Kitty Werthmann: History Distorted

When doing my usual check of “What’s New” on snopes.com, I came across a recent entry for an email from one Kitty Werthmann, purporting to tell her story of living through the annexation of Austria by Nazi Germany, also known as the Anschluss. The long email is a transcribed speech that describes how Hitler brought the promise of repairing Austria’s faltering economy, boosting employment and ensuring the happiness of the people, and how these promises curdled into a slow stripping of freedom, encroaching of malicious bureaucracy, the cleansing of those deemed inferior and eventually, a rain of Allied bombs brought on by total war.

Like most of us do with these kinds of forwards, I was ready to assume it was fake or misattributed and move on. Snopes itself was still researching the matter, listing it as “undetermined” as of January 6, 2013. But to my surprise, both the email and Kitty Werthmann are perfectly real. She really did live through the Nazi occupation of Austria, and since emigrating to the US in the 50’s, she’s given hundreds of speeches, written a book, produced a DVD and made television appearances, all in the service of spreading a laudable message that must be repeated, lest it ever be forgotten.

With the email confirmed, there was no reason to think anything untoward about Ms. Werthmann. Taking a historical anecdote as fact is usually pretty bad science, but it’s not like the misery of life under the Nazi boot isn’t something we’re still debating about. And while it’s entirely possible that 70 years later, she’s gotten some of the details wrong, that certainly wouldn’t invalidate her story. One of my favorite books on World War II, Guy Sajer’s autobiography about fighting for Germany on the Eastern Front, The Forgotten Soldier, has numerous historical, geographical and military-related errors, yet doesn’t suffer in the slightest for it.

So why would I accuse Kitty Werthmann of grossly distorting history in a way that actually marginalizes the victims of Nazi oppression? How could anyone find fault with an elderly woman telling a vitally important story of how her country was overtaken by tyranny?

Because the real message of Kitty Werthmann’s speech is that that same tyranny is taking hold in another time and place: America, right now. Like others in a small but vocal fringe movement, Ms. Werthmann believes that the US is being consumed by a slowly building socialist takeover, and she’s using the story of the Anschluss and its aftermath to prove that what happened there is happening here.

I’m not interested in going through the email line by line to debunk every claim. I’m not a historian, I wasn’t there and I can’t tell her that she didn’t remember what she remembers. But I can and do take great umbrage with the comparison of Austria in 1938 to the current United States, because it’s incorrect and illogical. It’s also nakedly partisan. While the original email never mentions current political figures, Ms. Werthmann exhorts her reader at both the start and end of the speech “don’t let freedom slip away,” implying that it is. She goes on to describe numerous ways freedom slipped away for her and her family:

Hitler Targets Education – Eliminates Religious Instruction for Children
Equal Rights Hits Home
Hitler Restructured the Family Through Daycare
Health Care and Small Business Suffer Under Government Controls
“Mercy Killing” Redefined
The Final Steps – Gun Laws

Other speeches are more explicit, railing against Barack Obama and leftist values, and telling listeners that the way to defend freedom in America is to “keep your guns, and buy more guns, and buy ammunition.”

And lest anyone think I’m simply ranting on a political soapbox, my rejection of her message is not based on my own political beliefs or opinions, but by her own use of a terrible past to rail against a present that doesn’t exist. When faced with this kind of bald-faced distortion, my opinions become irrelevant. Furthermore, the truth has no political affiliation. It’s not liberal or conservative, didn’t vote for this one or that one, and has no agenda other than to be conveyed accurately. And on that score, Ms. Werthmann fails completely.

It’s virtually impossible to find anything more than the most superficial similarities between the two countries in those two time periods. Yes, these are tough times economically. But at the time of the Anschluss, Austria was crippled by the same Great Depression that had sent not only Europe and America, but the entire world, into economic spiral. The entire world was collapsing into hyperinflation, desperation and poverty, with fascist militarism rising up in places like Japan and Germany to fill the void. Ms. Werthmann herself describes the decrepit state of Austria as:

In 1938, Austria was in deep Depression. Nearly one-third of our workforce was unemployed. We had 25% inflation and 25% bank loan interest rates.

Farmers and business people were declaring bankruptcy daily. Young people were going from house to house begging for food.. Not that they didn’t want to work; there simply weren’t any jobs. […] The Communist Party and the National Socialist Party were fighting each other. Blocks and blocks of cities like Vienna , Linz , and Graz were destroyed. The people became desperate and petitioned the government to let them decide what kind of government they wanted.

Putting aside the issue of whether her statistics are correct, none of this is happening in the United States right now. Far from it. Our unemployment rate during the recent recession has never been anywhere near 33%, inflation is under control and interest rates are lower now than any time in our history. And while our rival political parties seem stridently uninterested in compromise, nobody is destroying any city blocks to get their point across. The economic conditions that allowed Hitler to take power in Germany and annex an Austria whose government was on the verge of collapse due to pro-Nazi Austrians simply don’t exist here.

Time and time again, Ms. Werthmann describes how a freedom was taken away or a change forced on her, including:

Hitler decided we should have equal rights for women. Before this, it was a custom that married Austrian women did not work outside the home.
I walked into my schoolroom to find the crucifix replaced by Hitler’s picture hanging next to a Nazi flag. Our teacher, a very devout woman, stood up and told the class we wouldn’t pray or have religion anymore.
All food was rationed and could only be purchased using food stamps.
Soon after this, the draft was implemented. It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps.
The state raised a whole generation of children.
If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn. There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine.
As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80% of our income.
We were told how to shop and what to buy. Free enterprise was essentially abolished.
Those people [the mentally ill] left in excellent physical health and all died within 6 months. We called this euthanasia.
Most citizens were law abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long after-wards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily.
No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away.

While these things are terrible deprivations that nobody should ever have to suffer through, and fortunately, we aren’t. Nobody is being taken away for speaking out against the government. Otherwise, one would think Ms. Werthmann would have been hauled away long ago. Nobody is forced to work. Nobody is paying 80% of their income in tax. Nobody is being gassed.

To compare Austria under the Nazis and the US now is to embrace a staggering array of logical fallacies, all of them piling on top of each other, crushing her argument. The entire thesis of her message is one giant slippery slope with nothing to back it up but potentially flawed anecdotal evidence and her own opinion. It is a vast excluded middle. It’s an argument based on emotion, hyperbole and disdain.

There are other reasons to be skeptical of Ms. Werthmann’s motivations. The speech transcribed in the email on Snopes is just one sound-bite in a five year history of using the fascist subjugation of Austria as a jumping-off point to rail against a variety of liberal terribles, none of which have the slightest to do with Adolf Hitler or the Nazi Party, except in her own mind. A darling of the Tea Party movement, Ms. Werthmann also serves as president of South Dakota Eagle Forum, an offshoot of the ultra-conservative think tank Eagle Forum, founded by the notoriously science-hating and conspiracy-loving activist Phyllis Schlafly, also the mother of Conservapedia founder Andrew Schlafly.

From what I’ve learned about Ms. Werthmann, the affiliation makes perfect sense. Her excoriating of equal rights for women, removal of religious instruction from public classrooms and the existence of even basic government intervention in social matters dovetails nicely with the Schlafly family’s mission to demolish science and secularism in the name of Christian conservatism. If Ms. Werthmann were truly interested in simply expressing a clear, powerful message about the horrors of the Nazi regime, she’s aligned with possibly the worst group of people to help her do that. But if she wanted to spread the message that Obama, “the government,” godlessness and women leaving the house to work are leading us down the road to tyranny, she’s in fine company.

Obviously, Kitty Werthmann is entitled to her opinion. She can be right wing, conservative and religious. She can think America is barreling toward Hell on a high speed train. She can think Barack Obama is the worst president we’ve ever had and is wrecking our country just for the giggles. I’m sure some Skeptoid Blog readers think so as well. But contrary opinions can be held without them being based on the distorted view of history that Ms. Werthmann is selling. As I said earlier, the truth has no political party, doesn’t choose sides and doesn’t vote. It needs only to be expressed honestly without embellishment. Which is exactly what Kitty Werthmann isn’t doing.

About Mike Rothschild

Mike Rothschild is a writer and editor based in Pasadena. He writes about scams, conspiracy theories, hoaxes and pop culture fads. He's also a playwright and screenwriter. Follow him on Twitter at twitter.com/rothschildmd.
This entry was posted in Conspiracy Theories, TV & Media and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

596 Responses to Kitty Werthmann: History Distorted

  1. Steve says:

    The curious thing is though that according to the South Dakota Eagle forum you linked to above Ms. Werthmann is 77. Now the Anschluss happened in 1938 so unless my maths is way out that means she was two when the Anschluss happened and only nine when the war ended.

    So unless she was a very precocious child, and indeed gifted she would have had difficulty ‘walking’ into a classroom and seeing her devout teacher replacing a crucifix with a picture of Hitler and even if she did she probably (or at least a child of today of that age) wouldn’t understand what it meant but would need to be told.

    This would of course mean that the email isn’t a true first hand account but only what she had picked up from history, and as they say the victors write the history books so anything she had read would’ve been written to show Hitler (who was Austrian) and his fellow countrymen in a particularly bad light.

    • fiddlestix says:

      * She was 77 in 2003 according to the South Dakota Eagle forum page that you refer to. Shes closer to 85 now. Meaning, she was around 11 in 1938.

    • Yes, she’s 85 right now. The Eagle Forum article is old, but I thought it important to go to right to the source in that case.

      • Steve says:

        Thanks for that. Thought I’d found the smoking gun for a minute :-)

        Hmm, wonder if Austria children were compelled to join the BDM / HY as our current pope was forced to do?

      • Sterling Louviere says:

        Mike,

        You sound like someone Karl Marx would call a useful idiot!

        You act like none of this can happen here!

        Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. C.S. Lewis on Tyranny

        Socialism, begets Fascism, in the totality of the state for the benefit of all becomes, Communism!

        We only need look at our hemisphere and Venezuela in our lifetime and the nationalization of oil and other industries for the benefit of the collective!
        Only once the the oppression of the state rises to an intolerable level in which people seek revolution as their solution. The government uses it’s full force and power to protect itself and seeks to abridge the rights of the oppressed do we get communism, and or Dictatorship, The government temporarily suspends the rights of the people permanently for there own protection!

        Both Republicans and Democrats have become masters of the illusion of safety for our own protection.

        The patriot act under George W. Bush a Republican is but one example. Passed in 2001 nearly unanimously with only 1 dissenting vote in the Senate, and 357 to 66 in the House would be a good example of protecting us with benevolent tyranny.

        When he got his chance Senator Obama voted to extend the bill in 2006!

        RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS WE HAVE NEEDLESSLY
        LOST IN THE NAME OF NATIONAL SECURITY

        Through the enactment of the USA PATRIOT Act and subsequent
        executive directives and regulations, essential rights and freedoms
        that were once guaranteed to all individuals have been substantially
        degraded. Many Americans still do not realize the significance of
        what we have lost. The resulting expansion of government powers,
        and the erosion of 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th and 14th Amendment
        rights and freedoms have transformed the United States.

        1st AMENDMENT FREEDOM OF SPEECH

        • The Patriot Act broadly expands the official definition of
        terrorism, so that many domestic groups that engage in
        nonviolent civil disobedience could very well find themselves
        labeled as terrorists.
        • The Government may now prosecute librarians or keepers
        of any other records if they reveal that the government
        requested information on their clients or members in the
        course of an investigation. It has become a crime for these
        individuals to try to safeguard your privacy or to tell you
        that you are under investigation.

        1st AMENDMENT FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION

        • Government agents may now monitor the First Amendment protected activities of religious and political institutions, and
        then infiltrate these groups with no suspicion of criminal
        activity. This is a return to domestic spying on law-abiding
        religious and political groups.
        • You may now be the subject of a government investigation
        simply because of the political, activist, or advocacy
        groups you are involved in, or the statements you make
        within these groups.

        1st AMENDMENT RIGHT TO ACCESS
        GOVERNMENT INFORMATION

        • A U.S. Department of Justice directive actively encourages
        federal, state, and local officials to resist and/or limit access
        to government records through Freedom of Information Act
        (FOIA) requests.
        • The Government has conducted immigration hearings in
        secret behind closed doors. Such proceedings were once
        open to the public. Hundreds, if not thousands, of immigrants
        have already been deported in secret.

        4th AMENDMENT FREEDOM FROM UNREASONABLE
        SEARCHES &SEIZURES

        • Law Enforcement authorities may now conduct secret searches and wiretaps in your home or office without showing “probable cause.” They need only to claim that intelligence gathering is “a significant
        purpose” of their intrusion, even when the primary goal is ordinary law enforcement. They may also monitor where and to whom you send and receive e-mail, or where you go on the Internet, recording
        every e-mail address and website you have been in contact with.
        • Law Enforcement may now demand any personal records held by any source including your doctor, employer, accountant, or library. All they have to do is claim that it is related to an investigation into
        “terrorism.” The record keepers may not reveal that your records were provided to the government.
        • Judicial oversight of secret searches has been effectively minimized. The Patriot Act directs judges to consent to secret searches based only on the Government’s assertion that a “significant” purpose of an investigation is gathering information related to “terrorism,” as the government defines it.

        5th AMENDMENT RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS & FREEDOM FROM BEING HELD WITHOUT CHARGE

        • Americans can now be jailed without a formal charge & without the right to confront the witnesses or evidence against them. American citizens are now being held in military jails without charge and without
        a clear path of appeal for their indefinite confinement.
        • Hundreds of Arab, Muslim and South Asian men were rounded up in the Ashcroft raids following September 11, and held for weeks without charges until all were cleared of terrorism charges

        6th AMENDMENT RIGHT TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION

        • Hundreds of U.S. residents have been detained for months at a time, and denied access to the advice and advocacy of an attorney. The Government may now monitor conversations between attorneys & clients in federal jails.
        • The Bush Administration filed papers in court that arguing that an American citizen held in a military jail without charge should be denied access to legal counsel because such access would interfere with the process of the interrogation.

        6th AMENDMENT RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL

        • The U.S. Government may now jail its residents and citizens indefinitely without charge & without a public trial.

        8th AMENDMENT FREEDOM FROM CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS

        • The U.S. Government has taken into custody individuals they identify as “material witnesses,” transported
        them across the country, and held them for months in solitary confinement without charge or contact with their family.
        • According to the Justice Department’s own Inspector General, immigrant men rounded up in the Ashcroft raids following September
        11 and held in the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, NY
        were subjected to a pattern of “physical and verbal abuse.”

        14th AMENDMENT RIGHT TO EQUAL PROTECTION
        • Over 82,000 men from Arab, Muslim and South Asian registered with the Government under the Special Registration program. Over 13,000 are now in deportation proceedings. None
        have been charged with terrorism.

        • Keith says:

          Ouch! The heavy hammer of truth falls hard on the “useful idiot”. Nicely done, Sterling.

        • Bradford says:

          Fantastic post Sterling! The author’s vitriolic response to this woman’s account of her youth under Nazi fascism, is exactly the reason the story needs to be told over and over. The parallels in current times obviously alarmed Mike so much that he felt the need to try to disassociate the current erosion of LIBERTY from the horrors of the past. Ask yourself why anyone would want to minimize the lessons of history, and you will see a common theme in the rhetoric of people in power and those that support them. If history doesn’t support your agenda, then spin a version that will allow it. This woman’s personal account is not “created” to support a political viewpoint. It is supported by well know historical fact. If someone knows a historical truth, it does not become an extreme viewpoint just because the facts make your current political stance difficult. How can anyone dispute a historical truth that actually happened? Contrary to Mike’s article, there is no “historical” check list to determine whether the modern withering of Liberty will lead to the exact tyranny and oppression of the past, and to dissuade people to turn a blind eye to history is unconscionable. We should always be vigilant! Neither Bush nor Obama championed Liberty. There are things people who value Liberty should never allow. This is a universal truth that cannot be denied. Once all political sides agree on this, then the question of what those things are can be addressed.

          • tabouley says:

            Strange that most European, Scandinavian, as well as Canada, Japan, and Australia have either strict government control over health care or single payer, and many other of these “tyrannical” government sponsored programs and laws mentioned in the article, including stricter gun control.
            I don’t see where any of these countries are executing people, or outlawing religious expression.
            The “square tables” story, however, sends a chill up my spine! Wake up sheeple!

          • Rachel says:

            Mike’s response is vitriolic? I think not. It’s logical.

          • MJ says:

            Actually there is no logic involved, or very little. It is the statement of opinion based on his view that everything is here in the good ol USA is peachy and it is beneath our supreme intellect to fall for what happened to Europe in the 30’s and 40’s.

          • Karl says:

            Thank you, Bradford. You said quite well.

        • ispy says:

          I wonder why Mike hasn’t replied to any of this yet? Mike, is it because it doesn’t fit with your juvenile view show in your article?

        • Ken Gage says:

          What’s the difference between socialism and well-regulated capitalism? I say it’s only your level of paranoia, Sterling.

        • Well thought out, case well stated. Thanks for taking the time to make a substantial comment.

        • Brad says:

          Excellent response! Mike is drinking the Kool Aid and clearly trying to convince others to imbibe.

          • So because I don’t agree that Barack Obama is as bad as Adolf Hitler, I must be some sort of brainwashed cultist? Talk about an excluded middle…

          • Tburt76 says:

            As bad . . . not yet. But he is still a threat and the similarities between Hitler and Obama can’t be ignored. Let us not turn a blind eye and make the same mistake as those of the past.

          • arosenb4 says:

            Let us not forget that Obama wears pants. Hitler wore pants!! ITburt76 is right – it’s a slippery slope. A SLIPPERY SLOPE I TELLS YAH!

          • SteveD says:

            Typical liberal shuffle there Mike, but we’ve all seen it a hundred times. Who said Obama is as bad as Hitler? It is the constant, gradual shifting of our fundamental societal value by Alinky-ite nudges, the never-ending undermining of the Constitution, and the attack on the foundations of our economic system via crushing debt (again, very Alinsky-ish) that can lead America into the kind of desperate state that often ends in despotic rule…which is precisely where M. Werthmann’s story becomes very relevant. You improperly attempt to characterize her argument as claiming we are already at that desperate state, which no one believes and which she never claimed. But our current path, if not corrected can lead us there eventually. How close do we need to get to THAT cliff before we are convinced corrective action need be taken? And will it be too late by then?

          • Anon says:

            OBAMA may not be the bad man, single-handedly. It’s been a whole string of political lies and candidacies…. bet ya Ron Paul would have won had the MEDIA (governed by you-know-who) given him more attention. They pre-choose these fools. How much of a real choice do you people think we really have?!

          • Monty says:

            Mike, Adolph Hitler in 1917 wasn’t as bad as Adolph Hitler (in 1942). That’s a disingenuous defense. It wasn’t a comparison, it’s a warning that if you open a path to tyranny, you won’t know until it’s too late to get out of it cleanly that the guy you thought was a savior turned out to be a tyrant- Hitler’s rise as an example. That if it happens to us it likely won’t be quite as evil as Hitler’s Reich strikes me as little comfort.

            “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”

        • bbarnavi says:

          tl;dr: SOCIALISM = FASCISM = COMMUNISM

          (a claim not supported by history)

          • jbs says:

            No, but that was the philosophy of communism’s authors: Marx and Engels, leaving one to logically conclude that if one is interested in socialism it is because they are attracted to its designed outcome.

        • Allan says:

          Everything Sterling said.

          “Socialism, begets Fascism, in the totality of the state for the benefit of all becomes, Communism!”

          I think this is the main point that modern progressives simply refuse to (or can’t) understand.

          • Cted says:

            Except that Socialism, Communism and Fascism are completely different ideologies. Socialism has “begotten Fascism” exactly once. Fascism has never begotten Communism (since Fascism and Communism are actually opposites on the spectrum).

          • Except communism in its final ideological form is a stateless communal society, so no, you are wrong.

          • null says:

            Cted, you are wrong and don’t actually know what fascism is, from your post I can make a surprisingly accurate guess as to what you think it is, since it is a common mistake, also it is the stated goal and order of steps outlined by Marx and Engels.

        • marieelise says:

          thank you for your comments yes that guy is a useful idiot !!

          • Reg. says:

            Is it just possible that those who remain tethered to the past in a vastly altered society, are also useful idiots?

            America’s international opponents are not restricted by any such annoyance. They have moved from horse and plow to sophisticated modern methods, largely with the help of hardware contrived by their enemy or their enemies opponents in response to the cold war.

            There is no more effective method of annoying ones enemies than by using their own self-imposed strictures against them. Those who insist on maintaining this situation to the advantage of their enemies, are indeed useful idiots who long for the days of yore.

            Very much as the British once regarded submarines as an unsporting method of waging war, but were forced to discard such quaint attitudes to accommodate the situation thrust upon them by their enemies.

        • Anonymous says:

          Thank you Sterling.

        • John says:

          You have a peculiar view of the political spectrum… this holds true only if you believe Jonah Goldberg

          Communism:
          A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.

          Socialism:
          1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
          2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.

          Capitalism:
          An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.

          Fascism:
          is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. Influenced by national syndicalism combining more typically right-wing positions with elements of left-wing politics, in opposition to communism, socialism, liberal democracy and traditional right-wing conservatism.

          Seems there is some disagreement at best & incongruity at worst in your assertion that…

          “Socialism, begets Fascism, in the totality of the state for the benefit of all becomes, Communism!”

          The American Heritage dictionary places Socialism between Capitalism & Communism with no mention of Fascism & with out that… the rest of your fears of the US turning into Fascist Germany are without logical or historical merit…

          To many… yourself not included… the Political spectrum is viewed as such…

          According to the simplest left-right axis, communism and socialism are usually regarded internationally as being on the left, opposite fascism and conservatism on the right. Liberalism can mean different things in different contexts, sometimes on the left (social liberalism), sometimes on the right (economic liberalism).

          The left-right political spectrum is a system of classifying political positions, ideologies and parties. Left-wing politics and right-wing politics are often presented as opposed, although a particular individual or group may take a left-wing stance on one matter and a right-wing stance on another. In France, where the terms originated, the Left has been called “the party of movement” and the Right “the party of order.” The intermediate stance is called centrism and a person with such a position is a moderate.

          There is general consensus that the Left includes progressives, communists, social-liberals, greens, social-democrats, socialists, democratic-socialists, left-libertarians, secularists, feminists, autonomists, anti-imperialists, anti-capitalists, and anarchists, and that the Right includes conservatives, reactionaries, neoconservatives, traditionalists, capitalists, neoliberals, right-libertarians, social-authoritarians, monarchists, theocrats, nationalists, Nazis (including neo-Nazis) and fascists.

          but of course, you won’t agree with that

          • null says:

            Rather than reading and regurgitating the dry and quite wrong definitions in your dictionary, in particular, that on fascism, look at it in practice, review history.

        • Shelly says:

          ABSOLUTELY!!!!!!

      • Bad Whisky says:

        Mike, after some research to insure this is a real lady and further research into the events of her story, I believe she is correct. I also look at people such as Ayn Rand who lived through the Bolshevik take over of Russia and the storied of warning she wrote and I believe that at very least the warnings should be taken and care should be give to our reaction to these cautionary tales. Remember, history has a bad habit of repeating its self and those caught up in the moment rarely ever see the train coming until it has run over them. Your dismissal of this story as being implausible in the USA is your gullibility; let us think of this differently, rather than attempting to dismiss it let us say take it at its face value, our opinions will vary and only history will tell whether her concern is real. One thing is for certain though, I had rather assume she might be right and be vigil and wrong that to assume her wrong and find she was correct at the end of a bayonet.

      • Redeemed says:

        Mike, you have a very interesting last name. I wonder if you are related to the World Bank controllers: Rothschild?
        Anyway, what kitty is doing is giving us a warning of what it was like under socialist rule and informing us the American citizen of the false ploys used by the Nazis to enforce their agenda. Also, you sound very defensive in your article and only when one is convicted because they knows something is wrong but they keep trying to make excuses for calling bad good is when that defensive attitude comes out.

        • katnea says:

          Oh Nooo! Mike, you need to delete “Redeemed” post because he somehow caught on to your “very interesting last name!” (gasp) Did ya hear me Mike?! I mean this guy actually came right out and admitted to ‘wondering’ if you are related to them their,:::::whispers::: R o t h s c h i l d s! So quick delete his post so that others wont find out you are really nothing but a Pinko lefty SPY that’s hell bent for election on disrupting them Riiiiight wingers! Shhhh! (grin)

          Seriously though, I for one appreciate what Mike has to say! And even if he is somehow related to ‘the’ Rothschild’s, (which I highly doubt) I really could care less! I mean what if YOU were born with that last name and had to go around defending yourself all the time? (sheesh!)

      • Former Expatriat says:

        It is very interesting to read Mike’s and his Left Wing Extremist’s cohorts radical twists of logic and rationalizations for their extremist view point! Mrs Werthmann lived the reality which they try so hard to discredit because it does not fit into their dogma.

        I have to wonder how many of these people ever lived for any length of time in Germany or Austria. How many of them even read “The Rise and Fall of The Third Reich – – probably not many as it is long and uses big words and they don’t want to be confused by FACTS.

        I believe that Sterling was correct about these useful idiots – – in spades!

        • I don’t know that it’s “left wing extremism” to think Barack Obama is not as bad as Adolf Hitler. Most people will agree on that.

        • frozensun11 says:

          The U.S. is nothing like the landscape of Germany which led to the rise of HItler’s fascism or the Bolshevik revolution. Wanting to feed the poor and level income disparities and provide proper health care to the people does not mean a government is turning socialist or fascist. It means caring about our fellow citizens. The whole reason Germany and Russia (whose ideologies by the way were not similar or compatible) were so evil is because they demonized, vilified, and harmed a certain group of people unjustly. Is it unjust to want to feed and provide health care and working wages for the poor? I don’t think so.

    • gayle says:

      I would remember!! Important tragic things, are never forgotten. I can remember when I was 1Year old.

      • Anonymous says:

        No, you can’t!

        • MJ says:

          If she said it, I’ll bet she can. I remember an incident that happened to me when I was 18 months old and repeated verbatim the incidident and what was said, by whom, much to my mothers shock. BTW, I am now 57.

      • Indeed Gayle, some peoples memories start quite early in life. The gravity of an event good or bad can hold it into your memory. Especially if you reflect on it often.

        • mariahwwa says:

          You cannot remember in a logical sense at that age. You may remember years down the road emotions you felt during certain events such as if you had been abused by say ‘an older man with a beard’, or if you had been bitten by a ‘large long haired dog’, and then in later years you react to seeing those people/animals. You won’t remember WHY you are afraid, though.

          • Reg says:

            Untrue Mariah. At that age one is so impressionable that this stuff burns itself into one’s mind, especially by its being the first think you think about every day upon waking.

            I’ve been there and I know.

    • helen says:

      I have a friend who is DUTCH and her stores reflect what Kitty went through under the nazis. My friend’s father was a butcher and they used to hide him under the floor of his butcher shop whenever the black boots came around looking for able bodied men. As a child, this young Dutch girl was forced to go into the Hitler youth programs, had to watch others as directed and report anything that was banned or if the neighbors said anything untoward Hitler. The officers who came to get her father often would take a week’s worth of meat with them without paying saying it was for Hitler. she knew them to be a bunch of thieves.

      Another from Hungary tells of the Nazis putting a woman at the bottom of the stairs in the apartment building where she lived with 10 others to a small apartment so she could snoop on who went and where they were going. If anyone wore a “nice blouse” or a “dress shirt” she would report it. She would come around sniffing at the doors to see who was cooking what in the building.

      Young Mike – if you had ever talked to any of the survivors of the death camps you would not write what you had You are showing your ignorance of what went on under the Nazis. Like today, there are those who want all from the government just like under the Nazis. THE PEOPLE elected Hitler and they kept him in power as they got “stuff” from the government. Lifefor them was good.

      I think you need to open eyes and learn a bit more about what went o under the nazis.

      • I’m not sure where you’re getting the impression that I’m ignorant of the horror of the Nazi regime. It’s certainly not from anything I’ve written here…

        • MJ says:

          It might be when you said,”But contrary opinions can be held without them being based on the distorted view of history that Ms. Werthmann is selling. As I said earlier, the truth has no political party, doesn’t choose sides and doesn’t vote. It needs only to be expressed honestly without embellishment. Which is exactly what Kitty Werthmann isn’t doing.

          Distorted view of History….. It needs onl to be expressed honestly without embellishment…… Kitty .. isn’t doing.

          I didn’t see embellishment or distortion of history. I saw the hard cold facts of what it was like back then. So what exactly did you mean?

          • I know at least one fact that is warm, soft and sloppy. Official NSDAP programme (1920) insists on the traditional female roles, and discourages female employment. Their documents and leaders asserted that many a time, including the speech Hitler himself gave to the National Socialist Women’s League (Sept. 8, 1934, http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/sub_document.cfm?document_id=1557). Here are select quotes:

            The slogan ‘Emancipation of women’ was invented by Jewish intellectuals and its content was formed by the same spirit.[…] …a state of affairs which was unnatural and which lasted until both sexes returned to the respective spheres which an eternally wise providence had preordained for them. […] …her world is her husband, her family, her children, and her home. […] We do not consider it correct for the woman to interfere in the world of the man, in his main sphere.

            In fact (you know, actual, historical fact), the Nazis campaigned in Germany on reducing male unemployment by removing females from the workforce, and returning them into homes where they would take care of household, and breed future soldiers. Now, why would they make such a dramatic exception for Austria? They sure were opportunists, but this is, in fact (again, that fact), one of the core tenets of their platform.

          • frozensun11 says:

            I think Mike meant the conclusions Ms. Werthmann was drawing was distorted and illogical. The United States landscape now (for better or worse) is not even close to how Germany was back then, which paved the path for Hitler’s rise. We have not just suffered an failed monarchy, and redistribution of our lands. We have rising poverty, but not people dying in the streets of starvation. Obama is not like Hitler at all, he doesn’t vilify Jews, or any other ethnic group, nobody is exiled or forced into labor camps. He’s not obsessed with overtaking other countries, we don’t owe significant WW1 reparations and we don’t have 33% unemployment. Even the Socialist Democrats IN GERMANY at that time were AGAINST HItler and didn’t agree with his ideology. Many socialist minded German citizens tried to assassinate Hitler. Hitler did NOT like communism except to admire their use of propaganda. I don’t see or hear about any citizen going to jail, being ousted, or killed for voicing dissenting opinions, there are not massive book burnings and Obama isn’t spreading propaganda against other countries to make a case for invading them or bashing ethnic groups, quite the opposite.

        • AJF says:

          Mike, unless you yourself have experienced one has experienced, it is easy to come up with armchair conclusions. You’re not bad or calloused, just unexposed. One month is the jungle of North Korea or the deserts of Iran will change your tone. One month in a bad place that some of your people have mentioned here could change your words.

          One saint in the field is worth many theologians in the room.

          • There’s no jungle in North Korea. They have average of 37 days of snowfall in the winter. American troops actually experienced that in their time.

            As for theologians, many of them are sanctified posthumously anyway.

            Just sayin’

      • Reg says:

        All very relevant stories Helen but you’re a little off beam with how Hitler came to power.

        He was reluctantly appointed with the approval of the German banks in the vain hope that his followers would protect the bank’s assets against the rampaging communists who were intent on destroying them.

        Von Papen was to be his keeper except that Hitler was well aware of this and quickly adjusted the law to his own advantage, reducing von Papen to irrelevance.

        Take particular note that this intrinsic deed, amongst others, dismantles the ridiculous assertion that Hitler was a communist supporter. His own personal desire to dominate is in complete opposition to the thought of sharing power with anyone. That’s also why he demanded that each of his troops individually swear allegiance to HIM, not to the state.

        • Reg, where did she assert that Hitler was a communist supporter? Hitler came to power with the support of some of the people (about a third) and later more of them as he was having success in improving the state of Germany. That the bankers were in favor of his appointment for their own interests is almost a side note. That alone didn’t allow him to take power over a country of millions.

          This part of your comment I find interesting to it’s echoes in todays American government:
          “Von Papen was to be his keeper except that Hitler was well aware of this and quickly adjusted the law to his own advantage, reducing von Papen to irrelevance. “

          • Reg says:

            Too long ago WYSIWUG, I’m sure I never said the woman contended that AH was a communist. She just missed the fact that AH threw in his lot with all the disillusioned soldiers in 1920 in Munich, and most of those were Communist. I do recall typing that AH used every avenue available to him to rise to power and if that meant changing horses mid stream, he did it.

            Please don’t try and tie Obama to AH, you only make yourself look a complete idiot. In the nicest possible way of course. :-)

    • Anonymous says:

      My mother was born in 1914 and lived through Nazi times. My family has photos from that time and their stories concur with Ms. Wertmann’s. My grandfather’s partner was Jewish and they were both jailed because the partner was Jerwish. The churches were all locked up and left to rot until the wall came down, I SAW THEM! One of my uncles was left behind in East Germany…..his son was taken from the family and sent to an “education camp” to be “instructed” The family knew nothing of where he was for 5 years! His brother was mentally retarded and was euthanized. You are a fool to discount this woman and support the current regime in America! You comment that unemployment has not skyrocketed to the numbers that existed post WWI in Europe, but you fail to mention that we don’t count the people who no longer qualify for unemployment and we have initiated a new “formula” thought up by this administration to “count” unemployment numbers! In reality we are at the 33%+ level in this country! I feel sorry for you to say the least!!!

      • Eric Hall says:

        I’m not sure how you get to 33% unemployment – About 135 million people are working right now – So if we quickly generalize and say that everyone under 18 and everyone over 65 is not looking to work, and every person in between is looking for work if they aren’t working, that gives us unemployment of just over 20%. Historically, the percent of the population that has worked has been in the high 60% to just about 70% – so even though the unemployment number is a bit deceiving, so is your 33%+ estimate.

  2. Hey Mike,

    Excellent article. I sometimes let myself be pulled into “discussions” with folks who hold similar views, but not quite as extreme, as Kitty. One of the “distorted history” trends I’ve noticed over the past few years is propensity for some of these folks to say that Hitler was actually a socialist (in the words of most of these folks: “National SOCIALISTS – DUH!!”), and that’s why Obama = Nazis. I think this idea may have it’s origins in Jonah Goldberg’s book, “Liberal Fascism”. It’s hard to argue with people who don’t have a grasp of history and correct terminology, so this is where my “discussions” usually end. It would be nice to be able to have something constructive to say when this happens, though. Thoughts?

    Thanks,
    Aaron

    • I completely agree. You can’t have a discussion about an event when the person you’re trying to debate has a different, and incorrect, definition of what you’re talking about. I think that pretty much sums up life as a skeptic, come to think of it…

      • Yep. Reminds me of the recent AMA Deepak Chopra did on reddit. Interesting read if you haven’t seen it: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/15ye9m/i_am_deepak_chopra_md_pioneer_in_the_field_of/

      • Anonymous says:

        wait, so if people disagree with you, they are automatically wrong?

      • Eddie says:

        You agree with the writer that the person that lived through the history has a distorted view and that you, the all wise, tolerant, not extreme guy, (who was not even born yet) has the “correct” view?? You’re proving the point of the other writers. You have been fed the “correct” view. Socialism is a way of controlling people through reliance. It’s from there that the powers that be can move into various types of controlling governments and no two may be alike, just depends on the fancy of those in control. If education, food distribution and healthcare are centralized, the government controls what people think and who get’s to eat and be healthy. You don’t have to get taken away by the government when they can audit you and your business and take all you have worked for. If they can leave you helpless right where you are at, why bother with the expense and bad PR of taking you away. Those reaping the benefits will not say a word or lift a finger to help you. They are enjoying their endless recess time. In Washington, all animals are equal, but some are more equal for sure.

        • Reg says:

          Hey Eddie, employment is also a method of controlling people through reliance. I guess you’re waiting for another thought.

          “Powers that be.” Hahahahaha

          • In a healthy job market, you’re never reliant on any one particular job- that’s one of the strengths of the free market.

          • Reg says:

            Silliness WYSIWYG.

            The upper strata of society strives to organize their position so that it is in-vulnerable, while simultaneously attempting to ensure that the working class is restrained from any organization whatever, especially by unionization, and yet the Industrial Revolution was a product of the lower middle class while Universities and Governments slumbered on unaware of what was happening around them. Nothing has changed except that the upper 1%, recognizing the difficulty, have taken over some of AH’s more useful ideas.

            Do you happen to be a Christian-Zionist by any chance?

          • Monty says:

            Christian Zionist? What’s that?
            Shall I ask if you’re an anti-semite?

            Upper class invulnerability? You obviously don’t live in America, where the top 10% are transitory- almost no one stays in the top 10%- it’s mainly populated by those in the peak earning years of their career trajectory. Even the top 1% is highly transitory- very, very few people in the United States are locked into their socio-economic strata. The most likely to be so- those on the public dole who are lulled into the control of the state through reliance, to use your terminology..

    • Sarah says:

      I’d point out that this is a false comparison between the agenda of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party in 1938, and the agenda of the American Democratic Party in 2013.

      The absolute irony of a Tea Baggy, a creature of the far right of today, arguing that liberal democracy = socialism = fascism a la the National Socialist German Workers’ Party in Austria in 1938 is that Nazism as a facist ideology held these values: nationalism, anti-semitism, homophobia and racism. Politically, they condemned capitalism, abortion, immigration, democracy, liberalism, entitlement programs, individualism, all things western, the irreligious…and pacifism. They believed “true socialism,” not Marxist socialism, would be in the form of corporatism with no politicians, organized political parties or periodic elections. Their brand of socialism was the idea of the master race, rather than the socialism of seeking social justice and equal rights. They were not atheists, but rather Protestant Christians who elevated nationalism to spiritual dogma.

      • mark says:

        Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning by Jonah Goldberg (Jan 8, 2008)
        FIVE STARS!!!

      • John J says:

        We all should listen to someone who calls someone else a “Tea Baggy.”
        .

        • Jay Williams says:

          Sarah, you likely don’t even know why tea baggy is offensive and reduces the teeth of your argument You might need to go Google the term tea bagging so you understand. .

          • arosenb4 says:

            Perhaps the tea party should have taken that into consideration when they did their tea bag campaign in ’09, Jay Williams

          • Reg. says:

            Actually Tea Baggy means nothing in the international forum but it does have a strong semblance with Hitler’s enforces, the SS.

            Vote for any of Obama’s propositions at the risk of losing party endorsement or worse. Is that right and does in not amount to white-anting the democratic process?

      • Protestant Christians eh? Show me the evidence for that as an ideological point of the Nazis. For that matter, their supposed condemnation of the irreligious, or “all things western (sic)”… You are right about one thing- they elevated nationalism (through an all powerful central government) to spiritual dogma (pushing Christianity out of the picture). Sounds familiar to me…

  3. Janet says:

    Can anyone give me a good reasion why this cant happen here?

    • I can’t tell you it *can’t* happen here, as pretty much anything can happen anywhere. But there are many reasons why it’s not happening here now and is extremely unlikely to happen here in the future.

      • Mike says:

        First time reader, and I was pretty impressed with your article as a whole. The only critique I may have for you is that in your rush to state that Kitty was overgeneralizing what could possibly happen in this country, you lumped everyone who might coincide to this viewpoint as an uber conservative, right wing, gun nut, etc. I am none of the above, although I do lean towards fiscal conservatism ( I am pretty socially liberal). I have to say that I disagree with your viewpoint that this is unlikely, and the reason for that would be the power of scale. The global economy is much more complicated now than it was then. To simply compare the two global climates and state that something is “unlikely” is a tad ignorant. From a financial perspective, I see the US spending, Global armament, and the EUROZONES fiscal foolishness as telling signs that a massive correction, or redistribution is on the horizon. So I might wager that it actually is very possible we may be seeing some of the more daunting issues with Nationalized Health Care, and careless Government spending. IMHO.

      • Janet says:

        You know when I was little my parents would say because I said so, but I am no longer a child. I would be interested in your reason’s. I want you to think hard about this. I want you understand what is at stake if you are wrong. what would the concquences be? Is there anyone on the face of the earth that would come and save us as the USA has done for every one else. would you bet your life on this? because that is what it could come to.

        • Steven says:

          While I can’t speak for the author, I can give you my reasons as to why these catastrophes that you speak of won’t come to pass. We have an AMAZING self-correcting system. Every four years we, the people, get to decide whether or not we want our current leaders to stay in power. And even if we screw it up, the president can only serve two terms. The woes that concern some of the people here just can’t come to pass in such a short time. Currently, we have historically low taxes regardless of what some would like to think. More gun control laws have been repealed under Obama on the last four years than in GWB’s entire 8 year presidency. More people have health care now than ever before, even though we have a much higher unemployment rate. The US is one of the biggest ships in the world and ships this size turn slowly. Nothing is going to get better over night just like it won’t get destroyed over night. People can still pray in schools (just not led by the faculty). Books aren’t being burned. Certain races aren’t being hauled off into prison camps. We have more equality now than ever in our history. I feel like the people that are so concerned are just unhappy to see the pendulum swing closer to the center.

          • Bryan Merrill says:

            I’d sure like to see your facts concerning your statement that “more gun control laws have been repealed under Obama than in GWB’s entire 8 year presidency”. I’m not saying it is incorrect because I don’t know if it is or not. People love to make blanket statements to make their points, hoping others are ignorant of the facts they purport, and most of the time we are. Politicians and the press are notorious for this. So please back this up, point by point. Otherwise I must assume this is something you have been told by someone else, equally ignorant of the true facts. Thank you.

