Can you name some?

Especially after his secret pact with Hitler became known.

I'm 60.

This charge is part of a chain that reaches back into the 1950's. Soft on Communism, soft on crime, soft on terrorism. Take it from someone who lived through those years. It was bullshit then and it's bullshit now. As for Republicans, their enmity for Russia is still ongoing. The Senate just last week voted 97-2 to increase the sanction on Russia. Sure, they're not going after Trump. And they won't as long as he gives them what he wants. If he doesn't, they have all the ammo they need to take him out.

The House Republicans blocked the bill the Senate passed 97-2:

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/338673-house-republican-stalls-russia-sanctions-bill

I guess certain Republicans enmity for the Russians, isn't really a sure thing after all!!!



You are right, they're not going after Trump, but by not going after him they provide him with ammo he needs to bring their house down as well...which means that they will continue to go along with destroying this country, together!

Spent most of my life hearing about The Red Menace. During the 50's and 60's, expressing any positive opinions about the USSR could get you fired, lose security clearances, black listed, in short become an outcast. When I was in the AF, knew one guy who hated his job, so he lost his clearance and job by carrying around a copy of Das Capital. If there were any widespread love, it was way underground.

Just in case anyone has forgotten, Joe McCarthy was a Republican.

However, those events are relatively isolated and low in number. There's less evidence of the Rosenberg's collusion than there is of Republican collusion in 2016.

When the Russian revolution looked like a promising development to socialists everywhere. Unionists, suffragettes, and others on the left saw it as a great momentum builder for North America. Not in the spirit of being traitorous, but with the idea of building a better, fairer America.

But as Russia became more authoritarian and brutal, (which was spurred on by American and other capitalist countries funding of the white army), the Communist party of America lost its appeal, and by the end of the 50's they did not have much support left other than a small number of hard core ideologues. So that statement is not relevant.

He's a cruel murderous money-loving thug.

So please, spare us the false equivalencies and insinuations that your fellow DU'ers are "red-baiting" when they are upset over Putin helping elect Donald Trump while Republicans cover it up and look the other way.

"So please, spare us the false equivalences and insinuations that your fellow DU'ers are "red-baiting" when they are upset over Putin helping elect Donald Trump while Republicans cover it up and look the other way."

I'm a Democrat, nice to meet you.

I grew up knowing the USSR was an enemy of our country. While things
have changed a bit, Russia and Putin are still our enemy.
Reagan called them a part of the "evil empire".
That's how Republicans used to think.

because it has become what far too many conservatives would like to make of America: an anti-democratic militaristic dictatorship seeking to conjoin church and state while opposing change and diversity and discriminating against dissent and expressions of individual liberty – such as disadvantaging homosexuals, as is the practice in Russia.

And I remember when the Soviet Union/Russia were our enemies as well.

People who score high in RWA characteristics manifest a high degree of submission to authorities they perceive to be legitimate (e.g. religious authority) in the society they identify with, and a higher propensity to show aggressiveness towards those who they perceive violate those social norms (and they see their aggressiveness as sanctioned by the authorities to which they submit).

They show a high degree of adherence to social norms (you go outside the box of what they see as "normal," and you're going to be aggressed).

They're fearful - they see the world as a dangerous place, requiring strong action to stamp out what they see as a threat.

They're self-righteous - they feel justified in looking down on anyone their authority figures perceive as less moral than themselves.

They require structure. They tend to be inflexible.

They tend to frame their worldview in terms of ingroups and outgroups, and perceive that outgroups threaten the traditions and values held by their ingroup - which attitude correlates positively with higher rates of prejudice.

(Notes taken in a psychology of prejudice and stereotypes lecture)

make no mistake, Americans who that is A-OK are TRAITORS

From Wikipedia

"Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were United States citizens who were executed on June 19, 1953 after being convicted of committing espionage for the Soviet Union. They were accused of selling the United States' top secret plans for building a nuclear bomb to the Soviet Union; at that time the United States was the sole country in the world with the knowledge and resources to build nuclear weapons."

Chump and the rethugs collaborated with the Russians to destroy our democracy by rigging the 2016 election in their favor. This is so treasonous it makes my head spin!! We fought the revolutionary war to gain our independence from England now we are giving our country over to Russia.

Political rhetoric, is their God.

Whatever wins them the next election.

