Democrats Have More in Common with Nazi's Than Republicans Do

What does it really mean when you call someone a Nazi? If you type in the word “Nazi” into the German to English translation tool on this website http://translation.babylon.com/german/, you get the following translation:


n. Nazi; national-socialist, member of the German National Socialist Party that governed in Germany under the leadership of Adolf Hitler from 1933-1945

I am getting sick and tired of the left trying to equate the Republican Party with the Nazi party, when in reality the Democrats have more in common with Nazi’s than the Republicans ever will. I suggest you take the time to read this whole article before you make and uninformed, opinionated comment.

Let’s take a look at the true history of these similarities: First of all Woodrow Wilson, one of the early leaders of the Progressive movement in the US, enhanced racial segregation in the military. This set back much of the progress that had been made following the Civil War. It should also be noted that Blacks fought in the Revolution and Civil Wars in exchange for their freedom.

One of Hillary Clinton's heros is Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, as well as a leading advocate for legalized birth control, was also a know eugenicist. Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, a social philosophy which claims that human hereditary traits can be improved through social intervention. Sanger's eugenic policies ran to an exclusionary immigration policy, free access to birth control methods and full family-planning autonomy for the able-minded, and compulsory segregation or sterilization for the profoundly retarded.

Many know of Adolf Hitlers genocide against the Jews during WWII, as well as his desire for Germany to be a “Master Race”. But the concept of a white, blond-haired, blue-eyed master Nordic race didn't originate with Hitler. The idea was created in the United States, and cultivated in California, decades before Hitler came to power. California eugenicists played an important, although little known, role in the American eugenics movement's campaign for ethnic cleansing.

Only after eugenics became entrenched in the United States was the campaign transplanted into Germany, in no small measure through the efforts of California eugenicists, who published booklets idealizing sterilization and circulated them to German official and scientists.

Hitler studied American eugenics laws. He tried to legitimize his anti-semitism by medicalizing it, and wrapping it in the more palatable pseudo-scientific facade of eugenics. Hitler was able to recruit more followers among reasonable Germans by claiming that science was on his side. While Hitler's race hatred sprung from his own mind, the intellectual outlines of the eugenics Hitler adopted in 1924 were made in America. Rockefeller and Carnegie even made donations to various German research facilities to further eugenics research. To learn more of this connection read “The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics”, written by Edwin Black and posted on George Mason University’s History New Network.

Under another Progressive Democrat, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, hundreds of thousands of Japanese were rounded up and put into internment camps, much in the way the Germans rounded up the Jews. Many of those arrested were rounded up simply because of their ancestry. In many cases, these were descendants Japanese immigrants several generations deep. Many didn’t even know how to speak Japanese. As we move into present day, the resurgence of Socialist Progressive thought is beginning to encroach on our liberties. Already, the government is trying to silence dissenting thought and speech. The White House’s “War On Fox News” is and attempt at censorship straight up. Can you imagine if George Bush had a “War on MSNBC”? People would be outraged. There is also the attempt to discredit the Tea Party movement, which I must say have been very peaceful and without any destruction or violence. Unfortunately, this can’t be said about the Arizona Immigration protests, where we saw a law enforcement officer hit in the head with a water bottle, as he was trying to protect the protesters.

Then we have the takeover of the auto industry, banks, with attempts to take over wall street, as well as the insurance and health care industries. Further, there are more mandates coming at us: fines for not having health care, restrictions on the types of foods available, limits on salt content, etc. It is expected that cap and trade is coming in the near future. This will raise energy costs and limit travel, further restricting our mobility. So to the Liberals out there, the next time you want to call someone a Nazi, remember you are calling them a socialist. Also, it should also be known, that all of the dictators and despots in the world currently, such as Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong IL, Hu Jintao, and others are either Communist or Socialist Dictators. I am not seeing any right-wing fanatic dictators, who follow the Republican Conservative model, in the world right now.

Just thought I should point this out. Thanks for reading.

Discrimination On The U.S. Supreme Court

It has often been said that too much of a good thing can be a bad thing. We need a little diversity in our lives and a break from the routine.  The same can be said about losing the diversity of knowledge and diverse perspectives that people from other institutions can provide. The majority of the Supreme Court Judges should not all be Ivy League graduates.

