HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

the Differences between Lowe and Comrie

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-27-2003, 08:46 AM
  #1
windowlicker
Registered User
 
windowlicker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Murky Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 2,180
vCash: 500
the Differences between Lowe and Comrie

from slam sports:

"Philosophical differences between Mike and Kevin, and they have nothing to do with money, are no less than those that would exist between Ronald Reagan and Karl Marx," Winter said. "They are insurmountable. The philosophical differences between them are irreconcilable."

whoaa... Karl Marx and Ronald Reagan? How can a young center and a GM have philosophical differences, I thought Lowe ran the team.

Anyways, knowing how Kevin Lowe is, I bet hes Dying to release to the public just what the little s*^#T and his wonderfull agent have been up to. And knowing all he said publicly after the Carter trade (and Carter didnt even piss him off), when this whiny-baby crap is over, we will all find out what really happened.

(ps. if no deal comes across Lowe's table that absolutely makes him jump out of his seat, I want comrie to sit for a while. As was said earlier, we own him untill 31. Just think, because of his youthfull inexperiences and false pride, he may not get another NHL paycheque for 7 years)

windowlicker is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 10:04 AM
  #2
Behind Enemy Lines
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 3,765
vCash: 500
This is simply more player agent rhetoric to force a trade. Winter's mandate is solely to get Comrie the most money possible. This is simply a public plea to attempt resolution to suit Winter's and Comrie's agenda -to play hockey asap and make the most money possible. Comparing their philosphical differences to historical figures is insulting and trivializing. In no way would I ever equate the personal circumstances of a millionaire athlete with political philosophies which divided our world and at times could have led to our armaggedom. Karl Marx was indeed a prototypical left-winger and Reagan a right-winger but their arena was much bigger and truly significant. Pathetic effort by Winters.

Oiler management will do what is right for the organization and determine when and how to resolve this impasse. It is their right and leverage based upon the Collective Bargaining agreement. Their duty is to consider the long term implication of this impasse.

Behind Enemy Lines is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 11:11 AM
  #3
windowlicker
Registered User
 
windowlicker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Murky Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 2,180
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Behind Enemy Lines
This is simply more player agent rhetoric to force a trade. Winter's mandate is solely to get Comrie the most money possible. This is simply a public plea to attempt resolution to suit Winter's and Comrie's agenda -to play hockey asap and make the most money possible. Comparing their philosphical differences to historical figures is insulting and trivializing. In no way would I ever equate the personal circumstances of a millionaire athlete with political philosophies which divided our world and at times could have led to our armaggedom. Karl Marx was indeed a prototypical left-winger and Reagan a right-winger but their arena was much bigger and truly significant. Pathetic effort by Winters.

Oiler management will do what is right for the organization and determine when and how to resolve this impasse. It is their right and leverage based upon the Collective Bargaining agreement. Their duty is to consider the long term implication of this impasse.

When I saw Winter using those 2 examples, I thought it was laughable and showed no class. This is an athletic monetary disagreement. This isnt a class struggle of the worker against the corrupt system of wealth. In this case the workers are the wealth.
It seems he is a player's dream agent. He will do anything to get his client the best deal, and cater to a young clients every whim at the risk of damaging his reputation in this city and across the league, because in the end its all about the $$.

In one of those articles theres a pic of Rich in front of some Oiler painting. Thats a disgrace. In the future I can see Lowe treating him thesame way Goodenow was treated by Sather when he arrived in town.

windowlicker is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 01:10 PM
  #4
Jim_Harnock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Burlington, Ontario
Country: Wales
Posts: 1,458
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by windowlicker
"Philosophical differences between Mike and Kevin, and they have nothing to do with money, are no less than those that would exist between Ronald Reagan and Karl Marx," Winter said.
Strangely appropriate, I'd say. Mike Comrie = Ronald Reagan, the natural-born capitalist, looking out for the big money and the big business. Kevin Lowe = Karl Marx, the champion of the working class, always looking to do what's in the best interest of the "msall market" world and to bring down the high-rollers.

