtuse deflection
- Noooo, you never conflate marxism and socialism........
- And brave libertarian Tom is silent...
- re: And brave libertarian Tom is silent...
- Socialists believe that government should provide a certain basic level of support for individuals...
- You never have positively contributed to any discussion
- Laugh it up.
- re: And brave libertarian Tom is silent...
- OUCH (n/t)
- And brave libertarian Tom is silent...
- re: obtuse
- Could have sworn that you have ranted that Sweden was Marxist.
- and the subject line goes "pop!"
- Sweden isn't Marxist, and you know it.
- That pic was from Sweden, right? (n/t)
- "Soft" Marxism.
- Kill off 350k Americans (plus or minus) and try to take over the world and it leaves a bad taste in our mouths
- Now that I think about it...
- The points which escape you...
