Posted on 01/06/2013 7:23:14 PM PST by wesagain
Michael Savage, one of the nation’s most prominent voices in talk radio, said today America is “absolutely” ripe for a third party, in part, because the two largest parties in the U.S. have pulled a “charade” on the American people.
“There is no Republican Party,” Savage told fellow talk show host Aaron Klein. “It’s an appendage of the Democrat machine, as we’ve all just seen. It’s two-card Monte, as we well know. It’s a game being played against the American people. You’ve got the drunk Boehner on the one side, and the quasi-pseudo-crypto Marxist on the other, who is really just enjoying the ride in Hawaii right now, representing his factions.”
Instead, “We need a nationalist party in the United States of America,” said Savage on WABC’s “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio,” suggesting a party focused on “borders, language and culture.”
Get your copy of Michael Savage’s newly released “Train Tracks: Family Stories for the Holidays” from the WND Superstore!
He continued: “You have the rudiments of a new party in this country called a tea party. They need to restructure their party. They need a charismatic leader, which they don’t have. When you say, ‘Tea party,’ no one knows who the leader is, because there is no leader. No man has stepped forward who can lead that party – no one who is an articulate speaker, a charismatic mover of people.
“The tea party is the rudiment of the new nationalist .......
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
You are talking about “private” companies whose only real customer was the NAZI government.
http://reason.com/archives/1999/08/01/nazi-economics
http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=507
“Naziism is Socialism”
the second one is a good read
>>I never understood why in Germany the Nazi’s and the Red’s hated each other so much. They are both socialist in nature, as well Hitler was on the right in that country politically.
First of all, hitler was a National SOCIALIST and thus was on the Left. Second, the following quote explains the situation well with respect to the Soviets.
Although our modern socialists’ promise of greater freedom is genuine and sincere, in recent years observer after observer has been impressed by the unforeseen consequences of socialism, the extraordinary similarity in many respects of the conditions under “communism” and “fascism.” As the writer Peter Drucker expressed it in 1939, “the complete collapse of the belief in the attainability of freedom and equality through Marxism has forced Russia to travel the same road toward a totalitarian society of un-freedom and inequality which Germany has been following. Not that communism and fascism are essentially the same. Fascism is the stage reached after communism has proved an illusion, and it has proved as much an illusion in Russia as in pre-Hitler Germany.”
No less significant is the intellectual outlook of the rank and file in the communist and fascist movements in Germany before 1933. The relative ease with which a young communist could be converted into a Nazi or vice versa was well known, best of all to the propagandists of the two parties. The communists and Nazis clashed more frequently with each other than with other parties simply because they competed for the same type of mind and reserved for each other the hatred of the heretic. Their practice showed how closely they are related. To both, the real enemy, the man with whom they had nothing in common, was the liberal of the old type. While to the Nazi the communist and to the communist the Nazi, and to both the socialist, are potential recruits made of the right timber, they both know that there can be no compromise between them and those who really believe in individual freedom.
— F.A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom
In other words, they will still not address the real problems
A leader will step forward—we know them know by name—just no one sees him as the savior of the nation. He will be charismatic in a Reagan like way, forceful and inspiring. He will be called many foul names by the left—but this many will rise up and lead the nation back to her roots. He will not be perfect—but he will know just what to do. Now we must structure the Tea Party for the change. Think Grass Roots, think small structure, but also think greatness. The mid 2013 period will be the rise. We must be ready.
‘They’ nor any other party out there will address ‘our’ problems.
Look you’ll find a TON of good feelings on this website for Sarah Palin.
She’ll woop Michael Savage any day of the week.
That is. Provided Ms. Palin gets with it and starts acting like a candidate or something.
In the meantime, let Mr. Savage talk.
Plenty of time to tell him to shut up already about Palin. When that day arrives.
Agreed.
Nationalism is scary.
Let us return to FREEDOM
I would not go with a nationalist party either as the same reasons which others on this thread have said. Wrong hands, it could be disastrous. His ideas are a right basis though we have moved so far away from anything which makes good sense, it’s almost time for action.
It would have to be a rebirth of the constitution, liberty and freedom.
I once thought Savage was so awesome and right on. I'm sure he still is with his dedicated fans. We all have to like someone. Some things, he still is saying are right. Other times, he becomes confusing to a conservative like me. Just a normal person, not a far right off the wall extremists (which are on both sides to be truthful). Then I began to see him as mostly a democrat sympathizer, like Bill Crystal. He makes me so confused. He always swings backs to defending them because the republican party is bad ( true enough) though the dems are much worse since their ideas are fast lane dictatorial rule.
He really let Palin and Newt have it and that really did strike a nerve. Those 2 have accomplished more than he has because they each have worked in the government. His right to say it.
If it's time for a new party, which it's not quite ready yet because we have no one to follow. He's right about that. The media made certain that a few good leaders were crucified. One day, I think things will have to become so bad in people's lives, a reformer comes out of this crazy mess of the Marxist which makes people get behind him or her. Look how out of touch the GOP leaders still are. The guy in Kentucky and the man who weeps from Ohio. No wonder we are getting our ideas killed on the field. Why are those weak?