Jim_Harnock is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 01:14 PM
  #5
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
wow, perhaps we should change our name to the Edmonton Reds? lol

I do as well find it rather commical to pull something as major as the difference between a Marxist and a Conservative in comparison to Comrie's hurt pride.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 01:15 PM
  #6
LoudmouthHemskyfan#1
Registered User
 
LoudmouthHemskyfan#1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: E-town
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim_Harnock
Strangely appropriate, I'd say. Mike Comrie = Ronald Reagan, the natural-born capitalist, looking out for the big money and the big business. Kevin Lowe = Karl Marx, the champion of the working class, always looking to do what's in the best interest of the "msall market" world and to bring down the high-rollers.
If our GM shares anything in common with the writer of the communist manifesto, we should all run for the hills right now. Our team is going to all make the same salary wether you're Ryan Smyth or Dan 'freaking' Cleary, and the same ice time...AHHHHHHHHH!!!! And I guess nobody will be cut either.


LoudmouthHemskyfan#1 is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 01:25 PM
  #7
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoudmouthHemskyfan#1
If our GM shares anything in common with the writer of the communist manifesto, we should all run for the hills right now. Our team is going to all make the same salary wether you're Ryan Smyth or Dan 'freaking' Cleary, and the same ice time...AHHHHHHHHH!!!! And I guess nobody will be cut either.

lol, good point. But I think MacT could fall under the leninist grouping - has his favorites (party members to soviets) that get all the playing time (or are rich) and the others (Ukrainians) he does what ever he can to hold them down and is a jerk to them.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 02:09 PM
  #8
Jim_Harnock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Burlington, Ontario
Country: Wales
Posts: 1,458
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
lol, good point. But I think MacT could fall under the leninist grouping - has his favorites (party members to soviets) that get all the playing time (or are rich) and the others (Ukrainians) he does what ever he can to hold them down and is a jerk to them.
Hey now, don't go confusing Communism with Soviet Communism. They're both based on the Marx/Engels Communist Manifesto, but the Soviets did quite a bit of "fluffing" to the principles. I just spent two and a half weeks studying Marx and while he's a fanatic, he's certainly no Stalin.

Jim_Harnock is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 04:01 PM
  #9
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim_Harnock
Hey now, don't go confusing Communism with Soviet Communism. They're both based on the Marx/Engels Communist Manifesto, but the Soviets did quite a bit of "fluffing" to the principles. I just spent two and a half weeks studying Marx and while he's a fanatic, he's certainly no Stalin.

Communism is Communism, whether its Stalin's, Mao's or whomever's version. Its only logical end is degradation of humanity, mass graves and misery.

...but since this is a hockey board here's what i think happened in the Comrie/Lowe saga. I believe the key here is not this contract battle but the first contract battle. K-Lowe has no leverage, he has to trade guerin to free up room and he signs Comrie to a ridicuously easy-bonus laden contract. "That" contract is why we are here today. It's been admitted that Comrie, sensing the leverage he would lose in a years time, tried to renegotiate an extension in year two. K-Lowe said no. If I was a guessing man I would say K-Lowe made some comment to either MC or Winter that Comrie was robbing the Oilers with his current contract. It was then that a trade demand was first issued. So we now have one side (K-Lowes) who feels he has a player that was paid too much and wants him to earn his "next" big contract. We have the other side (MC's) who feels he's put up Weigh-like numbers and isn't getting any props from the org.

HotToddy is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 04:06 PM
  #10
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
[QUOTE=HotToddy]Communism is Communism, whether its Stalin's, Mao's or whomever's version. Its only logical end is degradation of humanity, mass graves and misery.
QUOTE]

Wow, somebody has had their daily helping of propaganda:
"communism is bad, communism is evil, communism is bad....."

lol

(and no I'm not a communist - lol, I'm a conservative)

But I know there are difference (and indeed there are) between what Marx and Engles wrote and to what Lenin and Stalin implemented (thats why Soviets called themselves Marxists/Leninist not just Marxists). And actually Mao was a great leader for his country - the only brutal things that happened under him happened because he was sick and wasn't even running the country, it was his not job wife and other advisers that were sending the little men with red books around - and they were hanged for it.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 05:48 PM
  #11
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,567
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=thome_26]
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy
Communism is Communism, whether its Stalin's, Mao's or whomever's version. Its only logical end is degradation of humanity, mass graves and misery.
QUOTE]

Wow, somebody has had their daily helping of propaganda:
"communism is bad, communism is evil, communism is bad....."

lol

(and no I'm not a communist - lol, I'm a conservative)

But I know there are difference (and indeed there are) between what Marx and Engles wrote and to what Lenin and Stalin implemented (thats why Soviets called themselves Marxists/Leninist not just Marxists). And actually Mao was a great leader for his country - the only brutal things that happened under him happened because he was sick and wasn't even running the country, it was his not job wife and other advisers that were sending the little men with red books around - and they were hanged for it.
Mao was a great leader for his country - the only brutal things that happened under him happened because he was sick and wasn't even running the country - I think you need to touch up on history a little my friend, read "The man who stayed behind" by Sydney Lightenberg. Or any non-univeristy issued book on Mao for that matter.