          • Sheila K says:

            If you really read the original article, Kitty states that all this change took place over 5 years. Two terms of a President equal 8 years. Why could this not happen here?

          • Janet says:

            Jose Serrano D-NY introduced a HJ-Res 5 to repeal the 22 amendment. This has been tried 6 other times since Clinton was in office. How long do you think it will be before it gets tacked on to something else and ram rodded through. I hear what you are saying, but when you hear things like ” you will just have to pass it to find out” comming from the people we are electing, and they still get re-elected. I also cought it on the news last night that they want Obama to use amendments to by pass congress on the debit celling. If they use it once to get around the constuition than they will keep twisting it until it stands for nothing and we are sunk! If you trust our goverment we may be in for trouble. The devil is in the details. We need to look at term limits on all public servents so we don’t become servent’s to them.

          • Steven says:

            A few reasons. 1) By the time Hitler took control in Austria he had already been the german dictator for 4 years before taking control of Austria (he became dictator of Germany in 1934 and took control of Austria in 1938). His plans of world domination were already rolling forward. 2) We live in a republic. We elect our officials, they do not seize control. While we are in WAY too many wars, we do not seize control of governments. 3) That and the fact that there are ZERO similarities between Obama and Hitler. Well, maybe they enjoy the same breakfast cereal or something.

          • Steve says:

            Bryan, I can definitely appreciate your common sense skepticism. In fact, I DID misspeak. He actually repealed more gun control laws in his FIRST year than GWB did in his entire 8 years. Here’s your source.

            From page one of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence report (page 1): “In just one year, Barack Obama has signed into law more repeals of federal gun policies than in President George W. Bush’s eight years in office.”

            http://www.bradycenter.org/xshare/reports/fedleg/obama-1styear-report.pdf

          • Veteran Don says:

            What happens when Pres. Obama decides to exercise executive privilege to extend his term For reasons of national security? Your argument is foolish And your comment about America being one of the biggest ships in the world is ludicrous. I remember a ship that couldn’t turn fast enough because Of it’s size. It hit an iceberg on April 15, 1912 and sank to the bottom of the North Atlantic Ocean. I think I remember someone saying the ship was unsinkable! Perhaps you choose to forget about that date in history as well? The ship was called Titanic. “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”. The other error that you make is thinking that this just started in the last administration. This is a movement that started over 50 years ago or more. It’s too bad you were not around to Witness a government out of control.
            Frankly I don’t care what label you put on it. Socialism, fascism, communism, progressiveness or liberalism. It all amounts to the same thing. Tyranny! The framers of our Constitution had these things in mind when they wrote the Bill of Rights. They knew that a government unchecked unbalanced would become tyrannical & oppressive.
            Mike take a lesson from Sterling! Talk to people who lived in that era like WWII VETS and study True history. Not the revisionist history you learn in the public school system.

          • Veteran Don, fun metaphor, but bear in mind, country is not a ship. Not even when metaphorically described as such. No empire had crumbled overnight. But they all do crumble, eventually.

          • mariahwwa says:

            WRONG on so many points! Yes, we screw up every 4 years. We just screwed up the worst we have ever done the last TWO times. None of them are worth a piece of lead. And no, that is not a threat…that is an old saying.

            And, if Obama has his way with the help of a certain Congressman who has tried to get it done for the past decade – there will be no term limits on presidents. God help us then. I think there should be term limits on ALL politicians.

            I don’t have time right now to do the research, but I would like to see your proof on Gun Control. Obama/Pelosi/ and the idiot Feinstein have fought hard to take away all our rights. And don’t give me no bullshit they aren’t. Feinstein said in 95 and this is a QUOTE from a video of an interview with one of the lib medias: ‘if I could have gotten 51 votes I would have said we are coming for your guns, Mr. and Mrs. America’. THAT IS A QUOTE!

            And to healthcare. WE ARE SCREWED. We had insurance that was $40 a week, no deductible, $15 copay and tremendous coverage. Thanks to the asshole in the white house as of January 1st our insurance goes to $80 a week, $6000 (did you read that correctly – there are THREE zeros on there!) deductible and lower coverage.

            So, we are supposed to suffer so people who are so lazy they don’t want to work therefore can’t pay for insurance! Not on my watch. Obama wants to get all the illegals voting rights and give them our benefits as well while letting them pop babies out every year. Don’t give me no crap on that one either. I worked for social services. I saw it.

            Got news for you. YOU CANNOT PRAY in school. They will stop you. It has happened all over Missouri and Missouri is one of the most conservative states. But teachers are afraid of the damn ACLU and their idiot lawyers. All they want to do is take our rights away. When it first started it was a good thing, it was protecting blacks from abuses. It is not gone so far left it has its head stuck up the libs backside. There were some students who were actually expelled. So know what you’re talking about before you open your mouth. The schools are so LIB that kids can’t wear NRA t-shirts. No nasty words, no violence depicted, simply the words NRA. You can’t wear military shirts. The ACLU is a bunch of assholes. Sorry for my language, but this whole post has gotten me upset.

            Swing to the center?! Are you kidding me? You are delusional.

        • The conditions that allowed fascism to emerge in Germany, Italy and Japan in the late 20’s and early 30’s were a toxic brew of economic hardship caused by the Depression and the lingering aftermath of the Great War. Germans felt abandoned by their leadership, Italians hadn’t gotten their fair share of spoils from Versailles, and Japan’s economy was on the verge of collapse. It’s no surprise that these populations were easy to take control of and direct toward militarism. They were unemployed, deprived and angry at those they were told to blame for their hardship.

          The US in 2013 is wealthier, prosperous, freer and more informed than it was even possible to be in the 30’s. Yes, there have been societal changes over the decades. But they’ve come about organically, as a result of marginalized citizens demanding more freedom. Exactly the opposite of a fascist state.

          • Janet says:

            While I agree we have the capability to be more informed there are way to many people who have no Idea what is going on. Apathy on the part of many Americans did you see the evening news where they ask what the Fiscal Cliff was? Many had no Idea and these people vote. How many people voted one way or another just because their “friend did” or “just because” or because they are giving me something “free”. By the way someone is paying, but they don’t get that it is not coming from the presidents personal income. It’s comming from taxes they pay on gas, income, and other vairious sources. It’s sad to see people taken advantage of in that way. This administration has made people think they are not getting there fair share of the spoils. We just missed having a Depression of our own. Now tell me why exactley this could not happen here? If you are informed and it seems you are many of the things you just mentioned as a contrubiting factor above are in our nightly news cast.

          • Hunter Don says:

            If you think America is prosperous and wealthy think again! The borrower becomes a slave to the lender. This country is in such financial Disarray that there is no telling what the consequences will be for your generation. The United States has the highest debt to income ratio of any industrialized nation in the world. Our gross domestic product is less than the amount of interest we owe on our loans from other countries. These are facts! Here is a quick lesson from economics 101. When you owe more than you earn it’s called bankruptcy! Also your comment about marginalized citizens demanding more freedom is erroneous. The fact is it’s not marginalized citizens demanding freedom but more and more people who are not willing to recognize their responsibility To do their part. There’s a cultural cycle that runs from 2 to 300 years through most civilizations. There were exceptions in the ancient world. It starts with breaking away from oppression which leads to freedom, which leads to a “free market” of trade which leads to prosperity. Prosperity leads to a propensity for comfort and leisure, including gluttony and elicit pleasure. The next step is an increase in violence and devaluation of human life. This is followed by or accompanied by a sense of entitlement which stimulates class envy and or a “cast” in society. Entitlement leads to social “welfare” programs which leads to fiscal irresponsibility within the culture. (Poor credit management). From there the governing body increases its entitlement programs which discourages free trade and market initiative. This allows a government to create a dependency on government created jobs paid for by exorbitant taxes which naturally leads to a collapse of the governments financial reserves. Disarmament of the people Comes in the guise of Public Safety. Ultimately the society collapses in upon itself. In the latter stages of this Cycle these governments look for additional resources from outside of their own government and countries. This manifests itself in the form of wars abroad. Sound familiar? The United States is at the end of this cycle according to what we see in our current economic & social conditions.
            In conclusion, Become students of history. Always look for the sources closest to the time period you are interested in. History becomes distorted the further away from the time of the actual events. We see this in the current movement to claim the Jewish Holocaust never happened. Dig for the truth for yourself. Don’t rely on others to spoonfeed you Because you can’t really be sure of what They are feeding you.

          • MJ says:

            Mike I don’t mean to sound demeaning, but, how old are you? Why you may be educated, albeit the U of I, you don’t seem to have a grasp on reality. My granddady said, “everything is consantly changing so you must have as board a base to stand on as possible.” I ship can sink in a instant, a a nation can do it self in over night. Saying it can’t happen hear, and it was different then is like saying the bible has no relivance today. Quite frankly, humans haven’t changed much in the last 6000 years.

          • MJ, at no point during the original post or during the subsequent discussion have I said “it can’t happen here.” What I have said, and maintain, is that it is NOT happening here, and very unlikely to happen here in the near future.

            To say Kitty Werthmann is right and I’m wrong because she’s older than I am is arguing from age, which is a logical fallacy.

          • MJ says:

            @ Mike Whoa! Hold on Cowboy. I didn’t say she was right and you were wrong because of age. I know a lot of stupid old people. You inferred that all on your own. What did you call that, a logical fallacy? I always like it when people call out logic fallacies when there was no logic used. Asking a question is not logic, nor is stating facts. You gotta start the If/Then process in order to practice that logic stuff. I asked your age to get a feel for your outlook and historical experience, not how brilliant or correct or incorrect you might be. You seem real sure of your stance. All I’m sayin’ is you better be careful. And don’t come crying to me when you lose other freedoms cause you didn’t see it comin’.

          • b.J. says:

            You forget our 17 trillion dollar debt. That alone is an omen of changes to come for America, especially since the federal government seems to ignore its potential harm for our Country. America’s prosperity, as you described it, is exceedingly exaggerated. A man in serious debt may be living like a rich man, but his deception will eventually be exposed.

          • TruthWFree says:

            Good post b.j. Yes, the amount of money being pumped into the economy is masking a lot of problems that will surface when China stops lending to us and inflation kicks in due to the money printing. The current Obama and Dems supporting him is a recipe for disaster….and possibly anarchy.

          • Reg says:

            That day in August 1945 when the first Atomic bomb did its stuff, the world changed. You may wish to think your country is the same insular body it tried to be in 1939 but now your assets and your debts are distributed around the world.

            There was a time when you could export your problems but now they have come home to roost because if you undermine a country over the horizon you are undermining the holder of a substantial part of your assets. Read, China. It’s an International Market and thinking you can regain the security of the Depression period was never a good idea.

        • Reg. says:

          Nice thoughts Janet, now think of what saving Europe amounted to. Total destruction driven by the delusions of one man. Read, Hitler; Military Commander. by Rupert Matthews.

          As long as a government neglects its middle and lower class, the dissatisfaction it engenders brings them to accept anything different, as longs as it’s different from what caused “this.”

          The inclination to keep voters from expressing their wishes is rampant in the US right and particularly in Republican states with their extraordinary efforts to disenfranchise workers.

          I do not see Obama standing defiant on a platform giving stirring speeches about reducing the nation to a one-party system as Hitler did. Nor are his SA scaring the be-jesus out of the banks, although a little would not go astray. Building up his military machine? Perhaps, but we do need those jobs and it’s all such fun showing what we can achieve.

          Referring to the letter from the survivor lady I find it strange that she made no reference to the effects of WWI, and that apparently the voters of Germany and Austria had learned nothing from the experience. Or if they had, it was to the effect that they needed an all-powerful leader to follow unerringly.

          Yes they’re clever people those Germans.

          But I put that down to the fact that she was a wide-eyed child taking in the spectacle of the Nazis in the 1930s without much critical thinking at the time. Only later to revise her impression
          under the influence of the violent response it drew from the British and later the US.

          I lived through that period and apart from other things I remember there was no colour, everything was monochrome.
          Much like some of the views expressed above.

          • MJ says:

            @Reg You lived through the period. Really? I guess that is why I see an underlining Workers Unite and disenfranchised workers undertone in you comments. In addition, I don’t see a lot of debate in you comments, only chiding those you disagree with. No dialogue, it monologue. What’s up with that?

          • Reg says:

            Then you’ve been cherry picking MJ, May I presume that your objection to workers uniting against being treated as sheeple means you are a right-wing fascist? I don’t think so but in light of you extreme tendency, you are invited to clarify your position.

      • Wes says:

        Just remember it happened slowly there. As it is happening slowly here. If you haven’t heard of the new world order then look it up. We have already moved into the direction of socialized medicine with obamacare. Now we are in the process if passed to register all guns through the government through background checks and finger printing. If this law is passed then it will only be a matter of time that we have to turn in all of our guns here in America. Wake up people lets stand our ground and stop this before it happens here. If you think it can’t happen here you are sorely mistaken.

        • Steve says:

          And if you think all those things can happen here, you understand very little about our political process. I have to be honest any time I read the phrases, “wake up” or “open your eyes” I generally immediately skip to the next comment. I have yet to read a rational response from someone that contains either of those phrases. They’re dismissive and assumptive and generally display an over-abundance of closed-mindedness.

          • Historically, there has been no democracy that has lasted as long as ours. That could mean that after thousands of years, we are the ones who finally have gotten it right, or it could mean that we are due for revolution. Democracies by their very nature are divisive and this country has flirted with drastic political change on more than one occasion in our history. To say those things will never happen here is a little ignorant to me.

          • Steven says:

            Fair enough. Maybe I exaggerated a bit in saying that those bad things could NEVER happen here. I suppose anything can happen. When Wes said that what happened in Germany happened slowly, I was responding specifically to that. I don’t believe the things that happened in Germany can happen here in that same time frame. They actually happened relatively quickly preceding WWII, all within the span of one evil dictators lifetime. If America becomes what so many in this forum seem to think that it’s becoming, it will be because the will of the people lead us there, and I don’t believe that we are all evil. I believe that pretty much all of us, on both sides, want what’s best for this country and as long as we maintain the freedom to vote the ship will stay on a fairly straight course. Where you see ignorance I see optimism.

          • mariahwwa says:

            When the media does not report events that do not support their thinking – aka Obama – then, yes, people need to get their head out of the sand.

            An east coast state had a situation where a black man drove up to one of the bridge protestors and threatened to kill them. Another spit on them. Nothing was reported on the lib media. I even asked my own tv station why and told them the story. I never saw the story.

            So, close-minded better fits the libs than the conservatives. Close-minded on religion and 2nd amendment, perhaps, but nothing else. Unless you are talking the radicals….and if you think there aren’t lib radicals, you don’t live here.

        • I knew it would only take a matter of time before “new world order” popped up here. Someone has been listening to Alex Jones and other crazies like him. People who believe in this “new world order” fail to realize that what you’re choosing to believe in, a group of very powerful individuals who are seeking ultimate power over the world yet are able to seamlessly work with each other to achieve it, is an impossibility. A group like this would be paranoid, distrustful and constantly stabbing each other in the back to the point that they would have constant deaths within their organization and would be easily visible to everyone, not just a few loud-mouths with websites. A very basic knowledge of psychology will discount at least half the conspiracy theories out there.

          • Steven says:

            Thank you! +100 internets to you.

          • hirider says:

            In the Bible, at the time of the end, all nations will come together as one enemy and attack Israel in the battle of Armageddon. All nations together would certainly be a new “World Order.” The Bible calls it the Anti-Christ. Christians are certainly being attacked right now for speaking up in public. Laws are official now in Canada and Belgium (and England and France and Germany?) that are used to prosecute people who speak out biblical truths, or who try to win people over to Gods’ Word. Very slowly, our rights are being expunged!

          • El (@KYnyts) says:

            Alex Jones aside, numerous presidents and top government officials in this country and in many others have bandied that phrase about in speeches for the past forty years or more. Elites, Bilderberg groups, etc? Perhaps not. I do not subscribe much to conspiracy theories (though I would point out that conspiracies are formed and furthered on a regular basis as evidenced by any U.S. District Court’s docket) but the powers that be have not been at all ambiguous about wanting a more global type of governance.

            Whether or not we are going down the same path as Nazi Germany, I do not know. There are some eerie similarities, but perhaps that is all they are…similarities.

            The suspension of the Rule of Law in this country seems to be opening the door to just about anything. Indefinite detention without charge or trial, too big to fail banks and businesses, drones in our skies, warrantless searches, an out of control and above the law Department of Justice, do not all add up to warm, fuzzy feelings. No, I do not know what the future holds, but I do not see any possible path to solvency for our country, which means bad things are very possibly on their way.

            Finally, I would like to commend the majority of you here for having such a civil conversation, despite the diversity in viewpoints. For the most part, people have stated their opinions in a way that allows for discussion, and at times even cited their sources. It is truly refreshing to see a discussion where people are able to entertain ideas that are a juxtaposition of their own without their heads blowing off.

        • Reg. says:

          Move on Wes, the military is part of social security, would you have them secure your society so it may live in one of unhealthy squalor?

          We’re supposed to be looking at both extremes of governmental responsibility but it appears you are obsessed with guns rather than the actual well-being of the citizens.

    • Ken Gage says:

      When it does happen here, it won’t be under the helm of a tolerant, well-spoken, thoughtful President like Obama. It’ll come under a supernationalistic, mentally rigid, anti-pluralistic, authoritarian personality type.

      • Your “tolerant, well-spoken, thoughtful President” is a fraudulent, lying, Marxist, wanna-be dictator. And you are a sheep.

        • Amy says:

          It is so amusing to see people who swallow lies and misrepresentations so easy turn around and call their opponents “sheep.”

          Pot, Kettle

        • I, as a Socialist, can tell you that Obama is no Marxist (do you even know what that entails?). In Europe we would qualify him as a typical right-of-centre moderate. Cross an ocean, and it turns into the radical left? How amusing.

        • Reg. says:

          Thank you for your intellectual observations Cindy. Baa.

          A blonde as well!

      • MJ says:

        If you like your policy, you can keep you policy. You won’t have it change doctors……. :^)
        VERY well spoken and thoughtful………
        Please keep drinking the Koolaid.

        • Rick says:

          MJ, tolerant, well spoken & thoughtful? What are you smoking? He sicced the IRS on political opponents. When his TelePrompTer breaks he interjects “uh” several times in each sentence. And without knowing the circumstances in Boston, he spoke right out in favor of the black “educator” who was later found to be in the wrong.

    • Reg says:

      While you insist on strict political division such as you have just seen, NOTHING will happen there. What sort of compromise are you prepared to accept in the cause of UNITY and PROGRESS? Socialism?

      I’d suggest that instead of asking a pointless question, you try offering a productive solution.

  4. Lori Kightlinger says:

    I think that you are an extreme optimistic. That is the most polite way to say it. This woman’s recollections from a LIVING hell that she likens to the mess we are sitting in here in the United States today is truth. I detest how you put the spin on it that she is some PTSD old lady with an overactive imagination. It makes me ill that you would even THINK to be so disrespectful. She was a victim of one of the worst acts against humans by humans in the history of our world little boy, and if you feel the need to bash someone why dont you choose a different target? Sometimes i am amazed at how kids like you (Yeah, you look 12) think you need to constantly be passing your hate message and try to come off sounding all intellectual with your 50 cent verbage. You think your so safe here living in the lap of luxury in America the great? It’s because of blind Americans that just march themselves to the slaughterhouse that we are self destructing. YOU TRUST too much! Im no conspiratorist but im telling you that if you dont think we can become a third world country OVERNIGHT your the one who is crazy… NOT this lady. I dont know where you learned your history but we were founded as a CHRISTIAN NATION. We have indeed removed God from our classrooms. We have indeed OVER indulged the American public by handing out foodstamps, medicaid, and financial assistance to people who are very capable of helping themselves. Although our taxes have not yet hit that 80% you laugh about, we are headed that direction my friend. And let me remind you that it is THOSE VERY TAXES they collect from you and me that pays for your wonderful president to fly himself and an entourage of GUN PACKING CIA agents/nanny’s/hairstylists etc… to Hawaii for a month long vacation while we face falling off the fiscal cliff here at home. Dont think they will ever gas us in a chamber? READ the headlines friend. They keep trying to pass the humanity legislation laws to gently eliminate the lives of those who are sick, elderly or not quite up to standard. One step closer. The point of her whole message is that you cant allow gradual change or empty promises from self serving politicians to overtake a great country like ours. Instead of knocking her for her message you should try to learn something from her past and be damn sure glad it wasnt yours.

    • Begone, insane troll lady!! Back to the rock you crawled out from! Wow, are you nuts.

      • Martin J. Estrada says:

        Let me give you an example then. With a super majority. Obama convinced Bart Stupak of MI to vote for the healthcare reform assuring him that there will always be a conscience clause for religious reasons. Without Stupak’s vote, the legislation would have never passed. Now remember when the president kicked off his 2012 campaign and imposed that Catholic institutions would have to pay for contraceptives and abortion. I can clearly see this example of history repeating itself. Are you looking forward to one party rule again?

        • Steve P says:

          Obama is not requiring anyone to pay the cost for contraceptives, you are simply wrong. They decision to cover is left up to the carrier, the insurance company. If they decide to allow coverage for these items they are not allowed to pass the cost along to their customers, in this case the Catholic institutions. Why would the insurance companies want to give away the pill for free you ask? Because it saves them money, buckets and buckets of money. It’s cheaper to hand out the pill TO WOMEN WHO MAKE THE PERSONAL DECISION TO USE THEM than it is to pay for a full term delivery of a baby. No one is being forced to pay anything. In fact this type of coverage actually lowers health insurance costs. By denying their employees the right to choose how to life their own life’s they are actually paying more.

          • Ty Brown says:

            Actually lowers health insurance costs, huh? How is it that premiums have gone up nationwide?

          • Martin J. Estrada says:

            Hi Steve, Yes I agree that is the way it turned out in the end. The backlash from many of Obama’s supporters of religious faith and the reality that he could lose that support, plus the way it was portrayed made him back off of the idealistic stance that he would make it a requirement of those foundations that receive ANY faith based governmental support. This speaks very clearly about exactly what is his philosophy and ideology and galvanized the base that would support him showing up the Catholic Church and any other christian faith, but mostly the Catholic Church by injecting government into those very foundations. I don’t see how it is a savings to the rate payer or society as a whole when nationally insurance premiums in 2012 went up 30%. There is a marginal amount of women working within those organizations who are taking advantage of those benefits anyway. There are other examples of how he launched his campaign in a negative way by distorting the republican platform. Do you remember Biden’s chain’s remark? Did you know that on the campaign trail he said republicans want to reverse Roe V. Wade and take away a women’s right to choose? The point is that he lied to Stupak about the conscience clause and took that off the table by the action and example I pointed out originally which is dictatorial even though it may or may not suit your agenda.

          • mariahwwa says:

            Are you nuts! Rates have skyrocketed. Companies are cancelling people. THEY CANNOT KEEP THEIR policies…he is and was a LIAR.

            Businesses are reducing people’s hours to fall under the 30 hour rule to keep from having to supply insurance, and those people are in many cases having to QUIT because they can’t afford the insurance and/or the commute to work. Don’t give me no crap. I have a friend who is a PROFESSOR but she travels 100 miles roundtrip in a vehicle that gets 15 miles to the gallon….they have a farm, they HAVE to have that vehicle – so again don’t go on any lib rant about gas mileage. She is going to have to quit if they cut her hours. These are COLLEGES talking about cutting professors time back. And that’s not private businesses.

          • I have a friend who is a PROFESSOR but she travels 100 miles roundtrip in a vehicle that gets 15 miles to the gallon….they have a farm, they HAVE to have that vehicle – so again don’t go on any lib rant about gas mileage.

            Mariah, why rant? If she hast to keep the truck she already have, there is no point for her to get another vehicle in addition to that, because with given numbers, if she were to get a daily beater that would get 30 mpg, for instance, it would only save her about $600 a year — enough maybe to cover insurance and registration on that additional car, so there is simply no economic sense.

            But if that $600 such a big deal to her, in addition to time wasted on commute, she should just deal with it either by moving closer to work, or getting a job closer to home. You can’t expect someone to live in a woods and have big city job without any sort of trade offs. So there is no reason to whine about it, but one needs to just figure out what is more important in their quality-of-life equation. You know, something that responsible self-sufficient conservative person would do. Instead of whining.

          • mariahwwa says:

            I hardly call Columbia, MO a big city, lol! WOW! And she isn’t living in the woods….what a typical lib statement. She has a horse farm, and her husband’s business is transporting horses, as well as traveling to big name shows. The trucks are a necessity. NO, it’s NOT a tradeoff. It’s a necessity. Closer to work? So you’re saying that in order not to have to work for less money (fewer hours), then have insurance rates double, benefits go down….that they are supposed to move closer to town? Really? Maybe you don’t mind living in dangerous parts of town, but that should not be a requirement because of what Obamacare is doing to the middle class.

          • Oh, Mariah, the never-ending wondrous font of excuses. Let me quote myself to re-iterate the point I am trying to get at:

            So there is no reason to whine about it, but one needs to just figure out what is more important in their quality-of-life equation. You know, something that responsible self-sufficient conservative person would do.

            That was a bit of a tongue-in-cheek, because this is really how any sane and reasonable person would approach this situation. There are things that we have little or no control over (at least individually in the short-term), and there are things that we can influence with direct action. The situation you had described falls into the latter category in my opinion.

            I know you are “asking for a friend”, but I thought tough self-reliant conservatives would pull themselves by the bootstraps and perform whatever other miracles necessary to better their lot in life. You(r friend) should either accept this imperfect, but bearable situation, or make steps to improve it. However, all I saw from you are dozen of excuses.

            And if you worry about the fate of American middle class, where was your concern that wages of lower and middle class Americans stagnated for the past forty years, including on the watch of three Republican presidents — which did a lot more damage to middle class long before Obamacare?

        • bbarnavi says:

          You know, I remember that there was one-party rule not long ago…

      • Then, you haven’t read the book “Through Innocent Eyes – The Chosen Girls of the Hitler Youth” yet, have you?

    • First, I don’t know where you learned your history but we were founded in the name of RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. While we may have been founded by Christians seeking freedom from religious oppression, that does not change the fact that they were seeking a place where all would be free from religious persecution. In fact, it’s written into our country’s founding paperwork. All Christians who deny this deny everything our forefathers stood for and then accuse everyone else of being unpatriotic. Forcing everyone who lives in our country to study and embrace one specific religion is nothing short of oppression. God has not been removed from schools, schools are just no longer allowed to force the learnings of any specific relgion on their students. Second, how you can claim this is a Christian nation in one sentence and then bash public assistance in the next boggles my mind. Isn’t one of the cornerstones of the Christian teachings that you should love and care for your fellow man? How would you like to see the poor in our country treated? Should we just walk by them and allow them to starve? Should we examine them physically when they apply for assistance and, if we find that they’re physically fit, take their children away from them and put them in foster care? No, the foster care system is a public service too, maybe we should just leave the children in the home to starve with the perfectly fit parents who can’t find a job. They all must be lazy. Everyone who bashes public assistance does so without any regard to where everyone who is receiving it would be without it. Meanwhile, the same people complain constantly about the unemployment rate (oh, I’m sure the two are completely unrelated), yet most spout off about how we as a “Christian Nation” should get back to our religious values. What the writer of this article was pointing out is that this woman is using a horrific time in human history to try to further her own opinions and political agenda with spiderweb-thin comparisons that don’t hold up, and that is detestable.

      • Michael says:

        Desiree Turnbough, i think I love you :)

      • Anonymous says:

        The detestable thing is how people who dont agree attempts to slam and insult. Like the way you attempted to slam Lori for mentioning this country was founded as Christian. This country was founded under the motto “In God we trust”. The seperation of church and state was to keep any religion from being favored over another religion in politics like the Catholics where so dominant in England and France’s government. It was never meant that God could not be part of government. If you look at our constitution, the first amendment reads as this: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Does not demanding voluntary school prayer be abolished infringe on the free excersise of religion?
        You also claim that Christian teachings you should love and care for your fellow man. Did not Jesus say give a man a fish and feed him for a day but teach him to fish and feed him for a life time? That does not mean to put them on welfare forever and think your doing something great by creating another entitlement. Public assistance is just that, to assist. It should never be meant as a way of life.
        Lori is correct on many points and Mike Rothschild is wrong on many points. History is repeating itself and we being free people will not stay free for long, as long as the liberal thinking continues unchecked. What will it take to wake people up. Right now our second amendment rights are under attack. It doesnt matter if you like your rights or not, it is still your right and you should fight to preserve every right you have. If the goverment is allowed to do away with one single right then what is to stop them from taking other rights away. What if your freedom of speech is restricted to, you can speak freely as long as nothing negative against the government is mentioned. Or how about freedom of the press will be unrestricted as long as they stay within government guidelines.
        Our second amendment reads: A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Yet this kind of gun or that kind of gun are not allowed. How is that any differant then saying you can speak freely as long as you dont say this or that, or the press can report freely as long as they only report government approved items.
        Wake up people, we are about to lose our rights as Americans just as Kitty seen her country men lose their rights and you are freely letting them do it to us.

        And BTW people, liberals made it where parents cant spank their children even tho the bible teaches to spare the rod is to spoil a child (can you say constitutional religous infringment?) and liberals took any mention of God out of schools and now we see children going to school and killing other children. Yet most liberals are too clueless to connect the dots here.

        • In the name of his holy noodlyness, the flying spaghetti monster: BEGONE insane, poorly educated troll demon!

          • JD says:

            These people debating are making good points. I would hate to have you backing me if I was one of these folks

          • @JD: Well, sir, you and I just don’t see eye to eye on what “good points” are, I guess. What I’ve read so far is a whole mess of ugliness (some stinking of bigotry) and ignorance.

          • Get Real says:

            Aaron Brown, you seem to think everyone is insane except for yourself. Wake up, it doesn’t hurt to open your eyes. ..,

        • I didn’t slam Lori for anything. My points were contradictory, but not in any way insulting or demeaning, so if you feel I slammed her then I did so by making good valid points.

          This country was not founded under the motto of “In God We Trust” that was not added to our currency until 1956 when it replaced E pluribus unum which is latin for Out of many, one. As you stated; “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” How is mandatory Christian prayer in school not prohibiting the free exercise of other religions? How is having laws based upon Christian beliefs not infringing on the rights of other religions? You choose to be blind to this and then get angry when someone points out your hypocrisy.

          Again, I stress, God has not been taken out of schools! Schools are not allowed to promote Christian teachings, that’s all! Students are free to bring their Bibles, read them, form prayer groups. The only thing that has changed is that the school administration is not allowed to promote one set of beliefs to an entire school full of children, yet Christians claim their rights are being infringed upon. What about other religions’ rights? Should a child of a Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist or Atheist family be forced to pray to a Christian God at school every day? That’s what you’re arguing for, not freedom for all religion but freedom for yours and oppression of others, you’re fooling yourself if you believe otherwise.

          As far as public assistance goes, do you know anyone on assistance? I do, and it barely feeds their family and keeps a roof over their heads. They live in a crappy run-down apartment in a crappy run-down area and as soon as one of them got a job their cash aid was almost completely taken away to the point that they were bringing in less than they were before the job. It is not even a hand up, it’s a pittance, during a time when jobs are few and far between. Does the system need to be fixed, absolutely. Should we just abolish it completely and let every man fend for himself? If we do I seriously hope, for your sake, that you never fall on hard times, in fact, I really hope you don’t now.

          Another thing you fail to see is that it is not the government trying to take away our second-amendment rights, it’s the people themselves demanding change. What is happening now is people who are getting sick and tired of public shootings trying desperately to find some solution, to put a stop to senseless violence. Whether you think gun control is the answer or not, convincing yourself that this is just a matter of the government trying to take your guns is conspiracy-theorist crap. I’m not sure I agree that taking guns away from honest citizens is the answer, but I can certainly understand why some do, and when you can understand the reason behind another person’s actions it’s a lot harder to make up the wrong ones.

          • MJ says:

            Some people will say he didn’t say this. I don’t care. As far as I am concerned, IF he didn’t say it I did. I am not trying to attribute this for more emphasis. I think this quote makes sense.

            If ye love wealth better than Liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of Freedom, go from us in Peace. We ask not your counsel or Arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen. –Samuel Adams

            If the people are trying to take away their own rights, then they will perish when they lose them all.

            ANYONE who will trade freedom for safety will have neither. I don’t care who said this. It is absolute truth.

        • Sheep says:

          Jesus did not say that fish quote at all (give a man a fish as opposed to teach a man to fish). That was Lao Tzu, the founder of Taoism.

          • Wow, that’s one I didn’t know. I’ve always heard it but never looked into it’s actual origins. Thanks!

          • Wordwizard says:

            Lao Tzu didn’t say it either, although it is commonly attributed to him, among others.

          • Reg says:

            Wordwizard friend, you just drew upon yourself an obligation to explain, and still you failed. Therefore your comment is not only irrelevant, it is deceptive as well. Please desist.

          • Here is another play on that: “Sell a man a fish, he eats for a day, teach a man how to fish, you ruin a wonderful business opportunity.” ― Karl Marx.

          • Reg says:

            The adventures of Winston Churchill provide a smidgen of balance.

            “Winston’s own faith in the free market was severely shaken by the loss of his savings($300,000 in today’s money, along with over 30 billion dollars in paper money of the USA) in the Wall Street crash of October – November 1929. He was in New York on “Black Friday” the 29th of October and claimed that one of the many stockbroker suicides tumbled past his hotel window.”

            There’s no questioning the free market confidence of one so tumbling. None.

        • Steve says:

          “Did not Jesus say give a man a fish and feed him for a day but teach him to fish and feed him for a life time?”

          Not only did Christ not say that, but what he said was almost exactly the opposite.

          Matthew 7:7: Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!

          • Bunny Keene says:

            Yes. Good Christin principals. Since our government is not Christian and this was demanded of good Christian individuals – NOT government – then the government has no right to take the property of one American and give it to another against their will. Of course, the federal government has a purpose – but redistribution of wealth is not one of them. Christians have ALWAYS taken care of the poor and ill. Christians founded the first hospitals and charities. What will you socialists do when the workers are outnumbered by the career receivers? And what’s wrong with monthly drug testing to cut the welfare roles?

          • Steven says:

            I don’t think you get to have your cake and eat it to. You don’t get to complain that God has been taken out of government and then, if the government does something that you happen to dislike (which coincidentally falls in line with Christian ideals) tell them that they have no right to do it since they aren’t a Christian organization. Anyway, I think it’s a moot point since you’re drawing an odd conclusion. Just because a government demands separation between church and state, does not mean that they aren’t able to do anything that falls in line with a Christian ideal. Christ said, “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s”. Does that mean that the government isn’t allowed to collect taxes because that’s a “Christian principle”?

            I absolutely agree with you that, for the most part, Christians do a great job of taking care of individuals (Note: I’m a Christian and go to church weekly, serving in a pretty demanding church calling voluntarily, with no pay), but unfortunately, that’s just not enough. If the government said that from now on all charitable work would be left to individuals, where do you think the victims of hurricanes Sandy or Katrina would be today? There’s just not enough resources there to fix everything. I understand a lot of this is a matter of opinion, but I for one happily take on the social and societal contracts that allow for the government to help those that can’t help themselves. I personally am opposed to welfare drug testing because I think it unfairly targets those in difficult circumstances. Not to mention that it would cost a WHOLE lot of money to maintain such a program and in the end I question the effectiveness of such a program. I don’t think it would do much to get people off drugs. It would just further destroy lives, especially those of innocent children. Just my two cents.

          • Anonymous says:

            2 Thessalonians 3:10 says:
            For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

            Matthew 7:7 is about asking God for what you need, not about the government giving to anybody who asks.

          • Jackie says:

            Steve, that verse is a parable telling us to pray to God if we need anything. Did you even read the quote? It has nothing to do with giving men food.

        • m167a1 says:

          Anonymous and most if not all of the replies to her post make the mistake of trying to make a very complex thing such as the founding of our nation simple. Although Aaron Brown is just name calling and accusing other of bigotry and ignorance without saying why, I find your comment to be the trollish one sir.

          Nearly two hundred years passed between initial English colonization and the Revolution. All that time and all those people from who know how many backgrounds make a complex and fascinating story you can’t boil it down to a paragraph or two in the Skeptic Blog comments.

        • Tom Wood says:

          Actually, no, Jesus did not say give a man a fish and you feed him for a day but teach him to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

        • Wordwizard says:

          “Did not Jesus say give a man a fish and feed him for a day but teach him to fish and feed him for a life time?”

          No. Anne Ritchie is given first credit for mentioning this saying, although Maimonides aka RAMBAM (Rabbi Moses ben Maimon) said something similar in his first (best) of 8 levels of charity-giving.

        • Sorry, Jesus did NOT say “give a man a fish and feed him for a day but teach him to fish and feed him for a life time?” Please, if you disagree, find it in the Bible and quote it. A quick google search finds it atributed to a Chinese Proverb or Anne Isabella Thackeray Ritchie. NOT Jesus. Here is a link http://www.friendships.org/Scriptures.html, to almost 20 different Bible verses about how Christians (and Jewish and Muslims as there are quotes from the Old Testament as well) are to care for the poor.

        • KP says:

          Sorry, I just have to say that Jesus did not say anything about teaching a man to fish. That’s a Chinese proverb. You got your Bible wrong

        • Steve says:

          So, you seem concerned about us losing our right to maintain firearms. Maybe you need to understand a little better about how amendments to the Constitution are changed. It would need to be approved by both Congress and the Senate as well as a 3/4 majority of the states. And you really think that could possibly happen? So then let’s assume that he doesn’t change the Constitution, and instead just passes a bunch of laws that restrict the use of firearms. He only has four more years to carry that out (and enforce them), and then the people would just elect another president that would repeal those laws. America is a great nation of checks and balances. We’ve got it covered.

          • Michael says:

            Sorry to nag, but Congress is composed of both the Senate and House of Representatives.

          • Steven says:

            My apologies, I mistyped. You are indeed correct. Not to blame the fact that I was laying in bed having just woken up as that would be a cop out. But, yeah, I’m going to go for that. :-)

          • vmmike1@gmail.com says:

            Okay, you say our rights cannot be lost without constitutional amendment. Yet the Patriot Act has several provisions that directly are in conflict with the 5th and 6th Amendments that have never been repealed or struck down. Those Amendments say:

            Amendment V

            No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

            ————–

            Amendment VI

            In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

            According to the Patriot Act, you can be held indefinently and ALL you property seized and sold before you ever see the inside of a court house. If you don’t like that Act, talk to others who have had property seized by government officials trying to make a buck for their government entity. Y’all are looking throught the rose colored glasses if you think it isn’t happening here right now.

      • mariahwwa says:

        OK. First, our basic background is Christianity. Separation of church and state was declared to prevent the STATE from interfering with the church. You have it backwards.

        But, no, there should not be ONE religion. And most of us Christians do not state that. HOWEVER, they should be allowed to pray in school and don’t tell me they can. They can’t. I’ve seen children sent home for praying, for wearing shirts that depict Christ on the cross, and the list goes on. YOU ARE WRONG. Oh, and at the same time, schools in NYC (surprise!) actually have praying rooms for Muslims. I’m not anti-Muslim, I dated one and came close to marrying one, so don’t go off stating I’m racist. Far from it. But if we can’t pray in school, then they shouldn’t either and to have special rooms is unbelievable.

        The ACLU has made everything a civil rights issues, you can’t breathe without them interferring in your life. Kids can’t wear an NRA shirt to school that does not depict any violence or bad words. The ACLU originally was a good thing….they have turned into idiots.

        I worked in social services. I saw so many abuses that when I read your words I want to throw up. I’m all for assistance to those who need it ON A TEMPORARY basis. IT was never intended to be a paycheck. I needed it while I went to school, divorced and 2 kids. The minute I was out of school I was off it, and even then it was only food stamps, nothing else.

        I saw people who used one address to get their welfare benefits while living in upscale neighborhoods. I saw them driving BMW’s. I saw them popping out babies every year because our system REWARDS promiscuity….or just stupidity. The pill is readily available but they wouldn’t get any money that way.

        I will make an assumption that perhaps I shouldn’t but your post is definitely leaning that way…I’m assuming your an atheist or an agnostic. That is your right. But it doesn’t give you the right to bash Christianity.

        And its funny that there is such a fervor about wanting people who vote to have to show identification, yet if we want to purchase a weapon, get a driver’s license, etc. we have to provide that. What a hypocrit!

        And if we get a job we have to agree to random drug testing, yet welfare recepients are not required to do the same to take the money the rest of us give them. Again, why hypocrisy! Double standards everywhere!

      • ReadyFreddy says:

        No one is bashing public assistance or saying it should be done away with. The issue is those who misuse it. Yes, Christians are instructed to help their fellow man. That does not mean give him a free meal ticket for life. Everyone might have a time when they need help getting back on their feet. But once they are back on their feet, they should become self sufficient again. We have those who make living on public assistance a lifestyle. And they breed more generations of the same. What on earth is wrong with making these people earn what they get? Responsible hard-working taxpaying citizens are tired of the fruits of our labors going to some individual who is just too lazy or drug infested to get a job. The system needs an overhaul and there needs to be a time limit on the benefits. And of course, taxes need to be collected on that income. If you don’t pay into the system, you should not be eligible to get anything out of it. Any changes would be harsh and hard to take at first, but it must be done. Soon.

