Thanks to Right Wing NutHouse, I ran across this piece titled "We Answer to the Name of Liberals". I would rename that piece to "We Answer to the Name of Communists".
Below I do some actual comparisons between the Liberal Manifesto and the Communist Manifesto with a link to the Communist Manifesto so you can also do your own comparisons. I clearly distinguish which manifesto I am quoting from, because in reality, it is hard to tell. THAT should be the scariest thing of all. I used red bold for the Communist Manifesto and black bold for the liberal manifesto.
Let me point out a couple of deliberate distortions, because truth does not attest to these points of view, therefore distortion on their part is needed.
[From American Prospect]
We have all opposed the Iraq war as illegal, unwise, and destructive of America's moral standing. This war fueled, and continues to fuel, jihadis whose commitment to horrific, unjustifiable violence was amply demonstrated by the September 11 attacks as well as the massacres in Spain, Indonesia, Tunisia, Great Britain, and elsewhere. Rather than making us safer, the Iraq war has endangered the common security of Americans and our allies.
By simple virtue of adding 9/11 to this paragraph, it distorts reality, 9/11 happened before we went into Iraq. This particular paragraph interested me, because although it does not state that 9/11 happened after, with the wording, they also do not make it clear that it happened before.
As I have pointed out, in painstaking detail, there was significant terror attacks before 9/11 ever happened, which is rarely acknowledge because the left media and the Democratic liberal Communists would lose what legs they stand on by admitting this.
[From American Prospect]
We believe that the state of Israel has the fundamental right to exist, free of military assault, within secure borders close to those of 1967, and that the U.S. government has a special responsibility toward achieving a lasting Middle East peace. But the Bush administration has defaulted. It has failed to pursue a steady and constructive course. It has discouraged the prospects for an honorable Israeli-Palestinian settlement. It has encouraged Israel's disproportionate attacks in Lebanon after the Hezbollah incursions, resulting in vast destruction of civilian life and property.
By what right do these communist liberals dare attempt to claim what is and what is not "disproportionate"? Let these terrorists come into your home, kill your family, kidnap your child, then come whine to me about what you think is proportionate. Israel made it clear that any further attempt to cross the line would be met with a drastic response, and they had every right to do so!!! Where are their cries about Hezbollah firing rockets into Israel's cities with no concern whatsoever for civilian life? Once again, it cannot be addressed, because to do so, would invalidate the distorted point they are trying to get the American public to swallow.
Further distortions which prove that this piece is either trying to deliberately lie, or they have not bothered to actually READ the Military Commissions Act-2006.
The misapplication of military power also imperils American freedom at home. The president claims authority, as commander in chief, to throw American citizens into military prison for years on end without any hearing, civil or military, that would allow them to confront the charges against them. He claims the power to wiretap Americans' conversations without warrants, in direct violation of congressional commands. These usurpations presage what are likely to be even more drastic measures if another attack takes place on American soil.
The distortion is where they imply the President can throw "American Citizens" into military prisons for years on end. The Act clearly states that persons involved with terrorist activities", which in my mind, I do not care if you are American or a foreigner, if you are dealing or participating with a terrorists, YOU BELONG IN PRISON. Period.
[From the American Prospect]
The administration's politics of panic diverts attention from pressing questions of social justice and environmental survival. The president remorselessly seeks to undermine the principle of progressive taxation. Under cover of patriotism, he promotes vast tax cuts to the rich at the expense of policies that strengthen the common ties that bind us together as a community.
Principle of progressive taxation. I love how they phrase this, the point is they are whining that the President is not raising taxes. The presidents vast tax cuts is the reason that the larger corporations have the means to hire more employees, thereby our unemployment rate is lower. Once again, they ignore the obvious benefits of the presidents program because then the American people would see the lack of benefits in their raising of taxes again.
[From the Communist Manifesto]
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.That is the second principle of the manifesto..
At a San Francisco fundraiser in 2004- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., told wealthy supporters the government will need to take money away from them for the "common good."
Clinton headlined an appearance with other women Democratic senators in San Francisco, where donors gave as much as $10,000 to California Sen. Barbara Boxer's campaign.
"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Clinton said, according to the Associated Press. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
This statement from Hillary Clinton says it all, it comes directly from the Communist Manifesto. We will take from the rich for the "Common Good", ignoring the fact that by doing so would take jobs directly from the American people, causing the job unemployment rate to rise again.
[From the Communist Manifesto written in 1848]
In the national struggles of the proletarians of the different countries, they point out and bring to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all nationality.
(By proletariat, the class of modern wage labourers who, having no means of production of their own, are reduced to selling their labour power in order to live. [Engels, 1888 English edition] )
The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: Formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat.
(By bourgeoisie is meant the class of modern capitalists, owners of the means of social production and employers of wage labour).
The distinguishing feature of communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property. But modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few.
In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.
Are you beginning to see how much of the Liberal Democratic message comes directly from the Communist Manifesto and where it is leading you?
More from the Communist Manifesto on "Common Property"
When, therefore, capital is converted into common property, into the property of all members of society, personal property is not thereby transformed into social property. It is only the social character of the property that is changed. It loses its class character.
You are horrified at our intending to do away with private property. But in your existing society, private property is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population; its existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us, therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any property for the immense majority of society.
In one sentence, you reproach us with intending to do away with your property. Precisely so; that is just what we intend.
One last distortion from the American Prospect:
To the contrary, this administration's lawless conduct and its violations of the Geneva Conventions only damage our moral standing and our ability to combat the appeals of violent ideologues.
The Geneva Conventions apply to war combatants, soldiers fighting for a country... NOT terrorists with no uniform or badge.
Read the Communist Manifesto, then Read the Liberal Manifesto and listen closely to what your politicians are saying, especially when they talk of the "Common Good". Understand the nature of what you are about to become, like cattle being led to the slaughter house, you are being led into the world of communism, by your liberal democratic communistic politicians, such as Hillary Clinton.
Visit Stop the ACLU and see the new CNN poll showing the majority of the American people do not think the President has gone too far in restricting civil liberties in the war on terror.
Hot Air is also talking about the CNN poll.
You have to check out Townhall, Dean Barnett is hyped with the smell of victory!!!
Also from Townhall, check out Mary Katharine Ham's piece.
Amy Proctor has an awesome game for Liberals.
Check out the great piece at Iowa Voice "A Predictable Epidemic of Reagan Democrats".
I just found something on Conservative Right that is a definite must read. The Future of America if Dems win.
[UPDATE] 11/15/06- Excellent Article by QandO.