And yes Marx and Engels weren't ravenous monsters ,but inadvertently or not, they wrote the template that allowed histories greatestabomination to occur, communism.

HotToddy is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 05:55 PM
  #12
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy
Mao was a great leader for his country - the only brutal things that happened under him happened because he was sick and wasn't even running the country - I think you need to touch up on history a little my friend, read "The man who stayed behind" by Sydney Lightenberg. Or any non-univeristy issued book on Mao for that matter.

And yes Marx and Engels weren't ravenous monsters ,but inadvertently or not, they wrote the template that allowed histories greatestabomination to occur, communism.
Of course Mao wasn't the most pleasent leader - but he stabilized and turned his country back into a power. And never yet have we seen what Marx and Engels wrote truely take form. In Russia there was still different classes - the only thing is that it was no longer aristocrats - and there was more potential to be able to move up in life. To make a statement that communism is the greatest abomination is nothing more then your opinion - as the ideals of pure communism are fairly commendable. The only problem is it is a dream. To make Marx into a bad guy is laughable - because in that case Jesus is a bad guy as the religion that was started due to his teachings has been a the reason of numerous wars. The case in both is that their message was distorted.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 06:03 PM
  #13
Kerplunk
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
I don't like Winter's recent posturing. First they tell us they have a confidentiality agreement and now they're trying to negotiate through the media. None of the other holdouts have gone this way. The worst has been Havlat and Gaborick saying they’re going home. Big deal. With Winter we have all sort of innuendo about trade demands and irreconcilable differences. This is the one time in a player’s career under the current CBA where he has no bargaining power. They had Lowe backed into a corner three years ago and he gave them a good deal and now the roles are reversed. Winter and Comrie need to deal with that fact, suck it up and accept whatever the Oilers are offering IMHO.

 
Old
10-27-2003, 06:04 PM
  #14
G-Double
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: left coast
Posts: 979
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to G-Double
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy
Mao was a great leader for his country - the only brutal things that happened under him happened because he was sick and wasn't even running the country - I think you need to touch up on history a little my friend, read "The man who stayed behind" by Sydney Lightenberg. Or any non-univeristy issued book on Mao for that matter.

And yes Marx and Engels weren't ravenous monsters ,but inadvertently or not, they wrote the template that allowed histories greatestabomination to occur, communism.
the greatest abomination? please tell me you are kidding or just not versed in history...communism is a great idea in practice, except that in practice it is always guaranteed to fail. Read the manifesto if you haven't whichseems to be the case here, Marx/Engels have good ideas and alot of them are actually incorporated in current day welfare and assistant programs that aid people that are less fortunate.

Anyway, this isn't the place for it but i was ghastly shocked at these comments.

G-Double is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 06:17 PM
  #15
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Double
the greatest abomination? please tell me you are kidding or just not versed in history...communism is a great idea in practice, except that in practice it is always guaranteed to fail. Read the manifesto if you haven't whichseems to be the case here, Marx/Engels have good ideas and alot of them are actually incorporated in current day welfare and assistant programs that aid people that are less fortunate.

Anyway, this isn't the place for it but i was ghastly shocked at these comments.
OK, good, I wasn't the only non communist who thought that was off. Can't help but think this guy has had his healthy helping of propaganda rammed down his throat, lol.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 06:23 PM
  #16
Kerplunk
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Double
the greatest abomination? please tell me you are kidding or just not versed in history...communism is a great idea in practice, except that in practice it is always guaranteed to fail. Read the manifesto if you haven't whichseems to be the case here, Marx/Engels have good ideas and alot of them are actually incorporated in current day welfare and assistant programs that aid people that are less fortunate.

