From: matt@galaxy.nsc.com (Matt Freivald x8043)
Subject: Re: NLNS: Fascism with a Friendly Face
Nntp-Posting-Host: pogo.nsc.com
Organization: Thought Police Watchdog Agency, U.S.A.
Lines: 370


Who wants to look through the bars at some reactionary Liberal conspiracy-
theory idiots and see how they rant and rave at the erosion of their populist 
support?  This is very typical of the elitist Liberal attitude that The People 
are incapable of thinking for themselves.  This elitist attitude will be the
eventual undoing of the arrogant liberal tide sweeping America, as The People
begin to realize more and more that they are being treated like errant children
and robbed of their freedoms by a bunch of Utopian arrogent socialist jerks.


In article 167077 in talk.politics.misc, New Liberation News Service 
<nlns@igc.apc.org> writes:

>Subject: NLNS: Fascism with a Friendly Face
>Lines: 164

>From: New Liberation News Service <nlns>
>Subject: NLNS: Fascism with a Friendly Face

>/* Written  8:33 pm  Apr 14, 1993 by nlns@igc.apc.org in igc:nlns.news */
>/* ---------- "NLNS Packet 3.11 *** 4-14-93" ---------- */

>Fascism with a Friendly Face: Does Rush Limbaugh Remind You of 
>Anyone?
>Daevid Bornhuetter-Machen, The Madison Edge

>"The main difference between Adolf Hitler and Rush Limbaugh is that 
>Hitler was original and showed initiative." 
>--Mort Sahl on The Tom Snyder Radio Show, ABC Radio Network, 
>October 27, 1992.

Although I find myself often disagreeing with the populist rationale
of Mr. Limbaugh, I find him entertaining and I often agree with his 
conclusions.  The fact that he sends liberal reactionaries like these
idiots through the roof makes him all the more entertaining.



>(NLNS)--Believe it or not, I was planning this comparative review of 
>Mein Kampf and Limbaugh's transcribed rant, The Way Things Ought to 
>Be before Sahl issued his comparative review. As usual, Sahl's was 
>independent and sharp as a scalpel.
>        My effort can only dream of comparing favorably to Mort's. At 
>least it has a fairly popular orginating premise; everyone I'd mention the 
>idea to thought it was either divinely inspired or at least past due for 
>delivery.
>        Those reactions are based on parallels that should be obvious to the 
>most peripheral observer of the Acts of those False Prophets. Both are 
>noted for their galvanizing oratorical skills, which they both used with 
>passion to generate a political cult of massive numerical proportions (in 
>fact, Limbaugh claims to have an audience of just over 12 million, almost 
>identical to the number of votes cast for Hitler in the April 1932 German 
>election). Both used a myopic social perspective to build the cult, and 
>enthusiastically amputated facts from the record to fabricate their 
>ideological quilt.

Actually, I find Limbaugh's oratory less than sizzling and his debating
skills sometimes lacking, even though his conclusions are often correct.

I would suggest that a bankrupt leftist ideology that hopes to use concentrated 
political power and a loaded gun to force everyone to do the "right" things
(where "right" is defined by the elitist academics who lead the movement)
is showing an acute case of "myopic social perspective", not to mention
arrogance and utter stupidity.

Limbaugh is certainly far from perfect, but his opponents in the established
body politic and the media are the ones arguing for Federal control of
virtually all aspects of the lives of the Citizenry, and for the elimination
of local control over Affairs Public.  

Perhaps Limbaugh has a following because The People are tired of being treated 
like errant children by a self-important group of arrogant controlling myopic 
people who have no understanding of how life operates outside of the "oughta-be's"
inside their own hopelessly closed minds.



>        The last point is glaringly documented by passages in the opening 
>pages of both books. Hitler's example is when, on page 5, he claims the 
>German nationalist terrorist Leo Schlageter (he bombed part of a railway 
>line between Dusseldorf and Duisburg, being caught in the act, in 1923) 
>was "betrayed to France by a representative of his government" when 
>there has never been any factual foundation for such a statement.
>        In fact, the governments of both the Reich and Prussia, as well as 
>the Vatican, actively intervened to save him from execution, and almost 
>succeeded. 

