« Cheney's Going Nowhere | Main | Jimmy Carter: A Better Choice for Feingold to Censure »

If you can't handle justice being done, I'm not sure you'll be able to take what's coming next very gracefully.

Justice, eh? No wonder conservatives don't speak of "social justice" anymore in terms of what we stand for -- even though we were right out front in the civil rights battles against the segregationist Dems. (AL Gov. Wallace and Sens. Gore Sr., Fullbright, and KKK Byrd come to mind.)

Now, socialist, leftist-elite connotations have hijacked the term "social justice" so as to bastardize it, implying social-engineering of the most nefarious, UN-democratic, Hate-America-First kind.

Essentially the same can now be said of the term "civil rights" -- it's not a meaningful concept anymore given those who claim to champion it -- the Sharptons, Jacksons, Farakans, ACLU, etc.

I would have to agree with that. Many terms have been hijacked by political forces and made useless. On great example is environmentalism. You can't even mention it to convservatives without getting wierd looks, but if you start talking about habitat for fishing and hunting they are suddenly all ears.

I don't believe Civil Rights has lost its meaning yet, though many people have done much to discredit what it stands for.

"I think next time I would've said Mussolini."

Who needs grammar when you just know you are right...

This is actually spot on, and with the exception of "fascist" (which perfectly describes the current synthesis of corporate interests with government policies) and "Bush Crime Family", which I actually will be the way they will commonly all be referred to one day in contemporary literature, I actually agree with what you are saying. We truthfully DO appropriate all of this terminology simply out of habit and exhaustion, without always considering if it really describes the situation we are referring to.

I'm actually trying to work on that one.

Moonbat supreme: wrong! Fascism is control of corporate interests by the state, not synthesis of the two. THe word was hijacked in the 1960s and 70s and re-tooled for use as an insult against anyone in power, most obvious in the 1980s right-wing governments started deregulating industry and reducing welfare handouts and taxes based on the notion that a successful economy is a lightly regulated one, which you have to consider ironic in light of the original meaning of the word.

In truth tt's a variation of socialism, wherein corporate interests remain officially in private hands, but are so tied and regulated by the state that they're left unable to act independently. That certainly isn't the case in the US, which is somewhere between its original representative republic and democratic corporatism. Good examples of fascist states, ranging from reasonably unfascist to extremely fascist, would be France, China and Iran. It's notable that the buses run on time in all three of these countries.

Facts have the sharpest sting in any argument.

Arch, are you saying that you consider France to be a prime example of a fascist state?

Context, my good man. Context. The list was ranging from reasonably unfascist to extremely fascist, not "these are all fascist states".

And yes, I do consider France to display many fascist qualities. While capital largely remains in private hands, the state has created so many regulations to bind capital and businesses as to make them essentially vassals of the state. Those regulations, incidentally are the reason why the unemployment rate in France is one of the highest in the western world. It isn't a prime example of a fascist state, nor did I say it was a prime example; France is a state that is moving toward fascism. It is, as I said, reasonably unfascist. But it is fascist nontheless.

Too bad we can't pack that twerp Bennish off to North Korea for an education on the joys of socialism.