kowalski in the same comment:
I wrote this, whent back to check on comments, and couldn’t find.
just to check my facts.
Oh well.

He proposed great projects to stimulate the national economy.

He expanded government for the Good of the People.

He hacked off previous good relationships, such as with the Pope.

He took traditional situations and stuck his campaign logo into them.

He promised change from the mistakes of war in the past and the Generals who ‘betrayed us.’

For the Trolls/Mobies… Try and explain away again…
Where did Marx come from (and I don’t mean the Comedic brothers team)
Why “Socialist” is right in the NSDAP (Nazi – english warping of the NSD sound)
NSDAP – translated – Natl Socialist German Workers Party

Only truth in his comment was the German Socialists’ disdain for the Russian version (Lenin/Stalin) of it… Trading one version of RULING ELITES for another is the Leftist (and always has been and will be the Leftist) notion. Leftists do not care how they obtain power only that they will be able to ensure they get to be the Ruling Elite amongst that Power. Big Government of ANY kind is NEVER a Right notion/ideal (true Conservatives anyway, as for here – there were plenty of clowns with R’s that forget that when they had control and therefore we allowed it to be stripped from them).

National Socialist Party sure SOUNDS right…

How ever will we replace him and how will we fill that big empty literary space that he left behind?

Sources: Fritzsche, Peter. 1998. Germans into Nazis. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press; Eatwell, Roger, Fascism, A History, Viking/Penguin, 1996, pp.xvii-xxiv, 21, 26–31, 114–140, 352. Griffin, Roger. 2000. “Revolution from the Right: Fascism,” chapter in David Parker (ed.) Revolutions and the Revolutionary Tradition in the West 1560-1991, Routledge, London.

In the 1930s, Nazism was not a monolithic movement, but rather a (mainly German) combination of various ideologies and philosophies which centered around nationalism, anti-communism, traditionalism and the importance of the ethnostate.

The first three are mainstays of the right. The fourth is just racist, but you do hear it from racists who identify as conservatives in our country; usually the ones who are afraid of the “browning” of America. For example, John Gibson told his viewers to “do your duty, make more babies” when he discovered that nearly half of all children under the age of five in the United States are minorities.

We’ve all seen what the sycophant media arm of this government does to someone who dares to have a differing opinion than the statist view – systematic character assassinations.

It is the misuse of profiling, the concentration on areas of an individual that are not related to behavior, such as race, creed, clothing, without consideration of the individual’s actions, that give a great tool a bad name.

Every law enforcement officer worth his or her salt uses profiling everyday to determine whether or not criminal activity is afoot.

The tripe in the DHS report that is the a perfect example of creed profiling. lWhen good folks get labeled and the press joins the in the frenzy by misidentifying people, we all lose.

http://blogs.jta.org/politics/article/2009/06/12/1005837/congress-condemns-holocaust-museum-shooting

But crime is always motivated by some kind of “hate.”

James von Brunn was a despicable human being, but he would have been just as horrifying if he had targeted a school playground or a nursing home. Would we then have been including a category for hate crimes against children (an interesting subject) or senior citizens? Why didn’t the resolution contain “age” as a protected category?

Profiling based on the “potential to hate” (according to a liberal definition) will always lead to stifling the free speech rights of the law-abiding — just like gun control punishes the legal gun owner, not the criminal.