OK, let us take your word for that and work with it.  A nice specific
incident.



>Limbaugh follows suit by making the hysterically sarcastic 
>claim in his introduction that "in a school or during a commencement 
>ceremony or many other public places... God is unconstitutional." Of 
>course, it's not God but the official imposition of particular concepts of 
>God against an individual's will that's unconstitutional. But Limbaugh is 
>too gleeful in his talent for distortion to want you to know that.

Hmmm, "Congress shall pass no law regarding an establishment of religion,
nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof."  Liberal translation: "the
federal government (as long as it is run by Liberals) may force local
school districts to include certain iconic content in Christmas displays,
while prohibiting others."

I think Limbaugh has you on this one.  It seems to me that he is arguing
for LESS imposition of the federal government into religion.

Nice job on the specificity of that one, too.



[Analysis of historical/modern communication media deleted] 

>        But, as Mort Sahl also observed on the radio the other night, some 
>cloutmeister of the radical right wants Limbaugh to be a focal point of 
>their propoganda. (And remember, Sahl is an Al Haig conservative these 
>days.)
>        Mort might not know exactly who Rush's equivalent of Rodolf 
>Hess is (the book itself suggests Ed McLaughlin, the former president of 
>ABC radio and now Limbaugh's partner in EFM Media, the radio 
>program's production company). But Mort himself is a veteran of the talk 
>show, having hosted them in New York, Washington and Los Angeles. He 
>knows what evil lurks in the hearts of major market media men. He knows 
>that Limbaugh could not have collected his audience had not the 
>opportunity been placed on a silver platter and handed to him. Limbaugh 
>earns his money just as honestly as Al Capone did; it's almost worthy of a 
>RICO indictment.

Ah yes, it is a conspiracy of profound proportions.  Methinks that you
may be a bit resentful of Mr. Limbaugh's success because you attribute it
primarily to luck (how, after all, could anyone with profound differences
of opinion from yourself have become successful without the operation of
conspiracy or blind luck!)  Do you feel this same level of knee-jerk
resentment against lottery winners, or do you congratulate them on their
good fortune?



>        On questions of social issues, there is an overabundance of 
>material in the Limbaugh book that seems to echo Hitler's venom. For 
>example:

This should be great fun, since it is the Liberal movement in America
that is pushing the hardest for centralized fascist control of The People
and business (government/business 'partnership' indeed), and Mr. Limbaugh 
is the populist nemesis of that movement.

I have read Mr. Limbaugh's book, and although it was not the most literary
piece I have read in recent memory it certainly did not contain "venom"
at all, let alone "venom" comparable to an individual who callously murdered
millions out of racism.



>On Their Own Qualifications to Control Society
>        Hitler: "Out of the host of sometimes millions of people, who 
>individually more or less clearly and distinctly guess the truth, partly 
>perhaps understand it, one man [author's emphasis] must step forward in 
>order to form, with apodeictic force, out of the wavering world of 
>imagination of the great masses, granite principles, and to take up the fight 
>for their sole correctness, until out of the playing waves of a free world of 
>thought a brazen rock of uniform combination of form and will arises" 
>(page 577).

A very serious tone in that oratory.



>        Limbaugh: "Who needs the media when they've got me? ... The 
>show is devoted exclusively to what I think ... [the phrase "with half my 
>brain tied behind my back to make it even"] denotes the egress of mental 
>aptitude I require to engage and demolish liberals and others who disagree 
>with me ... It might take four or five years, but I'm convinced The Media 
>will slowly and reluctantly come around to my way of thinking, kicking 
>and screaming all the way." (pages 266, 21, 299 and 273, respectively.)