Over the last several years, many have been focusing on ethnic and gender diversity as deciding factors for Supreme Court Nominees. I am of the opinion that Supreme Court decisions may be considered biased, due to their common Ivy League education. This amounts to what I would call educational discrimination, by limiting the Court to Ivy League Graduates. Some might also call it elitist.

The following applies to Kagan, just as it did to Sotomajor.

Obamas Appointment of Sotomayor Fails to Offer Educational Diversity to Court.

Sotomayor and Kagan do not offer true diversity to our Supreme Court. The potential power of Sotomayor’s diversity as a Latina Woman, from a disadvantaged background, loses its strength because her Yale Law degree does not offer educational diversity to the current mix of sitting Judges. Nor does Kagan's Harvard law degree. Once Sotomayor walked through the Gates of Princeton and then Yale Law School, she became educated by the same Professors that have educated the majority of our current Supreme Court Justices, and our Presidents. The same applies to Kagans Princeton to Harvard track.

Diversity in education is extremely important. We need to look for diversity in our ideas, and if our leaders are from the same educational background, they lose the original power of their ethnic and gender diversity. The ethnic and gender diversity many of our current leaders possess no longer brings a plethora of new ideas, only the same perspective they learned from their common Ivy League education. Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, “I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Ones character is often developed by the education they receive.

One example of the common education problem is that a former lecturer at Yale, Judge Frank, who developed the philosophy of Legal Realism, has heavily influenced Yale’s Law School. Frank argued that Judges should not only look at the original intent of the Constitution, but they should also bring in outside influences, including their own experiences in order to determine the law. This negative interpretation has influenced both Conservatives and Liberals graduating from Yale. It has been said that Legal Realism has infested Yale Law School and turned lawyers into political activists. A generation of appointees with either a Harvard or Yale background has the potential to distort the proper interpretation of our Constitution. America needs to decentralize the power structure away from the Ivy League educated individual and gain from the knowledgeable and diverse perspectives that people from other institutions can provide. We should appoint Supreme Court Justices educated from amongst a wider group of Americas Universities.

Here is a list of where each Justice got their Law Degrees from:

Harvard

Chief Justice John Roberts
Anthony Kennedy
Antonin Scalia
Stephen Breyer
Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Harvard, Columbia)

Yale

Samuel Alito – Yale JD 1975
David Souter
Clarence Thomas – Yale JD 1974
Sonia Sotomayor – Yale JD 1979

Northwestern Law School

Justice John Paul Stevens (retiring)

The Presidents we have elected for the last twenty years have, themselves, been Harvard or Yale educated. This has the potential to create an even more closed minded interpretation of our laws.

Yale – Bush Sr. – 4 years as president

Yale Law – Clinton – 8 years as president

Yale – Bush, Jr. – 8 Years as president

Harvard Law – Obama – current president (potentially 4-8 years)

When we consider that our Nation has potentially twenty – eight years of Presidential influence from these two Universities, as Americans, we should look long and hard at the influence Yale and Harvard have exerted on our nation’s policies. Barack Obama promised America Change, but he has continued the same discriminatory policy by appointing a Yale graduate over many qualified candidates that graduated from other top Colleges and Universities in America.

I think it is time to have, not only ethnic and gender diversity on the court, but educational diversity as well.

Elena Kagan Should Not Be Confirmed To THe Supreme Court

We need a Supreme Court Justice with experience in application of the law, not just an academic view of it.

While most people cite Elana Kagan having never been a judge as a reason to disqualify her, I do not think that is the only reason. In fact, I really believe we need non-judges on the court, just like we have needed minorities and women on it. Personally I would love to see a strong constitutional attorney or a member of the military’s Judge Advocate General Corps appointed to the Supreme Court. The retiring Justice Stevens is the last member of the court to have served in the military. With all of the terror trials still looming, and whether federal vs. military trials should be used, I think we need a judge with some military experience.

When you look at Elena Kagan’s record she only has 2 years with a law firm. She spent to years clerking for judges, and until she became solicitor general, she has spent her entire time in legal academia, from University of Chicago as a professor, to Harvard Law Professor, to Dean of Harvard Law School. She has spent very little time trying cases, or writing any substantive works regarding any aspect of the law. The only issue she has really made herself a name for was getting the military kicked out of Harvard Law School. Her opinion on the law is a virtual secret.

Elena Kagan isn’t inexperienced because she was never a judge; she is inexperienced because she hasn’t done anything of significance outside of academia.