Obama IS a socialist

[rocky_joe]

Sure we have a capitalist free market

No we don't. That is just right wing rhetoric used to make it seem as though imposing regulations wold disrupt the magical phenomenon that neo-conservatism has renewed. Bullshit. The market is nowhere near perfect competition, nor is it "free." We that the case, the government would not subsidize anything, housing, farms, logging, etc. There would be no regulation on exportation of jobs, no corporate tax, no capital gains tax, etc. The notion that our market is a free one is ludacris and everyone should get it out of their heads.

 

That being said. Obama maybe further to the left than many like but to try and equate him with the socialism of Cuba, Russia, and China is absurd. Rather the socialism Obama presents is one similar to the successful and wealthy Sweeden or Norway.

 

O8ama!!! GObama!!! Barack the Vote!!!

[Off_White]

Neitze proposed the abolition of the world's oldest and most fundamental institution. There is nothing conservative about that no matter how deeply you agree with the need.

 

Really? What did Fredrich have against prostitution?

[G-spotter]

Bill, FW challenged a few posters here. he stated that he know US better then the rest and if mcsame wins he wants us to stop posting for a year. i said i will do it if he fuck a pig if obama wins.

 

a live pig or a dead pig?

[Fairweather]

You know very well what I am referring to...

the final nail in the coffin of Dred Scott vs Sandford.

 

I don't get it. Are you saying that I support slavery? I doubt you understand the history behind the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments as well as I do.

[bradleym]

I doubt you understand the history behind the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments as well as I do.

 

That is a very bold statement indeed!

 

For my part, I sincerely hope that Obama IS a socialist. The social bits around here could use a bit of work.

[ScottP]

You know very well what I am referring to...

the final nail in the coffin of Dred Scott vs Sandford.

 

I don't get it. Are you saying that I support slavery? I doubt you understand the history behind the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments as well as I do.

 

I'm saying you're a bigot.

[Bug]

Hey I am a German by heritage. The fact that we dot every 'i' and cross every 't' does not mean we can't obliterate things.

no, but as a fellow kraut, it does mean i'm depressive and alcoholic, character traits which are well re-inforced by my irish half

Aye laddybuck, n ahm 1 part Scotish so yu'r buyn th beer.

[tvashtarkatena]

Bill, FW challenged a few posters here. he stated that he know US better then the rest and if mcsame wins he wants us to stop posting for a year. i said i will do it if he fuck a pig if obama wins.

now fw had his share if insults towards me, so i am just simply returning him a favor. that makes me an asshole- nice logic!

never mind his racist, anti-immigrant comments. a short memory you have mister

 

Well, as long as no one asks me to screw a pig then.....

 

Seriously Bob, in my opinion, it weakens a very strong and honest post to end it that way. It will lead to insults back in return, and your points, as spot on the money as they are, will not be read or addressed.

 

Take care all!

 

Keep being yourself, Bob. We love you the Euro-psycho-way you are.

[tvashtarkatena]

Eminent Domain has been around far longer than 2005.

the Magna Carta from 1215 contains some fun pearls like this'n:

 

 

"31. Neither we nor our bailiffs shall take another's wood for castles or for other private uses, unless by the will of him to whom the wood belongs."

 

Take my wood for private uses, FW.

[Bug]

Neitze proposed the abolition of the world's oldest and most fundamental institution. There is nothing conservative about that no matter how deeply you agree with the need.

 

Really? What did Fredrich have against prostitution?

 

Hmmm.

Before religion it would not have had any weight outside the immediate company.

I am not sure it would be wise to call a gender an institution.

[tvashtarkatena]

What's mildly amusing about FW is that he doesn't realize that the rest of the world, outside his right wing, round padded cell, doesn't view the word 'socialist' as an insult.

 

Humans survived extinction because we are social creatures. From an evolutionary standpoint, we are designed to be 'socialist'. The sharing of wealth started about 5 million years ago and has been the key to our success ever since.