Anyway, this isn't the place for it but i was ghastly shocked at these comments.
I've browsed through the manifesto as it is available online and I thought it was an abomination. It called for the forceful removal of property by the state from everyone and went as far as to condone murdering people if they resisted. A means to an end if you will. In addition it calls for the complete domination of the planet under communism because if given a choice many people would chose to live under another system thus resulting in the failure of communism. It's a very scary piece of work and is not a great idea at all. Not only that but the fundamental economics (and Marx wasn't even an economist) which he basis his opinions on were flawed. The only work to which he ascribes value is that of the workingman. He believed that owners/managers provided no benefit to the economy. Yet if you look at Canada and the U.S. today you would see that small companies owned by entrepreneurs are creating most of the jobs and growth. Since Marx ascribes no value to that you should be able to see where we would be under Marx's manifesto.

 
Old
10-27-2003, 06:27 PM
  #17
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kerplunk
I've browsed through the manifesto as it is available online and I thought it was an abomination. It called for the forceful removal of property by the state from everyone and went as far as to condone murdering people if they resisted. A means to an end if you will. In addition it calls for the complete domination of the planet under communism because if given a choice many people would chose to live under another system thus resulting in the failure of communism. It's a very scary piece of work and is not a great idea at all. Not only that but the fundamental economics (and Marx wasn't even an economist) which he basis his opinions on were flawed. The only work to which he ascribes value is that of the workingman. He believed that owners/managers provided no benefit to the economy. Yet if you look at Canada and the U.S. today you would see that small companies owned by entrepreneurs are creating most of the jobs and growth. Since Marx ascribes no value to that you should be able to see where we would be under Marx's manifesto.
I think we all know and agree that Marx was wrong, but I could handle hearing it called folly - or idiotic, but the greatest abomination? talk about an over-statement. I've read the Manifesto - and you have to understand the situation back then to realize that killing a few bourgeoisie isn't actually that bad of an idea or crime.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 06:30 PM
  #18
Kerplunk
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
I think we all know and agree that Marx was wrong, but I could handle hearing it called folly - or idiotic, but the greatest abomination? talk about an over-statement. I've read the Manifesto - and you have to understand the situation back then to realize that killing a few bourgeoisie isn't actually that bad of an idea or crime.
Excuse me? The Nazi's thought killing all the Jews wasn't a bad idea, that doesn't make it right.

 
Old
10-27-2003, 06:35 PM
  #19
G-Double
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: left coast
Posts: 979
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to G-Double
So Kerplunk, you've read parts of it, its not that long why not the entire thing, couldn't stomach it? Did you read it in the context of the time period it was written? Did you read it in the context of history up until that point?

If you were a feudal lord in the 10th century what would you have thought of capitalism or small middle-class business owners? probably the same thing capitalists thought/think of communists now.

The idea that communism, an extreme form of socialism, something that many western countries are slowly tending towards is so despicable and opposed to everything all of us have ever been taught is to me quite funny.

Anyway, the economic principles at the time were very open for debate and obviously held some merit. In theory of course, in practice they are practically impossible because of human nature.

Anyway, if anyone wants to keep talking about it maybe we should take this to PM's to let this thread get back on topic...or just die out.

G-Double is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 06:37 PM
  #20
FacelessButcher
Registered User
 
FacelessButcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,201
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kerplunk
I've browsed through the manifesto as it is available online and I thought it was an abomination. It called for the forceful removal of property by the state from everyone and went as far as to condone murdering people if they resisted. A means to an end if you will. In addition it calls for the complete domination of the planet under communism because if given a choice many people would chose to live under another system thus resulting in the failure of communism. It's a very scary piece of work and is not a great idea at all. Not only that but the fundamental economics (and Marx wasn't even an economist) which he basis his opinions on were flawed. The only work to which he ascribes value is that of the workingman. He believed that owners/managers provided no benefit to the economy. Yet if you look at Canada and the U.S. today you would see that small companies owned by entrepreneurs are creating most of the jobs and growth. Since Marx ascribes no value to that you should be able to see where we would be under Marx's manifesto.
Have you read Das Kapital 1,2, and 3 I think that covers most of the economic side. Personally I don't mind the idea of communism at all its just you have to realize Marx was writing his book for a far different time and era.Marx has had a great impact on our society(mostly for the better I would say especially in the area of workers rights) whether or not you believe in Communism.