    • Eric Hall says:

      Here’s a pretty nice article showing how the founders specifically avoided founding the US on Christianity – http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/farrell_till/myth.html

      And the often cited Treaty of Tripoli spells it out in Article 11, as ratified by the US Senate and signed by the President – http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/treaty_tripoli.html

    • Ava says:

      Hi Lori! I believe your tin foil hat might be on a little too tight. This nation was founded under Godly and Christian principles, but that does not mean you are allowed to force one religion. Why??? Because that would be religious oppression, which is one of the reasons we fled and came here in the first place.

      This old lady is just an old tea-party sound-box, that is all. She is an extremist, who probably believes that Obama is the Anti-Christ, and soon we will all be marked with 666 symbols! THE HORROR! THE HORROR!

      Did I fail to mention that I am a devout Christian, and not a devout CRAZY person who listens to morons like Glenn Beck and this old hag?

      Also, can you please explain to me how much different and better our America would be if Obama was not president? I would find that very enlightening.

      • Were there any of this nation’s founding principles, which you say we’re Godly and Christian, that could not also be held by a non-religious person?

      • m167a1 says:

        May I respectfully suggest that if you don’t wish to be dismissed as someone’s sound box you should not be calling people names. But then that would entail explaining why you feel that way, and opening you to actual discussion and perhaps criticism.

        I also wonder how you would know if someone is a moron if you don’t listen to them. It would be pretty weak to call someone a name because someone else you listened to told you they were.

        My point is, not that you are right or wrong. You and many of us including myself get so tied up in other perceptions, fears and such that we forget to discuss the issues.

        You can do better. You are here (presumably)because you want to view the world in a rational way. I don’t care what your opinion is.. but do try to be grown up about how you reached it.

        Yes, this is one of MY pet peeves… :-P

      • m167a1 says:

        My reply should have included at that it was directed at Ava.
        I apologize if it appears if it was directed at BD.

      • Bunny Keene says:

        Ava, I have never met a ‘devout Christian’ who spoke like you. How insulting to call this brave woman nasty names. She shared her memories of the horrors of her experience as a youth under Adolph Hitler and WWII and you call her a hag?! She is not an extremist just because her personal experiences cause her to worry about the same thing happening to America. Neither you nor anyone in America has been able to prove that the Tea Party Patriots are extemists, racist or crazies like you and your propaganda bias media try to shove down our throats. OBAMA is THE worst president in history. He has the worst first term record in every catagory that presidents are measured and has broken our treasury. ANYONE would have been a better president. Unfortunately, voter fraud, ignorance about the issues, promises of freebies by Obama to everyone including illegal immigrants and the low turn out of Republican voters gives us another 4 years of the same as the last 4 years. Of course, when you start hearing rumblings of the 22nd amendment (term limit) being overturned to give Obama a 3rd and 4th term, maybe then you’ll listen to this elderly lady with the wisdom of history behind her.
        ‘Devout Christian’? I think not.

      • I guess you too did not read the book “Through Innocent Eyes – The Chosen Girls of the Hitler Youth” yet, did you?

    • Nancy Elliott says:

      I agree!

    • Bunny Keene says:

      Many Americans agree with you, Lori. Pay no attention to Aaron the troll.

    • Wordwizard says:

      This is a very sad post. Rather than address your OPINIONS, let me address one FACT, and point out that Obama grew up in Hawaii. Should he be unable to take vacations in his home state just because you think it’s a waste of tax dollars?

    • hirider says:

      Lori, you are absolutely right! Any time Congressmen will lock the other party out of the legislative planning process and require a vote before anyone has a chance to read it, is NOT being the upright politician we normally expect our representatives to be. If “You have to pass it so you can find out what is in it!” becomes the norm for all future legislation, then we WILL be one nation gone under QUICKLY!

      Keep on Lori, you are absolutely right.

    • Larry says:

      There have been 18 assassination attempts on the lives of US presidents (2 on JFK) so thats roughly 39% of our presidents to date and you call out the POTUS on having gunpacking Secret Service??? Woah lets not compare the average citizen’s risk of injury to that of the president or infer hypocrisy.. But rather take a deep breath and reach into what’s left of your heart and understand the fact (not opinion) that saving even one life is worth public gun regulation (aka putting to rest the militant ideologies that make fools feel that target practice and shooting a deer 56 times is more important than the safety of our country’s youth). It is sickening that this is even a partisan issue.. And im sick of all the ammendment referencing to back that crap up! The 2nd ammendment does not say feel free to purchase an assault rifle as you please…. I live in Connecticut so the Sandy Hook shooting hits close to home, i bet if your local elementary school was shot up you’d be chomping at the bit for legislation, and if not then you are a heartless pig who would fit in very well, in fact probably officer material in the Hitler party!

      • mariahwwa says:

        Bull. Had there been police and/or security (trained – not rent a cop) personnel there…..or allowed well-trained CCW carriers to have been armed, the death toll would have been reduced. NOT GONE, but reduced. You can’t control stupidity, and that includes idiots like the shooters, or idiots that think gun control is going to stop it. Stats prove you wrong. Remember the only places these psychos are hitting – over and over again – are GUN FREE ZONES! What part of that do you not understand?

  5. really says:

    Fascism – when the power elite and their cronies deem themselves the only ones who have the ability to know, understand, and create laws for everyone else to follow…That would necessarily have to include our president who exempted his administration from having to abide by his own executive orders such as no lobbyists, or instructs or allows his appointees to disregard law to further his agenda (the WARN Act, the closing of dealerships…) or misrepresents numbers, facts, and figures (the ‘saving of GM,’ the numbers of jobs ‘saved,’ the real cost of Cash for Clunkers, the increase not decrease in health care premiums under AFfordable Care Act…), who ‘gifts’ money to his children who are considered members of a millionaire family so that they can amass wealth without paying federal taxes, expensive vacations to exotic resorts flying a huge carbon footprint for all the attendant planes and vehicles when the American debt and deficit are out of control, enlisting a womanizer to forward an illegitimate ‘war on women’ when women in the Oval Office make far less, refusing to disclose who visits the Oval office or circumventing the process through his administration meeting elsewhere to avoid disclosure, …the list goes on.

    • So, based on what you just wrote – why do people call this guy a socialist?

      • Bunny Keene says:

        Who cares? Fascism, communism, Marxism, socialism…….FAILURES ALL. No matter what you call it, if it walks like a duck…..talks like a duck….it’s a duck….or at least the ‘egg’ of a duck. ;)

        • It matters when you’re accusing someone of who completely different ideals that contradict eachother. That matters. I’ve noticed in your comments you’re quick to call someone down for labeling others while labeling others with your own opinions in the very next message. I believe that’s called hypocrisy, something I believe it’s said Jesus frowned upon.

    • Martin says:

      It starts off talking about hitler. You are a tard.

      • Landjahr Lager Seidorf – 1941

        Hello Martin:

        In 1941, my mother, Gertrude Kerschner, wrote a personal journal (complete with photos) when she was in “Landjahr Lager Seidorf” (Country Service Camp) while serving in the BDM. Coupled with neo-pagan rituals, songs, and folklore, this book captures the self-actualization of 10 year old Gertrude as she progresses from childhood and living in poverty, to adolescence and becoming ‘one’ with her country. Gertrude met and married my father, PFC Robert Sandor – 1280th Army Corp. of Engineers Battalion, Company “C,” – 65th Infantry (Battle Ax), and moved to Greenwich, Ct.

        The main emphasis of this historical, non-fiction, true-life story is the moral character upbringing of the girls in Country Service Camp. The strong work ethics, high moral principals and standards that my mother instilled in me were derived from her service in the BDM.

        I am the voice of millions of German/Austrian grandmothers, and mothers who are silent and are still in fear of speaking about this time to their daughters or granddaughters. For, people have told me this is the opposite of the Anne Frank diary. I just thought you’d like to know. What does Ms. Werthmann and my mother’s journal have in common? They both speak with truth (I without the Obama part).

        ~ Cindy ~

        The book is now available in US at: http://bookstore.balboapress.com/Products/SKU-000607829/Through-Innocent-Eyes.aspx, including: Barnes & Nobel, Amazon.com, ALibris.com, Powells.com.

        In England: WHSmith.co.uk, Waterstones.com, Abebooks.com, Bookshop.Blackwells.com, Tesco.com.

        To see the actual journal, please visit: http://cynthiasandor.blogspot.com/

  6. GabbyWeiss says:

    perception is reality. Ain’t that a shame? sigh.

  7. Momof3-2onearth1inheaven says:

    Let me just say this, I went to look to see if this account was true or false and now I know it has probably been spin for the Teabaggers – makes sense. At 11 what does this woman recall? I know from digging back into my family tree for the last two years, I have come across some facts that were obviously skewed by my mother, even at a much older age. By facts, receipts, deeds, copies of probated wills, death certificates, census information etc.

    • m167a1 says:

      Is it really necessary to call names?

      You (presumably) disagree with someone so you give them a pejorative nickname rather than calling out whatever you feel their failings are?

      In this case the limited government folks such as the Tea Party will indeed see many of the same intentions behind the Administration’s policies, while supporter of the Administration will dismiss them.

      This is in no way helpful in and makes you look like a “insert rude nickname here”

      You can do better.

    • Bunny Keene says:

      And what sources did you check? This woman is real. Her memories are hers for you to believe or not. Your choice. Afterall, many Muslims deny the holocause ever happened. Perhaps that is where you are going with your accusation of ‘spin’? This lady doesn’t have to show receipts, deeds, copies of anything to prove she lived in Austria when she did and the history of Hitler and WWII. Besides, she’s already been vetted.
      And do you expect to be taken seriously when you disrespect this elderly lady AND the Tea Party Patriots just because they believe in limited government, fiscal responsibility, national security and low taxes? This used to be called patriotism.

      • The book “Through Innocent Eyes – The Chosen Girls of the Hitler Youth” is a biography about Gertrude Kerschner at the same time she was growing up in Austria as did Ms. Kitty Werthmann.

    • m167a1 and Bunny Keene: you have both attacked this person and accused them of name calling and disrespect… I don’t see it. Looks like a pretty tame comment to me.

      • m167a1 says:

        Hi Desiree,
        I was referring specifically to the use of the term “teabaggers”

        This a pejorative ie.. rude, offensive or generalized slang in the same vein as “commie or pig” and its use and relevance to the topic is left unexplained by its author. Additionally she states that “it has probably been spin for the teabaggers” implies a conspiracy or at least alteration by some unseen zelot.

        I criticized it as I found it unworthy of a blog devoted to rationality and generally uncivil.

        • I’ve heard “teabaggers” used by both sides, so never thought of it as anything offensive. As far as the reference to it probably being a spin… it’s really easy to put a “spin” on your own memories simply by having thoughts and opinions. It just didn’t seem uncivil.

          I guess it’s all in the eye of the beholder. I’ve found most of your responses to be very rational and civil, whether I agreed with them or not, so this one confused me. Thanks for the explanation.

  8. twoeditorz@comcast.net says:

    I think Kitty has good intentions, and I applaud her vivid descriptions of what she went through — it’s better than any history book. But while we must learn from history, I cannot see what she does in our current situation. We don’t have a genocidal maniac for a leader. We don’t have runaway unemployment. No one is exterminating the intellectually challenged. No one is prohibiting religion … the list goes on.
    I’m sorry for what she went through, and I’m also sorry she has such a negative outlook for the future of her adopted homeland.

    • I think your last sentence is an excellent summation of the KItty Werthman conundrum.

    • Bunny Keene says:

      You really don’t think Kitty is alone with her ‘negative outlook for the future’ in America after the last 4 FAILED YEARS of Obama, do you??? Some of us have been paying attention to what he’s been doing and we don’t like it. We love our freedoms.
      Perhaps Kitty is just seeing the many changes in America over the last 4 years under this President and the many more changes he has in store for us. She’s only sharing history and warning us not to allow it to happen here. Afterall, Obama’s life was steeped in….shall we stay…’far-left’ principals? He sealed his personal/educational/professional records (why?). He was a drug using follower of Marxist Saul Alinsky, had communist mentors & radical friends including terrorists. He bought his Chicago home from a felon in a shady deal and surrounds himselves in DC with Chicago thugs. AND he refuses to answer questions from the press at press conferences unless he agrees with the questions ahead of time.
      You know, the trouble with us Conservatives? You liberals can’t stand it when we actually argue with facts. Sorry!

      • Steven says:

        I wouldn’t worry about Obama doing too much harm. With our current senate and congress, he won’t be able to get much of anything done. This has been the most ineffective legislative branch in the history of our country.

      • The problem with you, not all conservatives – just you and those like you, is that all of your “facts” come from conspiracy theorist websites and have been debunked and dis-proven to the point of ridiculousness and you still choose to believe them. Us “liberals” (i.e. everyone who likes to check facts) are just getting sick and tired of rehashing the same points over and over and over again with a group of individuals who refuse to see reason and truth. When you choose to discount anyone who disagrees with you as “sheep” or “part of the conspiracy” you create a fantasy world to live in that no one can ever dispel with any amount of facts they show you.

      • John Smith says:

        Bunny: when Ms Werthmann published this in 2003, both the US Senate and the House had been pretty much “Conservative” for the prior 10 years. And so was the President. Why didn’t her “manifesto” get any traction right there and then? Were her statements irrelevant at the time?
        It wasn’t till 2009 that (some) folks started digging it up as “proof” that “we are doomed”… Coincidence?

      • Rachel says:

        I grew up in the 80s in a Christian conservative home. The talk about losing our freedoms, country is going liberal and out of control, our country is doomed is not new. And that’s when the beloved Reagan was president. This hand-wringing is not new.

        I personally think that without the doomsaying, there are many organizations that would not exist, books that would not be written, leaders who not have a message.

        It’s too bad the doomsayers are not spending that same time and money making a difference in the lives of people — the true calling of a Christian. Jesus lived and preached in a kingdom ruled by a dictator and yet put his focus on people. Why can’t his followers take a lesson?

    • Hello Twoeditorz -If you are interested in reading more about what Kitty went through, Kitty’s vivid descriptions are in even more detail with the book “Through Innocent Eyes – The Chosen Girls of the Hitler Youth.” It’s a book about Gertrude Kerschner who, at the same time, was growing up as a young child in Austria.

    • hirider says:

      LESSONS FROM THE BATTLE OF WOUNDED KNEE??

      GUN CONTROL ACT OF 1890

      December 29, 2012 marks the 122nd Anniversary of the murder of 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota . These 297 people, in their winter camp, were murdered by federal agents and members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearm. Get this reason – “For their own safety and protection”.

      The slaughter began AFTER the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms and the remaining group of indians (about 40?) refused to do so. When the final round had flown, of the 297 dead or dying, two thirds (200) were women and children.

      Around 40 members of the 7th Cavalry were killed. Over half of those were cut down by friendly fire from the Hotchkiss guns of their overzealous comrades-in-arms.

      Twenty members of the 7th Cavalry were deemed “National Heroes” and awarded the Medal of Honor for their acts of cowardice. Twenty men in any ‘ONE’ action, to receive the Medal of Honor is many, many times the number of Medal of Honor awards ever presented for any
      one action in the history of all the wars that the United States has ever been in.

      We do not hear of Wounded Knee today. It is not mentioned in our history classes or books.

      What little does exist about Wounded Knee is normally the sanitized “Official Government Explanation” or the historically and factually inaccurate depictions of the events leading up to the massacre on the movie screen.

      Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

      Take a moment to reflect on the real purpose of the Second Amendment – “The right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government.”

      The argument that the Second Amendment only applies to hunting and target shooting is asinine. When the United States Constitution was drafted “hunting” was an everyday chore carried out by men and women to put meat on the table each night, and “target shooting”
      was an unheard of concept, musket balls were a precious commodity in the wilds of early America, and were certainly not wasted “target shooting”. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regime in Europe, and refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defense purposes should such tyranny rise in the United States .

      As time goes on the average citizen in the United States continues to lose personal freedom or “liberty”. Far too many times unjust bills are passed and signed into law under the guise of “for your safety,” “for protection,” or “for the children.” The Patriot Act signed into law by G.W. Bush, then expanded and continued by Barack Obama is just one of many examples of American citizens being stripped of their rights and privacy for “safety.” Habeus Corpus was to prevent anyone using the military forces in America against American civilians. Bush did away with that! Now, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is on the table, and will, most likely be taken away for “our safety”.

      Before any American citizen blindly accepts whatever new firearms legislation that is about to be doled out, they should stop and think about something for just one minute – Evil does exist in our world. It always has and always will. Throughout history evil people have committed evil acts. In the Bible one of the first stories is that of Cain killing Abel. We can not legislate “evil” into extinction. Good people will abide by the law, evil people will always find a way around it.

      And another thought Evil exists all around us, but looking back at the historical record of the past 200 years across the globe, where is “evil” and “malevolence” most often found? In the hands of those with the power – that has always been the governments. That greatest human tragedies on record and the largest loss of innocent human life can be attributed to governments.

      Who do governments target? “Scapegoats” and “Enemies” within their own borders…but only after they have been disarmed them to the point where they are no longer a threat. Ask any Native American, and they will tell you it was inferior technology and lack of arms that contributed to their demise. Ask any Armenian why it was so easy for the Turks to exterminate millions of them, and they will answer “We were disarmed before it happened”. Ask any Jew what Hitler’s first step prior to the mass murders of the Holocaust was – confiscation of firearms from the people.

      Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should not be in such a hurry to surrender our Right to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we have no right under federal law to defend ourselves and our families.

      The right to self defense, defense of our families, defense of our property issues not from any government on this earth, but that right comes down directly from God.

      Our government seeks to make God irrelevant and even the mention of his name illegal.

  9. Miki says:

    Yup, public education, equal rights, gun control laws, and most of all, public health care have destroyed us up here in Canada. It’s all school shootings and Nazis now.

    • John Smith says:

      Very funny! And so to the point … Isn’t it weird that some folks rather listen to old stories by a disgruntled lobbyist, than to just look across the border to assess today’s realities?

    • If public health care is working so well for you, why do so many of your countrymen come to the U.S. for treatment that would take far longer, if ever, to receive in Canada?

        • Ty Brown says:

          Do the math. That’s close to 250,000 people. So, yes, I would say that is ‘a lot’ or ‘so many’.

          And the obvious factor here is that a quarter of a million people were ABLE to come get the health care they wanted in the U.S. For every person that had the cash available to make the trip, pay the bill, stay the time in the U.S. to recover, etc. how many people WOULD do that if they had the cash?

          Think how hard it is for them to get their treatment in the U.S. when you consider the obstacles and still a quarter of a million of them were willing to do that to get away from government run health care. Pretty telling stat to me.

          • Reg. says:

            Remind me again Ty, how many US citizens was it that could not afford heath insurance? And to make the figure more realistic, include the number who face bankruptcy from some sad health encounter, even though they did carry health insurance.

            Even in Canada there are people who can afford the exorbitant costs of exclusive attention in the exclusive US system.

  10. Bryan Merrill says:

    I’m almost speechless. I hope someday you actually become as intelligent as you think yourself to be. I stumbled upon your comments while looking for the truthfulness of the same email you are commenting on. What I have found is more troubling than what I thought could have been in that story. You apparently are lost “in the weeds” with the details rather than the point of the story, if it is factual. You’ll be at the front of the line with a smile on your face if anything remotely similar comes to be in America like what happened in Hitler’s Austria. Happily boarding the train wondering what new housing subdivision the government is relocating you to. I’ll be there too, but with the full knowledge of how we both arrived there.

  11. Craig Good says:

    I think you may have had an overreaction to her overreaction. It is a matter of history that the Nazis were socialists. The impression that many Leftists want to insist upon now, ie: that they were “right wing”, is sheer denial, started as Soviet propaganda. In any case, you can march down a long list of policies and see which side they most often line up with. That doesn’t mean that Obama is Hitler, of course.

    It does mean there’s some merit to her warning that 1) it *can* happen here and 2) there is a clear overlap between many Nazi positions and those of many current politicians. One doesn’t have to agree with all of her opinions to see those historical facts. Jonah Goldberg has documented this all quite well, but it’s obvious even without his work.

    For example, just compare the 1928 “Waffengesetz” with the Gun Control Act of 1968. Look up the JFPO site.

    Are things as bad now as Weimar Germany? Of course not. Are many of those policies being implemented or seriously proposed by current politicians? Absolutely.

    You’re right to call her out for exaggerating. Careful that you don’t, also.

    • m167a1 says:

      Some excellent points, thank you Craig.

    • Well said, Craig. And I don’t want to exaggerate. I’ve never claimed it can’t happen here (“It” being some kind of transformation of the United States into a Nazi-style socialist dictatorship). I am, however, claiming that it’s very unlikely to happen here on the scale of Germany in the 1930’s, and that whether or not it’s happening here at all is a matter of opinion.

      Whether or not Hitler and his cronies were left-wing, right-wing, socialist, national socialist or devil worshipers is irrelevant, at least to me. That they were murderous, militaristic, genocidal thugs bent on ruling the world and slaughtering those they deemed inferior is more pressing.

      • Bunny Keene says:

        Mike, I believe your last line closely describes the extemist Muslims bent on destroying Israel and anyone who is not Muslim. I agree that this is VERY pressing. I’d like to hear your thoughts in a future article.

    • The German currency was relatively stable at about 60 Marks per US Dollar during the first half of 1921.Because the Western theatre of World War I was mostly in France and Belgium, Germany had come out of the war with most of its industrial power intact, a healthy economy, and arguably in a better position to once again become a dominant force in the European continent than its neighbors. However, the “London ultimatum” in May 1921 demanded reparations in gold or foreign currency to be paid in annual installments of 2,000,000,000 (2 billion) goldmarks plus 26 percent of the value of Germany’s exports.

      The first payment was paid when due in June 1921. That was the beginning of an increasingly rapid devaluation of the Mark which fell to less than one third of a cent by November 1921 (approx. 330 Marks per US Dollar). The total reparations demanded was 132,000,000,000 (132 billion) goldmarks which was far more than the total German gold and foreign exchange. And today, the United States is $16 Trillion in debt. In the WR, you are talking Billions. Today, you are talking Trillions.
      Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation_in_the_Weimar_Republic

  12. m167a1 says:

    Yes Goodwin’s law is certainly in play here and no, the President has not yet demonstrated any genocidal plans for us.

    I do wish to make a point however.

    First, we form many of our opinions; particularly regarding politics on what we feel the “opposition” whoever that is for us personally “wants to do.” In a recent Poly-Sci class I found that self-professed liberal students were not all that liberal and the conservative ones not all that conservative. Most of them had a party preference based on a slogan.

    In short we don’t often frame things as honest disagreements. We see the other side as evil because we mistrust their intentions. This produces a false correlation in our political reasoning.
    Do any of us not do this to some level?

    As for myself I got all worked up over a political point recently and started building my own guillotine. I had to quit when the police got their knickers in a twist over it.. :-P

    • This I completely agree with. The tendency in this country for people to think anyone who disagrees with them must be homicidal maniacs hell-bent on the destruction of America is just ridiculous and has gotten out of hand.

      People who are afraid of gun control measures taking away freedoms accuse the government of trying to work up to doing just that, when really what’s happening right now is an outcry from millions of people, politicians and otherwise, who are just tired of the heartbreak of these mass-shootings trying to take control of an out of control situation.

      The people who are trying to find that control think that people who are afraid of gun control measures are all gun-toting psychos who would rather have their guns than have safety for others, when really they’re just people who want to have the ability to defend their families and homes if necessary from that same out of control world.

      The tendency to demonize the opposition seems to be reaching a critical point in our politics.

      • m167a1 says:

        Hi again Desiree,
        I had aimed the comment at both sides of our current situation as in my view its wrong to demonize people instead of civil criticism or support of issues. Sen Fienstien and many others have surpassed all previous records in terms of vitriol and pure hate-mongering as well as demonstrating a complete lack of knowledge of firearms.

        Most destructively they haven’t really done anything to address the topic or have a public discussion. Its all name calling and bomb throwing.

        • I tend to believe that those who are the most vocally for gun control really do believe that it’s the best answer to the rise in mass shootings. I disagree with this view, but I choose to believe in their good intentions. The tendency of my friends and family who are against gun control to assume that the government is just trying to take more control by taking away our firearms disturbs me, largely because this is not merely the government trying to pass gun control measures. Millions of Americans also wish to make these changes, and to simply accuse the politicians of bad intentions and dismiss it as conspiracy is to dismiss the wishes of all of the average citizens who believe it’s the right thing to do. Any situation this complicated deserves to be treated as such, and not minimized or demonized. I personally don’t think more gun control is the answer, but I can completely empathize with the knee-jerk reaction that causes people to believe it is.

          • m167a1 says:

            If I came across as doubting the sincerity of everyone on the control side of that debate then I misspoke. I do doubt both the sincerity and motivation of certain political figures.

            That said, I find the arguments in favor of further restrictions to range from ill-conceived to irrational. As it seems you follow the topic I won’t waste the space in this venue to regurgitate everything but in summary I don’t see any of the proposed restrictions having a positive effect, rather the pro control argument ignores completely three points that are each insurmountable in my opinion.

            First the use of personal weapons in self defense is usually ignored as it is not tracked in a detailed fashion like gun crime. How can anyone in good conscience propose such restrictions with only half of the necessary information?

            Secondly, just because you outlaw weapons, doesn’t magically make them go away. Only those who actually obey the law will comply and be left at the mercy of those who don’t. I fail to see how this enhances the safety of anyone other than an armed robber or murderous lunatic.

            Finally, as is often ignored, the reason we have a Second Amendment is so that we as a society have the material means to resist a tyrannical government, or oppressive majority. This is one of those rights that really are not supposed to be messed with. What constitutes tyranny is subjective, but this sort of legislation is seen as tyrannical by those it proposes to regulate. How can any sane person justify placing that many people in what they might well view as a desperate position?

            I flatly refuse to predict the consequences of such legislation except to state that while anything is possible, the very least likely outcome will be fewer death from firearms.

  13. Tim says:

    This discussion has made for some interesting reading and expresses the concerns and emotions associated with those concerns are what appears to make them seem extreme, to some degree. There are a lot of similarities to the pre war era of WWII and now i.e. major economic issues, an unsettled population and governments acting in “unconventional or extreme ways”.

    Look at the way the media is reporting the “cry of the populace” for more gun control due to the actions of a deranged individual. There was an increase in gun control in the mid 90’s and yet there were mass shootings that occured.

    I do agree with a comment that Steve made about the “pendulum” coming back to center, except that I feel that it has passed center and is swinging back the other way. This is what I think that Kitty is making reference to and trying to get people thinking about stopping it from swinging too wildly or too far.

    We are close to falling into a recession or possibly a depression again with the world economy in a precarious position. The U.S. has a national debt of over 16 trillion dollars and using a population figure of 330 million that means every single one of us owes over $48,500.00. Our government is discussing raising the debt ceiling and they still are operating at a defict level. Where and when will it stop???

    Desiree refers to public assistance as if the government owes it to those persons forever. There definitely are some people that need to be on public assistance (PA) for an indefinite time and some that should not be on any longer. I know several families that are on PA and of several that make it a way of life to the point of making a statement “I had to have another child ’cause I needed more money.” There was an article I read several years ago about a town in Vermont or New Hampshire that took it upon themselves to build up their local infrastructure utilizing unemployed local citizens. As I recall the majority of the people that worked instead of receiving PA were happier about working as opposed to getting what they considered a government give away.

    The state and federal government moved in and advised the local government that they would no longer receive any state or federal tax revenues and would possibly be subject to prosecution if they did not stop their work program and return the PA persons back to the previous status. Could this be construed as “government control” or worse yet socialism?

    Do I believe that we will revert back to a genocidal cleansing? No, not in a thousand years, but we need to be careful of who we put in power to control our country and watchful of what they ALL are doing!

    • Steven says:

      This has been one of the more reasonable comments here. I appreciate your measured reasoning and ability to see both sides of the issue. I think that maybe there are multiple “pendulums” to consider. A fiscal pendulum, a human rights pendulum, etc… I think many of these pendulums are righting themselves and headed to the position that they need to be. However, there are some that, as you put it, are indeed wildly out of control.

    • Bunny Keene says:

      Well said.

    • I don’t believe at all that the government owes public assistance to anyone forever. I believe the system does need a serious overhaul. I believe there should be rules and restrictions to discourage/stop “career dependents” as some like to call them. I believe that it should be set up in a way that not only aides those on assistance with improving their lives themselves, but encourages it as well. I am all for work programs and creating jobs, teaching responsibility.

      What aggravates me is when people talk about public assistance as if it is an uneccessary drain on our economy. So many these days talk about how public assistance is nothing but a hand out for those too lazy to take care of themselves, yet when you call them on that assumption they’ll quickly state “I know not ALL people on assistance are lazy.” and then turn around and make the same blanket statements again. Very few people on assistance are “career dependents”, yet so many are quick to judge everyone based on those few.

      I take issue with any person who says “I shouldn’t have to work so that the government can take my money and give it to someone who doesn’t.” That, in my eyes, is the real sense of entitlement in this country.

      But what makes me the most angry is when someone goes on and on about how this country is losing it’s “Christian values” and then turns around in the very next breath and complains about their taxes going toward paying for someone else and how “socialist” this country has become. I am an Atheist and I never at any point in my life felt ripped-off by the fact that a percentage of my taxes was going toward helping those in need, yet I and those like me are the ones that are destroying our country because I’m not a Christian and therefore cannot share “Christian values” such as good will toward my fellow man.

  14. Brad T. says:

    I’m curious, do you think it would happen the exact same way that it happened in 1930’s Germany?? This lady is simply telling her story and making reference to similarities. How dare you question her intentions. she has been through it before. You have NOT, therefore all of the bs you just spouted off is all opinions with really no substance. This is why we read history books, to learn from the past. You may study history, but she experienced it! You think just because you have a blog that you’re all of a sudden an expert? She’s trying to tell you that this is how it started, but you’re too busy drinking the kool aid to realize it.

    • Steven says:

      That would be a fair point if this woman’s story weren’t being used as a platform by so many on the right. “See, she was there! We’re approaching Nazi socialism!” I personally think that her story is interesting and on it’s own doesn’t feel like a severe indictment on our current situation, however that’s not how it’s being used by others.

      P.S. – While I’m not saying this is her situation, it’s fair to say that those that lived through an experience are seldom the most reliable witnesses as they see events through their own lens which is distorted by many things. History books (at least when you are able to take MANY witnesses into account) are often more accurate because they are less prejudicial.

    • There is an excellent book entitled “Through Innocent Eyes – The Chosen Girls of the Hitler Youth” that goes into detail exactly what Ms Werthmann experienced the same as what Gertrude Kerschner’s herself experience. All the girls experienced the same education at the same time throughout the entire country. Some girls were chosen for the Country Service Camp program while others went on into the BDM. This book is based upon the personal journal Gertrude Kerschner wrote when she was in the BDM, specifically, Landjahr Lager in Seidorf, now in Sosnowka, Poland. A Historical, Non-fiction, biography, true story…and Ms. Werthmann’s is LIVING HISTORY.

  15. Michael says:

    I like to think that I am smart enough to “know what I don’t know” so I would not comment on any of the religious points to this argument, but what I am always amazed by is the absence of outside views. America is a brilliant place with some of the most wonderful people I have ever met but they never try looking at the rest of the world, Alabama I am talking about you. If you consider the gun control laws in other developed countries I cannot think of anywhere that has as high a level of guns per capita as America and we are not all being enslaved by our governments, nor can I think of any terrible consequences other than a number of retailers that went bankrupt when gun laws were tightened. Please forgive any spelling or grammatical errors.

    • m167a1 says:

      Hi Michael.
      I understand both of your points.
      Your point that Americans look inward is true to a point, I have always held this to be more of our traditional independent outlook than the arrogance it’s usually attributed to. I just don’t usually feel a need to look elsewhere for guidance. As an Instructor I do keep tabs on professional issues abroad, but my interest in international events is simply academic.

      On the issue of guns we could not cover the relevant history and political thought in this limited venue. So in brief, many of us consider weapons to be a critical civil right. The ultimate expression of individual rights and the ultimate rejection of collectivism. (Remember how worked up we still get over socialism?) We can defend ourselves, our property and our rights if we are armed. If we are disarmed, we are at the mercy of the state. A standing Army of any size was also considered a threat to individual rights as such a formation might overcome the armed citizens, but that’s another discussion.
      It is true that at this particular moment the citizens of say Luxembourg are not horribly oppressed, but that is subject to change at the whim of their government or an invading power. In contrast, armed citizens in the United States form something of an “Army in being” that is not under the control of our Federal Government and might in time of great controversy at least give it pause.

      As such personal weapons of approximately the same type as those used by security forces are seen by many as both necessary for personal security and personal freedom. So it has become bother a cultural force and political statement.
      Sorry if I rambled a bit there….

      • Bunny Keene says:

        Excellent and accurate response. I have enjoyed reading your comments and not necessarily because I’ve agreed with them all.

        I believe I heard that Japan didn’t attack America’s mainland because Americans would be too hard to disarm. This may be an urban legend. If so, please excuse me. Too tired to research. :)

        • Bunny, from my knowledge of the matter, Japan never intended any kind of landing on the US mainland. There was some talk of landing in Hawaii, but that was scuttled by their defeat at Midway. Japan’s intention was mostly to establish defensive rings around the home islands and protect their supplies of natural resources.

          Even if they had planned an invasion, there was no way for them to pull it off. Japan had nowhere near enough men and manufacturing ability to execute a successful landing across the Pacific Ocean.

          • Stephen Propatier says:

            Not sure if I can agree with that. By all accounts Japan never tried to win a head to head war vs the US. They wanted to keep a steady rythm of victories over them, while establishing a double layer of ring defences on the pacific (phillipines-marianas-marcus island was the inner, NG-solomons-Marshalls-wake-eastern aleutians was the outter) to convince the US that a counterattack was unfeasible. They never intended to invade the US mainland as such, as far as I can tell.

            Midway was never in the initial plans of Japan when the war started. It was out of the twin concentric defence rings they planned to set up in the pacific, and too far from the mainland (and too close to Hawaii) to set an easy invasion. The reasons to attack Midway rested mostly in the aftermath of the doolittle raid over tokyo. Pearl Harbor had crippled the US battleline but their carriers were still unharmed, and Yamamoto wanted those carriers to be sunk at all costs. The attack on Tokyo was an insult to the Japanese armed forces (and the IJN in particular), and had been launched from carriers. And the US Carrier striking force was the only offensive weapon left in US inventory by then, so it only made sense to force a major battle to trap and sink them. Midway was intended to be that battle, the island was of secondary or even tertiary importance, what Yamamoto wanted was the US carriers…things turned out to be pretty different tho.

            Had Midway been a Japanese victory what would’ve happened?…probably not much. Hawaii was out of the scope of probable (or even possible) japanese targets because it was almost unfeasible to successfully invade it-it would’ve overstretched the japanese navy to the point of rupture.

            US mainland was completely out of question-the distances involved were extreme.Remember aswell that both to invade hawaii and/or the Eastern US a lot of troops would’ve been needed. The Navy did not have enough manpower to pull something like that (the Japanese Marine force was mostly based on regimental combat teams for amphib operations of limited scope), and the Army was:

            1-Absolutely not going to cooperate with the navy, at least not easily (japanese Army-Navy rivalry was extreme, they fought each other constantly). That would mean that one of the key points of any long range invasion like Hawaii or US would be poisoned from the start -no interbranch cooperation meant the operation would be a disaster from the start.

            2-already heavily commited both in China, Burma/India, and New Guinea. There was a hefty manpower reserve in Manchukuo but neither the Imperial staff nor the Army staff wanted to weaken that force too much because they wanted it to act as a deterrent against possible Soviet agression. The Japanese Army without taking large units out of Manchukuo-which was politically impossible to pull off, would’ve had no resources to mount a successful large scale invasion in the US Mainland.

            3-Lack of proper amphibious resources. The japanese landings at the start of the war were doing against unprepared enemies, and using barely adequate ships as amphibious transports. To land in USA would be very very different than landing on, say, Legaspi. The scope of the operation would be much different, the ammount of troops to be landed ,too, the distances from the Japanese supply sources (the mainland) would be all the way across the pacific meaning enormous travel times for the supply convoys, and Japan had not enough ships to keep such a invasion supplied.

            Those 3 points were well known for all the IMperial staff and of course by the IJA. They would’ve never agreed to such an operation. There’s also the important part of intel and recce. It was nigh impossible for Japan to conduct a proper recconaisance over the US mainland, and it would’ve been very difficult to the point of almost impossible to conduct a proper research on the possible landing locations.

            We all know the ammount of preparation work the landings on Normandy needed, and the immense logistical problems faced by the allied force in france afterwards after one of the mulberries was put out of order, cherbourg port destroyed by the germans, and Antwerp not captured until late in 1944. The japanese had quite a stretch of water to cross (quite bigger than the Channel), no Mulberries at all (they were an allied improvisation), and would’ve needed a similar or bigger ammount of troops to succesfully invade US mainland.

            Nope-it was impossible. Japan never planned nor intended to invade the US mainland. It was well out of reach for them, and they always knew it.

          • Reg. says:

            From recollection there was a plan to attack the Panama Canal that came to nothing.

            Another interesting detail but about the Normandy landing. The Germans were convinced that where-ever the landing would happen it would have to be adjacent to at least one of the three local ports. They had no idea that the British intended bringing their own.

            The Mulberry caissons were planned to remain operational for 90 days in heavy weather if installed as intended. The US one was not and broke up prematurely even though it had achieved its main goal.

            Another interesting point was the matter of deceiving the enemy. Various disinformation plants suggested almost every possible date for the landing except the actual 5th 6th and 7th of June. This was regarded as negative information so it was arranged for a French General to feed the real dates into the German intelligence machine, which must have caused some loss of sleep. Fortunately the xx spies and the code breakers kept tabs on German reactions.

  16. m167a1 says:

    Hi Steven,
    The negative examples provided by Germany and many other totalitarian regimes over the ages are instructive as to what course events have taken in the past and may or may not take in the future. It is irrational to discard them as irrelevant as so many people seem to do.
    You are correct that the example of National Socialist Germany is over played for effect in the current gun control debate. This sort of hyperbole is sadly neither rare nor exclusive to one “side” or another in modern American politics although everyone like to point out example on the “other” side rather often then their own. That said, we ignore history at our own peril, and some paranoia in this case is in my personal opinion, healthy. We should always be paranoid where personal liberty is concerned. Guns, free speech, not being forced to quarter troops or whatever issue may not be important to you personally, but what will you do when something you care about is threatened? As Thomas Payne said, “He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.”
    Thanks for the conversation.

  17. A perspective that requires the truth be hidden or put aside is one unlikely to stand on that truth. Excellent article.

  18. lester ness says:

    You don’t have to be a ultra right winger to notice that the US has gotten pretty authoritarian. It’s not Nazi Germany, but it does have secret permanent imprisonent, torture, an alternative kangaroo court system, execution of citizens after they’ve been condemned by a secret committee. Even PR China (where I live and work) does not blow up dissidents with drones. The usual excuses I hear are pretty feeble: only OTHER people will suffer, and they’re bad anyway.

  19. Michael says:

    The Austrians “vote” to ratify their annexation has hardly a free one. German troops had already occupied the country following a coup d’etat by the Austrian Nazis, to prevent a referendum by their Chancelllor on whether to join Germany, thus it was held only after they had already done so. We have only the Nazi sources from the time for the “98% of the vote” data and in any case this happened without secret ballots, with the Gestapo monitoring how people voted. So it’s fair to say people who might have voted against it were intimidated not to, fearing retaliation, and the Nazi government simply could have fabricated most of the results. Over and above that, approximately 400,000 people were prohibited from voting at all (Jews and left-wing party members, around 10% of the population, obviously the most likely to have voted against it). This probably surprises no one, but it is important when Werthmann compares this with the US, which has (relatively, at least in comparison) free elections. As for the claims of Nazis being socialists, the confusions arises because they were a self-described “third way” between communism and laissez-faire capitalism, joining socialist policies with far-right racism, militarism and nationalism (hence their name National Socialist German Workers Party, that echoed both). Socialists and communists were long, bitter enemies of the Nazis from the beginning, and their first members were right-wing Army veterans organized specifically against the Communist Party of Germany. Their relationship with religion was complicated, reflecting different views within the Nazi Party (they were not a wholly amorphous blob, although tendencies were suppressed if Hitler disliked them). Overall it would be fair to say Hitler wanted himself above everything, not surprisingly. Dissident clergy along with anybody else who opposed them were persecutedl; most, though. went along. Hitler set up the Reich church to merge the Lutheran and Catholic Germans, but also made a concordat with the Vatican. The atheist and freethought groups were banned, along with abortion (they wanted German women to have more babies). The persecution of homosexuals is not mentioned by Werthmann, strangely enough, although it was a staple of Nazi ideology. While today’s right wing doubtless would stop short of sending people to death camps, they agreed on some particular issues, and thus some comparisons in that direction could also be made as Werthmann has done with the left. Neither would be accurate or fair. I personally met someone that fled Austria in 1938 (they were Jews). History should not be distorted to make political points.

    • hirider says:

      I found this from The Omega Letter website. It is a very powerful message for those who will hear……..