You neglect to mention that Mr. Limbaugh (have you ever listened to his show, 
BTW?) continuously encourages his audience to think for themselves rather
than blindly following any media icon, himself included.  You yourself mention 
that he makes no bones about his show being strictly about his own opinions.
He also adopts a rather satirical approach, and presumes his audience to be
intelligent enough to distinguish satire from seriousness (and he says as much).
This is in contrast to the average mass-media show, in which the audience is
treated as society's intellectual lowest common denominator.

I am sure that Adolf Hitler was a master of satire; I am sure he was just
kidding when he said that the Jews were the cause of Germany's problems and
needed to be exterminated.



>On Religion as the Basis of a Nation
>        Hitler: "In this world human culture and civilization are 
>inseperably bound up with the existence of the Aryan. His dying-off or his 
>decline would again lower upon this earth the dark veils of a time without 
>culture ... He who dares to lay hand upon the highest image of the Lord 
>sins against the benevolent Creator of this miracle and helps in the 
>expulsion from Paradise." (Page 581.)

This is not religion, it is clearly a perverse worship of race.  Since
Christ was a Jew, it seems quite unlikely that Hitler's characterization of
the Aryan as "the highest image of the Lord" fits with Christian doctrine.



>        Limbaugh: "America was founded as a Judeo-Christian country ... 
>But our intellectual and political elites are often either hostile or 
>ambivalent toward religion ... People for whom belief in God is at best a 
>charming superstition have managed to ban prayer from the public schools 
>for the last thirty years. Is it only a coincidence that the quality of 
>American education has declined ever since?" (pages 274-5.)

Private religious schools have a vastly better record of success than
publicly funded schools.  American history is indeed primarily Judeo-
Christian.  I suppose that Mr. Limbaugh pointing out facts is equivalent
to Adolf Hitler worshiping the Aryan race.  I think you might be reaching
just a wee bit here.



>On Popular Culture as a Reason for Social Collapse
>        Hitler: "The fight against the poisoning of the soul has to set in ... 
>One has only to look at the menus of our movie houses, vaudevilles and 
>theatres; and one can hardly deny that this is not the right kind of food ... 
>Theatre, art, literature, movies, the press, billposters and window displays 
>must be cleaned of the symptoms of a rotting world and put into the 
>service of a moral idea of State and culture." (pages 346 and 348.)

Definite suggestion that the government should control the entertainment
industry here.


>        Limbaugh: "Today, Hollywood is in trouble. The reason [is] that 
>Hollywood has forgotten who its audience is ... They make fun of people 
>who believe in God. They ridicule the traditional family, heterosexuality 
>and monagamy. They disparage American heroes." (page 254.)

Just a guess here, but I don't think that Mr. Limbaugh would advocate
government control of Hollywood.  You should perhaps call his radio show
to confirm this.  I believe this is more a criticism of Hollywood and the
depraved moral values it espouses, not an advocation of government control 
of Hollywood.

90's Liberals, on the other hand, want to have complete government control 
of our school systems, so that the government can teach The People at an
early age the "right" way to view religion and morality.  I believe Mr. 
Limbaugh is against this, as his satirical use of the "young heads full
of mush" hyperbole indicates.



>On the News Meida
>        Hitler: "The activity of the so-called liberal press was the work of 
>gravediggers for the German people and the German Reich. One can pass 
>by in silence the Marxist papers of lies ... it's task is only to break the 
>people's folkish and national spine, in order to make it ripe for the yoke of 
>slavery of international capital and its masters, the Jews." (Page 331.)

Pretty strong conspiracy theory insinuated here, with an implicit plea for
government power to be used to break up the conspiracy.



>        Limbaugh: "Elements of The Media have jumped on the 
>bandwagon of leftist causes. The cynical journalist of the past has been 
>replaced in many cases by an enthusiastic cheerleader for causes ... During 
>the Gulf war, CNN correspondent Bernard Shaw [said] CNN is a global 
>network. We can't take sides. Cant take sides? --- --- ---! ... If they don't 
>realize that their freedom lies in the United States of America and that 
>therefore they should defend this nation, they are hopelessly misguided 
>and, may I suggest, flirting with megalomania." (pages 270 and 268.)