They're like a college debate team. Okay, next debate switch sides,

we are more fools to not have the ability to expose Bullshit

Right-wing newspapers, and they watch Faux News. Most are also racist. We (the Dems) had a black president so we will forever be hated by the large number of racists for a while. My mother (who was a Republican) screamed at me "you are voting with all those black and poor people" when I voted for Gore. A lot of it is "identity politics." Most Republicans I know were born and raised Republican and it is part of their identity.

Many of those Republicans would support a dictator if he opposed liberals, socialists and communists.

Extreme wealth concentration in Russia under their current oligarchy? The Republicans probably admire that!

Obama dropped the ball, they should have gotten crippling sanctions through Congress.

That would cause a revolution and they would try to overthrow Vladimir Putin.

I don't know they would succeed, though

Electoral chances. The GOP is as venal, cynical, hypocritical, heartless, and just plain EVIL as it gets!

going to get a tax cut, and then they never notice that they didn't get a tax cut. A lot of Republicans I know think they are going to get a tax cut. They do not know the difference between payroll tax and income tax. If you try to explain it to them, their eyes start to glaze over and they usually don't believe you.

infiltrated most of the Republican Party. Most of these Repub. politicians want power and money and will do whatever it takes to keep it.

I don't even know who I am anymore.

If it catches on I will hook my thumbs in my belt and say, "Wasn't I clever!"

and are motivated by the pursuit of power. Putin is someone to be admired since he has both power and wealth.

... they've taken measures to protect wealth ever since.

Get your history right.

Like I wrote, many of the Republicans became rich from that war. At that point, protection of their wealth became more important. That's correct history.

from the Civil War. It is true that many southern slave owners lost their wealth in the Civil War, so there were fewer wealthy Democrats. It is true that the economy of the north boomed after the war ended and likely many of the northerners who became wealthy from that boom were Republicans.
But, the Democrats were the party of slavery at that time. They represented the slaveholders and continued to represent their ideological descendants until after WWII.

I agree with you! Republicans were the party that freed the slaves and maintained the union. That was great!

On the other hand, I'm not sure why you're telling me what I already know, especially since it doesn't pertain to what I wrote about how the Republican party became the party more concerned about protection of wealth.

is not the Republican party of today. The same goes for the Democratic party. That is my point. Wealthy people do not live forever.

The article claims Eisenhower as a progressive Republican, he was President in 1953-1961. The Republican party chose him as it's candidate for President. That is after WW2.

(snip)
~~~~~~~~~~
But business leaders who hated government regulation insisted that Eisenhower’s policies were tantamount to communism. They pointed to desegregation as proof that the government was redistributing tax dollars to undeserving minorities, and their mingling of racism and communist fears won votes. By the 1970s, in an uncanny echo of the 1890s and the 1920s, Republican economists had embraced the old idea that only deregulation and unfettered capitalism would create wealth, which would then trickle down to everyone.
~~~~~~~~~~

Democrats nominated and elected Bill Clinton too, but that doesn't mean the Democratic party fully embraced welfare reform, NAFTA and other wealth-friendly ideas at that time.

My parents were Democrats and they both voted for Eisenhower, by the way. I think he was the only Republican nominee that they ever supported.

"It's not new. Many Republicans became rich from the Civil War and...

... they've taken measures to protect wealth ever since."

That is simply not true ;the Civil War was in the 1860's not the 1960's. By the 1960's, even the oldest Civil War veteran was dead.

Perhaps I needed to express myself with more detail, but my point is that Republicans as a whole have been concerned about wealth protection since the 1870's. That doesn't mean all of their politicians have stuck to that principle as strictly as today -- again in general terms because there's still some oddball Republicans on economic issues.

I can't think of another aspect of the Republican party that's been as consistent going back so many years. It wasn't the party of born-again Christians and racists in the more recent past, etc.

have been concerned about individual rights, beginning with the right to property, since before the founding. Many of the founders argued that people owned their other rights.

I think I'll pass.

You progressive dog, you!

explained and selected by an anarcho-syndicalist.

when ronnie raygun called them the evil empire. We have now joined with and are ourselves an evil empire.

The Republican base will support just about anything if they can get richer from it.

They hate big government if it helps the poor, but love anti-free market government aid if it helps the rich.

They support people like Saddam Hussein if he doesn't impede transnational corporations or threatens to not accept the dollar for Iraq's oil. They support the Saudi dictators against the will of the Saudi citizenry as long as they tow the line in business deals too.