      1. The first school massacre in America was well planned and premeditated. As the four grown men entered the small rural schoolhouse, the school master pleaded for the safety of the school children inside. Within minutes the school master and nine small children were killed. The date was July 26, 1764.
      The school master was shot and scalped; the nine children were scalped, and two other children survived their injuries. Four children were taken prisoner. The four murderers were Lenape Indians who were ticked off at the results of the French and Indian War. This was when the Indians were the “bad” guys and the Christian settlers were the “good” guys. Under revisionist history, the opposite is now true.
      The settlers were mostly Christians, trying to escape King George and the Church of England. Their escape was successful, only to be met by the religion of the new land which was far from Judeo-Christian philosophy. The massacre became known as the Enoch Brown school massacre, named after the protective school master and happened in what is now Pennsylvania. Some know it as Pontiac’s Rebellion.
      The day before the massacre, the same warriors encountered a pregnant woman named Susan Cunningham and beat her to death. She was scalped, and her baby was cut out of her. When the warriors returned to their village showing off their scalps, an elderly chief scolded them and called the warriors cowards for killing the children.
      2. In 1927, 163 years after Pontiac’s Rebellion, there was the Michigan Bath School Disaster, the deadliest mass murder of children and their teachers in United States history.

      “There was a pile of children of about five or six under the roof and some of them had arms sticking out, some had legs, and some just their heads sticking out. They were unrecognizable because they were covered with dust, plaster, and blood. There were not enough of us to move the roof. It looked as if hardly anything held it at the top.” Monty J. Ellsworth, Eye Witness

      It seems the school treasurer had a fight with his wife and killed her. Then he went to the basement of the school and detonated dynamite, blowing up the school and killing 38, mostly children. After this he drove his car to the front of the school and set off another bomb, killing himself and two others.
      3. Another school mass murder occurred May 6, 1940 in South Pasadena, California. Recently fired principal, Vieling Spencer, killed five school officials before shooting himself.
      In 176 years, there were 3 school massacres that left 54 dead. Back in those days, God and religion, as well as prayer were fundamental parts of the school’s curriculum.
      There were no more mass murders until 26 years later in 1966 after God was banned from the public school system in 1963, at least as far as the curriculum went, by the U.S. Supreme Court with a little help from Madalyn Murray O’Hair and other atheists, as well as a few rabbis and preachers. I refer to the period before Madalyn Murray O’Hair’s drive to remove God from school via the “separation of church and state” clause as pre-MMO. The time period after, I refer to as post-MMO.
      So pre-MMO there were 3 mass killings and 54 murders.
      On January 8, 2013 Pastor Louie Giglio from Atlanta was invited to deliver the benediction at President Obama’s inauguration. One reason Pastor Giglio was invited was because of his hard work and dedication toward ending human trafficking.
      On January 10, Pastor Giglio withdrew from participation in the inaugural event and stated,

      “it is likely that my participation and the prayer I would offer will be dwarfed by those seeking to make their agenda the focal point of the inauguration.”

      The Presidential Inauguration Committee response:

      “As we now work to select someone to deliver the benediction, we will ensure their beliefs reflect this administration’s vision of inclusion and acceptance for all Americans.”

      The key words are “their beliefs,” not God’s beliefs. God had rules. Here is Pastor Giglio’s withdrawal message:

      “Due to a message of mine that has surfaced from 15-20 years ago, it is likely that my participation, and the prayer I would offer, will be dwarfed by those seeking to make their agenda the focal point of the inauguration. Clearly, speaking on this issue has not been in the range of my priorities in the past fifteen years. Instead, my aim has been to call people to ultimate significance as we make much of Jesus Christ.

      Neither I, nor our team, feel it best serves the core message and goals we are seeking to accomplish to be in a fight on an issue not of our choosing, thus I respectfully withdraw my acceptance of the President’s invitation…” – Pastor Louie Giglio, January 10, 2013

      As a pastor, he felt obligated to go with God, not man; because he realizes that God is not a myth nor Santa Claus. That’s what preachers and rabbis are supposed to do. He wanted to reflect God’s beliefs, not the President’s.
      So what was this terrible message that Pastor Giglio had preached a decade or so earlier?
      In Pastor Giglio’s sermon in the mid-90s he called homosexuality a “sin” and declared that “gay marriage” would risk undermining our society.
      Pastor Giglio, don’t feel bad; because you are in great company. In the same situation, based on the President’s new value system, God would have been uninvited, Jesus would have been uninvited and Moses would have been uninvited too. Here’s what God had to say about “homosexuality,” so why would Pastor Giglio say different?

      “Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom-both young and old-surrounded the house. They called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.” (Genesis 19:4-5 NIV)

      “Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.” (Leviticus 18:22 NIV)

      “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” (Leviticus 20:13 NIV)

      “Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians: 9-10 NIV)

      There are many more scriptures disagreeing with President Obama’s “agenda.” Apparently his agenda is not God’s agenda. God is out, narcissism is in. It’s been going on for 50 years. Could there be a correlation?
      How many school massacres have there been post-MMO? 174 dead, 21 massacres

      August 1, 1966: 16 dead, University of Texas-Austin
      November 12, 1966: 5 dead, Rose-Mar College of Beauty, Mesa, Arizona
      December 30, 1974: 3 dead, Olean, New York
      June 12, 1976: 7 dead, California State University, Fullerton
      January 17, 1989: 6 dead, Cleveland School, Stockton, California
      November 1, 1991: 5 dead, Iowa University of Iowa, Iowa City
      May 1, 1992: 4 dead, Lindhurst High School, Olivehurst, California
      February 2, 1996: 3 dead, Frontier Middle School, Moses Lake, Washington
      August 15, 1996: 3 dead, San Diego State University, San Diego, California
      October 1, 1997: 3 dead, Pearl High School, Pearl, Mississippi
      December 1, 1997: 3 dead, Heath High School, West Paducah, Kentucky
      March 24, 1998: 5 dead, Westside Middle School, Craighead County, Arkansas
      May 21, 1998: 4 dead, Thurston High School, Springfield, Oregon
      April 20, 1999: 15 dead, Columbine High School, Columbine, Colorado
      March 21, 2005: 9 dead, Minnesota school
      October 2, 2006: 6 dead, Amish School, Pennsylvania
      April 16, 2007: 32 dead, Virginia Tech, Virginia
      February 14, 2008: 6 dead, The Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, Illinois
      February 27, 2012: 3 dead, Chardon High School, Chardon, Ohio
      April 7, 2012: 7 dead, Oikos University, Oakland, California
      December 14, 2012: 29 dead, Sandy Hook Elementary School, Newtown, Connecticut

      The figures pretty much speak for themselves. Pre-MMO, there were 3 school attacks in 176 years with 54 murdered. Post-MMO, there have been 21 school attacks in 46 years with 174 murdered.
      We installed metal detectors, expel kids for having paper cutouts of guns and now want to install armed guards or armed school teachers at our kids’ schools. These are all bandaid approaches. If we want to solve the problem, rather than adapt to it, invite God back to school and just hope He accepts.

      “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord. (Isaiah 55:8 NIV)

      Not even for you Mr. President. God is not changing the rules, you are. Mr. President, do you believe that God is a homophobe, because his way is not your way? Just wondering.

  20. Julia says:

    Mike, why do you say that equal rights and removing religious displays from schools are “terrible deprivations that nobody should ever have to suffer through”?

    • Hmmm, good point. The first one probably doesn’t belong on that list. Not going to edit it now, but I see what you mean. I’m a pretty big fan of equal rights. That said, I wouldn’t want to live in a society where religion wasn’t allowed, any more than I’d want to live with religion forced upon me.

      Of course, if you asked Phyllis Schalfly those are probably the worst of all.

  21. Thank you for the voice of reason. I, too, immediately went to Snopes when I saw numerous conservative friends posting this on Facebook. Of course, they also post articles about onions curing the flu and children qualifying for surgeries based on the number of photo likes. Naturally, I wanted to check this out. Snopes let me down this time but you came through with flying colors. Thanks so much!

    • Yes, I looked at Snopes too and they said they are ‘still researching’ the matter. There is an excellent book entitled “Through Innocent Eyes – The Chosen Girls of the Hitler Youth” which goes into detail much of what Ms. Werthmann had covered. However, this book is based upon the personal journal of Gertrude Sandor,and her life story, much like Ms. Werthmann, who is the exact same age and grew up in the exact same country.

  22. Michael J. says:

    Awesome article, I’m gonna follow your writing.

  23. Garix says:

    Articles like the original one talking about how bad we have are insane. Do people realize that in 4 more years Obama will be gone. He’s no self-appointed dictator that wants to rule forever. Do people realize the Nazi’s set fire to the Reichstag (the German version of Congress) 1933?

    Well done Mike in your article here. They always say that people who forget history are doomed to repeat it, but comparing history like Ms. Werthmann’s is doing to now is just way off base. Mike more then covered that in this article. I minored in American history in college and let me tell you most people have NO clue as to what caused WW2 or lead to the rise of Hitler. Had the winning forces of WW1 been a little smarter there probably wouldn’t have been a WW2. But instead the winning sides created an economic situation in Germany which allowed a monster like Hitler to rise. But debating history here is pointless since most only know the very little they slept through in high school.

    As far as worrying about religion being in school that ship sailed LONG ago here in the United States. The public schools have not had prayer in them for years here (at least in the 1970’s/80’s when I went to school in NJ) and that’s the way it SHOULD be. Not everyone in this country practices the same religion and if you want your child to learn religion then send them to a private school that offers it.

    And thinking that our government is coming for our guns is ridiculous. There aren’t enough ATF/FBI agents in the world to disarm the rural areas of this country. And if you turned our troops on people where do you think most of the army regulars come from?
    The day we start paying 75% in taxes is the day you can start to worry. But this country has way more problems to face besides the big bad socialist Obama. Unless we address our spending/taxing and the FIAT dollar the world could face a HUGE economic crisis that COULD lead to the rising of another madman like Hitler.
    The next time a conservative person says to you that we are becoming a socialist country tell them this:

    The average income tax rate under Reagan in 1983 was 11.06 percent. Under Clinton in 1992, it was 9.18 percent. And under Obama in 2010, it was 4.68 percent. If they don’t believe you tell them to Google it. Reagan taxed the top Americas at 50% from 1982 to 1986. It then dropped to 38.5% in 1987 (almost the rate of now 2013) and finally to 28% in 1988 his last year in office.
    Let’s not forget that Bush #2 and Obama kept the rate at 35% from 2003 until today. Oh and Bush started two wars. You know what the top tax rates were during WW2 …

    1941 – 81%
    1942/43 – 88%
    1944-45 – 94%

    From 1945 until 1963 they never went below 82% and topped out at 92%! Talk about socialism!
    Here is the source: http://ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of-federal-individual-1.html
    Where was Ms. Werthmann back then? I mean she’s been in the USA for a while how come back then the socialist boogie man wasn’t coming for her? Oh wait Presidents back then weren’t HALF black.

    • CW says:

      Um, Garix, Really? You’re accusing her of being a racist? She’s been speaking out on the same subject since Bush was president.

      Your last statement reveals who is the real racist bigot on this thread.

  24. Michael G says:

    Wow. I just can’t believe how naive some people can be. Your gullibility is living proof of an “innocence betrayed.” So, rather than get into a long-winded argument involving what I find to be, some rather distressing “talking points,” I’ll just say this: I’m not going to let you hand MY country over to some extreme radical fascist governmental wannabe’s. I am going to do everything I can to a) survive, b) protect those I care about, and c) protect this country. For without our Constitutional Rights, we are nothing. If you think you’re safe with the status quo, you’re blind as a bat to what is happening right under your noses. You want proof? Do your own research. I’m not your freaking butler who will go and fetch for you whatever proof you think you need in order to change your perspectives which probably can’t be changed by any amount of substantive argument anyway. By all means, hang on to that lacunary version of the past and carry on with your “safe as milk” vision of the future all the while maintaining the profile of a narcoleptic sheep. But when the SHTF, just don’t say you weren’t warned.

    “Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.” ~Mark Twain

    Mike Rothschild. Any relationsh… naw, couldn’t be.

  25. forliberty1 says:

    With all do respect, Mike. I am baffled at the conclusions you’ve come to after hearing the story of Kitty Werthmann. I cannot even grasp my mind around the fact that you cannot see the comparisons between the situation in Austria and the situation of these United States. How could you even think that that could not happen here? It is indeed a slippery slope, and I, for one, would like to steer clear of it and keep my countrymen far from it as well.

    History is meant to teach us about the past so we can learn from our mistakes. In this case Kitty Werthmann has lived history and is now sharing her story (We of course cannot verify whether she has told the truth in it’s entirety, but we can at least give her the benefit of the doubt. Certainly horrible atrocities of this sort occurred at that time, and the research could be done to at least verify that the events she spoke of took place.). Regardless of what group she is affiliated with (and how we feel about that group),history is still history, and we would be fools to not learn from it. Yes, we must take everything with a grain of salt, but we still must open our eyes and learn from others.

    All the best to you, good sir!

  26. Anonymous says:

    Wake up America. Obama (Muslem Hitler) and the Democratic Party (Nazi Party) are distroying America, He has the muslem brotherhood members in the White house and has selected Two muslem senator sympatizers for very important positions in his cabinet He is long down the road to bringing America into the muslem fold.
    We must stop him soon or the United States of America will no longer exist.God must save America and every Americn must fight to save our freedom and the constituional government.We Trust Under God.

    • Steven says:

      I’m seriously going to create a Firefox/Chrome extension that highlights the phrases “wake up” and “open your eyes” so that I know at a glance when a crazy person just wrote something.

      • Oh, please do, I’ll be looking for it eagerly.

      • Anonymous says:

        When they come arrest you or put a bullet in your head. opening your eyes or waking up will be to late. Yes we are heading down that road, and the brainwashed people like you are allowing to happen. This is from a 50 year young AMERICAN. Who has watch my country slowly be destroy by bratnwashed people like you.

        • Steven says:

          My friend, I’m so sad for you that you really have this level of animus to believe that something like that could happen. At this point the only person that’s going to be putting a bullet in my head is some whacked out shooter while I’m at the mall trying to buy new shoes. No, America is a much better place than you give it credit for. I’m going to make a few blanket statements here, and you can correct me if I’m wrong. You are a staunch conservative that has voted republican in pretty much every election. You’re used to seeing things going your way and this is the first time in a long time that we’ve had a democratic majority in DC. Your “end of the world” mentality didn’t really start until Obama was elected. Oh sure, now that Bush is out of office you claim that he wasn’t the greatest president either because of the wars he lead us into but in your heart of hearts, you still love the old guy and don’t really assign him any of the fiscal blame for the situation we’re in and believe that it’s the current administrations fault (I think it’s a much bigger issue than that but everyone seems hell bent on blaming a president for our financial woes so…). Am I off at all? Since you’re so convinced that I’m a brainwashed sheep, let me help you understand where I’m coming from. I’ve never voted democrat IN MY LIFE until this last election. I actually voted for Ron Paul in 2008. It wasn’t until the parties (specifically the repubs) really became so polarized that I had to reevaluate what I believed in. I want equality. I should clarify, I want equality for EVERYONE. Not just the people that look and act like me. If that gets me a bullet in the head, then so be it. But through it all, through all the twisted media and election campaigns, the political divides, the fragmented friendships over inane ideologies, one thing that I have not lost is a love and respect for this great country. I find it deeply sad (and troubling) that you have lost such faith simply because things haven’t gone your way. You forget that the process allows you to have a voice. If all of us really feel that America has lost it’s way, then we vote and right the ship (which many, possibly a majority, would tell you is exactly what we’ve done). WE give the government it’s power. Maybe you can take a step back and recognize that, just this once, you’re a minority. And instead of sulking, just soak it in. Try and understand what it feels like not to be in control. And that’s okay. We still love you and value your opinions and contributions and before long, you’ll be right back on top. It’s the dance we dance. No bullets. No forced marches into death camps. Just ideas. Settle down a bit. This is how it’s always been. And, God willing, how it will remain.

    • Steve P says:

      Just exactly what is a mulsem?

  27. Anonymous says:

    It’s funny how you criticize her words as being so politically sided. If her words were, then yours would be so as well–using the similar judgment–as you do more than point out errors; you strongly express a side as well. Nothing wrong with anyone expressing that and writing their beliefs, but instead of criticism perhaps you should write your own supportive piece for your own arguments instead, would be much more positive and inspiring–as hers actually was. Not only that, having to work so hard to defend or criticize another’s work sometimes makes it seem like that work has more truth–that some people don’t want to hear because it is truth. To top it off, she lived through the experiences of Austria under Nazi Germany–have you experienced something very similar to that? While you can look things up and read and study about history and correct errors, which is great–she lived that history. And even with errors in statements, her life speaks stronger; you can’t compare with that actual experience no matter your studies, so while you correct errors in dates and statistics, which is good to know, only someone with experience as hers is qualified to critique her words, and the way you have written this actually lends more support to her words because of that. I actually read this expecting to find her story wasn’t true or that there were flagrant exaggerations, but come away thinking though she had errors she wrote to inspire from the experience she has had to prevent similar experiences from occurring. Her comments stand as they are qualified by the life she actually lived. You seem talented with writing, fact checking, and history, but need another direction.

    • There is an excellent book entitled “Through Innocent Eyes – The Chosen Girls of the Hitler Youth” which parallel’s Ms. Werthmann’s life growing up in Austria. This biography, however, is based upon Gertrude Kerschner’s personal journal, and her life story, growing up in Austria, becoming a member in the JM, Landjahr Lager, and the BDM, until the war was over. Gertrude came to America and called America her home! Even though Gertrude is no longer with us, her life story goes on and Ms. Werthmann is a testimony to LIVING HISTORY.

  28. Henry says:

    You might want to re-examine the basis for your so-called “rejection”. Things are happening a lot closer to her perceived chain of events than you think. I wish I had time to go over this with you point by point but I do not. Let’s just pick the last scenario. The rabid anti-gun-control folks will swear on a stack of [bleep] that gun registration is the start of gun confiscation. Sure that sounds crazy now. It did in Austria also. The difference is we have the 2nd Amendment and the Austrians didn’t. But what if the equally rabid gun-control folks manage to shove a gun-control bill into law and, essentially, negate the 2nd Amendment. Then we’re not too far from Austria anymore, are we? Here’s where the conspiracy nuts come in on the chorus: These attacks on our schools and malls are shadow-government sponsored to attack the 2nd Amendment. See? This whole thing gets messy real quick. I’m not even sure if Sheldon and four other people in the US could even follow it. And this is why I avoid politics like the plague.

  29. Sterling Louviere says:

    Many of you sound like something Karl Marx would call useful idiots!

    Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. C.S. Lewis on Tyranny

    Socialism, begets Fascism, in the totality of the state for the benefit of all becomes, Communism!

    We only need look at our hemisphere and Venezuela in our lifetime and the nationalization of oil and other industries for the benefit of the collective!
    Only once the the oppression of the state rises to an intolerable level in which people seek revolution as their solution. The government uses the full force and power to protect itself and seeks to abridge the rights of the oppressed do we have communism and or Dictatorship in which the government temporarily suspends the rights of the people permanently for there own protection!

    Both Republicans and Democrats have become masters of the illusion of safety for our own protection.

    The patriot act under George W. Bush a Republican was passed nearly unanimously with only 1 dissenting vote in the Senate and 357 to 66 in the House would be a good example of protecting us with benevolent tyranny.

    RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS WE HAVE NEEDLESSLY
    LOST IN THE NAME OF NATIONAL SECURITY

    Through the enactment of the USA PATRIOT Act and subsequent
    executive directives and regulations, essential rights and freedoms
    that were once guaranteed to all individuals have been substantially
    degraded. Many Americans still do not realize the significance of
    what we have lost. The resulting expansion of government powers,
    and the erosion of 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th and 14th Amendment
    rights and freedoms have transformed the United States.
    1st AMENDMENT FREEDOM OF SPEECH
    • The Patriot Act broadly expands the official definition of
    terrorism, so that many domestic groups that engage in
    nonviolent civil disobedience could very well find themselves
    labeled as terrorists.
    • The Government may now prosecute librarians or keepers
    of any other records if they reveal that the government
    requested information on their clients or members in the
    course of an investigation. It has become a crime for these
    individuals to try to safeguard your privacy or to tell you
    that you are under investigation.

    1st AMENDMENT FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION

    • Government agents may now monitor the First Amendment protected
    activities of religious and political institutions, and
    then infiltrate these groups with no suspicion of criminal
    activity. This is a return to domestic spying on law-abiding
    religious and political groups.
    • You may now be the subject of a government investigation
    simply because of the political, activist, or advocacy
    groups you are involved in, or the statements you make
    within these groups.

    1st AMENDMENT RIGHT TO ACCESS
    GOVERNMENT INFORMATION

    • A U.S. Department of Justice directive actively encourages
    federal, state, and local officials to resist and/or limit access
    to government records through Freedom of Information Act
    (FOIA) requests.
    • The Government has conducted immigration hearings in
    secret behind closed doors. Such proceedings were once
    open to the public. Hundreds, if not thousands, of immigrants
    have already been deported in secret.

    RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS WE’VE LOST SINCE 9-11

    4th AMENDMENT FREEDOM FROM UNREASONABLE
    SEARCHES &SEIZURES

    • Law Enforcement authorities may now conduct secret searches and wiretaps in your home or office
    without showing “probable cause.” They need only to claim that intelligence gathering is “a significant
    purpose” of their intrusion, even when the primary goal is ordinary law enforcement. They may also
    monitor where and to whom you send and receive e-mail, or where you go on the Internet, recording
    every e-mail address and website you have been in contact with.
    • Law Enforcement may now demand any personal records held by any source including your doctor,
    employer, accountant, or library. All they have to do is claim that it is related to an investigation into
    “terrorism.” The record keepers may not reveal that your records were provided to the government.
    • Judicial oversight of secret searches has been effectively minimized. The Patriot Act directs judges to
    consent to secret searches based only on the Government’s assertion that a “significant” purpose of
    an investigation is gathering information related to “terrorism,” as the government defines it.

    5th AMENDMENT RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS & FREEDOM FROM BEIN HELD WITHOUT CHARGE

    • Americans can now be jailed without a formal charge & without the right to confront the witnesses or
    evidence against them. American citizens are now being held in military jails without charge and without
    a clear path of appeal for their indefinite confinement.
    • Hundreds of Arab, Muslim and South Asian men were rounded up in the Ashcroft raids following
    September 11, and held for weeks without charges until all were cleared of terrorism charges

    6th AMENDMENT RIGHT TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION

    • Hundreds of U.S. residents have been detained for months at a time, and denied access to the advice
    and advocacy of an attorney. The Government may now monitor conversations between attorneys &
    clients in federal jails.
    • The Bush Administration filed papers in court that arguing that an American citizen held in a military
    jail without charge should be denied access to legal counsel because such access would interfere with
    the process of his interrogation.

    6th AMENDMENT RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL

    • The U.S. Government may now jail its residents and citizens indefinitely without charge & without a public trial.

    8th AMENDMENT FREEDOM FROM CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS

    • The U.S. Government has taken into custody individuals they identify as “material witnesses,” transported
    them across the country, and held them for months in solitary confinement without charge or
    contact with their family.
    • According to the Justice Department’s own Inspector General, immigrant men rounded up in the
    Ashcroft raids following September 11 and held in the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, NY
    were subjected to a pattern of “physical and verbal abuse.”
    14th AMENDMENT RIGHT TO EQUAL PROTECTION
    • Over 82,000 men from Arab, Muslim and South Asian countries registered with the Government
    under the Special Registration program. Over 13,000 are now in deportation proceedings. None
    have been charged with terrorism.

  30. Anonymous says:

    Werthmann may not have all her ducks in a row, but Charlotte Iserbyt does. Her book, Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, details quite extensively the turn of America as a constitutional republic to a socialized democracy. If Werthman is to be given any credit at all, it’s in her recognition of a slower paced decent into totalitarianism (by any name) for she has lived to see it happen once before.

    • Not only that, in Gertrude Kerschner’s biography, “Through Innocent Eyes – The Chosen Girls of the Hitler Youth,” backs up Ms. Werthmann’s life growing up in Austria during WWII. This book goes into explicit detail about what Ms. Werthmann would have experience – the mood, the tone, the excitement, the camaraderie and fellowship, while in the JM and BDM. This book goes into so much detail about how the HJ started, why it started, and then, moreso, into the indoctrination ceremony, the girls responsibilities, onward into Landjahr Lager, working in community, building strong work ethics, learning practical skills, household management, finances, and preparing the girls for adulthood! Yes! At 10 years of age, that is when they were being educated to become viable members of society. I give Ms. Werthmann kudos for being strong and courageous for speaking out for she is LIVING HISTORY and we MUST respect those who dare to speak out. 70 years ago, anyone would have been shot and killed immediately for speaking out. She might have just a few more years to live. She’s been through enough during her lifetime. Until you have walked in another person’s shoes, who are we to pass any kind of judgement? Only time will tell. Only then, will historians look back 70 years (in the year 2083) and say ‘what were they thinking at that time???”

  31. Anonymous says:

    Look go ahead and play the dumb ass game, but you had better wake up and smell the coffee.
    so how about when all this happens, lets hear no sniveling from the peanut section. ok?

  32. Anonymous says:

    Obviously the author of this article has already been sucked in! Are you so blind that you don’t see all the things happening around you? Welfare (Socialism) at an all time high, a suden push to take away our second amendment rights, and the list goes on. You Sir have already been sucked in!

  33. Joe Rizoli says:

    People knock Hitler but didn’t he appear on TIME magazines cover a few times?
    As to our Christian heritage. We had a Christian heritage but we lost it when they put together the Godless, polytheistic Constitution. “WeThe People” became the god of the United States which is why we are in the mess we are in today. Our nation is in deep sin. The Biblical maladictions are upon us as we speak.
    Go to the web site “mission to Israel” and read or listen to audio of Ted Weilands information on the Constitution. It will wake you up to a few things.

    • Steven says:

      Another “wake up”! I think “wake up” is slightly edging out “open your eyes” but it’s pretty close.

    • Yes, he appeared in 1938 as Time Magazines “Man of the Year.” This is written in “Through Innocent Eyes – The Chosen Girls of the Hitler Book.” Excellent biography about Gertrude Kerschner growing up in WWII in Austria, just as Ms. Werthmann did. Their stories as the same (without Obama of course), because Gertrude passed away in 1989.

      • Reg says:

        Don’t stop there Cynthia. The US had its own Nazi Party that dressed up in their uniforms and marched thought the streets in support of the dictator’s activities, while Time Magazine effectively gave the Hitler salute.

        Nazi Germany also had a representative in Hollywood to guide the film industry in what would be acceptable to German audiences under threat of banning. Then, having achieved control, insisted that film distributed through-out the world conform to the same restrictions or risk losing access to the German viewing rights. Never happened in Britain where Churchill had recognized that Hitler would never be appeased.

        The begging letter from Hollywood to the Fuehrer, complete with swastika and finishing with Heil Hitler, is still in existence. Even the already banned Warner Bros. conformed under pressure from the other film-distributors.

        In effect, Hollywood and Time magazine elected to suppress the Nazi treatment of Jews and the breaking of Armistice conditions in order to advance their profit margin. All a long way from the Henry Morganthau Plan which sought to lay waste to Germany only a few years later.

        I wonder if Time Magazine ever thought of leading with an apology on their front cover?

  34. Greg Machlin says:

    Oy gevalte, as they say. Mike, I give you immense credit for writing a thoughtful and sympathetic response. You’re kind. Possibly too kind. But we need more like you.

    Steve: Thanks for fighting the good fight.
    Miki: I think you win the internets for today.
    Michael @ 7:13 PM: major propos about the *actual* policies of the Nazis (including targeting left-wing groups, targeting unions, opposing abortion, persecuting gays and lesbians), and how they came to power
    Desiree: Nicely done.

    Re: Ms. Werthmann’s screed: A lot of people are arguing. “She lived through it.” Yeah, so did Art Spiegelman’s parents (see “Maus.”) Although they’re deceased now, they weren’t exactly manning the barricades for the Republicans. There’s a lot of Holocaust survivors, and their descendants out there. You think every single one is a conservative Republican?

    The Democratic party gets a minimum of 70% of the Jewish vote. Without fail. You don’t have to look too far in that vote to find either survivors or their direct descendants.
    But no. This one person says “This is like the Nazis,” and you all want to jump on board without the slightest bit of critical thought.

    Could you maybe wait until, I dunno, Obama has *one* Jewish person gassed to death? Or builds *one* death camp? (Or killed a gay person. Let’s not forget the Nazis hated the gays.) Guys. I opposed Bush. I frequently thought he made decisions that were bad for this country. I believe his election in 2000 raises serious questions about the process. But AT NO POINT IN HIS PRESIDENCY did I ever think that he had anything but the best of *intentions* for our country. (On Cheney, I politely decline to comment). Nor, for that matter, do I think John Boehner, current Republican Speaker of the House, is a Stalin-in-waiting, a Pol-Pot-in disguise. Heck, he plays golf with Joe Biden. How bad can be be?

    How desperate do you have to be, how fearful of your fellow American citizens do you have to be, to think that they will stand by and let you be put in death camps? Look. I don’t own a gun. But I make this solemn promise: if somebody comes along to try to lock you up solely for your political beliefs, or your religious beliefs, I will grab whatever weapons I can get, and I will defend your right to believe what you believe, and say what you say. I will fight, and I will get arrested, and they will lock us up in the same cell.

    You’d do the same for me, right?

    Mmmmm. I hope you would. But maybe you wouldn’t. Maybe… it kinda feels good to hate. (And yes, I’m sure some of you are going to cite the fringe folks who called Bush a Nazi. They were fringe, and we did our best to shun them.) Maybe you guys just hate me, and my fellow Obama-voters that much. I did vote for Obama. Twice. Not only that, but campaigned for him. Maybe we’ve lost the point where it’s taken as a default that our fellow American citizens may disagree with us on policy issues–serious disagreements–but we all want what’s best for the country.

    I count at least 14 different people on this thread who have either directly stated or implied that, because of Barack Obama’s carbon-copy-of-Eisenhower, center-left policies, that we’re goin’ Nazi. Fascism is here.

    (end of Part 1)

  35. Greg Machlin says:

    Part 2:
    14 is enough to be a trend.

    If someone says to me, “Greg, I disagree with you on tax rates. Marginal tax rates need to be lower, not higher, to stimulate growth”–well, that’s a person I can talk to. And we can look at the evidence, hash things out, debate. But if someone says, “Greg, you’re a Nazi who wants to kill me and take away my freedoms”… I can’t really reassure you otherwise. That’s a conversation-ender. No matter what I say, you’ll chalk it up to my Nazi cleverness. (Some of the more polite ones might just think I’m a “sheep.” Great. So I’m not a Nazi, I’m just accidentally helping them out and am too stupid to defend my own freedoms.)

    I get that you guys are in an unfamiliar position. The last time a Democratic President won re-election, in 1996, he got under 50% of the vote and you had both the House and the Senate. You haven’t been *here*–with a Democrat winning re-election +50% of the vote, and the Democrats having at least one Chamber–since 1944. That is a long, long, long time. Democrats were here as recently as 2004. We know what it is to have a majority of Americans disagree with us. But I get it, sort of, this is very new to you. Having only one Chamber. And one where the Democrats actually got more total votes.

    What happened? Did you guys think you were always going to win everything, forever? And now that you don’t, you can’t take a breath, can’t take a step back and say, “Hmmm. A majority of Americans disagree with my vote, or my party’s policies. I guess we’ll just have to do a better job of expressing them, and find better candidates.”

    You have to think of us as greedy freeloaders who want free stuff? And that’s not even enough? Now you have to think of us, your fellow Americans, as Nazis? How does this work? Do you think we’re going to ship our neighbors and friends off to death camps–built on American soil–because we disagree with you on taxes? Or pollution? Or marriage rights for gays? Who? Who is coming to lock you up? Where are they going to put you? Do you really think 51.7% of all voting Americans hate you? Because I cannot imagine living with that level of fear, and thinking that many people hate me. I disagreed with a majority of my fellow Americans in 2004. And in 2002. And in 1994. But I never saw them as Nazis. Or evil. I saw them as people who loved this country like I love it, but who had different ideas on how to keep it great and make it better. What the hell’s wrong with you that you can’t do the same for us?

    Oh, and for crying out loud, for anyone still reading, you need 67 votes in the Senate (out of 100) and 290 in the House (out of 435) to even PROPOSE an amendment to the Constitution, AND THEN 38 state legislatures would have to pass it. Democrats… we don’t even have a majority in the House. We are a full 100 seats away from having 290. And even then you’d have conservaDems peeling off. I guarantee you Obama doesn’t want a 3rd term. Among other reasons, when he tries to help people get health care, they call him a Nazi.

    • Steven says:

      Thank you, sir, for your brilliant insight. While this is obviously an ongoing dialogue, I’m not sure that anything more needs to be said. Beautiful!

      • m167a1 says:

        Perspective is a funny thing. While I must compliment Greg on a comprehensive elucidation of his opinion, brilliant is not the adjective I would have chosen to describe it.

        I lack the dedication necessary to go back and deconstruct Greg’s maniacal rant line by line. But I have the impression Greg is rooting for a sports team rather than devoting thought to his words. That said, it is possible that he is indeed serious in which case I must reluctantly conclude that there is no longer sufficient common ground between the two ideological sides for us to co-exist.

        Speaking for myself, I can think of no redeeming qualities in the positions and actions of the present administration and its party. It is my distinct impression that our system is being used to impose an ideology on our country, one that it anti-ethical to individual freedom our Constitution and our national sovereignty. These are not questions of policy or a democrat / republican issue, subject to change from one election to another. They are my inalienable rights, and the most precious gift I can leave to my children and I do not intend to fail them.

        Will all due respect to Greg, I can only suggest you read more history in the hope you might reconsider. Sadly there are so many quislings such as Greg out there who consistently act against their own best interest that I strongly suspect this will end in tears for everyone.

        Thank you for a lively discussion.

  36. I want to thank everyone who has left comments so far, including the people who disagree with me. As long as we can have a free and open discussion about issues like this, there’s hope for us.

    I’m guessing a lot of people reading this are new to Skeptoid, so please go to the top of the page and check out the podcast. Brian puts a ton of work into it each week, and virtually every episode gives me some new piece of information or way of approaching a subject, many of which I’ve used in real life debates.

  37. Greg Wright says:

    Funny thing, perspective is…
    – Something she has and you apparently don’t: Most of the folks I have known over the years who lived though that evil period have a view MUCH more similar to hers, than yours.
    – While I am somewhere in between on this, I believe we should listen to our elders when they take the time to warn us on something with which they have relevant experience.
    – Before you make this assumption, you should find as many surviving folks from this period and see if they agree with you or not.
    – I have known quite a few from both sides of the pond over the years, and find that they see the writing on the wall based on our debt and the factors that will come into play once we default (and we will – when?? Unknown, but 2015-2017 is my guess)…..

    • Steven says:

      As has been pointed out earlier in this conversation, the Jewish vote is 70% democrat. Just how exactly do you explain that big of a disparity? If we were really that steeply headed toward fascism, why would victims and their families vote so clearly democrat? I would be interested to hear an explanation that falls in line. I understand we’re all debating the words of one woman that was there, but she wasn’t the only one. There are MANY with historical experience and perspective that would disagree with her. While she may have perspective, it’s HER perspective. I give her the utmost respect and sympathy for what she experienced, but it doesn’t cloud my judgement to the fact that her experiences may be clouded with her personal biases, like experiences, etc…

      • m167a1 says:

        The future defies prediction and the argument from experience fallacy works poorly in any case no matter which side you are arguing.

        The perspective of any individual including you and I is colored by our view of many things. She is correct that we are doing today, many things the fiend with the little mustache did in the 30s.

        The correctness of her conclusions remains to be seen. Let us hope she is mistaken.

        • Steven says:

          I absolutely agree that we each have our own paradigm and as unbiased as any of us may want to be, it’s pretty much impossible to be COMPLETELY free of our own prejudices.

          While I’m sure some comparisons could be made to America today and WWII Germany, I’m sure many comparisons could be made of EVERY US administration. But I tend to see the differences and they are too vast and plentiful for me to ignore. I guess time will indeed tell, but I for one choose to believe in the good in our country rather than see evil in every corner. I can honestly say that it has made my life brighter. And for those that would say I’m naive to the “facts”. I would say that I see the facts as I see them, and you see them as you see them. Such is the nature of truth. We each interpret it as we choose.

  38. jwagner says:

    Just as you believe today, so too did Kitty and so many of her fellow Austrians back then; that it could never come to this. That government could never reach this level of tyranny, that we could never compromise our morals. I’m sure Kitty and many Austrians had felt that way. But it did happen, and it can happen again!

  39. Badger40 says:

    Perhaps people would think about this basic thing, regarding many chaotic situations.
    No one ever believes things can really get badly out of hand.
    It’s always usually such a surprise to the majority of people.
    And yet, there are the few that were shouting on the sidelines a warning.
    History does repeat itself in many ways. Humans never change.
    And so it goes.

  40. Anonymous says:

    I definitely concur with Badger40. Clearly people seem to have already forgotten Neville Chamberlain’s Ironic statement of having achieved “peace in our time” through a series of negotiations with Hitler…I am not saying Obama is or IS NOT like hitler…a am making an attempt to keep my politics out of it. But by saying “Obama is nothing like Hitler” as many people seem to want to state here is doing the same thing that you people criticize Kitty for…putting a political skew to your observations. Criticizing an author for biasing their statements is, in (once again, my OPINION, my BIAS) a totally ludicrous observation to begin with….the astute learner listens to a presenter regardless of bias, my even be offended by the bias, but then does his best to compartmentalize and say okay…WHAT elements of this are fact and what elements are open for interpretation.
    The statements she makes…about gun regulation…about socialized health care…are there parallels…YES…undeniably. To say “this cannot happen now because the environment is different…” is so unbelievably foolish. It totally fails to address whether the actions themselves lend toward generating a totalitarian dictatorship, but rather depends on varia ble outside factors…like “we can choose who we elect…or our economy is not THAT BAD”…in what way does this determine whether gun control, or socialized health care, or….you name it…how does this prove that these are either bad or good? this type of reasoning is like saying….its okay to shoot a gun at someone…if he has a flak jacket on…you can support whatever political doctrine you wish, but using the “flak jacket” of greater economic stability, or liberties (Which we have now and could lose tomorrow) fails to lend any credence to arguments levieed against Ms. Werthman….my issue is not with any particular politics…but just HOW FAR will you stray from the GOOD DEBATING practices and slip into politicking, all the while countering with your own politics?
    Chamberlain and many others never believed Hitler would go so far…but he DID. Who here knows Obama, or any other politician, well enough to say “he definitely wants to be a dictator” or he “definitely does not want to be a dictator” such arguments, based upon a political image that is his WORK image….who among us beats our wives at work…or flagrantly steals….the majority of us put on a “front” which may or may not represent who we are or who we really want to be. Personally, I don’t even know my own NEIGHBORS or family members well enough to determine…who is depressed, or who is a sociopath, or who won the lottery…how can you even imagine to make such a sound personal assessment of an individual who few if any of you know personally. AND EVEN IF YOU DO KNOW OBAMA personally, I would venture to say you are STILL not qualified to make that assessment. I am a conservative, but I am open to sound logical argument….the precept of minimizing gun control, or government institutions, is that “absolute power corrupts absolutely.” It may be that, our country does, in fact move toward Socialism. It may prove that, despite the risks, many of the things we conservatives fear may never come to pass…but to deny possible outcomes completely based upon malleable environmental factors….that is in all honesty, just plain stupid.
    Now I will make clear MY BIAS. I am a conservative. But, Even being a conservative, I dont deny that there is a POSSIBILITY that socialized healthcare could prove beneficial for a time….but my premise is that over a long period of time, the depravity of humanity will, sooner or later, lend itself toward corruption of the system, whereas the capitalist model can utilize both the benevolence and depravity of humanity…in other words, when one person or group’s greed gets out of control, it will eventually be countered by the rights and greed of other individuals….in a socialist system however, where everything is held in common, when one person’s greed gets out of control, the balance of power and wealth can shift rapidly in one direction…without checks and balances. In an IDEAL situation…either a capitalist or Socialist model CAN WORK…but the issue is, there is not such thing as an ideal situation, and you have to ask yourself WHAT SYSTEMS WILL WORK IN A SITUATION WHERE NOTHING CAN BE PERFECTED….of course, this is also dependent on world views…such as whether you believe people are naturally good, naturally bad, neutral, etc…..
    So you may defend any system you like, you may possess any bias you like…but it is actually MORE honest to VOICE that bias up front, than to attack another person’s bias. And if you want o attack a bias, at least do us all the favor of countering with FACTS…rather than simply your own bias…..this argument was shot down from the beginning, when the AUTHOR said

    “I’m not interested in going through the email line by line to debunk every claim. I’m not a historian.”

    Pardon me but, you made this an issue of FACTS…and if you are unwilling to debunk perported facts, then, in short, you wish only to voice your own bias.

    “truth has no political party, doesn’t choose sides and doesn’t vote. It needs only to be expressed honestly without embellishment.”

    But how does one get at truth without “debunking every claim”? It is not possible. And I will say, no where in the article that I read from Ms. Werthman did she claim NOT to be biased…

    Here on the other hand, I read a mythical premise…and by mythical I mean, it is once again an IDEALISTIC POSSIBILITY but in fact essentially never happens. We all use information to support a bias….sometimes that bias coincides with the truth, other times it does not. But the idea that people can present truth without bias…

    BIAS: an inclination of temperament or outlook; especially : a personal and SOMETIMES unreasoned judgment

    In other words, a bias MAY OR MAY NOT COINCIDE WITH the truth…one may judge that one will fall when one steps off a cliff, one may judge otherwise, both are personal judgements, and one is actually correct, while the other will be proven wrong shortly…

    ….this inidicates to me a distinct lack of awareness of WHAT BIAS is, and what LEARNING is…..to say there are “parallels between Hitler and Obama” IS a biased observation, and is also, in some respects, the truth, as far as present knowledge indicates….if you look at her claims, they say seem to be valid observations…the only way for example to debunk the gun registration claim, is to prove that Hitler did not in fact require gun registration…now WHETHER you personally assesses these parallels as great enough to pose a threat or not, that is another matter entirely…but to write off statements as bias without debunking them is as if one were to endeavor to deny gravity, and then walk away without ever doing any research to debunk the theory of gravity…Newtonian physics has essentially been replaced by a more accurate theory….but only by those who actually CARED TO DEBUNK PREVIOUS information….those who merely spouted philosophical opinions are, for the most part, dead and forgotten. In my case, I am mostly spouting biased rhetoric with only a few factual observations… but I readily admit it. And while I began with a relatively neutral assessment, it can be clearly seen that I have digressed into my own personal bias, just as Kitty, and the author of this article did.

