[wmbwinn]

I find it disturbing that I have to teach history for people to understand my posts. But, here it goes:

From Wikipedia:

The National Socialist German Workers' Party, (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (help·info), abbreviated NSDAP), commonly known in English as the Nazi Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei), was a political party in Germany between 1919 and 1945. It was known as the German Workers' Party (DAP) before the name was changed in 1920.

The party's last leader, Adolf Hitler, was appointed Chancellor of Germany by president Paul von Hindenburg in 1933. Hitler rapidly established a totalitarian regime[1][2][3][4] known as the Third Reich.

Nazi ideology stressed the failure of democracy, failure of laissez-faire capitalism, "racial purity of the German people" and persecuted those it perceived either as race enemies or Lebensunwertes Leben, that is "life unworthy of living". This included Jews, Slavs, and Roma along with German homosexuals, the mentally disabled, communists, and others. To carry out these beliefs, the party and the German state which it controlled organized the systematic murder of approximately six million Jews (in what has become known as the Holocaust), and about five million other people, mainly Russians, Poles and Roma. Many thousands of political enemies of the Nazi regime, along with homosexuals, people with disabilities, and members of religious minorities were also killed. Hitler's desire to build an empire in Europe through expansionist policies was a major influence that led to the outbreak of World War II in Europe.

I very specifically said that I had no intention in my post of ascribing or assigning genocidal thoughts or plans to our current National Socialists who prefer to be called far left Democrats (or far right in the left wing if that makes any sense in the Wikipedia entry).

Now, let us examine where the politics of Pelosi, Reid, and Obama are:
1)constantly talking about the failure of capitalism and how we cannot allow this to happen again
2)attacking not a race or ethnic group but targeting the heads of capitalism (if I can call CEOs and COOs and other similarly titled persons who make millions).
3)buying AIG (government now owns around 70-80% of AIG)
4)buying into other aspects of the system such as the other banks and the auto industry and bailing out state governments; applying their own controls to the banks and auto industry and states in exchange for the money/government ownership/bailout
5)nationalizing healthcare

and I could go on. The point is that we have entered into European style Democratic Socialism.

Again, from Wikipedia:

Democratic socialism is a description used by various socialist movements, tendencies, and organizations, to emphasize the democratic character of their political orientation. The term is sometimes used synonymously with 'social democracy', but many self-identified[citation needed] democratic socialists oppose social democracy, seeing it as capitalist.

Democratic socialism is difficult to define, and groups of scholars have radically different definitions for the term. Some definitions of democratic socialism simply refer to all forms of socialism that follow an electoral, reformist or evolutionary path to socialism, rather than a revolutionary one.[1]

Frequently, this definition is invoked to distinguish democratic socialism from Communism, as in Donald Busky's Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey[2], Jim Tomlinson's Democratic Socialism and Economic Policy: The Attlee Years, 1945-1951, Norman Thomas Democratic Socialism: a new appraisal or Roy Hattersley's Choose Freedom: The Future of Democratic Socialism.

However, for those who use the term in this way, the scope of the term socialism itself can be very vague, and include forms of socialism compatible with capitalism. For example, Robert M. Page, a Reader in Democratic Socialism and Social Policy at the University of Birmingham, writes about "transformative democratic socialism" to refer to the politics of the Clement Attlee government (a strong welfare state, fiscal redistribution, some nationalisation) and "revisionist democratic socialism", as developed by Anthony Crosland and Harold Wilson:

"The most influential revisionist Labour thinker, Anthony Crosland..., contended that a more 'benevolent' form of capitalism had emerged since the [Second World War]... According to Crosland, it was now possible to achieve greater equality in society without the need for 'fundamental' economic transformation. For Crosland, a more meaningful form of equality could be achieved if the growth dividend derived from effective management of the economy was invested in 'pro-poor' public services rather than through fiscal redistribution."[3]

Indeed, some proponents of market socialism see the latter as a form of democratic socialism.[4]

A variant of this set of definitions is Joseph Schumpeter’s argument, set out in Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (1941), that liberal democracies were evolving from "liberal capitalism" into democratic socialism, with the growth of workers' self-management, industrial democracy and regulatory institutions.[5]

In contrast, other definitions of democratic socialism sharply distinguish it from social democracy.[6] Peter Hain, for example, classes democratic socialism, along with libertarian socialism, as a form of anti-authoritarian "socialism from below" (using the term popularised by Hal Draper), in contrast to Stalinism and social democracy, variants of authoritarian state socialism. For Hain, this democratic/authoritarian divide is more important than the revolutionary/reformist divide.[7] In this definition, it is the active participation of the population as a whole, and workers in particular, in the management of economy that characterises democratic socialism, while nationalisation and economic planning (whether controlled by an elected government or not) are characteristic of state socialism. A similar, but more complex, argument is made by Nicos Poulantzas.[8]

Other definitions fall somewhere between the first and second set, seeing democratic socialism as a specific political tradition closely related to and overlapping with social democracy. For example, Bogdan Denitch, in Democratic Socialism, defines it as proposing a radical reorganization of the socio-economic order through public ownership, workers' control of the labour process and redistributive tax policies.[9] Robert G. Picard similarly describes a democratic socialist tradition of thought including Eduard Bernstein, Karl Kautsky, Evan Durbin and Michael Harrington.[10]

The term democratic socialism can be used in a third way, to refer to a version of the Soviet model that was reformed in a democratic way. For example, Mikhail Gorbachev described perestroika as building a "new, humane and democratic socialism".[11] Consequently, some former Communist parties have rebranded themselves as democratic socialist, as with the Party of Democratic Socialism in Germany.

Hal Draper uses the term "revolutionary-democratic socialism" as a type of socialism from below in his The Two Souls of Socialism. He writes: 'the leading spokesman in the Second International of a revolutionary-democratic Socialism-from-Below [was] Rosa Luxemburg, who so emphatically put her faith and hope in the spontaneous struggle of a free working class that the myth-makers invented for her a "theory of spontaneity"'.[12] Similarly, on Eugene Debs, he writes: '"Debsian socialism" evoked a tremendous response from the heart of the people, but Debs had no successor as a tribune of revolutionary-democratic socialism'.[13]

Justification of democratic socialism can be found in the works of social philosophers like Charles Taylor and Axel Honneth, among others. Honneth has put forward the view that political and economic ideologies have a social basis, that is, they originate from intersubjective communication between members of a society.[14] Honneth criticises the liberal state because it assumes that principles of individual liberty and private property are ahistorical and abstract, when, in fact, they evolved from a specific social discourse on human activity. Contra liberal individualism, Honneth has emphasised the intersubjective dependency between human beings; that is, our well-being depends on recognising others and being recognised by them in turn. Democratic socialism, with its emphasis on social collectivism, could be seen as a way of safeguarding this dependency.

As to fascism, what else do you want to call Pelosi's rule in the House of Reps passed at the start of the session that prevents the Republicans from offering any amendments and prevents any debate. What do you call it when Pelosi forces the omnibus stimulus package down our throats by forcing a vote on the bill before the House members in EITHER party could even read it?

It is tyranny. It is all about bigger government control. And, it must be stopped.

I am sorry to those I offended with the title of Nazi Pelosi. It is a reference to her politics (minus genocide).