I think Palin knew she had no party backing so she didn't try for the presidency. I think after Perry entered, she was completely knocked off guard. We could have did better with her, Newt, Gov. Walker, Allan West or even a patriot from one of the audiences at a Tea Party rally. Maybe, someone will turn out to be the patriot before Obama has his new term completed. Just one solid patriot would be the person. Maybe a former military person who has the right credentials/ with top standings in their life and professional career or even a business person. Who has no ties to corruption or who goes back on their convictions then or now.
I know there is someone out there with deep convictions, who can step up and who can build the support to get the funds that they need. The Tea Party has to begin investigating and searching for that person. If people were not such purists, we could find a leader and make sure that person and their team are lead by us, the people. You make the party conform to a majority view. I hope if the GOP doesn't change, it's falls fast so we stop wasting time trusting them to be a strong patriotic party. We are running out of time as our freedoms are being taken away. The current speaker is not a leader and the dems know this. People are shouting at them to change, fight become aggressive with your ideas and they continue to be mellow and go along. GOP, you lost. Shell shock time over. You should have fired the Speaker. Now, tell him to fight or your party is dead. Even the republicans by name only cannot save you. When Newt won SC, you were talking conservative and people were excited. What is wrong with you people. Balance the books, stop spending and stop writing more damn laws taking away our rights.
Come back, Sarah. We can make it work....
Ok, how about Constitutionalists who fight for the preservation of our borders, language and culture? Which, in effect, also includes a respect and adherence to our history and traditional beliefs and thus, a belief in the trite but true, “American Way”. Hence, nationalist. Nary a drop of socialism need be in there.
fine. IMO, it’s simple, especially if you’re in a blue state. unregister yourself from your current party (dem, rep, libertarian, whatever). and reregister as “decline to state”, other, independent, whatever your state assigns to none of the above, and then just vote and act at a local, non-partisan level as if you were a member of the conservative party. support conservative, non-partisans wherever you can find them. forget about the national scene, it’s lost.
it’s simple, i did it years ago.
“property rights and religious freedom were NOT respected by the Nazi’s. That is what I meant”
No, they weren’t. They went through the motions of pretending to protect them so that Germans would see them as a viable alternative to the communists who were threatening to overthrow the Weimar Republic. It worked.
Agreed. As for a real leader, Sarah. Or one or more of the tea party elected people in office. The beauty of the tea parties that I’ve attended IS the independent thought. I am wary and suspicious of any group that claims the mantle of a national Tea Party, including Tea Party Express and the others.
Sarah again was correct on this part, we have to change the Republican Party and that is going to require a good deal of housekeeping from within. With names like Cruz, Scott, Rand Paul, we’ve shown it can be done.
I’d like to get a concentrated effort to get Allen West re-elected. He was robbed. And I want at least two dozen more like him. The ones in Congress holding the line and continuing to be a bee in the bonnet of the establishment Republicans ARE the Tea Party elected Reps. We NEED MORE “CHuckleheads” (or Hobbits) if you prefer.
I wish you define your particular definition of “not admirable”!
Borders of a nation are not to be sieves, through which immigrants can squeeze through.
Language and culture define a nation.
Our national language is English, German missed by one vote.
Culture is what a nation has as its historical background, or as a conglomeration, to make a nation what it has become. Our culture is unique, because we are NOT Old World Europe, or old World Asia. Europe looks at us, and calls us ‘uncultured’. But, then again, Europe has never truly been a place engendering Freedom in any of its history, now has it? Freedom IS our culture. Although the media would have you think otherwise, America is not a place where royalty is held in high regard.
Nationalism, according to Webster, is: a devotion to one’s nation; patriotism. Since when is patriotism ‘not admirable’? Tell that to the next of kin who have lost one of their’s in military service to this nation, and see what happens! Tell that to the many military veterans of this nation, who still stand proud when the Flag comes by in a parade, or at an event when the National Anthem is played, and see what happens!
Muslims running rampant, wanting to change OUR ways of over 200 years, to bend to THEIR quizzical and dangerous point of view; illegal immigrants, some dangerous (9/11, drug lords, etc), some maybe trying to get to a place to start over outtside of a life-threatening environment. And you say “nationalism is not admirable at present”.
I would tend to think you are one born after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and therefore, the world you know, is different than the world that I know.
If that is not the case, you have just earned the title of “lizardspoor”!
Sounds like a henotheistic European-style "blood and soil" party to me. That's not what we need. That's the opposite of what we need.
We need a party dedicated to the Laws of G-d. Why can't anyone see that?
When I said borders language culture were side issues, do not assume I said they were unimportant. It meant they are subservient and meaningless without an adherance to the Constitution.
I never said nationalism was “not admirable.” I said it was not admirable IN AND OF ITSELF. Huge difference.
Meaning, nationalism without an adherance to the Constitution is not only unadmirable, it is worthless.
My point is that the Constitution is what should be emphasized, because THAT is what makes America unique. Not “borders language culture” which any nation should be able to boast of.
All your other points, and things that I did not say, were just straw man arguments. I never said any of those things.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.