    • tabouley says:

      Why do you insist on talking about “socialized health care” when you know it is not being implemented in this country? AND why did every industrialized country implement some form of health care that is either highly regulated by the government, or is actually single payer, after WWII? Have all these countries built death camps, imprisoned left wingers, homosexuals, Jehovah’s WItnesses, the intelligentsia, along with the ruling party’s political opponents?
      We have “socialized” health care for elderly and disabled people in this country, extending it, (which Obama has not proposed, btw) to everyone is not going to institute the Fourth Reich in the USA.
      Please get a dose of reality. People still claim that Obama is “soft” on illegal immigration, when he has deported more people than Bush, that he is “going to take away our guns”, when he actually liberalized gun laws in this country. Mentally ill people now have the right to get their guns back because of the NRA, hope you are happy.

  41. John Smith says:

    Got the email yesterday. Had never heard of her, started searching and landed on this site, and many others. Thanks Mike, for your voice of reason.

    Why do (some) people believe Ms Werthmann’s theories?

    It took me a while to get it. A good portion of the facts she brings up about Hitler are true. To use the word “elected” is a far stretch for a referendum after the fact, under strict German control. But Hitler (Austrian himself) was indeed welcomed in Vienna. As a kid, growing up in Europe in the 60’s, I saw the (granted, German) films of the joyful atmosphere in Austria when he arrived. Yet her conspiracy theories would get zero traction in Europe.

    And that’s exactly the point. She establishes her “credibility” as an “expert” by implying that this was kept a secret. Reaction: “So she knows more than us! She must be right on all accounts!”
    If many Americans believe Hitler took Austria by force, who is to blame? Education, a lack of interest in the outside world, the movie industry, lazy media, you name it, but what’s that got to do with our situation?
    Nothing. Nichts. Nada. Rien. Diddly squat.

    What it does though, is reinforce what some in other countries think about us.
    “They don’t know a thing about history, yet constantly want to mess with the rest of the world”. Leading to imperialistic theories, just as ludicrous as Ms Werthmann’s own.

    I’ve had it with those immigrants who come up with a scary narrative to peddle to fringe groups. Like Wally Shoebat, the self-proclaimed Palestinian terrorist.
    Educate people, yes. Scare them needlessly (often for profit), a loud no.

    • homosexuals and blacks were killed by Hitler too says:

      Clearly, you didn’t read what she she said. .
      You read mike’s op-ed and thought you knew it all. Like the experts you love to hate.
      Try pointing with your thumb.
      And let’s examine who exactly will do the educating. The lefties?? The Righties?? the on- the- fence unwilling to commities ??

      • John Smith says:

        I read her (2003) email 3 times. Read up again on the history of the Anschlüss (in various sources and languages) to confirm that my recollections (and her simplified version) were correct, before making a statement. Also read many of her interviews, incl. a more recent one where she claims immigration from Mexico is part of a plot orchestrated by the Russians, linking this to the need for guns.
        Your groundless assumption that I have no clue confirms the point I made: folks believe her because she starts off by manipulating their ignorance about history. She’s an “expert”.
        History education should have no left or right slant. Facts are facts: Hitler was welcomed in Austria.
        It also strikes me that her 2003 email didn’t get much traction for years. Only around 2009 did a certain crowd pick it up as proof that we are “doomed”. Coincidence?
        I do agree we’re in trouble, but blaming it on some obscure outside influences is totally unproductive.

  42. Haddassah says:

    This opinion of Mike Rothchilds is quite ironic consider he is a Jew. A “Rothchild” even.
    Ironic that while he decries Kitty, he never acknowledges the real horror. The Holocaust. The pits of human ashes I couldn’t fill with 50 years of home heating fires.
    Mike makes claims of his lack of historical knowledge.
    Yet regurgitates shameless propaganda.
    It is mostly that he doesn’t like what Kitty is saying. Mike, must you personally experience hate to understand it? Obama in his fathers dreams as his torch -hates America. Our “imperialism”
    ..but Afghanistani’s are up for murder.
    The trouble with liberals is facts are useless.
    Isaiah the prophet describes Jews aptly. But Jeremiah 2:13 takes them to town.
    Since Mike rejects his own “Zionism” he will accept his own enemy as his brother.
    No one blamed the light saber.
    Sha’alu shalom Yerushalayim.

    • I didn’t bring up the Holocaust because it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. But if I were to bring it up, it would only strengthen my point. If Barack Obama is doing to America what Adolf Hitler did to Germany and Austria, where are the camps? Where are the deportations and ghettos and gas chambers? For that matter, where is his Reichstag Fire? Where is his Night of the Long Knives? Where is the lust for power and living space?

  43. Anonymous says:

    I found my way to this article by way of a Facebook post. I’d like to direct attention to something that just took place in Boise, Idaho (an area that is often considered primarily “conservative”:
    The Boise City Council and Mayor unanimously approved an ordinance that prohibits “discrimination” against homosexuals, bisexuals, “transgender” people, etc. Anyone found to be engaging in such alleged “discrimination” -in housing, employment, or public accomodation (which, as I learned, includes pretty much everything) will be subject to monetary fines and up to 6 months in county jail – UNLESS they submit to government-sponsored “sensitivity training” for themselves and (if applicable) their employees. While the ordinance has an exemption for “religious institutions”, there is no question that it already is an infringement on religious freedom; Christians who may be business owners or apartment building managers will plainly be expected to ignore any conscience-driven conviction that might prompt them to exclude someone engaging in the “GLBT” lifestyle, or face jail time or “re-education.” And no one with any brains is going to believe that they won’t come after churches next.
    As disturbing as this ordinance is, what is perhaps more disturbing to me is how few of Boise’s citizens seem to be concerned about it. As I read Ms. Werthmann’s account, the fact that Austrians apparently welcomed Hitler with open arms really struck home, because right here where I live – in a “conservative” stronghold – people had the opportunity to speak publicly, to voice concerns, to do SOMETHING. And only a handful (maybe 8-10) showed up at the public hearing to express opposition, while many times that number voiced their support, along with local newspapers, etc. The City Council effectively came right out and said, “we are going to indoctrinate you, or send you to jail,” and hardly anyone batted an eye. It seems like almost no one believes that this can happen, even while it IS HAPPENING!
    Unfortunately, this is the inevitable result of human nature. We have a tendency to get comfortable, fat, and happy, and to flock to “leaders” who just say what people want to hear, regardless of what history has repeatedly proven about such leaders. If things continue at the present rate, I’d be surprised if this “Nazi-like” process even takes 5 years!

    • Steven says:

      Well, that’s the same thing, except for the fact that Hitler PROMOTED and FORCED discrimination instead of trying to get rid of it. So, yeah, I guess it’s not at all the same.

      Did you ever think that nobody showed up to voice their concerns because maybe everyone supported the idea of equality? This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. All of those people are still allowed to hate on the gays all they want. They can even go and protest at gay funerals if they feel like it (as Westboro Baptist Church has shown us). But yes, in most places, sexuality is a protected class and when it comes to housing and employment there are fair housing acts employment discrimination laws that must be adhered to. Free speech doesn’t mean, “I get to do whatever the hell I want to whenever and wherever”.

    • John Smith says:

      There is truth in both your (Anon & Steven) comments, imho.
      In Hitler’s era laws came from the top down. Unthinkable that there would even be a hearing at City level. We have clear, well established layers of legislation that defy any comparison with a “Nazi-like” process.
      But yes, there’s a “tendency to get comfortable, fat and happy”. It is much easier to sit, type and protest on your keyboard, in the comfort of your own home, than to get up, dress up, get out and go protest (in a civil fashion – in public) something you disagree with.
      And if the LBGT community, whose tactics – not principles – I sometimes disagree with, was successful in Boise and elsewhere it is precisely because they are so much more motivated to defend their rights than others who didn’t even realize they (LBGT) had a problem.

      Bottom line:
      Our political system bears no likeness whatsoever to Austria in 1938, but yes, please let your voice be heard where / when it counts.

  44. newman5 says:

    Dear Mr. Rothschild,

    With all due respect, for you to say that Ms. Werthmann is “selling” a “distorted view of history” reveals both your ignorance and your arrogance.

    She is not saying that everything is EXACTLY the same now in America (interest rates etc.*) as in Austria before Hitler took over. She is making the point that the Austrian people had become complacent, unsuspecting and desperate, for reasons eerily akin to what’s happening in America today. She is also obviously pointing out many of the ear-marks of the socialistic onslaught in Austria – the blind deification of a national leader, the government dictated “logic”, the “morality” and the removal of God, all heavily propagandized through State-run media, the approach to gun control, and how many of the other oppressive, regulatory “solutions” that were imposed by Hitler’s government, are also most certainly all too similar, if not identical to what we are dealing with in America as we speak.

    To ignore her message and write it off as “distorted” and merely “an argument based on emotion, hyperbole and disdain” is beyond foolish… it is in fact irresponsible and dangerous.

    * As far as the interest rates in America today being so vastly different from what existed in Austria and most of Europe during the late 1930’s, you need to do some research into what is really going on today, economically. We are on the precipice of the very same economic situation. In a nut shell, all that is holding us back from total economic collapse is that a.) there is A LOT more money involved today (which is necessarily prolonging the collapse) and b.) the money supply itself is being heavily manipulated by our government (printing $1 billion per day) and other governments, in order to maintain the illusion that things are all under control. They are not. Things are about to take a serious turn for the worse. Hopefully, by the time you and others of your ilk finally recognize that Ms. Werthmann’s warnings were not so far off, it won’t be too late.

  45. Landjahr Lager Seidorf – 1941

    Hello Everyone!

    Thank you for allowing me to post on your page.

    In 1941, my mother, Gertrude Kerschner, wrote a personal journal (complete with photos) when she was in “Landjahr Lager Seidorf” (Country Service Camp) while serving in the BDM. Coupled with neo-pagan rituals, songs, and folklore, this book captures the self-actualization of 10 year old Gertrude as she progresses from childhood and living in poverty, to adolescence and becoming ‘one’ with her country. Gertrude met and married my father, PFC Robert Sandor – 1280th Army Corp. of Engineers Battalion, Company “C,” – 65th Infantry (Battle Ax), and moved to Greenwich, Ct.

    The main emphasis of this historical, non-fiction, true-life story is the moral character upbringing of the girls in Country Service Camp. The strong work ethics, high moral principals and standards that my mother instilled in me were derived from her service in the BDM.

    I am the voice of millions of German/Austrian grandmothers, and mothers who are silent and are still in fear of speaking about this time to their daughters or granddaughters. For, people have told me this is the opposite of the Anne Frank diary. I just thought you’d like to know.

    Please feel free to pass my name along if you know anyone who is interested in this subject and becoming a ‘friend’ on Facebook. Thank you very much for your time.

    ~ Cindy ~

    The book is now available in US at: http://bookstore.balboapress.com/Products/SKU-000607829/Through-Innocent-Eyes.aspx, including: Barnes & Nobel, Amazon.com, ALibris.com, Powells.com.

    In England: WHSmith.co.uk, Waterstones.com, Abebooks.com, Bookshop.Blackwells.com, Tesco.com.

    To see the actual journal, please visit: http://cynthiasandor.blogspot.com/

  46. We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are. – Anais Nin. A lady that has been through so much suffering deserves to have her view point.

    • Jennifer has written the most intelligent comment by far on this post! Remember, one day, God willing, we will be as old as ms. Werthmann – how would you like to be respected by others? Badgered, belittled, and knocked down for the wolfs to devour you? Ms. Werthman has every right to speak her mind, because she deserves it!

  47. What is distorted here is the article’s title. There is nothing distorted about Ms. Werthmann’s history lesson. The author is saying that her view of present day America is distorted, as well as her comparisons to it. But that is not a distortion. Mr. Rothschild simply does not agree with her, which is fine, but that doesn’t mean her account of the history she lived through was inaccurate, or exaggerated, which is the only purpose in titling the article “History Distorted”.

    Besides, anyone who has respect for their elders would do well to heed their warnings. I have spoken to many people who lived under the iron fist of communism in the former USSR that told me in 2008 that we should be concerned about Obama. That his rhetoric is eerily similar to the communist dictators in the police state they grew up in. Now those same people are warning that the policies they see the current administration are pursuing are eerily similar to the dictatorial removal of freedoms they experienced in their home countries. Should we discount all of these people as right wing zealots and “teabaggers” and extremists?

    I think not. We should heed their warnings, because they lived through things we did not. They experienced the soft tyranny of socialism and the hard tyranny of communism, which we Americans have never seen in this country. And this laissez faire attitude that “it will never happen here” is just plain dangerous. Jews who had escaped the death camps came back to the ghettos to warn people of the gas chambers; and their stories were discounted as alarmist fiction. Most of the ghetto Jews still willingly went to the death camps wanting to believe in the Nazi propaganda lies. And the fact is that it HAS happened here, in the past century. Native American men, women and children were rounded up and murdered or starved to death by the U.S. government. Blacks in the south were routinely lynched, murdered, tortured, and raped without any intervention or repercussions. Tens of thousands of Japanese Americans were rounded up and sent to internment camps for years during the second world war. Many times their homes, businesses and possessions were sold while they were gone. So to say the we, in the United States of America are immune, that our government is not capable of these things is just patently false and is a denial of reality.

    We would all do well to heed Ms. Werthmann’s account as a history lesson, warning, and a reminder of what men, and the governments they institute, are capable of. Because if we don’t learn from history, we are destined to repeat it. Learning the lessons from the past is the only way to ensure that the words “Never Again” have any meaning.

  48. O.o says:

    I’m surprised at the author for having the audacity to question a FIRST PERSON account of a woman that compares our current state of affairs with her personal account, as get effort to educate ignorant people of America, such as the author. Read and research our founding fathers young man.

    • I’m not questioning her account of life in Austria in 1938. I’m questioning her comparison of it to life in the United States over the past five years.

      • Bradford says:

        Are you not able to admit even the slightest hint of similarity with the current political climate and those historical topics you list in your own article? And can you then admit that it is healthy to explore those similarities, even if they are benign.

        Hitler Targets Education – Eliminates Religious Instruction for Children
        Equal Rights Hits Home
        Hitler Restructured the Family Through Daycare
        Health Care and Small Business Suffer Under Government Controls
        “Mercy Killing” Redefined
        The Final Steps – Gun Laws

        Worst case scenario, these modern day comparisons are in their infancy and could become full blown horrors. Best case scenario, these comparisons are innocuous and serve to remind us of what can happen when combined with sinister motives.

        Attempting to further a political ideology based on persuading people that obvious comparisons are not applicable, will only persuade those who are already committed to your ideology. But, maybe THAT is the point?

        • newman5 says:

          Amen Bradford!

          Also, the economic similarities are indeed uncanny, considering how the gross manipulation of the money supply, by Left-leaning economists controlling it today, is all that really makes things APPEAR much different from 1939 Germany/Austria/Europe.

          And Stephen, Your post actually makes very little if any sense…

          The “one woman” you are referring to, witnessed one of the most powerful lessons in the history of Mankind. To brush it off as somehow less than worthy of our full attention and respect, or to grant equal respect to the subjective interpretation of her account, by one who, in all likelihood, has had relatively NO real-life-experience in the same arena, and who is thus rendered far less qualified to comment on the subject, is sheer foolishness. Not that the ignorant and unqualified don’t have the right to voice their opinions… sometimes they make good points.

          Furthermore, it blows my mind how or why some people feel that those in the US government are somehow above reproach, compared to “evil” corporate executives etc.. I suggest that you stop buying into all the Left wing media propaganda and think for yourself.

          • Steven says:

            I wonder if you would give her story as much credibility if it didn’t happen to line up with your own political agenda. But I believe if you would re-read my post, I in no way brush off her story. I personally question the comparison between Nazi Austria and the current United States, but that’s just my opinion because as you so astutely pointed out, I have no real-life experience with the holocaust (as I’m assuming, neither do you), which somehow makes me unworthy of entering the conversation, I guess? I take issue with all the people here who vilify those that even dare question the comparison. Like many others on this blog post (on both sides of the issue) you offer nor real substantive argument as to whether or not what Kitty Werthmann said is indeed occurring other than to point out that she lived through it. If human history has taught us anything, it’s that memories change over time and that witnesses of an event are not necessarily that accurate.

            Now, you said, “To brush it off as somehow less than worthy of our full attention and respect… is sheer foolishness.” I’m fine with that. So, here you go. A bunch of people passionately arguing their points. What more do you want? Or when you say that it demands our attention, do you really mean that it demands our 100% unquestioning acceptance? It gets a little frustrating being called a “sheep” so often, but when I dare to question something am told, “Come on, just accept it! How dare you question her?”

          • newman5 says:

            Steven, If you look further back in all the posts, you will see that I certainly did already offer a substantive argument (if “argument” is even the right word)… as have many others. Indeed, “arguing” about it seems to me pointless, since the parallels between today and to Austria in the late 1930’s, are a matter of recorded history (if one can sort through all of the revisionist garbage), again, as many on this thread have pointed out. What those of us whom you seem at odds with are trying to help people like you see is that those facts are there for anyone to find… if they have that all-important desire to know the real truth and they are not completely blinded and led by their entrenched political ideology/identity.

            Also, I was clearly addressing the author of the article, when I mentioned how he (not you – although I am more and more inclined to put you in the same boat) is less qualified to comment on the subject than is Ms. Werthmann.

            Of course you have every right to enter into whatever conversation you wish. I never said you or anyone else didn’t have that right.

            Finally, I never said or implied that because we should give Ms. Werthmann’s story our full respect and attention, that means that “it demands our 100% acceptance”. Seriously? You are putting words in my mouth.

          • Steve says:

            I meant arguing in the legal sense, not so much as fighting, though I agree that’s what’s mostly going on. I’ll try to be concise (though I’m to the best at that). Are there parallels? Absolutely. Are there differences? Most definitely. When I look at the totality of it all, I believe that the differences far outweigh the similarities and the similarities are mostly coincidental or benign. We could find similarities all day. Hitler and Obama both wore shoes. Both were male. Both probably like oatmeal. I know that’s being quite rediculous, but I’m exaggerating to illustrate a point. Similarities does not necessarily equate to Nazi fascism. I can definitely appreciate that there are people such as yourself that are asking questions and poking and prodding. This is what I love about our country (it should be noted that such dissidence would have been quickly squashed in Nazi Germany), we are free to ask these questions.

            I think it’s pretty dismissive to think some of us need your help to “see” anything. Have you ever thought for one moment that I see the same exact facts as you do and yet arrive at a different conclusion? I’m not sure why that is so hard to believe/understand.

            Lastly, I didn’t mean to put words in your mouth. It just seemed that you were putting down those who deigned to question her story.

    • Steven says:

      Just out of curiosity why is it that you so quickly accept the word of one woman’s recollection of an event that happened decades ago and so harshly criticize anyone that might question her, when on the other hand you feel obligated to question the government as a whole and assume their ill-will? I’m not going to get into the argument about whether or not the government is wholly corrupt, but I find it disingenuous for you to attack a person for exercising their first amendment rights (responsibility?) while so freely exercising yours. If you want to engage the issues, that would be great, but how weak to attack someone for even asking the questions. Hypocrite much?

  49. Robert says:

    :) I can’t help but marvel at the free time people have (myself included) to argue about any little thing on the internet. Are we just bored? I mean, shit… this is super entertaining, and I love to throw my 2 cents in as much as the next guy, but is anybody really convincing anyone else here to think the way they do? As much as I love a good debate, I wonder if this whole exercise is really achieving anything substantial, or if it’s just cementing all of our prior beliefs and opinions. I don’t know… I feel like over the last few years, things have been getting worse. Despite the internet’s immense value as an undeniably sweet source of diverse information, it appears that alot of us have been drawn into (or entered into voluntarily) these little form-fitted echo chambers that just pound a particular line of reasoning into our psyches over and over again… cheering us to fight the good fight online with strangers. We champion our avatars to battle it out in some lame/pointless philosophical deathmatch, even though every one is a stalemate.

    That being said… these conspiracy theories are getting fucking out of control! Haha! Holy shit balls, they’s some crazy as crackas! ;)

  50. newman5 says:

    Robert, I can’t help feeling the same way much of the time, but at such times I try to keep in mind that, for the sake of preserving all that is good and right, we need to resist the pressure to give up trying to learn the real truth about things and then trying help others understand it as well… above all with civility and charity.

    Those in Nazi Germany who were clueless about the full implications of Hitler’s philosophies and policies (which they either fully embraced or merely went along with) and who also failed to recognize how it would later define their own, collective, insanity and culpability, they said much the same thing you’re saying about those “conspiracy theorists” who simply had a fairly good understanding or at least suspicion of who Hitler really was and where his delusions of grandeur and superiority etc. would inevitably lead.

  51. K.C.B. says:

    Do I dare say amen to the above statement? Thank you Mr. Newman. I refuse to give my right to vote just because some conservative woman with her own hate agenda said the Nazis believed in rights for women. I wonder if some of the same arguments were used with regard to rights when the issue being debated was the right to own people and not guns. Baptists ministers in the South would argue that the Bible sanctified and authorized slavery…It may be time to repeal the Second Amendment if that is what it takes to keep children safe. And, yes, I do believe people could have guns under rules that would keep children safe if followed. With regard to hiring guards to protect children in schools, that is fine by me as long as the costs for this are paid by sales taxes on guns.

    • mariahwwa says:

      All I can is OVER MY DEAD BODY! Your words is what will start a civil war. Keep children safe? From what? It’s already been proven over and over again that statements about guns killing children in the home is over-stated. It happens, yes, but not to the extent the libs like you try to do. It happens because of stupid parents not having the guns locked away…PERIOD.

      It certainly is NOT going to keep children or anyone else safe on the streets, because the damn criminals are not going to obey any laws….gee, I wonder why…..could it be because they are CRIMINALS! They are going to get black market guns just like they do now. They don’t go to a gun shop and buy a gun, or a gun show! Their guns are not registered, they don’t go through any check. BTW: I’m not against a background check, I AM against REGISTRATION. That is a proven fact that it eventually leads to confiscation. Maybe not today, this year or next year, but eventually, and that is what Obama and his minions want. He said as much when he was a senator.

      Just what the blue blazes are your ideas on ‘keeping children safe’? Doesn’t matter, you won’t win this battle. If you remove the 2nd amendment, then your right to free speech will be next. Obama has already tried to squash any media that speaks out against him. If one amendment can be repealed then they all can, then were are we? I think this lady is right….with people like you talking.

  52. newman5 says:

    Want to know the common denominator in EVERY mass shooting of completely innocent people who happened to be in the wrong “Gun Free Zone” at the wrong time?

    Obama, Biden and the Left purposely avoid the correct target to stop mass murders because of the all the money that is poured into the Democratic party by the companies who are responsible for creating the monsters who murder without remorse or reality. The common denominator IS NOT GUNS…

    http://ssristories.com/index.php?sort=what&p=school

    Also, any American interested in voicing their opinion about gun control needs to watch this video… or else save it for those who don’t really care about the whole truth.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bgJg3L7VLxU

    Just to let you know, that video is an hour long, and there many extremely sad/disturbing images, for which gun control proponents around the world is responsible. Not sure why it left out Cuba.

    • mariahwwa says:

      Guess what, your youtube link is no longer there. Says copyright infringement. I think it’s something else. Darn it. I wanted to save it to watch later. Did you save it? If so, could you send it to me? Well, nix that. If it’s just a link, it won’t matter, it’s not there.

  53. Robert says:

    Newman5, while I can’t comment on the video (because I haven’t the time to watch it right now), I did look briefly at the link you posted regarding anti-depressants and violence. The idea that commonly prescribed anti-depressants and other psycho meds are responsible for atrocities such as mass shootings, etc, is something I’ve just started hearing about, and while it’s an interesting theory and seems vaguely plausible, it doesn’t change the fact that individuals like James Holmes and Adam Lanza were able to access weapons of the type used in those respective murders. Undoubtedly, our mental health systems in the US need to be addressed and steps taken to try and prevent the unstable among us from getting the chance to commit violence of that magnitude, but if your argument (and I’m not sure if I’m getting this exactly right) is that weapons don’t matter – that weapon type/design/function doesn’t matter (this is in regards to thoughts of an assault weapon ban and magazine limitations), then perhaps the US should legalize machine guns. But hey, that seems like a strange and arbitrary place to stop… lets allow the private ownership of TNT, nuclear material, etc. And before you jump on me (if you were going to at all) for bringing up these types of weapons of mass destruction, just ask yourself… why are these kinds of weapons illegal? I think it’s safe to argue it’s not because the government wants to keep us down, but rather because if things like machine guns and explosives find their way into the hands of criminals and/or the derranged, then the innocent would pay dearly. How many people can you kill with a six shooter? I would answer 6. How many people can one man – ONE MOTIVATED GUY – kill with an assault rifle equiped with a high capacity magazine? I would say, potentially, alot more than 6. In Aurora, James Holmes killed 12 and wounded 50 something people. One guy did that. Imagine what he would have done with a mini gun? But of course, you don’t support ownership of miniguns, right? Because… hey, that’s crazy! Right? But why is it crazy to support restrictions on assault rifles and high capacity magazines? How do you decide to draw the line there? Because of the 2nd amendment? The 2nd amendment was written when people were shooting flintlocks and does not (nor can it) address modern weaponry like assault weapons. Maybe the true meaning of the 2nd amendment (if you ignore the “well regulated” part of it) is to provide US citizens with the right to own any and ALL types of weapons. Why don’t gun rights people fight for their right to military weapons? If the whole point of the 2nd amendment is to give US citizens a fighting chance to prevent a tyrannical govt takeover, then maybe we should go for it! Go big or go home! Tanks, Apaches, Bomber Jets… won’t we need all that if we’re going to fight off our own military?

    Anyway, the point I’m making is that while people fight for their right to own dangerous weapons that serve no real purpose (A bunch of AR15s vs. the most powerful military ever established is a losing proposition any way you look at it), alot of innocent people will continue to die needlessly. Sure, the issue of mental health and prescription meds needs to be addressed. But if meaningful gun laws can reduce the incidence or the severity of mass shootings, then that is a good thing. No, you can’t stop people from killing each other, but you can ABSOLUTELY make it harder for them to do it with terrifying efficiency.

    • newman5 says:

      The following is a response I made to my brother on Facebook in response to this that he had posted:

      http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=269100969885440&set=a.116258378503034.12070.116184575177081&type=1&relevant_count=1

      Total BS. No one is calling teachers “union thugs”. The union thugs are the teacher’s union leaders who are FORCING teachers to pay union dues which are used to pay-off their corrupt political counterparts who continue to support the current, corrupt educational system, while they are all laughing all the way to the bank. Do a little non-biased research on the subject. The teachers unions are a HUGE problem and THE primary reason for the state of our educational system today. If you like how things are going then yes, continue to support the status quo.

      As for the second point: The only proposal that has seriously been put forth is that SOME teachers WHO FEEL COMFORTABLE CARRYING A FIREARM could do so. NOT that EVERY teacher needs to. The other option would be to have one or two armed security personnel present at schools (which has actually been a reality at hundreds of schools across the country for years). But real point is that, for example, if Adam Lanza had known that there were always a couple of armed security guards at Sandy Hook Elementary, then the tragedy, in all likelihood, never would have happened.

      And this was a conversation with my sister, who responded to the video above that I linked on FB as well:

      My sister: I watched a chunk but admit not the whole video. It seemed to show how citizens with no guns available to defend themselves were killed in numerous situations. There are many possibilities between taking every gun away from every person and anyone of any state of mind getting any kind of gun. I am in favor of creating tighter restrictions not completely taking guns out of Americans hands.

newman5 (me): Of course, the opposing argument is that the restrictions are certainly tight enough at this point, the powers-that-be have been tightening them for decades, state by state, as it is and was always meant to be an issue left to each state to address, NOT the federal Government. More importantly, all of the gun control regulations and restriction and even confiscation that has been happening across America, more and more, has simply not applied to criminals at all. They continue to get whatever guns they want, as soon as they want them, while the Feds look the other way… or they are behind the supply of them (again Fast & Furious).

      There is no logical reason, let alone any clear evidence that could lead any reasonable person to conclude that it is a good idea to tighten restrictions anymore, for law-abiding, responsible citizens, than they already are. It will do nothing but make matters much worse… just as it already has. Like I said, look at Chicago, look at other places where guns have heavy restrictions or have been banned etc. Then look at crime rates in towns and counties where the 2nd Amendment is honored and all the gun control and regulations etc. have been resisted. The contrast and the truth of it simply cannot be denied.

      Yes, it it obviously a good idea to do whatever we can to make sure that certifiably deranged or drugged-up people can’t have access to guns, and we should do whatever we can, as citizens, to address that problem, but we need to keep in mind that, above all (as the above video should make clear), it is a profoundly foolish idea to give that authority to the government.

      The 2nd Amendment was not established based on any “philosophical” argument, or because “children have been killed” or whatever. It was derived from entirely common sense, practical reasoning of our Founders, born of their own, first-hand experience and acute awareness of what would happen if THE PEOPLE were not allowed to bear arms. And it is based on that same reasoning that they made sure that it was the 2ND Amendment… not the 3rd or 4th or 5th or 10th. In other words, they knew that, aside from Freedom of Speech, nothing would be more sacred and crucially important to the security and sovereignty of America than for each citizen to have the right to bear arms (without a lot of unnecessary regulations and restrictions) with which they could defend themselves against any and all forces who otherwise no doubt seek to control them or, if they would not submit, then simply kill them… just as has been the case in so many sad situations around the world.

      I know that you started that video, but I beg you to finish it. there are interviews at the end that everyone should listen to.






      • Robert says:

        So, explain how people armed with AR-15s (or weapons of similar nature) are going to defend against the US military? This gets back to what my post was in regards to. I get that the point of the 2nd amendment is to provide citizens with the right to defend against tyranny, but when it was adopted in 1791, military arms were limited to muskets and simple rifles (canons as well). Todays weaponry is obviously more evolved, and our own military possesses weapons that can wipe out the worlds population several times over. Should we be engaging in an arms race with our own government/military? Should “responsible citizens” be able to arm themselves with weapons of mass destruction… “just in case.” What would the founders have said about that? I have my own guess, but there’s no way to know because they’re not around. And honestly, does it really matter? Kudos to them for writing arguably the most important document in the history of modern democracy, but they lived in a different time – in a different America. So, what would they say about all this gun control discussion? I don’t know. What would they say about women’s rights? Would they ask where all the slaves are? Would they pop huge boners over our technologically superior firearms? Hard to say. Maybe we should (and now I think we are) ask ourselves what our values are NOW. Do we want more gun control if it can help? Or proper and properly funded enforcement of existing laws? You mention restrictions being tight enough, but what is your response to the fact that the ATF, the one agency responsible for enforcing laws regarding gun sales, has been effectively neutered over the last few decades. They have as many agents now as they did back in the 70s, and their power to track gun sales or prevent unlawful or fraudulent behavior by gun dealers is nil. So, how does Chicago get its guns? Well, I doubt they’re forging them at home or robbing the Colt factory, so the other answer is that people are selling and trafficking them them illegally. So you’re right… as long as things stay the way they are now, criminals WILL continue to get whatever weapons they want. And that is no accident.

        • Ty Brown says:

          “So, explain how people armed with AR-15s (or weapons of similar nature) are going to defend against the US military?”

          I don’t know…explain how a small cadre of men are able to evade the entire strength of the US army for years by hiding out in caves in the desert.

          Explain how a bunch of untrained guerrillas in an Asian jungle are able to defeat the greatest army that ever was with no training, lousy weapons, and the world joined against them.

          Or explain how a bunch of farmers with bayonets and pitchforks were able to defeat the Royal British army in the 1700’s.

          Hmmmm…..

          • Robert says:

            Well, they haven’t all evaded the army, and they aren’t all hiding in caves… e.g. Bin Laden. Like you said, they are a relatively small group. They’re also spread out over a large area, including Pakistan… a slightly complicated situation.

            Vietnam? Yes, wouldn’t it be lovely if America turned into Vietnam circa the 1960s. Innocent civilian casualties in the hundreds of thousands. Saying they had no training isn’t really true, and they had the support of China and the USSR. Over a million North Vietnamese soldiers killed while the US lost almost 60,000. Did we lose? We pulled out, so I guess you could argue that. If you think the average gun-toting American will have the kind of endurance and lack of concern for human life the way the Vietcong did, then I guess it is possible that a NWO takeover could fail after a decade of fighting and millions of innocent deaths.

            Hmmmm…

            But hey, freedom isn’t free. Right?

            So what say you? Ready to start a White House petition for your right to full auto and high explosives?

        • Ty Brown says:

          Sigh. I guess I’ll spell it out more directly. Your assertion was that the founders didn’t foresee the government having such advanced weaponry so the idea of one obtaining weapons to defend against them is ridiculous because the government could just quickly wipe them out with their incredible strength.

          My point was to make that advanced weaponry does not a victory make.

          Our enemies evade us in caves in deserts despite advanced weaponry. How complicated is it, really, when we’ve got satellites, drones, et al. Shouldn’t we be able to just ‘wipe out’ our enemy as you claim?

          And I think it’s obvious the founders understood this. They had just beaten the biggest army on earth, that no one thought they could beat, with a much less equipped army.

          So the idea that citizens will one day perhaps be forced to successfully defend themselves against a corrupt government is not ridiculous nor implausible.

          Personally, I’ve never owned a gun and haven’t shot one since boy scout camp over 20 years ago. But show me the petition for full auto and the rest and I’ll sign it. How stupid do we have to be to authorize our government to use something we can’t have? How is it even possible for us to hire our government to have these weapons if we can’t have them ourselves? We as a people give rights to our government, it is a paradox and tragedy that we would ever give them a right that is illegal to us.

          • Robert Coulter says:

            Why can’t we have weapons that the govt has? I dunno… because all it takes is one moron or psychopath to use them on innocent people and nobody will want that. You really think giving people like James Holmes the opportunity to purchase a macine gun or explosives is a good idea? Your argument for these weapons doesn’t address the issue of what we do with them in the meantime… before this inevitable Govt takeover begins. I have a good idea that they won’t be put to good use, and that homegrown terrorism will bring the US down to the level of a 3rd world nation. But, hey… we still got our freedom to bear arms! Freedom to live safely and not be worried about walking into a wall of bullets from some psycho kid or Tim McVeigh… not so much.

          • Steven says:

            You keep pointing out how our enemies are “evading us in caves”. While that may be true, they are by no means defeating us. They are hiding from us at best. So you’re saying, in the event of an uprising, we’ll be able to run and hide? And then do what? Even the Taliban has access to military grade weapons. The citizens would be left to fight one of the largest armies in the world with handguns and hunting rifles. Come on. Just admit that you’re wrong on this one. We would have ZERO hope of defeating our military were it to come down to that.

          • Ty Brown says:

            Steven, you are trying valiantly with this straw man argument but it’s not working.

            I’m not positing that people with guns have them to overthrow and be victorious over the government. I never said that nor do I believe that to be a solid plan of action. For you to counter that argument is futile because I’m not making it.

            My point was to show how Robert was wrong. Just because an army is superior in force does not mean that they will crush their enemy.

            In today’s day and age what does it look like when a citizenry has to defend itself with force in the United States from tyranny? I don’t know. I’m not worried about it and I don’t own guns. But I’m also not going to try to tell someone else that their concerns aren’t valid based on history’s naggingly efficient way of repeating itself. And I’m not going to have the defeatist attitude of ‘well, let’s just limit those 2nd amendment rights because it doesn’t matter, the government can crush you no matter how awesome your gun is’.

          • Ty Brown says:

            “because all it takes is one moron or psychopath to use them on innocent people and nobody will want that.”

            Ha! You mean like, I dunno…Bush, Cheney, Obama?

            Liberal logic is so funny to me. Someone might do something bad so let’s get out the ban-wand and start going down a list and legislate ourselves into safety.

            It doesn’t matter that bans have been shown to have no effect on health and safety (read: prohibition, drug laws, strict gun laws ‘I’m talking to you Chicago and D.C.’, Pit Bulls, age laws for tabacco, etc.) I can’t wait to see this wonderful utopia that you progressives are going to ban us into.

          • Steven says:

            “I’m not positing that people with guns have them to overthrow and be victorious over the government. I never said that nor do I believe that to be a solid plan of action. For you to counter that argument is futile because I’m not making it.”

            Oh, okay. Because when you said this:

            “And I think it’s obvious the founders understood this. They had just beaten the biggest army on earth, that no one thought they could beat, with a much less equipped army.

            So the idea that citizens will one day perhaps be forced to successfully defend themselves against a corrupt government is not ridiculous nor implausible.”

            …that’s EXACTLY what it sounded like you were saying. I think I’m through with this “conversation”. It’s pointless having a debate when the other party continually re-writes his own history. None of us are going to change each others minds anyway nor are we going to be changing any policies. So, it’s all yours…

          • Ty Brown says:

            Double sigh. I suppose if I can’t help you understand the difference between defending oneself and overthrowing a government then, you’re right, there is no further reason to head down this argument.

            All the best.

          • Steven says:

            Hold on there, friendo. I’m all for self-defense. I don’t believe you can find one single thing I’ve said that points to the contrary. I’m not the one that brought up overthrowing the government. Someone else did in regards to the 2nd amendment (which, arguably, is what the 2nd amendment was created for) and you responded to support that. You repeatedly argued how it was possible for the citizens to defend themselves against a “corrupt government” (your words, not mine). That’s what I was responding too. We’re in trouble if you don’t even know what argument you’re having. But whatever, go ahead and keep claiming straw man arguments to validate yourself.

          • Robert says:

            Ty – Bush, Cheney and Obama??? No, dude! Did you even read my post? I’m talking about nut jobs like James Holmes and Tim McVeigh. You want to give James Holmes a machine gun and Tim McVeigh a tactical nuke? Just we can say we truly live in the LAND O’ FREEDOM? I don’t want to live in that place, and if the US ever becomes that place, then I’m taking my family and moving as far away as I can. It’ll be the saddest day of my life, but I’m not going to risk their safety for the sake of 2nd amendment cults.

            Liberal logic is funny to you? Sounds like logic is funny to you, period. “Ban-wand”? C’mon… your libertarian brain can come up with better goofy mental props than that!!! :)

            I’ll grant you that prohibition didn’t work. People want to get fucked up, and that’s never going to end. But just because alcohol isn’t still “banned”, doesn’t mean that we put it in friggin’ elementary school drinking fountains just because we can. Like everything, we try to approach things like booze with some common sense. You can’t drink and drive. You can’t drink if you’re under 21 (or where you live, perhaps it’s 14).

            Drugs… *sigh* … This country’s “war on drugs” has been controversial to say the least, and with all the money spent every year to fight illegal drug importation, we still seem to be losing the battle against our undying appetite for hard drugs. But just because the fight is hard, doesn’t mean you necessarily give up on it – if it’s something this important. If you were to legalize drugs today, I will put my money on useage skyrocketing… it’s a sad fact, but for whatever reason, Americans love to be bad, and nobody ever thinks they’re going to end up a junkie until it’s already happened.

            But when it comes to bans on weapons… I don’t know how your brain lets you get away with thoughts like “…bans have been shown to have no effect…” Yeah? How many people were killed with machine guns last year? Tell me that ban isn’t effective. So… Chicago and DC. Ok. Let’s talk about how they get their guns. Do they grow them on trees? Hmm… no. Do the gang members who are mostly HS dropouts make them during craft hour? Hmm… no, I don’t think they have an appreciation for crafts. Hey! I know! They buy them! But from where? Do Russians in business suits meet them in empty warehouses? Nope! They just go to gun shows in the next town or county and buy them from private sellers without any kind of background checks or tracking whatsoever. They also buy them from corrupt licensed dealers! And the ATF, the one agency entrusted to prevent illegal sales, has been effectively gutted (by those in congress who enjoy a good suck on the NRA’s chode), so that they have virtually no ability to enforce the laws we already have! The laws that pro-gun people keep screaming about, “we already have 20,000 laws!” Yeah… and nobody to enforce them!

            Do I want all guns banned. Absolutely not. Do I want guns like assault rifles, which have no purpose except to kill people in battle (not imaginary future battles against the UN), banned? Yep. Nobody needs them for protection. They’re just another way for guys to feel better about their penises, like lifted trucks, and big ol’ Hemi motors, etc. Except for some reason, psycho killers don’t favor the Hemi as their go-to weapon, they like the AR-15 – hence the attention placed on it. If we pass another assault weapons ban, it will be another law that, as members of a civilized democracy, we will abide by (despite the disapproval of some like yourself) until it is shown that the law has no use or is ineffective… then we can address repealing or ammending it. Will it stop murder by firearm? No. Will it stop nuts from being able to mow people down with drum magazines, etc? I hope so. That’s the friggin’ idea. (I’d love to see a buyback program for assault rifles but the NRA still has way too much of grip on our gonads to pull something like that off in congress.)