 

Sharing the wealth through through progressive tax policy is one key to our national survival today. No country remains socially healthy without a strong, stable middle class. When the middle class unravels, the social glue that holds our society together frays and disintegrates into the kind of chaos that only desperate humans can create. Our middle class has been eroding ever since Reagan began concentrating wealth in this country through regressive tax policies, deregulation, and other forms of corporate favoritism.

 

A strong, stable society makes the rich rich. They become so from the labors of others, not just themselves. They got more out of the system; it is right to expect them to pay more back into it. So often the hyperwealthy of societies with a weak middle class (the third world, which seems to be FW's end game for our country) accumulate and maintain their wealth through corruption and monopolization, not 'hard work'. In this society, most of the friends I know who became wealthy didn't work any harder than anyone else; they simply got lucky.

 

It's sad that FW worships material wealth above social justice, the overall well being of Americans, and all the other higher virtues at the core of our society. There's not a lot to admire there.

[dougd]

[Bug]

Harsh.

But would catagorize him with the Gingrich republicans. Reagan stood for something and took stands. I agree that his stand was misguided but he saw it as a "return to old ways" which is another tendancy of humanity. Gingrich introduced the concept of campaigning primarily on character assassination in mass, real or otherwise, rather than on the real values and beleifs of the opponent. The Clintons played along and played well.

This was not new as a individual concept but it was new as a mass party "modus operandi". It destroyed statesmanship in campaigns and worse yet in government. It led citizens and elected officials to beleive that the other side was morally wrong not just "getting there by a different means". It threatens to destroy the system of checks and balances.

It appeals to the ugly side of humanity.

We inadvertantly foster it by using it against those who use it against our beliefs. Someone has to take the higher ground.

I think Obama has done that better than most.

[mattp]

I agree, Bug, and I only hope that Obama can lead the Democrats to getting their heads out of their you know where's. They've forgotten that they actually had a platform and could actually stand for something ever since Gingrich kicked their butts.

[Off_White]

Neitze proposed the abolition of the world's oldest and most fundamental institution. There is nothing conservative about that no matter how deeply you agree with the need.

 

Really? What did Fredrich have against prostitution?

 

Hmmm.

Before religion it would not have had any weight outside the immediate company.

I am not sure it would be wise to call a gender an institution.

 

I'm not following you. Sex for money has always had a certain weight, regardless of religious opprobrium. Prostitution is also in no way a gender, as even a cursory reading of the back end of The Stranger would assure you. It's most certainly an institution, the "second oldest profession" as it were.

[Bug]

Neitze proposed the abolition of the world's oldest and most fundamental institution. There is nothing conservative about that no matter how deeply you agree with the need.

 

Really? What did Fredrich have against prostitution?

 

Hmmm.

Before religion it would not have had any weight outside the immediate company.

I am not sure it would be wise to call a gender an institution.

You must be Celtic.

Before "religion" there was no money or government.

Religion is beleived by many to be the first institution that permeated broader societies (beyond the clan group).

But I am sucking the fun out of this aren't I?

 

I'm not following you. Sex for money has always had a certain weight, regardless of religious opprobrium. Prostitution is also in no way a gender, as even a cursory reading of the back end of The Stranger would assure you. It's most certainly an institution, the "second oldest profession" as it were.

[Off_White]

I confess I'm weak on my Nietzsche, though I've always been fond of Goethe's quip "what doesn't kill me makes me stronger." I've always thought he should be the patron saint of alpinism.

 

So, you're saying Fred wanted to do away with religion? Well hell, sign me up!

 

If by Celtic you mean Norweigan, reivers who had their fair share of influence on those northern isles, then yes, I suppose I am, but not in any woo woo kind of way.

[Bug]

Interesting rendition.

 

PORTERRRRRR!!!!!

Fix the quote thingy.

[Bug]

Fred said "God is dead."

