Gene Edward Veith wrote a book about 10 years ago called Modern Fascism that I’d recommend to you. Less political, more general philosophy and theology.

I’ll have to put in on my list.

modern fascism, liberal fascism… all the same attempt to make your “enemies” (atheists, liberals, university professors, neo-pagans) look like those they despise. both are weak attempts to redefine fascism. the fact that this was hosted by hewitt on townhall, and that his blog is hosted at nro are enough to discredit it, but not for hewitt groupies who believe his words are the gospel – “if hewitt can spew it, it must be true.”
i guess it goes to show that anyone can write a book full of historical inaccuracies put in a historical setting with a tiny sprinkling of historical fact for good measure and at least a few will be fooled. one can’t just connect any dots and assume that the lines between them are valid. but it’s frightening to see how many conservatives are doing exactly that and accept this rewriting of history just because it feels good to clothe your enemy in the epithet epitomized by the extreme right wing.
i believe that goldberg got much of his influence from veith. so while applying veith’s ideology to a more political realm, his ideas aren’t original but still just as inaccurate. of course, thanks to goldberg, frothing conservatives will feel justified and vindicated to throw this epithet around just like veith followers in the evangelical realm did a decade ago.

No, they are actually attempt to look at the history of the word and how it’s been misused by the left. If you despise the word, then you might want to be affiliated with another movement because your party is going in this direction. Just look at the rhetoric of Obama and those who talk about him like he’s a political savior.
It’s very telling how you try to stifle debate by poisoning the well. Unfortunately for you those tactics don’t work and make you look like you’re afraid to listen to anything that you don’t agree with.
Have you read Goldberg’s book? And have you read Veith’s?

no, they attempt to redefine the term, and they fail. i have read goldberg, but not veith. however, i do know that one beget the other, and i also know from whence veith comes, and it ain’t political history. ditto for goldberg. one thing that i will agree with is that some on the left use the term too lightly and too often. not all conservatives are fascist by any means. not even all right wing extremists are fascists, only the fascist feather of the right wing is. there are many other feathers on the extremes of the right wing. but just because some on the left overuse the term doesn’t make goldberg’s and veith’s claims true.
having this debate about a couple of grudge holders misrepresenting history is not a debate worth having. if you want to discuss the importance of not rewriting history then that’s fine. so, yes please, let’s discuss “poisoning the well” of history. your two champions here are dangerous. they will redefine fascism to be something that it is not. your hewitt, coulter, new republic groupie people will jump on this train because they hate liberals (or pagans or gays or environmentalists or their enemy du jour) without a true understanding of history. eventually, the movement will parallel that of “intelligent design” being peddled as science. they can’t stand on their own merit so they must redefine the very structures they masquerades as. as a result, these people won’t know true fascism when they’re standing in its shadow.
sister, it’s not that i don’t agree with them. it’s because they’re false.
as a testament to my open-mindedness, i’m here, listening to you, and hardly afraid. we disagree often and i’m never afraid to point that out, but that’s just a matter of ideology. theirs is a matter of lacking factual basis.

Please define fascism the proper way that these men have failed to do. Then cite how they failed, out of their books, since you’re so familiar with Goldberg’s work.

how about for starters you revisit the king of fascism, since you’re not at all familiar with true, historical fascism.
http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm
then explain to the readers here how goldberg bends reality to turn fascism inside out such that american liberals are now fascists.

OK I guess you won’t or can’t. Just thought I’d try to see if you could even define what you’re complaining others were unable to.
One would think if you are so very certain they are wrong you’d be able to clearly state the proper definition, but I guess that’s not to be.

i already said that their bull isn’t worth discussing, so “won’t” is more on the mark. but i’ll offer you this:
you go read mussolini’s doctrine of fascism (linked above for your convenience) and throw in a couple of history books of the era for good measure and gain a clear understanding of historical fascism. when you’re done, you come back here and show that you understand the key characteristics of fascism and note for me a few credible historians who buy goldberg’s b.s. and THEN we’ll talk. fair ’nuff?
by the same token, one would think that if you are so very certain that they are right, you would be able to clearly state the proper traits of fascism. or you just won’t or can’t. if you don’t understand what fascism is, how can you be so certain that goldberg is right?
i see it this way: on my side are educated historians, history itself, and many, many, many books written since the rise of fascism in the early 20th century. i don’t see the mob of historians rallying around to rewrite history with this new definition of fascism, saying “OMG for 80 years we’ve had this completely upside-down!” on your side, a handful of disgruntled right-wingers. ask yourself this, is goldberg concerned about spreading the “truth” or is he interested in selling his politically charged books?
it’s clear why you would like for these books to be true, considering your intense distaste for anything liberal, especially liberal political leaders. all one has to do is read the vitriol of the comments on the hewitt site to see the baseless ammunition this book gives liberal-haters.
in fact, this book is born of the same fear-mongering tactics that we are so used to coming from politics on the right. it’s saying “don’t vote for clinton or obama or any liberal, because they’re all fascists, and we all know that fascists are bad!” of course, that’s after goldberg redefines fascism for us.

Following my investigation, thousands of people on our planet receive the loan from good creditors. Thence, there’s good possibilities to get a secured loan in all countries.