            But just because a law doesn’t stop EVERY incident of the crime it was geared for, doesn’t mean you scrap the law. Would you have your “ban-lifting wand” pass over laws concerning murder, rape, theft, child abuse, etc? Those are bans basically. But I don’t think you want that. And I don’t think you want innocent people killed by guns either. It’s too bad you can’t recognize your disconnect.

          • Ty Brown says:

            Your comment was along the lines of ‘what happens if nut jobs get ahold of bigger weapons’ and my response was to remind you that it’s already happened. It just so happens that we’ve called them Presidents and these nut jobs have killed plenty of innocent civilians.

            The simplicity about my arguments against yours are that mine have case studies and proofs to back them up. Do I know that things would go the exact same as the case studies? No. But there is enough evidence to support my platforms vs yours.

            You say that legalizing drugs would lead to spikes in usage. All we have to do is look to places like Portugal and Holland to find out that drug abuse goes down when drugs are legalized or decriminalized.

            All we have to do is look to prohibition to show that banning a substance does nothing to diminish it’s use.

            All we have to do is look to DC and Chicago to see that stricter gun laws don’t halt gun crime and if that isn’t enough we only have to look to Australia and the UK to see violent crime go up AFTER stricter laws against guns go in effect or look to Sweden to show that OBVIOUSLY more guns do not a more violent population make.

            We can look to other countries to see that lower drinking age does not cause children to die, we can look to Nevada counties to see that legalized prostitution does not cause outbreaks of AIDS and STD’s. We can look to Holland to show that banning Pit Bulls doesn’t make people safer from dog attacks.

            We have case study after case study showing that banning behavior, items, mindsets, etc. does not work. We aren’t safer for them at all. Yet people like you will always make up phony arguments like ‘what are we supposed to do, put alcohol in drinking fountains?’ as if that furthers along a reasonable discussion and as if the opposite of authoritarianism is enabling.

            For the record, yep, I’m pretty much for banning murder, rape, et al. Those are behaviors that infringe on my, or someone else’s, safety, life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

            If Joe Crackhead wants to smoke crack that doesn’t effect me. Now, if he wants to steal my TV that does effect me so punish that.

            If Billy Redneck wants to own a machine gun that doesn’t effect me. If he wants to shoot it at people, that’s a problem and punish that. There are hundreds of millions of guns in the US and millions upon millions of assault rifles, plenty in my old neighborhood in fact (we left the US a few months ago). You say that all they are good for is murdering people yet I’ve not once been murdered (nor has anyone in my neighborhood for that matter). In fact, out of the millions of legal assault weapons how many murders can you point to? You’d be better off banning rubbing alcohol or hammers, of course those don’t get media attention so you won’t get up in a dander about those.

            If Tommy Teenager wants to drink what does that do to me? If he wants to get in a car and drive drunk that effects my life, liberty and pursuit of happiness so let’s punish that.

            Your flawed thinking tells you that you must legislate the alcohol out of Tommy’s hands, the gun out of Billy’s trailer, and the crack out of Joe’s pipe and you’ll be successful in making people safer in the process. I don’t blame you for that thought process, naive as it may be. It’s easy to think that government can solve societal problems. Any rational look at the history of government, though, shows you that it just won’t happen and that government meddling in these rights ALWAYS makes people less safe and less free.

          • Robert says:

            The use of deadly force by the military isn’t what I’m talking about though. That’s a worthy discussion, but I’m talking specifically what happens when private ownership of CERTAIN weapons puts the safety of everyday citizens at risk.

            About your case studies, the “simplicity” of your argument doesn’t address at all what I have already brought up, and that is the inability of law enforcement agencies to tackle the problem of illegal gun sales, straw buyers, private sales without background checks, etc. If the laws we already have were enforced… if the ATF had the funding and right to properly monitor sales, then the incentive for criminals to buy/sell weapons in places like Chicago or DC would be diminished. But the NRA has done everything in their power to prevent proper enforcement, for the sole purpose of maintaining the firearm industy’s bottom line.

            As far as bans and prohibition go, I don’t think it’s fair at all to compare the US to any other country. Do you really think America/American society can be compared to The Netherlands or Sweden? If so, then compare us to Japan too – where there is total gun ban, and their murder rate by firearms (as well as their general violent crime rate) is much lower than ours. Whey you said Sweden, did you mean Switzerland? Regardless, the US blows them both out of the water when it comes to privately owned guns per capita, and we have much more violent crime. So the idea that we can model our gun policy directly off another country is flawed. We need to do what works here, because we aren’t Japan, and we aren’t Switzerland.

            The alcohol in the drinking fountain bit was clearly a joke, so don’t saddle up your high horse yet.

            Joe Crackhead… I think I knew him in high school. Anyway, if crackheads and speedfreaks steal, don’t you think perhaps addressing the whole reason they’re stealing in the first place might be a good idea? How do you turn a blind eye to the root cause of something? Especially when you’re talking about drugs, which are the motivation for much of not only theft but of violent crime as well. So, the crackhead’s drug habit DOES effect you.

            If Billy Redneck opens fire on a crowd with a machine gun and kills 65 people, your reaction is never mind the gun, just punish the guy? HE WOULDN’T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SHOOT THAT MANY PEOPLE IF HE DIDN’T HAVE THE GUN! I fail to see what is so difficult to understand about that. What if Billy sets off a nuke in the middle of NYC? “Gosh darnit, Billy! Stop it please!” But lets not bring up the fact that Billy’s new freedom to own nuclear weapons had anything to do with the death of 8 million people… ’cause it wasn’t the nuke, it was just Billy! Right? Fantastic. But I guess there was never anything we could have done to prevent that from ever happening, right?

            So, your reasoning for opposing an assault weapons ban is that you yourself have not been murdered by somebody that had one??? Brilliant! You know, I’ve never been hit by a drunk driver, but I don’t think I’m ready to get a petition together to legalize drinking and driving. Why? Because although I have not been directly effected by a drunk driver, MILLIONS of other people have been – either because they were hit (and perhaps killed) or because someone close to them was. You know who may have something to say about this? How about the parents of those 20 little kids that got shot up in Connecticut? I’m sure they would say that the AR15 had absolutely nothing to do with what happened that day. If Adam Lanza had walked in and started shouting “bang”, I’m sure just as many would have died.

            Lastly, let’s talk about our respective ways of thinking about this. To you, my thinking is, as you say, naive – because I want laws, and apparently that means I’m aching to GIVE UP ALL MY FREEDOM to the gubment. To me, your ideology strikes me as that of another cookie-cutter Libertarian. You fantasize about implementing essentially a kind of friendly anarchy, whereby government’s role in our lives is non-existent. Go and stroll down the street… stop into your neighborhood SafeWay for a couple of sticks of dynamite… you know… for the kids to play with. In your America, the freedom to do whatever you want, whenever you want, without being questioned by anyone, magically leads to a stronger, safer country, where everyone does the right thing solely because they want to, and not because any LAW is telling them to. Nobody dumps chemical waste into their river (to the point that the river continually catches on fire) because it’s cheap and an easy shortcut (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuyahoga_River). Nobody drives off industry competition so that they can fence off the market and set their prices as high as they want just because they can. Nobody uses their machine gun to kill police because they’re part of a criminal gang in the 1930s. NOBODY does any of that sfuff in your MORE FREE, and undoubtedly MORE SAFE America. It’s a dream come true! Too bad I’m not asleep to believe it.

    • mariahwwa says:

      First, I think you need to learn correct terminology. Although individuals CAN purchase an assault weapon…NONE of the weapons used in any of these shootings ARE ASSAULT weapons. This tirade is getting really old. They are just scary looking hunting guns. Same caliber and NOT FULLY AUTO!!!!! GET IT, not fully auto….not assault weapon.

      The only reason I have certain weapons is for the collector reason – historical reason or just unusual. The 100 round clip is a little overboard, yes. But here’s the point the above poster was making… or did you miss that.

      EVERY SINGLE event of a mass shooting in recent years – or probably ANY years has happened in a GUN FREE ZONE. Meaning that those of us with CCW’s could not have had our firearm.

      Had there been people with CCW’s in those places, the amount of deaths could have been reduced. Could it have prevented the deaths, no…just reduced. The teacher that was hiding under her desk when he walked in, then walked out…..she could have waited till he turned to walk out and then unloaded her entire clip in his back and not a single soul would have condemned her for it.

      News media does not like to report on the number of lives saved by those who carry. The one that did hit the news many years ago was one in Texas at a restuarant. But since then the stories have been squashed.

      I can tell you that since Obama’s 2nd election, and the Sandy Hook shootings, getting ammo has been nearly impossible. Not even .22’s. And the government freely admits that they are purchasing massive amounts of ammo, AR’s (the full auto kind), and armored personnel carriers for HS. Now you tell me…..since this is not purchased for the military but for use on American soil….WHY? I won’t even go conspiracy on you….I’m just asking you….WHY? Give me a logical reason.

  54. Ty Brown says:

    This has got to be one of the most intellectually lazy articles I’ve ever read. In an article spanning some 1749 words, according to my word doc, the author spends 125 words actually attempting to debunk this Werthmann woman (and we were led to believe the article was written to debunk her). The manner in which the author attempts to debunk it is so full of holes. At one point even saying essentially ‘well….no one is getting gassed today so we can’t compare the two!’ Ridiculous. Take the most extreme element of the Nazi movement, show that it isn’t happening, so that invalidates Werthmann’s platform? Who falls for this?

    At least at some point the author attempts to be honest about his sloth saying that he’s not going to go line by line into her speech. Thank goodness he didn’t because he has already shown his skills at critical thinking are certainly lacking.

    It’s not until the end of the article do we find the true motive. He just wanted to smear this woman by association. She’s in bed with science haters! Run! She’s religious! Shield your children!

    This is such a typical ploy by progressives. Instead of invalidating a message just attack the person giving it with no real rationale. In the immortal words of Principal What’s His Name- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3JzbWVDzac

  55. So…I attempt to debunk the letter, while at the same time saying I’m not going to debunk the letter? I’m not sure how that works.

    Also, it’s 1,731 words according to WordPress.

    • Ty Brown says:

      Boom! Got me on the word count. If only your writing showed such accuracies.

      You’re not sure how it works? You’re telling me. The article didn’t work. Have you never met someone who says they aren’t going to do something and then goes right ahead and attempts to do it? It’s called disingenuous, as was the article which was nothing more than a smear of a woman rather than an ideal. At least if your article went after her ideals and supposed inaccuracies in her comparisons that could be respectable. Easily disproven, of course, but respectable because at least you’re giving a viewpoint worth debating.

      The only viewpoint you provided with this article was that you don’t like South Dakota Eagle Forums, Tea Partiers, and Christian conservatives so we mustn’t lend any credibility to her story. Again, you don’t go after her story you go after her associations. Weak move.

      The only surprise in the article was that you didn’t figure out how to mention how much she likes to Tivo FOX News.

    • John Smith says:

      There is not much to “debunk” in Ms Werthmanns (2003) email because most of these events did happen. It’s the totally different circumstances Austria-1938 vs USA-2013 that must be stressed.

      For instance, how did Ms Werthmann (born Mathilde Gautsch in 1926) know what was going on elsewhere? Little phone service, one or two government controlled radio stations and newspapers. If that much in the tiny village she grew up in (Ramingstein, in central Austria).
      Folks knew only what the powers that be wanted them to know. How does that compare with the way we can read any newspaper or listen to any radio station (70,000 on TuneIn) in the world?

      Austria had just gone through extremely turbulent geopolitical times. It’s been a while since the Spanish and English were here.
      Germany & Austria were rather homogeneous societies. We are the biggest melting pot ever seen.
      The influence of the church then/there, and now/here is incomparable.
      How mobile were people then? And where would you go, even with millions in (worthless) currency?
      Germany and Austria were in shambles after WWI. Hitler seemed like Santa. Any resemblance with the crowds here shopping on Black Friday?

      And let’s look at one issue: “Hitler Restructured the Family through Daycare”.
      If there’s one country in the world that was way ahead (or behind, depending on your point of view) when it comes to working mothers (and the need for day cares), it was us! Why were we the cradle of fast food worldwide? To make up for the lack of cooking at home. When did that start? We are the nation with the most modern, beautiful, expensive yet least used home kitchens. To somehow imply that this is due to recent “socialist influences” is absurd.

      People’s expectations of life change. Priorities change due to all sorts of factors. Technology above all, in recent years. Must we always find someone else to blame?

      As I wrote on Jan 13, Ms Werthmann’s biggest “coup” is in her first two paragraphs, leading the reader into believing that she will reveal dark, hitherto unknown secrets. It has since struck me however – even more so after reading Hadassah’s outrage in a post on Jan 13 – that she:
      (a) specified “in any American publications”
      (b) added – on the 2 occasions where she mentions Jews: “Jewish or otherwise” and “not only Jews”.
      Her intro sounds more like: “You folks know only part of the story.”
      Not untrue: Americans – in general – know more about the Holocaust than about other events and circumstances preceding WWII. Why would that be? I believe that, in the laudable efforts to make sure it never happens again, the focus on the horrors of the Holocaust may have unintentionally eclipsed some of those other elements.

      Bottom line: can a monster like Hitler one day get traction here? Nothing is impossible, but let’s remember one thing: dictators usually thrive in primitive / poor societies (I believe we are way past that), or by creating fear, false controversies, or a common (imaginary) enemy.
      The best way to prevent this is for people to talk *to* each other, not *against* each other.
      Ms Werthmann’s assertion (last year) that immigration from Mexico is part of a plot orchestrated by the Russians and should be cause for all of us to buy more guns is very worrisome in that respect. Way more so than this email from 2003, now resurfacing.
      Unbridled immigration must be reduced and I hope we will soon start enforcing E-Verify and limiting birthright citizenship, among other things. But why the call for violence?

      • Ty Brown says:

        Your assertions, along with the authors, are fairly ridiculous. It’s your platform that we can’t compare things because they aren’t exactly the same. Well, if they were exactly the same…they’d be the exact same! And no call for comparisons would be needed.

        Werthmann’s point was to juxtapose authoritarian measures of the past and present.

        You call that into question because people are more mobile and communicative now. Huh? So the only way we can compare fascist measures is if we find two societies who were equally as un-mobile?

        The Spanish and English haven’t been here in a while so that means we can’t see present day fascism? Wha???

        You’re missing the entire point. The point is totalitarianism, fascism, authoritarianism. It doesn’t matter that people today have iPhones and Hitlers youth had two cups and a string. The point is government control.

        And you’re right, times are different today. Back then you saw one man effectively take control and commit atrocities.

        Does Obama or Hillary or Anthony Weiner or any other right-invented leftist boogey-man have the ability to do that? I doubt it. I’m probably with you on that one.

        But we don’t need one charismatic leader to become a dictator to see authoritarianism. We’ve already proved as a society that collectively we can do it.

        Collectively we’re saying, “Dear benevolent government. We’re too stupid to handle our own health care. YOU must do it for us. We’re too irresponsible…PLEASE strip us of our weapons. We’re too dumb, give us food, shelter, and clothing. We can’t find jobs on our own, YOU must provide them. We are so naughty, please punish us for using electricity.” ‘Progressivism’ has become the biggest misnomer ever.

        I don’t disagree that it is highly unlikely the United States could see a ‘Hitler’. It doesn’t matter, though. Authoritarianism is about as adaptable as the dinosaurs on Jurassic Park, it always finds a way to survive. This time it’s just allowing the people to willingly submit and vote themselves into it.

  56. Geoffrey says:

    Your article is very articulate, logical and even objective. Certainly much longer than Mrs Werthman’s But far less potent. I suspect you will think back to it when your own life and family are touched by fascism.

  57. h says:

    I believe sir, you have proved her point…

  58. EJ says:

    Well stated comments!!

  59. Ignorance at it’s best. I implore you to educate yourself, before it is too late.

  60. Anonymous says:

    Can’t we all just get along?

  61. MJ says:

    I never could figure out what the voters who voted for him saw. We know nothing about him or his past, yet, we are supposed to believe and dring the Kool aid. By the by, He have violated my First Amendment rights with his shannagins. Oh, I’m sorry, I had a year to change my moral code. Say what? After he promised that no one would be forced into any insurance and no one would lose insurance they had and liked. What you said Cindy!

  62. MJ says:

    Okay, I keep hearing that we need to get rid of assault weapons that are only used to kill people. Exactly how do you propose to DEFINE an assault weapon? Automatic, semi-automatic, calibre, clip size, range, ……..??!?!?
    Any hunting rifle worth its salt will kill a person. I wrote this response to a guy who said:

    Jim Barber, Dallas says:
    ‘No right-thinking American gun owner has any need for a military assault rifle……The sole purpose of these weapons is to kill other people.”

    I said:

    The 2nd Amendment says:

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    Last time I checked, a militia was not an organization designed to shoot deer. A militia is organized to protect people and their rights and, if necessary, kill other people to protect the citizenry. Only an armed citizenry is a free citizenry. If only the government has weapons, then the people are not free, they are subject to the will of the people in power, not the will of the citizenry. So I guess the writers of the Constitution were not “right-thinking American gun owners”, according to Mr. Barber.

    And for you folks that say it is a tired old document (The Constitution that is) that needs to be trashed, it or parts of it have no relevance today, exactly how long after it is trashed do you believe you will still be able to write or exchange ideas on whatever you want without fear of jail or execution?

    • John Smith says:

      No, the Constitution is not a tired old document, and should definitely not be trashed.
      But I believe you overestimate the usefulness of guns as protection against a rogue government or foreign power, today.
      Given our dependence on supplies (incl. food & fuel) from thousands of miles away, electricity, and information and communications technology, a few well targeted drones could paralyze an entire state in a matter of hours. And lead to submission within months, perhaps even weeks.

      Solid education (to prevent such conflicts from happening) and self-sufficiency (to survive if they do) rank higher than guns, imho.

      • MJ says:

        @ John Smith. This is the “it’s pointless to fight because they have superior forces, firepower, weapons and supplies. They are smarter than us and we might as well give up”. I wish someone had told the Viet Cong that back in the sixties. It seems they wore out a rogue government or two who thought like you do. Maybe some of my buddies would still be around today. Or the other argument is, “Its different today”. Like I said in a previous post, not much has changed in the last 6000 years of human history. Oh yeah, technology is improved and more lethal, but, just as the stone in a sling beat the sword, and the rifles, homemade bombs and booby traps beat superior air power and massive weapons, so too can a determined and armed populace keep a rogue government at bay thinking twice about how to operate. If they are dealing with unarmed sheep, they don’t have to think much about how to handle them and can do as they please.

        Besides, how are you going to be self-sufficient and survive without a gun to hunt for food or protect yourself from the other folks looking to steal your food and supplies that don’t care if you live, maybe even actually prefer you die in the process. Have you ever watched what happens during a severe natural disaster? Usually one of the first groups out are the looters and that’s when the government is supposedly on our side. What will it be like when the looters are your friendly neighborhood law enforcement folks?

        BTW, imho, rarely is. Mine’s not humble, but, it is educated.

        • John Smith says:

          @MJ: you actually confirmed my points:
          – the Viet Cong, in those days, in S Vietnam, had food available wherever they went. Rice, chicken, pork, whatever. They also used bicycles if necessary. They were smart. Today, in our country – unless you live in a rural, agricultural area – you’ll be starving within a matter of weeks. Because most of your food comes from 1000’s of miles away.
          – a gun, at the right time, in the right place, (or a stone in a sling) is useful. And I will always defend it. But it doesn’t have to be a “kill 20 people in one minute” type of weapon.
          Looters? When attacked by outside forces, you’re supposed to stick together. If you don’t? Don’t blame it on the outside forces. Blame it on the fact that you and your neighbors didn’t get along in the first place. That’s a local problem.

          Bottom line: a society that sticks together, educated and self-sufficient, will survive. Guns may help, but are not the major factor.

          • MJ says:

            Where do you live that you sincerely believe your neighbors will look out for your interests and not their own family in a pinch? If you think they will, has your neighborhood been tried and pressured by true calamity to prove that point. And you are correct, if you live and stay in a city environment when it hits the fan, you are dead meat in a short period of time.
            Back to the weapon issue. How are you going to define what we “need” to have for a weapon and what we don’t need? Who makes the call? You or me or someone neither of us know? I am not saying you need a Vulcan mini cannon, but, exactly where an how do you determine the line? What’s the definition?

      • mariahwwa says:

        I don’t disagree with your last sentence at all, I do disagree with any effort to change our 2nd amendment. And even if you are right, (drones) at least those of us who believe in the 2nd amendment can go down fighting.

        Unfortunately, the government already ‘spies’ on us from satellites and even building a bomb shelter underground is useless. They can see them from space. Hell, they are spying on our allies right along with even their ‘trained’ media puppies. That is coming back to bite them in the ass. The AP is not longer a believer… – in Obama – .took long enough!

        And I don’t want to believe the stories about ‘concentration’ camps, but I can tell you that the government admits they are there, they just don’t call them concentration camps, they call them FEMA camps that are supposed to be used for people who are without homes during a disaster.

        Yea, right. If anyone believes that one I have a bridge they can purchase.

  63. Roland says:

    What I took away from Kitty’s speech is that we shouldn’t willingly and/or easily give up our freedoms. Our society has been good at giving up little freedoms here and there as we’ve gone along, I know. It’s normal to do so without complaining much because of how insignificant it seems. The comparison between or nation and 1930s Austria isn’t a perfect match-up. But, they slowly and willingly gave up their freedoms in the name of security, safety, and convenience. While the other details may be different, this specific comparison holds true.

  64. Corey says:

    So let me get this straight. If universal background checks are implemented, Russians will be raping American women in less than five years? Yeah, sure.

    • mariahwwa says:

      Did I miss something? That is a ridiculous statement from your side or if it was said earlier. HOWEVER, REGISTRATION will lead to confiscation, period. We already have background checks. When I purchase a weapon the seller automatically sends the paperwork to the ATF and I’m checked out. I don’t mind that. The paperwork is supposed to be destroyed in a certain amount of time, not kept. Are they doing that? I doubt it. A government that spies on its own people and its allies, are not going to obey a date on a piece of paper.

      I DO mind any kind of check that keeps a record of the guns and types of guns I own. The issue of assault weapons is a joke.

      In order to own an assault weapon ( a true one – aka fully auto), you have to jump through a lot of hoops and basically turn your life over to the government. Depending on the weapon, you can’t even take it from your home without notifying local police. It is registered and can never be sold or given away. So we already HAVE rules for any weapon other than a semi-auto.

      We don’t need more rules. Enforce what we have.

  65. Rose says:

    Wow — what an entertaining, horrifying, humorous, disturbing, eye-opening, and jaw-dropping collection of comments. I stumbled on this looking for materials for wrapping up a high school teaching unit on 1984. Um — yeah — I can use this. Thanks!

  66. kadyalsalaam says:

    I think they important message is the role of incrementalism in establishing totalitarian rule.

    Take, for example, the takeover of GM and AIG by the governmetn in 2009. “Takeover’ is an accurate term; the government owned most of the stock, which is precisely what a takeover is.

    As a conservative, this angered me for many reasons, just ONE of which was that although the government said that they did not intend to run the company or keep an ownership stake past solvency, there was no guarantee that they wouldn’t; direct ownership of the means of production is, of course, socialism.

    Now, in 2013, we know that the government did NOT change its plans, and has divested or is in the process of divesting itself of AIG (at a nice profit) and GM (at a big loss). But the point remains: we stepped on the slippery slope to totalitarianism when those stakes were made.

    Here’s another. An essential element of totalitarianism is a citizenry that knows that they have no legal recourse if the government decides to arrest them, hold them, or even kill them. Since it is established that an American has rights of due process wherever he is in the world, our government again has stepped on that slippry slope when they used drones to kill American Al-Queda menbers in Yemen. Was he a traitor and did he deserve the death penalty? Probably, but that’s for a jury of his peers to decide, not a bureaucrat in Washington. And, what about his 17 year old son, born in Denver, also killed. Why is that not murder?

    The left SCREAMED when the Bush Admin put its TOE on the slippery slope with the Patriot Act. But, it seems unconcerned when the Obama Admin puts both feet on it.

    At any rate, there is cause for Ms. Werthmann’s concern. Those who trust the government completley don’t have to worry. The other 80% of us share her concerns.

    • It seems worth mentioning that the bailouts you speak of (which I believe were a necessary evil prompted by extraordinary economic circumstances) didn’t actually take place during the Obama administration.

      And while I have issues with the administration’s use of drone strikes, it’s a far cry from that to “the government can kill anyone anywhere.”

      • hirider says:

        Mike, actually most of them did! Only the first one ($800,000) occurred on Bush’s watch. All the others were on Obama’s hand. Also I don’t think the bailouts were needed. We have bankruptcy laws just for those cases.

        If bankruptcies were allowed to work normally, no tax money would have been used or lost as is the case now. In bankruptcy, GM and Chrysler would have reoganized their contracts with debtors and unions so as to reduce the amount owed to debtors and forced lower wages on unions, thereby lowering their overhead and keep operating. Or other companies would have come forth and bought up the companies in liquidation, and continued operating as another company.

        • Steven says:

          Unfortunately, you have no clue as to what you’re talking about. Bush signed the law which would allow up to $700 million to be used for the bailouts: http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/03/news/economy/house_friday_bailout/index.htm

          The reality is that the bailouts were widely supported on both sides of the political fence and (unfortunately) very much a necessity.

          You’re bankruptcy idea is great and all, except here’s what likely would have happened. Many of those US owned companies would have been bought up by foreign interested. We would then have seen a huge influx of money leaving the country, or moved entirely out of the country. TENS OF THOUSANDS of people could have lost their jobs. The banks and auto industry collapsing would have done irreparable harm to our country. Mismanagement and poor regulation caused a problem that required a big solution. The bailouts were the lesser of 2 evils.

      • mariahwwa says:

        You truly think they can’t? Really? Will they write it off as something totally different than what it is? You bet. But you can keep living in your dream world. Hope you don’t get that ‘I’m falling’ feeling and hit the ground. They say if you do, you’re dead. But that’s another philosphical question. If you’re dead, how would the living know that’s what you were feeling. Now I remember why I hated philosophy in college, lol!

  67. Veritas says:

    “none of that is happening here”. Mr. Rothschild you need to do better research for your articles. Actual unemployment is north of 18%, over 9 million people have left the workforce since 2008 and aren’t counted in the goverment stats. The ones who can find jobs are earning $8 per hour. Since 2008, people have been losing their houses because of unemployment or because their property is “under water”, not worth what they owe. The government is printing money like it’s going out of style and buying back our debt. It’s called Quantitative Easing and they’re up to QE3 for 3 times. When you have too many dollars chasing too few goods, that’s inflationa and the dollar is devalued. Gas has gone from $1.80 to almost $4. Prices of essentials like food and clothes continue to climb. Religion has been removed from public schools. Rich and poor are pitted against each other for political purposes. And now they want our guns. I’d say Kitty Werthmann is spot on and you need to get out more often.

    • hirider says:

      You are right. And this Q3 is a continuing, long term run. Never allowed before! But the liberals will come up with any scheme to lower their susceptibility to blame by not having to call for Q4, Q5, or Q6.

    • I’m not seeing what Quantitative Easing or underwater mortgages have to do with Nazi Germany. Yes, our economy is sluggish. No, it’s not in catastrophic meltdown like Europe in the late 20’s.

      But maybe if I woke up and opened my eyes…

  68. Joe says:

    When you consider that with all the hidden taxes we pay Ms. Werthmann is not far off. If memory serves me right we now work half the year to pay all those taxes. The interest rate is set by the Fed. and that is an artificial number. The government is funding businesses by printing more and more money. So yes a comparison can be used to the works program. This time rather than be for the public it is for the corporations and banks. Our unemployment totals are skewed to the low side when you factor the truth. People who have dropped out of the work force or people like me who are not counted in those numbers because we were always self employed. With the advent of the Patriot Act and now the strengthening of it, the government can now detain you indefinitely if they suspect you of being a terrorist (what their definition is I don’t know). So we should pay attention to what she says. I know she is biased in her opinions but doesn’t everybody have an agenda? Even you? Even me? We all do. The fact is we should pay attention to voices from the past because if we listen we can see where we might be going.

    • Steven says:

      I’m not sure exactly what you mean by “hidden taxes” but historically, income tax is the lowest that it’s ever been since WWII.

      • hirider says:

        Joe wasn’t refering only to income tax. For instance, federal gasoline taxes are more than 18 cents a gallon plus state and local taxes. No one sees that tax at the pump because it is included in the price. That’s just gasoline! Every petroleum product has a hidden excise tax in it’s price: engine oil, grease, kerosene, varsol, white gase, light lubricating oil like WD-40, etc. And guess what? We pay a sales tax at the counter too.
        Everything we buy has a sales tax, unless you have an exemption of some kind, like agriculture exemption for farmers and ranchers, business exemptions for manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers who resell their products to the public.

        • Joe says:

          Very good hirider…you understand….When somebody says they don’t know what hidden taxes are then they are also part of the problem. You can only see whats in front of you and have no vision. Like the sheep being led to slaughter.

          • Steven says:

            Seriously, just shut up. You have zero concept about what I know or what I don’t know. I wasn’t sure exactly what you meant when you said “hidden taxes”, but I’m very much aware about taxation. I’m hardly “part of the problem”. Some might argue that part of the problem are pompous asses like yourself that think you have the only solutions and are the only ones able to see the problem. You think the US pays a lot for gas? Our gas is so heavily subsidized by the government that we’re paying MUCH lower gas prices than Europe. This is why the right misses the big picture. They have zero wild view and wouldn’t know the definition of compromise if it was tattooed on their arm. Don’t worry. I’m sure if you keep spouting your platitudes and voting the party line, you’ll eventually see some change (rolls eyes).

          • hirider says:

            My my, Joe seems to have hit a sore spot here.

            “When you can’t get them to agree with you, call them names and denigerate them.” – Saul Alinski’s ‘Rules For Radicals.’

            Oil companies aren’t subsidized any more than any other companies are. They get the same write-offs as any other business gets when amortizing equipment they’ve purchased. The reason prices are lower here is that we produce almost half of it here in America. Europe and Asia imports almost all of their oil. NOT because our government subsidizes it.

          • Anonymous says:

            In response to Joe in regards to Steven’s lack of understanding of our tax system. Joe you are absolutely correct with the hidden taxes that Steven seems to be so unaware of. There are so many hidden taxes within our system it’s unbelievable. And isn’t it typical of an uninformed Person to attack the person rather than issue when he called you a pompous ass. This is so typical of liberal propaganda. It seems whenever a liberal or “progressive” has an issue with the conservatives point of view they don’t stick to the facts they attack the person in order to scare them away from speaking their mind. Here are some of the hidden taxes Steven that you are so unwilling to recognize. Text or alcohol, tax on cigarettes, excise tax on tires, Highway used taxes that you don’t even see because they’re buried within your property taxes. What about the other school taxes These are just a few. Most businesses pay additional taxes on fuel usage based on the number of miles that they travel in and out of different states. It’s called IFTA. Interstate fuel tax agreement. Most self-employed or Small businesses pay a huge number of hidden taxes that no one ever sees. Unfortunately their employees are the ones that suffer because they have to meet a profit margin in order to stay in business. This affects workers salaries and benefits! The next time you decide to take someone about taxes you might want to do a little research for yourself Steven.

          • Steven says:

            You’re joking with that quote, right? You do realize he led the charge in name calling, don’t you? Yeah, it’s a bit of a sore spot when instead of arguing facts, Joe turns to insults. I may have responded a little harshly, but at least my response was laced with perspective.

            As far as oil subsidies, how can you say with a straight face that oil companies are subsidized to the same extent as everyone else? I’m a small business owner. I don’t see the same benefits. You’re just wrong on this one. (Hey look, a source! Reading is fun!)

            http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/

          • hirider says:

            Steven, nope. I can’t accept your link as a true source of reliable inormation. That’s a leftist global warming site that is funded by all the establishment liberal elites in America.

          • hirider says:

            Joe, I don’t want to seem insulting to you because I’m a lifelong Republican, but for a Democrat, you are wiser than many of those I personally know. Two thumbs up.

          • Steven says:

            In response to you, Anonymous, yeah I got a little frustrated at Joe. Basically, his only comment was to insult me and call me a name. I would say he started the mudslinging and I, in poor judgement, continued it. You would be pretty naïve to assign name calling to a party. That’s a human trait, my friend. As for hidden taxes, I’m well aware of them. For some reason, I thought the OP was referring to income tax. It’s a matter of semantics and I didn’t catch what he was talking about. Yet everyone feels so obligated to jump on me, calling me names, and using my misunderstanding as some platform. Really weak. “Hidden taxes” is such a charged term anyway. It implies that there’s someone trying to pull the wool over your eyes in regards to taxation. You seem to be fairly aware of them all, so how “hidden” are they really? It would be impossible (or at least very difficult) to show EVERY SINGLE tax in EVERY circumstance that we are paying, so they get bundled into the cost. Taxes are necessary to make our country go. Don’t like that gas tax (which is one of the lowest fuel taxes in the world, by the way)? Let’s get rid of it! And while we’re at it, why don’t we get rid of our road system as well? No need for that. And let’s get rid of emergency services and all the other things that our taxes help to pay for. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a fan of over taxation, but the way some of you are talking, you make it sound like you want to get rid of taxes entirely, which is just silly. Unless you have some other grand idea that you’d love to propose?

            And I think MIke Rothschild pointed out correctly, what in the world do hidden taxes have to do with the original subject anyway?

          • hirider says:

            “Don’t like that gas tax (which is one of the lowest fuel taxes in the world, by the way)? Let’s get rid of it! And while we’re at it, why don’t we get rid of our road system as well?”
            Your statement is wrong! Federal gasoline taxes COULD be lower. But then, the feds wouldn’t have enough federal highway money to send back to the states as bribes with strings attached. Obama evn threatened to hold back federal funds, if any states refused to set up insurance exchanges that Obamacare required, until the District court struck that down.

          • Steven says:

            How is my statement wrong? I never said that the tax COULDN’T be lower. I simply said that it was among the lowest of fuel taxes, which is correct. I stand by the statement that our fuel taxes are pretty dang low. Now, if you want to talk about improper use of tax money, I’m with you. That’s one thing I won’t argue against. But that wasn’t the topic at hand.

          • hirider says:

            Several years ago Congress was holding a hearing on oil company excess profits. Shell Oil Company pres. testified ans stated, “After all of our operating and production costs, we earn four percent profit total. Compare that to the federal gasoline tax of 18.6 percent. How can you say that we are gouging our customers?” That’s just federal gasoline taxes! ’nuff said.

          • Steven says:

            Can you state your source? Because my research shows that the current federal gas tax is 18.4 CENTS per gallon, not 18.6 PERCENT. That’s quite a big difference.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_taxes_in_the_United_States

            http://www.gaspricewatch.com/web_gas_taxes.php

          • I’ll go ahead and answer my own question. To a certain segment of the population, taxation = theft. Since Nazi Germany had high taxes (though not as high as the top tax rates in the US in the 50’s or the UK in the 60’s) and confiscated property for state use, that also = theft.

            They also have swallowed the fiction that President Obama does nothing but tax everything you earn and buy.

            So Obama = taxes. Taxes = theft. Theft = Hitler. Hitler = Obama.

            It has nothing to do with the truth, but there it is.

          • MJ says:

            So exactly what is the Truth?

    • What do hidden taxes have to do with fascism? Were hidden taxes a particular issue in Nazi Germany?

  69. Joe says:

    You are totally off your rocker. For one I am a registered Democrat. Who is the pompous one here? You assume that I am on the right? Look in the mirror and then tell me who follows lock step along party lines. Look at most of the oil producing countries in the world and see what their citizens pay. They pay prices a lot lower than us. Venezuela pays around 20 cents a gallon. Saudi Arabia pays 45 cents and gets 200 liters free a year. There are others that pay a lot lower price than us but it would be useless to go on. We are an oil producer now and Europe is not. The unfortunate thing is that we citizens will not get a reduction in prices as other oil producing countries citizens do. The reason for that is that we will export our oil to raise profits for stockholders of corporations. That is the truth. Period!

  70. Joe says:

    What I was trying to say was in regards to the article by Ms.Werthmann. I just want people to listen to those that came before us. There are lessons to be learned from those that survived the Holocaust whether they were in the camps as my mother was or if they were living as citizens in the offending countries as my cousins wife did. When my mother who is also a Democrat sees this country slipping into tyranny I have to pay attention. My wife left Cuba as a child with her parents because they saw what was happening to their country. When she tells me she remembers her parents reaction when Castro came to power and the disappointment after the realization of what was actually happening, I think long and hard when people like Ms. Werthmann try to warn us.Remember these people say the changes in their governments and the effect it had on them and their country. We have not and most likely cannot see what is coming. That is what makes changes to tyranny possible. More often than not it creeps up on you till its to late to realize you are one of the sheep.

    • Joe says:

      should read “Remember these people saw the changes

    • Just for the sake of accuracy, Kitty Werthmann is not actually a Holocaust survivor.

      • hirider says:

        “Just for the sake of accuracy, Kitty Werthmann is not actually a Holocaust survivor.”

        In Kitty’s whole article, nowhere did she say she was a survivor of the holocaust! She did say that her mother was in those camps, though. To me, that’s getting very personally close!!

    • John Smith says:

      Joe – you are very right about history, and sheep. We should always look at the past. What upsets me is that her column was written in 2003 – 10 yrs ago – but has only recently resurfaced in order to blame all our ills on the current administration. I’m an independent who doesn’t worship either party, but when I see history used when it suits a fragment of society, I cringe.
      As you can see from prior posts, I did quite a bit of research on her, and came to the conclusion that she is a rather bitter person, whose message got hijacked and she went with the flow. Incidentally, her hometown, Ramingstein, is now a peaceful little tourist town with several B&B’s. She’d be better off right there, right now, than to instill fear here.

      • hirider says:

        I first received a copy of her letter back in 2006. It has been around several times.

        • John Smith says:

          Sure, within relatively limited circles. But it wasn’t till 2009 that it got traction, and again Glen

        • John Smith says:

          Ooops, hit “post” by mistake:
          Sure, within relatively limited circles. But it wasn’t till 2009 that it got traction, and again when Glenn Beck had er on in 2010. And even more so late 2012. Just go to Google Trends, and enter her name to see the stats.
          Facts about Anschluss have been around since it happened. Why do they suddenly become of interest is another story.

  71. Joe says:

    You voted for Ron Paul then Obama? lol . Polar opposites? Some how I doubt that. Ron Paul had the most conservative voting record and Obama, well we all know that one. I voted for Ron Paul. I was a registered Democrat as a young voter and have since evolved. I have to thank Ed Koch for that one. He said if we agreed with everything he said we would have to be certifiable. So now I do question everything just like I did in the 60’s. lol I would love to know how you go from Ron Paul to Obama.

    • Steven says:

      Doubt it all you want, but that’s how it went down. The thing about Ron Paul that I really loved, and still do, is his push for more independent states. I live in Washington and am proud of the fact that we passed gay marriage and legalized marijuana. I hate the fact that the federal government has the power to do something about that (the weed, not the gay marriage). In 2012, while I initially supported Paul, when the race came down to Romney and Obama, I just trusted Obama a bit more when it came to fiscal matters (I’m even Mormon, BTW). I know that may sound crazy, but I had a really hard time with the republican rally cry of reducing taxes. Taxes were/are already at historic lows. Couple that with the fact that Romney wanted to increase military spending and that made NO sense to me. Decreased taxes + increased defense spending didn’t seem like a recipe for decreasing national debt. Even Ben Stein agreed with that one (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/18/ben-stein-taxes-low_n_1980540.html). I personally felt like the nation was headed in a better direction with Obama. Slower than I wild have liked, but better. I felt that he deserved a second chance. And the Republican Party and agenda just left a really bad taste on my mouth.

  72. Joe says:

    We can agree on the Republican party leaving bad taste. But to try to spend our way out of this mess is a recipe for disaster. You cannot (or I should say I believe you cannot) spend your way to solvency. Printing more and more fiat currency is not the answer. If you think we are heading in a better direction than so be it. I don’t. I would love for some form of socialized medicine but not in the manner that is being touted. I have paid for my healthcare for over 40 years now and I know that with Obamacare the price will go up. My rates have already gone up 3 times in the last 6 months. My wife cannot get health insurance and there is no way in the world that Obamacare would help her other than possibly fining her. We do have gap insurance for her which is a help but it also is expensive in relation to the coverage for her. I hope you are right and we are heading in the right direction but unfortunately I do not believe we are going that way. I am a supporter of the 2nd amendment and yes I do fear our government. The reason for that is my mom and what she went through and my cousins wife who is German born and lived through Hitlers Germany. Her husband by the way is a 25 year veteran of the armed forces and was one of the first Green Berets. He is 84. He is a multi medal winner and also was a resistance fighter in WW2. He also fought for Israel in 1948 and is a man who I admire and respect more than anybody in the world. He has seen tyranny head on and agrees that we are heading down that road. As I said previously, when these survivors from the past talk we should listen
    GOOD NIGHT ALL AND IT WAS NICE TALKING TO YOU.

    • Steven says:

      It was good talking with you as we’ll. I apologize if I got heated or condescending at any point. The Internet makes that all too easy.