Indication here that "Elements of the Media" (since career is a self-selected
categorization, perhaps an inferred 'larger percentage than represented in
the populace at large') has a leftist bias.  Doesn't sound too unreasonable.
No insinuation that CNN should not report in an objective fashion, only
that for reporters to say that they do not have any personal bias in the
situation is disingenuous to megalomaniacal.

You may disagree, and it may well be exagerrated, but it is not an unreasonable 
opinion; and Mr. Limbaugh goes well out of his way to make sure that his 
audience knows that these are his opinions, unlike most other reporting that 
purports to achieve perfect objectivity but in actuality will in some degree 
or other, in a statistical sense, reflect the biases of the reporters.  Who 
is being disingenuous here, Mr. Shaw or Mr. Limbaugh?

Again, you should ask Mr. Limbaugh himself, but I expect that he would
oppose government control of the media.



>*     *     *
        
>To continue these comparative excerpts is certainly possible, but 
>ultimately too depressing to take in one reading.

It is indeed depressing to see such myopia and tiresome Liberal arrogance.
Liberals love to play games with paradigms as a way of discrediting people
who disagree with them.  Why don't you challenge conservative ideology
on an intellectual level rather than engaging in ludicrous comparisons?
Perhaps the underpinnings of your ideology are intellectual only in that
they exist in your mind, not the real world.



>        After putting these books down, there is one undeniable fact that 
>haunts me. In the 1920s, Adolf Hitler fed depressed and frightened 
>Germans the opiate of hatred of those around them; in turn, it allowed 
>Germans to hand their collective national power to the Nazis. In the 1990s, 
>Rush Limbaugh is doing the very same thing: distributing hatred to 
>depressed and frightened Americans; in turn, it is helping the American 
>radical right to maintain its power base as the 12-year nightmare of the 
>Reagan-Bush era comes to an end, hoping to rebuild it into their hopes for 
>The Fascist States of America.

Perhaps there are a few among the intellectually challenged who percieve
Rush Limbaugh as a hate-monger, but in my experience he has been spreading
laughter at the ludicrous self-importance of the Left, not hatred.

As to Mr. Bush, you may be correct about his fascist economic leanings.
Mr. Reagan, on the other hand, did his best to reverse the fascist trend
of government involvement in business.  Mr. Clinton is increasing fascism
in America through "business/government partnership" and increased levels
of taxation.  Perhaps you should not have skipped your vocabulary classes
in grade school.



>        And if Limbaugh is not as repellant a Hitler, it is only because the 
>radical right utilizes Limbaugh as its own gateway opiate. One can only 
>wonder what the ultimate drug is they plan to hook America on.

Hmmm.  Seems to me that Limbaugh is not in any way comparable to Hitler
because he has not murdered six million Jews and many, many others out of
racism.  I come from a mixed-race family, so I am quite well attuned to
racism; I don't hear any coming from Rush Limbaugh.  The only place I hear 
racism coming from these days and being taken seriously is from the Liberal 
Left.

The Liberal Left is the movement I see trying to get America hooked
on the opiates of Socialized Medicine, Socialized Transportation, Socialized
Education, etc.  The Left already has America hopelessly addicted to 
that Liberal drug, the Social Security Chain Letter.  It is quite clear
to me that while the Hitler analogy does not really apply to either Rush 
Limbaugh or William Jefferson Clinton, if one of the two is closer than 
the other it is clearly the Fascist Clinton.


>The Madison Edge can be reached at PO Box 845, Madison, WI 53701-
>0845; (608) 255-4460.
>
>--- 30 ---

This is the same address as "Idiots Anonymous", isn't it?


Matt Freivald

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LiBORGalism:
             THINKING IS IRRELEVANT. INTEGRITY IS IRRELEVANT.
          FREE SPEECH IS IRRELEVANT. PRIVATE PROPERTY IS IRRELEVANT.
                 PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY IS IRRELEVANT.
                     CONSERVATIVISM IS FUTILE.
                      YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
THESE ARE MY OPINIONS ONLY AND NOT THOSE OF MY EMPLOYER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