Iran's democratically elected leader who wanted to nationalize ownership of their oil? He was overthrown and replaced with a dictator in the 50's. Americans later acted surprised that Iran didn't like the USA so much. They just "hate our freedom" according to the Republicans, of course.

in a communist country, those in power have all the money, same, same.

The capitalists opposed communists because that might result in less influence for them, and vice versa.

The Soviet Union wasn't a democracy, and that SHOULD have been our main complaint about them. Right-wingers focused on their economic model, however, and it's really not surprising given what really matters to them.

At least this country's forefathers were wise enough to place checks and balances in the government.

James Madison and several other forefathers were concerned democracy could be a threat to their wealth, however, so that aspect of the USA was less democratic right from the start. Only white males with property were allowed to vote, for example.

Love Russia, hate it, ignore it. Most rightwingers probably couldn't find it on a map or name a single Russian city other than Moscow.

Everything was a secret plot to ruin the U.S.

Even the Beatles...they were planted to ruin the young people...turn them against their parents and cause them to go the drug route.

It stopped being one with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. That was more than 25 years ago.

It is now an authoritarian corrupt capitalist nominal republic. The Republican Party supports corrupt authoritarian capitalism with nominal representative democracy. They are aligned ideologically.

They work very hard through propaganda efforts to convince people that their economic model is "the only way" as well. That's something they always want kept outside of the democratic process.

And a daddy to hold them, reassure them, and protect them from a confusing world.

We stopped it in 2nd grade. The USSR was our sworn enemy in 1971.

I still believe Russia is our enemy. Old fashioned Henry "Scoop" Jackson style neocon here.

that our government considered continuing through Germany and Eastern Europe to prevent our lover from enslaving them. We remembered what Uncle Joe was and we didn't forget his pact with Hitler.
We were briefly allies with the USSR, never even friends.

The Yalta Conference divided Europe and Stalin promised to aid the Allies in the war against Japan.

and it was a contingency plan for freeing Poland (where Stalin didn't honor Yalta) and became a defensive plan for the expected Soviet attack after American forces were withdrawn. Fortunately, American love for Uncle Joe wasn't so deep and American forces remained in Europe.

Larger than ours, very well armed, and quite capable, must have been one heck of a plan.

There were people advocating nuking Russia during the period when we had that capability and they didn't. Thankfully we did not commit that crime against humanity.

whom you "love." The claim that we once "love(d)" Russia and Uncle Joe was the topic.

for Uncle Joe. That was the claim made which I responded to.

Last I saw, we run 45-65. I'm not there yet.

But I was 12 when the Wall came down and the Iron Curtain fell. Even in my 20s, conservatives were suspicious of the post-Soviet world. (I did a summer internship in Ukraine in undergrad. I got a lot of criticism from RWNJs for doing science/history in Red territory.)

This is my primary argument for some form of mass memory loss. The same people who are going strong for the GoOP and thus are being pro-Russian are the same ones who were screaming about Reds deep into the Clinton Adminstration.

It suits them just fine!

I remember too.
Good to see you are still around. Keep up the good fight!
ELY

Out

Is just like how I remember so many guys from the cold war era...

redumbliCONs used to call Democrats communists. Russian communists are favored over American Democratic communists. No wonder they are called deplorables.

called anyone saying nice things about Russia "unpatriotic."

They're all kleptocrats now ... just like the Repugs.

So, now they're natural allies.

There used to be republicans who were a bit more than moderate too, like Dwight Eisenhower, Nelson Rockefeller, William Scranton and others...even Nixon had a moderate vein inside his dark mind.

But it drove the hard right nuts and over time they corrected that, at least among elected officials. There are still moderates in the media though who have no stomach for Chitolini, we see them all over MSNBC, like Charlie Sikes.

Some animals were always more equal than others, but still.

I think that the real far right always rather liked the authoritarianism and leader-worship of non-democratic countries.

The sad thing is that Russia might have had some chance of becoming a democracy, if given more time to reform under and after Gorbachev. But the Reaganites were too keen to rush their 'victory' (more a case of the Soviet Union bankrupting itself and imploding), and so here they are with an autocratic, essentially neo-Stalinist government; and the leader of the country that never quite became a democracy rubs shoulders with the leader who got in through the holes in the supposedly safe net of his country's democracy.

(And don't get me started on my own country's leaders...)

in the 50s