      I definitely don’t think Obama was an ideal solution but, to me, he felt like the best choice. I definitely agree we need to cut spending, but I don’t believe that that’s enough. Unfortunately, we need more income in the way of taxes. I have a feeling that we’ll continue to make slow progress but Obama may very well be remembered as the president that couldn’t quite dig us out. Time will tell…

  73. Fred Grant says:

    Good try to grossly distort her age to discredit her, Steve. You and Mike must love it that Obama can now target US Citizens deemed threats to the state for instant annihilation via drone. Hitler would have loved it….no need for camps and no paper trail.

  74. Anonymous says:

    And you didn’t even talk about gasoline tax, heating oil tax, cell phone tax, about a third of my bill, hotel tax, users feew (tax), city line charges (tax), Landing fees on plane tickets (tax), disposal fees on tires and motor oil (tax), and on and on and on.

  75. L Smith says:

    If you watched Obama’s talk last night you will see how we are following quickly in the path of Nazi Germany. VERY DISTURBING.

    • Steven says:

      Would you care to share some examples?

    • hirider says:

      How about Obama’s condescending state of the union speech? Once again, Americans who ownfirearms don’t trust him.

      “They deserve a vote,” hollered Obama, pointing to the liberal drooling anti-gun activists in the galleries.

      Well, Veterans deserved a vote on whether they would receive due process from a court of law before having their constitutional gun rights taken away. But, when Senator Chuck Schumer threatened to filibuster the DoD authorization bill in order to block that amendment, it didn’t happen.

      Americans deserved a vote on Sen. John Thune’s reciprocity legislation — allowing concealed carry holders to carry their firearms from one state into another. But Democratic Leader Harry Reid made sure each controversial bill coming before the Senate was filled with the maximum number of allowable amendments, so Thune’s amendment couldn’t be offered.

      Americans deserved a vote on appropriations language to block 16,000 IRS agents from imprisoning those who refused to comply with the anti-gun ObamaCare law. But Reid carefully manipulated the Senate rules to insure the ObamaCare-related votes were kept to a minimum.

      From responsible budgeting to gun rights, Reid’s office became the graveyard for votes on issues of interest to conservatives.

      • tabouley says:

        The concealed carry law tramples on states’ rights, which I thought conservatives were in favor of. If you want to conceal carry, move to a state that has allowed it. Ask police officers if they like this bill, I guarantee you most of them do not.
        Oh, and nice of you to refer to the familys of gun vitims as “drooling”, anti-whatever, yadayada.

        • hirider says:

          I wasn’t referring to victims families. Where in my statement did I say that? I said “….liberal drooling anti-gun activists…”! That means “activists!” not victims? Get your head on straight! Those activists in the galleries werr the Feinsteins, Reids, Schumers, Lautenbergs, and a whole host of liberals that are too numerous to name here.
          Why should I move to another state? The second amendment is for ALL Americans, not just for those who live in Wyoming, Texas, Arizona, or whatever state you want to name. Kitty Werthman was telling how their rights were incrementally taken away by the people in power (the Nazis) to the point that they became slaves of the state. Anyone with a gram of reasoning can see the similarities between the Nazis then and those presently in power in America now. Did Bloomberg lawfully enact his gun control legislation openly and fairly?
          No he did not! He rammed it through in the middle of the night. Is Harry Reid allowing gun bills to come to the floor for a fair vote? No he’s not! He’s loading those bills down with amendments that he knows the conservatives will not pass any other way! Is Obama following law on the gun control issue? No he’s not! Now he’s trying to circumvent congress by issuing executive orders to get his way!

          • tabouley says:

            Many Presidents have issued executive orders to “get their way”, that you don’t agree with what he wants to do is what you have the problem with, and I would probably feel the same way about any executive order I disagreed with..
            I would assume that the gun victims families are in favor of gun control, and it’s also a safe assumption that these activists that you are ridiculing have their approval.
            There is nothing about concealed carry in the constitution. Different states have seen fit, as they are entitled to, also by the same Constitution, to regulate guns in different ways.
            Concealed carry laws, along with the Stand Your Ground laws in Florida and other states are making life very difficult for law enforcement personnel, nobody seems to pay any attention to this. There is also our right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, which is becoming “trampled” under the rights of gun owners who seem to be indifferent to the suffering and deaths of tens of thousands of people killed and injured ever year in the US.

          • tabouley says:

            The Government is “in control” whether we like it or not. If the government, say, instead of increasing the minimum wage, does away with it, wages will go down. Do you think McDonald’s or other similar companies would increase wages if they didn’t have to? Do you think they would take any extra money saved by not having to provide health insurance or a minimum wage and lower prices, or give raises? No, that money would go into their pockets. Luxury car or boat dealers might benefit, but not most people.
            I am repeating myself, but other Presidents have issued Executive Orders.

          • l smith says:

            When there is an increase in minimum wage, there is an increase in the cost of the products we buy. Businesses are going to recoup this extra expense so in the long run we don’t actually realize an increase in the minimum wage. It’s a vicious circle. When I ran a business, I paid above minimum to those who were hard working, loyal and consientious. I think most employers today are desperate for that kind of employee so if people want more pay they should have to work for it instead of being guaranteed a certain wage by the government, regardless of their work ethic.

          • l smith says:

            Steven, you asked for examples-to use government money to create jobs and strengthen the nation’s middle class,stricter gun control,expansion of early education to every American 4-year-old, create 15 “manufacturing institutes” that would bring together businesses, universities and the government. He said he was prepared to go around lawmakers and act through executive orders. In other words, Government control. We’ll take care of you but give us your guns first. That isn’t happening now but as in her article, it begins with required registration. All this is just setting the stage.

          • hirider says:

            Obama’s transformation of America will come couched in logical, reasonable sounding language. His future changes has been preceded by conditioning (today) that come in tiny, little incremental moves towards that ultimate destination. Like a frog in a pot of boiling water…the water is heated slowly so that the frog never notices that it’s getting warmer until it’s too late.

            Greater power is becoming more concentrated into fewer hands. Corporations and governments have increasingly globalized and interconnected to the point that they feel the ripple effects from any number of places on the planet. Personal anonymity is almost non-existent anymore. No other generation has been so utterly chronicled, documented, and scrutinized as we have been.

            This digital replica world will be so thoroughly dissected and studied by nefarious unseen men and women, that when the time comes for implementation, no one will be able to hide. No one will be able to cheat the system, because every plausible scenario will have already been run through computer models every possible way. Brain Machine/Computer Interface (BCI) technology is making such ground breaking strides that a person won’t even be able to hide back what’s on their mind from the authorities who seek any particular sort of information. Facial recognition technology will be employed in every major city as part of efforts to control an increasingly lawless society. Black markets will not be able to exist outside of the Beast’s system because of the all Seeing Eye that will exist on the streets and overhead, and will not only have human enforcers, but demonic oversight that will blanket the earth.

          • Steven says:

            I’m going to have to disagree with you on your first point. The cost of products isn’t tied to minimum wages. Product cost in a capitalist society is tied to supply and demand. I’ve never heard of a business changing their pricing because the minimum wage went up. And minimum wage isn’t a reflection of mean income which would be a more accurate picture of disposable income. I run a business myself and have never once considered minimum wage when adjusting my pricing model. Pricing has always been determined by P&L’s and what the general demand for my product is as well as the pricing of similar competing products.

          • lsmith says:

            So you are saying that a business doesn’t consider the cost a salaries paid out, when they are setting the price for their product? That makes no sense. Especially in a small business, every penny counts so, yes, you must consider the salaries.

          • MJ says:

            You say you ran a business? The cost of a product is related to the labor cost to produce it as well as the cost of material. The Price (what you sell it for) is regulated by supply and demand. If you can’t make it for less than you can sell it, then you lose money. Minimum wage is a bunch of crap. Lets go to that supply and demand model you talk about on cost. That is people get paid what they are willing to work for or what the market will bear, not some fabricated number that causes jobs to go away. You better be worth more that you are getting paid. If you arn’t, there is no reason to hire you to make something to sell to someone else. Oh yeah, business owners are supposed to invest their money to make nothing and/or subsidize under performers.

          • Steven says:

            I think many people here need an education about how executive orders work. An unconstitutional executive order would almost definitely get overturned by the supreme court. We still live in a nation of checks and balances. The president doesn’t have carte blanch power to just create whatever law he feels like. And I’m not exactly sure how your examples equate to Nazi Germany. I know if you attach the words “Government Control” to something that it sounds ominous, but it does not Nazi Germany make.

          • Steven says:

            I see what you are saying now. It sounded like you were saying that a business would consider the general minimum wage when adjusting pricing (because people would have more to spend), not only as it related to what they were paying out in payroll. I still don’t really agree. While the bottom line of a business is obviously critical, most business will charge for their product whatever the market will bear. If a business is changing their pricing because of payroll costs go up, that seems like a business that’s circling the drain.

            There are so many other ways to increase profit margin besides raising product costs. If a company can raise product costs and not see a loss in sales, then they weren’t pricing themselves right in the first place. Besides, minimum wage doesn’t even keep up with cost of living increases so, in theory, a business should be raising their pricing faster than the minimum wage increases. Obviously, that’s just in theory and there are so many variables there (business type, market saturation, etc…).

  76. l smith says:

    to use government money to create jobs and strengthen the nation’s middle class,stricter gun control,expansion of early education to every American 4-year-old.create 15 “manufacturing institutes” that would bring together businesses, universities and the government. He said he was prepared to go around lawmakers and act through executive orders. In other words, Government control. We’ll take care of you nut give us your guns first. That isn’t happening now but as in her article, it begins with required registration. All this is just setting the stage.

  77. Anonymous says:

    Just last week, a small independent Seattle coffee shop had a sign at their cash register that the City of Seattle passed a law that employers in Seattle had to have paid sick leave for their employees. (although I’m glad the employees can now stay home when sick and will not be serving the public) This does impact the business’ financial picture. The business figured it would be a cost of about $25,000 to cover this paid time for his employees when they would not be at work. He noted that a 3 cent increase to his products was to cover that added expense the city now required of him. Added increases in cost to your business ALWAYS is passed on to the price of the product or service or they could not stay in business. It seems this could also apply to raising the minimum wage.

  78. Someone Else says:

    Didn’t you guys know? The only way to beat Hitler is with Republicanism!

  79. What leftists fail to see that this woman is talking about is that she sees the TREND of policy and law TRENDING the way she observed in Austria 1938 towards fascism. She is trying to WARN us that it could possibly happen here just as she watched in the 1930’s.

    • MarjiWoj says:

      Nicely put. Younger Americans these days are not only historically ignorant but few seem to have much capacity for analytic thought. Many of the above youthful utopians would be well-served to read Hannah Arendt’s “The Origins of Totalitarianism” (she can’t be easily dismissed as a dotty octogenarian), followed up by Mark Levin’s “Ameritopia.”

  80. Jim V says:

    Mike, your original article seems quite well thought out and quite eloquently expressed, all the way up to your conclusions at the end. It’s there where you jumped to some disrespectful & erroneous conclusions. Young man, you’re sharp, don’t stoop to disrespect and categorizing and do keep an open mind that Kitty W. just might be doing her own thinking still at age 87, and that her recall just might be still clear and correct, and that her conclusions of wanting to warn us youngsters today just might come from a genuine and true heart of compassion. Don’t categorize all her friends/associates as religious crazies and kooks to be ignored, they may be caring enough for you and your generation so that they take the time to offer warnings based on a long life of learning. Keep thinking critically, Mike, cause you’re good at it, but don’t jump off the thinktank at the end with disrespectful and “I’ve got it all figured out” conclusions.

    • MJ says:

      @ Jim V, well said and thank you. I totally agree with everything you wrote. Mike is very talented and it was frustrating for me to see the final conclusions.

    • Disagreeing with someone is not the same thing as disrespecting them. Despite (or perhaps because of) her personal experience, she has an agenda, and it’s worth discussing that agenda. I never said her memories weren’t genuine. What I am saying is that her conclusion is incorrect.

      But thank you for the compliments! I appreciate them.

      • MJ says:

        Okay Mike, your opinion of her conclusion is an opinion, not statement of fact or a logical arguement based on fact. Since you deny that my constitutional rights are being abridged, I believe you may have some logical flaws to deal with yourself, however intelligent you might be. And it wasn’t your disagreement that claused the conclusion by others of disrespect. It was the tone and choice of words and essentially calling her a liar, that brought the conclusion of several, if not many that you were disrespecting her. “It needs only to be expressed honestly without embellishment. Which is exactly what Kitty Werthmann isn’t doing.” Where I come from embellishment and not honest is the equiviant of a liar, intentionally stating things that are not true.

  81. G. Kerry Comerford says:

    I have become convinced, having listened to socialist fascists, that debate is useless. They have an agenda of totalitarianism and will do and say anything to get their way. Be prepared. The day will come when you will have to fight force with force. It is only your fault if you are unprepared. Long live the God given right of free will, Capitalism.

  82. Tripp Young says:

    Say what you want. Obama is the most socialist leaning president in history. If he is not a socialist, he is about as close as we have gotten to a socialist president. He certainly has ignored the consititution several times. Whether he is evil or not, we need to watch him and be careful that the “dreams” of his father are not ever realized in America.

  83. Anonymous says:

    “none of this is happening in the United States right now.” LIES! Our unemployment rate during the recent recession has never been anywhere near 33%- actually it is at 27% if you calculate it the way they did back then., “inflation is under control”- i don’t call 10-14% “under control”!!! and “interest rates are lower now than any time in our history” – only because raising them would instantly make our country insolvent.

    You clearly have drank too much kool-aid and don’t understand the first thing about what is going on in this country.

    • I’d love to know where your information is coming from. For example, according to usinflationcalculator.com, the inflation rate for January 2013 was 1.6%. A pretty far cry from 10-14%.

      • hirider says:

        Think about that Mike! January’s inflation rate is 1.6 %. If that rate holds true for the entire year, that’s 1.6 multiplied by 12 months equals 19.2 percent. This is just in America. Other nations have much higher rates: just as happened in the 1930s.

      • MJ says:

        Inflation of what. You do know they keep changing the idex to make it look better under the guise of making it more accurate and/or meaningful. If you compared numbers using the matrix from the 60’s or 70’s then it wouldn’t be anywhere close to the 1%-2% you quote. Kinda like the BS unemployment numbers that are being throw around like Hallelujah victories.

  84. Jack says:

    Rothschild, you are living in a dreamworld. My mother was also Austria in 1938, and my uncles, and several other relatives. Some made it to America some didn’t. Their stories match with Werthmann. But that’s not the issue. America has changed dramatically since 2001 and anyone who denies that we are now living in the post-Constitutional period of American history needs to have their head examined. Anyone who cannot make the comparisons with Austria and connect the dots must be heavily locked-in to their beliefs. Yes, you are correct in one thing. You are not an historian. Sadly, I have a feeling there is a dishonest agenda behind your piece.

  85. hirider says:

    * God is always in control and things are not as bad as we seem to think. Even though America’s economy is still in a recession and slowly gatting worse, we are not in the shape that the rest of the world is. America’s unemployment rate is still only officially under 8% (but unofficially, probably closer to 16%) while the rest of the world is in much more dire straights. God has blessed America with people who were able to help us make a historic leap to become the greatest nation in history.
    * Consider for instance that America represents about 5% of the world’s population but has created more wealth than the rest of the world combined. During this time period from 1492 until the present, we have never suffered a famine, in spite of the fact that even today famines continue to stalk the world over. Thoughout the ages humans have gone hungry and many have starved, in spite of their fertile land and manpower to work it. The ancient Assyrians, Persians, Egyptans and Greeks were intelligent people, but in spite of their intelligence they were never able to get enough to eat. They often killed their own babies because they couldn’t afford to feed them. The Roman Empire collapsed in famine.
    * For more than a hundred years America has been the food basket of the world. Americans have been responsible for more discoveries and inventions in science and elsewhere than any nation on earth. Its’ men and women have fought in wars throughout the world in defense of freedom, asking nothing for their efforts and sacrificing their lives in return. America is always the first nation to provide relief and aid to other nations that have had natural calamities, sometimes even to our enemies.
    * Americans have given more money in aid and relief than most of the other nations of the world combined. In spite of this we are the target of the hate and envy of the rest of the world. The fruits of freedom and the free market economics allowed science to thrive in an explosion of inventions and discoveries which, in 200 years took us from the horse and buggy, and sailboat technology, to the gigantic power resources of harnessed electricity, the internal combustion engine, jet propulsion, space exploration, and all the wonders of nuclear energy.
    * Communication went from smoke signals to the written word, to the telegraph, to telephone, radio, TV, to radar, to microwave technology. From the simplist vacum tube to the transistor and micro-electronics, to the cell phone and iPads. The whole earth was explored from pole to pole, from the depths of the sea to the furtherest reaches of the skies.
    * From Ancient history until the 1700s’ the average person’s lifespan was thirty years. Americas’ wonderous scientists (along with other nation’s contributions too) have extended the normal lifespan to 72 years. Only in the most backward areas of the world do we have Polio, Plague, Typhoid Fevers, Malaria, Tetanus, and even cancer, the scourge for the longest time, has seen cures and advances that were previously unbelievable. God has truly blessed America with wise talented men and women that have revolutionized the world.
    * * In 1963 America’s Supreme Court ruled that official prayers during school hours and at school sponsored functions were a violation of separation of church and state, and that prayers and proseletizing in the name of God was illegal. In effect, the Christian religion was kicked out of all of America’s government activities, functions, buildings, etc.
    *The first school massacre in America occurred July 26, 1764. The school master was shot and scalped; the nine children were scalped, and two other children survived their injuries. Four children were taken prisoner. The four murderers were Lenape Indians who were ticked off at the results of the French and Indian War. In 1927, 163 years after Pontiac’s Rebellion, there was the Michigan Bath School Disaster, the deadliest mass murder of children and their teachers in United States history. Google it.
    * Another school mass murder occurred May 6, 1940 in South Pasadena, California. Recently fired principal, Vieling Spencer, killed five school officials before shooting himself.

    In 176 years, there were 3 school massacres that left 54 dead. Back in those days, God and religion, as well as prayer were fundamental parts of the school’s curriculum. There were no more mass murders until 26 years later in 1966 after God was banned from the public school system in 1963, at least as far as the curriculum went, by the U.S. Supreme Court with a little help from Madalyn Murray O’Hair and other atheists, as well as a few rabbis and preachers

    How many school massacres have there been post-1960? 174 dead, 21 massacres

    August 1, 1966: 16 dead, University of Texas-Austin
    November 12, 1966: 5 dead, Rose-Mar College of Beauty, Mesa, Arizona
    December 30, 1974: 3 dead, Olean, New York
    June 12, 1976: 7 dead, California State University, Fullerton
    January 17, 1989: 6 dead, Cleveland School, Stockton, California
    November 1, 1991: 5 dead, Iowa University of Iowa, Iowa City
    May 1, 1992: 4 dead, Lindhurst High School, Olivehurst, California
    February 2, 1996: 3 dead, Frontier Middle School, Moses Lake, Washington
    August 15, 1996: 3 dead, San Diego State University, San Diego, California
    October 1, 1997: 3 dead, Pearl High School, Pearl, Mississippi
    December 1, 1997: 3 dead, Heath High School, West Paducah, Kentucky
    March 24, 1998: 5 dead, Westside Middle School, Craighead County, Arkansas
    May 21, 1998: 4 dead, Thurston High School, Springfield, Oregon
    April 20, 1999: 15 dead, Columbine High School, Columbine, Colorado
    March 21, 2005: 9 dead, Minnesota school
    October 2, 2006: 6 dead, Amish School, Pennsylvania
    April 16, 2007: 32 dead, Virginia Tech, Virginia
    February 14, 2008: 6 dead, The Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, Illinois
    February 27, 2012: 3 dead, Chardon High School, Chardon, Ohio
    April 7, 2012: 7 dead, Oikos University, Oakland, California
    December 14, 2012: 29 dead, Sandy Hook Elementary School, Newtown, Connecticut

    The figures pretty much speak for themselves. Pre-1960, there were 3 school attacks in 176 years with 54 murdered. Post-1960, there have been 21 school attacks in 46 years with 174 murdered.

    God gave us freedom to seek unimaginable achievments that benefited all mankind. Kicking God out of our lives bring on unintended consequences of the worst kind immaginable.

  86. Nck says:

    Steve…..you LOOOOOOOOOOVE to talk, don’t ya? But, one someone is discussing whether or not HITLER can repeat himself today, in the USA…….it would be BENEFICIAL to that persons CREDIBILITY if he or she knew something about HITLER. You used the words “world domination” to describe hitlers main motive….., exactly where did you come up with the notion that Hitler wnated to DOMINATE the world???

  87. Nck says:

    OH…..and “STEVEN”…..how many business do you run, at this time ? I mean , it seems your pretty sure of yourself when you are instructing others on the reality of pricing………….so, how many millions are you grossing, how many people are you employing, and how many tax dollars is your brainchild contributing to the economy???

  88. Nck, Hitler wrote about it quite a bit in his second, unpublished book, and spoke many times about the struggle to control the world. There are also numerous quotes from Goebbels, Himmler and other high-ranking Nazis about Germany’s ultimate plan.

  89. AshriChan says:

    @Mike I liked your story and I really liked reading the comments this taught me things about politics, that I never learned in school or never cared to learn about. Thank you so much. (: keep on writing. Your Great.

  90. noneofyourdamnbusiness says:

    It’s ironic that your last name is Rothschild and you write this shit.

    • hirider says:

      NOYDB— You said it the best it of all!!!! Mr. Rothschild is a narcissistic megomaniac!

      • This is the greatest thing anyone has ever said about me.

      • Reg says:

        Ho-Ho-Ho, then it’s hirider who is the narcissistic megomaniac.

        Obviously one of Santa’s pixies. But I just have to stamp my foot to find that the magnanimous Santa has room for such a racist under bridge micro-brain. Now that’s ironic. It can only be out of pity.

      • hirider says:

        Because the Rothschilds were much wiser than you, and built an empire that many of the richest people in the world today cannot match, ever.

        • Reg says:

          If riches and power are the arbiters of success, then Hitler did pretty well up to the 22nd of July 1941 after which he really stuffed-up, while the Yanks dithered indecisively until December.

          • hirider says:

            LOTS of people earn riches and power. crust of the point is to earn it without getting greedy and going too far. Yes, Hitler did pretty well, but that’s where he differs fron the Rothschilds.

          • Reg. says:

            Am I to understand that the crux of your point is that Hitler was NOT greedy?

            And how is it that you are so certain that these “lots of people” gain their riches without being greedy?

            Greed is the motive force of the US economy otherwise the workers of America would not be working for just a few dollars an hour while the top 1% couldn’t give a toss. Look at the figures and weep ffs.

  91. noooo says:

    I have to say, I disagree with the opinions of this article. I do, however, appreciate your understanding of the subject, Mike. You are very intelligent, and I did take the time to read your entire article and process and think about all your opinions.
    Now, I’m no braniac, and I’m just a 14 year old kid, so I’m not too experienced and I’m kind of naive, but I would have to agree with Kitty’s opinion that the United States is sort of heading down that socialist route. Granted, no we don’t have huge inflation or interest or unemployment like you noted and you are correct, not even close to the 25% that Kitty documented, but I think she is right to compare the similarities of Hitler and Obama. The fact that it does start out small and gradual, not over night. Like she said, it took years. And do I think Obama is “ruining the nation for sh!ts and giggles?” No, I don’t think he’s that kind of person, and I definitely dont think he’s going to do something as drastic as exterminate an entire group of people for no reason. I just don’t see the route of trying to take away firearms and trying to socialize medicine being a good one. Obama is intelligent, yes, but I just don’t agree that his ways are good, and I truly do think they will lead to too much control and socialism, eventually. And when she noted a huge tax increase, I do honestly see that coming if socialized medicine were to occur. I will also say that while reading the article, I sort of predicted what she’d say next. When she started mentioning the welfare and entitlements and programs, I actually saw where she was going. I formed my own opinion even before I finished reading the article, and thought “Wow, I bet this free healthcare and welfare seemed good at the start, but i bet it led to immense tyranny, and huge increases in tax and decreases in well-being.” And I was right, I read the rest of the article and that’s what she said. I truly think that with government trying to hand out welfare/entitlement, and slowly convert healthcare into socialized medicine, and to take away firearms, I see the bad in it, and I do see it coming. I think Kitty is right to make this comparison. And I truly think that is what will happen if it continues the way it does. thank you for writing this article Mike. As a 14 year old high schooler, I enjoy trying to think and learn new opinions, but unfortunately I cannot see myself agreeing with yours. this article just shows me that I am sure of my opinions/beliefs. A very interesting read.

  92. Jeff in CA says:

    I’m sure the Austrians would have fought tooth and nail if they knew the results before voting Hitler into office. Her message is clear, little by little, our freedoms that have made us strong are being eroded away… piece by piece. I think its a fair warning to us Americans. Austria, a civilized nation, succombed to the flair that was Hitler and his party. Why can’t Americans do the same thing?

  93. TruthSeeker says:

    Mike, when the voice of reason is drowned out by fear, we should all brace ourselves for bad events. Nazi Germany happened because people like you were afraid to speak up. The paranoia from the detractors of your article illuminates the dark side in all of us. Ironically, that fear and paranoia tells us far more about how Hitler and the Nazi Party were able to come to power than any current political or cultural trends. The good news is that well-reasoned people like you are the reason Kitty’s warning is unfounded. America will never ever go down that road. Not ever. The logistics of it happening here are staggering and laughable. Thanks for the article and please keep up the good work.

  94. “To compare Austria under the Nazis and the US now is to embrace a staggering array of logical fallacies, all of them piling on top of each other, crushing her argument. The entire thesis of her message is one giant slippery slope with nothing to back it up but potentially flawed anecdotal evidence and her own opinion. It is a vast excluded middle. It’s an argument based on emotion, hyperbole and disdain.”

    But she didn’t make that argument. You did. All she did was describe her experiences and suggest that people do let the “happen here”. It seems YOU are the one making the actual comparisons. Apparently, she struck a nerve.

    Then, you, yourself, go on to commit one of the largest fallacies known to political hacks the world over: association fallacy to the point of ad homimem, not to mention the straw man you set up in the beginning of the piece. This is the sort of intellectual dishonesty and intellectual laziness that, very well, could facilitate a dictatorial tyrannical regime.

    The problem here is not Socialism or Capitalism. The US and Europe are a combination of both with a big hunk of Mercantilsm thrown in. The problem is statism. The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer, and the Middle Class cries for “protection” in the form of fundamentalist paternalism.

    Being as product of the 80s, I have seen more and more of the fundamental rights of individuals slip away. Be it, the War on Drugs, the War on Poverty, the War on Terrorism, the government has been stealing, no, the people have been handing over their rights so that they can be “protected” from the big, bad wolf that lurks in the forest. Well, hey there Little Red Riding Hood, let the government take care of you and the American people are incapable of taking care of themselves.

  95. Anonymous says:

    All theory, no action. Money talks to itself just like internet debaters talk to other internet debaters. No ideas are being exchanged here. No agreements, conclusions. Just the smashing of ideologies together. Go do something beneficial. Promoting ideologies is not beneficial. Join the human race, stop trying to control what you unlike about others. And whatever grandiose idea about saving our nation or tearing it down to start anew, these are closer to insanity then practical. It is the emotional and irrationality of groups of like minded idealist which cause pain and suffering constantly, not the ideals you form to villainize one of the greatest expressions of human progress the world has seen. to urge the throwing of the baby out with the bath water only leaves us with dead babies. Also learn some neuroscience, maybe then you can start to understand why you feel anxiety or anger towards these situations.

  96. bbarnavi says:

    I think I’d stick to the classical narratives of the rise of Nazism. You know, by Wiesenthal, Wiesel, just about every alter kocker I see in shul…

    She blabs about the EVILS of removing Catholicism from schools and ensuring universal health care, but NOTHING about the cruel war and genocide machine that required loads more taxes. Hmm…

  97. Marjorie Snyder says:

    It’s not a socialist takeover at all going on in the USA now, as Miss Werthman claims. It’s an attempt at a fascist takeover. Hitler was a fascist, not a socialist. Let’s get that straight right now. The extreme right wing conservatives smell of fascism. Fascism is extreme conservatism at it’s worst. That’s truly fearsome.

    • hirider says:

      Actuallu, off the top of my head, socialism seems to be worse than facism. Under facism an owner of a business will retain the title and ownership of his property but the government will give orders to him as to what he can produce, the quantity to be produced, and who he can sell it to. The government then pays him what it considers to be a reasonable price (whether fair or not). Under communism, the government nationalizes all properties and actually manages the daily operations itself. Correct me if I’m wrong.

  98. H4RL4N says:

    Mike, I won’t go into the many flaws in your reasoning or observation because so many others here have already done so. I’ll just say that the thing that is apparent to me is that because Werthman is relating a story that concerns Hitler and Nazi Germany, then she is necessarily saying that things now are as bad as they were under Nazi Germany. That isn’t the case. You also seem to think that because all of the stats and conditions in Austria are not explicitly correlative to America today, then Werthman is also telling tall tales. Again, that isn’t the case. Werthman is talking about two situations which are similar, but not identical. She’s extrapolating from her experience to one that does bear some similarities and issuing a warning. You of course, seem unable to discern this and are sure that she is comparing Obama to Hitler. The only thing I find fascinating is that you just didn’t call her a racist and be done with it.

    • Why would I call her a racist?

    • John Smith says:

      @H4RL4N: you – and others – claim that Mike is just making up that Ms Werthmann is comparing Hitler to Obama. Indeed, in 2003 when she wrote the original text that became a viral email only many years later, Obama was still unknown. How could she even think of him?
      However, once he was elected, and she turned into a hero to some, it became the essence of her narrative:
      F.ex. in 2011, on a Shad Olson radio show about anti-semitism, she stated: “What Hitler couldn’t finish, that is what Barack Obama is doing right now.”
      How’s that for a comparison?

      • So…Hitler comparisons are out because President Obama is part black. When he is acts in a clearly authoritarian leaning toward totalitarian way using Fascist techniques & methods is it OK to compare him to Mussolini or is that out too?

  99. Ken Anderson says:

    Hopefully everybody here understands the inherent diversionary nature of the whole left-right paradigm, in that it is a smokescreen behind which the forces of centralized authoritarianism operate. Both the left and the right advance centralized authoritarianism together, today. Let’s examine what would happen if there were a default button we could press to immediately restore the beacon of individual freedom and liberty of western civilization to what it was prior to all of the centralization of power and policymaking that occured from the civil war forward.

    No 14th Amendment, no notion of Federal authority superceding state authority and individual authority on virtually any matter the Feds decide they’d like to intrude into. That change was at the heart of the civil war; slavery was a dying institution and more a catalyst than the central issue of that conflict. The central issue was whether states joining an association voluntarily retained the right to sever themselves from that same association by similar action of their elected reps. Postwar, the states that had formed the confederacy were not allowed to come out from under military occupation, military governance and be represented in the legislative branch of Federal govt until they ratified this amendment, essentially at gunpoint. To their credit, it wasn’t just confederate states that initially rejected ratification; the amendment was rejected by Kentucky, Delaware & Maryland. Additionally, New Jersey and Ohio rescinded their earlier ratifications prior to the necessary 2/3rds being accumulated but the Federal govt refused to recognize those states’ rescindment actions. Oregon joined them by rescinding their earlier ratification three months after ratification had been declared. It was only the military governors that had been appointed in the former confederacy, who single-handedly ratified without any input from any elected rep, that made ratification, even after the very underhanded means of refusing to recognize valid rescindments, possible.

    The 13th amendment abolishing slavery, on the other hand, was ratified very quickly and without mandatory requirements imposed on the confederate states. Mississippi’s legislature finally got around to it in 1995, and only completed the action officially last month by notifying the Office of the Federal Registrar of the 1995 action. Besides Mississippi, the only states to initially reject the 13th were all union states – Delaware, New Jersey & Kentucky. No state ever rescinded once it ratified.

    For Lincoln, holding the union together even by denying voluntary secession of those ties was paramount over any slavery issues; in his 1861 inaugeral speech he supported the Corwin amendment that had just passed in both chambers and sent to the states for consideration for ratification, which would have made it the 13th amendment and warded off the civil war had it been ratified prior to looming secessionary actions:

    “I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution . . . has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service [slaves]. I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.” – Abraham Lincoln

    …next up, the 16th amendment

  100. If anything, I’m gratified to see that the discussion continues even as the generation who outlived those atrocities leaves the forum. After 22yrs as 12th generation Pennsylvanian, I’ve had the honor of living as an expatriate in Europe & Asia since 1989. Frau Werthmann’s story is not unique. The crucial point for every individual to ask oneself is, “Who is my leader? In whom do I trust? Do I apply myself to self-government?” If you don’t know where you want to end up, then don’t be surprised by the aftermath.

  101. You are absolutely correct when you say that Ms Werthmann:has the right to believe her conclusions. You are however wrong in your assertion she has a right to voice those opinions. Under the George W Bush Dick Cheney (Orwellian named) Patriot Act & later the NDAA of 2011 & reaffirmed in @012 it is against the law & considered a Terrorist act to “Make statements that may undermine confidence in the government.” BTW you may be “Detained” for mere suspicion of this, held indefinitely without trial & (as has happened already) be forcibly administered psychosis inducing drugs & subjected to sensory deprivation alternated with sensory bombardment & sleep deprivation all of which are known to cause psychosis. A theory would require a detailing of motivations & intended outcome. I don’t. These are simply easily verifiable facts. Draw you own conclusions or better yet protest the facts. What ever the desired out come of these things they are inhuman, unlawful & definitely Un American.

    • She hasn’t been detained yet. So I guess we’re still free.

      • they only detain those whose torture can induce self censorship. big brother however is watching…& recording. everything you ever said can be used against you in a secret cout, secret trial, after secret interrogation, followed by secret detention or imprisonment in secret prisons. just got to love people that don’t want to see the truth
        ]

  102. jbs says:

    I suppose if Ms. Werthmann’s speeches/email and this blog foster one to actually research this history for oneself, then valuable purpose will have been achieved. For instance, this entire subject has already been covered in great detail by a contemporary of the time by, without irony, an economist, F.A. Hayek in his “Road to Serfdom.” Read it. After this is done, whether or not Ms. Werthmann’s view is accurate becomes rather rhetorical.

  103. All the lady was doing was giving Americans a warning and relating her own experiences. Nothing to think deeply about. She was warning us that freedom isn’t taken away by force, but gradually and that humans usually vote their freedoms away. Her speech is a wake up call. I am so tired of the right wing/left wing crap! Obama isn’t Hitler but we Americans act like the 1930’s Germans who voted Hitler in and praised him. Please right wingers and left wingers BOTH of you need to wake up!

  104. van says:

    Mike, you mentioned snopes – it is still undetermined to them. you also say that the story is true, but do not say how you came to that conclusion.

  105. Vincenzo says:

    Hey Steve, regarding your statement: “He actually repealed more gun control laws in his FIRST year than GWB did in his entire 8 years. Here’s your source.”

    Steve, did you ever bother to read the entire article you chose to source? The only repeal of any firearms law was a reference to the prohibition of firearms in national parks. While Obama did sign it, it was a post script to the same legislation that Bush signed during his administration but was overturned by an activist judge in Washington D.C. And if you continue to read from what you posted Steve, you will see the entire site is a condemnation of Obama and his complete failure on passing any gun control laws and absolutely no reference whatsoever to the repeal of any others..

  106. evdebs says:

    Without going through all those responses, let me say that this is the usual right wing bullshit.

    I got the “Kitty Werthman” post a few minutes ago. It did not resemble my recollections about the Anschluss, which was forced upon Austria. I had too many friends while growing up in New York who related the actual history. I went to a Catholic school which related the history. I assume public schools taught the same history, so I don’t know how anyone with a decent education could not know it’s bullshit.

    I knew there had never been any such “vote,” so I went to Wikipedia for information. Here it is:

    Austria shared the economic turbulence of the Great Depression, with a high unemployment rate and unstable commerce and industry. During the 1920s was a target for German investment capital. By 1937, rapid German rearmament increased Berlin’s interest in annexation, because Austria was rich in raw materials and labor. It supplied Germany with magnesium and the products of the iron, textile and machine industries. It had gold and foreign currency reserves, many unemployed skilled workers and hundreds of idle factories, and large potential hydroelectric resources.[14]

    The First Republic, dominated from the late 1920s by the anti-Anschluss[15] Catholic nationalist Christian Social Party (CS), gradually disintegrated from 1933 (dissolution of parliament and ban of the Austrian National Socialists) to 1934 (Austrian Civil War in February and ban of all remaining parties except the CS). The government evolved into a pseudo-fascist, corporatist model of one-party government, which combined the CS and the paramilitary Heimwehr with absolute state domination of labour relations and no freedom of the press (see Austrofascism and Patriotic Front).

    Power was centralized in the office of the chancellor, who was empowered to rule by decree. The predominance of the Christian Social Party (whose economic policies were based on the papal encyclical Rerum Novarum) was an Austrian phenomenon. Austria’s national identity had strong Catholic elements that were incorporated into the movement, by way of clerical authoritarian tendencies not found in Nazism. Both Engelbert Dollfuss and his successor, Kurt Schuschnigg, turned to Austria’s other fascist neighbour, Italy, for inspiration and support. The statist corporatism often referred to as Austrofascism bore much more resemblance to Italian Fascism than German National Socialism. For his part, Benito Mussolini supported the independence of Austria, largely due to concern that Hitler would eventually press for the return of Italian territories once ruled by Austria. However, Mussolini needed German support in Ethiopia (see Second Italo-Abyssinian War). After receiving a personal assurance from Hitler that Germany would not seek territorial concessions from Italy, Mussolini began a client relationship with Berlin that began with the 1937 Berlin–Rome Axis.

    On 25 July 1934, Chancellor Dollfuss was assassinated by Austrian Nazis in a failed coup. The second civil war followed, lasting until August 1934. Afterward, leading Austrian Nazis fled to Germany but they continued to push for unification from there. The remaining Austrian Nazis started to make use of terrorist attacks against Austrian governmental institutions, causing a death toll of more than 800 between 1934 and 1938.

    Following Dollfuss’ assassination, his successor was Kurt Schuschnigg, who followed a similar political course. In 1935 Schuschnigg used the police to suppress the Nazi supporters in Austria. Police actions under Schuschnigg included gathering Nazis (and Social Democrats) and holding them in internment camps. The Austrofascism of Austria between 1934–1938 focused on the history of Austria and opposed the absorbing of Austria into the Third Reich (according to the philosophy Austrians were “better Germans”). Schuschnigg called Austria the “better German state” but struggled to keep Austria independent. Eventually Schuschnigg gave up his anti-Nazi program and in July 1936 he signed the Austro-German Agreement, which, among other concessions, allowed the release of Nazis imprisoned in Austria and the inclusion of National Socialists in his Cabinet. This did not satisfy Hitler and the pro-Germany Austrian Nazis grew in strength.

    [edit] 1938

    Following increasing violence and demands from Hitler that Austria agree to a union, Schuschnigg met with Hitler on 12 February at Berchtesgaden in an attempt to avoid the take-over of Austria. Hitler presented Schuschnigg with a set of demands which included appointing known Austrian Nazi sympathizers to positions of great power in the Austrian government. The key appointment was that of Seyss-Inquart who would take over as Minister of Public Security, with full and unlimited control of the police forces in Austria. In return Hitler would publicly reaffirm the treaty of 11 July 1936 and reaffirm his support for Austria’s national sovereignty. Schuschnigg accepted Hitler’s “deal”, returned to Vienna and made the changes to his government.[16]

    Seyss-Inquart was a long-time Nazi who sought the union of all Germans in one state. Leopold argues he was a moderate who favoured an evolutionary approach to union. He opposed the violent tactics of the Austrian Nazis, collaborated with Catholic groups, and wanted to preserve a measure of Austrian identity within the Third Reich.[17]

    One week later, Hitler made a speech in which he stated, “The German Reich is no longer willing to tolerate the suppression of ten million Germans across its borders.” This was clearly directed at Austria and Czechoslovakia. As would be proved throughout Hitler’s career, he could not be trusted to keep his side of any bargain.

    [edit] Schuschnigg announces a referendum

    On 9 March 1938, in an effort to preserve Austria’s independence, Schuschnigg scheduled a plebiscite on the issue of unification for 13 March. To secure a large majority in the referendum, Schuschnigg set the minimum voting age at 24, as he believed younger voters were now supporters of the German Nazi ideology. This was a risk, and the next day it became apparent that Hitler would not simply stand by while Austria declared its independence by public vote. Hitler declared that the referendum would be subject to major fraud and that Germany would not accept it. In addition, the German ministry of propaganda issued press reports that riots had broken out in Austria and that large parts of the Austrian population were calling for German troops to restore order. Schuschnigg immediately responded publicly that reports of riots were false.[18]

    Hitler sent an ultimatum to Schuschnigg on 11 March, demanding that he hand over all power to the Austrian National Socialists or face an invasion. The ultimatum was set to expire at noon, but was extended by two hours. Without waiting for an answer, Hitler had already signed the order to send troops into Austria at one o’clock.[19]

    Schuschnigg desperately sought support for Austrian independence in the hours following the ultimatum. Realizing that neither France nor Britain was willing to take steps, he resigned as chancellor that evening. In the radio broadcast in which he announced his resignation, he argued that he accepted the changes and allowed the Nazis to take over the government ‘to avoid the shedding of fraternal blood [Bruderblut]’.[20]

  107. CW says:

    evdebs – also according to Wikipedia, a vote was, in fact, held, albeit after the fact, which may be what Miss. Werthmann remembers.