He went on to create a "religion" of the Ubermensch. Superman was a distillation of that concept.

 

Celts were a Matriarchal society. Witches held the wisdom and were revered for it.

They set themselves apart to study and teach their craft leaving the men to fend for for themselves for long periods. Who can say what happened in those warm piles of man-flesh.

[Fairweather]

You know very well what I am referring to...

the final nail in the coffin of Dred Scott vs Sandford.

 

I don't get it. Are you saying that I support slavery? I doubt you understand the history behind the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments as well as I do.

 

I'm saying you're a bigot.

 

You saying it doesn't make it so. Using the 'racist' label to shut down discussion is an old and tired tactic used by weak-minded lefty punks such as yourself and a select few of your fellow zombies here. Dislike of Obama's policies--perceived or real--is not racist. Got it? Now if you want to go off on a tangent about the semantics of racist versus bigot go right ahead, but I think it was pretty clear what you were/are trying to say with your veiled historical references. Now go off somewhere and fuck yourself little man.

[Fairweather]

 

It's sad that FW worships material wealth above social justice, the overall well being of Americans, and all the other higher virtues at the core of our society. There's not a lot to admire there.

 

A lecture on the virtues of socialism from a man who claims he is so wealthy he no longer has to work? Now that's irony. I think you are confusing human altruism and charity with government imposition of the same. When you give to your fellow man both you and he are rewarded in the transaction, but when government comes in and inserts itself forcibly as the sole agent of that transaction--and takes a cut--the receiver is left with a feeling of entitlement and the giver is left feeling he just got screwed. Don't get me wrong, I have always supported a progressive tax system--the mountain should get steeper as you approach the top--but making the goal of wealth too unattainable destroys ingenuity and risk-taking. There is a balance that should be watched on the right side of the equation too, and I've never said otherwise, but ultimately I prefer to see wealth "spread around" through employment and public participation in the system. (And a safety net that is nothing more than advertised.)

[joblo7]

socialism like conspiracy, has become a four letter word, in an effort to control what we believe.

 

[ScottP]

You know very well what I am referring to...

the final nail in the coffin of Dred Scott vs Sandford.

 

I don't get it. Are you saying that I support slavery? I doubt you understand the history behind the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments as well as I do.

 

I'm saying you're a bigot.

 

You saying it doesn't make it so. Using the 'racist' label to shut down discussion is an old and tired tactic used by weak-minded lefty punks such as yourself and a select few of your fellow zombies here. Dislike of Obama's policies--perceived or real--is not racist. Got it? Now if you want to go off on a tangent about the semantics of racist versus bigot go right ahead, but I think it was pretty clear what you were/are trying to say with your veiled historical references. Now go off somewhere and fuck yourself little man.

 

I'm saying your a bigot as a response to bigoted statements you have made. As an example, your comment about arabs in general is a bigoted statement:

 

Originally Posted By: ivan

i also liked how mccain assured his one supporter at a rally recently who said "obama's an arab" by saying "no, no - he's a good-guy" - as if the 2 were mutually exclusive, or that he IS an arab, so don't vote for him, but don't hate him either?

"Damn straight. I mean, 9 after all, what did 1 those people ever do to 1 us?"

 

 

Your views of Obama's policies has nothing to do with it.

[STP]

I don't consider it necessarily a bigoted response. Seems more like a generalization to me. Most of the hijackers were Saudi, so ok Arabs, but are Egyptians considered to be Arabic? Could you use the term, Semite? So if you badmouthed the hijackers would that make you Anti-Semitic?

 

Re: Whether majority of Republicans are morally vacant

 

The majority of Congressman that were charged and indicted in three of the biggest political corruption scandals of the last few decades were Democrats (Abscam, Keating 5, House Banking scandal)

-- http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/law/corruption/history.html

 

All people are corruptible. I believe it has more to do with the majority party.

[rob]

yeah, Obama's such a socialist