FacelessButcher is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 06:37 PM
  #21
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kerplunk
Excuse me? The Nazi's thought killing all the Jews wasn't a bad idea, that doesn't make it right.
The attempted Genocide of the Nazi's is on quite a different scale of what the Communist revolution said should be done. To compare Communists killing people who had treated them disgustingly and left them to survive on next to nother while they lived in absolute luxury is quite a bit different then what the Nazis did. Very bad comparison. Killing should be a last resort to anything - but if you and your family had no food and no future and you had to see some person who lived in luxury because of the hard work that you and the rest of your class did, would you too, not be willing to sacrifice a few of their lives to put an end to it? I think so.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 06:40 PM
  #22
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Double
So Kerplunk, you've read parts of it, its not that long why not the entire thing, couldn't stomach it? Did you read it in the context of the time period it was written? Did you read it in the context of history up until that point?

If you were a feudal lord in the 10th century what would you have thought of capitalism or small middle-class business owners? probably the same thing capitalists thought/think of communists now.

The idea that communism, an extreme form of socialism, something that many western countries are slowly tending towards is so despicable and opposed to everything all of us have ever been taught is to me quite funny.

Anyway, the economic principles at the time were very open for debate and obviously held some merit. In theory of course, in practice they are practically impossible because of human nature.

Anyway, if anyone wants to keep talking about it maybe we should take this to PM's to let this thread get back on topic...or just die out.
Or I think the board even has a place for political stuff.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 06:42 PM
  #23
G-Double
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: left coast
Posts: 979
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to G-Double
i just have to say one more thing, to compare the nazi's to the communists is completely wrong, and in no way am i condoning the nazi's especailly with my heritage. What i am saying is, Stalin was NOT a communist, he was a stalinist, he used the idea of communism and his own sick and twisted desire to have a cult following like Lenin's to create his own style of ruthless dictatorship.

to judge communism based on the government of stalin is ridiculous, look at Kruschev, his ideas were MUCH closer to the actual ideals of communism but were still not all that close...

G-Double is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 06:47 PM
  #24
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Double
i just have to say one more thing, to compare the nazi's to the communists is completely wrong, and in no way am i condoning the nazi's especailly with my heritage. What i am saying is, Stalin was NOT a communist, he was a stalinist, he used the idea of communism and his own sick and twisted desire to have a cult following like Lenin's to create his own style of ruthless dictatorship.

to judge communism based on the government of stalin is ridiculous, look at Kruschev, his ideas were MUCH closer to the actual ideals of communism but were still not all that close...
Yes, as I've said, never ever have we seen and never ever will we see complete communism - as human nature will prevent it. I think countries such as Sweden and the other Scandinavian countries have are better examples of communism then what there was under the Soviets.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
10-27-2003, 07:08 PM
  #25
Allan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: United Nations
Posts: 1,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
Yes, as I've said, never ever have we seen and never ever will we see complete communism - as human nature will prevent it. I think countries such as Sweden and the other Scandinavian countries have are better examples of communism then what there was under the Soviets.
The closest communism has ever come to an actual application was in China in the early twenties, but unfortunately it was perverted by the cultural revolution, which took the changeover from being the replacement of the bourgeuois with the proletariat to being a witch hunt, with personal gain as its motivation, which obviously is the opposite of what they were trying to achieve.

Communism has always been a convenient thing of which to be afraid. That is why kids aren't taught about it in school. When I was in high school (not too many years ago), I was told that Stalin and the USSR were communism, without the time being taken to study the manifesto - it was merely given a passing reference. I had to seek it out myself in order to learn what communism truly is, in theory.

What it represents now, however, is another of the many ways in which political movements give themselves misleading names in order to gain support from those who don't listen. The conservative party in Canada has become progressively more liberal in recent years, while the liberal party has become as conservative as the conservatives. For that matter, the Nazis were actually called the National Socialist Democratic Workers' Party. While they were equally as socialist as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, they remain an autocracy, which is the antithesis of socialism and communism. Ironically, there was nearly a civil war in Germany in the early thirties, fought against the communists, who were supported by the USSR, even though Nazi and Soviet politics were actually similar. A fight which claimed to be about ideas was really about personal power and ego. Where have we heard that before?

Anyway, I've gone on long enough. Maybe we should send Rich Winter a copy of the Communist Manifesto, and something about Reagan, so he can check his references next time. He sounded like a pompous twit when he made that remark.

Allan is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:10 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.