    “Austria’s Chancellor Kurt Schuschnigg tried to hold a referendum for a vote on the issue. Although Schuschnigg expected Austria to vote in favour of maintaining autonomy, a well-planned coup d’état by the Austrian Nazi Party of Austria’s state institutions in Vienna took place on 11 March 1938, prior to the referendum, which they canceled.

    They transferred power to Germany, and Wehrmacht troops entered Austria to enforce the Anschluss. The Nazis held a plebiscite within the following month, asking the people to ratify the fait accompli. They claimed to have received 99.7% of the vote in favor.[4][5]”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anschluss

    Are you dismissing the entirety of Ms. Werthmann’s recounting of her experiences as “right wing bullshit” solely on the fact that you think there was no pro-Hitler vote held in Austria? Is Wikipedia both right and wrong? Is everything else in Ms. Werthmann’s recounting factually incorrect?

    Your dismissal of her entire message as “right wing bullshit” smacks alarmingly of a predilection for poop of the left-wing variety.

  108. Rorschach says:

    What’s also humorous is that I bet if you’d even suggested anti-Hitler opinions around the Werthmann household in 1938 you’d be an antique lampshade by now! We brought Nazis over here by the bucketload after the war and it is precisely those types now who will try to sell the narrative that “Oh the GERMAN & AUSTRIAN people suffered MORE from Hitler than ANYONE.. even the Jews.. ve had to suffer the construction of the autobahn and FORCED health insurance!”

  109. Anonymous says:

    While it’s likely the original article was sensationalized, I think the point of it still rings clear: that revolution, and the death of democracy, can reasonably come from within the system as well as by force, and that this revolution from the inside is even more subtle and frightening than one by an army. (Remember, Hitler tried to take over Germany by force and failed, and was imprisoned for it. Yet when he ran for office, he won easily.)
    It is the nature of government to grow. So, it is not terribly unreasonable to think that a “nanny state” can grow into something much more menacing. We cannot forget that the people of Germany, and other countries, really did support Hitler. They had no idea of the terrible crimes that he committed, because he was good at hiding what he was doing, and an excellent rhetorician. Most people will believe what someone in authority says, because, to them, this power gives them ethos. A Hitler-like figure could then easily come into power today, whether or not it actually is happening or not.
    It’s also fair to point out that this article shows clear signs of being biased as well. Attempting to discredit her, he says accuses her of being a “darling of the Tea Party movement” and associated with an organization “founded by the notoriously science-hating and conspiracy-loving activist Phyllis Schlafly.” He is probably a liberal, as opposed to the conservative Werthmann. This is not a news article; it is a review, meaning that it has an agenda as well. Take these words, not just Werthmann’s, with a grain of salt.

  110. anonymous says:

    You, sir, are a triumph off the public education system. Your “proof” that “this can’t happen here” is based on nit-picking percentage of unemployment and other trivialities. Might as well add that it’s nothing like modern United States because we speak English here so there can’t be any other similarities or patterns beyond that.

    I’m afraid you are already lost, but hopefully others with the ability for 3 dimensional thinking can see the patterns on a larger scale.

    God help us as a nation if people are really this simple and despite the overwhelming evidence still have faith in “the political system” which has failed to do anything to improve the lot of the average working American in well over 60 years. Giving free cellphones and EBT cards to layabouts is not “helping” anybody, but replacing the middle class with a dependent class and a class of low-rung party members in charge of the redistribution of wealth.

    • What’s funny is that people keep attacking me for saying “it can’t happen here”, when I’ve not only not said that, I’ve explicitly said “it CAN happen here.” It’s just not likely to, nor do I believe it is right now.

      • mariahwwa says:

        But Mike, that’s semantics. You gave your reasons why you say it can’t, ok, no, you said you don’t believe it is happening and is unlikely to. Same thing. Only difference is one word. Instead of can’t you say not happening and/or don’t believe it.

        I’m not saying Republican presidents are any better. I’m simply saying that this president is absolutely the WORST we have ever had. And that is saying a lot, since most of them have been terrible. He’s just the scum on the bottom of that pot.

      • G. R. Mobley says:

        This is one of Mike’s last posts, so I will presume he has bowed out of the remaining discussion. In his defense, what happened in Germany will not and has not happened here. For that matter it has not happened anywhere other than at the point in time it occurred in Germany and its occupied “States.” Paradoxically, he did not want to drudge through Kitty’s talk point by point, because this would open him to scrutiny; however, he uses the position point by point to refute what happened in Germany is not happening here.

        Where he would have erred would have been talking about the issues in ideological space. So he will find some solace in his grade school argument as the child keeps asking why, or he points out it is not the same and asserts that it is a distortion of history, or not analogous. Actually kitty is not distorting her own history. But here is the paradox in Mike’s post here when he said it CAN happen here. Again in Mikes defense he is not a history buff, but I will tell you in many ways it did HAPPEN here, unfortunately to the victors goes the pen who writes history and the secular progressives who have own the pen in America for over a century now, has distorted our history.

        Now Mike in his tone and decorum comes across as a reasonable person, however, he is trapped in his own bias yet to him there is no one more open and objective and in this (for a lack of a better word I’ll simply state) “perversion” of self-aggrandizement he probably looks at what has happened from the framing to today as all is well, America is thriving on the course that the founders acquiesced upon in 1791. He likely see the Federal Government as doing everything in its legitimate powers. But before I digress on early American history, I have to close on the fact that Mike is likely not read an academic book whose author was deemed as Conservative.

        Mike you should read Liberal Fascism, strictly in context with what happened here and around the world as the world began to embrace communism or socialism.

        To Kitty’s point the secular progressives have and are wagging the same ideological war here in America and have been unattested in most things as they continue to discard the Constitution.

        Mike if you are ready to learn an American History that your teachers did not teach you, and a perspective of the Constitutional Republic that has been rooted out of the curriculum for over a century, then you can contact me for a copy of my first book “We the People – Whose Constitution is it Anyway?”

        I would say you see America as a democracy, and that the Federal government is the supreme power in all aspects and that its’ Judicial Branch is the overseer of all things legal and Constitutional. Then my reply is this, you are a byproduct of secular progressive inculcation, and have taken their rendition of history on face value. You then do not recognize welfare, education, and healthcare as religious functions in the community and our society. That America has adapted to communism under the new age term of democracy that inalienable rights have now adopted entitlements, that property is the sole discretion of government as to who keeps what.

        Now I have made some presumptions, based upon your derision of Kitty and those who see Burke’s “History repeating” as illogical and irrational. But you are coming off as Baghdad Bob trying to defend your childish point that its not the same. OF course not, but ideologically it is precisely the same.

        We began redistributing wealth when in America? 1914? Well before Hitler or Lenin?

        This struggle of individual liberty and subjugation has been around longer than man has had a written language and I submit goes back to the war in heaven.

        That said, the only nation that was erected upon the principles of individual liberty and individual sovereignty with codified laws and processes was this nation. The framers (men) created a hybrid Constitutional Republic (because the Confederacy was retained) and the founders (States) ensured their position as the absolute sovereigns for their citizens by their citizens during the ratification process.

        Not trying to write a book here, but you seem like one who actually might be open to reading real history to prove someone wrong. So as one who has read the Ratification journals of most of the States, you may want to start there to understand what was created when the States established the general government and the Republic. Then try reading the Federalist Papers to see what the framers described as the compact that the States was creating with each other and their sub-contracted Federal government. As you learn your perspective will change and biases will flake away.

        God Bless the Republic, it is the only thing that can save us!
        G. R. Mobley

  111. hirider says:

    Mike, I have been one of those who have been replying adversely to your comments here, but today you are absolutely right! “It CAN happen here.” And it’s not likely to happen here as long as alert citizens raise the flag when they suspect infringements are being unlawfully perpetrated by those in power. And it is NOT happening right now because enough patriotic citizens HAVE raised the warning flag about possible infringements. One of the most blatant infringements was Bush’s Patriot Act and the elimination of POSSE COMITATUS. Its intent (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) was to limit the powers of Federal government in using federal military personnel to enforce the State laws. It was passed on June 18, 1878, after the end of Reconstruction. It does not apply to the National Guard under state authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state’s governor. Luckily for us, In 2008, these changes, that Bush pushed for and John Warner passed in 2006 legislation, in the Insurrection Act of 1807 were repealed in their entirety, reverting to the previous wording of the Insurrection Act[7] that in its original form was written to limit Presidential power as much as possible in the event of insurrection, rebellion, or lawlessness. Throughout history, from the times of the caveman until today, societies have been organized and ruled by strongmen who used the militarys of their time to control the citizenry at home and in the new territories just captured. It’s always been that he who controls the powers controls the nation. The Magna Carta was the most significant early influence on the long historical process that led to the rule of constitutional law today. Magna Carta influenced many common law documents, such as the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, and is considered one of the most important legal documents in the history of democracy. Without eternal vigilance, despots will try to manipulate current laws in order to gain powers over the citizens.

  112. dean says:

    she never mentions left or right in her email amazing how a leftist was able to put 2 and 2 together and realize that she was bashing socialism without her even having to mention left or right. Libs like the one who wrote this article love to distort history even tho millions have been put in concentration camps and executed under socialist regimes. When will libs realize that the constitutional republic that you grew up in with all these “greedy” capitalists who create billions of jobs is the only way to live free and that socialism will destroy this country whether you believe it or not.

  113. Hal Longue says:

    The author of this article is quite obviously either an ultra LIBERAL, or has had his head in the sand for the last 20+ years if he cannot readily see the parallels to Kitty’s story and todays events.

    • hirider says:

      Hal, you are right on. The author is a professional ultra-liberal from (where else?) California whose forte is to stir thought and controversy wherever possible. Does he have a day job? Probably! After all, birds of a feather flock together. He enjoys posting thoughts on various subjects and wording his thoughts to maximize controversy and replies. I think he becomes orgasmic when people post their replies, either for or against his thoughts.

      • I wouldn’t be much of a blogger if I didn’t write stuff that I thought people might respond to. Of course, I also believe what I write.

        • hirider says:

          Sure you believe what you write! So did Marx, Stalin, Mao, and Hitler. So does Obama! The trouble comes when those who believe what they write actually obtain the power to force their writings upon everyone else. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely-ie-Obama’s first two years with Democrat control of the House and Senate. They wrote and forced Obamacare upon America without any input from the Republican side of the aisle. Now they’re trying to force gun control measures upon us too.

  114. Anonymous says:

    You’re all leftist morons who view the current social regime as some sort of pop culture eutopia, refusing to see what is happening to your freedoms each and every day. Aren’t you tired of being manipulated?

  115. omasvoice says:

    Why must liberals always insult those that disagree with them? Is it their lalalala syndrome kicking in, putting fingers in their ears and covering their eyes so they only have to hear the sound of their own opinions echoing back at them?

  116. JayJay3333 says:

    She never mentions U.S. politics. She relates what she witnessed as happening in Hitler’s Austria. Your premise that because this doesn’t match what’s happening now it discredits her tale is ridiculous. Either her account of those years are accurate or they’re not. If you want to discredit her account, name actual instances of fallacy.

  117. Sonja Collier says:

    And Mike you did not even touch gun control. Most of us know that has happened very quickly. We still have our guns but what good will they do us if we have no shot to put in them

  118. AndyB says:

    First: No one is saying that there should be a mandated “Christian prayer” in schools, or any forced religious practice.

    Second: You say that schools are “no longer allowed to force the learnings of any specific relgion on their students.” Unfortunately this is not the case. Schools teach the hypothesis of evolution. EVOLUTION is a NATURALISTIC concept. NATURALISM is the basis of ATHEISM/IRRELIGION/AGNOSTICISM. Therefore EVOLUTION is a concept of ATHEISM/IRRELIGION/AGNOSTICISM. All three of those are world views, the basis of a religion or absence thereof. Ergo schools are “forc[ing] the learnings” of a specific “religion” to students.

    Third: Christian teachings say that the people of the Church should give money and help to the poor. Some how people have decided that it is “lov[ing] and car[ing]” to decide that the government should force us to “donate” our money to the less fortunate. This is not charity. Not to mention that the system is flawed and easily exploited. I have first hand experience seeing this “charity” in action when I worked at a grocery store. There were multiple times that different people would walk in, purchase almost a hundred dollars worth of meat, while talking on their iPhone (while I could hardly afford a “dumb” phone). Then, they would ask for help out to their car which was near brand new. The current system may help some, but it hurts many.

    That is all I am going to write for now, I’ve stayed up way too late. A quick disclaimer though: I am NOT a Christian, I am agnostic. I just enjoy fairness and a good, healthy debate. :)

    • mariahwwa says:

      Thank you for your response. It’s good to say an agnostic replying with such commensense. I’ve never endorsed FORCED prayer or teaching any religion…but freedom OF religion not FROM religion. So, if students want to pray or get together between classes and have a prayer group they should not be disciplined for doing so. They aren’t forcing their views on anyone – they are joining together with people of like beliefs. I’ve seen students expelled for doing just that. They were allowed back but not before a legal battle.

      As to charity, you hit it on the head. It’s only charity if you give it away WILLINGLY because you are a good person (Christian aside – charity is not just christian). If you are forced to do it, it is socialism.

      And I worked for social services. I saw what you saw only on a grander scale. If the truly needy were the ones who got it, most people would not be so pissed. Unfortunately the abuse is rampant, and OBama is encouraging it. Including voting. No proof of citizenship, yet we have to prove who we are to purchase a gun which is our constitutiional right. We have to prove it to get a driver’s license. Yet they have to do nothing but show up. And I’ll get my head bit of for this, but there appears to be voter fraud. The libs will say its a lie. Can I prove it, no.

      The websites have about 50/50 – people saying it is and isn’t. But voter fraud is not new. It’s just rampant with this POTUS. And his wanting to legalize illegals really pisses me off. I’m not anti-immigration…JUST COME HERE LIKE THE REST OF OUR FAMILIES DID – LEGALLY! You’re welcome then. Cross the borders illegally and you are not. I don’t care if you stay here and pop out kids (which is the premise OBama is using to get them legalized) – that’s your problem, not mine.

      Oh, one last thing. Funny that many countries including Mexico have EXTREME punishments for anyone crossing into their countries illegally, but oh no……we are the melting pot which welcomes criminals and illegals. No, I’m not saying they are criminals, but I don’t see us doing much about the criminal element that is crossing either.

  119. Mike says:

    The science of history? Then accusations anti-science? When it comes to empirical science, skepticism is a required element to get to the truth. If not, scientific principles are not being followed. Even worse, when science is applied by government, then disaster results! Eugenics, medical experimentation on humans (think syphilis as an example)… By the way…I am an American and live in Austria. You might want to listen to a few of the survivors of the annexation. There are striking similarities as well as realize discontent is the issue, control is the issue, liberty is the issue! Economic deprivation is not the issue!

  120. Mike,

    You stated “Because the real message of Kitty Werthmann’s speech is that that same tyranny is taking hold in another time and place: America, right now. Like others in a small but vocal fringe movement, Ms. Werthmann believes that the US is being consumed by a slowly building socialist takeover,”

    First of all, I don’t know where you live or how much you travel or even if you have ever left home, bu tin the last 20 Years I have lived in Missouri, Northern Illinois, Central and West Texas, Georgia, Virginia, West Virginia, Nevada and Now California so I have met and worked with and around a VERY LARGE and VERY DIVERSE group of this Great Countries population. I can tell you there is no SMALL FRINGE Movement. Just because the Lame Stream Media says something 1.) Does not make it true and 2.) Does not mean it is accurate.

    Unless you are blind, have your head buried in the sand or (are part of the problem) being obtuse, the facts are facts. The government Has been pushing people into government dependency by forcing unwarranted, and unnecessary laws and regulations that are too costly for small businesses and entrepreneurs to keep up with. Then allowing monopolizing mergers until only a small quantity of corporate conglomerates around the world control ~75+% of commerce either directly or indirectly. This forces prices up, mom and dad both have to work to survive because cost of living has doubled in twenty years. Where as wages have only increased about 25%-30%. Now the latchkey kids are in Uncle Sam’s grasp from breakfast until late afternoon, and home to be babysat by the Corporate controlled media for more indoctrination (almost every single show Has to have multicultural diversity and at least one queer or dike, yes I am not politically correct “Semper Fi”.). Then we have the gun grabbing treasonous leches inside the belt way “Who by the way are all guarded by ARMED Guards” but “Guns are dangerous right?”

    Mike that “Small Fringe” you think exists is a Tidal Wave that is building and building and building. You may want to pull your head of the sand, or what ever part of your anatomy it may be stuck in and look at reality. Do not follow your media masters pontificating Bovine Scat. Do yourself and your readers a favor. Do not watch MSNBC, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC or FOX for 4 weeks. Get your information from alternate news sources like talk radio or try the most non-biased new source available, Matt Drudge. He will nail anybody Republicrat or Demopublican (they are interchangeable you know, they only differ on how they want to spend YOUR Money).

    Find some real news and real sources, don’t rely on the drivel out of the Lame Stream Media and DO NOT Trust SNOPES, the are idiots with their heads stuck up Oblahblah’s back side.

    Semper Fi, and Good News Hunting!

  121. To Roy McMillan II: I appreciate your comment, and invite you to resubmit it without the completely gratuitous anti-gay slurs. Go ahead and call me politically correct, but that’s just not going to fly with me.

  122. patriot4ever says:

    Mike,
    It’s odd that you try to portray yourself as an educated person who speaks about a time and a woman both of which you know nothing about. Yet you fail to see the progressive similarities of the series of events that took place then and the comparisons of modern America. Anybody desiring to see objectively what is happening in this country currently would have to admit that the paths to destruction are eerily similar.

    They start with blindly electing someone promising hope and change. Government creates the illusion of restoring law and order while in actuality they are destroying small business and lining their pockets while all along preaching that small business is the backbone of America. Then comes Government takeover of factories, schools, and cities. Common Core anyone?

    You say no one has been carried away for exercising their right to freedom of speech. In fact, you are completely wrong. Just last week a gentleman attended a town hall public forum for the local school system to discuss the new “Common Core” education system. He simply asked a question as to why they were imposing sub-standard education on his and other children and he was encouraging the other parents to question it as well. For this, he was forcibly removed from the public town hall meeting by a strong armed thug security person. In fact, just recently in Louisiana during a public protest against CC, a parent stated that his son was being dragged back and subjected to educational material he had taken 2 years earlier. This is nothing more than the “dumbing down” of society, another important element for the “common good”.

    Next is gun control although they start out telling the people that they aren’t trying to take their guns but all guns need to be registered. Then we say we need more background checks ignoring the fact that background checks have been going on for eons. What we fail to address is the sociopath types who are allowed to continue to buy guns or renew their top security clearances as recently happened in Wash. DC, all the while knowing these people are being treated with drugs known to cause violent behavior. There are already those on Capital Hill whom have made it clear their intent is to confiscate all guns and leave the public defenseless against criminals including the very government that is taking them away.

    Food stamps, welfare, and “free” cell phones have become a way of life among the non-working and the numbers are growing every day. Government dependence is taking over among the sheeple of this country which is exactly what the government wants.

    You say that the economy is doing well. In actuality, if the Feds stop printing worthless paper money, our economy would tank. The economy has been propped up basically for the past 6 years and true unemployment is still at 14+% when you count the numbers of people who have just stopped looking for work. And the types of jobs that people are getting are low paying, service types such as flipping burgers in McDonalds, waitress/waiters in restaurants.

    And lastly, free healthcare. Well actually it will only be free for the people who choose not to work. The rest of us will pay through the nose for sub-par medical care and will wait on panels of politicians to decide our fates when we get sick with cancer or other diseases or injuries requiring long and expensive treatments or surgeries.

    At any rate, as you can see there is plenty of similarities between 1938 Austria and modern day America. All these things were exactly what Hitler imposed against the will of the people there. And just as the persecution of the Jews was accepted and not made public to the masses outside of Germany, so it will be with modern day Christians in America and around the world as is already taking place.

    God Bless America and the blood of Patriots that may be spilled before this is all over.

  123. patriot4ever says:

    You sir are making inaccurate statements. People are getting carried out of town hall meetings and other venues for speaking out against this despicable government. Common Core is the most recent example. Gun control efforts are moving at a fevered pace. There are some on Capital Hill who have said that total confiscation is the only satisfactory end. Food stamps, welfare, free cell phones, true unemployment (counting those who have just simply stopped looking for work) are all at record levels. Take away the Fed’s ability to print more worthless paper money and our economy would tank quickly. Just as with the Jews in 1938, persecution of Christians continues in America and around the world while the main scum media gives at best minimum attention to the issue. Free healthcare, well actually it will only be free to those who choose not to work while the rest of us pay through the nose and wait for panels made up of politicians to decide our fates.

    I hope you see the picture and striking similarities between 1938 Austria and modern day America.

  124. Anonymous says:

    It’s already happening…not gassed. . but drones. We just lost the first amendment. Every thing your saying is happening right here. Just not exactly as back then. Were losing rights all the time. Same shit different numbers. We have already had people turn in guns years ago. Next they try to take them. I had to stop reading your comments. It’s like you are not abreast of what’sgoing on today.

  125. robert ryan says:

    Sterling…..Bravo!!!!!well done…. We’ve been in trouble for a while now. It takes a long time for a nation to crumble. When we notice it it’s too late. We don’t seem to learn “history repeats itself” . Sterling , why do we not learn from the past ?

  126. Ricktor says:

    Truer words were never spoken than those… Kitty Werthmann was not saying that what happened then is exactly what is happening here now, but the simularities ARE there. And as others have said, it not just the democrates, it is the other parties as well that have caused this situation to manifest. I am a believer in the old saying about history repeating itself…

  127. I reiterate my question. if hitler comparisons are out are mussolinni comparisons ok & if not how about nkruma or patrice lumumba?

    • hirider says:

      Mike, all of them are in for comparisons, but in today’s (for the last 40 years) dumbed down school system, most Americans don’t know who those last two are and barely remember Mussolinni as being second fiddle to Hitler’s notoriety.

      • Reg. says:

        Well considering that Hitler is the center-piece of the Austrian issue it seems that Hirider has fallen off his bike again.

        Mussolini was someone Hitler looked up before outshining his puny efforts. Perhaps you still think Franco was a goodie.

        • hirider says:

          There you go again Mike! Stating something I didn’t say! I said that most Americans in today’s dumbed down school system don’t know squat about history and barely remember Mussolinni’s name at all. Who Hitler looked up to is irrelevant. People remember that Hitler killed so many in the ovens and gas chambers,
          so he’s the boogey man as far as they know.

  128. Anonymous says:

    Mike, you repeat the oft made mistake of thinking the inflation was high in Germany during the great depression. No, hyperinflation happened in the immediate aftermath of WWI when the government started a process of deliberate inflation. When the government stopped pursuing this process and tied currency to land to give it a stable value, the inflation came to an end. The inflation era ran 1921-1924. That’s five years before the US stock market crash of 1929 and eight years before Hitler first came to partial power. That’s 12 years before the enabling acts and 14 years before the invasion of poland.

    • Reg. says:

      Really? Apart from Germany having squandered reparation loans provided by US sources in the 20s, it was the US withdrawal of those loans in 1929 that created the real inflation and helped shoe-horn Hitler into power.

  129. jalina stutte says:

    You are correct Sterling and there is nothing I can say you said it for me. Obama is a communist, he was raised a communist and will not stop until we stand up against this government from taking anymore of our freedom. The author of this article must have his head in the sand or is liberal, to not see it’s happening here.

    • Reg says:

      What’s this? Obama a communist! Anyhow better to have your head in the sand than up your arse Jalina, like you have.

      What sort of communist did you have in mind? One YOU were raised to hate or just anyone who disagrees with you? Freedom is the LAST thing YOU want, it is your strong desire to restrict freedom to your tight-arsed values, except you’ve got no idea what freedom is because you’ve never lost it.

  130. Anonymous says:

    The basic premise,of what she said is right on target,the far left wants make this country a socialist nation.

  131. Anonymous says:

    i think the most simple thing to say is if we do not learn from history, we will make our past mistakes over again.

    • Diane Truitt says:

      Yes, Anonymous, and if we don’t find a way to have fair honest elections again we’ll have no choice in the matter. Google the video “We will not be silenced” to see what we’re up against in our elections now. Obama has never won an honest election. That video was done by ( Democrats ) about the Democratic 2008 Cucauses between Hillary and Obama and all the voter fraud and threats OBama and company were blatenly doing at the polls to Democrats! to make sure Obama won. If he did it to his own base I know he did it in both the Presidenial elections to win.

      • I’ve heard of the film. I also know it was produced by Bettina Viviano, who, among other things, alleges that President Obama plotted to have Chelsea Clinton killed. An accusation she presents based on the irrefutable evidence that “someone told her.”

      • Reg says:

        Gee that sounds interesting Diane. Does it mention the stacked court that gave the Florida election to GWB?

        Florida the home of the even handed? Yet still you have the audacity to speak of voter fraud when the real fraud is at the top of the Republican Party.

        Hang you head in shame my dear.

        • G. R. Mobley says:

          Reg, are you purporting that we have an honest election process that ensures honest election integrity in every election? I missed you citation that supported your opposition to Diane’s point.

          I appreciate you pointing out the convenient argument that America got screwed by the court in the Bush election, but I would like to see if you are honest enough to concede that there was not a difference from Bush I, to Clinton, to Bush II, and now Obama. We seem to be on the same course, globalization and debt. The secular progressive agenda has been propelled forward bit by bit since Teddy and has been on steroids with Nixon and Carter, and especially since the Bush I Administration to King Barry.

          You know I have never heard a secular progressive mention the court system before as a problem, since it has historically done more to promote their agenda than any other branch until Wilson, Roosevelt, and on… Are you that myopic that you think America would have been better off with Gore in office. Given the chance he would have been far more tyrannical, like all the other progressives who have taken us into war, like WW I (Wilson), WW II (Roosevelt), the Korean War (Truman), Viet Nam (Kennedy/Johnson), and I have always asserted that Nixon and Bush were big time progressives. Can you name a non-progressive that took us to war, again Bush was a big time progressive who threw us into debt spending billions on curing AIDs in Africa (how did that work out).

          BTW, if you bring up the war in Iraq, you have to be honest with everyone who knows the facts that Saddam was the one who started the war. All’s he had to do was let the inspectors back in. Even after we amassed the forces at this door he could have stopped the evasion and the war, and that is a fact! Or can you refute this with some you tube video of Saddam waving a white flag calling for the inspectors to come back before we invaded? Somehow it seems the facts escape both Progressive propaganda Mills and even Fox News… who cares about facts when there is a narrative to propel! This might make you wonder whose on what side?

          It might have been more objective and original for you to have started with Adams “midnight judges, and how the democrats had kept a majority of Southerners (slave trade sympathizers) on the court to ensure we would get rulings like Dred Scott, and Plessy v. Ferguson which set back race relations for over a century. Then you would have brilliantly elucidated the palpable violation to the Constitution with the Wickard v Filburn and other similar decisions that expanded unconstitutional behavior on behalf of the general government, because you are the ardent defender of individual liberties and sovereignty?

          One would hope so, but as I read your posts you appear to be caught in Kindergarten tossing out play ground comments and judgements that have nothing to do with the argument asserted by another poster.

          I am not the blog police nor do I want to be. What I believe is reasonable people equally informed seldom disagree. I think you can be reasonable but not when you are trapped in ideological biases and that constrain you to lose all objectivity. We all suffer from drive by postings that can’t affect the price of tea in China.

          Are you against honest and fair elections? I doubt it because that would be unreasonable and would prove me wrong about you being a reasonable person. There are stereotypes of conservatives and progressives, and it would be judgmental to pin stereotypes on anyone without knowing that person, right?

          Now a stereotype of secular progressives is that they have adapted a philosophy of Muslims and that is it is morally okay to lie, cheat and deceive as long as the end justifies the means. Sura 3, verse 28, introduces the doctrine of taqiyya, which holds that Muslims should not be friends with the infidel except as deception, always with the end goal of converting, subduing, or destroying him. Research this and you will find an eery parallel to those who lie and cheat on purpose to further their cause. This is why when one catches a Secular progressive in a lie, an illegal act or an act of deception the first thing they do is try to laugh it off or dismiss it. I find that they will deny until forced to face the facts, they will make counter acquisitions and they never possess remorse, except for getting caught.

          This exudes the same behavior of a sociopath. As Joseph Story (you might know who he was since you are a history buff on the court) stated why non-Christians were not allowed to bring a cases to court in the U.S until mid nineteenth century. You do not know this because you are not supposed to know America is a Judeo-Christian nation. I’ll bet you might be one to argue that America was a secular nation, without really knowing your history. Here is the fact, you as well as all Americans have been inculcated with a facade of history and facts that deny the real history and empirical data. If you want to learn I have a good book for you “We the People: Whose Constitution is it Anyway?”

          Can you claim that all is well for individual liberty and sovereignty in America. and in the same breath yelling “don’t worry about the IRS, NSA, or the DOJ tapping your communications illegally”…

          Anyway, I like most and even you would appreciate one who brings to the table or the discussion some facts and articulate an argument. In context here I wholeheartedly agree with Diane that voter fraud is our #1 problem. If we do not control our elections then we are loosing our Republic. Opps, I’ll bet you thought you lived in a democracy…

          WRT the actual post by the author of the article you may want to check out my comments refuting his childish assertions on distorting history! I think he may be in recovery since he has not piped in in quit a while!

          With as dreary as it seems and our liberties on the decline, we actually can fix our Constitutional problems rather quickly (in just a year or two) without worrying about election in Washington D.C. Think Reg, I can offer you an outlet for our frustration that is Constitutionally based and will actually make a difference in many ways…

          What say you?

          • Reg. says:

            I say you seriously need a shrink GR. Take Diane along for the ride.

          • G. R. Mobley says:

            Madam Reg, thank you for another kiddie court comment… and you had the opportunity to come out on the reasonable side, but a salient argument isn’t in you and I knew you could be baited to just this; thus, the stereotypical insertion in my first comment. You are what you are because over a century good people allowed our education system, our scientific community and psychotherapist like the one you’ve visited, to inculcate a world class army of useful idiots that Lenin would be proud of. Obviously, there is no point in seeking dialogue, but for everyone’s sake here and any other forum you use your obtuse pseudonym “Reg,” (probably stands for Regina) we now know you lack the maturity and attention span to engage with adults at an adult level.

            So why don’t you fire another childish irrelevant snide remark and absquatulate. I may try to find time in my schedule next year to personalize it. But next time you try to post a tired neoatomiton regurgitation to obfuscate an issue or use an unfounded, lame, and impotent argument to try to score some points with your fellow ADD anarchists, you will be taking a chance that someone like me may step on the tête of your quip and expose how shallow and feeble your cognitive capabilities are.

            Now go protect your liberties before some tyrant rips them away from you!

          • Reg says:

            You have no salient argument GR.

            You are resorting to filibusterer, the same ploy as used so recently to paralyze the governments of the people and no further babbling from the guilty party will rescue your severely damaged image.

            Let us hope that the voters remember your despicable performance when next asked to cast their vote. Because only the feeble minded would contrive the babble you present and only the weak minded would stay to listen. You have established your patently boring image so now you can writhe in it. You have nothing to offer.

          • G. R. Mobley says:

            Madam, did you mean filibustering? You call this a retort? All the subject matter I provided above and you can only spew a tantrum. Did I strike a nerve? Your retort falls into the same stereotypical brain dead narrative, instead of directing your anger on refuting voter fraud as a real problem, which is why you piped in here in the first place. How about all the unconstitutional rulings from the court, or the fact that Saddam was the reason why we went to war… I’m surprised you can postulate anything beyond your “BUSH LED PEOPLE DIED” rant.

            When you post an argument that merits discussion then I’m sure others will be impressed. Go ahead and tear me up with all that I asserted whip out your Koran or your history book and correct me like a real adult. If you can put aside your emotional side ma’am I would be surprised.

            You should have just absquatulated while the getting was good… obviously, salient is a fancy word that escapes you.

            Now go protect your liberties before some tyrant rips them away from you!

          • Question incisiveness of reply:

            You call this a retort?

            Contradict themselves:

            Your retort…

            Because logic.

            …absquatulated…

            The only new thing in this array of symbols. Your sesquipedalian loquaciousness is adorable. No, really, I applaud your effort to practise that word-of-the-day addition to your vocabulary, but using it twice in close proximity is just poor penmanship. Fret not, I had witnessed it betwixt Pulitzer laureates as well, so you are in a boon company.

          • G. R. Mobley says:

            Comrade, it is good to know that at least one of the blog policemen is on duty. Your girlfriend “Reg” is lost in childish swipes and rants, and completely lacks the ability to offer substance. She’s at least a comrade, because those with aligned machinations never swipe at each other. But your defending her does not make you noble. Nobility would be one who protects and defends individual liberty and sovereignty.

            You may need to check your ivory tower it is not what you assume it to be. What soothsayer would assert that “communism in its final ideological form is a stateless communal society?” Communism cannot work without force, period. The free market is innate in all people, and people will always gravitate to it; however, there are those hypocrites who espouse for a fully controlled market. Even in the most ardent communist states you will always find a free market. Therefore, you can never reach your utopian state with humans.

            So for intercourse sake, you subscribe to subjugation? Are you a hypocrite or do you buy State products and live off the State? I would love to hear how great your life is as you have submitted yourself to statist rules… do tell. I’ll check back when I return from my trip next month as I and my family celebrate what the birth of our savior means to us. I am interesting in how one would sell the merits and advantages of socialism.

            I am also interested in how you believe we can legally make America socialistic? Would you do away with the Constitution? If so, would this require a 3/4ths acceptance of disbanding the Republic and Constitution as Article V dictates or do you advocate ignoring the Constitution all together? I have so many questions and look forward to your replies, next month. Merry Christmas!

          • Reg says:

            To Diane.

            Do try to forgive the protector of your opinion his grave implication that in order to be feeble minded, one needs be female.

            I’m sure he meant every word of it and is simply displaying the innate imbalance that is so easily betrayed by the condescending male Republican.

          • Reg says:

            RGM in full flight;

            “Go ahead and tear me up with all that I asserted whip out your Koran or your history book and correct me like a real adult. If you can put aside your emotional side ma’am I would be surprised.”

            Moi? Emotional?

          • Reg says:

            Oh gosh GRM do you have to try and impress everyone by your choice of obscure words? Clearly you have an inferiority complex the size of Mt Everest but big words do not make your difficulty any easier.

            Your prior claim to the word salient is ok with me, let the baby have its bottle although I recall being impressed by its usefulness back in 1953.

            By “for intercourse sake,” I assume you meant the more recognizable “for arguments sake,” but “aligned machinations” conjures the image of lots of unaligned thoughts and an untidy mind, or worse, a mind that is so shallow that it never ventures down the deep end. Remember to drive on the left if you can. :-)

  132. Cindy MacDonald says:

    Hello,
    I think, one of the confirming facts about President Obama is his disdain of Israel and hence, the Hebrew/Jewish population. What Ms. Werthmann endured during WWII- we can all sympathize, or even show empathy towards, does not even touch the surface of what these people went through during that war. Let me rephrase that. Most of us can sympathize or show empathy towards those who have suffered so during WWII.

    What you readily point out I think, Mr. Rothschild, is the fact-based account of Ms. Werthmann’s accounts of the trauma she went through during the war. Your points in my opinion are political where Ms. Werthmann’s are emotional. Hers are heartfelt. She truly believes what she says, from her soul. You could be swayed, depending on the wind, if you know what I mean and…no offense. And there lies the difference. I truly believe everything that Ms. Werthmann says. I am sure that you have heard stories and they may be even more harsh. I am truly sorry. That does not negate the fact that Kitty has dealt with this scar through out her lifetime. That is such a heavy burden to bear…with the unexplained deaths of loved ones. She just sees it starting to happen again.

    Please respect Kitty’s voice. You don’t agree but she has been though so very much in her long life. More than anyone your age and mine could imagine. I may be middle of the road put if the two of them (Mr. Obama and Ms. Werthmann) were running for President (hypothetically speaking-lol) I would vote for Kitty. She’s been around the block and she has a view of the world….unlike our current President. Like the old adage, older AND wiser.

    Thank you for your time…I do appreciate it.

    Sincerely,

    Cindy MacDonald

  133. Patty Sanderson says:

    Ms Werthmann is not saying that everything that happened in Austria is happening now. She is saying that their freedoms were taken away little by little, like chipping away on an ice sculpture. This can happen. If financial analyst are correct, Financially it’s not “if” it happens, but “when” it happens. We will be in a deep depression just like austria. Then if not obama someone similar can pounce on us and do what hitler did to them. It makes us vulnerable for this to happen to us. A federal judge passed a law stating that it is legal for search and seizure of every american’s computers up to 100 miles of the surrounding border of the U.S. Do you realize how many people’s property that is considering how populated many of those cities are like L.A. and new york? Little by little our rights are being chipped away and more freedom given to illegals. Eventually, their rights will be gone too so that the government has taken over and we are living in a socialist dictorial republic!

    http://www.theminorityreportblog.com/2014/01/01/judge-reaffirms-constitution-free-zones-100-miles-inside-u-s-borders/

    • hirider says:

      Ms. Sanderson, may I add the following information? The Germans prior to WWII had such high debt that their money was worthless. From my history lessons in the late ’50s, the German citizen needed a suitcase full of money to buy bread at the local grocery store. Inflation was the main cause of WWII. Now look at our present situation here in the USA.

      Our current national debt is now over $17 trillion dollars.
      The average American person’s life lasts 2.4 billion seconds.
      One billion seconds ago is 1981.
      One trillion seconds ago is 29,700 BC.
      If we were to start paying $1,000 every second on the debt, without interest, we would pay only $31,536,000,000 per year and it would take our government 504.9 years to pay it off.

      Does anyone think THAT will ever happen? Throughout history, catastrophic wars
      and societal collapses have always been the result of such staggering debt.

      Source: Heritage.org

      • Reg says:

        “Throughout history, catastrophic wars and societal collapses have always been the result of such staggering debt.”

        No they haven’t, they’ve been from the threat of hunger and the need of “living space,” the very thing that Global Warming promises. Mr Hitler had no problem financing his war despite your claim of rampant inflation. He just stopped making teletypewriters and vacuum cleaners and made tanks instead. Then he stole back the typewriters and vacuum cleaners from the countries he’d conquered.

        Given the expensive US arsenal with few restraints on cost, this would equate to every man woman and child in the US sacrificing their standard of living to the same form of metal monsters that Mr Hitler worshiped.

        • hirider says:

          Mr Hitler had no problem financing his war because he ran the printing presses day and night printing money. Printing money without the resources to back it up is the chief cause of inflation.

          • Reg says:

            Then you’re suggesting that he did NOT plunder the gold resources of all the countries he conquered?

            The first thing the USA demanded from the British before Lend lease, was all their gold resources as well as those of other countries in the Commonwealth of Nations.

            The first law of war and the US wasn’t even at war.

            Hitler did so well because all levels of the population, from the military to the workshop were dedicated to the cause, whether they liked it or not. Then there was the slave labor reflected so beautifully in the US $7 an hour for the workers.

          • hirider says:

            Of course he plundered the gold resources. But that wasn’t enough to sate his appetite for more, so he just printed it.

          • Reg says:

            Are you completely unaware that the riches of a country lie in the dedication of the people to the attainment of their national goal? They’d have worked on bread and water and many did.

            The obsession about gold and money is yours, please don’t thrust it upon everyone else.

            Let us remember that Mr Hitler demanded the complete destruction of German and that no provision for its resurrection was necessary because the people had let him down. That’s another of his delusions. They certainly had not.

            The lesson to be learned from this is to motivate the people by paying them a reasonable wage and by not talking down the national agenda as you insist upon doing.

            One more, by also setting up a workable national health protection scheme such as the rest of the civilized world regards as essential. There IS a correlation between defending the country and making the country worth defending by improving the standard of living for the least of its people.

  134. Joanne Johnson says:

    All it takes is for people to try and deny that it could and is starting to take place right under our noses. When people bury their heads and cry “conspiracy theory” because they hear the term so much, it’s like the frog in the pot slowly being boiled to death. He doesn’t know anything, until it’s too late. We all need to take a real close look at what IS happening in this country. Comparisons help us to truly look at things. It is really something when people admit they haven’t really researched things but go on to discredit the very things and information that could help. It’s when we dismiss the historic realities and that History does repeat itself in similar ways, that we end up blind sighted. We need to be aware of what is taking place in this country. There are those in all states now that would want to take us down. There are training camps all throughout the US for that very purpose. The more you get informed and take the blinders off because you want life to be a blissful, healthy society and stand for what is right, the better off this country will become once more. It takes much to keep our FREEDOM. Our government isn’t even taking care of our vets, what does that say to you? Our president backs the killing of babies – wholeheartedly. What happened with Benghazi? Our leader says this is no longer a Christian Nation and goes on and on about the Muslim religion. Bowing to the wrong King!.As he lies and says he’s a Christian. Please – you can tell by actions and what they support. He’s supposed to be serving the US – “We the People”. Are we just to ignore all these non American aspects of character? Taking away prayer in the White House, taking God out of our daily lives has been dangerous and has brought about God’s with drawl from this country’s times of crisis. People cry why IF He’s supposed to be a loving God, why would this happen? Because people have kicked Him our of their lives. They turned their backs on Him. We need God’s protection for this country – We need to all be praying for God to return to our hearts and lives. We should be “one Nation under God – indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.” I have one exception – when you have individuals or people groups that are out to kill and destroy the US and it’s people, those people should have NO